Full text of "The works of the Right Reverend William Warburton, D.D., lord bishop of Gloucester : to which is prefixed a discourse by way of general preface, containing some account of the life, writings, and character of the author"

See other formats

Shelf..

? PRINCETON, N. J. ^*

BX 5037 .W3 1811 v. A
Warburton, William, 1698-
1779 .

The works of the Right

— >^

Digitized by

the Internet Archive

in 2014

https://archive.org/details/worksofrightreve04warb_0

THE

ORES

OP THE

RIGHT REVEREND

WILLTAM 'WARBURTON, D.D,

LORD BISHOP OF GLOUCESTER.

A NEW EDITION,
IN TWELVE VOLUMES.

TO ■WHICH IS PREFIXED

A DISCOURSE BY WAY OF GENERAL PREFACE-,

CONTAIXINO

SOME ACCOUNT OF THE LIFE, WRITINGS. AND CHARACTER

OF THE A'JTHOR;

BY RICHARD HURD, D.D.

LORD BISHOP OF WORCESTER.

VOLUME THE FOURTH,

Printed hj Luke Hansard dj- Sons, near Lincoln' s-Inn Fields,

FOR T.CADELL AND W. DAVIES, IN THE STRAND,

181 1.

THE

DIVINE LEGATION

MOSES

DEMONSTRATED.

BOOKS

IV. V. VI.

AnOKAAYYON TOYS O4)0AAMOY2: MOT
KAI

K-ATANOHSn TA ©AYMAIIA EK TOY NOMOY XOY.

[ vii ]

CONTENTS

O F

BOOKS

IV. V. Sc VI.

THE DIVINE LEGATION.

DEDICATION of Books IV. V. VI. in 1765, lo Lord
Mansfield pp, i — 12

Dedication to the First Edition of Books IV, V. VI. in
1740 — to the Jews ----- pp.13 — 27

PREFACE to the First Edition, in 1740 - pp. 28—34

- - D" - - to the Edition of 1758 - - pp.35 — 68

BOOK IV.

Proves the high antiquity of the aets and
empire of egypt; and that such high anti-
quity illustrates and confirms the truth of
the mosaic history - - - - p. 69

SECT. I. Introduction, shewing that the universal
Pretence to Revelation, proves the Truth of some, and
particularly of the Jewish - _ - pp. '69 — 78

SECT. II. Enters on the Third Proposition. Some general
reflections on the high antiquity of J^gypt ; and of the
equal extravagance of both parties in their attempts to
advance or depress that antiquity - - pp. 78 — 84

SECT. in.

vili CONTENTS OF BOOKS IV. V. VI.

SECT. III. Tlie liigh antiquity of Egi/pt proved from
Scripture : — Aud from the ancient Greek historians, sup-
ported and confirmed by Scripture. In the course of
this inquia-y the rise and progress of the art of medicine
is treated of and explained - - - pp. 84— 116

SECT. IV. The high antiquity of Eg>/pt proved from
their Hkroglijphks. Their nature, original, and various
kinds, explained. Proved to be the original of the art of
Ouirocritics or interpretation of Dreams, and likewise of
Ij) ute-iiorship. In this inquiry is contained the history
of the various modes of information by Speech and
Writing: And of the various modes of ancient idolatry,
in the order they arose from one another, pp. 116 — 214

SECT. V. Sir Isaac Newtons chronology of the Egyptian
empire c^)nfuted, and shewn to contradict all sacred and
profane antiquity, aud even the nature of things. In the
course of this Dissertation, the causes of that infinite
confusion in the ancient Greek history and mythology
are inquired into and explained - - pp.215 — 283

SECT. VI. Proves that Moses was skilled in all the learning
of Egypt, and the Israelites violently inrUned to all their
superstitious. — That the Kitual Law was instituted partly
in opposition to those superstitions, and partly in com-
pliance to the People's prejudices. — That neither that
llitual nor Moses's Learning is any objection to the
divinity of his Mission — But a high confirmation of it.
In which Herman fi itsiiis's arguments to the contrary
are examined and confuted ; and the famous Prophecy
in the twentieth chapter of Ezekiel explained and vin-
dicated against the absurd interpretation of the Kabbins
mid Dr. S/tuckfojd - - pp. 283— 365

KoTES on the Fourth Book - - - - P- 366,

{tVliatfolloucs, is contained in the V"' and VI"* Volumes.l

BOOK

THE DIVINE LEGATION.

BOOK V.

The nature of the jewish theocracy explained:
and the doctrine of a future state proved
not to be in, nor to make part of, the mosaic
dispensation.

SECT. I. Little light to be got from the systems of Chris-
tian writers, — or the objections of Deists, — or from the
Ilabbins, — or from the Cabalists, concerning the true
nature of the Jezcish Republic. — The Hehrczci People
separated from the rest of mankind not as favourites, but
to preserve the knowledge of the true God amidst aa
idolatrous world, — Vindicated from the calumnious false-
hoods of the Poet Voltaire.

SECT. II. Proves the Jewish Government to be a Theo-
cracy.— This form shewn to be necessary : There being
no other, by which opinions could be justly punished by
civil Laws : And without such Laws against idolatr}^, the
Mosaic Religion could not be supported. — The equity
of punishing opinions under a Theocracy, explained.
Bayle censured. — Foster confuted. — The Theocracy easily
introduced, as founded on a prevailing notion of tutelary
Deities. — An objection of Mr. Colhns to the truth of
Revelation examined and confuted. — The easy irttro-
duction of the Theocracy, it is shewn, occasioned as
easy a defection from the Laws of it. — The inquiry into
the reason of this leads to an explanation of the nature
of the Jewish idolatry. — Lord Bolingbroke's accusation
of the Law of Moses examined and exposed.

SECT. IIL Treats of the duration of the Theocracy.—
Shewn to have continued till the coming of Christ. —
The arguments of Spencer and Le Clcrc to the contrary
examined. — The Prophecy of Shiloh explained: the
Bishop of London's Discourse upon it examined and
confuted.

SECT. IV. The Consequences of a Theocracy considered. —
Shewn that it must be administered by an extraordinary
Providence, equally dispensing temporal Rewards and
Punishments; both to the Community and to Particulars.

—That

X CONTENTS of BOOKS IV. V. VI.

— That Scripture gives this representation of God's
govenunent. — And that there are many favourable cir-
cumstances in the character of the Jewish People, to
induce an impartial Examiner to believe that represen-
tation to be true.

SECT. V. Shews, that as temporal Rewards and Punisli- .
ments were the proper sanction of the Jewish Law, so,
there were no other ; Moses entirely omitting the Doc-
trine of a future State. — That this omission was not
accidental, but designed; and of a thing well known by
him to be of high importance to Society. — Proved from
several circumstances in the book of Genesis, — and from
the Law of punishing the crimes of Parents on their
Posterity, which was to supply the want of the Doctrine
of a future state. — The nature and equity of this Law
explained, and defended against Unbelievers. — It is then
shewn that as Moses taught not the Doctrine of a future
State of Rewards and Punishments, so neither had the
ancient Jews any knowledge of it.— -Proved from the
"books of the Old Testament.

SECT. VL Proves the same point from the books of the
New Testament. — What notion the early Jews had coa-
cerning the Soul, explained.

Appendix and Notes to the Fifth Book.

BOOK VL
Contains an examination of all the texts
brought from the old and new testaments
to prove a future state of rewards and
punishments did make part of the mosaic
dispensation.

SECT. L States the Question, — shews the Adversaries of
this Work to have much mistaken it.~ And that the true
state of the question alone is a sufficient answer to all
objections.

SECT. IL Enters on an examination of the Texts brought
from the Old Testament ;— first from the book of Job —
-i which

THE DIVINE LEGATION. a

T;hich is proved to be an allegoric Poem, written on the
return from the Captivity, and representing the Circum-
stances of the People of that time. — The famous words,
I know that my Redeemer liveth, &c. shewn to signify, ia
their literal sense, the hopes of a temporal deliverance only.

SECT. IIT. Contains an examination of the rest of the
Texts ur"ed from the Old Testament.

SECT. IV. Contains an examination of the Texts^pro-
' duced from the New Testament, in which the nature of
the Apostolic Reasonings against the Errors of Jewish
Converts is explained and illustrated.

Notes to the first four Sections.

SECT. V. The agreement of the Proposition of no future
State in the Mosaic Dispensation, with the Vllth Ariicle
of the Church of England evinced. — That the Old
Fathers looked for more than transitory Promises, illus-
trated in the famous case of Abraham, — where it is
proved that the command to offer Isaac was merely an
information, in a representative Action instead of W ords,
of the Redemption of Mankind by the great Sacrifice
cf CnHisr. — Shewn how this Interpretation overturns
all the infidel objections against the truth of this part of
Abraham's history.

SECT. VI. To support the foregoing Interpretation, The
Original, Nature, and Use of typical Rites and si;-
CONDARY SiiNSES in Prophccics are inquired into. — la
the course of which Inquiry, the Principles of Mr.
Collins's book concerning the Grounds and Reasons of
the Christian Religion are examined and confuted, —
and likewise the Reasoning of Dr. Sykes against all
double Senses of Prophecies in his book intitled. The
Principles and Connexion of Natural and Revealed Reli-
gion, 8cc. — The Use and Importance of these Questions
to the subject of The Divine Legation explained. — The
Co,NCLUsioN of the argument, — with a recapitulation
•f it.

Appendix, and Notes.

PLATES

BELo::Gi>rG to this
FOURTH VOLUINIE:

PLATE L— A Mexican Picture History of the 1 To face
51 years Keigu of their Monarch Tenuch, }■ p. 119
From Purchas. ' 3

PLATE H. — Specimen of the Hieroglyphics of ) • ,
the North Americans. From Lajilau. \ ^ ^ *

PLATE HL — Characters found upon Rocks in ?
Siberia, b}- Sluldeiiherg. V ^

PLATE IV.— Part of the North Side of the ?

Ramesscean Obelisk. Vmm liirclier. I P-^^*^

PLATE V. — A Specimen of the more INIodern ^

Chinese Characters, taken from their more V p. 124
Ancient. From Kircher, j

PLATE VI. — Scheme, shewing the Change from 1

Analogic Figures to jNI arks by Institution, in > ^.129

ERRATUM:
p. 150. liist line, after well, insert as.

p. 131

Chinese Writing. From Martinus

PLATE VII.— [Two Plates; one marked N°I.-)
— the other, N°1I. & N°1H.] Ancient Egyp-
tian Hierogl^'phic Figures and Letters. From
Count Caylus.

PLATE VI 1 1. —Part of one Side of the Floren- 1 ^
tine Obelisk. From Kircher. 3 ^' ^'

PLATE IX.— Fig. 1. from the Bembine Table ;
Fig. 2. a Mummy; and Fig. 3. the Pectoral
Cloth of the Mummy, on Avhich is depicted ^ p. 199
the manner of embalminij;. From Kitr/ier's
CEctipiis.

PLATE X.— Figures from the Bembine Table, |

illustrative of the Idolatry of Egypt. j i- Ji

DEDICATION

TO THE EDITION OF
Books IV. V.VI. of the
DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES;

1765.

TO THE RIGHT HOXOURAELE

WILLIAM LORD .MANSFIELD,

LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF EK GLAND.

MY LORD,

THE purpose of this Address is not to make a re-
turn for the favours I have received from you, for tliey
are many and great; but to add one more security to
myself, from the malice of the present and the forget-
fulness of future times. A purpose, nhich though it
may be thought less sober than tlie other, is certainly
not more selfish. In plain terms, I would willingly con-
trive to live, and go down to posterity under the pro-
tection of your Name and Character ; Irom w hich, that
Posterity, in the administration of public justice, must
receive their instruction ; and in tlie duties of private
life, if they have any virtuous ambition, will take their
example. — But let not this alarm you. I intend not to
be your Panegyrist. To praise you for • loquence,
w ould be to praise you for a thing below your Character,
unless it were for that species of Eloquence which
Milton describes, and You have long practised.
" True Eloquence, says he, I find to be none, but
" the serious and hearty love of Truth : And that, whose
*' mind soever is fully possessed with a fervent desire
Vol. IV. B "to

2 DEDICATION (1765) TO

*' to know good things, and with the dearest Charit}^ to
" infuse the knowledge of* them into Others, when^
** SUCH A MAN WOULD SPEAK, his words, like so many
*' nimble and airy Servitors, trij) about him at command,
" and in well-ordered Files, as he would wish, fall aptly
*' into their own places."

To live in the voice and memory of jMen is the flat-
tering dream of every adventurer in Letters ; and for
me, who boast the rare felicity of being honoured with
the friendship of two or three superior Characters, Men
endowed with virtue to atone for a bad age, and of abi-
lities to make a bad age a good one, for me not to aspire
to the best mode of this ideal existence, the being carried
down to remote ages along with those who will never
die, would be a strange insensibility to human glory.

But as the protection I seek from your Lordship is
not like those blind Asylums founded by Superstition
to skreen iniquity from civil vengeance, but of the nature
of a Temple of Justice, to vindicate and support the
Innocent, You will expect to know the claim I have to
it; and how, on being seized with that epidemic malady
of idle, visionary men, the projecting to instruct and re-
foiin the Public, I came to stand in need of it.

I had lived to see — it is a plain and artless tale I
have to tell — I had lived to see what Lawgivers have
always seemed to dread, as the certain prognostic of
public ruin, that fatal Crisis when Religion hath

LOST ITS HOLD ON THE MINDS OF A PeOPLE.

I had observed, almost the rise and origin, but surely
very much of the progress of this evil : for it was neither
so rapid to elude a distinct view, nor yet so slow as to en-
danger one's forgetting or not observing the relation
which its several parts bore to one another: And to
trace the steps of this evil may not be altogether useless
to those, whoever they may be, who, as the Instru-
ments of Providence, are destined to counterwork its
bad effects.

The most painful circumstance in this relation is (as
your Lordship m ill feel), that the mischief began amongst
our friends ; by men who loved their Country ; but
were too eagerly intent on one part only of their Object,
the security of its civil liberty.

LORD MANSFIELD.

To trace up this matter to its source, we need go no
further back than to the happy Accession of that illus-
trious House to whom we owe all which is in the power
of grateful Monarchs, at the head of a free People, to
bestow ; I mean, the full enjoy :iient of the common rights
of Subjects.

It fortuned that at this time, son^e warm friends of
the Accession, newly gotten into power, had too has-
tily perhaps suspected that the Church (or at least
that party of Churchmex which had usurped the
name) was become inauspicious to the. sacred ^ra
from whence we were to date the establishment of our
civil happiness ; and therefore deemed it good policy to
lessen the credit of a body of men, who had been
long in high reverence with the People, and who had so
lately and so scandalously abused their influence in the
opprobrious affair of Sacheverell. To this end they in-
vited some learned men, who in the preceding reign
had served the common cause, to take up the pen once
more against these its most pestilent enemies, the Ja-
cobite Clergy. They readily assumed the task, and
did it so effectually, that under the professed design of
confuting and decrying the usurpations of a Popish Hie-
rarchy, they virtually deprived the Church of every
poHer and privilegej which, as a simple Society, she
had a claim to ; and, on the matter, delivered her up
gagged and bound, as the rebel-Creature of the State,
Their success (with the prejudice of Power, and what
is still stronger, the power of Prejudice, on their side)
became yet the easier, as the Tory Clergy, who opposed
these Erastian notions, so destructive to the very being
of a Church, reasoned and disputed against the Inno-
vators on the principles commonly received, but indeed
supported on no sounder a bottom tlian the authority
of Papal, or (if they like it better) of Puritanical usur-
pations : principles, to speak without reserve, ill founded
in themselves, and totally inconsistent with the free ad-
ministration of Civil government.

In this then, that is, in humbling disaffected Church-
men, the friends of Liberty and the Accession carried
their point. But in conducting a purpose so laudable
at any time, and so necessary at that time, They had,

B 2 as

4 DEDICATION (1765) TO

as we observe., gone much too far ; for instead of re-
ducing the Church within its native bounds, and thereby
preserving it from its two greatest dishonours, the be-
coming factious, or the being made the tool of Faction,
vvliich was all that true Politics required, and all perhaps
that these Politicians then thought of; their Instruments,
by discrediting every right it had, and even stripping it
of some of them, in a little time brought it into general
contempt.

But this was not the worst. These Enemies of ob-
noxious Churchmen found much assistance in the forward
carriage of the Enemies of Religion itself ; who, at this
time, under pretence of seconding the views of good
Patriots, and serving the State against the encroach-
ments of Church-power, took all occasions to vent then'
malice against Revelation itself: And Passion, inflamed
by opposition, mixing with Politics throughout the course
of this affair, these Lay-writers were connived at ; and,
to mortify rebellious Churchmen still more, even cried
up for their free reasonings against Religion, just as the
Clergy- writers had been, for their exploits against
Church-government. And one man in particular, the
Author of a well-known book called The Independent
Whig, early a favourite, and to the last a Pensioner,
carried on, in the most audacious and insulting manner,
these two several attacks, together : A measure sup-
ported perhaps in the execution, by its coinciding with
some Statesmen's private opinions : though the most
trite maxims of Government might have taught such to
separate their private from their public Character. How-
ever, certain it is, that the attack never ceased operating
till all these various kinds of Free-writing were gotten
into the hands of the People.

And now the business was done: and the sober
Friends of the Government were become, before they
were aware, the Dupes of their own policy. In their
endeavours to take off the influence of a Church, or
rather of a party of Churchmen inauspicious to a free
State, they had occasioned at least, the loosening all
the ties which till then Religion had on the minds of the
Populace : and which till then. Statesmen had ever
thought were the best security the Magistrate had for
24 their

LORD MANSFIELD.

their obedience. For though a r«/e of right niay direct
the Philosopher to a principle of action ; and the point
of honour may keep up the thing called IManners amongst
Gentlemen; vet nothinsi but Rdi^rion can ever fix a sober
standard of behaviour amongst tlie common People.

Jjut those bad effects not immediately appearing, our
Politicians were so little apprehensive that the matter
had already gone too far, that they thought of nothing
but how to improve some collateral advantages
they had procured by tlie bargain; which, amongst
other uses, they saw likewise, would be sure to keep
things in the condition to which they were reduced.
For now Religion having lost its hold on the People;
the Ministers of Religion were of no further consequence
to the State; nor were Statesmen any longer under the
hard necessity of seeking out the most eminent, for the
honours of their Profession : And without necessity,
how few would submit to such a drudgery ! For States-
men of a certain pitch are naturally apprehensive of a
little sense, and not easily brought, whether from expe-
rience or conviction, to form ideas of a great deal of
gratitude, in those they have to deal with. All went
now according to their wishes. They couki now employ
Church-honours more directly to the use of Government,
that is, of their own, by conferring them on such sub-
jects as most gratified their taste or humour, or served
best to strengthen their connexions with the Great.
This would of course give the finishing stroke to their
System. For though stripping the Church of all power
and authority, and exposing it naked and defenceless to
its enemies, had abated men's reverence for it ; and the
detecting Revelation of imposture, serving only for a
State-engine, had destroyed all love for Religion; yet
they were the intrigues of Church-promotiom
Avhich would make the People despise the whole Ordi-
nance.

Nor did the hopes of a better generation give much
relief to good men's present fears or feelings. The
People had been reasoned out of their Religion, by
such Logic as it was : and if ever they were to be brought
back to a sober sense of their condition, it was evident
tiiey must be reasoned into it again. Little thought and

B 3 less

6 DEDICATION (1765) TO

less learning were sufficient to persuade men of what
their vices inclined them to believe ; but it must be no
common share of both, which, in opposition to those
vices, shall be able to bring them to themselves. And
where is that to be expected, or hkely to be found ?
In the course of forty or fifty years (for I am not speak-
ing of present transactions) a new Generation or two are
sprung up : And those, whom their Profession has de-
dicated to this service, Experience has taught, that the
talents requisite for pushing their fortune lie very remote
from such as enable men to figure in a rational defence
of Religion. And it is very natural to think that, in
general, they ^^ill be chiefly disposed to cultivate those
qualities on u hich they see their Patrons lay the greatest
weight.

I have, my Lorcl, been the longer and the plainer in
deducing the causes of a recent evil, for the sake of
doing justice to the Exglish Clergy; who in this in-
stanc-, as in many others, have been forced to bear
the blame of their Betters. How common is it to hear
the ii religion of the times ascribed to the vices or the
indiscretions of Churchmen ! Yet how provoking is
such an insult ! when every child knows that this accusa-
tion is only an Echo from the lewd clamours of those
very Scribblers whose flagitious writings have been the
principal cause of these disorders.

In this disastrous state of things, it was my evil stars
which inclined me to write. I began, as these Poli-
ticians had done, with the Church. My purpose, 1 am
not ashamed to own, was to repel the cruel inroads
made upon its Rights and Privileges ; but, I thank God,
on honester principles than those which have been em-
ployed to prop up, with Gothic buttresses, a Jacobite
or High-Church Hierarchy. The success was what I
n.ight expect. I was read; and by a few indifferent
and intelligent Jud^es, perhaps, approved. But as I
made the Church neither a Slave nor a Tyrant (and
under one or other oi these ideas of it, almost ail men
had now taken partv) 1 he AUiance between Cliurch and
State though formed upon a Model actually existing
before our eyes, was considered as an Utopian refine-
ment. It is true, that so far as my own private satis-
faction

LORD MANSFIELD.

faction went, I had no great reason to complain. I had
the honour to be told by the heads of one Party, that
they allowed my pr'mciplcs* ; and by the heads of the
other, that they espoused conclusion ■\ ; which how-
ever amounted only to this, that the One was for Li-
berty, however they would chuse to employ it; and
the Other for power, however they could come at it.

I had another important view in writing this book. — •
Though nobody had been so shameless to deny the use
of lltiigion to civil Government, yet certain friends of
Liberty, under the terror of tiie mischiefs done to So-
ciety by Fanaticism, or Religion run mad, had, by a
strange preposterous policy, encouraged a clamour
against Estai3Ltshments : the only mode of Religion
which can prevent what they pretended to fear ; that is,
its degenerating into Fanaticism. It is true, had these
Clamourers not found more enemies to the Establish-
ment than they had made, (enemies on solider grounds,
to wit, the sense of their exclusion from the emoluments
of a national Church) an Establishment had hardly
given umbrage to the appointed Protectors of it. But
these had the Sectaries to caress : and a private and
pressing interest will often get the better of the most in-
dispensable maxims of good policy.

It was for this reason, my Lord, that so much of the
book is employed in the defence of a national or an
^established Religion ; since, under such a Form, Fana-
ticism can never greatly spread: and that little there
will always be of this critical eruption of our diseased
Nature, may have the same good effect on the Esta-
biished Religion which weak Factions are observed to
have on the administration of Government; it may keep
men more decent, alert, and attentive to the duties of
their Charge.

Where then was the wonder, that a subject so ma-
naged, and at such a juncture, should be violently op-
posed, or, to speak more truly, be grossly misrepre-
sented? Those in the new system accused me of
making the State a slave to the Church ; those in the
old, of making the Church a slave to the State ; and one
passionate Dcclaimer, as I remember, who cared equally
* Bishop Ilo. t Bishop Sh.

B4 for

DEDICATION (1765) TO

for Church and State, was pleased to say, that, the bet-
ter to b.inter mankind, I had done both *.

Havi'igf thus, in the foolish confidence of Youth, cast
in my Goosequill, to stem a torrent that in a little time
was, to bear down all before it ; 1 proceeded, with the
same good faith, in another romantic effort, The sup-
port of Religion itself.

You, my Lord, who feel so humanely for the In-
jured, on whomsoever POPULAR ixjustice may chance
to fall, have hardly forgotten the strange reception with
which this my fair endeavour was entertained ; and
principally by Those whose interests I was defending.
It awaked a thousand black passions and idiot preju-
dices. The Zealots intiamed the Biiiots,

— 'Twas the Times plague^
When madmen led the blind.

For, the noble prosecution of real Impiety was now
over ; or, at least, no longer serious. Wliat remained,
to belie a zeal for Religion, was a ridiculous Tartu ffisin;
ridiculous, because without the power to persecute :
otherwise, sufficiently serious, as it was encouraged by
men, at that time, in eminence of placet- ^'or false
Zeal and unbelieving Politics always concur, and often
find their account in suppressing novelties.

But things, untiaturally kept up in a state of violence,
in a little time subside: And though the first Writers,
let loose against me, came on as if they would devour ;
yet the design of those who, at spring and fall, have
ever since annually succeeded them, has been, I think,
only to eat. The imputation that yet sticks to my no-
tions, amongst many well-meaning men, is, tliat they
are paradoxical. And thouoh this be now made the
characteristic of my Writings, yet, whether from the
amusement which Paradoxes afford, or from whatever
other cause of malice or curiosity, the Public seem still
sufficient! v eager to see what, in snite of the Argument,
and perhaps in spite to it, tliey are pleased to call my
conclusiox. And as in your Lordships progress
through your high Stations (for I will not take mv com-
parison lower v hile my subject is public favour) men no

* Lord B. t Archbishop P.

sooner

LORD MANSFIELD.

sooner found you in one than they saw you necessary for
a hig!ier; so every preceding Volume seemed to excite a
stroni^er appetite for the following; lill, as I am told, it
came to a kind of impatience for the last : which must
have been strangely ol)siinate if in all this time it has
not subsided. And }et it is very possible it may not:
For, the good-natured pleasure of seeing an Author fill
up the measure of his Paradoxes, is wortli waiting for. ,
Of all nm^, I would not appear va'm before your Lord-
ship ; since, of all n)en, You best know how ill it
would become my pride. Nor am I indeed in much
dang(ir to have my head turned by this flattering circum-
ftance, while I remember that Rabelais teils us, and
I dare say he tells us truth, that the Public of his times
were full as imp-atientfor the conclusion of the unfinished
story of the giant Gargantua and his son Pantagruel.

I have now, both leisure and inclination to gratify this
Public fancy, after having put n)y last hand to these two
Volumes: A work of reasoning ; and though tairly pur-
sued, and, as I thought, brought home to its ^.'onclu-
siox, yet interspersed vith variety of Philologic disser-
tations: For I had to do with a sort of Readers not
less delicate than the fastidious Frenchnmn, who tells us
in so many words, that — La r.aison a tort des quelle
t:\nuve. As my purpose therefore was to l)rin2: Rea-
son into good Couipany, I saw it proper now and then,
to make her wait without, lest by her constant pre.-ence
she should happen to be thought tiresome. Yet still I
was careful not to betray her l ights : and the Disserta-
tions brought in to relieve the oj)pressed attention of the
Reade'-, was not more for his sake than for hers If I
was large in my discourse concerning the nature and
end of the Grecian Mysteries, it was to shew the
sense the antient Lawgiver^ had of the use oj Religion
to Society : and if I expatiated on the origin and use of
the Egyptian Hieroglyphics, it was to vindicate the
logical py^opriety of the Pi^ophttic language and senti-
ment, for I should have been ashamed to waste so
much time in classical amusements, and at last to join
them to your Lordship's Name, had they not had an in-
timate relation to the things most connected with Man
and his interests.

I have

10 DEDICATION (1765) TO

I hnve detained 3'our Lordship with a tedious Storv ;
and still I must beg your patience a little longer. \v e

are not yet got to the end of a bad prospect. AV'hile

I, and odicrs of niy Order, have been thus vainly con-
tending pro Ay is with the unequal arms of Reason ; we
had the further displeasure to find, that our Rulers (who,
as I observed above, liad iieedlcsslv suffered those ties
of Religion to be unloosed, by which, till of late, the
pa«;sions of the People had been restrained) were
struggling, almost as unsuccessfully, pro Focis witli a
corrupt and deb?aiched Community.

General History, in its Records of the rise and decay
of States, hath delivered down to us, amongst the more
important of its lessons, a faithful detail of every symp-
tom, which is wont to forerun and to prognosticate their
approacliin'jf ruin. It might be justly deemed the extra-
vagance of folly to believe, that those very Signs, w hich
have constantly preceded the fall of other States, should
signify nothing fatal or alarming to our own. On the
other hand, I would not totally condemn, in such a
dearth of Religious provision, even that species of piety,
which arises from a national pride, and flatters us with
being the peculiar attention of Heaven ; who will avert
those evils from his favoured People, which the natural
course of things would otherwise make inevitable : For,
indeed, we have seen (and, what is as strange as the
blessing itself, the little attention which is paid to it)
something very like such an extraordinary protection al-
ready exerted ; which resists, and, till now, hath ar-
rested, the torrent just ready to overwhelm us. The
circumstance, I mean, is this : — That w hile every other
part of the Community seems to lie in fcece Romuli, the
administration of Public Justice in England, runs as
pure as where nearest to its coelestial Source; purer
than Plato dared venture to conceive it, even in his
feigned Republic.

Now, whether we are not to call this, the interposing
band of Providence; for sure I am, all History doth
not afford another instance of so much purity and inte-
grity in one part, coexisting with so much decay and so
many infirmities in the rest : Or whether, profounder
Politicians may not be able to discover some hidden

force,

LORD MANSFIELD.

force, some peculiar viitiie in the essential parts, or in
the well-adapted frame, of our excellent Constitution:
— In either case, this singular and shining Phenomenon,
hath afforded a cheerful consolation to thinking men,
amidst all this dark aspect from our disorders and dis-
tresses.

I3ut the evil Genius of England would not suffer us
to enjoy it long; for, as if envious of this last support of
Government, he hath now instigated his blackest Agents
to the very extent of their malignity; who, after the
most villanous insults on all other Orders and Ranks in
Society, have at length proceeded to calumniate even
the King's Supreme Court of Justice, under its ablest
and most unblemished Administration.

After this, who will not be tempted to despair of his
Country, and say, with the good old man in the Scene,

- - - " Ipsa si cupiat Salus
" Servare, prorsus non potest, banc Familiam."

Athens, indeed, fell by degenerate manners like our
own : but she fell the later, and with the less dishonour,
for having always kept inviolable that reverence which
she, and indeed all Greece, had been long accustomed
to pay to her august Court of Areopagus. Of this
modest reserve, amidst a general disonier, we have a
striking instance in the conduct of one of the principal
Instruments of her ruin. The witty Aristophanes
began, as all such Instruments do (whether w ith wit or
without) by deriding Virtue and Religion ; and this, in
the brightest exemplar of both, the godlike Socrates.
The Libeller went on to attack all conditions of Men.
He calunmiated the Magistrates ; he turned the Public
Assemblies into ridicule ; and, with the most beastly
and blaspheynoiis abuse, outraged their Priests, their
Altars, nay, the very established (iods themselves. — •
But here he stOj)ped ; and, unav\ ed by all besides, whe-
ther of divine or human, he did not dare to cast so
much as one licentious trait against that venerable
Judicature. A circumstance, which the Readers of his
witty ribaldry, cannot but observe with surprise and
admiration ; — not at the Poet's modesty, for he had
none, but at the remaining virtue of a debauched^ and

rained

DEDICATION, &c. (1765.)

mined People ; who yet would not bear to see that clear
Fountain of Justice defiled by the odious Spawn of Buf-
foons and Libellers.

Nor was this the only consolation which Athens had
in its calamities. Its pride was flattered in failing by
apostate Wits of the first Order: while the Agents of
public mischief amongst us, with the hoarse notes and
blunt pens of Ballad-makers, not only accelerate our
ruin, but accumulate our disgraces : \V^retches the most
contemptible for their parts, the most infernal for their
manners.

To conclude. Great Men, ray Lord, are sent for the
Times ; the Times are fitted for the rest, of common
make. Erasmus and the present Chief Justice of
England (whatever he may think) were sent by Pro-
vidence, for the sake of humanity, to adorn two periods,
when Religion at one time, and Society at another,
most needed their support; I do not say, of their great
talents, but of that heroic moderation so necessary
to allay the violence of public disorders ; for to be mo-
derate amidst party-extremes, requires no common
degree of patriotic courage.

Such characters rarely fail to perform much of the
task for which they were sent; but never without find-
ing their labour ill repaid, even by those in whose ser-
vice it was employed, lliat glo)y of' the Priesthood
left the World, he iiad so nobly benefited, with this ten-
der complaint, — " Hoc tempore nihil scribi aut agi
" potest quod not pateat calumni.e; nec raro fit, ut
" dum agis circumspectissime utramque partem of-
" fendas, quum in utraque slnt qui pariter insani-
" ant." a complaint, fated, alas! to be the motto of
every Man who greatly serves his Country.

I have the honour to be,
My Lord,
Your Lordship's most obliged,

most obedient and faithful Servant,

February 2, 1765. W. GLOUCESTER.

DEDICATION

TO THE FIRST EDITION OF
Books IV. V. VI. of the
OF THE DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES;

1740.

TO T H E J E W S.

SIRS,

THE purpose of this Work being to prove the Divine
Legation of Moses, it will, I hope, have so much
merit w ith you, as to engage your serious attention to
the following Address ; which, from the divinity of
Moses's Law, as in this work demonstrated, attempts
to shew you, how, by necessary consequence, it follows,
that the Religion of Jesls is also divine.

But, while I am laying my conclusions before you,
let me beseech you not to suffer yourselves to be pre-
judiced against the evidence, by such kind of fallacies
as these ; Both Jtu's and Christians confess, that the
religion of Moses came from God : hut one only, of
these tzco Sects, believe the divinity of that of Jesus :
the safest xcay, therefore, is to adhere to uhat both sides
own to be true. An argument, which however like,
hath not in all its parts, even so much force as what
the idolatrous Romanists are wont to urs;e against the
Reformed — That as both parties hold salvation may be
had in the church of RojMy and only one party holds it

viay

U DEDICATION (1740) TO

maij be liad in the churches of the Reformed, it is safest
to adhere to Popery : which I dare say you laugh at for
its impertinence, how much soever you may have de-
luded others by the same kind of sophistry *. For if
the Roman CathoHcs, or you, will not take our word
for Christianity or Reformation, ^Yhy do you build any
thing upon it, in favour of Popery or Judaism ? Both
of you will say, perhaps, " because we are prejudiced
in the former conclusion ; but that the mere force of
evidence extorts the latter from us even against our-
selves."' This is easily said ; and may, perhaps, be
easily believed, by those who, taking their Religion from
their ancestors, are apt to measure Truth only by its
antiquity. But genuine Christianity offering itself only
to the private judgments of men, every sincere enquirer
believes as he finds cause. So that if either you or
they Avould give yourselves the trouble to examine our
motives, it would appear, that the very same reasons
which force us to conclude that Christianity in ge-
neral, and the R.eformed religion in particular, are true,
force us at the same time to conclude that the Jewish
was from God ; and that salvation may be obtained,
though with much difficulty, in the church of Rome.
Either, therefore, the w hole of our conclusion is preju-
dice, or no part of it is so.

As I would not have you harden your habitual ob-
stinacy in favour of your own Religion, by bad argu-
ments ; so neither will I use any such to draw you over
to ours.

I shall not therefore attempt that way to bring you
to the truth, which some amongst us, little acquainted,
as should seem, either with your Dispensation, or the
Christian, imagine they have discovered : Who, taking
it for granted that the Mosaic Law can be defended only
by the Gospel of Jesus, pretend you must first acknow-
ledge our Religion, before you can support your ow n :
and so. which is very hard, will not allow you to have

• This, the miserable Urid Acosta tells us, %vas one of the
principal argumenis that induced him to embrace Judaism. —
Prajterea veteii loederi fidem dabant tarn Judaei quam Chnstiani ;
novo autem foederi soli Christiani. Exemplar bumanee vitae, p. 346.
in fin. Arnica Collat. Phil, a Limborch.

any

THE JEWS.

any reasonable assurance of the truth of your Religion
till you have forsaken it *. But I would not urge you
w ith such kind of reasoning, if it were only for this, that
I sus|"/ect you may not be such utter strangers to the New
Testament as not to know, that it lays the foundation
of Christianity in Judaism. Besides, right reason, as
well as St. Paul (which with us, at present, are still the
same thing) would teach you to reply to such Con-
vertists : Boast not against the branches of the native
olive-tree : but if thou boosts thou bearcst not the root,
but the root thee f .

Much less would I employ, in this Address, the
quainter project of our common x'\dversary, the Free-
thinker. For you are to know, that as those I spoke
of before, make Christianity too recent, so these make
it as much too old ; even as old as the Creation. Those
fall short of the support of Judaism ; These overleap
it; and assure us, that the only way to bring you to
believe in Jesus, is to prove Moses an impostor. So
says a late writer : who, by the singular happiness of a
good choice, having learnt his morality of our Tyndal,
and his philosophy of your Spinoza, calls himself, by the
courtesy of England, a jioral philosopher;}:.

The road I have taken is indeed very different : and
the principles I go upon for your conversion, will equally
serve, to their confutation. For I have shewn that the
Law of Moses was from God ; and, at the same time,
that it is only preparatory to the more perfect Reli-
gion of Jesus.

The limits of this Address will not allow me to point
out to you any other arguments than what arise imme-
diately from those important circumstances of the Law,
discoursed of in this Work. Much less shall I have
room to urge you with a repetition 6f those reasonings,

* "■' Dr. Rogers has declared, as I remember in oae of his ser-
" mons, that lie could not believe the truth of Mosf.s's pretensions,
" were it not for the confirmation given to them by the Gospel.
" This I take to be a dangerous assertion, that saps the very ibun-
*' dation of Christianity ; and supersedes at once the whole purpose

of your intended work, by denying any original intrinsic character
" of divinity to the institution of Moses." Dr. Middleton's Letter
to Mr, W. Nov. 30, 1736. vol. v. of his Works.

t Rom. xi. 18. { MoRGA».

•which

i6 DEDICATION (1740) TO

which Christian writers have aheady used with so supe-
rior a lorce against you.

Let us see then what it is that keeps you still enslaved
to a galling Discipline, so long after the h^ee, offers of
Redeniption. The two principal reasons, I suppose,
are these :

I. First, a presumption that the Religion of Moses
is perfect ; so full and complete in all its members as to
be abundantly capable of supplying the spiritual v\ants
of men, by preparing and fitting human nature for the
enjoyment of the supren}e Good, and by proposing and
procuring the possession of that Good. Hence vou
conclude, and, were your presumption well-grounded,
not unreasonably, that the Law was given as a perpetual
ordinance, to be observed throughout all your genera-
tions for ever.

II. The second is a persuasion that the Prophecies
(a necessary credential of the Messiah) which, we sav,
relate to Jesus, relate not to him in a primary sense;
and that a secondary sense is a fanatic vision raised by
deluded Christians to uphold a groundless claim.

For thus one of our common enemies, who hath in-
forced your arguments against us, tells the world, you
are accustomed to speak. All the books written by
Jexvs against the Christian Religion i^says he) some of
which are printed, and others go about Europe in manu-
script, chiefly attack the New Testament jor the alle-
gorical interpretations of the Old Testament therein,
and zcith the greatest insolence and contempt imaginable
on that account ; and oppose to them a single and literal
iyiterpretation as the true sense of the Old Testament.
A7id accordingly the allegorical interpretations given by
Christian expositors of the Prophecies are now the
grand obstacle and stumbling-block in the xcay of the
conversion f the Jews to Christianity

These, it seems, are the two great impediments to
your conversion. Give me leave then to shew you how
the reasoning of this book removes tliem-

I. As to the perfection of your Religion, it is here
proved, that, though it indeed had that specific per-

* Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion, pp. 82, 83.

fection,

THE JEWS. 17

fection, which no Religion comin«; from God can want *,
that is, a full ciijiacity of attaining its end, which was
the separation of the race of Abraham from an idola-
trous world ; yet that it was perfect only in this restrained
and relative sense. As to absolute independent perfec-
tion, the Law had it not.

1. That it had no perfection with regard to the im-
provement of human nature for the enjoyment of the
supreme Good, I have shewn from the genius of your
whole religious Worship ; and its general direction
against the various idolatries of those early ages. And
in this I have a Doctor of your own, the famous Mai-
MONIDES, for my warrant: who indeed little thought,
while he was proving this ti uth in so invincible a man-
ner, that he was preparing the more reasonable part of
his Brethren for the reception of the Gospel. It is true,
some of your later writers have seen better into this con-
sequence: and Orobio, in his dispute with Limborch,
hath part of a chapter f to disprove, or, rather, to
deny the fact. But if your religious Worship consist
only of a multifarious burdensome Ritual, relative to
the Superstitions ©f those early times, it must needs be
altogether unable to perfect human nature in such a
manner, as you do and must allow to be God's design,
in a revealed Religion, universal and perpetual.

2. Again, as to the second branch of this perfection,
the proposing and procuring the possession of the su-
preme Good : I have shewn that the Law of Afcjses re-
vealed NO FUTURE STATE of rewards and punishments,
but studiously declined the mention of any doctrine pre-
paratory to it : that no Mosaical Tradition supplied this
omission : and that it did not become a national doctrine
amongst you till the later times of your republic ; w hen
it arose trom various and discordant sources ; and was
brought in on foreiu^n occasions. But it is certain, that
that Religion must fall very short of absolute perfection,
which wants a doctrine so essential 10 Religion in

* Sec this proved against Lord Holiiigbroke, Took v § 1,
•f Tlie title of the chapter is: Quod nuiaha iioii erdiit piaecise ut
Israel ab aliis populis separaretur ; neqiie lex neque fjdpuius propter
Messiam, sed hie propter populum, ut ei iriserviret, p. 8(3. Ed.
Goud.

Vol. IV. C gene-

t3 dedication (1740) TO

general*. And this, you yourselves at length seem to
have been aware of : for though, during the existence of
your Republic, the denicrs of a future state, such as
the Sadducees, were not cut off from the rights of the
S\nagogue; yet since that time, it hath been generally
held by your Doctors for a prime cause of excomniuni-
eation : — One of tliem says, that it is the very Junda-

* Here Dr. Stebbing charges me with contradiction; [Exam. p. 9.]
first io asserting, that a future state 7nadc no part of the Religion of
Moxes; and then that a future state was essential to Religion in ge-
neral. Now this, which he is pleased to call a contradiction, I
brought as an argument for the divinity of the Law, and supposed it
to be conclusive by its consistency. — Where I speak of B.eligion in
general, I explain my meaning to be, a Religion universal and per-
petual, such as Natural Religion and the Christian ; and from thence
I argue, that if a future state be essential to a Religion universal and
perpetual; and a future state be not fuund in the Religion of Moses,
that then tlie Religion of Moses was not universal and perpetual, but
local and temporary ; the pomt I was inforcing, in order to bring
over the Jews to the Gospel of Jesus. If the Doctor supposes, that
what is essential in one species of Religion must be esseutial in the
other, this is supposing them not to be of different species, but one
and the sanne ; that is, it supposes, that they are and that they are
not of the same species. — But, continues our Doctor, " If you sliould
" say, that your argument is levelled against the Jews, considered
" only in their present state, in which they are not under an equal
" Providence, t/iis answer sill not serve you. For as in their present
" state they are not under any extraordinary Providence, so neither
" do the)' want the doctrine of a future siate, of which you tell us
" they have been in possession long ago." p. 11. What pains does
this learned Doctor take to make my application to the Jews, in fa-
vour of Christianity, ineffectual ! Your Religion (say I to them)
teaches no future state. You are at present under the common un-
equal Providence of Heaven. How disconsolate is your condition !
Not so bad neither, replies their Advocate, Doctor Stebbing They
NOW have a future state. How came they by it? By the Law?
No matter, says he, they have it, and that is enough to destroy all
the force of your persuasion to embrace the Gospel. Not altogether
enough, good Doctor: for if they have not tlie future state by the
Laiv, (and that truth I lake for granted in this address to them, as
I think 1 reasonably might, after I had proved it at large) tbeir fu-
ture state, even by their own confession, is a Phantom: and to gain
the Substance, there is no way left but to embrace the Gospel.
They themselves own this truth : for in the words quoted below, they
confess that believe a future state, and yet that it was not revealed
by tlie Law, is the same thing as not to believe it at all. — It is a sad
thing when Polemics or blacker passions have gotten so entire pos-
session of a man's heart, that he cares not what harm he does to a
common cause, or even to common sense, so he can but answer the
man or the opinion he happens to dislike.

mental

THE JEWS.

mental of fmuhmcntab'^'; Another, that to deny

this is the same thing as to deny God hiinscif, and the
Divinity of his Laxv^- : and a third, that even to believe
it, and yet not believe that it xvas revealed by the Laze,
is the same thing as not to believe it at all'^.

But you M ill do well, when you have considered the
force of those reasonings by v\ hich I prove a future state
not to be revealed by the La\v of Moses, to go on
with me, (for the free thoughts of many atnongst you,
concerning Revelation in general, give scandal to the
professors of n)ore than one Religion) while I prove,
from thence, by necessary consequence, that this Law
came from God: And, in conclusion, join with me in
adoring the intinite Wisdom of the God of your Fa-
thers, here so wonderfLdly displayed, in making one and
the same circumstance a standing evidence of the di-
vinity of the Mosaic Religion, and, at the same time,
an irrefragable proof that it was preparatory only to the
Christian ; The logical result of all our reasoning being
the confirmation of this sacred truth, long since enounced
by a great Adept in your Law, That the Law made

NOTHING PERFECT, BUT THE BIllNGIXO IN OF A

BETTER Hope did§.

Permit me to observe farther, that this rabbinical
notion of a future state of rewards and punishments in

* Sciipsit Rab. (Maimon.) p. m. Articulus fundanientdis deciinu.j
tertius agit de resurrectlone, cujus rationem (quomodo se habeat) &
fundameiita jam exposuimus. Quod si homo ciediderit lundamenta
ilia omnia, seque ilia credeie declaraverit, ingreditiir Ecclesiam Is-
raeli?, jubemur diligere ilium, & misencordiam illi exhibere, &
conveisari cum illo juxta omnia, quae pra^cepit Dtus benedictus cm-
libet erga prnximuin facienda. — Si quis autum vilipenderit hoc fun-
damenlum excellcntium fundamentorum, ecce exit ille cx Ecclesia,
quippe qui abnegat articulum fidei, & vocatur impius ac Epicureus,
amputatque plantas, quern odio haber3 & perdere jubemur. Ex
betb Elohim. Vid. Dassovium de Resuneciion'.-, Ed. 1693.

t -Haec fides [dc Resuirectione nioituoium] iiumeretur inter

articulo.s Legis & t'undament.i ejus, qumi qui negat, pcrinde tacit
acsi negaret esse Deum, legem esse a ctelo, ic quod in aliis istis ar-
ticulis tractatur. R. Salomo ap. Dassovmm de Resurrect.

X Oportet te scire articulum lidei de resurrectlone mortuorum ex
lege esse. Quod si quis fide firma rredident resurreclionem mortu-
orum, non autem crediderit esse illdm ex lege, ecce ille reputatur
acsi h^.'c onniia negaret. B.. Jehud. Zabara apud Dassov.

§ Heb. v.i. xg.

c 2 the,

20 DEDICATION (1740) TO

the IMosaic Dispensation, which still encourages the
renmant of your Nation to persist in rejecting the Gos-
pel ot Jesus, was the very prejudice which, in the first
ages of Christianity, so superstitiously attached the
Converts from Judaism, to the whole observance of the
Law.

As a Corollary to all this, I have shewn, that the
punishment of Children for the crimes of their Parents,
which hath given a handle to the enemies of your Law
to blaspheme, can be only well explained and vindicated
on the Principle of no future state in the Religion of
Moses: And farther, tliat, on this Principle, all the
inextricable embarras of your Rabbins, in their endea-
vours to reconcile the different accoimts of Moses and
the Prophets concerning that method of punishment, is
intirely removed, and a perfect harmony and concord
is seen to reign amongst them. But at the same time
that the Principle does this, take notice, it disables you
from accounting for the length of your present disper-
sion. For the only reason your best defender, Orobio,
had to assign for it was, that you now suff er not for
your oxoi sins, but for the si}is of your Foref athers.
But the Principle .which reconciles Closes and the Pro-
phets, shews that this mode of punishment hath long
since ceased.

II.- In answer to the second part, your prejudices
against tlie credentials of Jesus's Messiahship, tor the
want of rational evidence in a secoiulary sense of Pro-
phecy ; I have proved those prejudices to be altogether
vain and groundless : 1. By tracing up the nature of hu-
man converse in speech and writing, from its early
original ; and from tlience evincing, that a secondary
sense of Prophecies is proper, rational, and comform-
able to tlie justest rules of grammar and logic. — 2. By
shew ing that this method of information was so exactly
suited to the occasion, that if ever you were to have a
Messiah to complete your Law, the body of the Pro-
phecies, relating to him, must needs be given in the
very manner which those in dispute are actuahy given:
For that, had tliese Prophecies recorded the nature of
the iViessians Kingdom in plain and direct terms, it
would have defeated the very end and purpose of the
23 Law.

THE JEWS. ' 21

Law. And this, on refiection, you will find a sufficient
answer to those four Queries into which your ablest
Defender* has collected the whole strength of your
cause.

As a Corollary, likewise, to this part, 1 shew, in
order to reconcile you still farther to the Messiahship of
Jesus, that the history of God's Dispensations to your
Fathers, even before his giving the Law, can never be
rishtly understood, or fully cleared from the objections
of Unbelievers, but on the supposition of the redemp-
tion of mankind by the death and sufferings of Jesus.
And of this I have given a convincing proof in the
famous history of the Command to Abraham to offer up
his Son. Which I prove to be no other than a Keve-
LATiox of that Redemption, delivered in action instead
of words. This stiongly corroborates the IMission of
Jesus, and should incline you seriously to consider its
force. — Here God reveals to your father Abraham the
Redemption of Mankind by the death and passion of
his Son. N\ hy then, 1 ask you, snould yon not con-
clude with our learned Apostle, that to Abraham and
his seed the Promises being made, the Covenant that
'was confirmed before of God in Christ, the Law
which was four hundred and thirty years ajter cannot
disannul, that it should make the P)'amise of none
effect f?

Having thus shewn your Religion to be partial, im-
perfect, and preparatory ; and consequently shewn the

* Orobio. 1. Ut assignetur locus aliquisin quo Deus mandaverit,
aut dixerit expresse, qiiud fides in Messiam est absolute necessaria
ad saliitem generis huinani; adeo ut qui non credideiit damnaii-
dus esset.

2. Ut assignetur locus, in quo Deus dixerit, quod unicum medium
ad salutem Israelis, et reslitutionis in divinam f^i atiam, es^t tide in
]\Ies.siaiTi jam adventum.

3 Ut assignetur locus, in quo Deus dixent, quod Israel propter -
infidelit.item in Messiam erat oeperdend'^s, ti abjir xndus in nat. 'i-
bus, ut non sit amplius I'opulus iJei, set! ai aneiiiuju damn^uclus
donee Messiam adventuin non ciedidei 't.

4. Tandem assi_,neiur locus, in qu ■ dixit Lens, oiiuua Le <. ia
pritter moralia, tuisbe umbiam, seu figuiaui furum uni :u idveriTu
Measiae, et quod leie omnia quaj & in a/vina Le_e er ii: Prop <rtis
fueie revelata, mystice et tropolouick explica e l eat, qu lutuni-
vis sensus lite.alis omnino despiciatur. Arnica collauo Lnin,. ^. 1^ i.
t Gal. ui. i6, 17.

c 3 necessity

12 DEDICATIOX (1740} TO

necessity of its compIeti07i by the teaching of a Messiah ;
to whose character in the person of Jksus, I have en-
deavoured to reconcile you, by removing your only
plausible objection, the mistaken nature of the Prophe-
cies concerning him; As a Corollary to the vhole, I
have proved, in order to remove your prejudices tor a
worldly Prince, and a restoration to a carnal Dominion
in Judea, that your race was not at first chosen by Ctqd,
and settled in the land of Cenaan, as his favourites,
for whom he had a greater fondness than for oiher of
the sons of Ada 'n ; but only to serve the general ends of
Providence, in its Dispensations to the whole Species ;
which required the temporary separation of one People
from the rest of Maukiiid, to preserve, amidst an ido-
latrous world, the great doctrine of the Umtv, as the
foundation of that universal Religion to be dispensed
by Je»us, when the fulness of tinie should com.c. Which
time being now come, find the end obtained, you cannot
but confess there is no further use or purpose of a
national separation.

Let me add tlie following observation, which ought
to have some weight with you. Whoever reads jour
history, and believes you, on your own word, to be
still tied to the Religion of Moses, and to have nothing
to expect from that of Jesus, must needs regard you
as a People long since abandoned of God. And those
who neither read nor believe, will pretend at least to
think 3'Ou forsaken of all reason. Our Scriptures alone
give us better hopes of your condition : and excited by
the Charity they inspire, I am moved to hazard this ad-
dress unto you. For a time, as they assure us, will
come, when this veil shall be taken from your hearts.
And who knows how near at hand the day of visitation
may be? At least, who would not be zealous of con-
tributing, though in the lowest degree, to so glorious a
work? For if the fall of you be the ricltes of thefVorld,
and the dinmmhing cf you the riches of the Gentiles,
how much more your fulness * ! says the Apostle Paul.
Who at the same time assures us, that blindness i)i part
is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles
be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved f.

* Rom. xi. 12. t Ver. 25, 26,

I know

THE JEWS.

I know you will be ready to say, "that much of this
sort ot Charity hath been preached to your People, even
amidst the horrors of the Inquisition ; and that it has
always made a suitable iuipression : that indeed, in a
land of liberty like Britain, you should have thought
much more favourably of our good-will, had not a late
transaction, in which your natural rigiits came in
question, amply convinced you that Christian Charity is
every where the same."

Sufferers, even imaginary ones, may be excused a little
hard language ; especially when they only repeat the cla-
mours of those amongit ourselves; who, on the defeat of
your Naturalization project, affected to feel most sen-
sibly for the interests of Liberty and Commerce. And
yet I think it no difficulty to convince unprejudiced men,
that the Sanctity of Government was, in the first in-
stance, surprised ; and that the Legislature did justly
as well as politicly in acting conformably to their second
thoughts.

A People like this of Great Britain, the genius of
whose Religion and Government equally concur to make
tlif m tender and jealous of the rights of mankind, were
naturally led by their first motions to think they might
extend those privileges to your Nation, which they saw
plainly were the due even of the followers of Mahomet :
And yet for all this they were mistaken.

As much a paradox as this may seem, it is easy to
shew that in this point. You stand distinguished to your
disadvantage from all the Nations upon earth : ther-e
being in your case, a peculiar circumstance which must
eternally exclude your claim to the general right of Na-
turalization, in every free Government in Christendom,
while men act, not to say with common integrity, but
even with common decency, according to their pro-
fession.

Let us then consider your case as it is understood by
Christian Communities ; for men must always act, would
they act honestly, according to their own conceptions
of the case, not according to the conceptions of other
men.

Now it is a common principle of Christianity, that
God, in punishing your Nation for the rejection of their

c 4 promised

24 DEDICATION (17-40) TO

promised Messiah, hath sentenced it to the irremissible
inlaniy of an unsetlled vagabond condition, without
Country or Civil policy, till the fulness of the Gentiles
be come hi : and then, as we observed before, our St.
Paul declares, that vour Nation, converted to the faith
in Jesus, shall be received again into favour, and in-
titled to the privilege of Sons. 'J he sentence denounced
upon you was not only the loss of your own Community,
but the being debarred an entrance into any other. For
you are condemned to be aliens and strangers in every
land where you abide and sojourn. A punishment
which can only respect Particulars, and not the Com-
munity; for one People can be no other than aliens and
strangers to another People, by the constitution of
Nature. So that the sentence against you imports, that
the Particulars of your race shall not be received by Ka-
turalizaticn, to the rights and privileges of the free-born
Subjects of those civil States amongst which you .shall
happen to be dispersed. And we have seen this sen-
tence wonderfully confirmed by the actual intiiction of
it for the space of seventeen hundred years ; which must
Le confessed to give great credit to the truth of our in-
terpretation of your Prophecies.

Put to understand more clearly w hat share a christian
Community ought to take in preventing any ixsult
on those Prophecies v\hich it holds to be divine, it will
be necessary to consider what will be the worldly con-
dition of your Nation when reinstated in God's favour ;
which both you and we are equally instructed to expect.

If it shall be, as you imagine, a recovery of your Civil-
policy, a revival of the Temple-service, and a re- pos-
session of the land of Judea ; if this be the mercy pro-
mised to jour Naiion, then indeed the intermediate
punishment, between the abolition and the restoration
of your divine Policy, can be only the temporary want
of it ; and consequendy the facilitating your entry at
present into the several civil Communities of christian
inen, might well be thought to have no more tendency
to insult the general Economy of revealed Religion than
the naturalizing of Turks and Tartars.

But the genius of Christianity and the tenor of those
Prophecies, as interpreted by Christ and his Apostles,

declare

THE JEWS.

declare such a restoration to the land of Judea and a
revival of the Temple-service, to be manifestly absurd,
and altogether inconsistent with the nature of the whole
of God's religious Dispensation : for by this it appears,
that the Mosaic Law or Rehgiion (as distinguished from
its foundation, natural Religion, on Mhich it was
erected) was only preparatory to, and typical of
the Gospel. Consequently, on the establishment of
Christianity, the Political part of your institution became
abolished ; and the Ritual part entirely ceased ; just as
a scaffold is taken down \a hen a building is erected ; or
as a shadow is cast behind when the substance u brought
forward into day. Nor were you, after this promised
conversion, to expect AX Y other Civil policy or reli-
gious Ritual peculiar to yourselves, or separate from
those in use amongst men who profess the name of
Chiist : because the Gospel, of which you are now
supposed to be professors, disclaims all concern with
political or civil matters; and because all its professors
compose but one religious Body, under one head, which
is Christ.

All therefore that remains for us to conceive of your
civil condition, when the fulness oj the Gentiles shall be
come in, and Israel be received into grace, is this. That,
on your conversion, you shall be naturalized and
incorporated, as your convenience or inclination may
lead you, into the various civil Communities of the
Faithful.

This is the only idea we Christians can entertain of
your future condition : and this may and must regulate
our conduct whenever an alteration of your prese/it con-
dition comes in question.

And now to justify the Councils of our Lawgivers
in their last and perhaps final determination concerning
you.

If the DECLARED punishment of heaven on your
Nation, while you continue in unbelief, be dispersion
through the world, without a Civil policy of your
own as a People, and without a country, as Par-
ticulars ; and that your restoration to favour, on your
embracing the Gospel, is the being received into the
Church of Christ, and (as you can be received therein

only

DEDICATION (1740) TO

only as Particulars, and not as a Nation) the being in"-
couPORATED iuto tlic scveval civil Communities of
Christians; then, any attempt to incorporate you by
Naiui aiizal'wn into such civil CGtniiiunities, before the
time predicted and while you adhere to your old Ke-
liuion, as directly' opi)oses the Prophecies, or the de-
clared will of IJeaven, as the attempt of Julian to rebuild
your Temple, after the sentence of its final destruction
had been put in execution : because it aims to procure
for you a civil con'ditio.v while Jews, which it is
foretold you shall not enjoy till you are become Chris-
tians. Nor is it of any avail to those Politicians who
were concerned of late in your favour, to pretend that
Julian's attempt was with malice, and their's with much
integrity of heart j since this difterence makes no change
in the nature of the action, as it respects God's Dispen-
sations, whatever it may be supposed to do, in the
quality of it, as it respects the Actors. In either case,
the declared will of Heaven is opposed. When it is
done with knowledge of the Prophecy, and with inten-
tion to discredit it, the attempt is wicked and impious :
when with a forgetful ness of it, with a disregard to Re-
ligi'in, and a neglect of its interests, the attempt (even
in this best way of considering it) is indecent and dis-
honourable. Not that He who thus conceives of things,
hath the least apprehension that Prophecy can be dis-
honoured, or have its predictions defeated by Civil
Power : But this He thinks, that a Christian State while
it enacts Laws, though unwarily, whose operation com-
bats the truth of those Predictions, may very easily dis-
honour itself.

A Nation professing Christianity, though principally
busied in the office of protecting Hberty and commerce,
ceases not to be a nation of Christians, amidst all their
cares to discharge the duties of good Citizens. They
have the interests and honour of their Religion to sup-
port as well as the co ninon-rights of Mankind. For
though Civil society be totally and essentially different
fiom the Ecclesiastical, yet as the same Individuals
compose the mensbers of both; and as there is the
closest Coalition between both, for their mutual support
and benefit ; such Civil society can never decently or

honourably

THE JEWS.

honourably act with a total disresanl to that co-aliied
Reliiiion, which they profess to bciicve, and of which,
under another consideration, Uiey compose the body.

Perhaps You may tell me, it appears from the manner
in which this late affair was conchieted, that none of these
considertitions ever entered into the heads, either of your
Friends, or, those you will call, your Enemies, when,
at length, they both agreed to leave you as they found
you. It may be so. Yet this does not hinder but that
the result of a Council, may be justified on principles
which never influenced it. And as for the credit of Re-
velation, that generally becomes more conspicuous « hen,
through the ignorance and perverseness of foolish men,
the predictions of Heaven arc supported by Instruments
which knew not what they were aljout. Had they acted
with more knowledge of the ca je, the enemies of Religioa
would be apt to say, No wonder that the honour of Pro-
pliecy is suppoi ted, when the Power which could dis-
credit it, held it an impiety to make the attempt.

'J'hus you see the Briush Legislacure is justified in its
last determination concerning you, on all the general
principles of piety, honesty, and decency. I speak of
men, and I speak to men, wlio believe the Religion they
profess. As for those profligates, whether atnongst
yourselves or us, who are ready to profess tf/z?/ Religion,
but much better disposed to believe )W7ie, to them, this
reasoning is not addressed. Have a fairer opinion there-
fore of our Charity, and believe us to be sincere when
we profess ourselves,

Your, aCc.

PREFACE

TO THE FIRST EDITION O T

Books IV. V. VI. of the
DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES;
1 7 40.

THE Author of The Divine Legation of Moses, a
private clergyman, had no sooner given his iirst Volume*
to the Public, than he was fallen upon in so outrageous
and brutal a manner as had been scarce pardonable had
it been The Divine Legation of Mahomet. j\nd what
was most extraordinary, by those very men whose
Cause he was supporting, and A^hose Honours and
Dignities he had been defending. But what grotesque
instruments of vengeance had Bigotrv set on foot!
If he was to be run down, it had been some kind of
consolation to him to fall by savages, of whom it was no
discredit to be devoured.

Optat aprinn, aut fulvum descendere monte Leonem.

However, to do them justice, it must be owned, that,
what they wanted in teeth, they had in venom ; and
they knew, as all Brutes do, where their strength lay.
For reasons best known to Bigotry, he was, in spite
of all liis [)rofessions, to be pushed over to the Enemy,
by every kind of provocation. To support this pious
purpose, passages were distorted, propositions invented j",
conversation betrayed, and forged letters written +.

* Books I. II. III.

f See the Author's Letter to Smallbrooke, Bishop of Lichfield and
Coventry, in which he accuses the Bishop of th:s crime ; To which
accusation, the Public never yet saw either defence or excuse.

+ By one Roiuaine ctnd one Julius Bate in conjunction.

The

PREFACE TO Books IV. V. VI.

The attack was opened by one who bore the respec-
table name of a Country Clergipnan,. but was in reality
a Town- Writer of a Weekly Newspaper*; and uitli
such excess of insolence and malice, as the Public had
never vet seen on any occasion whtitsoever.

Amidst all tliis unprovoked clamour, the Author had
his reasons for sparing these nretclicd tools of impotence
anil envy. His friends thought it beneath him to com-
mit himself with such writers; and he liimself supposed
it no good policy to irritate a crew of Zealots, nho had,
at their tirst opening, called loudly upon the secular
arm. Our Author indeed could talk big to the Free-
thinkers; for alas, poor men! he knew their wea-
pons : All their arms were arguuients, and those none
of the sharpest ; and Wit, and that none of the bright-
est. But he had here to do \\\\\\ men in Authority;
appointed, if you will believe them, Inspectors-General
over clerical Faith. And they went forth in all the
pomp and terror of Inquisitors ; w ith Suspicion before,
Condonnation beliind, and their two assessors, Ignorance
and Insolence, on each side. IVe must suspect his
faith (say they) — JVe must condemn his book — JVe do
not understand his argument

— But it may perhaps be of use to Posterity at least,
if ever these slight sheets should happen to come down
to it, to explain the provocation wliich our Author had
given for so riiuch unlimited abuse and calumny. Tiie
Reader then may be pleased to know, that the Author's
fust Volume of The Divine Legation oj Moses was as
well a sequel and support of The Alliance bttrteen
Church an ! State (a book written in behalf of our Con-
stitution and Established Clergy) as it was an introduc-
tion to a projected Defence of Revelation. It might
likewise be regarded as an intire work of itself, to shew
the usejulntss of Religion to Society. This, and the
large bulk of the Volume, disposed him to publish it
apart ; u hile the present state of Religion amongst us
seenjed to give it a peculiar expediency, " an open and
*' professed disregard to Religion" (as an excellent Pas-

* Dr. \Vel)Stf-r hy name. Who soon iilie)-, by a circular letter to
the bench of l5,sho|>b, claimed aiewaid ior tliib »^xplcit.
t Webster, Yean, htebbinjj, Wateilanci, and olLers.

tor

30 PREFACE to first edition

tor of our Church observes^ " being become the dis-
*' tinguishing character of the present age. An evil
" grown to a ^reat height in the MetropoHs of the Na-
*' tion, and daily spreading through every part of it;
*' which hath aheady brought in such dissoluteness and
" contempt of principle in the higlier part of the w orld,
" and such profligate intemperance and fearlessness
" of committin'i; crimes in the lower, as must, if this
" torrent of impiety stop not, become absolutely fatal*."
Our Author tlicrefore thought, that as this evil, which is
now spread through the po[)ulace, began in the liigher
part oj the world, it must be first checked there, if ever it
were checked at all. And he knew no better way to do
this, than by shewing those People of Condition (who,
amidst all the ir couttnipt of religious Principlei yet pro-
fessed the greatest zeal for tlieir country and mankind)
that Religion is ahsolutelxj necessary for the support of
civil Government. He thought too, this no ill device
to get the advocate of Revelation a fair hearing. For
he supposed, that unless they could be made to see the
usejulness of Christianity to Society (which their con-
tempt of Principle shewed they yet did not see) they
would never be brought to believe its Truth, or Divinity.

These were his endeavours and designs. What he
got for his pains, I have already told the Reader. —

In vain had he endeavoured to deserve well of Re-
ligion at large, and of the Church of England in parti-
cular;— by fixing the true grounds of morality; — by
confuting the atheistic arguments of Bayle, and the
flagitious Principle of Mandeville ; — by explaining the
natures, settling the bounds, and adjusting the distinct
rights of the tzoo Societies ; — and by exposing the im-
pious tenet, of Religion's being the contrivance of Poli-
ticians.

All this went for nothing with the Bigots. He had
departed from the old posture of dejence, and had pro-
jected a new plan for the support of Revelation. His
Demonstration (says one of them) if he could viahe one
of it. could never ?nake us aiuends for changing our
posture of defence^ and deserting our strong holds ■f.

* Bishop of Oxford's Charge, London, 1738,410. p. 4.
f Webster's Country Clergyman's second Letter.

For

OF Books IV. V. VI.

For though they will talk, indeed, of the love of truth, and
the invincible evidence of our Faith, yet I know not
how, even amidst all their Zeal and Fury, they betray
the most woful apprehensions of Christianity, and are
frighted to death at every foolish Book new written
against Religion, though it come but from the Mint or
Bedlam. And what do our directing Fngineers advise you
to, in this exigence ? Do they bid you act offensively,
and turn the enemies' artillery upon them ? By no means.
Keep within your .strong holds. Watch where they
direct their battery, and there to your old mud walls
clap a buttress ; and so it be done vvith speed, no matter
of what materials. If, in the meantime, one more bold
than the rest, offer to dig away the rubbish that hides its
beauty, or kick down an aukward prop that discredits
its strength, he is sure to be called by these men, per-
haps to be thought by those who set them on work, a
secret enemy, or an mdiscreet friend*. He is sure to
be assaulted with all the rude clamours and opprobrious
names that Bigotry is ever ready to bestow on those it
fears and hates.

But this was the fortune of all his betters. It was
the fortune of Hooker, Hales, Stillingfleet, Cudwoith,
Bp. Taylor. They w ere called Politiqiics, Sceptics, Eras-
tians, Deists, and Atheists. But Cudworth's case was
so particular, that it will excuse a little enlargement.

The Philosopher of Malmesbury was the terror of the
last age, as Tindal and Collins have been of this. The
press sweat with controversy : and every young Church-
man militant would needs try his arms in thunderins
upon Hobbes s steel cap. 1 he mischief his writings
had done to Religion set Cudworth upon projecting its
defence. Of this lie published one immortal volume ;
with a boldness uncommon indeed, but very becoming
a man conscious of his own integrity and strength. For
instead of amusing Irimself with Hobbes's peculiar whim-
sies, which in a little time were to var.ish of themselves,
and their answers with them ; which are all now for-
gotten, from the Curate s to the Archl)isbop"s | ; lie
launched out into the iuunensity of the Intellectual
System 3 and, at his first essay, penetrated the very
* Wateiland. f Temson.

darkest

PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION

darkest recesses of Antiquity, to strip Atheisi\i of its
disguises, and drag up tlie lurking Alonster into day.
Wiiere, though fevv readers could follow him, yet the
very slowest were able to overtake his purpose. And
there wanted not country Clergyimn to lead the cry, and
tell the world, — That^ under prttaice of defending Re-
velation, he xvrote in the xiery manner tliat an artful
Infidel might naturally be supposed to use in writing
against it ; that he had given us all the flthy stuff that
he could scrape together out of the sink of' Atheism, as a
natural introduction to a demonstration of the truth of
Revelation : that with incredible industyy and reading
he had rummaged all antiquity for atheistical arguments,
which he neither knew, nor intended to answer. In a
word, that he was an Atheist in his heart, and an Arian
in his book *. But the worst is behind. These silly
calumnies were believed. The much injured Author
grew disgusted. His ardour slackened : and the rest,
and far greatest part of the Defence, never appeared.
A Defence, that would have left nothing to do for such
as our Author, but to read it ; and for such as our Au-
thor's Adversaries, but to rail at it.

Thus spiritual Hate, like carnal Love, levels all dis-
tinctions. And thus our Author came to be honoured
with the same treatment which it had bestowed upon
a CuDWORTH. But as this hate is for the most part,
only envy, under the name of zeal, the Bigots, for their
own ease, should be more cautious in conferring their
favours. They have given our Author cause enough to
be proud : who, as inconsiderable as he is, has, it seems,

his ; as well as a Locke his Edxcards, or a Chil-

LiXGWORTU his Cheynel. But alas ! the Public, 1 am
afraid, distinguish better. They see, though these men
cannot, that the Edwards's and Cheynels increase upon
us, while the Lockes and Chillingworths are be-
come exceeding rare. Turn then, good Creatures !
while you have time, turn your envy on their few re-
maining successors : and leave our Author in peace.
He has parts (^had he but suitable morals) even to be of

* See VVebstei's Country Clergyman's first Letter against The
Divine Leg uion; and one Mr. Juhn Turner's discouise (a Clergy-
jnaa hkewjse) against The Intellectual bystem,

our

ov EooKS IV. V. Vr.

your party. liut no lime is to be lost. ^Ve have a
sad j)ro.spcct before us. The Cmillixgwoutfis of
the present ago in a Httle time, be no more; while
the race of Chcj/nc/s threatens to be immortiil. But
this is the fate of human things. The Geese of the Ca-
pita I, we know, remained for ages, after those true
.defenders of it, the jManlii, the Camilli, tlie Afri-.
CAXi, were extinct and forgotten.

And alas! how ominous are the fears of friendship!
I had but just written this, when the cieath of Dr.
Francis Hare, late bishop of C/i}chestef% gave n)e
cause to lament my Divination. In him the Pulilic has
lost one of the best patrons and supports of letters and
religion. How steadily and successfully he employed
his great talents of reason and literature, in 0[)p0bing the
violence of each religious party in their turns, when court-
favour was betraying them into hurtful extremes, tlie
unjust reproaches of Libertines and Bigots will never
suffer us to forget. How generously he encouraged and
rewarded Letters, let them tell who have largely shared
in his beneficence : for his character mny be trusted w ith
I lis enemies, or even with his most obliged friends. In
him our Author has lost, w hat he could but ill s[)are, one
of tlie most candid of his Readers and ablest of his
Critics. What he can never lose, is the honour of his
esteem and friendship.

But whatever advantage our Author may have re-
ceived from the outrage of his enemies, the Public is a
real sufferer. Uc had indeed the honour to be known
to those few, who could have corrected his errors, re-
formed his course, and shewn him safely through the
wide and trackless waste of ancient times. But the ca-
lumnies of the Bigots obliged him to a kind of quarantain,
as coming lately from suspected places, from the caljinct-
council of Old Lawgivers, and the schools of Hcatkcn
Philosophers; whose infection was supposed to be yet
sticking on him. And under such circumstances it is
held ill- breeding to come near our Superiors.

This disadvantage was the more sensible to him, as
few writers have been under greater obligations to con-
sult the satisfaction of capable readers ; who gave his
first \''olume so kind a reception ; and waited with a

Vol. IV. D lavourabie

34 PREFACE to first edition.

favourable expectation for the following. And if he
has made these readers wait too long, he has only this
to say, that he would not follow the example of para-
doxical writers, who only aim to strike by a novelty.
For as his point was truth, he was content his notions
should become stale and common, and forego all ad-
vantages but their native evidence, before he sub-
mitted the prosecution of them to the judgment of the
Public.

PREFACE

TO THE EDITION

THE DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES;
1 75 8.

THE subject of these Volumes had occasionally led me
to say many things of the genius and constitution of
Pagan Reli^fion, in order to illustrate the divinity of
the Jewish and the Christian : Amongst the rest, I
attempted to explain the true origin of that opprobrium
of our common nature, persecution for opinions * :
And I flattered myself, I had done revelation good
service, in shewing that this evil owed its birth to the
absurdities of Pagan Religion, and to the iniquities of
Pagan Politics: for that the persecutions of tlie later
Jews, and afterwards, of the first Christians, arose from
the reasonable constitution of these two Religions, which,
by avoiding idolatry, opposed that universal principle
of paganism, intercommunity of worship; or, in
other words. That the Jews and Christians were perse-
CTited as the enemies of 7nankind, for not having Gods in
conuTion w ith the rest of the V/orld.

But a learned Critic and Divine hath lately under-
taken to expose my mistake ; He hatli endeavoured to
prove, that the Jirst persecution for opinion was of
Christian original ; and that the Pagans persecuted the
primitive Church, not, as I had represented the matter,
for the unsociable genius of its Religion, which forbad
all intercourse with idolaters, but for its nocturnal
and clandestine assemblies. From whence it fol-
lows, as will be seen by and by, that the first Christians
were fanatics, libertines, or impostors ; and that the .
persecuting Emperors, provident for the public safety,
legally pursued a bigotted or immoral, sect, for a crime
OF STATE, and not for matter of opinion.

* See Div, Leg. Vol. II. b. ii. sect. 6.

D 2 If

PREFACE TO THE

If it be asked, How a Doctor of Eaws, a Minister
of the Gospel, and a Judge ecclesiastical, would ven-
ture to amuse us with so strange a fancy ; all I can say
for it is, he had the pleasure, in common with many
other witty men, of writing against The Divine Lega-
tion; and he had the pleasure too, in common with
many wise men, of thinking he might indulge himself in
any liberties against a writer whom he had the precau-
tion not to name. — But he says, he never read the D. L.
I can easily beheve him : And will do hiui this further
justice, that, when many have written against it without
reading it, he is the first wlio has liad tlie ingenuity to
own it.

His system or hypothesis, as we find it in a late
quarto volume, called Elements of the Civil Laio *, is,
in substance, this, — That the same principle, ^hich
" set the Roman Senate upon prosecuting the abomi-
" nable rites Bacchus, excited the Roman Em-

perors to persecute the primitive church."

But it is fit, this marvellous discovery should be re-
vealed in his own words — // may be asked (says he)
in that almost universal licence and toleration, which the
ancients, the Romans particularly, extended to the pro-
fessors of all religions whatsoever, why the christian
profession alone, which might have e.ipected a favour-
able treatment, seems to stand exempted, and frequently
felt the severity of the bitterest persecution \. — If the
learned Critic be serious in asking a question, a\ hicii had
been answered, and as would seem, to the general satis-
faction, near twenty years ago, I suppose it is, to intimate
that no other answer will content him but one from the
Persecutors themselves. This then he shall have ; though
it be of sixteen hundred years standing.

Puny the younger, when proconsul of Bithynia,
acquaints his master with the reasons why He perse-
cuted ; and the satisfaction he had in so doing : — " Ne-
*' que dubitabam, qualecumque esset quod faterentur,
" certe pertinaciam, et inflexibilem obstina-
" tionem debere puniri j:." What was Xh\s froward
and inflexible obstinacy ? He tells us, it was refusing

* By the Rev. Dr. Taylor, Chancellor of Lincoln,
t Page 579- I Lib. x. Ep. 97.

EDITION OF

all uitercommumfy with paganism ; it was refusing to
throw a single grain of incense on their altars.

Tacitus, s['eaMng of the persecution which followed
the burning of Rome by Nero (the impiety of which
action that mad tyrant had charged upon the Christians)
says, " Hand perinde in crimine inccndii, quam odjo
" HUMANi GENERIS convicti Sunt*." Ey which, I
understand him to mean, — That though the emperor
falsely charged them w ith the burning of Rome, yet the
people acquiesced in the persecution, on account of the
enormous crime of Avhich they were convicted, [/. e.
judged guilty in the opinion of all men ;] their hatred to
the zvholc race of vumkind-f ; for nothing but such an
unnatural aversion, they thought, could induce men to
persevere in rejecting so universal a principle, as infer'
commimitij of zcorship.

The good emperor Aurelius was hinif elf a perse-
cutor. It is not to be doubted, when he speaks in
condemnation of the Christian sect, but that he would
tell the worst he conceived of them : and it must cer-

* Ann. 1. XV. c. 44.

t Tacitus, speaking of the Jews, observes tliat the end of their
peculiar llites was to separate tlieni fi-oni ail other people. From
their sepuration he inferred their aversion. In this sense we are to
understand him and otlicr Pagan writers, when they exclaim against
the Jews for their peculiar Jlihs. Each Nation had its own: so
that, pecvliaritij was a circumstance common to all. What dif-
feienced the Jewish Rites from all others was their end; which v/as
to keep the People from all intercommunity with the several leligion?
ot Paganism ; each of which, how dili'erent soever in tiieir Rites, held
fellowship with one another. — But here a famous French Critic, who
writes dc omni scibili, comes in support of our English Critic's sys-
tem of the PsEUDO-.Ai.vuTyiis of the primitive Church, and says, we
all mistake Tacilus's Latin. His words are these — " J'oserais dire
(jue ces mots odio /nima/ii g^'iicris convicd ncuvcnt hien signilier, dans
le stile de Tacite, coirjaincus d'etre hals du ge/ire-Ittmain, autant que
coniaincus dc /lair le gerire-kianaiii." [Traite sur la 'I'olerance, 1763,
p. Go.] He tells us, He dare say, — what not one of

" Westminster's bold race
dare say, — that these ivords, odio hinnmii generis convicti, may vccU
'•'gnify, in the style of Tacitus, convicted of being hated by the human
race, as urll a.'s convicted of hutin<^ the human race." And now Ta-
citus, so long fumed for his political sagacity, will he made to pro-
nounce this galimatias from his oracular Tripod, " The Jews vjere not
" convicted so properly for the CRiMt; of setting fire to Rotne, as for
" the CHIME 01 litjxu H.iTr.D by all mankind ."

D 3 tainiv

PREFACE TO THE

tainly have been that worst, which made him a Perse-
cutor, so much ogainst the mildness of his nature and
the equity of his philosophic manners. Now this saije
magistrate, in his book oif Aleditadons, speaking of the
wise man's readiness to give up life, expresses himself
in this manner, — He should be so prepared that his
" readiness may be seen to be the issue of a well-
" weighed judgment, not the effect of mere obsti-
** NACY, like that of the Christians*." For intercom-
inunity being in the number of first principles, to deny
these, could be owing to nothing but to vicrc obstinacij,
or downright stupidity. Here, the mistaken duty of the
magistrate, overcame the lenity of the man, and the
justice of the philosopher: at other times, his specula-
tions happily got the better of his practice. In his
constitution to the community of Asia, recorded by Eu-
sebius, he says, — '* I know the Gods are watchful to
** discover such sort of men. And it is much fitter that
" they themselves should punish those who kefuse to
" WORSHIP THEM, than that mo should interfere in
*' their quarrel-}-." The emperor, at length, speaks
out: and what we could only infer from Pliny, from
Tacitus, and from the passage in the IMeditations, he
now declares in so many words; viz. that the Chris-
tians WERE PERSECUTED FOR RErUSING TO WORSHIP

THE Gods of the gentiles.

Lastly, the imperial Sophist, who, of all the idolaters,
was most learned in this mystery of iniquity^ as" having
employed all his politics and his pedantry to varnish
over the deformities of persecution, frankly owns, that
" the Jews and Christians brought the execration of the
world upon them, by their aversion to the Gods of

THE gentiles

■Kct^cira^iv, ui 01 ^^iriami. L. xi. § 3.

i) v/xEr;. Eccl. Hist. 1. iv. c. 13.

{ 'AXXa TO, Oy -nrpoa-xw^cTEK BsoTq STSfotq. 0 ^rj jji,iyct t?? wtp rlv Siok
(p/iTi ^"laf 0^??' ©£o? yap ^>)AiJ]>)? ipr/^i — " A(pC\t tSto* tot A?^ov, xai f^n
Tr,>,ixuvrr,v l<p' ^^«S a^Ttf? jAxeIs ffXxa-^r,y.ixt. JuLl.\N apud Cyril,
cont. Jul. lib. V.

EDITION OF 1758. 39

We have seen, from ihe ^Magistrate's own testi-
mony, what it M as for which he persecuted. We shall
now see, from the people's demand, that they required
the exertion of his power, on no other account. It was
usual in their sanguinary shows, when criminals and of-
fending slaves were exposed to the beasts, to call out
for and demand execution on the Christians, by the
formula of AIPE T0T2 A0EOr2. This was their early
langua;7e, when they required Polycarp for the slaughter.
The name atheist was only one of their more odious
terms, for a rejector of tlieir Gods. And it was but
too natural, when they w anted to have their rage and
cruelty thus gratified, to use expressions, which, at the
same time that the terms were most calumniating, im-
plied the very crime for which the magistrate was wont
to persecute.

What says our learned Civilian to this evidence? He
allows Antiquity to have proved the Fact^ that the
pagan emperors did persecute. But for what, is a ques-
tion (says he) that maij .still be asked. And the true
answer, with your leave, he thinks himself better able
to give than the Persecutors themselves. My reader
(these are his words) zvill grant the J act; and I come
NOW to account for it. The account^ we find, had
been settled long ago. What of that? It had never
passed through his j^hilologic Ofiice ; and therefore lay
still open till our master-critic was at leisure to exa-
mine it.

It is not true (says this redrcsser of wrongs) that the
primitive Christians held their assemblies in the night-
time to avoid the interruptions of the civil pozver. But
the converse of that proposition is true in the ut.aiost
latitude, viz. that they raet zeith molestations from
that quarter, because their assemblies zverc nocturnal*.
He says, it is not true : The Clirisliin Church says,
* it is. Who shall decide? A bundle of Grammarians;
or the college of Apostles? I know his mnid: and I
guess at my reader's : And of the two, benig at present
more disposed to gratify the latter, I shall, for once,
venture to bring our Civilian before a foreign Judicatorv,
that 15 to say, holy scripture.

* Elements of the Civil Law, p, 579.

D 4 From

PREFACE TO THE

From Scripture we learn, that the lir^t Cliristiaa
assembly, hvld in the flight -time, was the very night
alter the hesukrixtiox ; Vvhen the disciples met in a
clandestine manner, witli the doors made fast upon them:
and this, we are assured, M as to avoid the i>iterrt(}itiuns
of the civil pozcer; or, in the plainer words ot' St. .John,
FOR FEAR OF THE Jevvs*: for the Soldiers' story of
the resurrection began now to make a noise ; and tlie
Jewish rulers were much sturllcd and enrajied at il.
But when the fright of the d;sci[):es was a little over, and
things had subsided into a calm, the next assembly,
we hear of, \\a^ i)i the dai/-f/nie; without any marks of
the former wary circumspection-}-. I'hcse open meet-
ings were rejjeated as often as the returns of jjublic
worship required : sometimes shifting fi-om liouse to
house; sf)metin)es more stationary in the Temple^.

But \vhen now the jiiracles, worked by the a))ostIes
in confirmation of the soldiers' storv, had alarmed the
rulers afresh ; and Peter and John, whom they had put
into pri-on, were, on their re!eascn)ent, enjoined silence,
the Church, assembled in this exigence to implore the
Divine direction touching the extent of their obedience
to the civil po^ver, was answered by sensible signs from
heaven,' as at the day of Pentecost — And Xi he?i they had
praijed (says the historian) the place icas shaken xvhere
they u-erc assembled together ; and they were all Jilled
with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word oj God

WITH liULDiSTESS^'.

Here we see, that this second persecution had a dif-
ferent effect upon the Church from the former. At
first, they assembled in a clandestine manner y^' /t-Y/;-
of the Jews; now, tliey continued openly in the 'I'emple
to speak the woi^d of God "aith boldness. This conduct
seemed good to the Holy Ghost : and the reason is not
difficult to comprehend. The Church was now, for the
iirst time, solemnly enjoined silence by Authority. It
v. as fit it should be as solemnly decided, Who was to be
obeyed; God, or the civil jNIagistrate. But this was
net all : the decision served another very great purpose;
it served, to disseminate the Faith : for the natural con-
sequence oi the disciples' persisting to discharge their

* John .\x. IQ. tActsi. 14. — ii. 1. t lb. ii. 46. |Ib. iv.3!.

jn'niitrV)

EDITION OF 175^?.

iiiinislrv, after they had been formally forbidilcn, was their
bcir:L»; scaltcrcd abroad t/irouo/ioiit the regicm of Judca
and Samaria Had tlie Church taken its usual remedy
a'iain>t civil violence, namely, secret assenu^iics (which,
ill ordinary cases, modesty and a sober regard to au-
lliority prescribeX the taithful Irad not been dispersed ;
and the piirj)Ose of Divine Providence, in the speedy pro-
pagation of the Gospel, had not been p. operly etFccted.

This being the case, in the interval between the dis-
persion, and St. Paul's miraculous conversion, vve hear
of no nocturnal assemblies \ unless vou reckon in the
number that between the Disciples and their illustrious
Convei't, on the town-n-ail of Danrascus, when they let
liim down in a basket, to esca!)e hi;, persecutors [ . In
this condiiion, things remained liil Paul's return to Je-
rusalem : and then, says my text, the Churches had
{■est throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria ;{;.

From this time, till Herod's persecution §, we have
not one word of any nocturnal assembly of the Faithful:
but no sooner did that persecution couimence, than those
meetings were again re-assun)ed. Ttie Church assembled
at midnight, to pray for Peter's deliverance out of pribon :
and he, when he was delivered by their prayers, found
more difiiculty to get to iiis secreted friends than to
escape from his gaolers ||.

In a vv ord, from this hii.tory of the first propagation
of the Faith, we learn, that, in times of persecution, the
Church assembled by steallii, and in the night: but
whenever ihey had a breathing time, and were at liberty
to worship God according to their conscience, they always
met together openly, and in the face of day. Thus when
Paul came first to Rome (where this seel shared in the
general toleration of foreign worship, till the magistrate
understood that it condenmed the great princi[)le of
tercominunity) we learn, Lliat he freely discharged the
office of his ministry Jrom morning to night And
the sacred writer, as if on purpose to insinuate, that,
when the Church had rest from persecution, it ne'.er
cre[)t into holes and corners, ends his narrative in this
manner ; — And Paul dwelt two xvhole years in his ou n

* Acts viii. 1. f Ibid. ix. '25. ^ Ver. 31.

§ lb, xii. ]. II lb. xii. 13. «f) lb. xxviii. 23.

hind

PRErACE TO TH£

hired home, and received all that came in unto him ;
preaching the kingdom cf God, and teaching time things
vhich concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all conji-
deuce, no man forbidding him*.

It may be objected, perhaps, " that the question is,
of the persecuting Pagans; and all that has been here
said, concerns the persecutiJig Jews only." It does so :
But who can help it? The .fens happened to persecute,
Ih'st. As to tlie question, tliat which is essential in it
is only this, Whether the primitive Christians held their
clandestine assemblies to avoid persecution ; or, whether
they were persecuted for holding clandestine assemblies ?
— Who pereecuted, whether Jews or Pajians, is merely
incidental to the question, and wholly indifferent to the
decision of it. Jiut it may still be said, " That the
Christians having thus gotten the habit of clandestine
assemblies in Judca; by that time Churclies became
formed in the midst of Paganism, they continued the
same mode of worship, though the occasion of its in-
troduction was now over ; so that the learned Doctor's
position may yet be true, That the Pagans persecuted
for those clandestine meetings, which had been first
begun in Judea, to avoid persecution, and were now
continued in contempt of authority." To this I answer,
that ihn fact, on the Doctors ozrw -principles, is impos-
sible. According to his principles, clandestine meetings
must be prosecuted as soon as observed ; and they are
of a nature to be observed as soon as practised. Now
all Antiquity, both profane and sacred, assures us,
that the Christian Church was not persecuted on its
first appearance amongst the Pagans : who were not
easily brought, even when excited by the Jews, to
second their malice, or to support their impotence.

But the fact is, in the highest degree, improbable on
any principles. Had our learned Critic consulted nhat
Philosophers, and not what Philologists, call hUxMAnity,
that is, the workings of our common nature, he had never
fallen into so absurd a conceit, as that the inspired pro-
pagators of a Revelation from heaven should, Mithout
any reasonable cause, and only in imitation of pagan
\\ orship, affect clandestine and nocturnal meetings. For

* Acts xxviii. 30, 31.

EDITION OF 175S. 43

lie Uiight have seen, that so strange a conthict had not
only been in contempt of their chvine Master s example,
who, at his arraignment before the high priest, said,
I ftpake OPEXLY to the zvorld; and in secukt have I
aaid nolh'uig * ; but hkewise in dehance of his injiinction.
ivhen he sent them to propagate the faith, — llliat I tell
you IN DARKNESS, tliat sliull you speak in the ltght:
ami lihat ye hear in the eah, that prcaoh yc upox
THE HOUSE-TOPS |'. Had our Critic (I say) paid tliat
attention to human nature and to the course of the moral
\^orld, which he has inisappHed upon an old mouldy
brass, and a set of strolling Bacchanals lie might liave
understood, that the first Christians, under the habitual
guidance of the Holy Spirit, could never have recourse
to nocturnal or clandestine conventicles, till driven to
them by the violence of persecution : he might have un-
derstood, that the free choice of such assemblies must
needs be an after- practice, when churchmen had debased
the truth and purity of Religion by human inventions and
sordid superstitions ; when, an emulous aftectation of
iMYSi ERY, and a mistaken zeal for the tombs of the
Martyrs,, had made a Hierarchy of that, whicli at
first was only a Gospel-ministry,

On the whole therefore, we need not, I think, ask
leave of this learned man to continue in our opinion, that
the primitive Christians held their assemblies in the night-
time to avoid the interruptions of the civil puu er ; and
to esteem his converse pi^oposition, as he affects to call
it (of their meeting with jnolestation from that quarter,
because their assemblies zvere nocturnal) as a mere
dream or. vision.

But to hide nothing which may concern a matter of
sucii importance as our Critic's Discoveries ; I will in-
genuously confess, how much soever it may make against
nie, that there are instances in sacred story of meetings
at midnight and before dawn of day, to which ?w inter-
ruption of the civil Fo7ver had driven the disciples of

* John xviii. 20. t Matt. x. 27.

I All these refined speculations concerning persecution, are at
tlie end of the said book of Elements ; in a dit.sertation on a curious
ancient tablet, containing tlit senatorial decree against a crew of
wicked Bacchanals, of the size and dignity of our luodern Gypsies.

20 Christ ;

PREFACE TO THE

Christ; but which ■^verc evidently done in contempt and
defjiince of tliat Power : such, for example, was the
clandestine meeting between Mary and the two Angels
at the sepulchre* : that between the Apostles and the
Angel of the Lord in the common prison f : and tiiat,
again, between Peter and the sanje Angel [j:: not to
speak of another f-dmous n/idfiight a.'isemblij between Paul,
Silas, the Gaoler, and an Earthquake §.

We come now to the learned person's second propo-
sition, called by w^ay of eminence, the cox veusk ; which
affirms, That the prhjiitire Christians met with moles-
tations from the civil power, because their assemblies
were noctarnal. And this he assures us is true ix the
UTMOST latitude; which in his language, 1 suppose,
signifies, true in the ex act est sexse; for his argu-
ment requires some such meaning. Now in common
English — true in the ulrnost latitude, signifies true, in
the LOWEST sense; for tlse greater latitude you give
to any thing, the looser you make it. This niost elo-
quent editor of Demosthenes, therefore, by utmost la-
titude may be allowed to mean, what makes most to his
purpose ; though it be what an Englishm.an would least
suspect,- — utmost strict rrcss. And now for his reasoning.
— B}' the molestations tlie Christians met xcith, we must
needs understand the first molestations; all other being
noth-ing to the pm'pose ; for when persecution was once
on foot, I make no doubt but the nocturnal assemblies,
to which persecution had driven them, gave fresh um-
brage to the Civil power; it being of the nature of a
])ersccutmg spirit to take offence at the very endeavours
to evade its tyranny. 'j"he question betvveep the learned
(Civilian and me, is. What gave birth to the Jirst, and
continued to be the general, cause of persecution ? He
says it arose from nocturnal and clandestine assemblies :
I suppose it to be occasioned by the Atheistic renun-
ciation of the Gods of Pajfanism.

Now^ it seems to be a violent prejudice against the
learned Critic's system, that no one of those persecutors
ever assigned nocturnal assemblies as first or general
cause of persecution ; and equally favourable for my

* John XX. 11, 12. t Acts V. i8, 19.

I Acis 7; § lb. xvi. -25.

opinion,

EDITION OF 1758.

opinion, that they all concur in giving another cause;
namely, the unhospitablc temper of the Christians, in
refusin'^ to have Gods in common with the rest of man-
kind,

Pliny, in doubt how to act with the Christians of
his district, Avrites to his master for insti uctions. His
embarras, he tells the emperor, was occasioned by his
never havino- been present at their examinations ; \\ h\ch
juailc him incapable of judging iv/iat^ or //orv he was to
prosecute. Cognitionibus de Christianis interfui nun-
** quam : idso nescio quid et quatoius aut puniri soleat
" aut quffiri." He wanted to know, whether the very
NAME was not criminal; either for itself, or for some

mischief hid under it " Nomcn ipsum etiam si fla-

" gitiis careat, an flagitia cohaerentia nomini puniantur."
But could a Roman Ivl agistrate, when at a loss for a
pretence to persecute, overlook so fair a one as mlunlarii,
unforced clande.sltne imond/k's, and hunt after a mormo
hid in the combination of four syllables ? Not that he
Avanted a Precedent for proceeding on these visionary-
grounds ; but the very Precedent shews that the Per-
secutors wanted better. Tertullian assures us, that
the (Christians had been actually persecuted for the
NAME onii/ : " Non scchis aliquod in causa, sed nomen;
" Christianus, si nuilius crimiuis reus, Jiomen valde
** infestum, si scinis noirdnis crimen est — si nominis
" odium est,- quis nominum realus : quae accusatio vo-

cabulorum r nisi si aut barbarum sonat aliqua vox
" nominis, aut infaustum, aut maledicum, aut impu-
" dicum," &c. Prom whence, by tlie way, allow me to
conclude, that when a harmless name becomes so odious
as to occasion the Sect, v. iiicii bears it, to be persecuted,
the aversion inust arise from some essential principle of
that Sect, and not from a casual circumstance attending
their religious practice. — But to return to Pliny ; at last
he discovers something worthy of animadversion. It
was their froward AND inflexible obstinacy: —
" neque dubitabam, qualecumque esset quod faterentur,
" pervicaciam certe et uijlcvibilem obstinationtm debere
" puniri." Now is it possible, if the Christians were
first persecuted, and continued to be persecuted, for
holding their assemblies in the night-time, that Pliny,

after

PREFACE TO THE

after so nuich experience of it, should not know the
criuie, nor how to proceed against the offenders ? Wiiat
is still more unaccountable, Tiiajan, in answer to this
application, is un ibie to deliver any general rule for the
direction of his Minister — " Neque enirn in universuin
" aliquid, quod quiisi certam formam habeat, constitui
" potest." Ijut the assembling in a clandestine manner
by night, if this \\ as the Crime M-hich gave offence, is
an action that admits of few modifications in a Court of
Justice ; and so might be commodiously submitted to a
general rule. On the other hand, if what the author of
The Divine Legation says, be true, that they were per-
secuted for opposing the principle of intercommunity,
we see plainly why no general rule could be delivered.
They expressed this opposition in various ways and
manners ; some more, some less, offensive : — by simply
refusing to worship with the Pagans, when called upon ;
by running to their tribunals uncalled ; by making a pro-
fession of their faiUi, unasked ; or by affronting the na-
tional religion, unprovoked. Now, so just and clement
a prince as Trajan might well think, these different
modes of expressius their abhorrence of intercommunity
deserved different degrees of animadversion.

When Nero, in a mad frolic, set Rome on fire, and
then threw that atrocious act upon the Christians, it is
highlv piobable that the nocturnal assemblies of the
Faithful (which, by tiiis time, persecution had introduced
amongst them) first started the happy thought, and en-
couraged him to pursue it. Now, if this, which is very
probable, and our Critic's hypothesis, which is very
improbable, be both true, I cannot see how it was pos-
sible for Tacitus, when he acquits tliem of this ca-
lumny, and at the same time expresses the utmost
virulence against them, to omit the mention of their noc-
turnal assemblies, had they been begun without necessity,
and obstinately continued after the civil magistrate had
forbidden them. Instead of this, all he had to object
to the Christians, was their odium humani generis : of
which, indeed, lie says, they were convicted ; convicfi
sunt : an expression, without either propriety or truth,
unless we suppose he understood their refusal of infer-
community to be a conviction : other proof there was none:

EDITION OF 1758.

for when examined on the rack concerning th"s hatred
of mankind *, they constantly denied the charge ; and ap-
pealed as well to tlicir principles as their practice ; both
of which declared their universal love and benevolence
to all the creatures of God. Eut to reprobate t!ie Gods
of Rome, the Orbis Rotnanus, (of which our Critic
can tell us wonders) was proclaiming hatred and aversion
to all the world. Hence it is that Quintilian, speaking
of the topics of dispraise, says that the Author of the
Jewish Religion, (equally reprobating, with the Author
of the Christian, the universal principle of intercom-
?mmifi/ ) was deservedly/ hated and held ignominious as
the founder of a superstition which was the bane of all
other Religions — Et parentes malorum odimus : Et est
conditoribus urbium infamias, contraxissc aliquam per-
xiciosAM caeteris genleni, qualis est primus Judaicas
superstitionis Auctor. But why pernicious and baleful
to the rest, if not by accusing and condemning all other
Institutions of error and imposture?'

JMaiicus AuurrjL's and Julian were vigilant and
active ; \vell instructed in the rights of Society ; and not
a little jealous of the interests of tiie T'-iagistrate. Yet
neither of these princes ever accuse the Christians of
running to nocturnal assemblies unprovoked, or of
persisting in the practice against imperial edicts. What
a held was here ibr Aurclius, wlio despised them, to
urge his charge oi bi^utal obstinaci/ ; and for Julian,
who feared them, to cry aloud of danger to the state ;
their two favourite topics against tlicse enemies of their
Religion and Philosopiiy !

But sacred story may help us out where the civil fails :
let us see then how this matter stands represented in
Scripture : for I make our Critic's cause my oa n, as sup-
posing we are both in the pursuit of Truth.

I have already given a brief accoimt of the Assemblies
of the infant-church, as they are occasionally mentioned
in the history of the Acts of the Apostles.

Our Critic's convej^se proposition, which we are now
upon, only requires us to shew in what light the perse-
cutors of the Apostles considered this matter ; and

* i. e. Concerning their principles and their practice, fiom whence
the Pagans inferred their hatred of mankind.

whether

PREFACE TO THE

whether 7wctun?al oss(mhlics, when any such were held,
cither give a(lvanta<i;e to their Jewish accusers, or um-
brage to tlic pagan Magistrate, before whom t!ie propa-
gators of the Gospel were convened.

The {xjrsecutions recorded in the history of the Acl t
were ahnost all of them raised, or at least, fomented, l>v
the Jews. Their several accusations against those thcv
called apostiitc brclhrcn are minutely recorded: and yet
the crime of asscmblhig bij night is never brought into
account. In the mean time, their point was to make
the unwilling •Magistrate the instrument of their malice :
for this reason, they omitted nothing which might tend to
alarm the jealousy of the State ; as when they accused
the Christians of setting up another king, against Caesar.
Had their nocturnal assemblies therefore been held out
of choice, ihey wo ild not ha\e neglected this advantage,
since nothing ct)uld more alarm the civil i\^agi^trate
than such assemblies. The truth is, the Jews could not
be ignorant of the advantage this would attbrd them.
But conscience and humanity are not to be overcome at
once. To accuse those they hated, of what they them-
selves had occasioned, required a hardiness in vice which
comes onlv bv decrees : and after a lonji by bit of
abusing civil justice and the common rights of mankind.

Our Critic, perhaps, may be ready to say, " That
it is probable the Jews did accuse the Christian Church
of this misdemeanor, though the historian, in his suc-
cinct history of the Acts, hath onntted to record it."

But this subterfuge will never pass with those who
consider how unwilling the Roman ISlagistrate always
was to interfere in their contests, as clearly apprehend-
ing, the subject of them to be of certain matters con-
cerning their law: so that, under this disposition,
nothing could be more eftcctual to quicken his jealousy
and resentment, tiian the charge of clandestine assem-
blies; of which, doubtless, the Romans were ver}^
jealous, as contrary to their fundamental Laws, though
not so extravagantly umbragious as our Critic's hypothe-
sis obliges liiin to suppose.

But it \\\\\ be said, " Were clandestine meetings never
objected to the primitive Christians?" Yes, very often.
(.-ELSus objected such meetings to them, as things

contrary

EDITION OF 175S.

contrary to law*. But Oriuen's reply ■will set matters
right. He says, the Churcli was driven upon this ob-
noxious measure lo avoid the unjust persecution of its
enemies -|- : Nay Ceisus, in a more increnuous humour,
confesses, they Lad reason for what they did ; there
being no other way to escape tlie severest punishments 'j^.
At least then, I have the honour of finding this reverend
Epicurean on my side, against our Civilian and his
cumerse proposition.

These meetings, therefore, it is confessed, subjected
the Church to niuch censure ; but that was ail. Tertul-
lian, vindicating the Christians on this head, says —
" Ilrec coitio christianorum merito sane illicita, si illi-
" citis par ; merito damnanda, si quis de ea qaeritur eo
" titulo quod de factionibus querela est §." The passage
is remarkable ; and shews, not only that the Christians
%veie never brought into condemnation for nocturnal
meetings ; but, why they were not ; namely, because
nothing bad or even suspicious could be proved against
them. The law of the twelve tables says, " Si qui in
" urbe coetus nocturnos agitassit, capital esto;" nietin-
ing, if celebrated without the licence of the magistrate I).
The Christians applied for this licence : it was I'enied
them. They assembled : and such assemblies are only
liable to animadversion, if any thing criminal or immoral
be committed in them. Crimes uere indeed pretended;
but on enquiry, as we find by Pliny, they could not be

* ocrai xaioc. »a^e? •yiyys/Ia*. Orig. cont. Cels.
§ Apol. cap. xxxviii.

il This appears to be the true sense of the Lr/w, from a passage in
Cicero's dialogue Dc Legibus. Atticus thouglit him too spveie upon
nocturnal assemblies : he vindicates himself oy observing, tli tl, even
in the midst of Greece, Diagond-is, the Theban, totally abohshed
'them. — Ne nos dunores forte vidci.mur, in n;ema Grascia, Liagondas
Thebanns lege perpetua sustulii. From hence I infer these two
things; That, were not the Law oj the twvlre tables to be understood
in the sense here given to it, Cicero needed not have gone so far as
Thebes for his justification : -And secondly, that his laying so much
stress upon the abolitic a's beiiig made in the midst of Greece, shews
how strongly, in his opinion, that country was attached to nocturnal
assemblies.

Vol. IV. E proved.

PREFACE TO THE

proved. This I take to be the true explanation of Ter-
tuUiar.'s argument: by which we understand that tlie
Christians were not persecuted, but only calumniated,
for their nocturnal assemblies.

jMaximus, a pagan Philosopher of INfadaura, desires
to know of Austin why the Christians so much atfected
mystery. To Mhich the answer is, " That, without
" doubt, this idolater did not mean, the meetings in
" caverns and sepulchres, • in which the faithful were
" wont to assemble during the heat of persecution — but
" their mysteries of Baptism and the Lord's Supper*."
St. Austin supposes JMaximus did not intend to object to
their clandestine meetings : however, if he did, he is
ready to justify them on the plea of necessity, and to
avoid persecution. Another sad discredit to the con-
verse proposition.

But since our Civil Judge is so eager to have the pri-
mitive Christians found guilty of a crime of state, at his
tribunal ; I will, out of tenderness to his credit, and
deference to his authority, consent to give them up ; and
airly confess, they were not only accused, but even
punished for high treason, the crimen leesce majestatis.
The process was thus carried on. Christians refused to
worship the Gods of Rome. Sacrificing for the safety
of the empire, and for the life of the emperor, made
part of that worship. If the Christians could not wor-
ship, they could not sacrifice: But tliis sacrifice was
esteemed a necessary part of civil obedience. The
omission of it, therefore, was a crime of state, and
amounted to high treason. Tertullian sums up the
charge, and pleads guilt}' to it. " Deos inquitis (says

he, repeating the pagan accusation) non colitis, et
** pro imperatoribus sacrificia non impenditis : — sacrile-
" gii & majestatis rei convenimur. Summa h^c cau-
" SA, I MO TOTA EST." Here again we see, Antiquity
gives the exclusion to the converse proposition: for if
this was the only cause of persecution, certainly noctur-
nal assemblies was not one. I could wish therefore, by
this crime of state, to save the learned Doctor's credit
and authority. But I am afraid, on examination, it will
prove no more than their refusal to communicate in

* Ep. xlrv.

pagan

EDITION OF 1758.

pagan AVorship, Tertullian himself, in the passage quoted
above, makes it amount to no more. However, it was
esteemed to be the crbnoi lascc majcstatU : and this we
are not to wonder at ; for one of the greatest ornaments
of Paganism, long before the moving this question, had
declared, that even the exclusive worship of one God
came pretty near the matter. Majestatem imperii

iSrO.V DECUISSE UT U\US TANTUM DEUS COLATUR,

says Cicero, in his oration for Fiaccus.

You see then, at length, to whatjour Critic's discovery
amounts. No marvel he triumphs in it. '* And now
" (says he) can any one doubt that the considerations I
" have mentioned, were those which gave an edge to
** the Roman persecutions ? The professoi's of Chris-
" tianity had no reason to be apprehensive of any
** severities upon the score of religion, any more than

the professors of any other religion besides.
" Antiquity, in its public capacity, was generally very
** indulgent to all who dissented from the estal>lished

worship: persecution for difference of belief
** alone owes its nativity to more modern ages, and
*' Spain was its country; where Priscillian, by some, is
** held to be the first sufferer for mere opinion." —

pp. .579' 580.

-- — And now can any one doubt that the considerations
I have mentioned were thoae which gave an edge to
the Roman persecutions? — For a tru^ry Guide, allow
me to recommend him to the reader ; whom he is ready
to mislead, the very lirst step he makes The question
is, and so he himself has stated it, what occasioned
the Ro7nan persecutions ? Here, he changes it to — fVhat
<3AVE AN EDGE to them ? — Aoctunial assemblies might
give an edge to the perbccuiions, and yet all be true that
his Adversary affirms, and the persecutions be occa-
sioned by a very different thing. — But our Criuc is so
. highly figurative, and often so sublime, as to transcend
'tile common liberties of speech Thus he speaks of An-
tiquity in its public capacity, meaning. I suppose, the
civil states of Greece and liome ; though in the mode
of ordinary language it would be no inelegant periphj asis
for the NEW incorporated society of antiquaries:
again he talks of the nativity of persecution, and of its

E 2 being

PREFACE TO THE

being a native of Spain ; and yet he seems not to mean,
as you would fancy, its b'irtli, hut its education. For he
tells us (p. 583) it was bvrn long befoie, in Egypt ;
where it occasioned, what he calls, their holy xcars ;
which, by his own account, were persecutions for dif-
ference of belief alene. However, as this Egyptian in-
trigue was but a miscarriage, and a kind of coming
before its time, he forces it to enter again into the womb
of Fate, and to be horn, we sec, a second time for tl"K3
honour of Christianity. Since, then, our Critic's figures are
so new, and of so transcendent a kind, why may we not
suppose that, the giving an edge to persecution, may sig-
nify the giving a sword to it, and then all will be right.

— The professors of Christia72ity (says he) had 7io
reason to be app7'ehensive of any severities upon the score
of Religioti. — The more fools they ; when their Master
had pointed out so many. If they had no reason, it must
be because no reason would make an impression. For
they were frequently reminded by him, of what they
were to suffer, not indeed for assembling in the night-
time, but for his name's sake, and because of the
WORD*. St. Paul too had expressly assured the
churches, that all who live godly in Jesus Christ shall
suffer persecution^. But where was the wonder, that
they, who paid so little attention to their Master, should
pay still less to their Fellow-servant ?

— Hear me out, however, cries our learned Critic :
I affirm that the professors of Christianity had no reason
to be apprehensive of any severities upon the score of
Religion, any more than the professors of any other
sect or religioti besides. On my word, he has mended
matters greatly ! What, had the professors of other
sects or religions any prophecies or revelations of
severities upon the score of religion ?

But, fi"om this essential difference in the external
circumstances of these two sets of Professors, the Pagan
and the Christian, we will turn to the internal: And,
under this head, let me ask another question. The Pro-
fessors of the faith held it to be unlawful, and a deadly
sin, to have communion or fellowship with the Gods of
the Heathen. But had the Professors of Idolatry any of
* Matt. xxiv. 9, & xiii. 21. f 2 Tim. iii. 13.

these

EDITION OF 1758.

these scruples, or did they hold any thing analogous to
them ? On the contrary, did not the Professors of
Gaul, of Greece, of Asia, and of Egypt, join heartily
w ith the Professors of Rome, to pay all due honours to
the established religion? while those masters of the
world as heartily joined communion with these strangers :
nay, were ready to do the same honours to the Gospel,
had they found the same disposition towards mutual ci-
vilities among its followers.

And was this so trifling a difference as to deserve no
notice either of the Critic or the Civilian? Had the
Christians, who damned Paganism in the lump, and
reprobated the established religion of Rome, as the work
of evil demons and evil men, no more reason to be appre^
hensive of any severities from this antiquity in its public
capacity, thaii the professors of any other religion besides^
all of which not only acknowledged the Gods of Rome,
but, to make good weight, added Rome itself to the
number of her Divinities? This public capacitated an-
tiquity must have been of an odd paste, and strangely
composed, to use those, who attempted the destruction
of its Gods, in the same gentle way it treated those who
revered and honoured them.

But, as this public capacitated antiquity is, after all,
Eo more than a fantom, and otees its nativity to our
Critic's brain, it is no wonder, it should have something
of the perversity of its parent ; who, searching for the
CAUSE of Persecution, could not find it in a circum-
stance in which idolatry and Christianity differed., namely,
exclusive worship, a principle most abhorred by pa-
ganism ; and yet can see it in a circumstance where both
agreed, namely, nocturnal worship, a practice most ve-
nerated by paganism.

But antiquity (says he) in its public capacity was ge-
nerally very indulgent to all xvho dissetited from the
established worship. This, he had many w ays of learning :
but the cause of the indulgence, if it be yet unknown to
him, he will owe to the author of The Divine Legation,
who hath shewn that it was entirely owing to the absur-
dity of its religious systems, just as the want of this in-
dulgence, under Christianity, was occasioned by the
reasonableness of . its system, unreasonably indeed in-

JE 3 forced

PREFACE TO THE

forced upon the mistiiken principles of Judaism. So that
the induiizence of Paganism had continued to this day,
had not Cliristianity come boisterously in, and brokeii
the peace. Then arose an exception, unfavourable to
the new Comer : For why was the established religion
so indulgent to every strange sect, but because every
stance sect was as indulgent to the established ? So that,
in this commerce of mutual civ ihtics, while the national
worship enjoyed the civil rights of an iistablishment, it
was content, the Stranger should still possess the natural
rights of a Toleration. But all this good harmony, the
Christian faith disturbed and violated. It condemned
paganism in the gross, whether established or tolerated:
and, under pain of damnation, required all men, both
Greeks and Barbarians, to forsake their ancient absur-
dities, and profess their faith in a crucified Saviour. A
circumstance, sufficient, one would think, without noc-
turnal assemblies, to sour this sweet-tempered Antiquity
in its public capacity.

But he goes on — Persecution for difference of
BELIEF ALONE oxvcs its nativity to more modern ages;
and Spain was its country, where Priscillian, by some^ is
held to be the first sufferer for mere opinim.

Here Ave have another cast of his office. The question
between us is, " ^Vhether the Christians were first per-
*' secuttd for ihen'Jailh in general, or for their noctur-
" nal assemblies'^ 1 hold the tbrmer ; he contends for
the latter : and to confute my opinion, observes " tl^at
** pei^stcution for diffi- hlnck of belief alone, was of
" later date, and began with PrisciUian That is,
persecution for modes of faith beuan at that time.
Well, and if it did, what then ? VV^liat is this to the dis-
pute between us ? I never held, because Jesus and his
Apostles never foretold, that the first Christians should
be persecuted by the Pagans for modes of Paith ; but on
the contrary, for the very genius of that Paith, so oppo-
site to the idolatrous world.

Paganism had no dogmatic theology, or, what we
call Religion : and nor having the thing, it was no wonder
they had not the word : neither the Greeks nor Romans,
with all their abundance, had a word for that moral
mode : the Latin word JleligiOy when it comes nearest

EDITION OF 1758. ' 55

to it, signifies only a set of cerononies. However,
though they were without a dogmatic theology, yet they
had their general principles ; but these principles re-
garded utility rather than truth ; the chief of which was
that of intercommunity ; which the principle of Chris-
tianity directly opposing, they rose against this principle,
and so began a persecution. Pagans therefore, having
no modts of faith, could not persecute for any : but
Christians, who had, might and did persecute for them.

Again, when the persecution is for modes of faith,
their truth or falsehood comes in question : v. hen for the
common genius of a religion, its harmlessness or malig-
nity is the only matter of inquiry. Now the pagan per-
secutors M ere so far from regarding Christianity as a
false religion, that they were ready*, according to their
general indulgence to all who dissented from the esta-
blished worship, to put the professors of tlie Faith on a
footing with other foreign sects : but this Avould not
serve their turn. The Christians believed their Reliiiion
to be the only true ; and therefore, that it should be the
only one professed. This paradox brought on perse-
cution. But for what? not for the profession of a false-
hood ; but for a practised hatred to the whole race of
mankind.

Here then, we find, the learned Critic has shuffled in
one question for another ; and again put the change
upon his reader ; and perhaps, upon himself.

But to let his reasoning pass, and come to his fact :
which, as a Critic, he is much more concerned, in

honour, to support. Priscillian (it seems) was the

first su ferer for mere opinion. But how shall we recon-
cile him to himself in this matter ? for as he goes on to
display his learning, he unluckily discovers a nrnth
earlier original of persecution for mere opinion than tiiat

* CcBcilins, the Pagan, in Minucius Felix, draws the following
extraordinary character of the genius of the Roman Religion — dum
obsessi, et citra solum capitolium capti, colunt decs, quos alius jam
sprevisset iratos — dum capus hostilibus mcenibus, adbuc fero-
ciente victoria, numina victa venerantur : dum unaique hospites deos
qusrunt, et suos faciunt : dum aras extruunt etiam ignofis numinibus
et manibus. Sic dum universarum gentium sacra suscipiunt, etiam
regna meruerunt.

E 4 ot

PREFACE TO THE

of the jirst sufferer, Priscillian : This was in the holy
wars (as he calls them) of the idolat'ous Egyptians
(p. ^583) : which, according to his own account, were
persecutions for difference of heiv f alone. Hei-e then
we stick, hetween i'/ie jirst, and the jirst of all; — but not
long. He has a fetch to bring us off. " This holy zvar
was indeed persecution in the Egy(jtians, \> ho dealt and
felt the blows ; but it was still toleration, and civil policy
in those, m ho set them together by the ears : ior it was
a standing maxim with the Romans, to support and en-
courage in the subd'ied Provinces, a mriciij in religious
worship ; which occasioning holy wars, the parties con-
cerned to carry them on ^vith proper decency and zeal
had n ork enough cut out lor them, without forming plots
and conspiracies against their Masters." Thu", although,
in these to^ls the Egyptians, the holy war might be per-
secution for opinions, yet in the tvorkmen, who put it
to use, it was an engine of state. The Egyptian super-
stition (says our learned Civihan) was rather an engine
of state. i?a//(t'r than what ? — than perscciition. How
so, M hen superstition made them persecute ? No matter
for that. It was under the direction of their Masters :
and in their hands it was an engine of state. It is pity
that so great a politician as our Chancellor had not still,
like his predecessors the Chancellors of old, a patent for
makins; tbe^e Kh:dnes. V7e know of One who has long
lived upon tiiis trade : and an example of his manage-
ment may set our Chancellors poUtica' refinement in a
true light. The Roman Conclaxt succeeded to the Roman
Senate in this engineering work ; and the later hoiy wars
in Egypt caricd on by Uieir sainved Kings and their
imperious Saints, ere co iiived and fomented by the
Roman Church, as before Dy the Roman State, to divert
the subject nations from quiin e'ling with the sacred See.
— But what then - [fa spirit of Policy projected it, was
it not a spirit of Superstition that put it in hand? And
the point our learned Civilian is debating, though only
with himself, is the spirit of Pagan Religion, not the
spirit of Roman Policy. Now surely it is a terrible
breach in the general indulgence of paganism; even as
he states it, to find hoiy xvars amongst them for dif-
ference

EDITION OF 1758.

ference of belief alone ; a species of persecution \s hich,
in another place, he expressly tells us, vwed its iioiiv'Uy
to modem ages.

To say the truth, Persecution is one of tiie \^ ickedest
imps cf Hell, and capable of any mischief: but who
M ould have suspected it of this trick, played as it were, in
its n)other's belly; so long before its nativity; and
while yet it had scarce cot a human being ? But the ad-
venture was, in all respects, extraordinary , and well
deserving the pen of our illustiious Historian.

Seriously, He seems much better htted, whether as
Critic or Civilian, to manage the intrigues of the Greek
and Roman Alphabets, (whose Revolutions make so
shining a figure in this splendid Dissertation on the Bac-
chanals) than to develop the policy of Empires, or to
adjust die riphts or civil and religious Societies.

But it is now time to shew, that his hypothesis has as
little support from reason as from fact : and that noc-
turnal assenihlies neitlier did, nor, on our Critic's own
principles, possibly could, give birth to Persecution,'
even though these assemblies had preceded all inter-
rupticns of the civil j ozcer.

While t'le con^.ion opinion remained undisputed, that
iioci'irnal assemblies were held to avoid persecution, all
men saw a ss^fficient reason for their practice. But since
we have been told, thut they preceded persecution, and
were the cause of it, we are utterly at a loss to account

• for so extraordinary a mode of wc-vship in tlie immediate
followers of Christ. For the original of nocturnal asson-
blieshcmg now, choice, not necessity, they must be
resolved into ( le or other oi these causes —

1. Either because true Christuinitij hath mysterious
rites, proper to be celebrated iu the nig! it-time, like the
pagan Orgies :

2. Or that the first propagators of the Faith affected
to imitate the dark and enigmatic genius of Paganism :

3. Or that tJieir followers were a set of gToomy Fa-
natics, who delighted in the horrors of a midnight
season :

4. Or lastly, that, like the Bacchanals (whose story
gave birth to this new hypothesis) they had some very de-
bauched and licentious practices to conceal, whose cele-
bration

PREFACE TO THE

bration was only adapted to the obscenities of night and
darkness.

Now, of all these causes, our learned Critic, as a
Dispenser of the doctrine, and a Minister of the disci-
pline of the church, can admit only the second. He is
too well instructed in the nature of the Christian Religion
to allow the first ; and he has too great a regard for the
honour of its early Professors, to suppose it possible to
be the third or fourth.

He must needs conclude, therefore, that the primitive
Christians v. ent voluntarily into this practice, in imitation
of the mysterious rites of Paganism. On a presumption
of the truth of this fact, he must build his hypothesis —
It may be asked (says he) in that abnost universal licence
or toleration, 'which the Ancients, the Roynans parti-
cularly, extended to the professors of all Religions what-
soever, why the Christian prof ession alone, which might
have expected a favourable treatment, seems to stand
exempt edi and frequently felt the severity of the bit-
terest persecution ? — Having asked this, he very ma-
gisterially solves the riddle : They met (says he) ivith mo-
lestations from that quarter, because their assemblies
were nocturnal.

What, now, would be the first reflection of a reader,
unacquainted with Greece and Rome ? W ould he not
conclude, that nocturnal assemblies for religious worship
were, till now, unknown in paganism, and regarded as
a prodigy, to be expiated only by capital punishments ?
He would never conceive that mysterious and nocturmtl
Rites were the most venerable and sacred part of their
worship. But when he is told that these Christian As-
semblies were in imitation of the most favourite practices
of Gentilism, and to conciliate the world's good will, he
will be lost in wonder, that a modern Critic should pre-
tend to know better A^hat would appease or irritate the
Pagans than the primitive Church did, which had the
best opportunities of distinguishing in these matters, and
was most concerned not to be mistaken. He will tell our
Critic, that if he really aims at the solution of what he
calls a difficulty, he should seek for a cause as un-
-common and singular as the effect. The effect, re-
ligious persecution, our Critic himself tells us, was a

EDITION OF 1758. 59

tiling almost unknov n to the pagan world : but the
CAUSE, )iocturual u.'iscmblu'n, was as common and as ex-
tensive as idolatry itself.

— All the various Relii2;ions of Paganism, M'ere ever
attended with mysterious rites, which (to keep up a ve-
neration for the worship, and to create a sacred horror
in the Participant) were generally celebrated in the night.
But as tliis aftbrded opportunities of private enormities,
as well as of danger to the State, the laws of the best go-
verned countries, such as Greece, required that foreign
Relii>ions, which celebrated such rites, should have the
previous licence of the magistrate. Hence we find, that,
bv a Laic of the tu'elve tables (an institute composed
chiefly from the Grecian laws) clandestine assemblies
held in the night were punished with death. In course
of time, as superstition abounded, this law was but little
observed : for, in the .5(>(ith year of Rome, some spu-
rious rites of Bacchus had crept out of Greece, and in-
sinuated themselves into the city ; where being celebrated
by ni'iht, without the knowledge or licence of the Ma-
gistrate, they presently suffered an abominable corrup-
tion *. On discovery, they were abolished ; and fresii
vigour given to the law of the tzvelve tables, by a new re-
gulation ior celebrating of nocturnal worship. So cau-
tious and tender was the magistrate (even under this
horrid provocation) of violating llie rights of Religion in
this capital point of mysterious worship : nor did the
heat of reformation carry him to impinge upon any other
of the nocturnal Kites, tlien celebrated in Rome; such
as the Mysteries of tlie Bona Dea.

Greece and Asia had been long famous for the cele-
bration of this kind of rites : which, Rome, now inasters
of the east, brought home with them ; togetlier with the
other ARTS of Greece, of which, Cicero-}' reckons these
of the MYSTERIES in the first class. And thus thinjis
continued in respect to these rites, throughout the whole
Ronjan Empire, down even to the time of Valentinian ;
who, out of zeal for Christianity, published an edict to
abolish the most famous of them all, the eleusinian.
But he was diverted from his purpose by his prudent
minister, Praetextatus ; who assured him, that it would

* Se« Divine Legation, Book II. Sect. 6. f De Legg.

drive

PREFACE TO THE

drive Greece and Asia to despair, and endanger flie
peace of the Empire *.

Such was the state and condition of nocturnal assem-
biies in the pagan world : The}' were of the earliest ori-
ginal ; of the most venerable use ; and practised with
the fondest attachment. In the very centre, and during
the full celebrity, of these Rites, the Christian church
arose: v\hichj if you will believe our Critic, went into
them with as much spirit and attention as any Gentile
Community of tliem all. When, strange to tell ! the
Genius of Paganism, so indulgent to new forms of Re-
ligion (every one of which had their Mysteries, and
most of them their nocturnal assemblies ) all of a sudden
turned tail, and fell foul upon this rising Sect, for a cir-
cumstance common to all, and in a time of full peace
and security.

What could occasion so unexpected a reception ? Was
it any disgust the people had entertained to tliis Chris-
tian rite ? (for, indeed, on their passions, the Magistrate
is generally obliged to square his administration). This
could not be ; for the People (every where the same)
are rarely offended, in religious matters, but with no-
velties. What is of common use they receive with in-
difference ; often with a favourable prejudice. Our
Critic confounds the nature and order of things, to
make Paganism passive and unprovoked at a Principle
which subverted the whole system of their religion,
namely, the unsociability of the Christian Faith;
and yet mortally offended with a practice the most sa-
cred and universal in Paganism, namely, mysterious

AND NOCTURNAL RITES.

But it will be said, " Some jealousy entertained of
this way of worship, by the magistrate, might occa-
sion that fiery inquisition: Nocturnal assemblies had
been abused, and therefore it became him to be very
attentive to every new institution of the like kind."
Here our Critic will appeal to his Bacchanalian rites:
and, indeed, it seems to have been this detestable JVIum-
mery which first put the fancy into his head. But this
abuse was a single, temporary thing, and had been long
forgotten. Nocturnal assemblies had since that time
* Zosiiu, 1. iv.

been

EDITION OF 1758. 01

been practised, for many ages, without jealousy. Cicero,
indeed, in an ideal Utopia*, had declared against them:
but he brings them in, apparently for no other purpose
than to stigmatize his mortal enemy Clodius. And,
what is remarkable, he gives not the least intimation
that the abuses of nocturnal assemblies had ever been so
general as to keep alive the attention or jealousy of tlie
iVIagistrate : Particulars had now and then perverted
tlsem to the gratification of their lusts ; and for this (for
want of better evidence) he appeals to the comic poets
of Greece, where indeed some of the Mystenes appear
to have undergone a shameful corruption.

However, let us suppose the state of Rome to be as
delicate on this point as our Critic's hypothesis requires
it to be: Their circumspection could never go further
than to regulate or to reform these Assemblies : it could
never proceed to the suppression or abolition of them,
because nocturnal meetings made an essential part of
their own worship.

It is probable, indeed, that those ridiculous calumnies
of the Vulgar, concerning the immoralities committed
in the nocturnal assemblies of the Christians, might
reach the ears of the INIagistrate : But if he attended to
them, would he not begin his inquiry by examining into
the truth of them, as he had done in the case of the
Bacchanalian rites? and "'hen he found them as inno-
cent as Pliny the Youngt i-, on a like examination, re-
ports them to have been, would not the search have
ended here; and a share of that universal toleration,
which he afforded to others, been imparled to them
likewise?

Our Critic may perhaps say, that these Christians
were such lovers of a secret, that thev would not reveal
the nature of their rites to the Pagan Magistrate, though
it were to entitle them to his protection. Should he say
this, he would forget the principles I have now torced
him to go upon, which will allow no other reason of
the first Christians' falling into this practice, than to con-
ciliate the good will of their Pagan neighbours.

Well, but " there might be some idolatrous Test re-
quired to qualify the Church for its share in this toleration

Pe Legg.

PREFACE TO THE

of nocturnal ^vorshi[); and, for non-compliance witli
the condition (he may tell us) the persecution began."
It is, indeed, likely enoush that such a Test was re-
quired ; aiid most probably it consisted in their appro-
bation of the princ iple of intcrcomynwutii ; if not in
words, yet at least in deeds ; such as ihrouing a grain
or two of incense on the Pagan altars. But then the
mischief of this evasion is, that it brings us round again
to the place from whence the learned ('ritic set out, when
he turned his back upon the reason given in The Divine
Legation for toleration, and would needs seek a better
in nocturnal assemblies.

Hitherto we cannot conceive how a persecution could
so much as begin, trom the cause our Critic has as-
signed. But let us, for argument's sake, suppose, that
the Magistrate, out of mere caprice (for we liave shewn
he could have no reason) and in t[)e plenitude of his
power, \vould forbid the Christians their nocturnal as-
sonblies, while he allowed the privilege to all besides :
Even in this case, his persecution must end almost as
soon as it was begun : it is impossible, on our Critic's
own principles, that it should have any continuance :
for, as the choice of nocturnal assemblies was only to
reconcile Paganism to Christianity, when they found
their neighbours receive these advances so ungraciously,
they would soon remove the occasion of offence ; in
which they would be quickened by their knowledge of
the rights of the Sovereign^ to whom, in tilings indif-
ferent, they had been told, all obedience was due.

Thus the matter being turned on all sides, we find
that NO persecution whatever could follow from that
cause, which our learned Civilian has assigned for the

whole TENT.

But it being certain, that persecuted they were ; and
as certain, that our Civilian will admit ot no other cause
than what he himself has given, namely, their nocturnal
asseynblies : Let us for once suppose him to be in the
right; and then consider the consequences which Avill
arise from it When we have done this, we shall have
done his System full justice; and the reader, with suf-
ficient knowledge of the case, may ttdce or reject it as he
finds himself inclined.

Hypo-

EDITION OF 1758. 63

IIvPOTHESFs are often very plausible, and much
oftener very flattering things. You shall L-dve of tiiese,
so fair and promising, that an honest reader shall be
tempted to wish them, and, frcim wishing, to think
them, true. But this, before us, is by no nieani in die
number of those specious visions.

I seriously believe it would be doing our Chancellor
great injustice to suppose he had any other view in this
notable discovery than to do honour to the Chri tian
name: much less should we suspect that he had any
formed design of traducing it. Yet it is very certain,
that neither Collins nor Tindal could have formed a
project more injurious to the reputation of primitive
Christianit}', than to prove, what is the aim of this
learned Critic, that the first Christians were per-
secuted FOR HOLDING THEIR ASSEMBLIES IN THE

NIGHT-TIME. For it inevitably follows, that these early
professors of the Faith were either wild Fanatics or
abandoned Libertines: and consequently, that the
Pagan Magistrate did but his duty in inforcing, what
the Church had been so long accustomed to call, a cruel
and urjust persecution.

Before the conception of this new fancy, it was uni-
versally supposed, that the primitive Christians assembled
in the night-time, to avoid the interruptions of tht civil
power. This our Critic assures us is a mistake. It is
NOT TRUE (says he) ; but the converse of the proposition
is true in the utmost latitude, viz. that they met
with molestation from the civil power because their as-
semblies iLxre nocturnal.

While the common opinion prevailed, these nocturnal
assemblies, recorded in ancient church- history, gave as
little scandal to the Pagans of our times, as indeed they
did to the Pagans of their own. But when this opinion
is given up for the sake of its converse, we shall be
utterly at a loss to account, to our irreligious Inquisi-
tors, for so extraordinary a choice in the immediate
followers of Christ.

It hath been shewn above, that these voluntary As-
semblies could be occasioned only by one or other of
these causes — either that the Christian religion hath
Mysteries, like the Pagan, which required nocturnal

celebra-

PPvEFACE TO THE

celebrations— or that the first preachers of Christianity
affected to imitate the practices of Paganism — or that
they were Fanatics, and delighted in the horrors of a
midnight season — or lastly, that, like the debauched
Bacchanals, they had some very licentious Rites to be
performed only in the dark.

Our Critic's religious principles will not allow him to
admit of any of these causes but the scco7id. And I
have shewn that, from the second, no persecution could
arise, or, at least, could continue. This, on a suppo-
sition that tlie Christians affected to imitate pagan ob-
servances. But it is a supposition which contradicts
fact, and violates the nature of things. The history of
the infant-church informs us, that the first Propagators
of the Faith were most averse to eveiy thing which bore
a shew of conformity to Paganism. They could not but
be so, for their Religion rose out of Judaism, which
breathes nothing but opposition to Idolatry.

In course of time, indeed, when pious zeal, by grow-
ing overheated, became less pure ; when love of pomp
and show (which is natural to men busied in the external
offices of Religion), and the affectation of importance
(which is as natural to those who preside in them), had
spread their leprosy through the Church, the Ministers
of the Gospel would be fatally tempted to rival the mag-
nificence, and to ape the mysterious air of Paganism.
And the obliquities, which led them into these follies,
they would strive to palliate or disguise by a pretended
impatience for the speedier extension of the Faith. I
have she^vn, from Casaubon, how this corrupt conduct
infected all the language of Theology *. But this was
some ages after the times in question.

Our Critic may perhaps tell us, it was accident or
whim which drew together the first Christians into dark
corners ; and as the evening and the mojming made the
Jirst day of the old Creation, so it was to make the first
day of the new : And thus Night, by her proper Usher,
Chance, became once again reinetated in her ancient
honours.

But this will stand him in small stead. He has not
only to account for the first threatenings of PersecutioOj
* Div. Leg. Vol. I. pp. 69. & 352.

but

EDITION OF 1758.

but for the Act ; and, what is stil! more, for the continu-
ance of it. Now, what the Christians fell into with so little
rcEison, they Avould certainly forsake on the appearance
of so great, as the displeasure of the Magistrate, and the
crime and danger of disobeying lawful Authority, It is
possible, indeed, that, in the heat of Persecution, some
over zealous men might mistake their noncompliance with
such commands as a necessary mai k of their open pro-
fession of the Faith, But this was not generally the case;

I Their common practice was to give to Casnr the things
tihich were CcEsars ; and to God, the things xvhich

j were God's : Of this, we have sufficient evidence in the
famous letter of Pliny the younger, before quoted.
Trajan had forbidden tlie assemblies called Hetaria:,
which succeeded those of public worship, and were used
•by the Christians of Bithynia, to confii-m anJ bind them
to one another in the practice of virtue, by the external
badge or ceremony of breaking bread ; and we are as-
sured by this vigilant Magistrate, that the Christians,
■ander his jurisdiction obeyed the iujperial Edict *.

From all this Letter it appears, that the only causes,
which, on our Critics principles, could possibly bring
on and continue persecution (if persecution arose from
nocturnal or clandestine asscmbiies), must be either fa-
naticism OR DEBAUCHED PRACTICES: in tlie first
case, their obstinacy would make them persist ; in the
other, their libertinage. To these agreeable conclusions,
have our learned Civilian's principles reduced us for a
solution of our difficulties : and such is the flattering pic-
ture, he has exhibited of primitive Christianity. Could
•its most inveterate enemies desire more ! or, if its

I friends should give credit to these fancies, would its
enemies be content with less ? Such are the disgraces

I which this converse proposition is- ready to bring upon
Christianity ; disgraces of so comf)licated a stain, as not
simply to dishonour our holy Faith, but even to justify the
powers of Paganism in all the violences they offered to it.

•*. — quod essent soliti stato die ante lucem convenire, carmenqije
Christo, quasi Deo, dicere, &c.— quibus peractis moiem sibi disce-
dendi t'uisse, rui susque coiiundi ad capiendum cihum, promiscuum
tainen >^ innoxmir. : quod ipsum taceie deSiisse post edictum meum,
quo secundum maudata tua heta;rias esse vetueram. Lib. x. Ep. 97.

Vol. IV. F For

PREFACE TO THE

For the Magistrate had a right to sujjpress the clandes-
tine meetings of Fanaticism and Debauchery.

But our Enemies will have no need to fly to consc-
^uencca for the discliarge of the pagan Magistrates ; our
Christian (chancellor himself proceeds directly to their
acquittal. He frankly tells us, that their duty, as Ma-
gistrates, required them to animadvert on nocturnal aS'
ccniblies, where they bound themselves to one another,
and employed the word sacra mkntum for a kind of
tessera of union ; the very appearance of guilt which
had occasioned the decree against the infamous rites of
Bacchus.

You will say, this is horrid, to make the Magistrate
j)rosecute the primitive Christians by the same provision
which obliged him to exterminate those monsters of so-
ciety! But who can help itr Our Chancellor had but
this one precedent for the prosecution of nocturnal as-
senihlies ; and if it be not the most honourable support
of his hypothesif., it is not his fault.

But there was no proof (you will say) against the
Christian, as there was against those Bacchanalian as-
semblies. What of that? Our Chancellor opines, that
mere suspicion, in so delicate an affair, was sufficient to
.acquit the Magistrate of l)lamo : nay, to make his con-
duct in his care and jealousy for the State, very com-
mendable. Yon shall have his own words. A jealous
Governor therefore, and a stranger to the true prin^
ciplcs if Christianity, was naturally open to such impres-
sions; and couj.D \ot but exert that caution and
attention xvhich the practice of their Country so zmrinly
recoirmiended. p. 579. Could Cicero himself have been
more ooarm, not to say more eloquent, in defending the
]>ecree whicii dispersed the profligate crew of Bac-
chanals ?

And now a very capital point of Ecclesiastical history
is cleared up and settled. " The Ten Persecutions
were begun and cariied on, not, as had been hitherto
supposed, upon the score of Religion, or mere opinion,
but against bad Subjects, or, at least against those who
were reasonably suspected of being such." And this is
given to us by the learned Critic as the true defence of
iieeand generous Antiquity, in its public capacitv:

just

EDITION OF 1758.

just as in free Britain (where, indeed, we now find
small difference, as to freedom, between its public and its
private capacity, except to the advantage ot" the latter),
when Papists complain of the penal laws, we reply,
Tiiey are not inforced against erroneous Religionists,
but against refractory Subjects, for refusing the Ma-
gistrate the common security for obedience. — There is
indeed a difference; our answer to the Papists is a se-
rious truth ; and our Critic's apology for the pagan Per-
secutors, an idle and ridiculous fiction.

But as if he had not yet done enough for his beloved
Antiquity, in thus blanciiing its tev persecutions:
lie goes on to clear it from the opprobrium of persecution
in general ; by charging the original of this diabolic prac-
tice on the Christian Cliurch ; where, indee.l, tlie Free-
thinkers had very confidently placed it, till the Author
of The Divine Legation restored it to its right owner,

the Pagan Magistrate. Persecution eor dii' FEK-

ence of belief ai.oxe (says our learned Civilian)

OAVES ITS XATIVITV TO ]\I01{E MODERN AGES; and

Spain zcas its coiDitry ; zrliere Priscillian, by some, is
held to be the first sufferer for mere opinion.

Thus the whole blame of persecution for Religion
is thrown from the. Gentile Persecutors, upon the suf-
fering Church : And Christianity, or for its follies or its
criu)es (as either insulting civil Society by its obstinacy,
or polluting it by its vices), stands covered with confu-
sion. So hap[)y an advocate has our learned Civilian
approved himself for the Cause to which, by a double
tie, li3 had devoted and engaged his ministry.

The length of these animadversions hindered them
from finding a place in the body of this volume, amongst
other things of the like sort. Except for this, he had
no claim to be distinguished from his fellows. I had a
lar»e choice before me : for who has not si2;n;ilized him-
self against the Divine Legation ? Bigots, Mutchin-
sonians, Methodists, Answerers, Freethinkers, and
Fanatics, have in their turns been all up in arms against
it. Quid dicam ? (to use the w ords of an honest man
in the samo circumstances) Commune fere lioc eorum
fatum est, quorum opera supremnm Numen uti vult in
Ecclesia, ut mature insidiis, accusalionibus et crimi-

F 2 iiationibiii.

68 PREFACE to the EDITION or 1758.

mtmiibus appetantur. The scene was opened by a false
Zealot, and at present seeuis likely to be closed by a
true Behmenist*. A natural and easy progress, from
knavery to madness, where the Imposture fails : as the
progress is from madness to knavery, where it succeeds.
It was now time to settle my accounts with them. To
this end I applied to a learned person, who, in consi-
deration of our friendship, hath been prevailed upon to
undergo the drudgery of turning over this dirty heap,
and marking what he imagined would in the least de-
serve, or could justify any notice : for I would not have
the reader conceive so miserably of me as to think I was
ever disposed to look into them myself. He will find,
as he goes along, both in the text and the notes, what
Avas thought least unworthy of an answer. Nor let it
give him too much scandal that, in a work which I have
now put into as good a condition for him as I was able,
I have revived the memory of the numerous and gross
absurdities of these writers, part of whom are dead, and
tlie rest forgotten: For he will consider, that it may
prove an useful barrier to the return of the like follies,
in after-times, against more successful Inquirers into
Truth. The seeds of Folly, as well as Wit, are con-
nate with the mind : and when, at any time, the teem-
ing intellect gives promise of an unexpected harvest, the
trash starts up with it, and is ever forward to wind it-
self about rising Truth, and hinder its progress to matu-
rity. Were it not for this, I should refer the candid
reader to what I take to be the best defence and sup-
port of the ARGUMENT OF THE DiVINE LEGATION,

the succinct view of the whole and of all its parts, which
he will find at the conclusion of the last of these V o-
lumes -f . For, as Lord Verulam says excellently well,
The harmony of a science, supporting each
part the other, is, and ought to be, the true
and brief confutation and suppression of all
the smaller sorts of objections.

• Rev. Mr. William Law.
t Vol. VI. of this Edit.

T n E

DIVINE LEGATION OF MOSES

DEMONSTRATED.

BOOK IV.

SECT. I.

THE foregoing Volume * hath occasionally, and in the
course of my main argument, shewn the reader,
that it was always tlie practice of mankind to listen to,
and embrace some pretended Revelation; in neglect
of what is called, in contradistinction to it, the Reli-
gion OF Nature; that, I mean, which is only founded
on our relation to the first Cause ; and deducible from
tlie eternal reason of things-f-'

If ever a general propensity might be called a dictate
of Nature, this surely may. That such a propensity
there is, the Deist, or pretended follower of natural
Religion, freely confesseth, nay, is forward to insist
upon, as a circumstance of discredit to those Revela-
tiom, which we receive for true. Yet surely, of all his
visionary advantages, none ever afforded him less cause
of triumph; a consequence. flowing from it, which is en-
tirely sui)versive of his whole scheme.

For let me ask such a one. What could be the cause

* Books I. II. III.

^iJaxloKj, y-xhivri )cj u^i'Kijj.a)! ivtyuvnt, to arif/.x'tvii* t>); t5 Seb fr^o<r»)iof ia»
Tl »tj tia'itit. 'ma.vlii; ya^ a-*9^W7rGi y.oivoTi; 7\ayi<Tfj.(iti; iiT^oBiXtj^ecoit, Te Tuiv oKur
A))/xitf^VB, TBTO 'ai.a-fi Aoyix?) jtj i/oEfce i^vyjt, ^ucix.ai? s^Koian? t'Wos'TEigavl®'.
« ^tit T») tT^occt^tffii ir, Kara Aoyor ix{'^j>)»Ia. Euseb. PfiEp. Evang.

1. ii. c. C. Edii. bteph, pp. 45, 46.

F3 of

70 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

of so universal a propensit}/ in all afres, places, and peo-
ple? But before he answer, let him see that he be able
to distinguish between the causes which the Few had ia
giving, and the Many in receiving, pretended Revela-
tions. The causes for projecting and giving are explained
at large in the former volume ; where it is shewn, that
all the pretended Revelations, but real corruptions of
religion, came from Princes and Lawgivers. It is true,
he hath been taught otherwise. His instructors, the
Tolands and Tindals of the time, assure him, that all
came from the priests; and I suppose they spoke
■what they l)clicved : It might be so, for any thing they
knew.

My question then is, What could induce Mankind to
embrace these offered Revelations, unless it w'cre,

1. Either a Consciousness, that they wanted a re-
vealed Will for the rule of their actions; or,

2. An old Tradition, that God had vouchsafed it to
their forefathers ?

One can hardly conceive anything else; for a general
effect must have as general a cause : which, in this
case, is only to be found in the nature of man ; or in a
tradition preserved in the whole race. Prince-craft or
priest-craft might indeed offer them, for their own pri-
vate ends : but notliing short of a common inducement
could dispose mankind to accept them.

1 . As to the consciousness of the want of a Revela-
tion, that may fairly be inferred from the miserable
blindness of our condition : And he who wants to be
informed of this, should consult Antiquity ; or, what
may be more for his ease, those modern writers, who,
for no very good ends, but yet to a very good issue,
have drawn such lively pictures of it, from thence. But
without going even so far, he may find, in the very dis-
position to receive such absurd schemes of religion as
Revelations from heaven, more than a thousand other
arguments to prove men ignorant of the first principles
of natural religion ; a very moderate knowledge of which
would have certainly detected the imposture of those
pretences. But now, men so totally at a loss for a rule
of life, would greedily embrace any direction that came
with pretended credentials from heaven.

Sect. 1,] OF MOSKS DE^fONSTRATKD. 71

If ;ve turn to the Few, the wise and leiirncd aiTiongst
them, we shall find the case still more desperate. In
lelisious matters, these were blinder even than the
People; and m proportion too, as they AAcre less
conscious of their ignorance. The most advanced in
the knowledge of human nature and its dependencies,
were, without question, the ancient Sages of Greece.
Of these, the wisest, and far the wisest, was Socrates;
for he saw and confessed his ignorance, and deplored
the want of a superior direction. For the rest, Avho
thought themselves mse, and appeared not so sensibly
to feel their wants, we have shewn at large *, how thcv
became Foots; and, debauched by false science, affected
the language of Gods before they had well emancipated
themselves from the condition of brutes f. The two
great supports of natural religion, in the world at large,
are the belief of a future state, and the knowledge
of MORAL OBLIGATION'. The Hrst was rejected by all;
and the true ground of the second was understood by
none : The honour of this discovery was reserved for
Revelation, which teacheth us, in spite of unwilling
hearers, that the real ground of ' moral obligatiofi is the
will of God.

2. There only remains that other possible cause, the
general tradition of God's early ret elatio7i of his xvill to
mankind^ as delivered in Scripture. I, for my part,
suppose both concerned in the effect ; and that that state
of mind which disposed men to so ready and general a
reception of these numerous impostures, was the result
of the consciousness ol their wants, joined to the preju-
dice of Tradition. If the Deist allow Tradition, he
gives up the question ; if he acknowledge our wants, hq
affords a strong presumption, in favour of Rcvelatior.

J or if man (let tlie cause proceed from what it
will) be so irrecoverably blind and helpless, it is highly
reasonable to think that Infinite Goodness would lead
and enlighten him by an extraordinary revelation of
his will.

Rut here, Tindal objects, " That this blindness is

* Book iii. § 2, 3, 4, & 5.

The Stciirs, who Uiouj^ht the soul mortal, yet reckoned their
•tdsc ntnn equal, or superior, to ihe gods.

Y 4 men's

71 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

men's own fault, who, instead of improving their rea-
son, and following its dictates, which would lead them
into all truth (our own Scriptures assuring us, that f/iat
li'hich may be bwu n of God is mamfent in than; for
God hath shewed it unto them*), go on like beasts, and
follow one anotlier as they are led or driven."

To this I answ er, that v. hat had been the lot of man
from the beginning of the world to the birth of Chuist,
was like to continue so to the end of it. A deviation
springing from no partial cause of climate, government,
or age ; but the sad tifect ot human weakness in the cir-
cumstance of our earthly situation. By the iault of

man, it is true ; but such a fault as, it is seen by long
experience, man could never remedy. He therefore
flies to Heaven for relief ; and seems to have reason for
his confidence.

But to this, our 7nan of morals has a reply at hand ;
" That if such be our condition, it may indeed want re-
dress ; but then, a Revelation will not render the cure
lasting." And for tiiis he appeals to the corrupt state
of-the Christian world ; which, in his opinion, seems to
demand a new Revelation, to restore the virtue and effi-
cacy of the old.

But let me tell this vain Rationalist, There is an ex-
treme difference between tlie corruption of the Pagan
and the Christian world. In the Psgan, where false
Revelations had given men wrong ideas of the attributes
of the Deity, they must of course, and did in fact, act
viciously upon principle f; a condition of blindness

* Rom. i. 10, 20.

. f See DlV. Leg. book ii- § 5. Tr,y (pvcit S»jis; a>&§wwi'vai?

jJ^^\J.sQ^^y.i^t^. roa-civrn ^ cifcc trvviT^cii avrtli; tp^ivuv a7ro7r^>)f ta, »j; ^y,Se»
Tui, lEy^^)/*^xE^Sft£^tl> Tor? SEoAoys/xEyoi; viro?^oyi^sa6eci' /jltd^ ifv^^tav tin Toi;

etvTup tsoL^iyjiiJ.liioi^ w^s^.tia;, jj tCj Ta; tote iBfurot <7v»iTCiu.ita.i Su-
tarfioci te TVfan'ioci: aTrofiai^/xa^Ei*. n^ut yut, wcrTTEg £^»J», 'iJ^/ W|0T£-
/jLYiStlTlil T01E l» U-A^illTOli fD<j>.ilsVOnenilll, y.Ti^ Iw* To"? afta^laVO/XEKJIf
ajjLa.^i'\ai [Tt^w^la;] «7rj)i;^ii^i»r.?, ^oipjEia? affituv (pGof«?, exSeV/iaS? T£
'dx^xiilj.ii; yafj.iii;, ^ttxt^ofia; te iralpoKlorta?, rixtuv te x^ a,aiK(put
c^a.yx^~ >C fjLT,}/ x^ is-oXE'fis? xj racEi? vmrpa.^y.itia.c onlo;; ToK oixEicri? 'apafct-
Tai?, s? Ses? r.ycvia te x^ aTDjzaXaK, ua-Tnf h /iE^st xalo^SwfxaTwi' ic, at^fx-
y£»9»c£{ i7r£^»,)^o»it;o», TJ)> ritut iAr,iij/.rjt <jf ffijxiiiii/ x^ a»JpEiw» tok o^iyiiioti

«ffe^iwj»]£j. Eu&eb. Pracp, Evang. 1. ii. c. 6. Edit. Steph. p. 46.

which

Sect. 1.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 73

which seemed to call out on God's goodness for a re-
niedv : but in the Cliristian world, for the very contrary
reason, all wicked men act ill against principle; a
condition of perverseness which seems to call out for
nothing but his justice : God, according to the state of
the case, having done every thing that man, with all
his presumption, can pretend to expect from the good-
ness of his J\Jaker.

So far on the Deist's own principles ; on his own false
notion that God's Revelation is represented in Scripture
to be merely a republication of the r^eligion of nature.
For, as such he has presumed to comment on it ; and
as such, in excess of complaisance, we believers have
generally thought fit to receive it. But I shall, ere
long, shew it to be a very diltercnt thing: and, from
its true nature, prove not only (as here) the use of Re-
velation, but likewise the absolute necessity of it, to
mankind. I shall shew that w hat our adversaries sup-
pose the only, was but the secondary end of the two
Revelations; that what was primary and peculiar to
them, as Revelations, was of such a nature as the ut-^
most i^erversity of man could not, in any degree, defeat ;
of such a nature as manifests there must needs be these
Revelations ; and that to expect more, or furtlier, would
not only be unreasonable, but absurd *.

At present, to go on « ith the Deist in his own way.
From what hath been said, we see a strong presump-
tion, that God hath indeed communicated his wili to
mankind in that extraordinary way we call revelation.

And now, that amazing number oi false religions,
under paganism, begins to appear less formidable and
injurious to the true. It was on a presumption they
would prove so, that, in a foregoing volume, they
were drawn out in review, with each its false Prophet
at its head -f. And here at last they are employed,
wicked instruments as they were, and wickedly as they
have been abused in dishonouring truth, to evince the
high probability of God's having actually given a revela-
tion of his will to mankind.

* See book ix. and, in tlie mean time, Sermons on the Frinciple i
«f Natural and Revealed Religion, Serm. v. vol. ixt
f See book ii. § 2.

If,

74 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

If, llieix'fore, there be such a thinw as true revelatioij,
our highest interests will engatfe us in the search of it :
and \vc shall want no encouragement to proceed, be-
cause it must needs have some characteristic mark to
distinguish it iVom the false. And this mark must b(.'
our guide.

- Now if we look round the ancient world, and take a
view of the numerous religions of paganism, we shall
find (notwithstanding all pretended to be original, and
all were actually independent) so perfect a harmony in
iheir genius, ai:d confoimity in their ministrations, as
to the object, sul>ject. and end of religious worship*,
tiiat we mu^t needs conclude them to be all false, or all
true. All true they could not be, because they contra-
dicted one another, in matters of practice and specula-
tion, professed to be revealed.

But amongst this prodigious number of pretended
?€velations, vve find one, in an obscure corner of the
globe, inhabited by a single family, so fundamentally
opposite to all the other institutions of mankind, as
•Hould tempt us to conclude w e have here found what
we search after.

The many particulars in which this religion differed
from all others, will be occasionally explained as wc go
along. For, as our subject forced us, in tlie former vo-
kime, to draw into view those marks of agreement which
the false had w ith true revelation ; so the same subject
brings us now to the more pleasing task of shewing
v berein the true differed from the false. To our pre-
sent purpose it will be sufficient to take notice only of
tiiat primary and capital mark of distinction, which dif-
ferenced Judais.u from all the rest; and this was its
pretending TO cOxME i rom the first Cause of all
things; and its condemning every other re-
ligion FOR AN imposture,

I. Not one of all that numerous rabble of revelations,
ever pretended to come from the first Cause j, or
t-aughtthe worship of the one God in their public mi-
nisti ations [j;. So true is that w hich Eusebius observes

* See Div. Leg. book ii. § i, i, 5, 6. & book iii. § 4.

f Ibid, book ii. § 2.

X bee note [A] at the end of this Book.

from

Sect. 1.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 75

from Scripture, that " for the Hebrew people alone was
*' reserved the honour of being; initiated into the know-
*' ledge of God the Creator of all things, and of being
" instructed in the practice of true piety towards him
I said, iti their public ministrations, for we have seen it
was tauglit in their jni/steries to a few ; and to their mys-
teries, it is I'eniarkable, the learned Father alludes ; who
opposeth the case of the Hebrews, to the Pagans f ;
where a small and select number only was initiated into
the knowledge of the Creator ; but in Judea, a whole
people.

1 1 . That the Hebrews were as singular, in condemning'
all other religions of imposture, fls in publicly wor-
shipping one (lod, the Creator, bath been shewn in the
former volume.

There is nothing more surprising in all Pagan Anti-
quity, than that, amidst their endless Revelations, not
one of them should ever pretend to come from the first
Cause of all things; or should condemn the rest of
falsehood : And yet there is nothing which modern writers
are more accustomed to pass over w ithout reflection. But
the ancient Fathers, who were more intimately acquainted
with the state of paganism, seem to have regarded it
with the attention that so extraordinary a circumstance
deserves : and I apprehend, it was no other than the
difficulty of accounting for it, which niade them recur
so generally, as they do, to the agency of the devil : for
I must beg leave to assure certain modern rectifiers of
prejudices, that the Fathers arc not commonly led away
by a vain superstition ; as they affect to represent them :
so that when these venerable writers unanimously con-
curred in thinking, that the devil had a great s/iare in
the introduction and support of pagan revelation, I ima-
gine they were led to this conclusion from such like consi-
derations as these, That had these impostures been

the sole agency of men, it is inconceivable that no one
false {)rophet, no one speculative philosopher, of all those
who regulated states, were well acquainted with the first
Cause, and affected singularities and refinement, should
ever have pretended to receive his Revelations from the

* See note [B] at the end of this Book,
t See Piv. l eg. \o\ ii. pp.34. & 342.

only

76 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

only true God; or have accused the rest of falsehood : A
thing so very natural for some or other of them to have
done, were it but to advance their own religion, in point
of truth or origin, above the rest. On the contrary, so
averse were they to any tiling of this management, tJiat
those who pretended to inspirations even from Jupiter,
never considered him, as he was often considered by
particulars, in the sense of the Creator of all things ;
but as the local tutelar Jupiter, of Crete, for instance,
or Libya. Again, those who pretended to tlie best
system of religion, meant not the best simply ; but the
best for their own peculiar con)munity *. This, if a su-
pernatural agency be excluded, seemed utterly unac-
countable. Ixit admitting the Devil to his share, a very
good reason might be assigned : for it is certain, the suf-
iering his agents to pretend inspiration from the first
Cause would have greatly endangered idolatry; and
the suffering any of them to condemn the rest of false-
hood, would (by setting men upon enquiry and exami-
nation) have soon put a stop to the unbounded progress
of it.

Thus, I suppose,, the Fathers reasoned : and I be-
lieve our Freethinkers, with all their logic, would find it
somewhat difficult to shew that they rea:3on€d ill.

But as we have made it bur business, all along, to
enquire into the natural causes of paganism, in all
its amazing appearances, we shall go on, in the same
■way, to see what may be assigned for this most amazing
of all.

1. First then, the false prophet and politician,
w ho formerly cheated under one and the same person -J',
found it necessary, in his character of Propliet, to pre-
tend inspiration from the God most reverenced by the
people; and this God was generally one of their dead
ancestors, or citizens, whose services to the community
had procured him divine honours + ; and who was, of
course, a local tutelary Deity. In his character of Po-
litician, he thought it of importance to have the national
worship paid to the Founder of the Society, or to the
father of the Tribe ; for a God, w ho had them in ..pe-
culiar, suited the gross conceptions of the people much

* See Div. Leg. book ii. § 6. . f W- Ib. § 2. J Ibid. § i.

better

Sect.i .] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. ^7

better than a common Deity at large. But this practice
trave birth to two principles, which prevented any opening
for a pretended intercourse with the one God, the Creator.
1. The first was, an opinion of their divines, that the
supreme God did not immediately concern himself with
the government of the world, but left it to local tutelary
deities, his vicegerents *. 2. The second, an opinion
of their lawgivers, that it would be of fatal conse-
quence to Society, to discover the first Cause of all things
to the people f.

2. But secondly, that which one would imagine should
have brought the one God, the Creator, to the know-
ledge of the world, in some public Institution of religion,
namely, his being taught to so many in the Mysteries,
and particularly to all who pretended to revelation and
lawgiving X, was the very thing that kept him unknown ;
because all who came to the knowledge of him this way,
had it communicated to them under the most religious
seal of secresy.

3. Now, while the first Cause of all things was re-
jected or unknown, and nothing professed in the public
worship but local tutelary Deities, each of which had
his own appointment, and little concerned himself in that
of another's, no one religion could accuse the other of
falsehood, because they all stood upon the same foun-
'dation.

How far this may account, in a natural way, for the
matter in question, is submitted to the judgment of the
learned.

Here then we rest. An essential difference between
the Jewish and all other religions is now found : the
very mark we wanted, to discriminate the true from the
false.

As for any marks of resemblance in matters circum-
stantial, this will give us no manner of concern. 'I'he
shame of this allegation must lie with the Deist, who can,
in conscience, bring it into account, for the equal false-
hood of them both; seeing, were the Jewish (as we pre-
tend! true, and the Pagan false, that very resemblance
must still remain. For what, I pray, is a false reli:j;ion,
but the counterfeit of a true ? And w hat is it to counter-

* Div, Leg. book ii. § i. f ^Iji^* § +• I l^^^'

fcit,

78 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV-

feit, but to assume the likeness of the thing usurped ?
In good earnest, an Impostor, Mithout one single fea-
ture of truth, would be a rarity even amongst monsters.

SECT. II.

BUT the business of this Work is not probability but
DEMONSTRATION. This, therefore, only by the way, and
to lead us the more easily into the main road of our en-
quiry : for the reader now sees we are j)ursuing no
desperate adventure, while we endeavour to deduce the
divinity of IMoses's Law, from the circumstances of tlie
Law itself.

I go on with my proposed demonstration.

Having proved in the foregoing volume the first and
second propositions That the biculcating the doc-
trine of a future state of rezvards arid punishiients is
neccssari) to the well-being of' civil Society ; — and, That
all mankind, especially the most wise and learned Jiations
of antiquity, have concurred in believing and teaching

that this doctrine was of such use to civil Society : ■

I come, in this, to the third,

That the doctrine of a future state of
rewards and punishments is not to be,
found in, nor did make part of, the ]\io-
saic dispensation.

Now as, in support of the two first Propositions, I
was forced to make my way through the long chicane of
Atheism and Freethinking; so in defence of the third, I
shall have the much harder fortune of finding Adversaries
in the quarter of our Friends : for it hath happened un^
luckily, that mistaken conceptions of the Jewish and of
the Christian Dispensations, have made some advo-
cates of Revelation always unwilling to confess the. truth
which I here endeavour to establish ; and a late revived
despicable whimsy concerning the sadducism of the He^
brews, hath now violently inclin,ed them to oppose it.

A man less fond of truth, and equally attached to
religion, W'ould have here stopt short, and ventured
no further in a road w here he n)ust so frequently suffer

the

Sect. -2.] OF JSIOSES DEMONSTRATED. 7!,

the disi)leasure of forsaking those he most agrees willi ;
and tlie much greater mortiticatioii of appearmg to go
along vvith tliose iie most diliers from. I have often asked
myself, What I had to do, to invent new arguments for
Religion, when the old ones had outlived so many ge-
nerations of this mortal race of infidels and freethinkers?
Why I did not rather chiise the high road of literary
honours, and pick out some poor criLic or small philo-
sopher of this school, to offer up at the .shrine of violated
sense and virtue ? Things that might be exposed to
their de.'^erved contempt on any principles ; or indeed
uithout any : I might then have flourished in the favour
of my superiors, and the good-will of all my brethren.
But the love of tkuth breaks all my measures : I/rir
periosa trahii Veritas ; and I am once m.ore borne mvay
'in the deep and troubled torrent of Antiquity.

These various prejudices above n)entioned oblige me
therefore to prove the third Proposition, in the same
circumstantial manner I proved the first and second :
and this will require a previous expUmation of the mo-
saic POLICY.

But to form a right idea of that Institution, it will
be necessary to kno\v the genius and manners of the
Hebrew people; though it be, as we conceive, of
<iivine appointment : and slill more necessary to under-
stand the character and abilities of their law'(;ivi:r, if
it be, ajj our adversaries pretend, only of human.

Now as the Hebrews, on receiving their law, were
but just come from a strange country, the land of Egypt;
where the people had been held in slavery and op-
[>ression ; and their Leader bred at court, and instructed
in all tlie learning of their colleges ; it could not but be,
that the genius and maimers of both would receive a high
tincture from those w ith u hom thev had so lono- and in
such dirterent stations, conversed : And in fact, holy
Scripture assures us, that Moses ',\as comersmit in all
the wisdom, and the Israelites besotted rr/V/i all the
whortdoms or idolatries, of Egypt.

It will be of importance theretbre to know the .state of
pUPERSTiTioN and LEARNING iu Egypt during these
early ages.

This, as it is a necessary, so one would think, siiould

8o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

l)e no difficult enquiry ; for it is natural to suppose, that
the same Scripture which tells us, that the Lawgiver and
ills people brought their wisdom and superstitions from
Egypt, would tell us also what that wisdom and what
those superstitions were. And so indeed it does ; as
will be seen in due time : Yet, by ill fortune, the fact
stands, at present, so precarious, as to need much pains,
and many words, to make it owned. Divines, it is
confessed, seem to allow the testimony of Stephen and
Ezekiel, who, under the very impulse of inspiration, say
that jMoses xcas learned in all the wisdom, and the
people devoted to all the superxtitiom of Egypt ; yet,
w hen they come to explain that learning, they make it to
consist in such fopperies, as a wise and honest man, like
Moses, would never practise : when they come to parti-
cularize those superstitions, they will riot allow even the
Golden Calf, the h MOIXOS I "Ani2 Jca^fsViv^**,

to be of their number. For by an odd chance, though
riot uncommon in blind scuffles, the infidels and we have
changed weapons : Our enemies attack us with the Bible,
to prove the Egyptians very learned and very super-
stitious in the time of Moses ; and we defend ourselves
with the new Chronology of Sir Isaac Ne\A'ton, to prove
them very barbarous and very innocent.

Would the reader know how this came about ; it Avas
in this wise : The infidels had observed (as who that
ever looked into sacred and profane Antiquity hath
not r) that in the Jewish Law there Avere many ordi-
nances respective of the institvitions of Egypt. This
circumstance they seized ; and, according to their custom,
envenomed; by drawing frdm thence a conclusioa
against The Divine Legation of Moses. The defcndere
of Revelation, surprised with the novelty of the argu-
ment, did that, in a fl ight and in excess of caution,
which one may observe unprepared disputants generally
do, to support their opinions ; that is, they chose rather
to deny the premisses than the conclusion. For
such, not knowing to what their adversary's principles
may lead, think it a point of prudence to stop him in
his first advance : whereas the skilful disputant well
knows, that he never has his enemy at more advantage,
* Herod. 1. iii. c. 28. •

than

Sect. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 81

than when, by allowing the premisses, he shews him
arguing wrong from his own principles ; for the question
being then to be decided by tlie certain rules of logic, his
confutation exposes the weakness of the advocate as well
as of the cause. When this is over, he may turn with
a good grace upon the premisses ; to cxjiose them, if
false; tj rectify them, if misrepresented ; or to employ
them in the service of Religion, if truly and faithfully
delivered : and this service thcv w ill never refuse him ;
as I shall shew in the previous question of t}ic high ant'i-
(juity of Egypt , and in the main question of the omis-
sion of a Jut are state in the institution oj the Hebrews.

And I am well persuaded that, had those excel-,
lent advocates of Religion (whose labours have set
the truth in a light not to be resisted) but duly weighed
the character of those with whom they had to do, they,
would have been less startled at any consequences the
power of their logic could have deduced. The Tolands,
the Blounts, the Tindals, are, in truth, of a temper and
complexion, in which one finds more of that quality
which subjects men to draw wrong Conclusions, than
of that which enables them to invent false Principles.

The excellent Spencer, indeed, endeavoured to dis-
sipate this panic, by shewing these premisses to be the
true key to the reason oe the law ; for the vvant of
a siifficient reason in the ceremonial and positive part of
it, was the greatest objection, which thinking men had,
to the divinity of its original.

Rut all this did not yet reconcile men to those pre-
misses. It would seem as if they had another quarrel
Avith them, besides the poor unlearned fear of their leading
to the infidel's conclusion: namelv, for their bein<j an
adversai-y s principle simply ; and, on that score alone .
to be disputed. This is a perverse, though common
prejudice, which infects our whole communication;
and hath hurt unity in the church, and humanity in civil
life, as well as peace in the schools. For who knows
not that the same impotent aversion to things abused
by an enemy, hath made one sort of sectaries divide
from the national church, and another reprobate the
most indifferent manners of their country *
* Puritans, Quakers, &f.

Vol. IV. G And

82 THE DIVINE LI' CATION [Book IV.

And it is to be obscvved, that till tbat unlucky time
>vhcn the infidels fiyst bluntkred upon truth, this pri-n-
riple met M ith a very general reception : the ancient
Fathers, and nx)dcrn Divines of all dcnou)inations, con-
curring in their use of ii, to illustrate the wisdom of
tiod's Laws, and the truth of his Son's interpretation of
them, «here he assurcth us that they were given fo the
Hebrews J or t/ic hardness of their hearts ; no sort of
men sticking out, but a few visionary Jcwg, who, be-
sotted with the nonsense of their cabbala, obstinately
shut their eyes against all the light which the excellent
Maimoxides had first poured into this palpable ob-
scure.

Not that I would be understood as admitting the
premisses in the latitwlc in which oiu- adversaries deliver
tliera ;

Jliacos intra maros peccutur 8^ extra.

The human mind, miserably weak and instable, aixi
distracted with a great variety of objects, is naturally in-
clined to repose itself in system ; nothing being more
uneasy to us than a state of doubt; or a view too large
for our comprehension. Hence we see, that, of every
imaginary fact, some or other have made an hypothesis ;
of every cloud, a castle : And the common vice of fhese
castle-builders is to draw every thing within its precincts,
■»\ hich they fancy may contribute to its defence or em-
bellishment. We have "iven an instance, in the foresoinji
book, of the folly of those who have run into the con-
trary extreme, and are for derr\ing all arts, laws and
religions, from the Peoj)le of God : an extravagance at
length come to such a height, that, if you will believe
certain writers tlie poor heathen had neither the grace
to kneel to prayers, nor the v;\t to put their Gods under
cover, till the Israelites taught them the way. But our
wise adversaries are even with them ; and w ill bate no
believer an inch, in driving on an hypothesis : for had
not tlie Egyptians, by great good luck, as tliey give us
to understand f, enjoined honour to parents, and re-
strained theft by punishment, the Jews had been m a

* See note [C] at the end of this Book.

t See Marsbam's CanoaCbron. ed fraueq. pp. 177. x88.

Sect. 2.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 83

sad blind condition when they came to take possession
of tiic promised land. Are these men more sober in their
accounts of the rcUgious Institutions of the Hebrews? I
think not ; w hen they pretend to prove circumcision of
Egyptian original from the testimony of late Avriters, who
neither speak to the point, nor in this point are in reason
to be regarded, if they did *.

But w hv all this strife for or against the one or other
hypothesis? for assuredly it would no more follow, from
this of our adversaries, that the Jewish Religion was
false, than from a lately revived one of our friends,
which supposes all the Gods of Egypt to have come out
of Abraham's family f, that the Egyptian was true.

It must indeed be of use to true religion, where or
whatever it be, to trace up things to their original : and
for that reason alone, without any views to party, I shall
endeavour to prove the four following pi'opositions.

1. That the Egyptian learning, celebrated in Scrip-
ture, and the Egyptian superstition there condemned,
were the very learning and superstition represented by
the Greek writers, as the honour and opprobrium of that
Kingdom.

2. That the Jewish people were extremely fond of
Egyptian manners, and did frequently fall into Egyptian
supei-stitions : and that many of the laws given to them
by the ministry of M(jses, were instituted, partly in com-
pliance to their prejudices, and partly in opposition to
those superstititons.

3. That Moses's Egyptian learning, and the laws
he instituted in compliance to the people's prejudices,
and in opposition to Egyptian superstitions, are no rea-
sonable ol)jection to the divinity of his mission. And,

4. That those very circumstances are a strong con-
firmation of the truth of his pretensions.

The inquiry, into which the proof of these points will
lead us, is, as we said, very necessary to the gaining a
true idea of the nature of the Jewish Dispensation : as
that idea will enable the reader to form a right judgment
of the force of those arguments, I am preparing for the
support of my THIRD proposition, That the doctrine

* See note [D] at the end of this Book. ~

t Voyez RcHexioDS Critiques sur les Histoire* des Anciens Peuples.

G 2 of

84 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book LV-

of a future state Is not to be found in, nor did make
part of the Jcxcisli Dispensation. But the inquiry has
still a furtlicr use. I shall employ the result of it to
strengthen tliat general conclusion, that Moses had
REALLY A DiviXK MISSION, \vhich I havc promised
to deduce through the medium of this third proposition :
SO tliat the reader must not think mc in the humour to
trifle with .hjm, if this inquiry should prove longer tiuui
he expected.

And here, on the entrance, it will be no improper
place to explain my meaning, when, in my first setting
out, I promised to dcnr:onstrate the truth of the Jewish
revelation, ox the puixciples of a religious deist.
Had I meant no more by this, than that I would argue
with him on common principles, I had .only insulted the
reader's understanding by an affected expression, while
I pretended to make that peculiar to my defence, which
is, or ought to be, a circumstance common to all : or
had I meant so much by it,, as to imply, that I would
argue with the Deist on his own false principles, I had
then unreasonably bespoke the reader's long attention
to a mere argument ad hovunem, which, at best, had
only proved tlie free-thinker a bad reasoner; and who
w ants to be convinced of that ? but my point was not so
much to shew that the Infidel was in the wrong, as that
the Believer was in the right. The only remaining sense
then of the Deist's own principles is this, Ihose true
principles of his, which because they are generally held
by the enemies of Religion, and almost as generally re-
jected by the friends of it, have got the title of deisticai
principles. Such, for instance, as this I am going upon,
the high antiquitij of the Egyptian xn isdvin ; and such
as that, tor the sake of which 1 go upon it, the omission
of the doctrine of a future state in the Mosaic dispen-
sation. And these are the principles by which I promise,
in good time, to overturn all his conclusions.

S E C T. III.

THE first proposition is. That the Egyptian learnings
celebrated in Scripture^ aid the Egypium superstition

there

Sect 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 85

ihcre condenuied, urcrc f/ic veri/ learning and super'
st/fioji represented hi/ the Greek u-fiters as the honour
ru/d opprobrium of tJiat kingdom.

To prove this, 1 shall in the first place shevv (both by
external and internal evidence) the just pretensions which
Et<;ypt had to a superior antiquity: and then examine
the new iiypothebis of Sir Isaac Newton against that
antiquity.

It is confessed on all hands, that the Greek writers
concur in representinir Egypt as one of the most ancient
and powerful monarchies in the world. In support of
■what they deliver, we may observe, that they have given
a very particular account of the civil and religious cus-
toms in use from the most early times of meinorv : cus-
toms of such a kind, as shew the followers uf them to
luive been most polite and powerful. — Thus stands the
Grecian evidence.

liut to this it may be replied, that the Greeks are, in
all respects, incompetent w itnesses, and carry with them
such imperfections as are sufficient to discredit any evi-
dence ; being, indeed, \ e\'y ignojxmt, and very prejudiced.
As this made them liable to imposition ; so, falling,
as we shall see, into ill hands, they actually were im-
|<oscd on.

Their ignorance may be fairly collected from their
age; and irom the authors of their intelligence'. They
all lived long after the times in question ; and, though
they received indeed their information from J'.gvpt itself;
yet, for the most part, it was not till after the entire
destruction of that ancient empire, and wlien it was now-
become a province, in succession, to Asiatic and Euro-
pean conquerors : when their ancient and public records
were destroyed; and their very learning and genius
changed to a conformity with their Grecian masters :
who would ncexls, at this time of day, seek wisdom
from Egypt, which could but fmnish tliem witli their
own ; thougl), because they would have it so, disguised
under the stately obscurity of an Eastern cover *.

Nor were their prejudices less notorious. They
thought themselves Autocthones, the original inhabi-
tants of the eardr, and iiidebted to none for their advan-
* See Div. Leg. book iii. § 4.

G 3 tagcs.

S6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

tages. But when knowledge and acquaintance \vith
foreign nations had convinced them of their mistake :
and that, so far from owing nothmg to othei-s, they owed
almost every tliing to Egypt; their writer?, still true to
their natural vanity, now gave the post of honour to
these, which they could no longer keep to themselves :
and complimented their new instructors with the
most extravagant antiquity. What the Greeks con-
ceived out of vain-glory, the Egyptians cherished to
promote a trade. This country was long the mart of
knowledge for the Eastern and Western u orld : and as
nothing so much recommends this kind of commodity as
its age, they set it oft" by forged records, which extended
their history to a most unreasonable length of time : ac-
counts of these have been conveyed to us by ancient
authors, and fully confuted by the modern. — Thus stands
the objection to the Grecian evidence. And, though
I have no business to determine in this question, as the
use I make of the Greek authority is not at all aftected
by it ; yet I must needs confess that, were there no
writings of higher antiquity to confirm the Grecian, their
testimony would be very doubtful : but, could writings
of n;uch higher antiquity be found to contradict it, they
would deserve to have no credit at all.

Whatever therefore they say of the high antiquity of
Egypt, unsupported by the reason of the thing, or the
testimony of holy Scripture, shall never be eniploycd in
this inquiry : but whatever Reason and Scripture seem
to contradict, whether it serve the one or other purpose,
I siiall always totally reject.

The unanimous agreement of the Greek writers in re-
presenting Egypt as the most ancient and best policied
empire in the world, is, as we say, generally known
and acknowledged.

I, Let us see then, in the first place, what reason
says concerning this matter.

There is, if I be not much mistaken, one circumstance
in the situation of i' gypt, which seems to assert its claim
to a priority amongst the civilized Nations ; and con-
sequently to it's eldership in Arts and Arms.

There is no soil on the face of the globe so fertile, but
Mhat, in a little time, becomes naturally effete by pas-
turage

Sect. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 87

turage and tillage. This, in tlic early ages of the world,
forced the unsettled tribes of men to be perpetually
shifting their abode. For the world lying all before
them, they saw a speedier and easier relief in removing
to fresh ground, than in turning their thoughts to the
recovery * of the fertility of that already spent by occu-
pation : for it is necessity alone, to \\ hich we are in-
debted for all the artificial methods ofs'upj)lyingour wants.

Now the plain of Egypt having its fertility annually
restored by the periodic overflowings of the Nile, they,
whom chance or choice had once directed to sit down
upon its banks, had never after an occasion to removo
their tents. And when men have been so long settled
in a place, that the majority of tlie inhabitants are be-
come natives of the soil, the inborn love of a Country
has, by that time, struck such deep roots into it, that
nothinji but extreme violence can draw them out. Hence,
civil policy iu-iscs ; which, while the unsettled tribes of
mankind keep shifting from place to place, remains
stifled in its seeds.

This, I apprehend, if rightly considered, will induce
U3 to conclude, that Egypt was very likely to have been
one of the first civilized countries on the globe.

il. Let us see next what scriptuki: has recorded in
support of the same truth.

1 . So early as the time of Abraham we find a king in
Egypt of the common name of Pharaoh f : which would
induce one to believe, that the civil policy was much the
same as in the times of Josej)h and Moses: and how
perfect it then was, he seen presently. This king-
<loHi is represcilted as aboundin<^ in corn, and capable
of relieving others in a time of famine which no king-
dom can do, uiicre agricultuix; has not been improved
by art, and regulated by a civil policy. We see the
splendor of a luxurious court, in the princes who resided
in the monarch's household: amongst whom, we find
some (as the most thriving trade for royal favour) to have
been procurers to his pleasures || : nor Mere tlie presents

* St"? note [E] at the end of this Book.
+ C'enebifi xii. 15. J.Ver. 10.

,11 The ph/iccs ahu of Pharaoh ^aiv her, aWcoMMF.NDF.D iifr before
Pji A UAOii ; and the noman uaa lahcn viio Vnaruok'n huutc. Gen. xii. 15.

e % made

8S THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

anade by Pharaoh to Abraham, at all unworthy of a
great king *. An adventure of the same sort as this of
Abraham's with Pharaoh, happened lo his son Isaac
with Abimelcch ; which will instruct us in the difference
between an Egyptian monarch, and a petty roitelet of
the Philistines. Ahimelech is described as little different
from a simple particular fj ^vithout his guards, or great
princes : so jealous and afraid of Isaac's growing poM'er,
that he obliged him to depart out of his dominions ;
and, not satisfied witli that, went afterwards to beg a
peace of him, and would swear him to the observance
of it ||.

2. The caravan of Ishmaelite merchants, going from
Gilead to Egypt brings us to the second scripture-
])eriod of this ancient monarchy. And here theii' camel-
loads of spicerv, bftlm, and myrrh, and their traffic in
young slaves commodities only for a rich and luxu-
rious people, sufficiently declare the established power
•and wealth of Egy[)t. We find a captain of Pharaoh's
guard; a chief butler, and a baker ff. We see in the
vestures of fine linen, in the gold chains, and state-
chariots given to Joseph :[::{:, all the marks of luxury
and politeness : and in the cities for laying up of stores
and provisions the effects of -wise government and
opulence. Nor is the policy of a distinct priesthood,
which is . so circumstantially described in the history of
this period, one of the least marks of the high antiquity
of this flourishing kingdom. It is agreed, on all hands,
that there was such an Institution in Egypt, long before
it was known in any other parts of the East. And if
what Diodorous Siculus intimates to be tlie original of a
distinct priesthood, be true, namely the growing mul-
titude of religious rites, we see the ^vhole force of this
observation. For multiplicity of religious rites is gene-
rally in proportion to the advances in civil life.

3. The redemption of the Hebrews from their slavery
is the third period of the Egyptian monarchy, recorded
in Scripture. Here, the building of treasure cities

* Gen. xii. 16.
II Ver. 26, & seq.
ft Chap, xxxix, xl.
nil Chap. xli.

■\ lb. ch. xxvi. 7, 8..
IT Chap, xxxvii. 25.
n Chap. xli. 4Q, 43.
Exod. i. 11.

I Ver. 16.
** Ver. 28.

and

Sect. 3.] OP IMOSES DEMONSTRATED. 89

and the continual einployuient of so vast a multitude, in
only preparing materials * for public edilices, shew the
vast pouer and luxury of the State. Here too, we find
a fixed and standing militia f of chariots ; and, what is
more extraordinary, of cavalry : in v\ hicii kind of
military address the Greeks were unskilled till long
after the times of the Trojan war. And indeed, if we
may believe St. Paul, this kingdom was chosen by God
to be the scene of all his wonders, in support of his
elect peo|jIe, for this very reason, that tln-ough the ce-
lebrity of so famed an empire, the power of the true
God might be spread abroad, and strike the observation
of the w hole habitable world. — For the Scripture saith
unto PluiraoJi, Even for this iwtie purpose hare I raised
thee up, that I might sheiv my poicer in thee ; and that
wy miiiw. might he declared throughout all the earth \\.

To this let me add, that Scripture every where,
throughout these three periods, represents I'^gypt as an
entire kingdom under one monarch *[ ; which is a certain
mark of great advances in civil policy and power ; all
countries, on their first egression out of barbarity, being
divided into many little States and principalities ; a\ iiicb,
as those arts improved, were naturally brought, eiiher
by power or policy, to unite and coalesce.

ljut here let me observe, such is the ceaseless revo-
lution of human affairs, that that power wliich icduced
Egypt into a monarchy, was the very thing which, w hm
it came to its height, occasioned its falling hack again
under its Regu/i. Scso-tris, as Diodorus Siculus in-
forms us, divided the Lower Egypt to his soldiery, by a
kind of feudal law, into large patrimonial tenures. The
successors of this militia, as J\Jarsham reasonably con-
jectures **, growing powerful and tactions, set up, each
leader for himself, in his own patrimonial Nome. The
powerful empire of the Eranks, here in the West, from
the same causes, underwent the same fate, from the
debility of which it did not recover till these latter ages.

TJius invincibly do the Hebrew records f| support

* Exod. V. 14. t CIi. xiv. 7. J Ver. 9. ]| Rom. ix. ij.
IT See Gen. xli. 41, 43, 45, 46, 55. xlv.i. 20. & E.\od. passim,
' Can. Chron. p. 446.

See note [F] at the end of tbis Book.

the

•90 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

the Grecian evidence for the high antiquity of Eaypt.
And it is further remarkable, that the later inspired
writers of the sacred canon confirm this concurrent tes-
timony, in the constant attributes of antiqu 'di/ and zrisdom,
which, upon all occasions, they bestow upon the Egyp-
tian nation. Thus tlic prophet Isaiah, in denouncing
God s judgments against this people : — " Surely the
** princes of Zoan are fools, the counsel of the m ise
" counsellors of Pharaoh is become brutish : How stiy
*' ye unto Pharaoh, I am the son of the wise, the son
" of ANCIENT Kings? Where are they? where are
thy WISE MEN ? and let them tell thee now, and let
^ them know what the Lord of hosts hath purposed upoa
- Egypt*."

But the Greek writers do not content themselves to
loll us, in a vague and general manner, of the high an-
tiquity and power of Egypt, which in that case was little
to be regarded ; but they support the fact, of which their
books are so full, by a minute and circumstantial account
•of INSTITUTIONS, civil and rcHgious, said to be observed
by that people from the most early times, nhich, in
their very nature, speak a great and powerful people ;
•and belong only to such as arc so. Now this account
sacred Scripture remarkably confirms and verifies.

1. The PRIESTHOOD being the primum mobile of the
Egyptian policy, we shall begin with that. Diodorus
"fiiculus thus describes its state and establishment: —
" The whole country being divided into three parts ; the
" first belongs to the body of Priests ; an order in the
*' highest reverence amongst their countrymen, for their
" piety to the Gods, and their consummate wisdom, ac-
" quired by the best education, and the closest appli-
*' cation to the improvement of the mind. With their
" revenues they supply all Egypt with public sacrifices ;

tliey support a number of inferior ofiicers, and main-
*' tain their own families : for the Egyptians think it ut-
" terly unlawful to make any change in their public

worship ; but hold that every thing should be admi-
** nistered by their priests, in the same constant inva-
" riable manner. Nor do they deem it at all fitting that
" those, to whose cares the public is so much indebted,

* leaiah xix. ii, 12. — See note [G] at the end of this Book.

*' should

Sect. 3 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 91

should want tlie common necessaries of life : for the
" priests are constantly attached to the person of the
" King, as his coadjutors, counsellors, and instructors,
" in the most weiujhty matters. — For it is not amongst
" them as uith the Greeks, where one single man or

woman exercises the office of the priesthood. Here
" a l>ody or Society is employed, in sucriticing and
" other rites of public worship; who transmit their
" profession to their children. This Order, likewise,
*' is exempt from all charges and imposts, and iiolds
*' the second honours, under the King, in tiie public

administration *."

Of all the colleges of the priesthood, Herodotus tells
us, that of HELiopor.is was most famed for visdonj
and learning'l": and Strabo says that, in his time, very
spacious buildings yet remained in that [)lace ; where,
as the report ran, was formerly the chief residence of
tlie Priests, who cultivated the studies of philosophy and
astronomy

Thus these three celebrated historians ; whose ac-
count, in every particular, is fully confirmed byMosE.s;
who tells us, that the Egyptian Priests \\erc a distinct
order in the state, and had an established landed reve-
nue; that when the famine raged so severely that the
people were compelled to sell their lands to the crown
for bread, the Priests still kept theirs, unalienated, and

fABfi^x TO ^Vi^ni^a Tu» 'n^iiity ^Eyifjjg {il^u'Tr?? rvf^a.>or ma^x ToiT; ti^w^tojf,

TBT»; fy. 'Cion^i'iu^ nV^t^sc^flai. ly. rarut rut/ 'a^oiroout rci^ Tf Swaku

ja'.aK jjpi'ai; ^sprjyairiv' art yctf ra; ruv Hjji.a,c; aotlo iiTif u>\\uT]it>,

4tXX iiro tuv aurur iit •acifa.irf^ri<riuf atii-^-tTjdxt' an Ta; via,t.u»
^ypofaXtfo/AEi'S;, t^Sfir? ilvcn Tuv anz/xait'ii. KaifioAa ya^ ■art^i riiiu fjLt-
ytj-i^f aT4» 'm^oQuXivOfAftoi at/t^ialpiCtc-i ts. jSaj-iAtT, rat fA.lv cvn^yti,
tuiv Si ilarty^.al ^to«£7xa^o^ yniixtrot' — a yup uinrif rcu^u To~i "£AX»)-
cm, JK an!^ rj jjiia. yvm rr>t It^acmr,) 'aa.^i\\n(pi», icWoc inoWoi iTf^i

etCotl^ fxiix rot ^ao-j^ia TaTj ti So^cck;, rcttf l^uulxi^. Bibl. Hist,
p. 46. Stepli. ed.

t Ol yup HXiaireXn-sn Xiyovlxi AlyimTtut iT»«i Xo7»wTa.1oi. lib. ii. c. 3.

* ^£ Tji HAiaTToXii Xj* oixaj il^opey ^iiyaXui;, \y 0I5 otiT^tSot o»
tf^iK ixxXifX yap Sri TavTuin xaroixia* It^iur ytio»£>a» fas) to icxXxiott

<fi>^7'j^a]) xvS^Ht 1^ arfoi'o^jitif. Geo^ir. 1. xvii.

■were

02 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

were supplied gratis *. Diodorus's account, which
gives us the reason of this indulgence, confirms the
scripture-history, and is fully supported bv it: for there
Me see, not only the reverence in which the Order w as
held, but the public uses of rclipon, to which two thirds
of their revjiniues were applied, kept Pharaoh from at-
tempting on their property. Again, Moses supports
what Diodorus says of the public and high employment
of the Priests (who w ere privy counsellors and ministers
of state), where speaking of the priest of Ox f, he calls
bin) Chohen, which, as J. Cocceius shews in his lexi-
con;!;, siii'iitics as well the friend and privy-counsellor
of the King, as a Priest; and accordinglv, the Chald.
Paraphr. calls him Frinccps On. The word often
occurs ; and, I imagine, was borrowed from the Egvj)-
tian language ; the Hebrews having no order of priest-
hood before that instituted by Moses, This further
appears from the name Coes ||, given to the priests of
the Samothrac'um Mysteries, plainly a corruption of Coen
or Chohen. The Mysteries in general, we have shewn*T,
Avcre derived from Egypt, and particularly those of Ceres
or Isis, at Eleusis : Now, in Samothrace, the Mysteries
were of Ceres and Proserpine, as at Elensis**. Lastly,
■Moses confirms Herodotus s and Strabo s account of the
superior learning and dignity of the Heliopolitan college.
"When Joseph was exalted to tlie prime ministry, he

* Onhi the land of the priests bought he not : for the priests hod a
portion assigned them of Pharaoh, and did eat their portion nhich
■Fharaoh gaie them ; 'icuerejore theij sold not their lands. Gen.
xlvii. 22.

+ Gen. xlvi. 20.

J Chohen, proprie et ex vi vocis, ijtii accedit ad Regeni, et euin,
(jui summus est. Ideo explicationis ergo adjungitur tanquam ety-
niologicE evolutio, Exod. xix. 2-2. " Sacerdotes (jiii aecedunt ad
" JeLovam." — iS'on, quod vox Chohen notet pri/natiim, ut vuii Kini-
chius, sed quod notel primos aeccdeutium — Certe in .Egypto fuei uut
tales, et his alimonia a rege debebatur.

II K3/»i5, Ufih Kcc^iifuf. Hesych.

^ Div. Leg. book. ii. § 4.

If.i, a? i'rofEr A»o»us-i^'4;?©-. Schol. iQ Apoll. Argou. 1. i. ver. 917.

tells

Sect. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 93

tells us, that Pharaoh married him to a daughter of tlie
priest of On * ; wliich the Septuagint and vulgar Latin
rightly interpret Heliopolis: that the king was tlien
in a disposilion- to do Joseph the highest honours, is
plain from the circumstances .of the story; and that he
principally consulted his estahlishmcnt in this alhance,
a|)pears trom the account given us by these Greek his-
torians. We see the public administration was in the
hands of the priesthood ; who would unwillingly bear a
stranger at the head of aftairs. The bringing Joseph
therefore into their family, and Order f, which was he-
reditary, was the best expedient to allay their preju-
dices and envy. And this Pharaoh did most effectually^
by marrying him into that Cast which was then of greatest
name and credit amongst them.

I will only observe, that this superior nobility of thq
Priests of On seems to have been chiefly owing to their
higher antiquity. Heliopolis, or the city of the Sun,
was the place where that luminary was principally wor-
shipped; and certainly, from the most early times : for
Diodorus tells us, that the first Gods of Egypt zvere
the sun and moon \ ; the truth of which, all liiis, laid
together, remarkably confirms. Now if we suppose, as
is very reasonable, that tl:e tirst established Priests ia
Esvpt were those dedicated to the Sun at On, we shall
not be at a loss to account for their titles of nobilit}'.
Strabo says, they were much given to astronomy; and
this too we can easily believe: for what more likely
lh;m that they should be fond || of the study of that sys-
tem, over which their God presided, not only in his
moral, but in his natural capacity? For whetlier they
received the doctrine from original tradition, or whcth.ei'
they invented it at hazard, uiiich is more likely in
order to exajt this their visible God, bv giving him the
post of honour, it is certain they taught that the sun
was' in the centre of its systen), anil that all the other
bodies moved round it, in perpetual revolutions. This
noble theory came, with the rest of tlie Egyptian learn-

' * Gen. xlvi. 20. f See note [H] at the end of this Book.

X See Div. Leg. book ii. || See note [I] at the end of this I'.oolc,
See Div. Leg. book i.

ing,

94 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

ing, into Greece (being brought thither by Pythagoras;
>vho, it is remarkable, received it from CEnuphis, a
priest of HeliopoHs *) ; and, after liaving given the most
flistiniiuished lustre to his school, it sunk into obscu-
rity, and suffered a total eclipse throughout a long suc-
cession of learned and nniearncd ages ; till these times
relumed its ancient splendor, and immoveably fixed it
on the most unerring principles of science.

II. Another observable circumstance of conformity
between the Greek historians and Moses, is in their
accounts of the religious rites of Egypt. Herodo-
tus expressly tells us, that the Egyptians esteemed it a
profanation, to sacrifice any kind of cattle, except
swine, bulls, clean calves, and gecbc-i-; and, in another
place, that heifers, rams, and goats were held sacred ;{;,
either in one province or in another : though not from
any adoration paid in these early times to the living
animal. I shall shew hereafter that the Egyptians at
first only worshipped their figures or images. How-
ever picture worship must needs make the animals them-
selves sacred, and unfit for sacrifice. Now here again,
in confirmation of this account, we are told by Scripture,
that when Pharaoh would have had Moses sacrifice to
God, in the land of Egypt, according to his own family-
rites, the prophet objected, — It is not meet so to do ;
for xve shall sacrifice the abomination of the Egyptians
to the Lord our God: Lo shall xce sucrijice the abtminu-
tion of the Egyptians before their eyes, and rviil they
not stone ns\\? And if Herodotus came any thins near
the truth in his account of the early superstition of
Eoypt, the Israelites, we see, could not avoid sacri-'
ficing the abomination, /. e. the Gods of the Egyptians.

• See note [K] at the end of this Book.

1. ii-'c. 45. ^ ^

X — Ta? ^5? Taq Sji'ita; 'Alyv'rf\itn tsa-Hi^ oftolwj <Tt€orlai •zf^oQii.rav
•BT'ltlav /AaAirot f/.a.r.^u. — cap. xll. — "Ocoi fjXv ^ii Aio; Gtioaiw i^jtvlaK
loov, »£)|«,3 tS ©Ji^otta KTOi LLif laavltj ii'ut Ltriy^oyniiOi^ a.\ya,<;

<iiX-r,» "laio'; TH Oal^iJ'^. To» J») ^ioyv(7oi ei»it» ^lyncri. rtnuf
iij.Qiai aTrayls; criSojIan. ocof t5 MevJuIo? tKlriilxt l^ou, v vafii tS
Ms»^5jcJ-ia Ei'cri, iroi a-lyut »B-£p^o^£»o», oi'j ^vtiVi. cap. xlii.

Exod. viii. ati.

And

Sect. 3.] OF MOSES DEiMONSTRATED. 95-

And with what deadly hatred and revenge they pursued
such imaginary impieties, the same Herodotus informs'
us, in another place *.

in. To come next to the civil arts of Egypt. — •
Concerning their practice of physic, Herodotus says,
that it was divided amongst the Faculty in this manner :
" Every distinct distemper hath its own physician, who
" confines himself to the study and cure of that alone,
" and meddles with no other : so that all places are
" crowded with physicians : for one class hath the care

of the eyes, another of the head, another of the teeth,
" another of the region of the belly, and another of
" occult distempers -f." After this, we shall not think
it strange that .loseph's physicians are represented as a
number — Afid Joseph commanded his servants, the phy-
sicians, to embalm his father : and the pJiijsicians tm-
halmed IsraelX- A body of these domestics w ould now
appear an extravagant piece of state, even in a first mi-
nister. But then, we see, it could not be otherwise,
where each distemper had its proper physician : so that
every great family, as well as citv, must needs, as He-
rodotus expresses it, swarm with the Faculty : and a
more convincing instance, of the grandeur, luxury, and
politeness of a people, cannot, I think, be well given.
]Jut indeed it was this circumstance for which the Egyp-
tian nation was peculiarly distinguished, not only by the
earliest Greek writers (as we shall soe hereafter), but
likewise by the holy prophets. There is a remarkable
passage in Jeremiah, wliere, foretelling the overthr<;\ir
of Pharaoh's army at the Euplirates, he describes Egypt
by this characteristic, her skill iu medicine. Go up
into Gilcady and take balm, O virgin the daughter of'
Egypt: in vain shalt thou use many Mi:DiciNhs; J'or
thou shalt not be cured \\. The prophet delights in this
kind of imagery, which marks out a people by its singu-
larities, or pre-eminence. So again, in tliis very chap-

* Lib. ii. cap. 6=5.

Iif'o.o't' o» it, xi^a,>.rt<;' ol Jt, oioy]av' ol ^t, xala tri^vt' cl ii, run
*(patiut incrui. lib. ii. C. 84.

; Gen. 1, '2. f jerem. xlvi. ii.

ter :

g6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Cook IV.

ter: Egypt, says he, is like a fair heifer, bat
destn(ctio7i comet h : it cmiieth from the north. Also
her hired men are in the midst of her like fatted
BUELocKs, for they- also are turned back and are ficd
axca\j together*. For the worship of Isis and Osiris,
under the figure of a cow and a bull, and afterwards by
the animals tlicnisclves, was the most celebrated in all
the Egyptian llitual.

But a learned writer, frightened by the common panic
of the high antiquity of Egypt, will needs shew, the art
of medicine to be of much later original f. And to
make room for his hypothesis, he contrives to explain
away this direct testimony of Herodotus, by a very un-
common piece of criticism. This is the substance of
his reasoning, and in his own words : — " We read of
" the Egyptian physicians in the days of Joseph ; and
" Diodorus represents them as an order of men not
" only very ancient in Egypt, but as having a full em-
" ploymcnt in continually giving physic to the people,
" not to cure, but to prevent their failing into distem-
" pers. Hciodotus says nuich the same thing, and
*' represents the ancient Egyptians as living under a
" continual course of physic, undergoing so rough a re-
" gimen for three days together, every month, that I
" cannot but suspect some mistake, both in him, and
" Diodoruss account of them in this particular. Hero-
" dotus allows them to have lived in a favourable cli-
*' mate, and to have been a healthy people, ivhich
*' seems hardly consistent with so much medicinal dis-
" cipline as he imagined them to go through, almost
" A\ithout interruption. The first mention we have of
*' physicians in the sacred pages shews indeed that there
*' was such a profession in Egypt in Joseph's time, and
*' Jacob was their patient; but their employment was
" to embalm him after he was dead ; we do not read
'* that any care v»as taken to give him physic whilst
" alive ; which inclines me to suspect that the Egyptians
" had no practice for the cure of the diseases of a sick
*' bed in these days : we read of no sick persons in the
" early ages. The diseases of Egypt, which the Israelites

* Jerem. xlvi. lo, "21.

t See note [L] at the cud of this Book.

" had

Sect. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 97

** luid been afraid of, were such as they had no cure
" for; and any other .sicknesses were then so httle

" known, that they had no names lor them. Aft

" early death was so unusual, that it whs generally
" remarked to he a punishment for some extraordinary
" wickedness. JMoses inlbrms us, that the physicians
*' euibalmed Jacob ; many of them were employed in
'* the oflice, and many days time was necessary for the
performance, luid difierent persons performed dif-
" ierent parts of it, some being concerned in ihe care
of one part of the body, and some of the other : and
I imagine this manner of practice occasioned Hero-
" dotus to hint, that the Egyptians had a different
" physician for every disten^per, or rather, as his sub-
*' sequent words express, for each different part of the
*' body: For so indeed they had, not to cure the
" diseases of it, but to enibahn it when dead. These,
" I imagine, were the cilices of the Egyptian j)hysicians
" in the early days. They wei;e an order of the mi-
nisters of religion. The art of curing distempers or
" diseases was not yet attempted. — VV^e may be sure the
physicians practised only surgery imtil after Homer s
" time ; — for we re^d in him, that their whole art coi)-
" sistcd in extracting arrows, healing wounds, and pre-
" paring anodynes. — In the days of Pythagoras, the
" k;arncd began to form rules of diet for the prcserva-
tion of health, and to prescribe in this point to sick
" persons, in order to assist towards their recovery.

And in this, Strabo tells us, consisted the practice of
" the ancient Indian physicians. They endeavoured to
cure distfcmpers by a diet regimen, bat they gave no
physic. Hippocrates — began the practice of visiting
sick-bed patients, and prescribed medicines \\ith suc-
cess fur their distempers. This, I think, was the
" progress of pliysic— it iimat evidently appear
from it, that ihe Egypt ia/is could hate no such phy-
sicians in the days of Moses as Diodorus and Hero-
*' dotus SEKM to suppose*.' — So far this writer. But
if it be made appear, that the very contrary of every
thing here advanced be the truth; I shall hope, th^%

* The sacred and profane History 6f the World connected, vol. ii.
ICd. 1. pp. 350, 36u» 361. 364—367.

Vol. IV^ H what

gS THE DinNE LEGATION [Book IV,

Athat IlerodotGs and - Diodorus, conformable to Scrip-
ture, do not s'ecnir to suppose, but directly and circum-
Stantialiy t<y affirm, may be admitted for certain.
' He tells us, first, '• that Diodorus represents the
E^vptian physicians as administering physic to the"
people in the early times, not to aire, but to preretit
their falling into 'distempers.''^ One would conclude,
;from his manner of expression, that ttie histbi'ian had said
■they drd not administer to the infirm, but to the healthy
only ; which gives us the idea of a superstitious kind of
•practice, by charms and amulet? : and so indeed the
•writer is x^ illing M'e should think of it. / should imagine ,
•says he, that their ancient prescriptions, xchich Diodo-
•rus and Herodotus suppose them so punctual in ob-
■serving, ivere not medicinal, but religious purifications.
■p. 361. Let Diodorus then speak for himself: " They
prevent distempers, says he, and keep the body in
health by refrigerating and laxative- medicines • by
" abstinence and emetics ; sometimes in a daily regi-
men, sometimes w 'nh an intermission everv three or
four days : for they hold a superHuity in all f»od, as
" usually taken; ami that it is the original ofdistem-
■*■ pers : so that the above-mentioned regimen removes
tlie cause, anxl greatly contributes to preserve the
bodv in a state of health Here we have a very
vali -'nal theory, and expert and able practice ; this pre-
scribing to [jrevent distempers, being, as am.ongst us,
the result of the physician's long experience in his art :
for the rei;imen, we see, was intermitted or continued
■according to the habit and constitution of the patient.
' But the Egyptians being a healthy people, mid living
under a favourable climute, could not hate occasion
(says the learned writer) j'or so much physic; therefore
he will suspect ■ their accounts. I have observed, that
these accounts are a proof of that grandeur, luxury, and
•p{;lil:encss, which sacred and profane historj' ascribe

• T»j >orrt!? cr^oxKla?.£«f/.e»»sptt»oi Stfairsi/sn Ta aufACLto. xXvffi^aTf, jt^
■ ' -s-oTM/toi; Tis-f Kxbxp-cf 'ioi:", !^ ;>;rEiaci; Jc^^ ifiirote, |»ic,1j ^tc xaO Ixarr' huc^af,

gii7;;ivai-i)(i Tr.i ly'\%i%t. Bibl. 1. 1. p. 52.

sm. ?,.] OF :\iosES demonstrated. 99

to this people, and which so many other circumstances
concur to umke credible. Now a too great repletion,
the eiiect of a luxurious diet, would ccrlainly iind cni-
ploynient for the wliole tribe of evacuants (as we may
see by the various experience of our o^vn times), not-
withstanding all tiiC advantages of climate aud constitu-
tion. And let me observe, and it seems to be decisive,
that the very establishment of this prii!ci|)le of the
Egyptian physic, tliat all distempers arose f rom a too
great repletion, fully evinces them to be a very luxu-
rious people : for a nation accustomed to a simple and
frugal diet, could never have atfbrded sufficient observa-
tions for the invention of such a theory.

It is true, (he owns) we hear of physicians in Joseph's
family f who embalmed his father Jacob; but xve do not
read they gave him any physic ichile alive. — Nor- do
we read that Jacob had any otlier distemper than old
age ; and, I suppose, Hippocrates himself would scarce
have prescribed to that — But xve read of no sick per^
sons in the early ages. A plain.man would have thought
this a good reason why we read of no medicines admi-
nistered. Though no man, who considers tlie nature of
Scripture history, will think tliis any proof that thero
were no sick persons in those early ^/^'c^.— But further,
the diseases vf Egypt which the Israelites had been
afraid qf\ were such as they had no cure for, Deut.
xxviii. 27. and from hence is inferred the low estate of
medicine in these early tijnes. One would reasonybly
suppose the authority liere quoted, to support this ob-
servation, had informed us that these were natural
diseases, which submitted iiot to the rude practice of
that time. But we are surprised to find that they are
supernatural punishments which the Prophet is here de-
nouncing in case of disobedience: And Providence
would have defeated its o\vn purpose, in sutferiug these
to be treatable by the common rules of art: — " ],;,,t it
" shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken to the
" voice of the Lord thy God, — The Lord will smite
" thee with the botch of Egypt, &x. wlicreof thou canst
" not be healed*." That very Botch or Bed, uhich
God had, in their behalf, miraculously inflicted on the

* Dcut. xKviii. 1 5. 27.

w 2 £gyp-

lod. TH£ DIVINI: LEGATION [Book IV.

Egyptian's, by the ministry of this Prcpphet ; as appeai''s
by ibe foUorwrnir wbfds of God himself : " If thou writ
*' (says he) diligently Ireaikep to the voree of the Lord
" thy God, &c. I put none of these diseases iipm
*' thee xchich I havt brought upon the Egyptians: fw
I am the \x>\d that healeth thee *." — Ami all other
sicknesses^ this learned writer says, xrere then so little
knorvHy that they had m name for them. For which we
are referred to tlic follo\> ing words of the same denun-
ciation, " Also every sickness and every plague which
" is not written in tlie book of this law, them will tlie
** Lord bring upon thee till thou he destroyed -j-/'
Tliis seems as if the writer considered the law of INlose*
in the light of Sabnon''i Dhpensatory, m whi^h we rea-
sonably soppose every disease and remedy wjJljovit name
or mention, to be anknoMn. — And still farther, A7t
early death (says he) xeas so ummial, that it was gefie-
ratly remarked to be a pmiishment for some mchediiess:
and for this we are ^sent to the x^xviiith chapter of Ge-
ne^ifs. — It seems then it was the rarity of the fact, which
jnade men believe the evil to be a punishment. Till
jiow I ifmagined, it was the sense of their beiii^ under an
f.xtJ-aordinary Proviclence: it is certain at least, tliat the
book of (icnesis as plainly reprtsents the {>atriarehs, as
the hook of Deuteronomy represents their posterity to b«
under that dispensation : and i hope, ere long, to prov«
these fcprescntutions true. If tlien we hear in Scripture
of little sickness but what is delivered as the effect o^'
(iivine vengeance, no believer, I persuade myself, will
aj5crii)e thi.^ opinion to ignorance, superstition, or ai>
-vuiiisual appearance, ih.ough j^agan writers be never
siHuch accustomed to talk in that strain but will own
it to be the necessary consequence of an extraordinary
jjrovidence. The truth is^ diseases were then, as now,
common in the world at large; but the intliclion of them,
jor an exen)ption froni them, amongst the people of
God, made part of the sanction of that economy under
Mhich they lived: — " Ye shall serve the Lord your

* Exod. XV. 26, 1 Deut. xxviii. 61.

t Kddeni auctore [Iloinero] disci potest, moibos tnm ad iram
i'frtrtim tmmoi laliuin rehitos esse; &; ub iisdeiB opera posci solitam.
t^jfUus i'i AUdifinu, lib. i. Fvsef.

1Sect.3 ] OF xMOSES DEMONSTRATED, loi

*' God," says Mosj-:s, " and he shall bless thy bread
and thy water, and I will take Sickness away from
the midst of thee*-" And agaia, " Thou shalt \)e
" blessed above all people,— aiitl the Lord \vill take
^' away from thee all Sickness -f." Jiut there are of
these Divines «ho read their Bible, and readily talk of
the extraordinary Providence there represejited, yet
argue in all questions arising from sacred history as if
there were indeed no such thing.

1 he learned m riter goes ou : T/ie physk'ians embalmed
Jacob, iiuiny of them zverc employed iu the office, and
many qmja time was necessaiy for the pi'rformauce, and
dijferoit peraons performed different parta of it, somc
being concerned in the care of one part of t lie body, and

$(me of the other. This account is pretended to be

taken from Diodoi-us: hovy the latter part came in, o^-
bow it can he true, unless the body were cut in pieces
to be emhalmed, is not easy to conceive : but u e kuuvv it
vi'as embalmed intire; and Diodorus says nothing of
bebig concerned in the care (f one part of the body, and
some of the other. His plain, intelligible account is this:
That (Jillei"ent perso4iS performed diftercnt parts of the
operation ; one marked d*e place for incision ; another
cut; a thii'd drew out the entrails; a foilrth salted the body;
a fifth waslied ; and a sixth embalmed it. — But the learned
Writer's addition to the account seems for the sake of
Litroducing tlic extraordiiiary criticism which follov/s.

ylnd I inuigine, says he, this manner of practice oc-
casioned Herodotus to niST that the Egyptians had a
different pJiysicum fox every distemper, or rather, as
the subsequent words express, for each different part of
the body : for so ?^deed they had, not to cure the diseases

0/ it, but to embalm it when dead. W'liat lie means

by Hcrodotus's hinting, I can hardly tell : for had the
historian been to give his evidciice in a court of Justice,
it is impossible he should have delivered himself Avith
more precision. Let us hear him over agiiin : " Every
" distinct distejipeu [NOTSOS] hath its own physician,
" who confines himself to the study and cure of that,
and meddles v.ith no other; so that all places are
crowded w ith physicians ; for one class hath the care
* r.xod. x.xiii. -i^. | Dcut. vii. 14, 15.

II 3 " of

102 *TIIE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

" of the eyes, another of the head, another of the teeth,
another of the region of the helly, and another of
" OCCULT DISTEMPERS [A^ANEHN NOTSflN."] Not-
withstanding all this, by every distemper, is meant, it
seems, each part of a dead bodij : Death, indeed, has
been often called a rcmedif, but never, I believe, a
disease, before.— —-But the subsequent words, he says,
lead us to this sense. The reader will suspect by this,
that I have not jjiven him the whole of tlie account : But
the subsequent words, whereby our author would support
his interpretation, are the be'^inning of a new cliapter
about funeral rites : — As to their mcurnings for the dead,
and funeral rites, they are of this kind *, &;c. Now
because Herodotus speaks next of their obsequies, which,
mcthinks, was methodical enough, after his account of
their physicians, this writer would have the foregoing
chapter an anticipation of the follrung; and tlie his-
torian to treat of his subject before he comes to it. —
He goes on : — For so indeed they had [i. e. a different
physician for eacli different part of the body] not to cure
the diseases of it, but to embalm it when dead. How comes
he to know this? Doth Scripture infor.n him that they had
a different physician for every different part of a dead
body ? No. ri)ey are only the Greek writers (in his
oj)inion) misunderstood, who are supposed to say it. But
why will he depend so much upon them in tiieir accoun
of iimcrhl j ites, and so little in their account of phy-
sicians ? Scripture, which says they used embalming,
and had many physicians, is equally favourable to both
accu;;r,ts : But it may be, one is, in itself, more credible
th.m the other. It is so ; but surely it is that which tells
n.i they had a different physician to every different dis-
temper ; for we see great use in this ; it being the best,
nay perhaps the only expedient of advancing medicine
into a science. On the otlicr hand, what is said of the
several parts assigned to several men, in the operation
of embalniing, appears, at first view, much more won-
derful. 'Tistrue, it may be rendered credible; but then
it is only by admitting tise other account of the Egypti in
practice of physiq, A\hich the learned writer hath re-
jected : for u hen each disorder of the body had a several

* Qfy,voi Ti -raipxl ff^iav, t\cr\ u,^i, 1. ii. c. 85.

physic'an.

^ect.3-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 103

physician, it was natural, it was expedient, that each
of These who were tlie embahners Hkewise should inspect
that part of the dead corpse to which his practice w as
confined ; partly to render the operation on the dead
body more complete, but principally, by an anatomical
inspection, to benefit the Living. On this account every
interment required a number, as their work was to be
divided in t!iat manner which best suited the ends of
their inspection. It is true, subsequent superstitions
nwght introduce various practices in the division of this
task amongst tlic operators, whicli had uo /elation to the
primitive designs. •
T/i€-se I iHiagi/ic, concludes our writer, were the offices
■(j^ the Egyptian phij.^cians, in the early days ; there
were an order oj the ministers of religion. — He then
employs some pages (pp. 361 — 364) to prove that the
Egyptian physicians w ere an order of Religions ; and the
whole amount comes to this, that their practice was in-
termixed with superstitions ; a circumstance which liath
attended medicine througli all its stages ; and shall ba
accounted for in the progress of this enquiry. — But tlieir
office of embalming is likewise much insisted on : for this
being j^artof the Egyptian funeial rites, and foneral rites
being part of their religimi ; the consequence is, that
these were - religious ministers. The physicians had
indeed the care of embalming ; and it was, as we have
hinted above, a wise designation, if ever there was any :
For, first, it enabled the physicians, as we have ob-
served, to discover sometiiing of the causes of the
Apccuiuv vHo-ut, the unkmun diseases, whicii was the dis-
trict of one class ; and, sccondlv, to improve their .skill
by anatomical enquiries into the cause of the hnoivn,
wi)ich was the business of the rest. Pliny ex])ressly says,
it was the custom of their kings to cause dead bodies to
be dissected, to find out the origin and nature of dis-
eases ; of which be gives a particular instance * ; and

* Crudos [niphauos] Medici suadetit ad colligcnda acria vis-

ceruni dundus cum tsale jejtinis esse, atqiic ita vomitionilms pra)piuant
nieatuin. Tradiint & piajcordiis necess^num hunc succum : cjuando
jilitliisim cnrdi iiitus inhaironteni, non alio potiiisse depelli conipertum
t!t in ^'Eoviro, ukcuels coiironA m(Miti;oui:m ai> sc'ui'ta:.do3
MOKBOS ixsECAN'niiLS. Nat. Hist, lib. xix. cap. 5,

11 4 Syncellus,

104 THE DIVIN^ LEGATION [Book IV.

Syncellu?, from Manetho, relates, that books of ana-
tomy were written in the reign of the second kin<; of the
rhinites. — But to make their employment, in a sacred rite,
an argument of their beino; an order of lleliiiious, would
be just as wise as to make the priests of the church of
Rome, on account of their administering extreme unction,
an order of physicians. -But though the learned writer's
arguments to support his fanciful opinions be thus de-
fective, yet what lie imagined in this case is very true ;
these physicians were j)roperly an order of tiie ministers
of religion ; Avhich (though it make nothing for his point,
for they were still as properly physicians) I shall now
shew by better arguments than those of svstem-makers,
the testimonies of antiquity. — In the most early times
of the E<i} ptian monarchy there nas no accurate sepa-
ration of science * into its distinct branches. The scho-
liast on Ptolemy's J'ctrabiblus expressly tells us, that
their ancient writings did not treat separately of medicine,
astrology, and religion, but of all these together f : and
Clemens Alcxandrinus savs, that of forty-two books of
Mercury, which v. ere the Bible of the Eg>'ptians, six
and tiiirty contained all their philosophy ; and were to
be well studied by the scvcrdl orders of tiie priesthood,
w hich he before mentions ; the other six, winch, related
entirely to medicine, Fjclonged to the Tn-aro^cf^t, /. e. such
as wt)re the cloak % ; and tliese, as in anotlier place, he
^ells us, were an order of ministers of religion [|: and
even in Greece, the art of medicine being brought thither
from Egypt, went in partnership, during the first ages,
with philosophy; though the separation was made long
before the timq which Celsus assigns to it ^, as ^ve shall

see

* See Div. Leg. book i.

+ Ol Alyjuifiirn «« iji'ct fj.\i to. *Ia1^i>;«, taisi T* Arf»^»V4^3£, «J T«

X - Sio ulii av Ttcs-a^xxoi^a at iraw itaf^ciTtji^r^ Efu.ri yiyj.a.n
bit rccc utt yf^, tr,y ■ar*o-a> Aiytiriiwy czrjf leyea-aij (ptXoi7o^'ta>,

nAITOOOPOI, t'a3fix.i,-

t7Mc, Sic. 1. vi. Stjom.

j| — nA^TC<tOPOS at, 5 Ti; aA>,^ rH^t ii^oircia/iai. vnp to t//xi»!^,
rE^»B» a(h^y,i(. &c. fad. 1 iii. c. i. From this passage v.e underbtancJ,
thar it w as an inferior order of the priesthood whicli practised p^iysic j
for such were those who sacrificed.

If llippocnites Cous, ])riinus quidem ex omuiiius memoria dignis
ab s.tudio Sdj-ientice discipliiiam hiiiic separavit. Pe Med. 1« i- I'rai-f-

Sect. 3-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 105

see presently. 1 iius it appears tliat tliesc artists were
properly both priests and physicians, not very unlike
the monk antl li iar physicians of tiie late ages of bar-
barism.

Our author now proceeds to tlie general history of
phvsic. Let us sec if he be more happy in his imagi-
mtioiis liere. fl^a may ha sure, says lie, the pZ/j/siciam
practised only mrgtry till after Homers time.'
What must we say then to the story of Aleiampus *,
who learnt the art of phvsic and divination in Eg^yptf;
and cure(i Proetus's daugiiters of an atrabiitiire disorder,
with hellebore, a liundred and fifty years before the Ar-
gonautic expedition ? But hy not till after the time of
Horaer, who wrote not of l>is own time, but of the
'JVojan, near three hundred years before ; and this in
a kind of work winch rerjuires decorum, and will not
sut5cr a mixture of later or foreign manners to be brought
into the scene r The writer, therefore, at least should
have .'^aid, till after tlic 'i rujan times. But how is even
this supported r ^Vhy U'e read in Homer, that their
WHOLE a)t comisted in extracting arrozrs, healing
Vi oands, and preparing an-odynes; and again, where
Idomeneus says to Nestor, 7'hat one physician is Xi ortk a
many other men, for extracting arrows, and applying
lenitives to the zi-'oand ;

Homer's speakers rarely talk imjiertinently. Idomeneus
is shewing the use of a ])hYsician in an army: now,
surely, his use on these occasions ccnsi.-its in healing
wouHds. 'J lic poet therefore chose his topic of recom-
mendation with good judgment ; and we may be certain,
had he spoken of the use of a |)hysici.m in a peaceable
' city, he had jilaccd it in the art of curing distempers j
and this is no imagination : we shall see pi-esently that
he hath in fcict done sg. In the mean tfme let me ask,
what there is in this passage, whidi in the least intimate!^

that

He aflds, we see, to save his credit, er omnibus mcmnria dignis ;
taking it tor grantrd, tliut tbose who weie not remeipbered, were
))()t worth reiiiP!i.:lipr:iig.

• f^ee Div. Leg. book i.

t See note [iM] ui the end of this Book.

J 11, xi. ver. 514, 515.

io6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

that the m hole art consist ed in crtractirig arrows, and
ttpplying amdt/nes ? liut Pliny says so *, who under-
stands Homer to intimate thus mucli. What then ? Is
not Homer's poem still remaining; and cannot we see,
willwut riiny, what inference the rules of good sense
authorize us to draw from the poet's words ? The general
humour of Antiquity, which was strangely superstitious
with regard to this Father of the poets t, may be some
excuse for Pliny in concluding so much from his silence ;
for Homer was their bible; and whatsoever was not read
therein, nor could be expressly proved thereby, passed with
them for apocryphal. But let us, whose veneration for
Homer vises not quite so high, fairly examine the nature
of his first great work : This, which is an intire scene of war
and slaughter, gave him fi cquent occasion to take notice
of outward applications, but none of internal remedies ;
except in the history of the pestilence ; w hich being be-
lieved to come in ))unishment from the Gods, was sup-
posed to submit to nothing but religious atonements:
not to say, that it was the chirurgical part of healing only
tliat could be mentioned with sufficient dignity. The
"Greeks were large feeders, and bitter railers; for which
excesses, I suppose, Machaon, during the ten years siege,
administered many a sound emetic and cathartic : but
these ^^ cre no [iroper ornaments for an epic poem. I
said, his subject did not give him occasion to mention
inward applications; nor was this said evasively, as shall
now be shewn from his second poem, of a more peace-
able torn ; w hich adniitting the mention of that other
part of the art of medicine, the use of internal remedies,
he has therefore spoken in its praise : Helen is brought
in, giving Telemachus a preparation of opium ; which,

* Medicina — Trojanis temporibus clara — vulnerum tamen duii-
tnxat leniediis. Mar. Hist. 1. xxix.cap. i. Celsus loo talks in the
same strain : — Qucs tamen Humerus iion in pestilentia, neque in
variis generibus morborum aiiquid atiuLsse auxilii, sed vulneribii*
iai'.lumniodo ferro & nu'dicair.entis mederi solitos esse propotiiit.
Kx qiu) fipparet ha? partes mediciiiaj xolas ab liis esse tentatas, easquft
«jSt; vetustissimas. !)e Medicina, lib. i. Proef.

-f- — Homerum puetam multiecium, vel potius cunctarum ren/m
cdprimc peiitvm. — And a^aiii : Ut omnis vi fu^tatis ccrdasmus aiictor
Ilonierus docet.' This was s.ud by Apuleius, a very celebrated pla-
toriic pbilobt.pUer, in u juridical defence of himself before a proconsul
of Africa.

the

ScGt. 3.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 107

the poet tells us, she had from Polydamna, the wife of
Tlion the Egyptian, whose country abounded with me-
dicinal drugs, many of which were salubrious, and many
baneful ; w hence the physicians of that land were more
skilful than the rest of mankind.

"ToTix, A»o? S'uyarnp ''.ys (pxp^xax fjttjtoivlx,
AJFTIITIH, rj? is-Afrra (p'i^u ^c(^cop^ ixpapx

'Ai/S^WTTUk' ri yoip Tlccr/ioucg tier* yt^/i^Xn; *.

Here then is an express testimony much earlier than the
time of Homer, for the Efvy[)tian physicians practising
more than surgery; wliich was the thing to be proved.

Our author goes on : Li the days of Pythagoras the
learned began to ferm rules of diet J or the preservation
of health, and to preseribe in this point to sick persons.
This is founded on the rules of diet observed in the
Pytliagoric scliooL There seems to be something
strangely perverse in this writer's way of arguing ; — In
the case of the Egyptian regimen, though it be expressly
delivered by the Greek w liters as a medicinal one, vet
by reason of some superstitions in it, our author will
have i to be a religious observance ; on the contrary,
this Pythagoric regimen, though it be generally repre-
sented, apd even by Jamblichus himself, as a superstitious
practice, yet by reason of its liealthfulncss, he will have
to be a course of physic.

He proceeds : — Hippocrates began the practice of
visiting sick-hed patients, and prescribed medicines with
success for their distempers. For which, Pliny is again
quoted ; w ho does indeed say he was the Ibundcr of the
clinic sect: but it is strange he should say so; since
Hippocrates himself, in numerous places of his w ritings,
has informed us that it was foimded long before. His
tract De diaia in acutis begins in this manner : " Those
" who have collected what we call the cnidiax s£x-
*^ TENCEs, have accurately enough registered the va-

* Odyss. lil). iv. ver. 227, & seq. Clarke on this place of I lonier
observes that Pliny, lib. xxv. c. :. quotes this passage as ascribinsi;
a knowledge of medicinal herbs tu the E<:yptians before Lower Kgypt
was inhabited.

" rious '

io5 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

** rious symptoms or affections in the several distempers,
*' with the causes of some of them : thus far mi^ht
" be well performed by a writer who was no physician,
** if so it were, that he carefully examined each pa-
" tient about his several affections. But what a phy-
" sician should previously be well instructed in, and
" what he cannot learn from his patient, that, for the
" most part, is omitted in this work ; some tilings in tliis
** place, others in that; several of which are very
" useful to be known in the art of judging by signs. As
" to what is said of judging by signs, or how the cure

should, be attempted, I think very differently from
" them. And it is not in this particular only that they
" have not my approbation : I as little like their prac-
" tice in using so small a number of medicines ; for the
" greatest part they mention, except in acute distempers,
" arc purgatives, and whey, and milk for the time :

indeed, were these medicines proper for the distempers
" to which they direct them to be applied, I should think

tiieni worthy of double praise for being able to attain
'■ tlicir purpose so easily. But this I do not appre-
*' hend to be the case : however, those who have since

revised and new-modelled these sentences^, have shewn

much more of the physician in their prescriptions*."
From this long passage we may fairly draw these con-
clusions : 1 . That there was a physic-school at Cnidus :
this appears from the sentences collected under its
name. 1, That the Cnidian school was derived from
jtlie Egyptian : this appears from their sole use of eva-
cuantt, in all but acute distempers. 3. That it was

* Oi iifyfcL'^afUi rctf KNIAIAL «a>.EO(x/»a; rNflMAS, 0x0?* fiiv

fvfy^a.-^cn, Et fv 'moc^a. tmi naunLtiui iy.ura truBo'ialo, IxcTx 'Srar^tfcn"
ixociz oE •n7^ov.a'a^a6Er» «£i tot Ir^^ly, f^r, >.iy(,i\'^ tS KUij.tiit\'^, Tultu; ra.
«-3X?,a •araff.lai' ptAXa It oAXoici, x^ ETTJxai^a I'jUa. ic TEX^afS'it. IxiTat
• £ c: •rtxu.ufa'ni >~iyrja.t uc p^^jj ixuTo, l-r^^iint, in TUTimji tBU/J^a, £TE;oi:j;
yituirxii, ri exe.Voi ixi^'iK^at' x^ i fj.otbt Ji» TtTO wx ivaniit>t a XX or*
1^ tX'yotM TOV dstiuit rc7i7ii axiic^v iyjiotio' ra yx^ is^.iT^a xCniatctt
u^icC'xu, tut l^nuii i/tisrut, (pi^i/.a-xcc (Xa1>;^>a oiootai, x^ ^'f"*^

ya,7ji., I? tnt Ufiti cnwtcxii/ r,t fey taZta. oyafea T,vy xj a^/xs^ofia tais^i
!Vi7W/ia^i», i$ b'iffi isu^riiK,! h^iia\, troXu at u^turi^ct iTrctitu r,t, iVi oXiya
Ect.'a ccvTa^xix jfi' ivv Oi t:y^ uraf iytt' ci Toi t/rE^ojr linini7xnuja.flt^

now

Sect. 3-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 109

now of considerable standing ; having had a reform iii
the teaching of more able practitioners. 4. And lastly,
which is most to the point, that the pliysicians of this
school were of the clinic sect; it being impossible thfey
should compose such a work as Hippocrates here cri-
ticizes, without a constant attendance on the sick-bed •
and therefore Hippocrates was not the founder of thia
sect, as Pliny, and our author after him, supposed. — •
liut, for the established state of physic, its study as an
art, and its practice as a profession, when Hippocrates
made so superior a figure, we have tlie full evidence of
Herodotus, his contemporary ; who tells us, that in the
time of Darius Hystaspis the physic school at Crotona
was esteemed by the Greeks first in reputation ; and
that, at Cyrene, second * ; which both implies, that
these were of considerable standing, and that there were
many others : and if Galen may be believed, who,
tliough a late writer, was yet a very competent judge, there
were many others -f : so that Hippocrates was so far
from being the first that visited sick-beds, and prescribed
with success in distempers, that he was not even the first
amongst the Greeks. The truth of the matter is this,
the divine old man (as his disciples have been wont to
call him) so greatly eclipsed all that went before him,
that, as posterity esteemed his works the canon, so they
esteemed him the father of medicine : And this was the
humour of antiquity. The same eminence in poetry
made them regard Homer as the founder of his art,
though they who penetrate into the perfection of his com-
positions, understand that nothing is more unlikely.
But what is strange in this matter is, that the writer
should think it evidence enough to bring in Pliny speaking
of Hippocrates as the first amongst the Greeks wlio
prescribed to sick-beds with success, for the confutation
of Herodotus (contemporary with Hippocrates) in what
he says of the pharmaceutic part of medicine, as an
ancient practice in Egypt.

But all the writer s errors in this discourse seem to
proceed from a wrong assumption, that tho diietctic

EXf.aS'x tltat, otvri^oi Se, Kvftitsii^t, lib, iii. c. 131.
t Melh. Medcndi, lib, i.

medicine

no THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book U'.

medicine Mas, in order of time, before the pharma-
ceutic : and the greater simplicity of the first method

.seems to have led him into this mistake : — hi the days
of Pythagoras, says lie, the learned begaii to form rules
of diet for the preservation of health ; atid in this con-
sisted the practice of the ancient Indian physicians;
thvy endeavoured to cure distempers by a diet regimen,
but (hey gave no physic. H'rppocrates began the prac-
tice of visiting sich-bed patients, and prescribed medi-
cines liith success for their distemptrs. This, I think,
uas the progress of physic. — I hold the matter to be

just otherwise; and that, ol die three parts of medicine,
the CHiRURoic, the pharmaceutic, acd the biiL-
TKTic ; the dicrteiic was the last in use ; as the chirurgic
uas, in all likelihood, the first. In the early ages of
long life and temperance, men were still subject to the
common accidents of wounds, bruises, and dislocations ;
this would soon raise surgery into an art : agreeably
to this supposition, we may observe, that Sextus Em-
piricus derives laipo?, a ph3'sician, from \U, a dart or

. arrow ; the first attack uj)on the human s|tecies being
of this more violent sort. Nor was pharmacy so far
behind as some mav imagine ; nature itself often eases a

. too great rrpiedon by an extraordinary evacuation ; this
natural remedy (whose good etlects as they are imme-
diately fck, are easily understood) would teach men to
seek an artificial one, wiien nature v\ as not at Itand to
relieve. But the very early invention of pharmacy is
further sCon from that superstition of antiquity, which

. made medicine the gift of the Gods. For, what me-
dicine do they mean.^ It couki not be setting a irac-
ture, or closing the lips of a wound ; n~juch less a re-
giiLn- diet. It could be nothing then but pharmacy ; and
this, both in the invention and operation, had all the
advantages for making its fortune : First, it ^vas not the
issue of study, but of chance; the cause of which is out
of sight : but what men understand not, they generally
ascrii)e to superior agency. It was believed, even so
late as the time of Alexander *, that the Gods continued
to enrich the physical dispensatory. Secondly, tiiere
was something as extraordinary in the operation as in
* Cicejo dc Divin. lib. ii. c. 66.

the

Sect. 3 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. iti

the invention. Pharmacy is divided into the two general
classes of evacuants and alteratives ; the most efiicacious
of these latter, commonly called Specifics, i\ot working
by any visible effects of evacuation, do tiieir business
like a charm. Thus, as the general notion of the divine
original of medicine made the patient very superstitious
so the secret operation of alteratives inclined the prajc-
tiser to the same imbecility. Hence it is that so muc4i
of this folly hath overrun the art of mediciise in all ages.
Now the bestowing the origin of pharmacy in this mannen,
is abundantly sufficient to prove its high antiquity ; for
the Ancients gave nothing to the Gods of wliose origliTal
they bad any records : but where the memory of thp
invention was lost, as of seed-corn, wine, writing, civil
society, &c. there, the Gods seized the property, by
that kinil of right, which gives strays to the lord of the
manor -f-.

But now the dietetic medicine had a very low original,
and a well-known man for its author ; a man worth a
whole dozen of heathen gods, even the great Hippo-
crates himself : and this we learn from the surest
-evidence, his own writings. In his tract dt Vcteri Me-
dicina, he expressly says, that medicine was esta-
blished from the most early times % ; meaning, as the
context shews, Pharmacy: but where he speaks soon
after in the same tract of the dio'tctic medicine (which
he calls ri-xj/n i l»i7f mr, as the pharmaceutic above, ItSoijcij
substantively) he says, the art of medicine was
Tieithcr found out in the most early times, nor sought
after \\. And in his de diceta in acutis, he tells us, 2 hat
the ancienls (meaning all who had preceded him) wrote
nothing of diet worthy notice ; and that, 7iotwithstanding

* Dii.s primum inveiitores suos assignavit, & co-lo dicavit ; nec-
non & liodie inultil'ariam ab oraculis luedicina petitur. Pliii. N. II.
1. xxix. Piooeni.

t l he Rabbins, amongst their other pagan conceits, adopted tbis;
4nd taugiit tliat God liimseH' inslruclt d Adam in the art of medicine ;
■ — " Et ducluB Ad.ihi per oniiies I'aradisi seuntas vidit omne lignum,
" arboves, phmfas, &. hipides, & dociiit eum Doniinus oauiem na-
*' tin-am corum, ad sanan<him omnem d(.!o;em & iiiiinnicateni."
R. Kbcnezra. Wbicii, however, shews their, opinion of the higli
a.;iti(iuity of tlie art.

J • inlfix») zouila. vtuT^Xi lita.^'/n. C. iii. .>

Jj — T»)» yasf "■^X^'> ar* a» si^t^vj Tiy^ti J ii^^imy *t' s^i;t»6ij, cap. V.

112 THE DIVINE LF.GATION [BooklV.

it 7i-as a matter of -cast moment, thcij had int'irdif
omitted it, aUhouifh theij zt ere not ignorant of the nu-
7ncrous subd'tvisiom into t/;e species of distempers, nor of
ihe vario2(.H shapes and appearances of each *. Hence it
appears, that, before the time of Jiippocrates, the vi-
siting of sick-beds and prescri!>ing iiiedicines were in
practice; but that tlie diatetic medicine, as an art,
was inlirely unknown: so t'iat had Piiivy called Hippo-
crates tlie author of tins, inf^tead of the founder oi the.
clinic sect, he had come much nearer to tlic truth.

liut \^ ithout this evidence we might reasonably co!^
dude, even froiri the nature of the thing, that the diit'
tetic was tlie latest effort of the art of medicine. For;
1. The cure it performs is slow an<l tedious, and con-
sequently it would not be tliought of, at least not
employed, till the quick and powerful operation of the
pharmaceutic (wiiich is therefore mo£t obvious to use)
had been found to be ineffectual. 2. I'o apply the
dia?tetic medicine, with any degree of safety or success,
there is need of a thorough kno'.vlcdge of the anim.il
economy, and of its many various complexions i v. ith
long experience in tiie nature and qualities of aliiiiciits,
and their different etFects on diffeient habits ana consti-
tutioirsf. ]ji!t the art of medicine must have made
some consideraljle pj'ogress betbre these acquirements
were to be ex})cc£ed in its prolessoi s.

If I have beep, longer tiidii ordinary on this subject, it
should be consicicred, that the clearing the state of
the E_ii;\ptian medicine. is a matter of importance; for if
the practice, in tiie time of Joseph, was -iviiat the Greek

* At«^ eel o.«»r)); ol k^)(SiTo; ^iifdpx-^av iiilt a^mt Xiyti, j«ti

TCI fj-iyx Turo ura^r.-ix'j tu.; //.=V T6» •Dr&A^l^'ojrla; t*; :» sy.xfWi T«» tUfftit,
«J Tijv «9?.iHr;i(^iJsr» xL-ivt ix. r.yi-oat. cap. ii.

•f" hill TOP ^iAAo/Ia ofQa; ^i/Iy^iifEiy w??. oiaiTy,{ ap6fulritr,f,

t'ivut ^vvs'-r,y.e> e| a^y^ri;' iiuynuiyui Si, iva r.'jaiy ^E^av kikciitjiIczi' eT jxii
yuf TV* £^ ^iyj''^ ^iVaciJ imyt^iiTilcn, t9 ETriz^alion eh tw ffufxccti, ny^
eio< T ctv iirj ta ^VfjL(pi(r,i!a. t.j a$if^-W Wf^j^wlxi'i' •ta.vra /jay et
yttuc-x.it* rlt ^^iy.-af)oiTa' //.tlx dt raZra, trirut ?d vtciut airi>!a;», oiyt
StxtTUfiidu, cn«ixi> >;> Tt»a IxxTX ej^ei i^ T>1* y.a}a, (fvo-n, T»)» ^'
ecKxyxxt a.iifon:n'''',>' oiT ysis ETriras'Szi rHn te If^vf^yficrstti;

tiyjTi, OKt ut C ca^ji; iy.dr'^''' "Ca^ayarirai, iJlj)J)OClv de Distta,

lib. i. eap. i .

writers

Sect. a"] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 113

writers represent it, as I think I have shewn it was,
then this topic seems absolutely decisive for the liigh an-
tiquity of Egypt; and the learned person's hypothesis
lying in my way, it was incumhent on me to re-
move it.

IV. We come, in the last place, to the funerai.
KITES of Egypt; which Herodotus describes in this
manner: " Their mournin!;s and rites of sepulture are
" of this kind : W hen any considerable person in the
" fauiily dies, all the females of that family besmear
" their heads or faces A\ith loam and mire; and so,
" leaving the dead body in the hands of the domestics,
** march in procession through the city, with their gar-
" ments close girt about them, their breasts laid open,
" beating themselves ; and all their Relations attending.
" In an opposite procession appear the males, close
*' girt likewise, and undergoing the same discipline.
*' When this is over, they carry the body to be salted :
" there are men appointed for this business, who make
*' it their trade and employment : — They lirst of all draw
'* out the brain, with a hooked iron, through the nostrils,
** S^c. — after this they hide it in uitre for the space of
" SEVENTY DAYS, and lougcr it is not lawful to keep
" it salted Diodorus agrees with Herodotus in all
the essential circumstances of mourning and embahning.
In this last he seems to vary in one particular : " They
" then anoint the whole body with the gum or resin of
" cedar, and of other plants, with great cost and care,
*' for ABOVE THIRTY DAYS: and afterwards seasoning
" it with myrrh, cinnamon, and other spices, not only
" proper to preserve the body for a long time, but to
" give it a grateful odour, they deliver it to the rela-

clxvi'uii aifl^ww©', tS Ti? >^->\^'/^ fii TO ^riXv yl»^ mZv to Ik' rut o'x^fut
VUTOit K(ZT uiv tTrT^uaali T>)» xc^a.?.rit tsrrif^lj »7 icj to ■m^icrwjr^y' y.aintla, it
ToiiTJ ■ oix>ftoi;r» }^tTriya,y tov tiy.^ot, a,inu,i otvct rriv 'auXtv i-^opsjf/.oa.h, Tvw-
lotlxi £T£^iusrp,/>a4, >c^ (paUaacti Ta? ixu^n^' Qiit Ss a^i al 'Sjpocrrjxaaai
.«r«o-izt^ iri^uBei Si ol einSfs; irviclciila.t, iiri^axTf^lsoi )t} troi* i'ntecv Si
Toira VTotiiauci, arw I? t>j» ya.f\yiv(jni xofxt^acri. Elyi Si oi sir' airci
TUTU KOilialat, Te^vrii/ i^tsa TS4LTr,ii. — tSfura. /jlIv axcXio a'iS/i^<J Stit

Tan fjLV^ul'ti^av i^ayna-i ror iyxe(pa'Koii , dfC^ Ta.vTU Si Tco'.ia-atis^, tcc^i-

^fiJtcr* >/n^u ^^•^a.flt(; rif/.f:^ci<; iQSoiAmoUsi' 'BMvve^i SI Turiur iix i^frv
Tctfix^ueit. lib. ii, caD. 85, 86.

' Voj^IV, * I " tions,"

114 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV,

" tions*," SfC. All this operose circumstance of em-
balming, scripture liistory confirms and explains ; and
not only so, but reconciles the seemingly different
accounts of the two Greek writers, concerning the num-
ber of days, during which the body remained with the
cmbalmers : And the physicians," says Moses, *' em-
" balmed Israel; and forty days were fulfilled for
" him (for so are fulfilled the days of those which are
embalmed) and the Egyptians mourned for him

*' THREESCORE AND TEN DAYS-f." NoW WC learn

from the two Greek historians, that the time of mourn-
ing was while the body remained with the embalmers,
which Herodotus tells us was seventy days : this ex-
plains why the Egyptians mourned for Israel threescore
and ten days. During this time the body lay in nitre ;
the use of which was to dry up all its superfluous and
noxious moisture ;[:; and when, in the compass of thirty
days, this was reasonably well effected, the remaining
forty, the lip' r;jU£|3a? ts-Atiaj Tftjv rpixxovla of Diodorus,
were employed in anointing it with gums and spices to
preserve it, \\ hich was the proper embalming. And ,
this explains the meaning of the forty days xvhich were
fuljilled for Israel, being the days of those that are
embalmed. Thus the two Greek writers are reconciled ;
and they and Scripture mutually explained and sup-
ported by one another.

But if it should be said, that though Moses here
mentions embalming, yet the practice was not so com-
mon as the Greek historians represent it, till many ages
after; I reply, t'.iat the company of Ishmaelitish mer-
chants with their camels bearing spicery, balm, and
myrrh, to carry down into Egypt ||, clearly shews, that
embalming was at this time become a general practice.

On the whole, ^vhat stronger evidence can any one
require of a rich and powerful monarchy, than what

: * KosGoXs 'ma.]) to eruf^oc to f/.i]/ tB^ato]) xeS'^ia x«i Tis-tr aXXotf lirijUS-

JtJ ToTi; ^t'>a^u,E»oi{ i^Lf) (/.otay 'mofi.iv ^^ovot T->)^£»V, wXXa; tr,i tiu^iat
wa^ip^ttrSai ^t^ctTrivotltii, iS7»^ccho'aa,<ri toT; g-vyUyts'i. Lib. i. Bibl. p. 58.
t Gen. 1. 1, 3.

X T«? a-i^xxi; to yWfav xctluTwii. Herodot. p. lig.
\\ Gen. xxxvii. 25.

hath

Sect. 3 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 115

hath been here given? — Scripture describes Egypt un-
der that condition, in the times of the Patriarchs, and
the egression of their posterity : the Greek writeis not
only subscribe to this high antiquity, but support their
testimony by a minute detail of customs and manners
then in use, a\ hich could belong only to a large and well
policied kingdom; and these again are distinctly con-
firmed by the circumstantial history of Moses.

But it is not only in what they agree, but likewise in
what they differ, that sacred and profane accounts are
mutually supported, and the high antiquity of Egypt
estabhshed. To give one instance ; Diodorus expressly
tells us, that the lands were divided betzceen the king, the
priests, and the soldiery*; and Moses (speaking of the
Egyptian famine and its effects) as expressly says, that
they were divided between the king, the priests, and the
people f. Now as contrary as these two accounts look,
it will be found, upon comparing them, that Diodorus
fully supports all that Moses hath delivered concerning
this matter. Moses tells us, that before the famine>
all the lands of Egypt were in the hands of the king, the
priests, and the people ; but that this national calamity
made a si'eat revolution in property, and brought the
«'hole possessions of the people into the king's hands ;
which must needs make a prodigious accession of power
to the crown. But Joseph, in whom the offices of
minister and patriot supported each other, and jointly
concurred to the pu[)lic service prevented for some
time the ill effects oi this accession, by his farming out
the new domain to the old proprietors, on very easy
conditions. We may well suppose this wise disposition
to continue till that new king arose, who knew not Jo'
seph \\ ; that is, would obliterate his memory, as averse
to his system of policy^. He, as appears from Scrip-
ture, greatly affected a despotic government ; to support

* L. i. Bibl. t Gen. xlvii.

X See note [N] at the end of this Book. || Exod. i. 8.

In this sense is the phrase frequently used in Scripture, as
Ju'lges ;i. lo. — " And there arose another generation alter them»

which knew not the Lord, nor yet the works which he had done
" for Israel,"— Here, knew not, can only signify despised, set at
nought,

I 2 which,

i;6 THE DIVINE LEGATION fDooklV.:

^vhich, he first established, as I collect, a standino; mi-
litia; and endowed it with the lands Ibrinerlv the pco-
ple's ; who now l)ecan)C a kind ot Villains to this order,
which resembled the Zaims and Timariots ot the Turkish
empire; and were obliged to personal service: this, and
the priesthood, being the orders of nobihty in this power-
ful empire ; and so considerable they were, that out of
either of them, indifierentlv, as we observed before,
their kings were taken and elected. Thus the property
of Egypt became at length divided in the manper, the
Sicilian relates : and it is remarkable, that from this
time, and not till now, we hear in Scripture of a stand-
ing militia*, and of the king's six hundred choseu
ciiariotSj c^t.

^ECT. IV.

HAVING thus proved the high antiquity of Egypt
from the concurrent testimony of sacred and protane
history; I go on, as I proposed, to evince the same from
internal evidence; taken from the original use of their so
much celebrated Hieroglyphics.

But to give this argument its due force, it will be ne-
cessary to trace up hieroglyphic writing to its original ;
which a general mistake concerning its primeval use hath
rendered extremely ditTicult. The mistake I mean, is
that which makes the hieroglyphics to be invented by
the Egyptian priests, in order to hide and secrete their
■wisdom from the knowledge of the vulgar I : a mistake
which hath involved this part of ancient learning in much
obscurity and confusion.

Men soon found out two w-ays of communicating their
thoughts to one another; the first by sounds, and the
second by figures: for there being frequent occasion
to have their conceptions either perpetuated, or com-
municated at a distance, the way of figures or charac-
ters was next thought upon, after sounds (which were
jjaomentary and confined), to make their conceptions
lasting and extensive.

V * Exod. xiv. 8,,9. . . .

t See note' [0] at the end of this Book.

I The

?;ect. 4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 117

The first and most natural way of communicating our
tiiouji;hts by marks or figures, is bs' tracing out the
images of things. So the early people, to express the
iilea of a man or horse, delineated tiie form of those
animals. Thus the first essay towards writing was a
mere |)icture.

T. We see an example of this amongst the Mkxicans,
vhose only method of recoi'dingtl»eir laws and history, was
by a picture-\\ riting *. Joseph Acosta tells us, tiiat, when
the inhabitants of the sea shore sent expresses to Mon-
tez jma with news of the first a[)pearance of the Spanish
navy on their coasts, the advicc-i \\ere delineated in large-
paintings, upon cloth -|*. Tiie same writer gives us,
in another place, a more particular account of this
sort of painting: " One of our conipany of Jesus (says
" he) a man of much experience and discernment, as-
" sembled in the province of Mexico the Ancients of
" Tuscuco, Tulla, and ]\Iexico; who, in a long con-
" ference held with him, shewed him their records, his-
" lories, and calendars ; things very worthy notice, as

containing their figures and hieroglyphics, by which
*' they painted their conceptions in the lollov\ ing manner :
" things that have a bodily shape were represented by
*f their proper figures ; and those ^vhich have none, by'
*' other significative characters : and thus they writ or
*' painted every thing they had occasion to express.—
V* For my ov. n satisfaction I had the curiosity to inspect
" a paternoster, an avemaria, the creed, and a general

* In diffetto di lettere usarono gl' ingegnosi Me.xicani figure, e
Ocroglifici, per significar le cose corporee, die han figuru ; e per lo
rimaneiite, altri caratteri propri : e in tal modo segnavano, a pro
della posterita, tutte le cose accadute. Per ragion d'eseinplo per
significaie I'entrata degli Spagnuoli dipinsero uii' uoino col cuppello,
e colla veste rossa, nel segno di Canna ch' era proprio di ^uell' anno.
Giro dol Mondo del Doltor D. Gio Fr. Gemelli Careri^ toin. sesto.
j\r^ Nuova Spagna. cap. vi. p. 37.

t — Qiiando era caso de importancia lleuauana a los Seiiores de
j^Iexico pintado el negocio de que les querian intormar; coino Jo
liizieron quando aparecieron los pnnieros navios de Espanoles, y
quaiido fueron a tomar aToponclian. Acosta's Hist, of the indies,
Madr. 1608. 4to. lib. vi. cap. lo. — Con este lecado tueiona Mexico
los de la costa Ileuando pintado en unps panos todo quanto auian
visto, y los navios, y libmbres, y su figura, y juntamente las. piedras
f[Ue les auieo dado. Lib. vii. cap. 24.

1 3 " confes-

n8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

" confession *, written in this manner by the Indians :
— To signify these words, / a sinner cotifess myself \
" they painted an Indian on his knees before a religious in
*' the act of one confessing ; and then for this, To God.
" almighty, they painted three faces adorned with
" crowns, representing the Trinity ; and, To the glo-
rioiis virgin Mart/, they delineated the visage of our
'^'Lady, with half a body, and the intant in her arms ;
" To St. Peter and St. Paul, two heads irradiated,
" together with the keys and sword, S^'c. — In Peru I
" have seen an Indian bring to the confessional a con-
" fession of all his sins written in the same way, by pic-
" ture and characters ; portraying every one of the ten
" commandments after a certain manner ■f

There is yet extant a very curious specimen of this Ame-
rican pictui e-writing, made by a Mexican author : and
deciphered by him in that language, after the Spaniards
bad* taught him letters ; the explanation was afterwards
translated into Spanish, and, from thence, into English.
Purchas has given us this work engraved, and the ex-
planat ons annexed. The manner of its coming into his

• Acosta's words are, y symholo y la confession general ; which
Purchas has translated, — and symbol or general confession of our faith.
This is wrong : by la confession general is meant a general confession
of sins, a formulary very different from the creed.

+ Una de los de nuestra Conipania de Jesus, hombre muy platico
y diestro, junto en la provincia de Mexico a ios Ancianos de Tuscuco, y
deTuUa, y de Mexico, y confirio miicho con olios, y le monstraron sus
Librerias, y sus Historias, y Kalendarios, cosa mucho de Ver. Porque'
teni in surfiguras, y Hiero^lyficas con que pintauam los cosas en esta
forma, que los cosas que tenian figuras, las poniancon sus propriasYma-
glnes, y para las cosas que no auia Ymagen propria tenian otros carac-
teres significatiuos de acquello, y con este modo figurauam quanto
queriam — e yo he visto para satisfazerme en esta parte, las Oraciones
del Pater Noster, y Ave Maria, y Symbolo, y la Confession general, en

cl modo dicho de Indios. -Para significar Aquella palabra, Yo pe-

cador me co'ificsso, pintan un Indio hincado de rodillas a los pies de
uh Rellaioso ; como que se confiessa ; y luego para aquella, A Dios
todo podeioso, pintan tres caras ron sus coronas, al modo de la
Trinidad ; y a la glorio^a Virgen Maria, pintan un rostro de nuestra
Senora, y medio cuerpo con un N ino ; y a San Pedro y a San Pablo,
dos cabefas con coronas, y unas Uaues, y una espada. — Por la misma
forma de pinturas y caracteres vi en tl Piru escrite la confession
que de todos sus pecados un Indio traya para confeSsarse. Pin-
dando cada uno de los diez mandamientos por cierto modo. — Lib.
yi. cap. 7.

hands

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 119

hands is curious *. It is in three parts ; the first is a
history of the Mexican empire ; the second, a tribute-roll
of the several tributes wliich each conquered town or pro-
vince paid into the royal treasury ; and the third, a digest
of their civil law, the largest branch of which was, de
jure patrio.

This was the first, and most simple way of recording
their conceptions -f- j obvious to every one, and common
not only to the Nortli as well as South Americans, but
to all mankind %.

* " Reader, I here present thee with the choicest of my jewels,

" &c. a politic, ethic, ecclesiastic, economic history, wiih just

" distinction of time. — The Spanish go\-ernor having, with some dit-
" ficulty, obtained the book of the Indians, with Mexican interpre-
" tations of the pictures (but ten da_\ s before the departure of the
" ships) committed the same to one skilful in the Mexican language,
" to be intei preted ; who in a very plain style, and verbatim, per-
" formed the same. This history thus written, sent to Charles Y .
" emperor, was, together with the ship that carried it, taken by
" f rench men of war ; from whom Andrew Thevet, the P'rench
" king's geographer, obtained the same. After whose death master
" Hakluyt (then chaplaine to the English embassadour in France)
" bi ught the same for twenty French crowns ; and procured master
" Michael Locke, in Sir Walter Raleigh's name, to translate it.
" It seems that none were willing to be at the cost of cutting the
" pictures, and so it remained amongst his papers till his death :
" whereby (according to his last will in that kind) I became pos-
" sessour thereof, and have obtained, with much earnestness, the
" cutting thereof for the press." Purchas's Pilgr. 3d parr, p. 1065,
1066. [See Plate I.] .

■f Quant aux caracteres, ils n'en avoient point: et ils y supplcoient
par des especes d' hieroglyphes. Charlevoix of the Northern Ame-
ricans, vol. V. p. 202. Lafitau gives us a specimen of these hie-
roglyphics. [See Plate II.]

X The same kind of characters Stahlenberg found upon rocks in
Siberia in the province of Permia, and near the river Jencsei. Of
which he has given a drawing. [See Plate III.] The aiithor l)e
vet. lit. Hunn. Scyth. p. 15. seems to admire this natural expres-
sion of things, as some uncommon stretch of invention. " Miratus
" ego saepe fui caupones idiotas (nempe in Hungaria) istis, qiiibus
" aliquid credere hujusmodi hcto charactere inter debitores non

adscribere tantum, sed longioris etiam temporis intervallo post,
" non secus, quam si alphabethario scribeiidi genere adnotati luis-
" sent, promere, debitamque summarn & rationes indicare potuissc ;
" ita si debitor miles est, rudi quadam linea frameam aut pugionem
" pingebant ; si faber, raalleuna aut securim : si auriga, (lagrum,
" atque sic porro."

I 4 11. But

izo THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

11.

But the inconveniencies attending the too great bulk
of the volume in writings of this kind, would soon set the
more ingenious and better civilized people upon con-
triving methods to abridge their characters : and of all
the improvements of this kind, that which was invented
by the Egyptians, and called Hieroglyphics, was
by far the most celebrated. By this contrivance, that
writing, which amongst the Mexicans was only a simple
painting, became in Egypt a pictured character*.

This abridgment was of three kinds ; and, as appears
from the more or less art employed in the contrivance
of each, made by due degrees ; and at three different"
periods.

1 . The first way was, To make the principal circum-
stance 171 the subject stand for the whole. Thus when
they would describe a battle, or two armies in array,
tliey painted (as we learn from that admirable fragment
of antiquity, the hieroglyphics of Horapolio) txvo hands,
one holding a shield, and the other a bow f ; when a
tumult, or popular insurrection, — an armed man casting,
arrows \ when a siege, — a scaling ladder \\. This vvas
of the utmost simplicity; and, consequently, we must
suppose it the earliest way of turning painting into an'
hieroglyphic ; that is, making it a picture-character.
And this is what we shall hereafter distinguish by the
name of the cuRiOLOGic HIEROGLYPHIC.

2. The second, and more artful method of contrac-
tion, was by putting the instrument of the thing, whether
real or metaphorical, for the thing itself. Thus an ci/e,
eminently placed, was designed to represent God's
omniscience % ; an eye and sceptre, to represent a mo-
narch ** ; a sword, their cruel tyrant Gi bus ff : and a
ship and pilot, the governor of the universe +|. And
this is what we shall call tlie tropical hierogly-
phic.

* See Plate IV.

+ HorapoU. Hierogl, lib. ii. cap. 5. Ed. Corn. De Pauw, Traj.
ad Rhen. 1727. 4to.

I Id. 1. II. c. 12. II Id. 1. ii. c. 28.

IT Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. v, ** Plutarch, Is. & Osir. ft Id. ib.

JI Jamblichus. See note [P] at the end of this Book.

3. Their

Sect. 4-]' MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 121

-3. Their -third, and still more artificial method of
abrid^in^j picture-writing, was, Z>j/ making one thing to
stand f or, or represent another^ where any quaint re-
semblance or . .analogy y in the represe?itative, could be
collected from their observations oj nature, or their tra--
ditional superstitions. And this was their symbolic

HIEROGLYPHIC.

Sometimes it was founded in their observations on the
form, or on the real or imaginary natures and qualities,
of Beiuiis. Thus the universe was designed by a serpent
in a circlet whose variegated spots signihed the stars*;
and the sun-rise by the tzvo eyes of the crocodile, because-
they seem to emerge from its head -f ; a widow who
never admits a second mate, by a black pigeon ; one
dead of a tever, contracted by the over great solar heat,
by a blind scarabccns \\ ; a client flying for relief to his
patron, and finding none, by a sparrow and owl*^ ; a
king inexorable, and estranged from liis people, by an
eagle**; a man who exposes his children through po->
verty, by an hawk ff ; a wife who hates her husband,,
pr children who injure their mother, by a viper one
initiated into the mysteries, and so under the obligation
of secrecy, by a grashopper jj ||, which was thought to
have no mouth.

, Sometimes again, this kind of hieroglyphic was de-
rived from the popular superstition. Thus he who had
borne his misfortunes with courage, and had at length
surmounted them, was signified by the hya'na be- '
cause the skin of that animal, used as a defence in battle, '
was supposed to make the wearer fearless and invul-
nerable.

But it is not from analogy alone (the force of which
will be seen more fully as we proceed), nor yet from
the nature of the thing only (which in these enquiries is
indeed the safest guide), that we conclude the hiero-
glyphics now described to be an improvement of an
earlier picture-writing used by the Egyptians, and re-

'.* Horap. Hierogl. 1. i. c. 2. t i- c. 68. J L. ii. c. 32.

II 1. ii. c. 41, 5fL. ii.c. 51. **L. ii. c. 56.

■ft L. ii. c. 99. \\ L. ii. c. 59 & 60. |||| h. ii. c. 55.

'1f1[ L. ii. c. 7'2.

sembling

122 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

sembling that of the Americans. Ancient history records
the fact. We are told, in that exquisite fragment of
Sanchoniatho, preserved by Eusebius, that " the God
" Taaatus, having imitated Ouranus's art of picture-
" writing *, drew the portraits of the Gods Cronus,
" Dagon, and the rest, and delineated the sacred cha-
" racters which formed the elements of this kind of wri-
" ting : for Cronus, particularly, he imagined these
" symbols of royalty, four eyes, two before, and two
" behind ; of which, two were closed in slumber ; and
" on his shoulders four wings, two stretched out, as in
" the act of flight, and two contracted, as in repose.
*' The first symbol signified that Cronus watched though
" he reposed, and reposed though he watched ; the
*• second symbol of the wings signified, in like manner,
" that even when stationed he flew about, and, ^vhen
" flying, he yet remained stationed. To each of the
" other Gods he gave two wings on their shoulders J, as
** the Satellites of Cronus in his excursions'; who had
likewise two wings on his head, to denote the two
" principles of the mind, reason and passion \\." Here
we see that Ouranus practised a kind of picture-writing,
which Taautus afterwards improved: Taautus, orThoth,
was the Egyptian Mercury ; on which name and family
all the inventions of the various kinds of writino were

* The original is, Upo tstwv ©eoj TiHavl^ fAifJunira.y.tf'^ rot Ov^arott
which Vigerus thus translates, Taautus vero Dcus cum jam ante cali
i?naginem effinxis'^et ; and Cumberland, But before these things the
god Taautus haring formerly imitated or represented Ouranus :~This
is wrong, fti/AJjo-a^e*®- royOv^xvon signifies here, imitating the art, or
practice, or example of Ouranus ; not painting his figure. So Plu-
tarch, de Fort. Alex. 'HfUKXU MIMOYMAI Iltgaia ^r,\u.
' + See note [Q] at the end of this Book.

■ I Conformably to this account, the Etruscans and Greeks occa-
sionally gave wings to the Images of all their Deities.

II n^o it rirut Seoj TaaJl®- ^jf*»)£raj(A£r<&* Ton Ovparov, ruv 5eov o^{/Etf,
K^o»tf T£ jcj AaywK^, )^ rut Xoittup ^ttlvwa-ev ts? tt^tf? ran s-o»;(;£twK

ruv ijjLiT^<n7^'ia¥ t£i> inKT^iut fj.fgut' Svo ria-v^ ftvoticc, xj iir) ru» iifAur
vj]c^d Ttcra-a,^oi. Sva [Ai llt\a,)jL,ita,, ^ia It v(pHfjt.itct,. ft ii <rvf£o\ir

vii^u* o^oioi;, on civa.'?ra.vojxi>^ iirlulo, t^rlaftE*©* uveTTxiilo' TOK ^'
>,oiiro7i Seoj;, Exar« «l£pij/*al« in) Tuv ujj.att oTt ^ri crvuir\av\o

tuj x^ h ETTf tS; atV6i9(7Efc'5. Prsep, Evang. 1. i. c. lo.
' very

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 123

very liberally bestowed : this, here mentioned, as the im-
provement of Taautus, being the very hieroglyphics above
dpscribed : and that, as before practised by Ouranus,
the same with the simple American paintings.

Such then was the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic*;
and this the second mode of invention for recording mens
actions and conceptions ; not, as hath been hitherto
thought, a device of choice for secrecy, but an expe-
dient of necessity, for popular use.

III.

: But the obscurity which attended the scantiness of
hieroglyphic characters, joined to the enormous bulk of
picture volumes, set men upon contriving a third change
in this kind of writing : of which the Chinese have given
iTs a famous example.

We have just observed, that the ancient Egyptian
hieroglyphic was an improvement on a yet more ancient
manner, resembling the rude picture-writing of the
Mexicans; and that it joined contracted and arbitrarily
instituted marks to images. The chinfse writing at
length went still further; it threw out the images, and
retained only the marks ; which they increased to a pro-
digious number. In this writing, every distinct idea
has its proper mark ; and is, like every real character,
whether formed by analogy or institution, common to
divers neighbouring nations, of different languages -f*.

The

• See note [R] at the end of this Book.

f — pero lo que se escrive en elia, en todas las lengiias se en-
tiende, porque aunque las Provincias bo se eiitienden de palabra
unaes a oiras, mas por escrito si, porque las leti as o fij^uras sou una*
mism-is para todos, y significan lo rnismo, mas no tinen el mismo
nomljie ni prolacion, porque como he dicho son para denotar cosas
y no palabras, assi como en el exempio de los numeros de guarisnio
que puse, se puede facilmente entender. De aqui tambien procede,
qu« fiendo los Japones y Chinas, Naciones y lenguas tarn dilfrrenles
leen y entendien los unos las escrituras de los oiros ; y si hablas sen
lo que leen, o escriven, poco ni mucho no se entenderian. K-tas
pues son las letras y libros que usan los Chinos tan afamados en el
mundo, &c. Acosta, lib. vi. cap. 5.

Les Caracteres de la Cochinchine, du Tongking, d« Japon snnt
le« memes que ceux de la Chme, & sigintient les monies chases, s os
toutefois que ces Peuples en parlant, s'expriment de la mcine soite,
Ainsi (juoique les langues soint tres-differentes, & tju' ils ne pu.sbent
I . pd$

^24 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book TV.

The shapes and figures of several of these marks, how-
ever now disguised, do yet betray their original to be
fronm picture and images; as the reader may perceive,
by casting his eye on the specimen given us by Kir-
cher * : for, that it is only a more contracted and
defined hieroglyphic, we have the concurrent testimony
of the best writers on the arts and manners of this fa-
mous people ; who inform us how their present writing
■was deduced, through an earlier hieroglyphic, from the
first simple way of painting the human conceptions f .

But

pns fe'entendre les uns les autrcs en parlant; ils s'entendent fort bien
en s'ecrivant, & tous leurs Livies Eont coinmuns. Cos Caracteres
son t en cela comme des Chiftres d' arithmetique: plusieurs Nations
s'eii servent: on leur donne difierens noms; niais ils signifient par
tout la mcnie chose — I'on compte jusqu'a quatre vingt mille de ces
Caracteres. Du Halde, Descr. de 1' Empire de la Chine, torn. ii.
p. 2-26. fol. ed.

. * China Illustrata, p. 227. & (Edipi yEgyptiaci Theatrum Hiero-
glyphicum, p. I 2. [See Plate V.]

t Primo siquidem ex omnibus rebus mundialibus primes Sinat cha«
hicteres suos construxisse, turn ex Cbronicis ipsorum patet, turn ipsa
characterum forma sat superque demonstrat; siquidem non secus ac
Miii/ptii ex animalibus, volucribus, reptilibus, piscibus, herbis, arbo-,
rumque ramis, funiculis, filis, punctis, circulis, simiiibusque charac-
teres suos, alia tamen & alia ratione dispositos formabant. Posteriorea
vero Since rerum experientia doctiores, cum magnam in tanta ani-
ihalium plantarumque congerie confusionem viderent, characteres
hujusmodi varie figuratos, certis punctorum linearumque ductibus
qemulati, in breviorem methodum concinn&runt, qua & in hunc usque
diem utuntur. — Porro litteras nulla ratione in Alphabeti morem,
uti caeteris nationibus consuetum est, dispositas, neque voces ex
literis <.V syllabis compositas habent, sed singuli characteres singulis
vocibus & nominibus respondent; adeoque tot characteribus opus
habent, quos res sunt, quas per conceptum mentis exponere volunt,
Kircheri China Illustrata, p. 226. -

Ah lieu d' Alphabet ils se sont servis au commencement de Jeur
Monarchic, de Hierog/ypkes. lis en peint au lieu d'ecrire ; & par
les images naturelles des choses qu'ils formoient sur le papier ils
tachoient d'exprimer & de communiquer aux autres leurs idees.
Ainsi pour ecrirc un oiseau, ils en peignoient la figure; & pour sig-
nifier un forest, ils representoient plusieurs arbres; un cercle vouloit
dire le Soleil, & un croissant la Lune. Cette maniere d'ecrire estoit
non seulement imparfaite, mais encore tres incommode. — Ainsi les
Chuiois changerent pen a peu leur ecriture, et composerent des fi-
gures plus simples, quoique moins naturelles, &c. — Le Cornie, Nouv.
Mcmoires sur I' Etat Present de la Chine, Tome prem. p. 256. Amst. ;
1698. 12".

Des le commencement de leur Monarchic, ils communiquoient
l«urs idees, en formant sur la papier les images naturelles des chose*

qu' ils

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 125

But it may be worth our while to consitler moie par-
ticularly, the origine and introduction of these arb[-
TRAUV MARKS ; tiic last advancc ot" hieroglyphics
touiinis alphabetic nrith/g. We may observe, that
substances, and all visible objects, were at first very
naturally expressed by the images of the things them-
selves ; as moral modes and other ideal conceptions of
the mind were more aptly represented by marks of arbi-
trary institution : for it required variety of knowledge,
and quickness of fancy, to design these latter ideas by
analogic or symbolic figures; which therefore can be
supposed no other than an after-thought of a people more
than ordinary ingenious, as the Egyptians, and who,
aiming to set a price upon their ingenuity, made their
meaning mysterious and profound.

We shall see presently, that as all nations, in their
ruder state, had hieroglyphic images or analogic or
symbolic figures for marking things ; so had they like-
wise simple characters or notes of arbitrary institution,
for mental conceptions. But, commonly, that sort only

qu'ils vouloient exprimer : ils peignoient, par exemple, un oiseau,
des montagnes, des arbres, des lignes ondoyantes, pour e.xprimer
des oiseaux, des montagnes, un furct, et des rivieres. Cette ma-
niere d'expliquer sa pensee etoit fort imparfaite, et demandoit plu-
sieurs volumes pour exprimer assez peu des choses. D'ailleurs il y
avoit une infinite d' objets, qui ne pouvoient etre representez par la
peinture. — C'est pourquoi insensiblement ils changerent leur ancienne
maniere d'ecrire : ils composerent des ligures plus simples, et eii
inventerent plusieui s autres, pour exprimer les objets, qui ne tombent
point sous les sens. Mais ces caracteres plus modenies ne laissent
pas d'etre encore de vrais Hieroglifes. Premierement parce qu'ils
sont romposez de lettres simples, qui retiennent la milme significa-
tion des caracteies primitits; Autrefois, par exemple, ils represen-
toient ainsi le Soleil par un cercle 0 et Tappelloient Ge; ils le
representent maintenant, par cette figure qu'ils' nomment pa
yeillement Ge. Secondement, parce que I'inscitution des Iiommes a
attache ^ ces ligures la meme idi-e, que ces premiers Symboles pre-
sentoient naturellement, et qu'il n'y a aucune letlre Cliinoise qui
n'ait sa propre signification, lorsqu'on la joint a,vec d' autres. Taai,-
par exemple, qui veut dire, malheur, calamife, est compose de la.
lettre miiii, qui signifie mnisnn, et de la lettre ho, qui signifie JeUy
parce que le plus grand malheur est devoir sa maison en leu. On
peutjuger par ce seul exemple, que les caracteres Chinois n'ctant
pas dis lettres simples, comijie les u6rres, qui separement ne signi-
fient rien, et n'ont de sens que quand elles sont jomtes ensemble ;
ce sont autant de Hieroglifes, qui forment des .images^ et qui ex-,
pnment les pensces. Du Halde, torn. ii. p. 227. • .

■which

126 . tub: divine legation [Book IV.

which they most cultivated, or for which they were
principally famous, happened to be transmitted to pos-
terity. Thus the Mexicans are remembered for their
hieroglyi)hic paintings only ; and the Peruvians for their
knotted cords. But we are not therefore to conclude
tliat the Mexican writing had no arbitrary marks *, or
that the Peruvians had no hieroglyphic paintings
Heal characters of both kinds had, at different periods,
been cultivated in China, if we may credit the concur-
rent relations of the Missionaries. In ancient Egypt,
indeed, where hieroglyphic figures were so successfully
cultivated as to give that general name to real charac-
ters, the use of marks by institution is more obscurely
noticed. And for this, a reason will be assigned. Mar-
tinus ]\Iartinius, in his History of China, tells us;|:, they
had two sorts of characters ; the one, marks by institu-
tion, which had been substituted instead of knotted
cords, once in use amongst them (as in Peru), but much
more intricate than the Peruvian knots: their other
characters were figures resembling the Egyptian hiero-
glyphics, and representing the th'mgs they were designed
to express. Now as the Chinese improved in arts and
empire, it is natural to suppose they would much in-
crease their marks by institution. The growing number
of these characters, the sciences to which they were ap-
plied, and their commodious and expeditious use, would
tempt them even to change their analogic figures into
marks by institution, till their whole writing became of
this sort. It is now such : and that the change was
produced in the manner here represented, we may col-
lect from the words and scheme of Martinius on the
other side || .

* Joseph Acosta (as we see above) expressly says, that " the
" Mexicans represented those things, which had bodily shape, by
" their proper figures, and those which had none, by other significative
^'characters:" — -las cosas que tenian figuras las ponian con sus
proprias ymagines ; y para las cosas que no avia ymagen propria
tenian otros caracteres significativos de aquello.

t The same Acosta says expressly, that, besides their quippos or
strings variously knotted and coloured, they bad paintings like the
Mexicans. L. vi. c. 8. <» >^ •

J Idem imperator [Fo-hi] Sinicos charactereS reperit, quos locrf
nodorum adhibuit, sed ipsis nodis iiitrieatiores. Sin. hist. 1. i. -

li See Plate VI. — -I

But

Sect: 4'] OF MOSES DEiMONSTRATED. 127

But to all this it may be said, How then came it to
pass, that Egypt, which had the same imperial fortune
in a long flourishing dominion, should be so far from
changing their analomc figures into arbitrary marks,
that their arbitrary marks were almost lost and absorbed
in analogic figures ? For such arbitrary marks they had,
as we may collect fi-om their monuments, where we find
them intermixed with proper hieroglyphics; and fi-om
Apuleius, where we see them described in his account
of the sacred book or ritual of the mysteries of Isis.
" De opertis adyti profert quosdam libros, litteris igna-
" rabilibus praenotatos : parlim figuris cujuscemodi
** ANiMALiUM, concepti sermonis compendiosa verba
" suggerentes; partim nodosis, et in modum rot.^:
*' TOHTUOSis, capreolatimque condensis apicibus, a cu-
" riositate profanorum lectione munita :" the very same
species of writing with that of the Chinese, described by
Martinius, and almost in the same words : " Fohius
" characteres reperit, quos loco nodorum adhibuit; sed
'* ipsis nodis intricatiores."

Now this opposite progress in the issue of hieroglyphic
writing, in Egypt and China, may, I think, be easily
accounted for by the different genius of the two people.
-The Egyptians were extremely inventive ; and, w hat is
often a consequence of that humour (though here other
things contributed to promote it), much given to secrecy
and njysterious conveyance : while the Chinese are
known to be the least inventive people upon earth ; and
not much given to mystery. This difference in the ge-
nius of the two nations would make all the difference in
the progress of hieroglyphic writing amongst them. I
have observed that the easiest, and most natural expres-
sion of the abstract conceptions of the mind, was by
arbitrary marks: but yet the most ingenious way of re-
presenting them M as by analogic or symbolic figures ; as
omniscience, by an et/e; ingratitude, by a viper; im-
pudence, by the river -horse. Now the Egyptians, who
were of a lively imagination, and studious of natural
knowledge, though at first, like the Chinese, they ex-
pressed mental ideas by arbitrary marks, yet, as they
improved their inventive faculties by use, they fell
yiaturally into this method of expressing them by ana-

laS THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

locric or symbolic figures ; and their love of mystery
disposed them to cultivate it: for these figures necessa-
rily make the Character mysterious, as implying in the
Inventor, and requiring in the User, a knowledge of
phvsics ; whereas arbitrary marks lie open to all, as
requiring no knowledge but tuat of the institution. Hence
we have a plain reason how it happened, that the Etiyp-
tian Hieroglyphics, from very early times, consisted
principally of symbolic and analogic marks, and that
those Chinese Hieroglyphics were turned altogether into
marks; by institution. For as the Egyptians had soon
Jearnt to express abstract ideas by analogic signs, so tlie
Chinese were at last drawn to express even material
things bv arbitrary marks.

In a word, the Chinese method of thus conducting
hieroglyphic writing through all its changes and improve-
ments, from a picture to a simple mark, was the occa-
sion that the Missionaries, who considered the history of
their writing only by parts, have given us such difterent
accounts of it. Sometimes they represent It like the
Mexican pictures; sometimes like the knotted cords
of the Peruvians ; sometimes as approaching to the cha-
racters found upon the Egyptian obelisks; and some-
times again as of the nature of the Arabic marks for
numbers. But each man speaks only of the monuments
of which he himself liad got information ; and these
differed according to their age and place. He, whose
attention was taken up w ith the most ancient only of the
Chinese monument?, did not hesitate to pronounce them
hieroglyphics, like the Egyptian ; because he saw them
to be analogic or symbolic signs, like the Eg)-ptian ; he
who considered onlv the characters of later use denied
them to be like the Egyptian, because he found them to
be only marks by institution.

These imperfect accounts have misled the learned into
several mistakes concerning the general nature and use
of Hieroglyphics themselves. Some supposing it of their
nature to be obvious marks of institution; and others,
that it required a very comprehemive knowledge of phy-
sics to be able to compose them.

M. Freret, speaking of the Chinese characters, says,
f Selon eux [les Chinois] ces anciens caracteres etoienl

'* tous

^'nctiif! f.'.J i't>.i<'/Jl'.

Tmrr

lit

TromMartiniuf Miarttniii)) .

Fj.ate it.

../^<r Ittciv^.i.ijmX' montem fujnificat,
olini ita , 2 . j>ipt(jcba/ti r. Sic Jo/em
CO 7Hod<> c^jyyrnncbdnt, /^Ut^ Jfizl/jcma-
ticis imzlic circ/i/c //id/ic^z/c jtfurfcto,
3 dffcn/nhuyminc i/ia /vr)na.4 cffitujiuit'
llfvuv/ii.y />ac.^. o/im ^^///ru crati^^odte
ita,o- /vf'mafa/: Re<//^ /ifcra/eu nome/i
Jcephu m cum (?cii/o, j.re^rt'Maf';niinc eta,
8.jJtft</iinl~- Vo/ucrcm ,^aJ/niam, ve/
(jfciI/um./iufJyoc ^l, nadift^cciCt^. u. /r -
pr(^n/ij/Hmti nit/ic ^is du£fil>us,Jo.i2.ejc .
pliceinhinHa/>e«>/fenes nu litnim tite-
ris Sinzcis ad fex divcrfos modos con -
/crijplunhojjn^' (infiqift^pninm k. ra .
ruf/o/S'ifu^t oI> retu/hilem rarif-afenif/iie
mat/fto Jhn/ur in jjrcfr/> l/af>i/27m. I/i c(7 /t
/>ro anttqutp /if-ertr j-hrm^zm /f/cu/fyi/c rc-
^/crunt Ci/rum , </iias Romcr tn oMiJc/s
Jcepe t/ie videre menuni ■

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 129

" tons tbncles sur des raisons philosophiques. lis ex-
" primoicnt la nature des choses qu'ils signifioient : ou
" du moins la determinoieiit en designant Ics rapports
" de ces mcnics choses avec d'autres niieux connues*."
But he doubts whether entire credit is to be given to
their accounts ; tor lie observes, that " La construction
" d'une pareille langue deiiiande une parfaite connois-
*' sance de la nature et do I'ordre des idees qu' il taut
" expriiner, c'est-a-dire, t(ne bovine vietaphy.sifjuc, et,
** peut-etre nieme une systenie cv/npltt de philo.'iUphie. —
" Les Chinois n ont jamais eu rien de pareil." He
concludes, therefore, that the Chinese Hieroglyphics
" n' ont jamais eu qu' ^n rapp rt d' institl'tion avec
" les choses qu'elles siynihent. ' This is strange rea-
soning. To knt)vv whether the ancient Chmese charac-
ters Avere tounded on philosophic relations, does not
depend on their liavino; a true system of physics and me-
taphysics, but on their hav'ng a system simply, whether
true or taise, to which to adapt those Characters : Thus,
that part of tlie f'gyptian physics which taught, that the
viper tore its way through its mother's entrails, and
that the skin of the hyana preserved the wearer invul-
nerable, served full as well for hieroglyphical uses, as the
soundest part of their astronomy, which placed the sun
in the center of its system.

Again, others have denied the Chinese characters to
be properly Hieroglyphics, because they are arbitrary
marks and not analogical. P. Parennin says, *' Les
" caracteres Chinois ne sont hieroglyphes qu' impropre-

" ment. Ce sont des signes arb'Uraiixs qui nous

" donnent I'idee d'une chose, non par aucun rapport

qu' ils aient avec la chose signifiee, mais parce qu'on
" a voulu par tel signe signiher telle chose. — En est-il
" de menie des hieroglyphes Egyptiens?" P. Gaubil
says, — " On voit T importance d'une histoire critique
*' sur I'origine et les changemens arrives a plnsieurs
" caracteres Chinois qui sont certainement hieroglyphes.
" D'un autre cote, il y a des caracteres Chinois, qui
" certainement ne sont pas hieroglyphes. Une histoire
" de ceux-ci seroit aussi importante." These Fathers,
we see, suppose it essential to hieroglyphic characters,
* Mem. de I'j^cad. torn. vi. p. 609.

Vol. IV. K that

130 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

that they be analogic or symbolic signs ; and finding the
4 more modern Chinese writing to be chiefly composed of
arbitrary marks, or signs by institution, they concluded
that the Chinese characters were not properly Hiero-
glyphics. VAHiereas, what truly denotes a writing to be
hieroglyphical is, that its marks are signs for things;
what denotes a writing not to be hieroglyphical, is that,
its marks are signs for words. Whether the marks be
formed by amlogy or institution, makes no alteration in
the nature of the writing. If they be signs for things,
they can be nothing but hieroglyphics ; if they be signs
for Tcords, they may be, and 1 suppose ah.\ays are,
alphabetic characters; but never can be hieroglyphics.
However, it is but justice to these learned Fatlierf to
observe, that one of them, from whom the others might
have profited, appears to have a much clearer concep-
tion of this matter.—" La nature des hieroghiphcs
*' (says lie) nest pas d' ctre des figures naturelles des
" chosfes qu' ils signifient, mais seulement de Ics repre-
" senter ou naturellcment, on par 1" institution des
" hommes. Or tous les lettres Chinoises, ou sont des
" figures naturelles, comme les ancienncs, du soleil, ds
" l:i lune, ou autres semblablcs, ou sont des figures.
*' destinees pour signiner quel que chose, comme sont
*• toutes celles qui significnt des choses qui n ont aucune
" figure; comme I'ame, la beaute, les vertus, les vices,
** et toutes les actions des hommes et des animaux *.''

On the whole, therefore, we see that, before the in-
stitution of letters to express souxtis, all characters
denoted only things; i. By reprtstntation. 2. By
analogy or symbols. 3. By arbitrary institution. —
Amongst the ■Mexicans, the first method wjis princi-
pally in use : The Egyptians chiefly cultivated the se-
cond : And the Chinese, in course of time, reduced
almost all their characters to the third. But the em-
pires of China and Egypt long flourishing in their dif-
ferent periods, had time and inclination to cultivate all
the three species of hieroglyphic writing : only with this
difference; the Egyptians beginning, like the ^Mexicans,
with a picture, and being ingenious and much given to
mystery, cultivated a species of hieroglyphics most
• P. Magaillans, flelat. de la Chine.

abound in<j

Sect. 4 ] OFMOSES DEMONSTRATIiD. 131

abounrnn; in si^ns by analogy, or symbols; whereas
the Chitiesc, nho set out like the Peruvians with a
knotted cord *, nnd were less inventive, and witliout a
secret worship, cultivated that species which most
abounds in marks of arbitrary institution |.

In a word, all the barbarous nations upon earth, be-
fore the invention or introduction of letters, made use of
Hieroglyphics, or signs for things, to record their n)ean-
ing : the more gross, by represent at 'icn ; the, more subtile
and civilized, by analogy and institution.

Thus we have brought down the general liistory of
Writing, by a gradual and easy descent, fi'om a picture
to a letter; for Chinese marks which participate of,
Egyptian hieroglyphics on the cue hand, and of alpha-
betic letters on the other (just as those hieroglyphics
partook equally of Mexican pictures and Ciiinese cha-
racters) are on the very border of letters; an alphabet
invented to express sounds instead of things being only a
compendium of that large volume of arbitj ary marks.

Some alphabets, as the Ethiopic and Coptic have,
taken in hieroglyphic figures to compose their letters ;
which appears both from their shajjes and nanies. The
ancient Egyptian did the same, as a learned French
Writer hath shewn in a very ingenious and convincing
manner||. But this is seen even from the names which
express letters and literary- vAriting in the ancient lan-
guages: thus the Greek words 2HMEIA and SHMATA
signify as well the images of natural things as artiiicial
marks or characters ; and TPA^Xl is both to paint and to
write. The not attending to this natural and easy pro-
gress of hieroglyphic images from p-ictures to alphabetic
letters, made some amongst the ancients, as Plato and
Tally, when struck with the wonderful artifice of an

• Les premiers inventeurs de I'licriture Chinoise, en s'attachaut a
des signeSj qui n'ont qu'uu rapport d'lnstitutioii avec les choses sig-
nifiees, ont suivi le genie de ki nation Chinoibc ; qui nit-me avaut
Fo-hi, c'est a dire, dans la plus profonde antiquiie, se servoit de
cordelettes nouees en guise d'ecriture. Mem. de I'Acad. torn. vi.
Freiet.

f See note [S] at tie end of this Book.
+ See note [T] at the end of this Book.
II See note [U] at the end of this Book.

K 2 ALPHA-

13-2 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

ALPHABET, concliule that it was no human invention,
but a gift ot the immortal Gods.

Mere then we see the first beginnings of Hieroglyphics
amongst the Mexicans, and the end of them amongst
tiie Chinese ; yet we never hnd them employed in either
of these places for mysterxj or concealment : what there
v\ as of this practice, therefore, in the middle sta^e of
their cultivation amongst the Egyptians, we must needs
conclude had some private or peculiar cause, unrelated
to their general nature.

But the course of the Mexican empire was too short
to improve picture into an hieroglyphic; and the Chi-
nese, which, in its long duration, hath brought this pic-
ture down, through hieroglyphics, to a simple mai'k, or
character, hath not yet (fi'om the poverty of its inventive
genius*, and its aversion to foreign commerce) been
able to hnd out an abridgment of those marks, by let-
ters ; it was the old and well established monarchy of
Egypt, so propitious to arts and civil policy, which car-
ried the PTCTURE, through all the stages of its improve-
ment; quite do\^n to letters, tlie invention of this
ingenious people -f*.

Now such a general concurrence in the method of
recording the thoughts, can never be supposed the etFect
of chance, imitation, or partial purposes; but must
needs be esteemed the Uniform voice of nature, speaking
to the first rude conceptions of mankind : for the reader
may be pleased to observe, that not only the Chinese of
the East, the Mexicans of the West, and the Egyptians
of the South, but the Scythians likewise of the North
(not to speak of those intermediate inhabitants of the
earth, tlie Indians, Phoenicians, Ethiopians, Etruscans,
&c.) all used the same way of writing by picture and
hieroglyphic \.

But to shew still clearer, that it was nature and ne-

* Ste note [X] at the end cf this Book.

f Primi f&r figiiras animaliurn jEgyptii sensus mentis effingebant;
et antiquissima monuiiienta memoriae liumaiiffi impressa saxis cer-
nuntiir, et litterarum semet inventores perhibent; inde Phoenicas,
quia mai i praepollebant intulisse Giajcite, gloriamque adept6s, tan-
quam repeierint, quaj acceperant. Taciti An. 1. xi. c. 14.

♦ See note [Y] at the end of this Book,

cessity.

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES l)Ei\K)NSTRATED. 133

cessity, not choice and artifice, which gave birth and
continuance to these several specicses of hieroglyphic
writing, we shall now take a view of the rise and pro-
gi'ess of its sister-art, the art of speech ; and having
set them together and compared them, we shall see with
pleasure, how great a lustre they mutually reflect upon
one another ; for, as St. Austin elegantly expresses it,
JSigiia sint verba visibilia ; verba, signa audi-

BILIA.

I. Language, as appears from the nature of the
thing, from the records of history, and from the remains
of the most ancient languages yet remaining, Avas at
first extremely rude, narrow, and equivocal * : so that
men would be perpetually at a loss, on any new concep-
tion, or uncommon accident, to explain themselves
intelligibly to one another; the art of inlarging language
by a scientific analogy being a late invention : this would
necessaril}' set them upon supplying the deficiencies of
speech by apt and significant siGNs-f. Accordingly,
in the first ages of the world, mutual converse was up-
held by a mixed discourse of words and actions;
hence came the eastern phrase of the voice of the sign'^ ;
and use and custom, as in most other affairs of life,
improving what iiad arisen out of necessity, into orna-
ment, this pi-actice subsisted long after the necessity was
over ; especially amongst the eastern people, whose na-
tural temperament inclined them to a mode of conver-
.sation, which so well exercised their vivacity, by motion;
and so much gratified it, by a per{)etual representation
of material images. Of this we have innumerable in-
stances in holy Scripture : as \\ here tlie false prophet
pushed with horns of iron, to denote the entire over-
throw of the Syrians || : where Jeremiah, by God's

* See note [Z] at the end of this Book

t If this be true, it must be the case at all times, and in all
places, where 1 mguage remains within those narrow bounds. Thus
l.afiteau, speaking of the s.ivages of North America, observes,
lis parknt mitant du cEsrE que dc la loix. — Mceurs dcs Sauvages,
vol. i. p. 482. 4to edit.

I Exod. IV. 8. And not for the reason given by Le Clerc on the
place, ideoque roj lis [piodigiis] tnbuitur, c\xm eorum opera Deus,
non minus ac voce, suum hunc prophetam esse significaret.

II 1 Kings xxii. 11.

K 3 direction,

134 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

direction, hides tlie linen girdle in a hole of the rock near
Euphrates ; where he hrt aks a potter's vessel in sight of
the people; puts on bonds and yokes; and casts a
book into Euphrates *: where Ezekiel, by the same ap-
pointment, delineates the siei^e of Jerusalem on a tile ;
weighs the hair of his beard in balances; carries out his
hou&ehold-stutf; and joins together the two sticks for
Judah and Israel -j-. By these actions the prophets in-
structed the people in the will of God, and conversed
with them in signs : but where God teaches the prophet,
and, in compliance to the custom of that time, con-
descends to the same mode of instruction, tiien the
significative action is generally changed into a vision,
either natural or extraordinary : as where the prophet
Jeremiah is bid to regard the rod of the almond-tree, and
the seething pot; the work on the potters wheel,
and tiie baskets of good and bad figs ^ ; and the prophet
Ezekiel, the ideal scene of the resurrection of dry bones ||.
The significati\e action, I say, was, in this case, gene-
rally changed into a vi.->ion ; but not ah\ ays. For as
sometimes, where the instrucdon was for the people,
the significative action was, perhaps, in vision: so,
sometimes again, though the information was only for
the prophet, God would set hiin upon a real expressive
action, whose obvious meaning conveyed the intelligence
proposed or sought. Of this, we shall give, at the ex-
pence of infidelity, a very illustrious instance'^. The
excellent JMaimonides, not attending to this primitive
mode of information, is much scandalized at several of
these actions, unbecoming, as he supposed, the dignity
of the prophetic office ; and is therefore for resolving
them in general into supernatural visions, impressed on
the imagination of the prophet**; and this, because some

few

* Jcrem. xiii. xix. xxvii. li. f Ezek. iv. v. xii. xxxvii. 16.
X lb. i. xviii. xxiv. || lb. xxxvii. -2.

^ See the rase of .Abraham, b. vi. § 5.

* " More Nevocliiin, P. ii. cap. xlvi. which chapter he thus in-
litles, Quod opera ca, qtice propficfa dicunt scj'ecisse, non fuerint Jacta
reieru externc, sed tantum in xisione prophetia ; and then goes on : —
Scias er_,o, quemadmodum in somnio accidit, ut homini videatur, ac
si in haiic vel il'.am regionem profectus esset, uxorem in ea duxisset,
ac ad tempiis aliquod ibi habitasset, filium, quem N. appellant, &
qui talis aut talis fucrit, ex ea suscepisset ; ita se quoque r«m habere

ijj

Sect. 4-] OF MOSES DExMONSTRATED. 135

few of them may, perhaps, admit of such an interpre-
tation. In wliich he is followed by Christian writers *,
much to the discredit, as I conceive, of Revelation ; and
to the triumph of libertinism and infidelity -f ; the actions
of the prophets being delivered as realities ; and these
writers representing them as mean, absurd, and fanatical,
and expoilug the prophet to contempt %. But what is it
they gain bv this expedient ? Tlie charge of absurdity and
fanaticism will follow the prophet in his visions, when
they have removed it from his waking actions : for if
these actions were absurd and fanatical in the real repre-
sentation, they must needs be so in the imaginary ; the
same turn of mind operating both asleep and awake I].
The judicious reader therefore cannot but observe that
the reasonable and true defence of the pi'ophetic writings
is what is here offered : where we shew, that information
by action was, at this time, and place, a very familiar
mode of conversation. This once seen, all charge of
absurdity, and suspicion of fanaticism, vanish of them-
selves : the absurdity of an action consists in its being
extravagant and insignificative i but use and a fixed ap-
plication made these in question both sober and perti-
nent : the fanaticism of an action consists in a fondness
for unusual actions and foreign modes of speech ; but
those in question were idiomatic and familiar. To il-
lustrate this last observation by a domestic example :

when

in illis parabolis proplietanim, quas vident aut faciunt in visioiie
prophetiae. Quicqmdenini decent parabola; illte de actione aliqua &
rebus, quas propheta facit, de niensura & spatio temporis inter unam
&c alteram actionem, de prolectione ex uno loco in alium : illud omne
non est nisi in visione prophetica, nequaquam vero sunt actiones
vcriE & in sensus incurrentes, licet quaedain partes prajcise & absolute
commemorentur in libris prophetarurn.

* Vid Joannis Smith, T/icol. Cantab. Dissertationem de Prophetia
Sf Prophi'tm cx transl- Joannis Clerici, cap. vi. and his late followers.

t See note [A A] at the end of this Book.

I See note [BlJ] at the end of this Book.

II " Prophetic dreams and visions were so very lively (says a learned
" writer) and affected the imagination with such force, that t/ie pro-
" pket hiiiiself could not at the time distinguish such visions from leali-
" tics. Somclh/ng of this land we experience in our dreams and
" rncries," — See Diss, on Balaam, p. 193.

K 4

136 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

when the sacred writers talk of he'm^ born after the
spirit, of he\ng fed with the sincere milk of the word, of
putting their tears into a bottle, of bearing testimony
against lying vanities, of taking the veil from metis
hearts, and of building up one another ; they speak the
common, yet proper and pertinent phraseology of their
country ; and not the least imputation of fanaticism can
stick upon these original expressions. But when we see
our own countrymen reprobate their native idiom, and
affect to employ only scripture phrases in their whole
conversation, as if some iuhercnt sanctity resided in the
Eastern modes of expression, w^e cannot chuse but sus-
pect such men far gone in the delusions of a heated
imagination. The same may be said of significative
actions *.

But it is not only in sacred story that we meet with
the mode of speaking by action. Profane antiquity is
full of these examples ; and it is not unlikely but, in the
course of our enquiry, we shall have occasion to produce
some of them : the early Oracles in particular frequently
employed it, as we learn from an old saying of Hera-
clitus : That the king zc hose Oracle is at Delphi, neither
speaks nor keeps silent, but reveals by sioxs -f.

Now- this M ay of expressing the thoughts by action
perfectly coincided with that, of recording them by
PICTURE. There is a remarkable case in ancient story,
which shews the relation between speaking by action and
•writing by picture, so strongly, that we shall need no
other proof of the similar nature of these tw o forms. It
is told by Clemens Alexandi inus : They say, that Idan-
thura, a king of the Scythians ( as Fherecydes Syrius
relates the story ), when ready to oppose Darius, who
had passed the Istcr, sent the Pei^siaji a symbol instead
of letters, namely, a mouse, a fi^og, a bird, a dart, and

* See Clem. 'Walker's story of the fanatic soldier witii his five
lights. Ilibt. Indt p. I' .rt. II. p. i5'2.

f OvTS 7\tyi*, UTS x^itiln, a.xy,d i7-»)ftat>£i. Plut. ta-Egl tS /xi X?^"
tlj.uLi\a, p. 990. which being a less precise and more equivocal mode
of informati(Mi, excellently well fiUed the trade of oracles. The La-
ceds monians [see Herodotus in Thalia] preferred it to speech for
another reason, viz. to hinder their being misled by the illusions of
oratory.

a plough.

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSKS DEMONSTRATED. 137

a plough*. Thus this message being to supply both
speech and writing, the purport of it was, wc see, ex-
pressed by a composition of action and picture.

II. As speech became more cultivated, this rude
manner of speaking by action was smoothed and polished
into an apologue or f'ahle\ where the speaker, to in-
force his purpose by a suitable impression, told a familiar
tale of his own invention, accompanied with such cir-
cumstances as made his design evident and persuasive :
for language was yet too narrow, and the minds of men
too undisciplined, to support only abstract reasoning
and a direct address. We have a noble example of this
form of instruction in the speech of Jotham to the men of
Shechcm ; in which he upbraids their folly, and foretells
their ruin, in chusing Abimelech for their king. As this
is not only the oldest, but the most beautiful f apologue
of antiquity, I shall need no excuse for transcribing it:
" The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over
" them, and they said unto the olive-tree, Keign thou
*' over us. But the olive-tree said unto them, Should
" I leave my fatness, \\herewith, by me, they honour
" God and man, and go to be promoted over the trees?
*' And the trees said to the fig-tree. Come thou, and
" reign over us. But the fig-tree said unto them. Should

I forsake my sweetness, and my good fruit, and go to
*' be promoted over the trees ? Then said the trees unto
" the vine, Come thou, and reign over us. And the
" vine said unto them, Should I leave my wine, zvhick
" cheereth God and man, and go to be promoted over the
" trees r Then said all the trees unto the bramble, Come
" thou, and reign over us. And the bramble said unto
*' the trees. If in truth ye anoint me king over you, then
" come and put your trust in my shadow ; and if not,

let fire come out of the bramble, and devour the
" cedars of Lebanon ;];."

How nearly the apologue and instruction by action
are related, may be seen in the account of Jeremiah s

X <t>a.(A ySv 1^ l^ztSapav rut 'Lkv^uv 0cii7iXeoi, in; ira|£» <t>E^Ei£tIJ»j? o
2t;g»®-, Aa^tiu «ia?a>T» Toy "ir^if 'aaXtyi.ov a-mit^ivlx •mifji.-^'ai cv^QoXov
ifli ray ypa/ji.iJia.Tiit, fuit, ^xt^x^cii, opufla, o'irot, a^o^fn). Strom.
lib, V. p. 567.

t See note [CC] at the end of this Book.

J See note [DD] ut the end of this Book.

adventure

138 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Cook IV.

adventure with the Recliabites * ; an instruction par-
taking of the joint nature of action and apologut.

This was the birth of the fable; a kind of speech
which corresponds, in all respects, to u riting by hiero-
glyphics, each being the symbol of something else un-
derstood. And, as it sometimes happened, when an
Hieroglyphic became famous, it lost its particular signi-
fication, and assumed a general one ; as the Caduceus,
for instance, which was, at first, painted only to denote
the pacific office of Hermes, became, in time, to be the
common symbol of league and amity : so it w as with
the Apologue ; of which, when any one became cele-
brated for the art and beauty of its composition, or for
some extraordinary efficacy in its aj)plication, it was soon
converted and worn into a proverb. We have a fine
instance of this in the message of Jehoash to Amaziah,
" Saying, The thistle that xvas in Lebanon, sent to the
" cedar that was in Lebanon, saying, Give thy daughter
" to my son to wife : and there passed by a wild beast
*' that was in Lebanon, and trode down the thistle. Thou

hast indeed smitten Edom, and thine heart hath lifted
" thee up : glory of this, and tarry at home : for why
" shouldest thou meddle to tliy hurt, that thou shouldest
" fall, even thou, and Judah with thee f r " Where we
see plainly that this satiric apologue of the thistle and
cedar was now become a proverb : of a like kind is that
of the prophet ; Hotel, Jir tree, for the cedar is fallen ;
to denote the danger of the lower people, when their
superiors cannot withstand the civil tempest.

III. But as speech improved into an art, the Apo-
logue was contracted into a simile, in which men con-
sulted closeness as w cU as brevity , for here the subject
itself being still kept in sight, there was no need, as in
the Apologue, of a formal application : and how easily
the Apologue slid into the Similiiude, we may see by
the follow ing passage of Jeremiah, which, being some-
thing between both these forms of speech, communicates
of cither's nature : The Lord called thy name a green-
olive-tree, fair and of goodly fruit : with the noise of a
great tumult he hath kindled fire upon it, and the
branches of it are broken ||, &;c. This w ay of speaking by
* Ch. sxxv. f 2 Kings xiv. 9, 10. I Zech. xi. 2. || Jer. xi. i6.

Simile,

Sect 4] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 139

Simile, we may conceive to answer to the Chinese marks
or chciraoters in writing.

Again, as from sucii viarks proceeded the abbre-
viated method of alpliabetic letters, so from the Simile,
to make language still more expedite and elegant, came
the mf.taphor; which is indeed but a Simile in little:
for men so ct^nversant in matter still wanted sensible
images to convey abstract ideas. The steps by which the
Siinih' was contracted into the Aletaphor, may be easily
traced by a careful perusal of the prophetic writings;
there being no mode of speech more common than that
compounded of both ; where the Simile is just about to
be forsaken, and the Metaphor to be received. In this
manner are God's judgments denounced against the king
of Assyria: " Therefore thus saith the Lord God, be-
" cause thou liast lifted up thyself in height, and he
" hath shot up his top amongst the thick boughs, and
*' his heai t is lifted up in his height ; I have tliercfore
" delivered him into the hand of the mighty one of the
" heathen : — and strangers, the terrible of the nations,
" have cut him oft', and have left him : upon the moun-
*' tains and in all the valleys his branches are fallen, and
*' his boughs are broken by all the rivers of the land,
" and all the people of the earth are gone doM n from his
" shadow, and have left him. Upon his ruin shall all
" the fowls of heaven remain, and all the beasts of the
" field shall be upon his branches. To the end that none
*' of all the trees by the waters exalt themselves for their
" height, neither shoot up their top amongst the thick

boughs*." Quintilian considering this matter in an
inverted order, yet makes an observation, where lie
speaks of Dictaphors, much to our purpose — Continuus
[usus] vero in allegoriam & a^nigmata exit That is,
As the allegory may, by degrees, be contracted into a
JMetaphor, so the Metaphor, by beating long upon it,
may be drawn back again into an allegory.

As the Siijiilc slid into a Metaphor, so the metaphor
often softened into a simple epithet, which soon dis-
charged all the colouring of the figure. This is observ-

* Ezek.xxxi. lo, Sc seq.

I L. viii. c. 6.

able

140 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

able in the words decrepit *, capricious, and a great
manv others, when apphed either to the body or mind.
Which being first used in simile, then in metaphor, at
len2i;th, by ft'equent use in epithet, lost the veiy memoiy
of their original f-

Thus we see the common foundation of nil these va-
rious modes of writixg and speaking, was a picture
or IMAGE, presented to the imagination through the eyes
and ears ; which being the simplest and most universal
of all kinds of information (the first reaching those who
could not decipher the arbitrary characters of an al-
phabet ; and the latter instructing those who were jet
strangers to abstract terms), we must needs conclude to
be the natural inventions of rude necessity.

And here it may not be amiss to repeat an obser-
vation made before, that the primitive and more simple
way of expression, whether in icriting or speaking, did
not always straight grow into disuse on the invention of
a more improved manner. Thus we see in Scripture,
the way of speaking by action was still used after the in-
troduction of the Apologue; and the Apologue, after
that of tlie Siiiiile and IMetaphor. And so again in
"aiiting; the first and simplest hieroglyphics continued
to be used in Egypt (as wo. shall see) long after the re-
finement of them into those more artfi^il ones called sijm-
bolical ; and these, after that further improvement into
characters or marks resembling the Chinese, and even
after the invention of letters.

But how, as in these several modes of speech, so in the
several forms of w riting, men made a virtue of necessity,
and turned that into ornament and mystery, which had
its birth in poverty, and was brought up in simplicity
and plainness, is to be our next enquiry.

II.

It is now, I suppose, apparent, that the hitheito re-
ceived opinion, that the Eg^'otians invented hieroglyphics
to conceal their knowledge, and render it mysterioLis, is

* Decrepitis. Comparatio vitce nostrne cum lucerna nota fuit
Latiiiis, ut p<itet ex decrepitoium senum uuncupatione. Prim.
Seal p. 48.

f See note [EE] at the end of this Book.

altogether

Sect. 4] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 141

altogether witliout foundation. However, as it is very
certain tliey did, at length, employ hierojyphic writing
to such a purpose, it will be proper to examine how this
came about; How one of the sinnplest ana plainest
means ol instruction caine to be converted into one of
the most artificial and abstruse.

To support what we have to say on this head with
proper authority, it will be necessary to produce two
important passages from Porphyry and Clemens Alex-
andrinus, concerning the several natures and kinds of
Egyptian writing. Orj these, we shall regulate our dis-
course; which will, in its turn, contribute to illustrate
these passages, hitherto, as we conceive, very imper-
fectly understood.

But it will be proper first of all to give the reader a
general idea of the several natures and kinds of Egyptian
writing, according to the order of time in w hich each was
invented and improved ; and for tlie truth, as well as
perfect intelligence of the account, refer him to the whole
of the discourse.

Egyptian writing was of four kinds: the first, hiero-
glyphic, and this twofold : the more rude, called
curiologic ; and the more artificial, called tropical: the
second, symbolic ; and this likewise was twofold; the
more simple, and the more mysterious ; that tropical,
this allegorical. Tiiese two kinds of writing, namely the
hieroglyphic and symbolic (v\ hicii went under the generic
term of hieroglyphics, distinguished into proper, and
symbolic hieroglyphics), were not composed of the letters
of an alphabet, but of marks or characters w hich stood
for THINGS, not words. The third epistolic, so called,
as we shall see, from its being first applied to civil
matters: and the fourth and last, iiieroghammatic,
from its being used only in 7rIigious. These two last
kinds of writing, namiely, the epistolic and hierogram-
matic, expressed words, and were formed by the letters
of an alphabet.

We come now to the passages in question. Porphyry,
speaking of Pythagoras, tells us : That lie sojourntd with
the priests in Egypt, and learnt the xnisdom and the
language oj the country, together with their three sorts
of letters, the epistolic, the hieroglyphic, and the

SYMBOLIC ;

142 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

symbolic; of wli'ich the hif.uoglyphic expressed the
meaning of the writer, by an imitation or picture of the
thing intended to be expressed; and the syMuoLic, by
allegorical enigmas *. Clemens is larger and more ex-
plicit : — Noxc those who are instructed in the Egyptian
wisdom, leaj'n first of all the method of their several sorts
of letters; thefrst of xchich is called efisto Lie; the
second sacerdotal, as bemg used by the sacred scribes ;
the last., with which they conclude their instructions,
HiEuoGLYPHiCAL. Of thcsc different niethods, the one
is in the plain and common way of writing by the first
elements of words, or letters of an alphabet ; the other
by SYMBOLS. Of the symbolic xvay of writing, which
is of three kinds ; the first is that plain and common one
of imitating the figure of the thing i^epresented ; the
second is by tropical marks ; and the third, in a contrary
way, of allegorizing by Enigmas. Of the first sort,
namely, by a plain and direct imitation of the figure, let
this stand for an instance : — To signify the sun, they
made a circle ; the moon, a half circle. The second, or
tj^opical way of writing, is by changing and transferring
the object with Just?iess and propriety f ; this they do,
sometimes by a simple change, sometimes by a complex
multifarious transformation ; thus they leave engraven %
on stones and pillars the praises of their kings, under
the cover of theologic fables. Of the third sort, by
enigmas, take this example : the oblique course of the
stars occasioned their representing them by the bodies of
serpents; but the sun they likened to a scarabaus, be-
cause this insect makes a round ball of beast's dung,
and rolls it circularly, with its face opposed to that lu-
minary II .

Thus these two ancient Greeks : but both of them
being in the general mistake concerning the original of
the Egyptian hieroglyphics, it is no wondei- their accounts
should be inaccurate and confused. The first mistake
common to both, and the natural consequence of that
false principle, is making the epistolary writing fii'st,

• See note [FF] at the end of this Book,
f See note [GG] at the end ot' this Book.
J See note [HH] at the end of this Book.
II See note [II] at the end o( this Book.

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 143

in order of time *, which was indeed the last. For that
this was their sentiment appears from Clemens's calhng
hieroglyphic writing urarriv nXivlaluv, the hist and most
perfect kind. The second common mistake is their
counting but three sorts of writing, when, indeed, there
were four ; as is discoverable even from their own
reckoning : Porphyry naming episto/ic, hieroglyphic, and
symbolic; Clemens, epistolic, sacerdotal, anrl hicrogly-
phical ; the First leaving out sacerdotal, which tlie Second
supplies; and the Second symbolic^ which the First
supplies. Their other mistakes are peculiar to each :
Clemens errs most in enumerating the several sorts; and
Porphyry in explaining their several natures.

This latter writer names the three sorts, epistolic, hie-
roglyphic, and symbolic, and this Mas not much amiss,
because the fourth, the hierogrammatic, or sacerdotal,
not differing from the epistolic in its nature, but only in
its use, he comprized it, we may suppose, under the
generic term of epistolic : but when he comes to explain
the nature of the symbolic, which is performed two \\'ays,
tropically and allcgorically, he quite omits the tirst, and
insists only on the latter.

Clemens, on the other hand, wives us these three
kinds, the epistolic, the sacerdotal or hierograinmatical,
and the hieroglyphical. Here epistolic is used as a
specific term, and hieroglyphical as a generic ; just con-
trary to Porphyry, who, in his enumeration, employs
them the other way : but then, as to their nature,
Clemens says, the epistolic and sacerdotal trere by letters
of an alphabet, and the hieroglyphic by symbols : the
tirst part of the explanation is exact. We have ob-
served that Porphyry judiciously omits to explain epis-
tolary writing, as supposing it to be well known : but
Clemens, who adds to epistolary, sacerdotal, a way of
writing, though like the epistolary'', by an alphabet, yet
being confined to the use of the priests, not so well
known, he with equal judgment explains their nature :
but the latter part of his account, w here he says hiero-
glyphic w riting was by symbols, making symbolic, v. hich
is a specific term, to be equivalent to hieroglyphical,
which he uses generically, is an unlucky blunder j of
* See note [KK] at the end of this book.

which

144 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

which this is the consequence, that proceeding to divide
symbolic, as a generic term, into three sorts, curiologic,
tropical, and allegorical ; he falls into a direct contra-
diction : Tijf Si Su/AfoXiJtrf, says he, r w^aXoyiTroih
xara ji*iji/.»)(n!/, tJicJirst kind of symbolic writing is by a
plain and simple imitation of the figure of the thing in-
tended to be represented ; which is directly contrary to
the very nature of a symbol ; a symbol being the repre-
sentation of one thing by the figure of another. For
instance, it was the bull Apis, and not the picture or
iuiage of Osiris, that was the symbol of Osiris : Clemens
therefore, we conceive, should have said- — hieroglyphics
were written curiologically and symbolically ; that the
curiologic hieroglyphics were by imitation ; the symbolict
by conversion ; and that, of this conversion, there were
two kinds, the tropical and allegorical ; and then all had
answered to his foregoing division. For the rest. He
explains the nature of curiologic and symbolic hierogly-
phics with sufficient exactness ; save that the first in-
stance he gives of allegoric symbols seems to belong to
the tropical.

Thus we see how these writers contribute to the cor-
recting one another's mistakes. What is necessary for
the further clearing up their accounts, which, obscure
as they are, are the best that antiquity will afford us,
shall be occasionally considered as we go along.

Let us next enquire how hieroglyphics came to be
employed for the vehicle of mystery.

I. The Egyptians, in the beginnings of their monarchy,
wrote like all other infant nations, in a kind of universal
character by picture ; of which rude original essays, we
have yet some traces remaining aniongst the hiei'oglyphics
of Horapollo ; who tells us, tliat the ancient Egyptians
painted a man's two feet in water to signify di fuller *,
and synoke ascending upwai^ds to denote fre f. But to
render this rude invention less incommodious, they soon
devised the more ai'tful way of putting one single figure
for the mark or representative of several things ; and thus
made their picture an hieroglyphic.

This w«s the first improvement of that nide and bar-
barous way of recording men's ideas ; and was practised
* Horap. 1. i. c. 65. f U. c» 16,

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 145

in a twofold manner ; the one more simple, by putting
the principal part for the whole; tiie other more artifi->
cial, by putting one thing, of resembling qualities, for
another. The first species was the cuRroLoorc hiero-
glyphic; the second, the tropical hiekoolyphic;
the latter of which was a gradual improvement on the
former ; as appears both from the nature of the thing,
and from the records of antiquity. Thus the rnoon was
sometimes represented by a half circle, sometimes by a
cynocephalus * : The overflowings of the Nile, sometimes
by a spreading water hi heavtn and earth, sometimes
hy a. I'wn'Y; (a hieroglyphic, we may suppose, invented
after they had learnt a little astronomy) : a. judge, some-
times by a man rvithout hands, holding down his eyes
to denote the duty of being unmoved by interest or pity :
sometimes by a dog near a royal robe \\ ; for they had
a superstition that a dog, of all animals, was only pri-
vileged to see the gods : and it was an old custom for
their judges to behold and examine their kings naked :
Now in all these instances we see the first hieroglyphic is
curiological ; the second, tropical.

The I'lgyptians therefore, employed, as we say, the
proper hieroglyphics to record, openly and plainly, their
laws, policies, public morals, and history; and in a
word, all kinds of civil matters.

1. This is seen from those remaining monuments of
old Egyptian wisdom, the oBELisKS^f. That very
ancient one of Ramesses, now standing before the pon-
tific palace in Rome, and first erected to adorn the city
of Heliopolis, is full of hieroglyphic characters ; these
Hermapion translated into Greek ; and part of his
translation is preserved in Ammianus Marcellinus. By
which it appears, that the writings on this obelisk con-
tained only a panegyric on Ramesses, and a history of
his conquests. Rut this was not the subject of one only,
but of all the obelisks in general**. We have seen

* Horap. 1. i, c. 14. f L. i. c. 21.

J Plutarch. Is. & Osir. — Diod. Sic. lib. i. || Horap. 1. i. c. 40.
fl See note [LL] at the end of this Book.

** O yEgypie, jEgypte, Religionum tuariim solse supererunt fa-
biila-, & a^que incredibiles Posteris suis; solaque supererunt verba
LAPiDiBus incisa, tua tacia narrantibus. j^puleius, Elmenh.
ed. p. 90.

Vol. IV. L already,

Mti THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV,

iil ready, and shall see further, what Clemens Alexandri-
nus hiith observed to this purpose. Diodorus saith, that
Sesvstris erected two obelish- of veri/ durable stone, each
txventy cubits liigh ; oti zcJuch lie engraved the number
of his forces, the particulars of his revenue, and a cata-
logue of the juttions he had conquered*. At Thebes,
Strabo telleth us, there were certain obelisks zvith in-
script ions recording the riches and poxver of their kings,
and the extensiveness of their dominion, stretching into
Scythia, Bactria, India, and the country note called
Ionia; together with the multitude of their tributes,
and the number of the soldiery, which consisted of a
million of men-^-i And Proclus assureth us, That the
Egyptians recorded all singular events, memorable ac-
tions and neio i?iventions on columns, or stone pillars
Tacitus is more particular than the rest : for speaking
.of Germanicus's voyage into Egypt, and his curiosity in
examining its antiquities, he saith ; J/o.r visit veterwn
Theburum magna vestigia ; 8^ manebant structis molibus
iiitera: lEgypticE, priorum opulcntiam complexes: Jus-
susque ^ senior i bus sacerdotum patrium sermonem inter-
pretari, refcrebat habitasse quondam septingenta milUa
cttate militari : atque eo cum exercitu regem Rhamsen
Libya, JEthiopia, Medisque Persist Bactriano-,
ac Scythia potitum. Quasque terras Syri Armeniique
^ contigui Cappadoces colunt, inde By thy nam, hinc
Lycium ad mare imperio tenuisse. Legebantur 8^ in-
dicia gentibus tributa, pondus argenti auri, immerus
armorum equorumque, dona tcmplis ebur atque odores^
quasque copias frumenti 8§ ouuiium icte?isilium quccque
natio penderet, hand minus magnifica, quam nunc, vi

* %\ia ^£ ^iSt*a? 'O^EAiirxa; \y. t5 cn«X«^5 ^i6», •as^nyjiiii to L'iI/©' ily.uai
«sr§oj TOK txaroy, av lirtypa-^e tote ixeye^i^ t!)? ^vnz/jtiui >cj to

ir^))6&' ru\i ifa^otro^av, Toy agtd^ov Twy >ie^a,iro\ii/.in^i!\u> idvai/. Lib. i.

p. 37. S.E.

-f — ii 34 Talj ^tixxif Ivi rivuiv i^tXicxuv avay^oi^xi ^■n'KicTxi Ton <s•^STal'
Tuv TOT£ ffxat^iiiiv, tJj» 'anx^uTiioiv, ai? ft«X§i 2xt;6uy, )<J Baiil^'iav, >tj

luarit lAv^ici^a^. 1. xvii.

t Ai'yfTTioi; oe tri tcc ytyotoTO. 5ii t?? lAtrif^rtf «£» ►£<» 'ora.pern''
it fjLVTifj.-^, Stoc T?; iVopla;' a'urri ciiro rui/ ri'A«», h aK airiyfa^oilo
ru V70i^a3o^ci, xj rx SatJ/Aa]©« Tun vr^afiAo.ruv, tirt it tJ^ot^KTit, lire

h iv^tffia-it. Prod, in Timaeum, 1, i. p. 31, f.

Partho-

Seet.4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 147

Parthorum, aut potcntla llomamt, jubmtur* . But to
obviate at once all the cavils of Kircher against this
concurrent testimony, I observe, in tlie last place, that
it receives tlie fullest confirmation trom that excellent
treatise of HorapoUo, which consists chiefly of the an-
cient and proper hieroglyphics ; all of them relating to
civil life, and altogether untit for the abstruse specula-
tions of pliilosophy and theology.

2. This is further seen from that celebrated inscrip-
tion on the ten]ple of ]\linerva at Sais, so much spoken
of by the Ancients ; where an infant, an old man, a
hawk, a lish, and a river-horse, expressed this moral
sentence, All you who come into the world, and go out
of ' it, know this, that the Gods hate impudence. The
excellent Stillingfleet, who was in the common opinion
that the Egyptians invented hieroglyphics to secrete their
profound wisdom, and that this inscription at Sais was
part of that wisdom, pronounces sentence from hence,
on all their mystic learning in general : — " Certainly
" (says he) this kind of learning desei ves the highest
" form amongst the dijficilcs nugce ; and all these hiero-
" glyphics put together will make but one good one, and
" should be for — labour lost But there miglit be
much knowledge in their mystic learning, whatever be-
comes of tlie hieroglyphical inscription at Sais ; which
was indeed no part of that learning, but a plain and
public admonition in the proper hieroglyphic ; so far
from being a difficult trifle, to be secreted, that it was
a very plain and important truth to be read and under-
stood by the people ; as aj^pears from the place Avhere it
was engraved, the vestibule of a public temple.

And here Kircher s visionary labours on this subject
might have been pitied, had he discovered in any of his
voluminous writings on the Hieroglyphics, the least re-
gard to truth or probability. This learned person had
collected a fact from Antiquity, which the notoriety of it
will not suffer us to call in question, namely, that the
old Egyptians committed their projourtd and secret wis-
dom to the seal of hieroglyphics. Egyptian wisdom vi-as
a matter of moment. But the learned Jesuit did not
duly consider, whether any of the vehicles of that wis-
* Auiiiil. lib. ii. t Orig. Sacr. 1. ii. c. ii.p. 79.

L 2 dom

148 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book ir.

(lorn "Nverc yet in beinsi ; much less did he reflect that
the same Antiquity which lells us they had much pro-
found wisdom, tells us like\\ ise, that it was all collected
in their sacerdotal * books, books long since lost ; and
that the ancient monuments of stone still remaining,
were records of another nature. However, inflamed
with the glory of a Discoverer, he lanches out in search
of this unknown World ; guided by some of the latest
Greek writings, in conjunction with the earliest Egyp-
tian hieroglyphics. The Greek writings indeed pre-
tended (though very impudently 'j-) to ancient Egyptian
wisdom ; but these hieroglyj:>hics constantly disclaimed
it^ ; By this direction he steered at large: and it is
pleasant to sec him labouring through half a dozen folios
with the writings of late Greek Platonists, and the
forged books of Hermes, which contain a philosophy, -
not Egyptian, to explain and illustrate old monuments,
not philosophical. While Ilermapion, Diodorus, Stra-
bo, Proclus, Tacitus, and Pliny, are carefully avoided
as false lights, which would drive him upon rocks and
shallows. — But to proceed.

II. Thus far went the two species, of the proper
Hieroglyphic; which, in its last stage of the tropical,
touched upon symbols (of which we are now to speak)
they having this in common, that each represented o?ie
thing by another ; in this they differed, that the tropical
Hieroglyphic was employed to divulge ; the tropical
Symbol, to secrete : for all the several modes of writing
by THINGS having had their progressive state, from less
to more perfection, they easily fell into one another ; so
that there was but little difterence between the proper
Hieroglyphic in its kst state, and the symbolic in its
first. For this method of contriving tropical hierogly-
phics, by similar properties, would of itself produce re-
finement and nice enquiry into the more hidden and
abstruse qualities of things ; which meeting at the same

* See Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. vi. f Vol. iii. b. iii. § 4.

X Thus in one place he expresses himself: — Plerique fere Herodo-
tum, Diodorum, Plinium becuti, Obeliscos non nisi historicas regum
veterum commeniorationes continere opinati sunt; quod laraen falsum
esse, ex dictis luce meridiana darius paid. pp. 269, 270. of his
(Edip. iEgTpt. torn. iii.

time

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEI\fONSTRATED. 149

time with a temper now much turned to speculation * on
matters of theology and philosophy, would as naturally
introduce a new species of zoographic Avriting, called
by the ancients svMBor.ic, and employed for se-
ciiECYf; which the hicrh speculations, conveyed in it,
required ; and for which it was ^^•ell fitted by the snig-
matic quaintness of its representations.

As the jM'oper Hieroglyphics were of two kinds, curio-
logical and tropical, so were symbols; the more
natural, simply tropical; the more artificial, exjg-

MATICAI..

1. TtioprcAL symbols were made by em.ploying the
less known properties of things. The quality was some-
times used for the sake of a fanciful resemblance ; as a,
cat stood for the moon, because they observed the pupil
of her eye to be filled and enlarged at the full moon,
and to be contracted and diminished during its de-
crease:!:: sometimes it was founded on the natural his-
tory of an animal ; as a serpent represented the divine
nature, on account of its great vigour and spirit, its
long age and reviresence ||. Plow easily the tropical
hieroglyphic fell into the tropical symbol^ we may see
by the following instances : eternity was sometimes ex-
pressed by the sun and moon, sometimes by the basi-
lisk ^ ; Egypt, sometimes by the crocodile, sometimes
by a burning censer with a heart upon it ** : where the
simplicity of the first representation and the abstruseness
of the latter, in each instance, shew, that the one was a
tropical hieroglyphic employed for communication ^ the
other a tropical symbol contrived for secrecy.

2. Enigmatic symbols were formed by the mys-
terious assemblage of different things, as in the Caduceus\
or of the parts of different animals, as in a serpent with

^otytiji, vs^ar'^ tec xxra, ttiii ^tauiQinxv ex t>7? 'Tu^ p^t/^aiun uTti^iccf, ti'j
iviryijJi.ovtKiiy £/*w£»giaii hha^it. Scinch, apud P^useb. Pr. Evang. lib. i.
cap. 10.

t See note [i\IM] at the end of this Book.

Plut.

de Is. & Os.

II Euseb. Praep. Evang. lib. i. cap. lo.

«[f Ilorap.l. i. c. i. ** Lib. i. c. 22.

L 3 a hawk*s

150 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

a hawk's head * : or of thing's and animals together, as
in a serpent witii a havv k s head in a circle : the change
of the tropical into the enigmatic symbol is seen in this,
To signify the sun, they sometimes + painted a hawk,
and this \vas tropical ; sometimes a scarabaw^ with a
round ball in its claws, and this, as we see in Clemens,
was of the enigmatic kind. Thus at length, though by
insensible degrees, these characters, called etiigmatic
symbols, became immensely distant from those called
curiGlogic hierogli/phics : to conceive this, the reader
need only cast his eye on two the most celebrated of the
Egyptian hieroglyphics employed to denote the universal
Nature ; namely, the Diana Alultimammia || ; and the
icinged globe with a serpent issuing from it *^ ; the first
is in the very simplest style, of a curiologic hieroglyphic ;
the other mysterious assemblage, is an enigmatic symbol:
but, under the first figure, we must observe that the
wiiverml Nature was considered physically ; under the
latter, metaphysically ; agreeably to the different genius
of the times in which each was invented.

But this was not all : the Egyptian Hieroglyphic, in
passing from an instrument of open communication, to
a vehicle of secrecy, suffered another and more re-
markable change. We have observed before, that the
early Egyptian hieroglyphics resembled, in this, the
Mexican, that what things had bodily form were gene-
rally represented by figures ; what had not by marks or
characters. Which we find verified in the most ancient
of the Egyptian Obelisks yet remaining. The reader
need but cast his eye into Kircher, to see how exactly
their hieroglyphics in this point resembled the American,
published by Purchas, not only in their use, which as
Purchas ** and Diodorus -\-\- say, w ere to record the
number of their troops, the particulars of their revenue, and
the names of tiicir conquered towns and provinces ; but
likewise in their forms and figures. But when now every
thing was directed to secrecy and mystery, modes as wejl

* Euseb. Prrep. Evang. lib. i. cap. lo. f Ibid.

I Horap. 1. i. c. 6.

II See note [NN] at the end of this Book.
IT See the Bembine Table.

** See p. 119. ft See p. 146.

substances

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSES ]:)Ei\IONSTRATED. i5i-

substances were painted by hnages *. Thus openness
was expressed by a Iiare \, destruction by a mouse 'j:,
uncleanness by a Avild goat ||, impudence by a fly ^j",
knowledge by an ant **, aversion by a wolt ' ("f, anger
by a cjnocephalus (^'c. And to make the matter
still more mysterious, one animal was made to represent
many and veiy contrary moral modes ; thus the harck
signified sublimity, humility, victory, excellence H||, 8<;c.
On the contrary, and for the same reason, one thing was
represented by many and various hieroglyphics ; some-
times for an addition, out of choice, to confound the
vulgar ; sometimes for a change, out of necessity, when
a hierogly[)hic by long or frequent use was become
vulgar or common.

Now the ancient Greeks, though they saw this to be
a different species of writing from the proper hierogly-
phic, and accordingly, as ue find by Porphyry, distin-
guished them into two kinds, hieroglyphical and sym-
bolical, yet confounding their original, in supposing both
invented out of choice, have not accurately distinguished
either their different natures or uses : they took it for
granted that the hieroglyphic, as well as symbol, was a
mysterious representation ; and, what was worse, a re-
presentation of speculative notions in philosophy and
theology ; whereas it ^A as used only in public and open
writings, to register their civil policy and history : —
These mistakes involved the whole history of hierogly-
phic writing in infinite confusion.

But it is now time to speak of an alteration, which
this change of the subject and manner of expression
made in the delineation of hieroglyphic figures.
Hitherto the animal or thing representing was drawn out
graphically ; but when the study of philosophy (which
had occasioned symbolic writing) had inclined their
learned to write much, and variously ; that exact manner
of delineation would be as well too tedious as too vo-
luminous : by degrees, therefore, they perfected another
character, which we may call the running-hand of hie-
roglyphics, resembling the Chinese writing, which being

* See pp. 123, 124, f Horap. 1. i. c. 26. J c 50.

II <^-49- ire 51. ** c. 52.

tt 1- ii. c. 22. XX I. i. c. 14. lili I. i. c. 6-

L 4 at

152^ THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

at first formed only by the outlines of each figure *, be-
came at length a kind of marks. One natural effect
■which this running-hand would, in time, produce, we
must not omit to mention ; it was, that the use would
take off the attention from the symboly and fix it on the
thing sig/iijiecl ; by which means the study of symbolic
writing would be much abbreviated, the reader or de-
cipherer having then little to do, but to remember the
power of the symbolic ir.ark; whereas before, the properties
of the thing or animal employed as a symbol were to be
leai'nt : in a word, this, together, with their other marks
by imtitution, to design mental ideas, would reduce the
cliaracters to the present state of the Chinese. And
these were properly what the ancients call hierogra-
PHiCAi. used afterwards on subjects which had em-
ployed the ancient hieroglyphic, as we may see by w hat
fallov\ s : Dr. Robert Himtington, in his Account of the
Poi^phyrii Pillars in Egypt :};, tells u.s, tliere are yet
some ancient nionuments remaining of this kind of writ-
ing ; — The Franks (says he) call these pillars Agug-
" lias, and the English, in particular, Cleopatra s
** needles ; but the inhabitants content themselves with
" the general name of pillars. They have no bases or
pedestals above ground; and if they ever had any,
" they must needs be very deep in the earth. The hie-
" roglyphic characters, ^^'here^^'ith they are engraven,
" are probably the aboriginal Egyptian letters, long be-
" come obsolete, and they resemble the Chinese cha-
" racters, each whereof represents a word, or rather
" an entire sentence ; besides, they seem to be written
*' the same way, namely, from top to bottom." Apu-
leius j|, speaking of his initiation into the mysteries of
Isis, describes the sacred book or ritual (which we find
was written partly in symbolic, and partly in these hie-
roglyphic characters of arbitrary institution, resembling
the Chinese) in this manner : " He [the Hierophant]
" drew out certain books from the secret repositories of
" the Sanctuary, written in unknown characters, which

* See note [00] at the end of this Book.
■\ See note [PPj at the end of this Book.
J Philos. Trans. N° clxi. p. 624.
|j Metamorphosis, lib. ii.

contained

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 153

" contained the words of the sacred Formula, compen-
" diously expressed, partly by figures of animals, and
" partly by certain marks or notes, intiicately knotted,
" )'evo/vifig in the manner of a wheel, and crowded to-
" gether and curled inward like the tendrils of a vine *,
" so as to hide the meaning from the curiosity of the
" profane -f The characters here described may be
seen in almost every compartment of the Bembine-table,
between the larger human figures ; and likewise on
several of the obelisks, where they are disposed in the
same manner. As we find these characters mixed with
the symbolic, in the ritual of Apuleius ; so in the Bern-
bine-table n e find them mixed both with the proper hie'
rogli/phic and the symbolic.

III. And now this contracted manner of hieroglyphic
writing, called hierographical. will lead us, by an easy
step, to the third species, called by Porphyry aiid Cle-
mens the EPisTOLic: For now we are come to one of
those links of the chain which served to connect hiero-
glyphic marks and alphabetic letters ; the first of which
contained curiologic or symbolic signs of things ; tlie
other comprised signs of words by arbitraiy imtitution.
For those hieroglyphic marks which vvere sigxs op

THINGS BT ARBITRARY INSTITUTION, partOOk of the

proper hieroglyphics in being signs for things, and of
alphabetic letters in being signs by institution. And
the contrivance of employing these arbitrary marks to
design all the primitive sounds of the human voice was
inventing an alphabet. This was what the Egyptians
called their epistolic writing. And, this, let u)e ob-
serve, the ancients agree, was invented by the secre-
tary OF AN EGYPTIAN KING. A circunistfuice which
will much conduce to the discovery of the cause of its
original.

Now, as it is evident that every kind of hieroglyphic

* For a specimen of the marks thus described, see Plate IX. fig. i.

f De opertis adt/ti profert ijuosdom libros, litteris ignorabilibus pritno-
tatos : partim Jiguris cvjuscemodi animaliam, concept i srrmoiiis compen-
diosa verba suggcrenten ; partim nodosis, et i\ modum rotje tor-
Tuosis, CAPREOLATiMQUE coNDENsis APiciBUS, a curiositate profa-
norum kctime munita.

writing,

154 THE DIVINET'LEGATION [Book. IV

M'riting, when employed in public business to convey
the royal comniiuids to leaders of armies and distant go-
vernors, must be unavoidably attended with the incon-
venicncies of imperfect and obscure information, it was
natural for our Secretary to set himself upon contriving
a remedy : and this he found in the invention of the
letters of an alphabet ; serving to express words, not
things ; whereb}^ all the inconveniencies of imperfect in-
formation, so fatal in nice conjunctures, M-ere avoided,
and the writer's mind delivered ^v^th the utmost clearness
and precision: Mliich too liad this further advantage,
that as the Government would endeavour to keep their
invention to themselves, letters of state were, for
some time, conveyed with the security of our modern
ciphers * : and thus, being at first appropriated to the
use of the cabinet, literary writing naturally acquired the
name of epistolary •]■ ; which if you will not allow,
no reasonable account, I think, can be given of its
title.

That this was, indeed, the fact, appears from Plato's
account of Theuth's inventions. He tells us that
when Theuth came to consult his master, king Thamus,
about communicating his discoveries to the people, zrupx

TOK aAXoif AlyuTrlt'oK, the king declared particularly
against communicatino; the invention of letters. But
the reason he gives for the prohibition, we see, Avas not
the principal and more immediate (as it rarely is amongst
Politicians), but only a secondary, and more remote ;
namely, a regard to the interests of hieroglyphic learning :
for the King tells his Secretary, that, if this secret should
be divulged, men's attention would be called away from
THINGS, to which hieroglyphics, and the manner of
explaining them, necessarily attached it, and be placed
in exterior and arbitrary signs, which would prove the

* It was an ancient custom, as Diodorous tells us, for the kings
of Egypt to read all the letters of state, themselves. — BuSet iJLit ya.p

t See note [QQ] at the end of this Book;

greatest

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 155

greatest hindrance to the progress of knowledge* . Wliat
is still more pleasant, and in the true genius of politics,
even the reason given was thought fit to be disguised ;
for though there might be some truth in this ; yet, without
doubt, thechief concern of the Egyptian Priests was to
continue themselves useful ; whicli they would be, w hile
science lay concealed in hieroglypkics.

Thus the reader finds, that the very contrary to the
common opinion is the true ; that it was the jirst literary
writing, not the first hieroghjphical, which was invented
for secrecy. In the course of time, indeed, they naturally
changed their use ; letters became common, and hiero-
glyphics hidden and mysterious.

But now it may be said, that though the progress
from a Picture to a simple Mark hath been traced out,
step by step, and may be easily followed, till we come
to that untried ground where art takes the lead of na-
ture, the point where real characters end, and the lite-
rary begin ; yet here, art seeing a precipice before her,
which seems to divide the two characters to as great a
distance as at first setting out, she takes so immense a
leap as hath been thought to exceed all human eftbrts :
which made Tully say, Surnmae sapientice fuisse sonos
vocis t, qui infiniti videbantur, paucis literarum notis
terminare^j:; and many of the ancients to believe that
LITERARY WRITING was an invention of the Gods.

However, if we would but reflect a little on the nature
of sound, and its unheeded connexion with the objects
of sight, we should be able to conceive how the chasm
closed, and how the passage from a real to a literary
character was begun and smoothed out.

While the picture, or image of the thing represented,
continued to be objected to the sight of the reader, it
could raise no idea but of the thing itself. But when
the picture lost its form, by being contracted into a
mark or ?iote, the view of this mark or note would, in

• TowTO yip ruv i^iMHuv Xri&nv fjii\i IV 4'''X*~? wape'lEt, nf>ifjL-/i< a.fj.t'Kilna-iU ;
an ^ici vtfif y(x<prii t^u&s> in aAAolpit'c tvwwh sx kv^o^tv aJJoi; v<p' uvTtit

^£,c. PhEEd.

-}• See note [RR] at the end of this Book,
J Tusc. i. 25.

course

1 56 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

course of time, as naturally raise, in the mind, the
aoiind expressing the idea of the thing, as the idea itself
How this extension, from the idea to the sound, in the
use of the real character first arose, will be easily con-
ceived by those who reflect on the numerous tribe of
words in all languages, which is formed on the sound
emitted by the thing or animal *.

^^et the use to which this new connexion might be
applied, would never be thought of till the nature of hu-
man sounds had been well studied.

But when men had once observed (and this thev could
jiot but observe early and easily, by the brute and inar-
ticulate sounds which they were perpetually hearing
emitted) how small the number is of primitive sounds,
and how infinite the words are which may be formed by
varied combinations of those simple sounds, it would
naturally and easily occur to them, that a very few of
those niai'ks, which had before casually excited the sen-
sation of those simple sounds, might be selected and
formed into what has been since called an alphabet, to
express them all : And then, their old accustomed way
of combining primitive sounds into words, would as na-
turally and easily direct them to a like combination of
what were now become the simple marks of sound ;
from whence would arise literary writing.

In the early language of men, the simple, primitive
sounds would be used, whether out of choice or neces-
sity, as significative words or terms, to denote the most
obvious of those things with which they perpetually con-
versed. Ihese sounds, without arbitrary institution,
would incite the idea of the thing, sometimes, as its
audible image, sometimes, as its jiaiura I representative.
Therefore the old rmrks for things, to nhich words of
this original belonged, would certainly be first thought
of for the figures of those alphabetic letters by tlie inge-
nious inventer of this wonderful contrivance. And, in
fact, this which appears so natural has been found to be

* For example, (to use the words of St. Austin) when we say in
Latin, teris tinnitum, equorum hinnitum, ovium balalum, turbarum
clungorem, stridorem catenarum, perspicis haec verba ita sonare, ut
res qii£e his verbis significantur. This class of words the Greeks de-
signed by the name of e»c^«1o»o i».

actually

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 157

actually the case : the most early alphabets being framed
from the outlines of those figures in the real characters,
which, by use, in their hieroglyphic state, had arrived
at the facihty of exciting, in the mind, the sound as

well as THING *.

IV. But this political alphabet, as at first it was,
soon occasioned the invention of another called sacred :
for the priests having a share in the Government, must
have an early communication of the secret; and being
now immerged in deep philosophy, tb.ey would naturally
employ, in their hidden doctrines, a method so well
adapted to convey abstract speculations with exactness
and precision. But the various uses of an Alphabet in
civil business not permitting it to continue long a secret,
when it ceased to be so, they would as naturally invent
another alphabetic character for their sacred use: which
fi~om that appropriation was called hierogram ma-
tic a l.

That the Egyptian priests had such a. sacred alphabetic
character^ we are informed by Herodotus: — " The
*' Greeks (says he) write their letters, and make their
" computations with counters, from the left to the
" right ; the Egyptians, on the contrary, fi-om the right
" to the left. — They use two sorts of letters, one of
" which they called sacred, the other popular -f." Dio-
dorus is yet more express; '* the priests (say he)
" taught their sons two sorts of letters, the one called
" sacred, the other, the common nnd popular^." Cle-
mens Alexandrinus goes still farther, and describes the
very books in which this sacred alphabet was principally
employed : And as the place, where he explains this
matter, is very curious, and contributes to the farther
illustration of the subject, I shall consider it more at
large. It hath been shewn that Clemens, in the passage
quoted above, understood what he called the sacerdotal,
lEPATIKHN, to be an alphabetic character. Now the

* Plate VIII.

\ T^ifji.fji.0L\cc y^a^vat fioyi^otloci tJ/^^okti, "EXThjje? fjut, iiro fvv
«f>rtp£» £7r< ra. ^s^ii (pi^niln; tSi)v ^(T^ct, Alyvvlioi ilj uwo Tut ^t|t(5r ivt
Ta a^i^cpai. — Jt^acrloiffi yf(XfAf^(x,ai xp'*"'''*'' ''"'^ f " avTut, l^x, ra
S't, SriiAoliKci na-Mslat. Lib, ii. Cap. 36.

X Tlcii^evuffi SI T«f m's; 01' ftii/ 'jepcTf jfujf.f/.ai* hriotj fci Tt xa^a-

same

158 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

same writer speaking in another place* of tlie forty-two
books of Ilerines, which contained all the civil and re-
ligious science of the Egyptians, informs us, that ten of
these books were called sacerdotal, and were the parti-
cular study of the chief priest, — Ty^oraxr]? t5 upS tk
lEPATIKA y-xxifxtvix, i (3jSA»a Ex/AakGoVfi. These ten,
theretore, wei e written in a sacred alphabetic character ;
though, as we learn from him in the same place, all the
various kinds of sacred characters were employed in the
composition of these forty-two books ; for some were
written in hieroglyphics ; as he tells us, where he speaks
of the sacred scribe, whose business it was to study
those called hieroglyphical, — tStov ra rs IEP0rAT4>IKA
xxXii^i^' And, what is very remarkable, we find the
subject of these to be of a popular and civil nature,
such as cosmography, geography, the simple elements
of astronomy, the chorography of Egypt, the descrip-
tion of the Nilef, &c. conformable to what has been
laid down concerning the use and apphcation of the
most early hieroglyphics. Others again of these books
were written in symbols, particularly those two Mhich
the chanter had in care : — o wJ'of 'Iv t» tuv rilf juaa-ixwj
iTri<pi^oiAiv^ STMBOAI2N* thtov (p<x,(r) $60 ^I'^Aa? dvuXripEvxt
SiTy tx TH 'EjifAB. Here then we have all the three spe-
cies of sacred writing, the hieroglyphic, the symbolic,
and the hierogrammatic or sacerdotal ; the last of which,
as we hold, was by letters of an alphabet.

But an ALPHABET for secrecy, and consequently dif-
ferent from the vulgar, was a thing in use amongst the
priesthood of almost all nations. Philo Biblius, in Eu-
sebius, speaking of Sanchoniatho's liistoiy, tells us, that
the author composed it by the assistance of certain re-
cords which he found in the temples written in ammo-
NEA>r LETTERS not undcrstoocl by the people : these
Ammonean letters Bochart explains to be such as the

' ' * Strom, lib. vi. pp. 633, 634. Edit. Colon. 1688.

*^ T?; T» NtiAa ^"layga^?,-. Ibid.

+ — 0 <it cv^QocXm Tj>5 a«-o ruy a&vrm tl^t^-uj-iv amnfuCpotf 'A^/^8-
tiuii y^aj/.iA»ft ffv[wi*imi, « »/. 'ZJxat yi(iii.x. — Pi'sep. Evaug.
"lib; i. cap. 9. •

priests

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 159

priests used in sacred matters *. Diogenes Laertius
informs us, from Thrasyllus, that Democritus wrote
two books, tl)e one of the sacred letters of the Babylo-
nianSi the other oi the sacred letters of the city Mero'e-f:
and concerning these last, HeUodorus saitb, that the
Ethiopians had two sorts of letters, the one called 7rgal,
the other vulgar; and that the regal resembled the sa-
cerdotal characters of the Egyptians J. Theodoret,
speaking of the Grecian temples in general, says that
they had certain forms of letters for their own use, called
sacerdotal |J ; and Fourmont, and others, suppose that
this general custom prevailed among the Hebrews also^.
Which opinion, a passage in Irenaeus seems to sup-
port**.

And now we shall know how to deal with a strange
passage of j\Ianetho in Eusebius. This historian as-
sures his reader, " that he took his information from
" pillars in the land of Seriad, inscribed by Thoytb the
" first Hermes, with hierograpluc letters in the sacred
" dialect; and translated, after the flood, out of the
" sacred dialect, into the Greek tongue, vvith hiero-
'* GLYPHic letters, and deposited in volumes by Aga-
" thodasmon, the second Hermes, father of Tat, in the

• Ammoneorum, i. e. Ammanim — Abenezra in Levit. xxvi. 30.
Templa facta ad ciiltum Solis. Quod verissimuni ; Sol enim He-
brSEis est amma, uiide ummu/i templum Solis, quciii solum Cojli Do-
minura ciedideruiit prisci Phoenices. Sanchoniathon, tStof ya.^
{joi ^Aio>) Stov t»o/Ai^o> ftti'o» i^atS Kvptcit. Itaque hic prcecipue cultus.
Tanien, cresceme superstitione, crediderim nomen Ammanim etiam
ad alia delubra pertinuisse. Itaque litera: Ammoneorum seu Ammanim
sunt liters templorum, literae in sacris receptse. Geogr. Sacr. par. ii.
lib. ii. cap. 17.

t See note [SS] at the end of this Boek.

/3<tcr»XixoK irif/Atkrjy, a S'n toT^ AlyvTrTiut IEPATIK0I2 KA/ C VMENOIS
«/xei£»1at. Lib. IV.

II '£> TOK EXAijuxeK yaoTf i^io» tive; rjffixy pj^apaxlij^s; y^xi^fAXTav^ s;
lEPATIKOTS •nrpocrjj7og£t/ei-. In Genes. Qu. 61.

^ Cette coutume de la pliipart des nations Onentales, d'avoir des
Characteres Nacres, & des Caracteres Proftines ou d'un usage plus
vulgaire, etoit aussi chez les Hebreux. Reflex. Crit. vol. i. p. 36.

** Antiqute et pnmae Hebrzeorum literal, qua; sacerdotales
nuncupatae, decern quidem fuere numero. Adver. Haer. 1, ii. c. 41.

tt liee Stillingfleet's Orig. bacr. book i. chap. ii. § 11. and Mr.
Shuckford's Connections, vol. i. ed. 2. p. 247.

Adyta^

i6o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.
*' Adyta of the Egyptian temples." The original is in

these words : 'Ejt Tw^ Mxv-^u tS ^iQivvvm, 0? tTTt UtoXc-
fjiOi'it TH $»AaJ'£X^Js ccp^npivg Toov Iv AjyuTrltj) ti^wAuv,

^•aX/jtltj) /fpoypa^itxorf 'ypx[ji.[u.x(n xc^ocpa)i\n^i(rfJi.ivuv Ctto -
0uu9 T8 zrpuTiS 'EpjM.8 )^ l^junvEuGfio-wf /i*£]a TOK xalaxAuo-jtAOV
tx Ttij If^flcf JtaXsxIa £»? t>i\ iXXnviSx (pui/^v y^eiix^uiriv lEPO-
rAT$IK0I2 >^ airoli^n^Zv \v ^'^Xoi<; utto tk 'Aya,^o$x!y.oii<^
ra iivltpx *E^|U,a, zrxj^o^ $1 t8 Tar Tor? a^uroK twp it^wv
AjyuTrli'wv*. Stillingfleet objects, with reason, to the
absurdity of translating into the Greek tongue with hie-
roglyphic characters : and the author of the Connections
well seeing that by ypol[xiJi.a.<riv IspoyXvpixoTi must be un-
derstood an alphabetic character, says the words should
not be translated hieroglyphics, but sacred letters f : he
might as well have said Gothic letters, rf/soyXu^ixa being
always used by the Ancients to denote characters
for things, in opposition to alphabetic letters, or cha-
racters, composing icords. It is certain the text is cor-
rupt ; as may be seen, i . From tlie word ypa/AjMaa-jf
(which in strict propriety signifies the letters of an al-
phabet ) its being joined to lt^oyXv(pncoTi, which denotes a
species of marks for things. 2. From the mention of a
sacred dialect, Upa SixXtxi^ (of which more hereafter) ;
for if these records w ere written in a sacr'ed dialect, it is
plain the character employed must be alphabetic; and
so indeed it is expressed to be in the words Tfpafjsaipjxor?
ypoL^^xciy -which immediately follow; and if, out of
this dialect, it were translated into another, must not
alphabetic characters be still employed ? And now we
see not only that the present reading is wrong, but are
led, by this last observation, to the right; the passage
being without all question to be read thus: — |t*£Ta toi>

xaJaxXvcTfAOV Ix rrj ii^a? J'taAcxIa £K rrtv iXXnvlSa, (puvtiV y^djA-
f/.u(TiV lEPOrPA^IKOIE diroli^iKTuv iv (ilCXoti, &C. — ypix,[x-
fjixa-iv IEPOrPA5>IKOI2', in speaking of the translation,
being the very words just before employed in speaking
of the original ; and v/ith great propriety : for \epo[pxtpiKx
was used by the ancients as a generic term, to signify as

* Euseb. Chron. ed. Seal. Amst. 1658. p. 6.
+ Connection of the Sacred and Profane History, vol. i. p. 274,
and vol. ii. p. 294.

well

Sect. 4 ] OF -AIOSES DEMONSTRATED. i6i

Avcll sacred letters composing rcords, as sacred marks
standing for things; ii^o^\v(piy.x not so, but denoting only
marks j'or things: so that the plain and sensible mean-
ing of the passage is, that a work, written by the first
Hermes, in the sacred dialect, and sacred letters, \vas
translated, by the second Ilerines, into the Greek dia-
lect ; the original sacred letters being still employed.
And the reason is evident ; the Gi eek translation w as
for the use of the Egyptians : but such would be soonest
invited to the study of a foreign dialect when written in
their o\\v\ letters : a common inducement for translators
into a foreign language, to preserve the original cliarac-
ter. Besides, this version was not for the Egyptians in
general, but for the priests only ; and therefore their pe-
culiar character was preserved.

We now begin to see that the whole extravagance in
this account, w hich made it rejected by the Critics w ith
so much contempt, is only in the high antiquity given to
the fact ,* and this, the very circumstance of the tact re-
futes : for it not only tells us of sacred alphabetic lettcrSy
Avhich we have shewn to be of late use amongst the
Egyptians, but likewise of a sacred dialect, which cer-
tainly was still later : And, if I be not much mistaken, a
passage in Herodotus will lead us to the time when this
translation was made. The historian tells us, that when
Psammitichus, by the assistance of the lonians and
Carians, had subdued all Egyi)t, he placed these Greek
adventurers on both sides the Nile ; where he assigned
thetn lands and habitations, and sent among them Egyp-
tian youths to be instructed in the Greek language ; from
whence sprung the State-interpreters for that tongue * :
Thus far the iiistorian ; from w liose account of Psam-
mitichuss project it appeai-s, that his purpCoC was to

* — T(/K7i ^£ "iwcT* T^r^i KafiTi, Tc.r5-( (Tvfuxliffa.S'a.fjAyoiTi atro .. «
^afifAiTipj;®' J'lJii/o-i ■)(u^ii<; Itotxiji'cct uvTldi ci^fy-ziXuv, T« NEi?.a to jj.Liv

£f/t>5»=E; Ir Alyi7ili> ye^ova-a-t. J .uterp. 1. ii. c. 154. Hence it npiiears
that the learned Dr. Prideaux was tiiistaken when h<? said— the
worst of it is, the ancient Egyptians did nut speak Greek ; i/ie riolemys
Jirst brought that hiiguuge amongst (hem — Connection, part ii. lib. i.
p. 12.

Vol. IV. M establish

i62 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Cook IV.

establish a constant intercourse with the Grecian nations.
The youth picked out for inteipreters were, without
question, of the priesthood, all letters and learning re-
siding in that order ; which had likewise a great share in
the public administration. And now the priesthood
having the Greek tongue amongst them, which its use
in public affairs would make them diligently cultivate;
Where was the wonder that, about this time, some of
these interpreters, 'EpixnvUi, should employ themselves
in translating the sacred Egyptian records into the Gre-
cian laniiuage?

But then as to the precise time of the invention of
Egyptian Letters, it can never be so much as guessed
at; because hierogivphics continued to be in use long
after that time ; particularly on their pubHc Monuments,
^^ here we find no appeai^ance of alphabetic characters.
However, that lei ten- were very early, we have shewn
above, as well from other eirctnriStances, as from this,
the giving the invention of them to the Ciods *.

Those who arc for deriving all civil improvements from
the line of Abraham, of course, bestow upon it the inven-
tion of an Alphabet. But as this fancy is only amongst
the loose ends of an hvpothesis, without any foundation
in Scrijiture, these critics diifer much about the time.
Some suppose letters to have been in use amongst the
Patriarchs; and, by them, transmitted to the Egyptians;
but there are such strong objections to this opinion (to
mention no other than the Patriarch's sending verbal
messages NAhere it \vas more natural as well as more ex-
pedient to send them \vritten), that others have thought
proper to bring down the time to that of Moses "j", when
God, they sav, tauglit him the use of alphabetic letters,
in the exemplar of the two tables written, as the text
assures us, a;ith the Finger of GOD. But how, from
words, whicli at most only imply that the Ttn Command-
ments were miraculously engraved well as dictated,
it can be concluded that letters wei* then first invented,
I Ijave not logic enough to find out. A common reader
\\ ould be apt to infer from it, tliat letters were no>.v well

* See pp. 131, 13-2. of this volume."
t ^>ee note [TT] :it the end of this Bool:.

known

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 163

known to the Israelites, as God had thought fit to deliver
the first elements of tlieir religion in that kind of writing;
I say, he would be thus apt to infer, though Moses had
never spoken of them on other occasions (which he hath
done) as of things in familiar use * : But if God was in-
deed the revealer of the artifice, how hajipened it that the
history of so important a circumstance was not recorded ?
for, as we shall see presently, the Memory of it would
have been one of the strongest barriers to idolatry.

However, though I think it next to certain that Moses
brought letters, with the rest of his learning, from Egypt,
yet I could be easily persuaded to believe that he both
enlarged the alphabet, and altered the shapes of the
letters f . 1 . The Hebrew alphabet, which he employed
in the composition of tlie Pentateuch, is considerably
fuller than that which Cadmus brought into Greece.
Cadmus was of Thebes in Egypt ; he sojourned in Syria,
and went from thence into Greece : His country shews
that his letters were Egyptian ; and this, their ditference
in number liom the Hebrew, sufficiently confirms ;
Cadmus having only sixteen, and the Hebrews two and
twenty. 2. That Moses likewise altered the shape of
the Egyptian letters I think probable ; all hieroglyphic
A\riting was absolutely forbidden by the second com-
mandment, and with a view worthy the divine wisdom ;
- hieroglyphics being, as we shall see hereafter, the great
source of their idolatries and supersiitions. But now
alphabetic letters (which henceforth could be only used
amongst the Hebrews) being taken by the Egyptians ;j:
from their hieroglyphic figures, retained, as was natural,
iimch of the shapes of those characters : to cut off there-
fore all occasion of danger from symbolic imaiies, I\Io5es,
as I suppose, altered the shapes of the Egyptian letters,
and reduced them into something like those simple forms
in which we now find them. Those who in much
later ages converted the noi thern Pagans to the Chris-
tian Faith observed the same caution. For the charac-
ters of the northern alphabet, called Ruxic, having been
abused to magical superstition, were then changed to tlie

* See note [UU] at tbe end ol" this Llook.
f See note [XX] at the end of this Book.
\ See p. 122, of this Volume,

M 2 Roman^

104 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

IlomaJi. — Tantas in his Ranis (shvs Sheringham) latere
virtutcs Gollii ante fidein susceptam rati sunt, ut sive
hostium caput diris sacrandimi, sive pestis morbique
amoliendi, sive aliud opus suscipiendum se incanta-
tionibus Rumsque muniebant — Post fidem vero sus-
ceptam Runo', qui incantationibus praestigiisque magicis
in tmtum adhibitffi fuerint, adeo fastidiri coej^erunt, ut
niulti libri, muitaque antiqua monumenta exinde piEe-
postero zelo dejecta atfjue deleta sunt : unde historia
Getica magnum dctrimcntum cladeuique accepit. Tan-
dem vero, teste Loccenio, Sigfridi episcopi Britannici
opera (Papa etiam Romano suam operam pra-stante)
CO res devenit ut RtincE in Succia A. dml. penitus abo-
Icrentur ; &, characteres Latiui substituerentiu" *.

This account will reconcile the ditfcring systems of
^Marsham and Renaudot ; one of whom contends f, that
the letters \vhich Cadmus brouiiht into Greece were
Egyptian : tlie other, that they were Phenician [j; ; and
both of them appeal to the authority of Herodotus ; who
says plainly, " that the alphabet brought by CadjJias
into Greece was Egiiptian ; and yet, speaking of the three
most ancient inscriptions in Cheece, he says, they nere
id Phenician characters, \\liich very much resembled
the Ionic :"' for if what has been here supposed be allowed,
then the alphabet which Cadmus earned with him was
doubtless of Moses's invention, as to the Jbrui, but Eij p-
tiau, as to the poucr. It may be just worth observiuii,
that Renaudot s discourse is full of paralogisms, which
this solution detects.

3. To this let me add another consideration. The
vowel-poir.ts fas seems now to be generally agi'eed on)
were added since the Jews ceased to be a nation. The
Hebrew language was originallv, and so continued to be
for a long time, written without tliem. Now if God
first taught Moses an alphabet, can we believe thut the
vov.els would have been thus wenerallv omitted : But
suppose; Aloses learnt his alphaljet of the Egvptians, and
only made it fuller, and altered the form of tlie letters,
we ma}' easily give a good account of tlie omission. The
'Egyptian alphabet, as Ave observed, was invented for

* De An^. gent. orig. pp. 292, 203. Can, CJiron.

J ^url'origir.e des leitres Grecques.

precision,

Sect. 4.] OF MOSKS DEMONSTRATED. 165

precision, and nsed for .secrecy. Both ends were an-
swered by an alphabet -with liardly any vou els.

Thus we see that the form of a!|)liabetic characters was
a matter of much importance to the Ilebrcws, as to the
integrity of their religion. If therefore God was tlie
immediate author of tliem, it is difiicult to suppose that
jMoscs could omit to record the history of their invention;
such a history being the best sanction to recommend
their use ; and the best security against a return to the
idolatrous practice ot hieroglyphic-writing; to which this
pco[)le, so fond of Egyptian manners, were violently
inclined.

But we have not yet done with jNIanetho ; The last
circumstance opening the way to another discovery of
great importance in the Egyptian antiquities : for by
this passage we find they had not only mcred characters-
and letters, but a sacred dialect or language also ;
for what he here calls 'n^oi ^ixXcilo;, in another place
(where he interprets a certain word in this language) he
calls 'upx yXucriTx *. It might perhaps be imagined that
this saord dialect was only the more ancient Egyptian
language ; which being now grown into disuse, Avas pre-
served amongst the priesthood : But if we consider the
small and slow change to which the Eastern languages
were subject; especially that of a people who admitted
so little of foreign manners, we can scarce believe this
to have been the case. Besides, the sacred dialect was
used for secrecy (being known only to the priests) which
could never be the condition of a national language, how-
obsolete soever wc may suppose it to be grown. All this
considered, I take the sacred dialect to liave been a lan-
guage of tiieir own framing : aiul oik; of their latest ex-
pedients for keeping their science to themselves. We
have shewn how, for the sake of exactness, as they grew
more speculative, they invented an alphabet to express
their conceptions by marks for words, instead of marks
for things : But the simple mystery of a peculiar alpha-
bet, em{)loyed in a common tongue, would be soon dc-

* Ey.a^uTo ^£ to (tv/avo.) uvruv tS*^ YKSnE, T«Te ^£ ir» 0acri?\n\
«-o(/*m?- T» y«§ YK xxd' lEI'AN rAl^XlAN ^cca-iXict anf/.tUu, to Xni
'srciftii' Iri >^ 'ETdi/ytEVi; zaTa T/)* KOINHN AIAAEKTOM, >^ aru c-wyTiGZ/xt^or
7£n*T«» YKSnZ. Apud Joseph, cont. Ap. lib. i. cap. 14.

?ii 3 tected;

i66 THE DlVINi; LEGATION [Book IV.

tected ; they therefore, as now it appears, invented a
pecuhar language for the use of their alphabet ; and thus,
under a double cover, eft'ectually secured their hidden
science. The way of framing the sacred dialect, I sup-
pose, to be this : Tliey called things by the names of
their hieroglyphical representatives : Thus Yk in the
Egyptian tongue signifying a serpent ; and a serpent, in
their hicroglvphics, denoting a king *, Yk, as Alanetho
informs us above, signified a king in the sacred dialect :
And in this manner, their hieroglyphics became a suf-
ficient fund for a neu- lan(Tuag;e.

On the whole then it appears that tlie Egyptian priests
had these three methods of secreting their recorded
knowledge; by hieroglyphic syimbols, by a sacer-
dotal ALPHABET, and by a sachf.d dialect. In
explaining their several natures, and distinguishing them
from the proper hieroglvphic, I have endeavoured to
disembroil a subject which seems to have perplexed
even the Ancients themselves ; who, in their accounts of
the Egyptian literature, perpetually confound the several
species of sacred xrriti/:g with one another. AV'hat
greatly contributed to this confusion, I presume, was the
sacerdotal practice of promiscuously using, in one and
the same book or literary monument, the several various
?:^ec\c& sacred writing ; that is to say, the proper Ide-
roghiphic, the symbcUc, and the hierogrummatic ; as was
done in composing the Eembine tabic, and the mystic
ritual described by Apuleius.

Thus we find how it happened that that which had its
origin in iiecessity, came, in time, to be employed for
secrecy, and was at length improved into an ornament.
But now, in the incessant revolutions of things, this
imagery, w hich was at first invented for open connnu-
nication, and was from thence converted into mystery,
at length resumed its primitive use ; and, in the flou-
rishing ages of Greece and Rome, was employed in their
monuments and medals ys the shortest and plainest
method of conveying men's conceits; and a symbol,
A\hich, in Egypt, was pregnant with profound wisdom,
^vas in those places the vocabulary of the people.

To illustrate these several changes and revolutions,
* IlorapoIIo, lib. i. cap. 59, Go, 61, 62, 63, 64.

Sect. 4-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 1G7

we shall once f\<^i\m tukc up our instance from l.an-
GUAGE (which still, in all its minuter alterations and
improvements, ran parallel with wiutino} ; and shew,
how the orij^inal expedient, to communicate our thoughts
in converse, the rude effort of Jieccssity, came in time,
like the lirst hieroglyphics, to be turned into omjsiery,
and afterwards improved into the arts of eloqucnoe and
persuasion.

I. It hath been already shewn, in the fable of Jotham,
how the Apologue corresponded to the proper Egyptian
hieroglyphic; and was invented only to present a
sensible image to the unimproved conception of the
hearer.

As the change of the object, which the fable intro-
duced, made it exactly answer to the tropical hiero-
glyphic; so that sort of PHOsopoPOEiA, which the fable
much employed, representing a multitude under the
image of one, made it equally correspond with the curio-
logical hieroglyphic.

II. But now, in after-times, either w hen men began
to affect mystery, or their subject to require secrecy, they
gradually changed the Apologue or fable, by quaint and
far-fetched allusions, into a parable, on set pur[)ose
to throw obscurity over the information ; just as the
tropical hieroglyphic was turned into the tropical sijmbol.
We find innumerable instances of this mode of speech in
Scripture : Thus God by the prophet EzekicI : — " Son
" of man, utter a parable unto the rebellious house,
" and say unto them. Thus saith the Lord God, Set

on a pot, set it on, and also pour water into it: gather
" the pieces thereof into it, even every good piece, the
" thigh and the shoulder, till it with the choice bones.
" Take the choice of the tiock, and burn also the bones
" under it, and make it boil weil, and let them seeth
" the bones of it therein *."

And in this manner was the Parable employed both
amongst the Orientalists and Greeks : and thus the Jews
understood it, as appears by the complaint of the pro-
phet : " Ah, Lord ! they say of me, Doth he not speak
" PARABLEs-f?" and by this denunciation of our Lord
himself; " Unto you it is given to know the mysteries

* Eiiek. XXIV. 3, & seq. t 49*

M 4 " of

t6S the divine legation [Book IV.

" of the kingdom of God ; but to others in para bles ;
" that seeing; they niiifht not see, and hearing they might -
" not understand And thus that great master of
Grecian eloquence, Demetrius Phalereus, explains it:
" The allegory is used (says he) as a covering and dis-
" guise to the discourse f."

III. ^\'e have observed, that the Sijmbdl, the more it
receded fro n tl:e proper Hieroglyphic, the more it be-
came obscure ; till it divided itself, at length, into two
sorts, the tropical and the eriigmatical: Just so again it
^■as with the Parable, which (ansv.ering to the tropical
symbol) grew more and more m^'Sterious, till it became
a RIDDLE ; and this again exactly corresponded to the
enigmatical Hieroglyphic.

This, in sacred Scripture, is called a dark sayixg,
y.xT lloy^rv. Tor tlie nature of God's dispensation re-
quired enigmas; and the genius of those times made
them natural. The prophet J-^zekicl will furnish us with
an example : — " And the w ord of the Lord (says he)
" came unto me, saying, Son of man, put forth a rid-

DLE, and speak a Parable unto the house of Israel ;
" and say, Thus saith the Lord God, A great eagle
" w ith great wings, long winged, full of feathers, w hich
" had divers colours, came unto Lebanon, and took the
" highest branch of the cedar ; he cropt oft' the top of
" his young twigs, and carried it into a land of traf-
" fic;|;," &c. In tiie interpretation of these Riddles
consisted much of the old Eastern Wisdom, according
to the observation of the Wise-man : " A man of under-
*' standing (says he) shall attain unto wise counsels ; to
" understand a Proverb and the interpretation; the
" words of the AVise and their dark savings ||." It
was the custom too, as we learn from Scripture^ (and it
lasted long, as w e learn from Josephus**), for the Sages

• Luke viii. lo.

-J- — u^Tf^ o'viiaAbTx/AoIj tS ?ioya, t»j iXXijyopa; xtp^^vjlai. De EIoc,
sect- loo. j Ch. xvii. 2, Sc seq.

il Prov. j. 5, 6. ^ Judges xiv. 12, 13, 14.

** — «J XQ!f\s-fAa\a, ^6 Xaysc AINirMATflAEIS ^lE^rs^Tj^a.lo Wfo? t«
"ZoXoii-^yo!, 0 tiiiv Tv^vjiv ^xatMvit 'BafXKaXuiii oVaf avTU Tsra; trat^^jnVjjj

f-wfTo» hilt TtiTut frapixfisy, 'axUx riK^ira; ru Xoyiafj-ai, f^x&u/i

nirxy Trv eizeoixt i^il-Turi, An'y]. Jud. lib. viii, cap.

Sect. 4.] OF xMOSES DEMONSTRATED. iCq

of those times to send or ofFcr riddles to each other,
for a trial of satracity, to the ex|)Ositioii of which, re-
wards and [)cniilties \\ ere annexed * ; so that the present
of a riddle was sometimes only a stratagem for a booty :
hence, the understanding dark sentences became pro-
verbial amongst the IIcl)rc\vs to signify the arts of fraud
and deceit; as may be collected from the character
given by Daniel of Antiochus Epiphancs: " And in the
" the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgres-
" sors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance
" and uxDERSTAXDixG DARK sEXTEXCEs shall Stand
" upf."

The mysterious cover to this kind of wisdom made it
(as always such a cover v> ill) the most high-prized accom-
plishment : so vrlien the Psalmist would raise and en-
gage the atteniion of his audience, he begins his song
in this manner: "Hear, all ye people; give ear, all
" ye inhaljitants of the world : both low and high, rich
" and poor together. My mouth sliall speak of wis-
" dom, and the meditation of my heart shall be of un-
" derstanding. I will ixclixh mlxe ear to a

" PARABLE; I WILL OPEX MY DARK SAYIXG UPOX

" THE harp;}:." For as a great Criuc in sacred and
profane learning rightly observes upon the [)lace : Psal-
mi hiijus auctor, quo audit ores attentos reddat, his pro-
niittit sc dc rebus maximis, in quibus summa sapicntui
posita sit, dicturum ; in carmine lioc componendo
artem quam potuit ma.iimam adhibuit, ut matei'ia dig-
numv redderet ||.

And as, in the improved art of writixg by Symbols,
the Egyptians (as v\ell to give it the air of learning and
elegance, as to cloud it «ith a variegated obscurity)
studied all the singular properties of beings, and their
relations^ in order to fit them for representatives of other
things; so in tl)e art of speakixc, men soon began to
adorn those modes of information just now mentioned

* A»o; — To» ^^t TVfamaHtx, 'ligoe-oXw/xwir Xo^o^^i!^^t ist/jL-^at, ^JiaJ, tnfof
rot El^acfAot AINIFMATA, »u isci^ alr'a >,aJciTv ablatio,' rot St, (Ari
iutnfiiylat StaKfTtcii, tu Xvcatli ^frifAxix a.Tt'jTiven/- — Id. ib.

t Chap. viii. ver. 123. J Ps.il. .xlix. 4.

II Psalmorum Liber in Versiculos metrice tlivisus, &c. Ed. Hare,
Episc. Cicest. p. 265.

170 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

with tropes and figures-, till at length Posteritv began to
doubt about the original q{ Jigurative e.vpre.ssion : even
as they had doubted about the original of h/erGgli/p/iic
painting: whereas, in truth, the first, like the latter,
owed its birth to mere want and rusticity; that is, a
want of words, and rusticity of conception. To give an
instance of the first want, in tlie pleonasm: of the lat-
ter, in the metaphor : for Eastern speech abounds
with these figures; they constitute its piide and beauty;
and to excel in them, consists the art of their orators
and poets.

1. Tlie Pleo}iasm evidently arose from the narrowness
of a simple language ; the Hebrew, in liich tliis figure
abounds, is the scantiest of all the learned languages of
tlie East : Amant (says Grotius) Hebra i xerborum co-
piam; if ague ran eandan multis verbis e.vpritnunt*.
He does not tell us the reason ; but it is seen above,
and appears to be the true: for when the speaker's
phrcise comes not up to his ideas (as in a scanty lan-
guage it often will not), he naturally endeavours to
explain himself by a repetition of the thought in other
words ; as he whose bodv is straitened in room is never
relieved but by a continual change of posture. We may
observe this to happen frequently in common conversa-
tion ; where the conception of the speaker is stronger
than his expression. The most scanty language there-
fore wiW be always fullest of repetitions, which is the
only copia in that which Grotius speaks of.

2. The Metaphor arose as evidently from rusticity of
conception, as the pleonasm from the want of words.
The first sijnple ages, uncultivated, and immerged in
sense, could express their rude conceptions of abstract
Ideas, and the reflex operations of the mind, only by
material images; which, so applied, became metaphors.
This, and not the warmth of a florid and improved
fancy, as is conuaonly supposed, was the true original
of figurative expression. We see it even at this day in
the style of the American savages, though of the coldest
and most phlegmadc complexions, such as the Iroquois
of the Northern continent ; of whom a learned mission-
ary says; " They afl'ect a lively close expression, like

• In Ilab. li. i.

" the

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 171

" the Lacedemonians ; yet for all that their style is figu-
" rativc, -aiul wholly tnc.taphorkal*.'' Their phlegm
could only nuikc their style concise, not take av.ay the
figures; and ihe conjunction of these different characters
in it, slieus plainly that metaphors were fi'om necessity,
not clioice. Tiie very same character, in other M'ords,
Dipdorus gives of the style of the ancient Gauls : In
convcrmtmi, says he, then ^^^^ utmost brtvity, at-
tended ci ith a high/i/ jigurative obscurity : their speech
abounds ivith a licentious kuul of S'j/necdoche, ichich
leaves much to the hearer to unriddle and divine ; and
also icitli hyperboles -f.

But we need not these far-fetched examples. He
who will only i-eflcct on what is so common as generally
to escape reflection, may observe, that the common
people are always most given to speak in figures. Ci-
cero olxscrved this long a^jo, where cucouraging the use
of metaphors, even in the simpler style, he says, — Trans-
latione fortasse crebrior, qua frequentissime sermo omnis
utitur non modo urbanorum, scd etiam rusticorum.
Siquidem est eorum, gonmare vitcs, sitire agros, latas
esse segetes, luxuriosa jrumenta. Nihil horurn pariun
audacter, sed aut simile est illi, undo transferas : aut,
si res suum nullum habet nonien, doccndi causa sump-
tunty aut ludendi videturX- Hence too, the people's
delight in that other figure of speech. Proverbs, a pas-
sion not stronger in our own times than in those of
Aristotle; who observes ol AFPOIKOI ^waAira rNHMO-
TTnoi £jVi. And the gross images under v. hich prover-
bial truths in all languages are conveyed, shew they only
delighted isi their own inventions : for, to the People, it
is certain, we are altogether indebted for this species of
instruction.

It is true, when gross conception met \Aith a warm
imagination which delighted in painting strong and lively
images, and was improved by exercise and use, figura-
tive expression Mould be soon adorned with all the
flourishes of wit. For wit consists in using strong wze^a-
phoiic images in uncommon yet apt allusions ; just as

* See note [YY] at the end of this Book,
t See note [ZZ] at the end of thie Book,
\ Orator, cap. xxiv,

ancient

17-2 THE DI\TXE LEGATION [Dook IV.

ancient Esvptian visdom did in hieroglyphic symbols
rancihilly analogized. Plato perhaps had something of
this in his thoughts i^it he had not, he had hardlv any
tJrini^ so good) m hen he observed to Alcibiades, that the
People was an excellent master of language '^.

Thus \\ c see it has ever been the w ay ot nien, both in
Speech and Writing, as well as in (Mothcs and Habita-
tions,' to turn their wants and necessities into parade and
ornament -f-.

W. In the first parallel between Speech and Jf'riting,
we have compared metaphors to the letters of an alplia-
bet ; and how well the parallel runs may be turther seen
iVom hence: The Egyptians had, as has been shewn,
two sorts of alphabetic letters, the one popular, the
other sacerdotal; so had the Ancients in general two
sorts of jnctaphors ; one open and intelligible, another
hidden and mystcj'ious. The prophetic writings are full
of this latter sort. To instance only in the famous pre-
diction of Balaam: There shall come a stau out of
Jacob, and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel %. This
prophecy may possibly in some sense relate to l)a\nd ;
but, without question, it belongs principally to Jesus :
tiie metaphor of a sceptre was common and popular, to
denote a ruler, like Dand; but the star, though it also
signified, in the prophetic writings |j, a temporal prince
or ruler, yet had a secret and hidden meaning likewise :
a star in the Eg\ ptian hieroglypliics denoted GoD*y :
and how much Jiierogluphic w riting influenced the east-
ern languages we shall see presently. Thus god, in the
prophet Amos, reproviuii the Israelites for their idolatry
on their first coming out of Egv'pt. says : " Ye have
" born the tabernacle of your Moloch, and Chiun your
" images, the STAii of your god, which ye made to
" yourselves**." The star of your god is a sublime
figure to signify the image of your god ; for a star being
employed in hiero^lvphics to signify god, it is used here
witii great elegance, to signify the material image of a

* See note [AAA] at the end of this Book,
t See note [BBBj at the end of this Book.
Z Numb. xxiv. 17. ji Dan. viii. 10.

•y 'Arrf -srap' AjV.s-'Ii'mj yja^afur^ GEON etj^xUit. Ilorepol. Hic-
rog. lib. ii. cap. 1. ** Chap, v, •25, 26.

GOD :

Sect. 4 ] OF !\IOSi:S DEMONSTRATED. 173

god: the words, the star of your cod, being only a
repetition, .so usual in the IJebrew touf^ue, of the pre-
ceding, Cli 'iun your images. Hence we conclude that
the metaphor here used by Balaam of a star was of that
abstruse mysterious kind ; and is so to be understood ;
and consequently that it related only in the mysterious
sense to Ciirkst, the eternal son of God.

We have observed how Symbols, which came from
open Hieroglyphics, lost their mysterious nature, and
rt;covered again their primitive use in the flourishing ages
of Greece and Rome. Just so again it was with the
Parable; whicii coming from the simple Apologue,
often returned to its first clearness, and became a pro-
verb plain and intelligible to all. " In that day (says
" the prophet ?\Iicah) shall one take up a Parable
" against you *," occ. " Shall not all these (sayi Ila-
" bakkuk) take up a Parable against him, and a launt-
" ing proverb against him, and say -}-," &c.

Thus WRITING and language, throughout all their
various modes, ran exactly the same fortune : invented
out of necessity, to communicate men's thoughts to one
another; they were continued out of choice, for mystery
and ornament ; and they ended at last as they began, in
the way of popular information.

Ilithei'to we have considered the relation only as they
stand in an independent parallel ; but as they are only
two different ways of communicating the same concep-
tions, they must need.s have a mighty influence upon one
another. To explain this in t!vj manner it deserves
would require a just volume; and as a properer place
Uiay be found for it, when we come to consider the ob-
jections to the style oj' Scripture, it v. ill be sufiicient just
to touch upon it at present.

1. The influence Lan<>uai>'e would have on the fir.-t
... . .

kind of writing, which was hieroglyp/tical, is easy to

conceive. Language, we have shewn, was, out of

mere necessity, highly figurative, and full of matcjial

images; so that \Ahen men tlr.st thought of recording

their conceptions, the writing would be, of course, that

very picture v.hich was before painted in the fancy, and

from thence, delineated in wortls : Even long alter,

■* Chap. ii. 4. f Ibid, ver, G.

when

1-4 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV;

V hen figurative speech « as continued out of choice, and
adorned with all the invention of wit, as amongst the
Greeks and llomans, and that the genius of the simpler
hierog/i/phic-wnUng was again revived for ornament, in
E.AIBLE5IS and DEVICES, the poetic habit of ]>ersonal-
izing ever}' thing, filled their coins, their arches, their
altars, &c. with all kinds of imaginary Beings. All the
qualities of the mind, all tlie affections of the body, all
the properties of countries, cities, rivers, mountains, be-
came tlie seeds of livin? things : for,

— " as iMAGiXATiox bodied foith
" The forms of tilings unknown, the artist's hand
" Turn'd them to shape, and gave to airy notliing
" A local habitation and a name

2. The reciprocal influence /licrogii/phic zcrit'ing would
have on language is as evident. The Chinese, we have
seen, used tiiis kind of writing, as well as the Egyptians;
and the character given of their language is entirely cor-
respondent : " The slvle of the Chinese, in their com-
*' positions, (says Du Halde), is mysterious, concise,
" ALLEGORIC, and Sometimes obscure. They -sajj much
" in fcic words. Tlieir expressions are lively, ani-
" mated, and thick sown \^ith bold coynparisons, and
" 7iobie metaphors f." Their style, we sec, Mas concise
and figurative ; the very character, as we have seen, of
all tlie barbarous nations upon earth, both ancient and
modern ; for Nature is ever uniform. The cold phleg-
matic temper of the Chinese made their style short and
laconic; the use of hieroglyphics made xX. figurative i
and from this mixture it became obscure : but had those
remote inliabitants of the East and West possessed tlic
warm imagination of the proper Asiatics, then had their
language, like that of the people spoken of above,
abounded with pleonasms instead of laconisms. The old
Asiatic style, so highly figurative, seems likewise, by

* Shakespeare.

t Le Stile des Chinois dans leuis composillons e^trtii/sienciu-, con-
cis, allcgoriquf, & quelqucfois obscur. lis disent beaucoup de cliofcs.?
cn pen de paroles. Leurs exprebsions sont vives, animees seniees
de comparaisons hardies, Sc de metapliores nobles, Descr. dc I'Em-
pire de la Chine, torn. ii. p. 2-27. Paris, 17:3,5.

23 ^^hat

Sect. 4-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 175

what wc iiiid of its remains, in the proi^hetic language
of the sacred Avriters, to have been evidently fashioned
to the mode of ancient Hieroglyphics, both cur'iolugic
and tropical. Of the first kind are the figurative ex-
pressions of spotted garments^ to denote iniquity; an
intoxicating draught, to signify error and misery j the
sword and how, a warrior ; a gigantic stature, a nniighty
leader ; balance, 'weights and measures, a judge or ma-
gistrate ; arms, a powerful nation, like the Roman. Of
the second kind, which answers to the tropical hierogly-
phic, is the calling empires, kings, and nobles, by the
names of the heavenly luminaries, the sun, moon, and
stars; their tcnipoi'ary disasters or entire overthrow,
denoted by eclipses and extinctions; the destruction of
the Nobility, by stars falling from the Jirmament ;
hostile invasions, by thunder and tempestuous ivinds;
and leaders of armies, conquerors, and founders of em-
pire, by lions, bears, leopards, goats, or high trees.
In a word, the prophetic siyie seems to.be a speaking

IIIEROGLYPIIIC.

These observations will not only assist us in the intel-
ligence of the Old and New Testament, but likctvise
vindicate their character from the illiterate cavils of mo-
dern libertines, A\ho have foolishly mistaken that colour-
ing for the peculiar workmanship of the speaker s heated
imajrination, v.iiich was the sober established languaye
of their times ; a language which God and his Son con-
descended to employ, as the propercst vehicle of the
iiigh mysterious ways of Providence, \i\ the revelation of
themselves to mankind.

Jiut to come to a conclusion. We must observe in
the last ))lace, tliat, besides the many changes which the
ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics underwent, they at length
suffered a very perverse corruption. It hath been al-
ready seen, how the jiysteries, that other grand
vehicle of Egyptian wisdom, degenerated into magic-
just so it happened with the hierogevpiiics ; for their
characters being become, in a proper sense, sacred (as
will be explained hereafter), it disposed the more super-
stitious to engrave them upon gems, and wear them as
amulets or charms. But this abuse seems not to have
been much earlier than the established worship of the

God

170 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

God Scrapis : wliich hapjiened under the Ptolemys ; and
was first brought to the general knowledge of the world
by certain Christian heretics*, and natives of Egypt,
who had mingled a number of Pagan superstitions with
their Christianity. These gems, called abraxas, fre-
quently to be met with in the cabinets of the curious,
are engraven with all kinds of hieroglyphic characters.
For this abusive original, we have the testimony of Ilu-
finus the ecclesiastical historian., contemporary with
St. Jerome : IVho can reckon up, says he, the horrid
superstitions practised at Campus? uhere under pre-
tence oj interpreting the sacerdotal letters, /or so
thejf call the ancient Egyptian characters, a public
school maif be almost said to be opened for the teaching
magical arts\. Hence these characters carne to be
called Chaldaic, the Chaldeans being particularly ad-
dicted to magic. So Cassiodorus, speaking of the obe-
lisks in the Roman circus, which were brought from
Egypt, calls tlie inscriptions on them Chahlaica signa \ :
To the JbrajYis afterwards succeeded Talis.maxs || :
which (mixed, like the other, with the dotages of judicial
astrology) are held in high reverence to this day, in all
jVIahometan countries. And here let me observe, that
from the low date of these kinds of charms may be seen
the impertinence of what Sir John Marsham brings from
late Greek and Roman writers, to confront and discredit
the mysterious elevation of the brazen serpent in the
>\ iiderness ^.

Lut what m.ust we think of Xircher, nho hath mis-
taken these superstitions for the ancient Egyptian wis-
dom : and setting up with this mngic, and that other of
tiie mysteries, which the later Phitonists and Pythago-
reans had jumbled together, in the production of their
fanatic-philosophy, soon ingrossed, in imagination, all

* See note [CCC] at the end of tins Book.

f — Canopi quis cnumerd supcrst/tiosa Jlagifiu? Ubi prirtc.rin
Sacerdotalium Liteuaruw, ita cnim appellant antiquas .Egypti-
orum litoras, Blagica: ttrtis crat pene publica scJiola. Eccles. liist;
lib, ii. cap. xxvi.

+ Ubi iacra pri^corum Chaldaicis signis, quasi Uteris, indicantiir.
Lib. iii- ep. 51! et lib. iii. ep. 2.

II See note [ODD] at the end of this Book.

^ See note [EEE] at the ead of this Bouk.

the

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 177

tlie treasures of Antiquity* ? However, to be just, it
must be owned that he was misled by the Ancients them-
selves ; some of whom imagined tliat the very first hie-
roglyphics were tainted with this magical pollution, just
as some Moderns would have the first Mysteries to be
corrupted by debauched practices. So Lucan, speak-
ing of the times before alphabetic writing, says,

*' Nondum flumineas Memphis contexere Biblos
" Noverat, et saxis tantum, x-olucresque feraeque
" Sculptaque servabant iMAGiCAS animalia LixGUAS,"

Here, we see, the abuse and the invention are made
coeval. An extravagant error, which the least attention
to the history of the human mind and the progress of
its operations might have prevented.

To conclude, I have here presumed to dispute an
unquestioned proposition, That the Egyptians invented
hieroglyphics for the sake of secrecy. It will be well if
the evidence of the reasoning may excuse the singularity
of the paradox. This is certain, the subject hath long
remained in obscurity ; and as certain, that I have,
some how or other, been able to throw a little scattered
light into the darkest corners of it. Whether the com-
mon opinion occasioned the obscurity, and the notion
here advanced has contributed to remove it, is left for the
candid reader to determine f .

III.

And now to apply this matter to the proof of our Pro-
position ; for this long Discourse on Hieroglyphic writing

* The following are three of his six Postulata on which he founds
his whole interpretation or the \i,^^y^X\anJnerog:lyphics : —

1 . Hiero<>li/phica Mgvvtiorum ductrina nihil aliud tst quam arcana
de Deo, dixinisque Idas, Aigelis. Dcewo-nibus, cueterisq; mundana-
rurn potcstatum clussibus ordinibusque scienlia, sa.vis potissimiiin in-
sculpt a.

5. Hierogli/p/iica Symbola non tantilm sublimium erant si^ni/icativQ
sacramentorum • sed <^ naturalem quondam tffliacinm habere crtdcban-
tur, turn ad Genios bonos quibuscum occultam, Sf in abdita natura
abysso latcntem si/mpathiam habere putabuntur, attrahaidos ; turn ad
contrarios 6f antitcchnos Genios^ ob eorundem cum lis (intipathiam,
co'ercendos profligandosque.

6. Hierogli/phica Symbola nihil aliud qudm prophylactica qucrdam
tigna, omnium malorum averruncativa, ob mirijicum catenurum mun'
4ialium consensum conncxioncmque, esse existimabantur.

Qldip. i^gypt. torn, iii. p. 4.
+ See note [FFF] at th««nd of this Book.

Vol. IV. N IS

175 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

is particularly given to deduce from its riaturc, oriain,
and use, an internal argument for the high antiquity of
Egifptian Imrnhig.

Let us see then how tlie evidence stands : The true
Egyptian learning, w hich the earlv Greek Sages brought
from thence to adorn their own country, was, by the
concurrent testimony of these writers, all contained in
JJ:crGgljjph'ics. They record a simple fact; and, in a
fact of this nature, they could not be deceived ; tiiough
in the causes of it they well might; and, as we have
shewn, indeed were. — But hieroglyphic-\\ riting thus in-
vented, M as improved into a contrivance to record their
secret \visdom. Ions before an Alphabet was found out ;
and yet an alphabet was of so high and almost immemo-
rial antiquity as to pass for an invention of the Gods :
and consequt ntly to deceive some men into an opinion
that Letters were prior in time to Hierogiijphics*.

To this it may be objected, "That, as I pretend
Hieroglyphics were not invented for secrecy, but after-
wards turned to that use, and even employed in it., long
after the invention of alphabetic letters, it might very
well be, that this profound learning, which all agi"ee to
have bt ;a recorded in Hieroglyphics, was the product
of ages much below the antiquity enquired after."

Now, not to insist upon the Grecian testimony, which
makes the learned hieroglyphics coeval with the first
race of kings ; I reply, and might well rest the matter
on this single argument, — That if at the invention of
letters, much high- prized learning had not been con-
tained in Hieroglyphics, but only plain memorials of
civil matters, no plausible reason can be given why the
Eg}"ptians did not then discontinue a way of writing so
ti'oublesome and imperfect. It hath been shewn, that
in the very early ages of the world, all nations, as well
as the Egyptian, used to record the succession of time
and revolutions of State in hieroglyphic characters : but,
of these, none, besides the Egyptians, continued to
write by marks for things, after the invention of letters.
All otliers immediately dropt their hieroglyphics on the
discovery of that more commodious method. The rea-
son of which is plain; all others were totally unlearned

* See note [GGG] at the end of this Book.

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 179

in those ])eriods of their existence preredin<T the know"
ledje ot letters; consequently, as their hieroglyphics
■were emploved in nothing but to record the rude annals
of their history, they had no inducement to continue
them : but at this renjarkable aTa, Egypt \\ as very
learned : and hieroglyphics being the repositories of its
learning, these monuments would be in high veneration,
and that veneration would perpetuate their use. There is
but one example perhaps in the world, besides the Egyp-
tian, where a peoples learning Avas first recorded in
■hieroglyphic characters ; and this one example uill sup-
port our argument: the people I mean are the Chi-
nese ; who, as the IMissionaries assure us, bear such
esteem and reverence for their ancient character, that,
-when they find it curiously written, they prefer it to the
most elegant painting, and purchase the least scrap at
an excessive price : they will not (we are told) apply the
paper even of any common book, on which these charac-
ters are written, to a profane or vulgar use ; and their
joiners and masons do nut dare to tear a printed leaf
which they find pasted to the wall or wainscot*. Now
if at length, these people should be prevailed on to use
the more excellent way of writing w ith the letters of an
alpiiabei, can any one doubt but that their Mmidarins
would still continue these venerable hieroglyphic charac-
ters in their works of Science and Religion? Thus,
what we see would be the case here was without all
question the case of the Egyptians ; Characters become
the vehicle of such treasures of learning must i)e in the
highest reverence : and, indeed, the name of Hieroglif'-
phics, under which tney vveie delivered to the Greeks,
shews they were in fact thus reverenced f. But that

* lis preferent m^me un beau caractere a lu plus admirable pein-
ture, & Ton en voit souvent qui aclietent bien clier une paye de vieu.f
carac teres, quaiid ils sont bien tbrmez. lis honorfnt leurs carac-
teres jusques dans les livres les plus ordinaiies, & si par hasard
■quelques t'euiUes etoient tonibces, ils les ramassent avec respect : ce
seroit, selon eux, un grossierete ^ une unpolilesse, d'en faire un
usage profane, de les fouler aux pieds en niaixb int, de les jetter
meme avec indifference ; souvent il arrive, que les menuisiers & les
mafons n'osent pas dechirer une feiiiUe impriinee, qui se trouve
collee sur le mur, ou sur le bois. lis craignent de faire une faule.
Du Halde, Descr. de I'Empire de la Chine, torn ii. p. 2 28.

t See p. 120; and see note [HHHJ at the end of this Book.

N 2 harning

i8o THE DIVIXE LEGATION [Book IV.

Jearnbiii ^vhich was contained in hieroglyphics, and was,
of itsclt, sufficient to perpetuate their use, gave birth to
a tradition which would eftisctually secure it ; and this
>vas, that the Gods tlitmselves invented hieroglyphic
^iriti/t"-.

On the whole, The argument drawn from their cos-
TiN'UED USE seems so sure a proof of the high antiquity
of Egyptian learning in general, that one might safely
rest the whole upon it : But to remove all cavil, I shall
proceed to other, and, as I think, incontestable proofs
of the antiquity of that learning, and paiticularly tlie
theologic : the one taken from the true original of the art
of OxiRO-CRiTic, or interpretation of dreams; and the
other from the true original of animal avorship : both
of these fantastic superstitions being the genuine and pe-
culiar growth of Egypt,

I. The art of Oxirocritic, from whose original I
•deduce my first proof, made a very considerable part of
ancient Pagan religion. Artcmidorus, mIio lived about
the beijinninc of the second centurv, and wrote a treatise
on Dreojns, collected from much earlier writers, divides
dreams into two kinds, the speculative and the allego-
rical * ; the first kind is that which presents a plain and
direct picture of the matter about which the Dream gives
information ; the second is an oblique intimation of it,
Jby a tropical or symbolic image : This latter, which
makes up the large farrago of dreams, is the only kind
that needs an Interpreter; on which account Macrobius
defines a Dream to be the notice of something hid in
ullegorij which wants to be explained -f*.

So diat the question will be, on what grounds or lules
of interpretation the Onirocritics proceeded, M hen, if a
man dreamt of a dragon, tlie Interpreter assured him it
signified majtsty ; if of a serpent, a disease ; a viper,
money ; frogs, impostors ; pigeons and stock-doves, rvo-
meny partiidges, impious persons; a swallow, sorrow ,

* "Eti rut oiti^air, cJ /aii, £i<r; Stiigii/xaTixoi" c£ Sc at^nyofmoi.

a>^iiy i\Xa. i7riu.ain'Ui. — Artemid. Oiaeir. lib. i. cap. a.

t Somiiium proprie vocatur, quod tegit figuris et velut ambagibus,
non nisi inierpretatione intelligendam, signilication«ra rei quae de-
monftratun — lu ^OIIm. Scrip, lib. i. cap. 3.

death,

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES ITEMONSTRATED. iSi

(kathy and disaster; cats, adultery; the ichneumon,
deceitful and mischievous vien *, %c. for the whole art of
ancient onirocritic was concerned in these remote and
mysterious relations. Now the early Interpreters of
dreams were not juggling impostors ; but, like the early
judicial Astrologers^ more superstitious than their neigh-
bours; and so the first who fell into their own delusions.
However, suppose them to have been as arrant cheats as
any of their successors, yet at their first setting up they
must have had materials proper for their trade ; wliich
could never be the wild workings of each man s private
fiincy. Their customers would look to find a known ana-
logy, become venerable by long application to mysterious
wisdom, for the groundwork of their deciphering ; and
the Decipherers themselves would as naturally fly to.
some confessed authority, to support their pretended
Science. But what ground or authority could this be,
if not the mysterious learning of sy7nbolic characters?
Here we seem to have got a solution of the difficulty.
The Egyptian priests, the first interpreters of dreams,
took their rules for this species of divination, from
their symbolic riddling, in which they were so deeply read :
A ground of interpretation which would give the strongest
credit to the Art ; and equally satisfy the Diviner and
the Consulter : for by tliis time it was generally believed
that their Gods had given them hieroglyphic writing.
So that nothing was more natural than to imagine that
these Gods, who in their opinion gave dreams likewise,
had employed the same mode of expression in both re-
velations. This, I suppose, was the true original t of
onirocritiCy or the interpretation of those dreams called
allegorical ; that is, of dreams in general ; for the wild-
ness of an unbridled fancy will make almost all natural
dreams to be of that kind. It is true, the Art being
now well established, every age adorned it witti addi-
tional superstitions ; so that at length the old foundation
became quite lost in these new incrustations.

If this account {)f its original stood in need of farther
evidence, I might urge the rules of interpretation here
given from Artemidorus, and a great many more which

* Vid. Artemidor. f See note [III j at the end of this Book.

^1 3 might

iSi THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

might have been given ; all of liiem conformable to the.
symbolic /:iet'ogIyphics in Horapollo.

Herodotus, in Clio, tells us. how Cyrus, dreaming
that vounsr Darius bad avixgs on his shoulders, which,
w hen spread out, shaded Asia and Europe, understood this
dream by the assistance of his Interpreters, to signify
(as we must needs conclude) a conspiracv formed against
him by that young man. Now Sanchoniatho tells us *
that in the most ancient hieroglyphic -u riting, a supreme
governor was designed by a ujan with four wixgs, and
his -lieutenants or princes under him bv a man with two :
and that tlieir being out-stretched signitied action or
design f .

But there is one remarkable circumstance which puts
the matter out of all doubt. The technical term used
bv the Onirocritics for the phantasms seen in dreams,
was IT0IXE1.\ I, elements. It would be hard to give a
good account of the use of so odd a term on any other
supposition rhan the derivation of onirocritic from sym-
bolic writing. On that supposition it is easv and evicicnt ;
for symbolic marks || were called STOIXEIA. Now when
they used s'"mbols to decipher dreams, nothingr was
more natural than to sive the same signiticative images,
on the stone and in the fancy, the same appeUation.

The reason why the Egy ptian priests (^who, we have
seen, used the Greek tongue very eaiiv) called their hie-
roglyphic and svmbolic marks STotj^na, was because, in
this wav of writins, they employed all kinds of natural
entities, to denote iheir mental conceptions ; the proper
signification or Ith^sTx being the first elements and
principles oi th uigs. wi:t of which all beings arise, and,
of \\ hich, tiiey are compounded i Hence it came that
alphabetic letters, w hich were an improvement on hiero-
glyphics and received their first shapes from hieroglyphic
images, v. ere called I.T0iy(^i7x.

So much for the original of onirocritic. To bring it
to the point, we are next to consider its antiquity. Now

* See above, p. 122.
t See note rKKKl at the end of this Book.
X See note [LLL] at the end of this Book.
^ See note [MMM] at the end of ibis Book.
.1^ See p. 120.

Scripture

Sed.4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 183

Scripture leads us to the practice of this art as high up as
the age of Joseph.

Phaiaoh had two dreams * ; one of 6fre« kine, the
other ot seven earn of corn. W'c see both tiiese phan-
tasms [2 rotp^sra] were symbols of Egypt: The t;«/'* de-
noting its distinguished fertility ; tlie kine, its great
tutelary patroness, Isis. Pharaoh knew thus much
without an Interpreter ; and hence arose his solicitude
and anxiety to understand the rest, as a matter that
concerned the Public : Accordingly, when Joseph f
conies to decipher these dreams, he does not tell the king
that the two sevens denoted seven years in Egypt, but
simply seven years : '] he scene of the famine needed no
deciphering. Unlike, in this, to the interpretation of
Daniel, \\ hen Nebuchadnezzar saw in a dream a fair
and high tree ; which being the symbol of majesty in
general, the pro|)het explains its particular meaning,
" The tree that thou sawest — it is thou, O king j:."

The argument therefore stands thus : the Ouirocritics
borrowed their art of deciphering from symbolic hiero-
glyphics.— But this could not be till hieroglyphics were
become sacred, by being made the cloudy vehicle of
their Theology ; because, till then, hieroglyphics had
neither authority enough to support the credit of those
interpretations, nor a perplexity sufficiently copious to
support the mystery of this application. — But by the
time hieroglyphics w&ce become sacred, Egypt was very
learned. — Now they were sacred in the days of Joseph,
as appears from the use of interpreting dreams according
to those Symbols. — Therefore learned Egypt of very
high antiquity.

IE My second argument for this antiquity is deduced
from the true original of animal-wohship ; and stands
thus : We have observed, that in those improved hiero-
glyphics, called Symbols (in which, it is confessed, the
ancient Egyptian learning was contained) the less obvious
properties of animals occasioned their becoming marks,
by analogical adaption, for very different ideas, whether
of substances or modes ; which plainly intimates that

* Gen. xli.

+ See note [NNN] at the end of this Book,
J Dan. iv. 19, 10, 21.

N 4 physical

i84 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

physical knowledge had been long cultivated. Now these
symbols I hold to be the true original of animal-
worship in Egypt. But animal worship was the e^Ya-
blished xcorship in the time of jVIoses, as is evident from
the book of Exodus : Therefore the Egyptian learning
was of this hi<zh antiquity *. The only proposition, in
this argument, that needs any proof, is the first. The
reasons therefore which induce me to think symbolic
•writing to be the sole origin of Animal-worship are
these :

1 . This kind of idolatry was peculiar to tlie Egyptian
superstition ; and ahnost unknown to all the Casts of pa-
ganism, but such as were evidently copied from that
ori,^';inal f : iVIosES treats it as their distinguishing su-
perstition J: : The Greeks and Romans, though at a loss
for its original, yet speak of it as the pecuhar extrava-
gance of Egypt : And the most intelligent of the
moderns consider it in t!ie very same Hght ||.

2. The Egyptians not only worshipped Aninuils, but
plants; and, iii a word, every kind of being that had
qualities remarkably singular or efficacious ; because all
these had found their place in symbolic writing : For, as
hath been shewn, when Hieroglyphics came to be em-
ployed for mystery, no sooner was one symbol grown
common and vulgar, than another was invented of a
more recondite meaning : so that the animal, vegetable,
and mineral kingdoms, would be all explored to paint
the histories of tlieir Gods.

* See note [000] at the end of this Book.

Such as the several Gentile nations of Palestine and India.
X Dent iv. 14 — 21.

II The learned Fourmont thus expresses liimself : — Mais pour
parler siniplement Sf fans fard, il faudra hon gre malgre en revenir d
ceci, que lex Egyptiens eteient, et, s'/ls peiuioient v/i pev, devoient se
croire tux metnes un peuplefort extrava'^ant ; on n'apui/ieose point sans
folie les Oignons et les Asperges : que pensez encore des Dieiix Oiseaux,
Poissons, Serpens, Crocodiles ? muis non-seulevient ils avoient deifie
les a/iimaux ; ce qui est plus etrange encore, infatuez de la Me-
tempsycost , ils s'etoient entliousiasinez la dessus de Mi/stagonies inconi'
prelieiisibliS. Leurs prelre.s, par un zele qu'on ne connoit pas trap,
sttoit'it rendus les Predicatcurs de ces manes Jolies ; Sr Us en avoient
da.'is leurs conqttetes, ou par des 7nissions, infectc tout I'liide, toute la
Ch:)ie, tout le Japoii. litjicx, Crit. sur les Hint, des Jnc. Peuples.
torn. 1. p. 227.

3. Besides

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 185

3. Besides the adoration of almost every thing existing,
the Egyptiam worsiiipped a thousand Chimeras of their
ow n creation : Some with human bodies, and the head
or feet of brutes; others with brutal bodies, and the
heads or feet of men ; while others again were a fantastic
compound of the several parts of beasts, birds, and rep-
tiles, terrestrial and aquatic : For besides the simpler
method, in hieroglyphic writing, of expressing their hero-
gods by an intire plant or animal, there were two others
which tiie more circumstantial history of those deities
brought in use. Thus when the subject was only one
single quality of a god or hero, the human shape was
only partially deformed * ; as with the head of a dog,
hawk, or ram, to denote fidelity, vigilance, or strength ;
with the feet and thighs of a goat, to represent rusticity,
agility, or lust ; and this gave being to their Anubis,
Pan, and Jupiter Ammon : But where the subject re-
quired a fuller catalogue of the hero's virtues or useful
qualities, there they employed an assemblage of the
several parts of various animals : each of which, in hie-
roglyphic writing, was significative of a distinct property :
in which assemblage, that animal, more peculiarly
representative of the God, was most conspicuous. This
will explain the verse of Anticlidcs in his hymn to the
sun,

'n'iXtoq $\ NoTOj» "AvaH lEPAS HOATMOP^E.
The sun was generally expressed by a hawk ; but this
symbolic hazvk, under various considerations, had the
various parts of other animals added to it.

4. That animal which was worshipped in one city
was sacrificed in another. Thus, though at Memphis
they adored the ox, at Mendes the goat, and at Thebes
the ram ; yet, in one place or other, each of these
animals was used in sacrifice : but bulls and clean calves
were offered up in all places. The reason of this can
only be that at Memphis the ox was, in hieroglyphic
learning, the symbol of some deity ; at Mendes the goat;
and at Thebes the ram ; but the bull and calf no where :

aCKKut) nyat ^uut j^i^ nn ^nrtxii^fvcc, le^ Si irnKfifutXt Porph.
4e Abst. 1. IV.

For

1 86 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV .

For ^^ hat else can be said for the orisinal of so fantastical
a diversity in representative deities within a kingdom of
one national religion ? — But farther : the same animal
was feasted in one place, with divine honours ; in another
it was pursued with the direst execrations. Thus, at
Arsinoe, the crocodile was adored ; becau-e having no
tongue it M as made in hieroglyphic Mriting the symbol
of the divinity * ; else\\ liere it was had in horror, as being
made in the same ^vriting the symbol of Typhon f ; that
is, it was used as a sacred character in the history both
of their natural and civil Theology.

5. Brute-worship was, at 7?"r.">f, altogether objective
to their hero-gods ; of whom animals were but the re-
presentatives. This is seen from the rank they hold on
ancient monuments ; from the unvaried worship of some
few of them, as the Apis, which still continued to be
adored as the representative of Osiris : — and from the
express testimony of Herodotus ; who says, that, when
the Egyptians addressed the sacred Animal, their de-
votions were paid to that God to whom the beast be-
longed %.

6. But to make the matter still plainer, it may be
observed, that the most early brute-worship in Eg\-pt
was not an adoration of the living animal, but only of
its picture or image. This truth Herodotus seems to
hint at in Euterpe, where he says, the Egyptians erected
the first altars, images, and temples to the gods, and
carved the figures of aximals on stones jj. Now,
were tlie original of brute-worship any other than \vhat
is here supposed, the living animal must have been first

• Plutarch, in general, teL's us, that the Egy ptians thus considered
the crocodile ; but this author, for private ends, delivering a false
original of Animal-worship, it was not to his purpose to tell. us it
■was so considered in symbolic writing : — a iai 0 K.^oy.o^n>-@' aiTiat?

ay7.iii(Ta^ u>' <pmri<; yxf 0 StT^- Xoy'^ xTrfoo'oini eft — Dc Is. & Osir.
t The subsequent doctrine of the Metempsychosis soon made this
the foundation of a fable, that the soul of Typhon had passed into a
• crocodile,— that Typhon had assumed that figure, <^c.. See ..Elian's
Hist, of Animals, lib. x. cap. 21.

J Ol l» T^^ri o-oXtci txarot J^xa; To.; a(pi iieoli>^ciifi' st/^o/xljoj ru>
BfuTu a» i TO Suplo* — ^lib. ii. c. 65.

II Bw/xB? T£ xj a.yoi\fj,»TA may Bfeiffi »7rtn7fAat ff^i*i tsj^uTHist xj
^£sc it ^ifieiirt iyfxi-\'on, c. 4.

worshipped,

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 187

worshipped, and the image ol" it would have been onl}'' •
an attendant superstition. From the skcond com-
mandment, and Moses's exhortation to obedience, it ap-
pears thai the Egvptians at the time of the Exodus, wor-
shipped no living animal, but the picture or image only :
" Thou shalt have no other Gods before me. Tliou
" shalt not make unto thee any graven iuiage, or any
" hkeness of any thing that is in heaven above or that is
" in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under tlie
" earth. Thou slialt not bow do^vn thyself to them,
nor serve them *." Thus speaks the hiw of the first
table ; by which we not only see that brute-worship was
un ler an image, but that such image was symbolical of
Goils different from the animal pictured, and alluded to
in the words, Thou shalt have no otho- Gods before me.
Another thing observable in the law is, that not only the
making pictures and images for adoration was forbidden,
but the simple making of them at all. And thus the
Jews understood it. The consequence was, that hie-
roglyphics were Ibrbidden : a strong proof of their being
the source of the idolatry in question. Moses, in his
exhortation to the people, paraphrases and explains this
law : " fake ye, therefore, good heed unto yourselves (for
" ye saw no manner" of similitude on the day that the
" LORD spake to you in Horeb, out of the midst of the
" fire) lest ye corrupt yourselves and make you a graven
" ima^e, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male
" or Jemale, the likeness of any beast that is on the earth,
" the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air,
" the likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground,
" the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the
" earth •]■." There are two important conclusions to
be drawn fi-om the reason of this exhortation, for you
saw no manner of similitude., 8gc. The first is, that the
Egyptian brute- worship was symbolical ; the other, that
Moses's prime intention was to warn the people against
representing the God of Israel under the shape of men
or animals, in the guise of the greater Gods of Egypt.

* Exod. XX. 3,4, 5.

t Deut. iv. 15, 16, 17, 18.

This

i88 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

This observation will open our way to another circum-
stance, which shews that the worship of the living animal
was not yet in use amongst the Egyptfans ; and that is,
the idolatrous erection of the golden calf*. Tiie people
now suspecting they had lost Moses, whom they were
taught to consider as the vicegerent, or representative of
their god, grew impatient for another ; and, besotted
with Egyptian superstitions, chose for his representative
the same which the Egyptians used for the symbol of
their great God, Osiris. Interpreters seem to run into
two different extremes concerning this matter, some con-
ceiving that the Israelites worshipped an Egyptian God
under the golden calf '', though the worshippers themselves
expressly declare the contrary : " These (say they) be thy
*' Gods, O Israel, Avhich brought thee up out of the land
" of Egypt f." Others suppose the calf was not made in
imitation of any Egyptian symbol whatsoever, because
it was the living Apis that represented Osiris ; but we
see the worship of the living animal was not yet intro-
duced. However, in time, and in no long time neither,
for it was as early as the Prophets, the Egyptians began
to worship the aniinal itself ; which worship, as might
be well expected, prevailed at length over that of its
image. Colunt effigies multorim animalium, atque ipsa
5IAGIS animalia, says Pomponius Mela J of the Egyp-
tians ; and this naturally gave birth to new superstitions ;
for, as he goes on, j4pis populorum omnium mimen est.
Bos niger, certis macuUs insignis — raro nascitur, nec
coitu pecoris (ut aiunt) sed divinitus & coelesti igne
conceptus.

These considerations are sufficient to shew that hie-
roglyphics were indeed the original of brute-xcorship :
And how easy it was for the Egyptians to fall into it
from the use of this kind of vvriting, appears from hence.
In these hieroglyphics was recorded the histoi*y of their
greater, and tutelary deities, their kings and lawgivers ;
represented by animals and other creatures. The symbol
of each God was well known and familiar to his wor-
shippers, by means of the popular paintings and en-

* See note [PPP] at the end of this Book.
• -(• Exod. xxxii. 4. J De sit. orb, lib. i. cap. 6,

gravings

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 189

gravings on their temples and other sacred monuments * :
«-o that the symbol presenting the idea of the God, and
that idea exciting sentiments of religion, it was natural
for them, in their addresses to any particular deity, to
turn towards his representative, mark or symbol. This
will be easily granted if we reflect, that when the Egyp-
tian priests began to speculate, and grow mysterious,
they feigned a divine original for hieroglyphic characters,
in order to render them still more august and venerable.
This would, of course, bring on a relative devotion to
these symbolic figures ; which, w hen it came to be paid
to the living animal, ^^■ould soon terminate in an ultimate
worship.

But the occasional propensity to this superstition was,
without question, forwarded and encouraged by the
Priesthood ; for it greatly supported the worship of the
hero-deities, by making their theology more intricate ;
and by keeping out of sight, what could not but weaken
religious veneration in remote posterity, the naked truth,
tliat they were only dead mex deified. And these
advantages they afterwards improved with notable address;
by making those Symbols as well relative to new con-
ceived imaginary qualities and influences of their first
natural godsy the host of heaven, as to what they pro-
perly respected, in hieroglyphic writing, their later heroes
and tutelary deities ; Which trick, invented to k^ep tlie
Egyptians in their superstition, spread so impenetrable
an obscurity over paganism, as hindered the most saga-
cious Philosophers and knowing Antiquaries of Greece
from ever getting a right view of the rise and progress
of their own idolatry.

And, if I be not much mistaken, it was the design of
these Egyptian priests to commemorate the advantages
of this contrivance in the celebrated fable f of Typhon's
WAR WITH THE GoDS ; who, distressed and terrified by
this earth-born giant, fled fiom his persecution into

* This account is supported by Herodotus, where saying that the
Egyptians Jirst of all raised altars, statues, and temples to the gods,
he immediately adds, and engraved animals on stone : $ai/.{i<; rt
uycct^lAola, v*in; ^ioTo'i aurovarfxai (r^iccf nrpaTa^, »cj ZfiA EN AI0OISI
ErrAY'f AT. L. ii. c. 4.

t Uiod. Sicui. lib. i. p. 54. Steph. Ed. informs us, that this was an
Egyptian fable : as does Imcian, in his tract J>e Sacrificiis.

Egypt;

K,o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Egypt ; and there hid themselves each under the form
of a several animal. This adventure is related by Ovid
in a very agreeable and artful manner, where he makes
one of the impious Pierides sing it, in their contest \\ ith
the Muses :

Bdla conit superum : Falsoque in honore gigantes
Pofiit, ^ extenuat uiagnorum facta deorum ;
Emismnnque una de seek Typho'io terrcE
Ccelitibus fecisse jneliim ; cunctosque dcdisse
Tcrga jugc£: donee fessos .Egyptia tellu^
Ccpcrit, 8^ septem discrctus in cstia Nilus.
Hue quoque terrigenam vtnissc Tiiphoea narrat,
Et se MENTiTis superos eclasse figuris :
Duxque gregis, dlvk, fit Jupiter : unde recurvis
Nunc quoque formatiis Libys est cum cornibua Amnion.
Delius in eorvo, proles Senielcia capro,
Fele soror Phcebi, nivea Saturnia vaeea,
Pisee Venus intuit, Cylkiitus Ibidi.- a/is *.

Typbon, au:ongst the Egyptians, was the exemplar
of impiety: so that under that name we are to understand
the inquisitive, which the ()riests always surnamed the
impious (such who in after-times foUo^^ed the celebrated
Euhemerus of Greece) ; these, in a malicious search into
the genealogies of their Gods, had so near detected their
original, and consequently endangered their worship,
that the priests had nothing left but to perplex and em-
broil the enquiry, by encouraging the symbolic worship
as explained above. Hence this fable (in which tliey ce-
lebrated the subtilty of their expedient) that Egypt af-
forded a place of refuge for the Gods ; who there lay
hid under the foryns oj beasts. Where we must observe,
that the shape each God was said to have assumed was
that of his symbolic mark in hieroglyphic writing f.
Indeed Antonius Liberalis '\, differs from Ovid in the
particular transformations ; and Lucian 1|, from thern
both ; but this rather confirms than weakens our inter-^
pretation ; since each God, as we have seen, was de-
noted by divers hieroglyphics. We must not suppose,

* Metam. lib. v. fab. 5.

See note [QQQ] at the end of this Book.
X Cap. xxviii. jj De Sacrif.

however,

Sett. 4] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED, i^i

however, that the whole of their distress came from tlie
quarter of tlieir enemies. More favourable enquirers
would be a little troublesome. And the same expedient
would keep them at a distance likewise. The Priests
seem to have hinted at this case likewise, in the similar
story they told Herodotus, " that Hercules was very
desirous to see Jupiter, who was by no means consenting
to this interview ; at last overcome by the hero's impor-
tunity, he eluded his curiosity, by this expedient : he
flayed the carcass of a ram ; and investing himself with
the skin separated with the head from the body, he pre-
sented himself under that appearance to the inquirer *."
Herodotus himself seems to hint at something like the
explanation of the fable of Typhon given above, where
speaking of Pan soon after, and on the same occasion,
he says, " The Egyptians represent Pan as the Grecians
" paint him, Avith the face and legs of a goat. Not that
" they imagine this to be his real form, which is the same
" with that of the other Gods. But I take no satis-
" faction in recording the reason they give for repre-
" seriting him in this manner f." Fi'om these two dif-
ferent v/ays of relating the circumstance of Jupiter's and
Pan's disguises under a brutal form, it appears that tne
Egyptian priests had two accounts concerning it, the exo-
teric and the esoteric. Herodotus, in the story of Jupiter,
makes no scruple to record the first ; but the other, which
concerns Pan's transformation, he did not care to touch
upon.

If this explanation of the famous fable of Typhon
needed any further support, we might find it in what the
Egyptian Theologers continued to dehver down con-
cerning it. Diodorus Siculus, speaking of the difficulty
in discovering the true original of Egyptian brute-worship,
says, that the priests had a profound secret concerning

TOP nofAOt Tor^e crifE T£9?»«i. H^anKia, ^iXriccti tsccvluK; l^iarQect rov Aia,
TQf Sx eOeAeji/ o^Qiji/a* isr uvm. teAo; <^e, etr/t Te XiTra^EEin T0» H|i»xX£«,
Tov Ala ji*?)j^a»^cra5-6ai, xpion ixoiipaHa, ■nr^oE^EVflal re t»ji/ xE^aX^v «7roI«^o»J«»
Ttt KfiB> iV^iivTo, TO va«.o<;, iriti o> iuvrof iTTihi^ui. Lib. li. C. 3.

■f — Ta Tla-yoi; Tuya.'h^a,, KarccTre^ "EM^nvt^, ctlyoTr^oatiiTrov xj r^aya^KiXta.
BTi toiStov ►o/ai^siIe; ihoti fjnv, aAX' Ojuoion toTo-i ctMoirt BcoTa-i, erto if
tiVixs Tei»T6> yfatfmvi (iVTiV) 'i ^st h$t9» cr* heyit*- Lib. ii< C. 4$<

it:

if)2 THE DIVINE LEGATION • [Book IV.

it* : A strong presumption that this here delivered was
the secret ; it being the only one which the Priests were
much concerned to keep to themselves ; as we shall see
when we coinc to spCak of the causes assigned by the
Ancients for brute-^vorship. What the Priests thought
fit to intrust to the people concerninij; tliis matter, the
Sicilian tells us, was this ; That the Gods of the early
times being jexi) in number, and so forced t« yield to the
multitude and injustice of earth-born men, assumed tlic
forms of divers yJnimals, and by that means escaped the
cruelty and violence of their enemies', hut that, at
length, gaining the cjnpire of the world, they conse-
ci^ated the species of those Animals whose forms they had
assumed, in gratitude for that relief which they had re-
ceived from them in their distresses -f-. The moral of
the fable lies too open to need an Interpreter : it can
hardly, indeed, be any other than that we have here
given. But Diodorus aids us in the discovery of that
secret, which he himself appears not to have penetrated,
where he says that Melampus, who brought the Mys-
teries of Proserpine from Egypt into Greece, taught
them the story of Typhon, and the whole history of
the disasters and sufferings of the Gods %. Now we
have shewn || that one part of tlie office of the Hiero-
phant of the Mysteries was to reveal the true original
of Polytheism : which instruction could not be conveyed
more appositely, than in the history of Typhon, as here
explained. From the whole then, we conclude, that
this was indeed the profound secret, which the Egyptian
priests had concerning it. So that the passage of Dio-
dorus, last quoted, not only supports our interpretation
of the fable of Typhon, but of the secret of the Mysteries
likewise.

Only one thing is worth our notice, that the Priests

* Ot i^tv lE^ir; airuv a.'jroffyjlov ri Joi/i** WEpi ritTui/ t^affiv. — Lib.i. p. 54*
ya^ TU? e| agJJ^S yt»ofi.i\iu<; Seusi oXiyK? o>Ia; xalnjp^uo^/i'aj
viro t5 wMSa; x^ t?; avo^tva; tut yriyivav av^fuiruv, ofjiatuQyivcn tiCi tuv
^av,^ x^ t5 Totara r^ivu ^nxfvytiv th" u^or^oc, xj avTuv'
vf-ipot Je tu* xcCl^ rot xie'f^oy 'maHui nfccl'icra-vlaq y.»l roT^ witiok t*;; e| ap%'>;c

Lib. i. p. 54. ^ ^

+ TO frifiXon fiiv m{» iBct6tj -tSv ^tSv iftfictt. Lib. i.

it Div. Leg. Vol. ii. pp. 188, &c.

should

Sect. 4.] OF IMOSES DEMONSTRATED. 193

should tliink fit to give the people this curious origin of
brute-worship: V^e have ol).->erved, th.it they piouioted
and encouraged this Brutal idolatry in order to hide the
weakness of their Hero-worship ; hut then some reason
was to be given for that more extravagant super-
stition : so, by a fine contrivance, they made the cir-
cionstanccs of the fable, by which they would com-
memorate their address in introducing a new superstition
to support the old, a rea.soii for that introduced sup-
port. This was a fetch of policy wortliy of an Egyptian
priesthood.

But let us hear what the Ancients in general have to
say concerning the beginning of brute-ivorship. Now
the Ancients having generally mistak'^n the origin of
Hieroglijphics, it is no wonder they should be mistaken
in this likewise : and how much they were mistaken, their
diversity and inconstancy of opinion plainly shew us : And
yet, amidst this diversity, the cause here assigned hath
escaped them ; which had otherwise, 'tis probable, put
an end to all farther conjecture. J:ut as they chanced
to fall into variety of wrong opinions, it will be incum-
bent on me to examine and confute them. What I can
at present recollect as any way deserving notice, are the
following :

They suppose brute- worship to have arisen,

1. From the benefits men receive of animals.

2. From the doctrine of the metempsychosis.

3. From the use of asterisms.

4. From the notion of God's pet'vadhig oil things.

5. From the use of Animals as Symbols of the divine

nature.

6. From the invention of a certain Eg3'ptian king for

his private ends of policy.

These, I think, are all the opinions of moment. And
of these, we may observe in general, that the fourth and
fifth are least wide of the truth, as n:akini.v brute-worship
symbolical: But the defect, common to iliem all, is that
the reason assigned by each concludes for the universa-
lity of this worsliip throughout paganism ; w hereas it was
in fact peculiar to Egypt ; and seen and owned to be so
by these very A ncients themselves.

Vol. IV, O I. The

194 THE DIVINE LEGATION [EooklV,

I. The first opinion is that we find in Cicr.Ro *, who
supposes the oriifiiial to be a graujal stmt oj bentjits
reel ire '-J) 'om anwtals .

I. 1 Ins labours under all tlie defects of an inadequate
cause, as concluding botii too much, and too littie :
Too much ; because, on this ground, brute-worship
would have been common to all nations ; but it was pe-
culiar to the Egyptian and its colonies : Too little ;
1 . Because on this ground none but useful aniuiais should
have been worshipped ; whereas several of the most
useless and noxious \ were held sacred. i. Plajit-u or-
ship must then, in the nature of things, have been prior
to, or at least coeval Nvith, that of brutes. But it was
much later ; and, on our theory, we see how this came
to pass ; the vegetable \vorld \^ ould not be explored, to
find out hieroglyphical analogies, till the animal had
been exhausted.

II. Neither could the doctrhie of the jnetempsychosis,
mentioned by DiODORUs ;};, be the origin of brute-wor-
ship : I . Because that opinion was common to all na-
tions ; but brute-worship peculiar to Eg\'pt. The doc-
trine of the jnttempsychosis flourisheth, at this day, with
greater vigour in India, than, perhaps, it ever did in
any place or age of the w orld ; yet it occasions no wor-
ship, or religious veneration to those animals which are
supposed the receptacles of departed souls. A ver}'
excessive charity towards rhem it does indeed afford.
And this is the more remarkable, not only as this peo-
ple are sunk into the most sordid superstitions, but be-
cause, having learnt animal-worship of Egypt 1|, if the
doctrine of the metempsychosis had any natural tendency
to inflame that superstition, they had by this time been

• See. note [RRR] at the end of ibis Book.
+ See note [SSn] at ilie end ol tins Book.

X Diodorns delivers this original, in his account of the supersti-
tious wolship of the Apis : T^; St t« /3oo; rara t</*5; aWutt enoi (pt^nai,

^'/j f a fee

tavrcx, StxIeXii' fjii^^t t5 vv» ill y.a\a, Ta; ivctSti^n^ avrS fcsftira^xsnj «rpo;
T«? f^ElcsyEVEs-E^s;. Lib. i. p. 34.

il As appears from hence, that those few animals, which are the
objects of their religious worship, are such as were formerly most
reverenced in Egypt; and into such, no souls are doomed by the
law of transmigration; the reason of which we shall see presently.

totally

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 195

totally devoted to it. 2. Because the hypotJiesis which
makes transmigration the origin of brute-worship, n)tist
suppose brutes to be venerated as the receptacle oi hu-
man souls become deified : but the ancient E>^yptians
deificil none but heroic and demonic souls : and souls of
this order were not supposed subject to the common law
of the nieten/psyc/iosis*. 3. The intrusion of those
souls into brutal bodies, according to the law of trans-
migration, was understood tq be a punishment for
crimes. Their prison-house therefore could never be-
conje the object of adoration ; but rather of aversion
and abhorrence ; as all subterraneous fire was amongst
the ancient Romans, and as that of purgatory is
amongst the modern. 4. Lastly, the doctrine of the
metempsychosis was much later than the first practice of
brute-worship ; and evidently invented to remove objec-
tions against Providence when men began to speculate
and philosophise. What seem.s to have given birth to
this opinion of the origin of brute-worsliip, was the
fancy of the later Egyptians, that the soul of Osiris re-
sided in the Apis. Diodorus himself supports the con-
jecture : For, reckoning up the several opinions con-
cerning the origin of brute-worship, when he comes to
that of the metempsychosis, he delivers it in a popular
relation of the soul of (.)siris residing in the Apis.

III. The third opinion we find to be favoured by
LuciAN X • which is, that the Egyptian invention of
distinguishing the Constellations^ and marJcing each of
them with the name of some animal, gave the first occa-
sion to brute-xcorship. But, 1. the same objection lies

* The difference between heroic, demonic, and human souls, as it
was conceived by the most early pagans, will be explained hereafter.
\ See Vol. III. Book iii. § 3.

X 0» S\ [Aj-yt'Trlioi] a.XKa iyL^<ra,v\a 'BtsMZ fAzl^o) nfltuy' ly. yu^ iin t5

xtnofiii/uv, ovui^iKO. ^olpa? IrajA.tivia \v toTs-i xitioustaKTi, oly.i7a. Spa. totla,
ixarof avTuv a^^jjv ^op^Jin fAijjUfAic^cci— ovko retiv ov) U^a, to, Alyv7r)ia
'SJoXvet^ta, ■ro-oiEtla*' a ya^ uaileq Aiyvifliot in run, Si^.di>ia, /jrcupiuv 'ufaaiut
t/iAaiUet/ovlo, a,7\Kn St, a?i.Aol>)7i fAOipijffin Ip^^Eolo' jc^ x^ton jiaeh a'sQucn,

vSt T^ciyot xlfiiieuiii, icoj cclyoxi^uv tj^iO'ctt -^val piv x^ TaiifOi i; ti/*»)? ru

ifpia Tuvfn o-e€1{o>I«». De Astrologiu, t. ii, p. 363. edit. Reitzii,
Amst. 4to. 1743-

O 2 against

196 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

against this solution as against tiie two preceding: for
this way of distinguishing the Asterisms was in use in all
nations ; but brute-worship w as confined to Egypt and
its colonies. 2. This way of solving the difficulty creates
a greater : for then nothing will be left in antiquity *, to
account for so extraordinary a custom as the giving to
one Constellation the form of a ram, to another the
form of a scorpion, S;c\ when, in the apparent disposi-
tion of those stars, there was not so much resemblance
to any one part of any one animal as was sufficient to
set the fancy on work to make out the rest. But if, for
distinction sake, those things were to have a name which
liad no shape f, why then, as being of such regard from
their supposed inlluences, were they not rather honoured
with the titles of their heroes than of their brutes?
"W^ould the polite Egyptian priests, M'ho first animalized
the Asterisms, do like Tom Otter in the comedy, bring
their Bulls and Bears to court ? would they exalt them
into heaven, before they had made any considerable
figure upon earth ? The fact is, indeed, just otherwise.
It was brute-worship which gave birth to the Asterisms.
That the constellations were first named and distin-
guished by the Egyptians, is agreed on all hands: that
they were much later than the beginning of brute-wor-
ship, is as evident; the confused multitude of stars not
being thus sorted into bands, till the Egyptian priests
had made some considerable progress in astronomy :
But brute-worship, we know from Scripture, was prior
to the time of Moses. When they began to collect the
stars into Constellations, a name was necessary to keep
up the combination ; and animals, now become the re-
ligious symbols of their Gods, atfbrded the aptest means
for that purpose : For, 1. It did honour to their heroes :
2. It supported their astrologi/ (which always went
along, and was often confounded with, their astronomy),

* I say, in Antiquity : for as to the solution of this point by the
liberty of imagining, nothing is more easy. The French author of
the History of the Heavens has, by the mere force of imagination,
removed all these difficulties; not only without any support from
Antiquity, but even in defiance of it.

"Arfo. J rat. in tpxivoyt..'

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEAIONSTRATED. 197

it being understood to imply that their country Gods had
now taken up their residence in Constellations of benig-
nant inllnencc.

IV. Nor is tliere any better foundation for the fourth
opinion; which is that of Porphyry*; who supposes
that the. doctrine o/'CJod's pervading all things was the
original of Lrute-xcorship. But, 1 . It proves too much :
for according to this notion, every tiling would have
been the object of divine worship amongst the early
Egyptians ; but we know many uere not. 2. Accord-
ing to this notion, nothing could have been the object of
tlieir execration ; but ^ve know many were. This no-
tion was never an opinion of the people, but of a few of
the learned only : 4. And those, not of the learned of
Egypt, but of Greece. In a word, this pretended
original of brute-worship was only an invention of their
late Philosophers, to hide the deformities, and to sup-
port the credit of declining Paganism.

V. Akin to this, and invented for the same end, is
what we find in JamblichusI ; namely, That brutes
U'Cre deified onlif as the symbols of the first Causey con-
sidered in all his attributes and relations. Groundless
as this fancy is, yet as it is embraced by our best philo-
logists, such as Cudworth, Vossius, and Kircher, on
the faith of those fanatic and inveterate enemies to
Christianity, Porphyry and Jamblichus, I shall endea-
vour to expose it as it deserves. This will be the best
done by considering the rise and order of the three great
species of idolatry. The first, in time, was, as we have

£yn;o-a>, u f» ayS^siwa ^ovu to Scion Ji?x6i», «te •v)/i'j^») tv ftonw OLt^^^iirtJ
itti 7?; Kixlic-wtuaiv, aKK'x, ayilo\i i) airri Jio. 'mailui ^lijAficn rut ^vuii' ho
£»'{ TTiii Btomilav lija^cAa'ooii tBut ^ioy. — De Abst. lib, iv.

•f n^o'TE^on Sn 70* ^<!iAo(xa» ran AlyvaTtut to> t^swov tw? SEoAoyia? ^ie^
fATivtvvai' aTOi ya^ Tnv ^vum t« 'w^t-.o^, )tj t/iv i>?ju,it!jyta» tw» •Sewh
/*if*i!p.£»oi, iC atToi Tu» jAvriiun u'niiKiK^UfjLf/.iiav x^ «^a»iJv voncriuv Eixoya;
Tifi? oi(i (TViaSoXuv ixfeiiHicrit, uaizi^ x^ tj (fva-i^ tok E/xipantVik eI'^ect* t»?
u(ptt,yi7<; \lyti<; Sia. itvia.QqXuv, i^o-ntiD Ttui, awslt/Two-alo" ^ ^1 twv Sewii
Sr,IAiUfyi», ^r|t <i>.)j9si«» lut ilSuv Sia. tuv ^avEgwy Eixavwv t'7rEyp4^)'»^o•
ilSoTti air ^aipanla -tscitlx t* x^eItIov* IjAOiuan ruv iirootej-t^uv, 1^ ^a-
AofAivoi avTx ayci^ut Hxa mXri^iv Sta. ti); x 4.Ta, to Ji/wtov fi.if/,rictu<i, Eixoroij
xj «h3to» to* 'Erfo<7-(popo» atTOK rfovoD t^? x£x/ju/*,«£H); It Tor^ aviAQoMiq
l*.Vfuyiiiyt»^ nr^o^E^Wtn. JyC MySt. /Egypt., § 7. C. i.

O 3 shevvnj

198 TlIE DIVINE LEGATION [Bwk IV.

shewn, the worship of the heavenly bodies; and this
continued unmixed till the institution of poiitical Society :
Tlicn, another species arose, the deification of dead
kings and lawgivers. Such was the course of idolatry
in all places as well as in Egv-pt : but tliere, the method
of recording the history of their hero Gods, in improved
hieroglyphics, gave birth to the third species of idolatry,
brute-uorshlp ; and this M-as peculiar to Egypt and its
colonies. No-.v as the method used by all nations, of
ingrafting hero-worship on star -worship, occasioned the
Philologists to mistake * the former as symbolical of the
latter; so the method, used by tiie Egyptians (men-
tioned a litde before) of supporting brute- worship, which
was really symbolical of their hero Gods, made the
same writers think it to be originally symbolical of star
Gods, and even of the first Cause. Thus the very
learned Vossius fell into two mistakes: 1. That hero-
worship was symbolical of star worship: :'. That biute-
worship was symbolical of it likewise. The consequence
of \\hich was, that the system of physical-tlieology,
which was, indeed, one of the last sciences of the Egyp-
tian school, was supposed to be die first; and hero-vsor-
ship, vvhich was indeed the first religion of the I''gyi)tldn
church, was supposed to be the last. This is no more
than saying, that (for reasons given before) the Magis-
trate would very early institute the worship of tlieir
dead benefactors, and that the Philosopher could have
no occasion, till many ages afterwards (when men grew
inquisitive or licentious), to hide the ignominy of it, by
making those hero Gods only shadowy Beings, and no
more than emblems of the several parts of nature f .

Now though the doctrine of this early physical Theo-
logy, as explained by the Greeks, makes very much for
the high antiquity of Egyptian learning, the point I am
concerned to prove ; yet as my only end is truth, in all
these enquiries, I can, with the same pleasure, confute
an error which supports my system, that I have in de-
tecting those which made against it.

The con^mon notion of these Philologists, we see,
brings Hero-worship, by consequence, very low ; and

* See Book iii. § 6.

t See note [TTT] at the end of this Book.

Sect. 4] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 199

as sor/ie of their followers have pursued that conse-
quence, I shall l)eg leave to examine their reasonings,
i'lie learned author of the Connections pushes the matter
very far : — " It does not appear from this table [the
" BemOine] that the Egyptians worshipped any idols of
" human shape, at the time when this table was com-
*' posed; but rather, on the contrary, all the images
" herein represented, before which any persons are
" descril)ed in posttn-es of adoration, being the figures
" of birds, beasts, or fishes; this table seems to have
been delineated befoiie the Egyptians worshipped
" the images of men and women; which was the

" LAST AND LOWEST STEP OF THEIR IDOLATRY*."

Now the whole of this observation will, I am afraid,
only amount to an illogical comequence drawn from a
Jake fact ; let the reader judge. All the images (he
says) herein represented, befm'e tvliich any persons are
described, in postures of adoratlo)i, are the figures of
birds, beasts, and Jishes. I was some time in doubt
whether the learned writer and I had seen the same
table : for in that given us by Kircher, the whole body
of the picture is filled up with the greatei- Egyptian Gods
in HUMAN shape; before several of which, are other
human figures iti postures of adoration; unless the
learned writer will confine that posture to kneeling;
which yet he brings no higher than the time of Solomon f.
Some of these worshippers are xe\iXQ?,e\\t.eA sacrfcingX',
others in the act of ofiering; and offering to Gods in-
throned i|. One of which figures I have caused to be
engraved where a mummy from Kircher's Oedipus**
will shew us what sort of idol it is which we see wor-
shipped by offerings -f -f-. With regard to the kneeling
postures of adoration, to birds, beasts, and fishes, these
are in a narrow border of the table, which runs round
the principal compartments. The learned writer indeed
seems to make a matter of it, " that all the images that
" kneel are represented as paying their worship to some

• Sacr. and Prof. Hist, of the World connected, vol. ii. p. 320.
t Ibid. p. 317.

X As at [S. v.] II As at [T. [O. Z.] and [S. X.]

ir See Plate IX. fig. 1. ** Fig. 2. tt F'g- »•

O 4 " animal

200 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

" animal figure ; there not being one instance or repre-
" scntation of this worship paivl to an image of hunmn
form, either on the border or in the table*." But
surely there is no mystery in this. The table was ap-
parently made for the devotees of I?is in Rome f . Now,
amongst the Rou)ans. brute-worship was so uncommon,
that the artist thought proper to mark it out by the most
distinguished posture of adoration ; while the worship of
the greater Hero-Gods, a worship like their own, was
&ufficient!y designed by the sole acts of offering and sa-
crifice.

But supposing the fact to have been as the writer of
these Cojutections represents it; how, I ask, would his
consequence tollow, That the tabic uas made I'-kfoue
tht Egyptians icorshipjKd the images of mtn and wo-
men? It depends altogether on this supposiiion, that
Brute-worship was nut symbolical of iiero-worship ; bjt
the contrary hath been shewn. The learned author
himseli must own that /Vuis, at least, was the •w w/'o/ of
the Hero-God Osiris. But can anyone believe, he was
not worshipped \\\ his o - n figure befure he was deli-
neated under that of an ox ? Jo sav the tiiith. lia'l liiis
author's fact been riglit, it had been a much juster con-
sequence, That the table teas made afiek t/>e Egyp-
tians had generallj/ lejt ojf xcorf^hipping the miagcs of
Tfien and rwnicn ; for it is 'cer' Mu, the symbolic worship
of brutes brou{2;ht human images into disuse. Who can
doubt but human images of Hero-Gods were used in
Egy[)t ong before the time of Strabo ? yet he tells us J:,
that in their temples (of which he gives a general de-'
scription) they either had no images, or none of liuman
form, but of some beast. He co'ild not mean in those
temples dedicated to animals ; for where had been the
wonder of that ? nor will this disuse of human iiaages
appear strange to those who reflect on what hath been

• Saer. and Prof. Hist, of the World connected, vol. ii- p. 318.

t See note [UUU] at the end of this Book.

$ Tit Si ■/.cRec,3-*ttiYi^ TUD li^un VI Jiaflecri; TOiayT)). K«T£t tJjv cla^oXriii
trill lU TO Tium^f iSfC. /xtTa St to, 'O-pomXccix, o *£iJ? tj^oiiccoi ^X'^"

{TPyxof^ov, uMffi liiDi uK^yti))! ^^oilV Titoi, GcOgr, lib. XVll. pp. HS^y

^15^. Am^t. ed/

said

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 201

said of these Si/mbols, m hich being supposed <^iven by
the God'? thei:isrlvcs, their use in religious worship
uould be ilioutyht most pleasing to the dvcrs.

This conclusion is further strengtl)cnevl by these con-
siderations : 1. Tiicit tlie age of the tablets so far from
being of the antiquity conceived by the learned writer,
that it is the very latest of all the old Egyptian nionu-
inc'its ; as appears froin the mixture of all kinds of hie-
rosilvphic characters in it. 2. That on alnriost all the
obelisks * in Rii-chcr's Theatriim Hicrog/i/pfiican/, w hich
are undout't.dly very ancient, we see adoration given
to idols in human form ; and likewise in that very way
the learned author so much insists upon, namely, Gc-
tiu/L'.ciofi.

Thus, though from the Bembinc-tablc nothing can be
concluued tor the hicfh date ot heroic image-worship, yet
nothing can be concluded for the low. However the
learned writer will still suppose (what everyone is so apt
to do) that he is in the right ; and therefore tries to
main .;\in his ground by fact and reason.

His arjTMment from /^/c^ stands th.is: — " The Egyp-

tians relate a very remarkable fable of the birtli of
" these five Gods. They say that Rhea lay privately
" with Saturn, and was with child by him ; that ihe
*' Sun, upon fin ling out her baseness, laid a curse upon
" her, that -he should not be delivered in any month or
" year; That Aie-cury being in love with the goddess
*' lay with her also ; and then played at dice with the
" j\ioon, and won from her the seventy- second part of
*' eac)) day, and made up of these winnini^s five days,
" which he added to the year, niaking the vear to consist
" of three hundred sixty five days, which before con-
*' siste^l of three lumdred sixty days only ; and that in
*' these days llhea brought forth five children, Osiris,
" Orus, iypho, Isis, and Nephthe. We need not en-

quire into the mythology of this fable ; what I remark
*^ from it is this, that the fable could not be invented
*' before the Egyptians had found out that the year con-
^* sisted of three hundred and sixty-five days, and con-

* Namely, the Lateran of Ramesses, the Flaminian of Psammi-
tichus, the Sal'.ustian, and the Constantmopolitan.

" sequently

202 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

" sequently that by their own accounts the five deities
" said to be bora on tiie five £7r*yc'/Aiva», or additional
*' days, were not deified before they knew that the year
" had these five days added to it; and tliis addition
" to the year was made about — a. m. 2665, a little
" after the death of Joshua *."'

I agree with this learned author, that the fable could
not be hrcented bef ore the Egypiums had Jound out that
the year comisted of three humirtd andsixiy-Jive days ; I
agree witii him, tliat the addition of the Jive days jnight
be made about a. m. 2665 ; but I deny the consequence,
that the Jive Gods were not deified before this additio/i to
the year ; nay, I deny that it will follow from the fable,
that the makers and venders of it so thought. What
hath misled the learned writer seems to be his supposing
that the fable wa^j made to commemorate the deification
of the five Gods, whereas it was made to commemorate the
insertion of the five da3's ; as appears from its being told
in that figurative and allegoric manner in \\ hich the Egyp-
tians usually conveyed the history of their science : and
it was ever the way of Antiquity, to make the Gods a
pai'ty, in order to give the greater reverence to tiie inven-
tions of men. A design to commemorate the ti))t€ of deifi-
cation was so absurd a thing in the politics of a Pagan
priest, that we can never believe he had any thing of tliat
kind in view : it was his business to throw the Godhead
back before all time ; or at least to place it from time
immemorial. But admitting the maker of this fable in-
tended to celebrate in general the history of these five
gods, can we think that he, who was hunting after the
marvellous, would confine his invention within the in-
closure of dates r a matter too of so dangerous a nature
to be insisted on. We know (and we now, partly, see
the reason of it) that the ancient mythologists affected
to confound all chronolog}' ; a mischief which hath so
shaken the crazy edifice of ancient times, that the best
chronolosists have rather buried themselves in its ruins,

o ....

than been able to lead others through it : besides, it is
evident that new lies were every year told of their old
Gods. Let him who doubts of this, consider what ad-
ditions following poets and theologers have made to the
* Connect, vol. ii. pp.283, -H-

fables

Sect. 4 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 203

fables which Iloiner and Ilesiod had recorded of the
Gods ; additions, seen, by their very circumstances, not
to have t'een invented when those ancient bards sung of
their intrigues. In these later fables we frequently find
the Gods of Greece and Egypt concerned in adventures,
Avhose dates, if measured by determined synchronisms,
would bring down their births to ages even lower than
their long established worship. The not attending to
this has, as vvill be seen hereafter, egregiously misled the
incomparable Sir Isaac Newton in his ancitnt Chro-
nology. Thus the same author *, Plutarch, tells us, in
the same place, of another Egyptian fable which makes
Typhon beget Hkrosolymiis and Juckcus But what
then ? must we believe, that Typhon was no earlier than
the name of Judieus ? must we not rather conclude, that
this was a late storv invented of liim out of hatred and

•J

contempt of the Hebrews }

In a word, this practice of adding new mythology to
their old divinity w^as so notorious, that the learned
Connector of aacred and profane history could not
himself forbear taking notice of it : " The Egyptians
*' (says he) having first called their heroes by the names
" of their aiderial and elementary deities, added in

" TIAIE TO THE HISTORY OF THE LIFE AXD ACTIONS
" OF SUCH HEROES, A MYTHOLOGICAL aCCOlOlt of their

" phdosophical opinions concerning the Gods whose
" names had been given to such heroes

" But, (says this writer) had Osiris, Orus, Typho,
" Isisr, and Nephthe, been esteemed deities before this
" additional length of the year was apprehended, we
" should not have had this, but some other fabulous
" account of their birth transmitted to us ||." Here
the premisses and conclusion are severally propped up
by two false suppositions ; the premisses, by this, that
the fable was invented to commemorate the origin of these
gods ; and the conclusion, by this, that we have no other
fabulous account of their birth.

* Is. & Os.

t Tacitus seems to allude to this paltry fable : Qi/idam, regnante
Inide, exundantem per Mgi/ptum multitudijtem, ducibus Hierosolyma
& Juda, proximas m terras exoneratatn. Hist. lib. v. cap. 2.
:j: Connect, vol. ii. pp. 300, 3»i, || lb. p. 284.

From

204 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

From fact, the learned writer comes to reason ; and
speaking of the Egyptian Hero-Gods, Avho, he supposes,
wfci e antediluvian mortals, he says : — " But I do not
" imagine they were deified until about this time of cor-
" rccting the year; for \vhen this humour first began,
" it io not likely that they made Gods of men but just
" dead, of whose infirmities and imperfections many
" persons might be living witnesses : but they took the
" names of their first ancestors, whom they had been
" taught to honour for ages, and whose fame had been
" growing by the increase of tradition, and all whose
" imperfections had been long buried, that it might be
" thought they never had any. — It is hard to be con-
" ccived that a set of men could ever be chosen by their
" contemporaries to have divine honours paid them,
" whilst numerous persons were alive, who knew their
" im-perfections, or who themselvss or their immediate
" ancestors might have as fair a pretence, and come in
•* competition with them. Alexander the Great had but
" ill success in his attempt to make the world believe

him the son of Jujjiter Ammonj nor could Numa
" Pompilius, the second king of Rome, make Romulus's

translation to heaven so firmly believed, as not to leave

room for subsequent historians to report him killed
" by his subjects. Nor can I conceive that Julius
" CsEsar's canonization, though it was contrived more
*' politically, would ever have stood long indisputable,
*' if the light of Christianity had not appeared so soon
" after this time as it did, and impaired the credit of
*' the heathen superstitions. The fame of deceased
" ])ersons must have ages to grow up to heaven, and
" divine honours cannot be given with any shew of de-
" CENCY, but by a late posterity*."

He says, it is not likely they made Gods of men but
just dead, of xvhose infirmities and imperfections many
persons might be living witnesses. How likely shall be
considered presently ; but that they did in fact do so, is
too plain, methinks, to be denied. The learned Eu-
sebius, a competent judge (if ever there was any) of

* Connect, vol. ii. pp. 286, 287.

ancient

Sect. 4] OF ]\IOSES DEMONSTRATED. 205

ancient fact, delivers it as a notorious truth, that in the
early ages, those who excelled in wisdom, strength, or
valour, who had eminently contributed to the common
safety, or had greatly advanced the arts of life, were
either deified during life, or immediately on their de-
cease * : This he had reason to believe, for he had good
authority, the venerable history of Sanchoniathon the
Phenician ; which gives a very particular account of the
origin of Hero-worship, and expressly says the deifi-
cation was immediate : And surely, when men were
become so foolish as to make Gods of their fellow-crea-
tures, the likeliest, as well as most excusable season was,
while the heat of gratitude, for new-invented blessings,
kept glowing in their hearts ; or, at least, M'hile the sense
of those blessings was yet fresh and recent in their me-
mories ; in a word, while they were warmed with that
enthusiastic love and admiration which our great poet so
sublimely describes :

" 'Twas virtue only (or in Arts or Arms,

" Diffusing blessings, or averting harms)

" The same, which in a sire the sons obey'd,

" A prince, the father of a people made.

*' On him their second providence they hung,

" Their law his eye, their oracle his tongue.

" He from the wond'ring furrow call'd the food ;

Taught to command the fire, controul the flood,

" Draw forth the monsters of th' abyss profound,

" And fetch th' aerial eagle to the ground •[•."

Was there any wonder in this, that he who taught man-
kind to subject all the elements to their use, should, by
a rude admiring multitude, be adjudged a Being of a
superior order ?

But they took the names of their first ancestors, whose
fame had been growing up by the increase of tradition,

* — TpiToi a.\Mi, irfpS.^ etvTiSi Iwi 7?? pi-vj/ayltj* rat ew* avttatt rut Kxr

€s^(>oi(^ix.v\a,^, tfitroci rt it* >cJ (Ktla TiAttli* 0£»? i'7ti(p'riijnfft'.». Praep. Lvang.
lib. ji. cap. 5.

f Essay on Man, Ep. iii.

^yilh-

2o6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Without doubt, the ancestors, men deified, and which,
as beinij extreme early, may be called the first, hiid a
very larue and spreading reputation. But how was this
procured but by an early apotheosis ? which, by making
them the continual subject of hymns and panegyrics, pre-
served them from the oblivion of those unletter d ages :
And in fact, the fame of all, but those so deified, was
very soon extinct and forgotten.

- — And all tvhosc imperfections had been long buried,
that it might he thought they never had am/. By tiiis,
one would be apt to think that the liero-Gods of Greece
and Egypt, whose deification the learned writer would
bring thus low, had nothing unseemly told of them in their
Legends : Which, were it true, tiie argument would
have some weight. But what school-boy has not read
of the rogueries which the Pagan v\ orshippers have every
where recorded of their Gods ? Are not these a con-
vincing proof of their deification by that very age wliich
saw both their virtues and their vices ; but, with the fond-
ness of times newly obliged, saw nothing but in an ho-
nourable light * ; and so unhappily canonized both the
good and the bad together, and, in that condition, de-
livered them all down to posterity? Not that I suppose
(for 1 have just shewn the contrary) that late poets and
mythologists did not add to the tales of their forefathers.
I can hardly believe Jupiter to have been guilty of all
the adulteries told of him in Ovid : I3ut this one may
safely say, that unless he had been a famed Adulterer,
in early tradition, his later worshippers had never dared
to invent so many odious stories of the Si?'e of gods and
men.

But, it is hard to be conceived that they should have
divine honours immediately paid them, because their con-
temporaries might have as fair a pretence, c(nd come in
competition with them. I understood that 7ione were
tieified but those whose benefits to their fellow-citizens,

* — Quae ista justitia est, nobis succensere, quod talia dicimus de
diis eoram ; & sibi non succensere, qui haec in 'I'heatris libentissimd
•pectant crimina deorum suorum? & quod esset incredibile, msi con-
testatissime probaretur, haec ipsa theatrica crimina deorum suorum
IN HONOREM iNSTiTUTA SUNT eorundem deorum. August, de civit.
Dei, 1. iv. c, 10. .

Sect. 4.] OF ]\IOSES DEMONSTRATED. 207

or to mankind at large, were very eminent; and that
all v\ ith these pretensions w ere deified ; so tiiat I scarce
know what to make of this observation.

— But Alcxaiulcr and Cccsar's apotheoses xvere scorned
and laughed at *. And so they deserved. For if they,
or their flatterers for them, would needs affect deification
in a learned and enlightened age and place, no other
could be expected from so absurd an attempt. But then
those, who knew better how to lay a religious project,
found no impediment from their we^7r«m to its execution.
Thus Odin f, about this very Caesar's time, aspired to
immediate worship amongst a rude and barbarous peo-
ple (the only scene for playing the farce \vith success),
and had as good fortune in it, as either Osiris, Jupiter,
or Belus.

— Nor coidd Numa Pompdius make RojjwIus's ^;yw?-
lation to heaven so firmly believed, as not to leave room
for subsequent historians to report him killed by his sub-
jects. Here the writer conscious that Antiquity opposed
his hypothesis of the late deification of their early heroes,
with many glaring examples to the contrary, has thought
fit to produce one \ which he fancied he could deal \\ ith.
Romulus s translation teas never so frmly believed but
that suBSEQL'ENT HiSTORFANS, (^T. As if at all times
speculative men did not see the origin of their best es-
tablished Hero-Gods : As if we could for«iet, what the
learned writer 'himself takes care to tell us in this very
place, that Euhemerus Messenius zcrote a book to prove
the ancient gods of the heathen rvorld to have been only
their ancient kings and commanders 1|.

The fame of deceased persons (says he) 7nust have
ages to gro7v up to heaven. — Must ! that is, in spite of
a barbarous multitude, who would make Gods of them

* Plutarch uses this very argument against Euhemerus, to prove
that their country gods ne-otr were mortal Men. Ui^t I£. OS. p. 641.

f Odmus suprcmus est Sj- antiijuissimus Asaruni, qui omnes res
gubernat ; utque etiamsi ccetcri Diis potentes sint, omnes idwen ipsi
insertiuvt, nt patri liberi. — Cvm Pumpeius dux quidum Ronianoj-um
Orientem bcUis injcstaret, Odinus cr Asia hue in .septentriunetn Ju-
giebat. Eddu Snorronia apud Thorn. Barthohn. de Antiq. Danic.
pp.648 & 652.

X See note [XXX] at the end of this Book.

[1 P. 288. See the Divine Legation, Book iii. § 6.

out

£08

THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

out of band : in spite ot ancient Story, which lells us
plainly, they had their wicked wills.

— And divine honours cannot be given with any shew
of decency hut by a late posterity. It luust be con-
fessed, the Ancients observed much decency vhen, in
the number of iheir greater Gods, they admitted ra-
vishers. adulterers, pathics, vagaboniis, tiiieves, and
murderers.

But now the learned writer, in toiling to bring hero-
worship thus low, draws a heavier labour on hiaiself ;
to invent some [)robable cause of the apotheosis : that
warmth of gi'atitude for god-like benefits received, which
ancient liisto y had so satisfactorily assigned for the cause,
beingnow quite out of date. For \\ hen gratitude is suffered
to cooi for many ages, there will want some very strong
machine to draw these mortals up to heaven. However,
our author has supplied them with a most splendid ve-
hicle. " Some ages after (says he) they descended to
'* worship heroes or dead men. — The most celebrated
" deities they had of this sort v. ere Cronus, Rhea,
" Osiris, Orus, Typhon, Isis, and Nephthe ; and these
" persons were said to be deified upon an opinion that,
" at ihcii deaths, their souls migrated into some star,
" and became the animating spirit of some luminous

and heavenly body : This the Egyptian priests ex-

pressly asserted. — Let us now see when the Egyptians
" first consecrated these hero-gods, or deified mortals.
*' I'o this I answer, Not before they took notice of the
" appearances of the particular -tars which they ap-

propriated to them. Julius Caesar was not canonized
" until the appearance of the JuUiim Sidus, nor could the
" Phtmcians hare any ?wtion. of the divinity of Cronus
*' until they made some observations of the star which
" they imagined he was removed into *."

He says, the Egyptian priests expressly asserted
that these persons zi ere said to be deijied upon an opinion
that at their death their souls migrated into some star.
And for tliis he quotes a passage out of Plutarch's tract
ot Isis and Osms ; which I shall give the reader in
Plutarch's own words, that he may judge for himself.
Speaking of the tombs of tlv? Gods, he says : But the
* Connect, vol. ii. pp. 281, 282, 283.

priests

Sect. 4] OF jVIOSES DEMONSTRATED. 209

priests affirm not onh) of these, hut of all the other Gods,
of that tribe 7rhich "a: ere nut unhegolten nor immortal,
that their dead bodies are deposited amongst them and
preserved u ilh great care, but that their souls illu^
ininate the stars in heaven *. All here asserted is that
the Eiryptians thought the souls of their hero-gods had
mijirated into some star; hut not the least iiilimation
that they xeere defied upon this opinion of their migra-
tion. These are two very different things. The opinion
of their migration might, for any thing said by Plutarch,
be an after superstition ; nay we shall make it very pro-
bable tliat it was so : for the Connector not resting on
this authority, as indeed he had small reason, casts about
for some plausible occasion, liow men come to be dei-
fied upon so strange an opinion ; and this he makes to
be their first notice of the appearance of a particular
star. But how the new appearance of a star should
make men suppose the soul of a dead ancestor was got
into it, and so become a God, is as hard to conceive
as how Tenterden steeple should be the cause of Good-
win-Sands. Indeed it was natural enough to imagine
such an £Vj(pav£i«, when the cultivation of Judicial as-
trology had aided a growing superstition to believe that
their tutelary God had chosen the convenient residence
of a culminating star, in order to shed his best infl-ience
on his own race or people. Tliis seems to be the truth
of the case: and tliis, I believe, was all the Egyptian
priests, in Plutarch, meant to say.

But from a sufficient cause, this new appearance is
become (before the conclusion of the paragraph) the ow/jr
cause of deification: Julius Caesar was not canonized
wit il the appearance of the Julium Sidus : ?wr could
the Phenicians have am/ notion of the divinity of Cronus
until they made some observatio?is of the star which they
imagined he was removed into. As to Caesar's apo-
theosis, it was a vile imitation of those viler flatteries of
Alexander s successors in Greece and Egvpt ; and the
Julium Sidus an incident of no other consequence than

* oil ij,ovov TBTW* ol Ic^tti ^tymnv, aXXa xj Tut aXy-i^v ^tuiii, ocroi f/M
uyyittriloi fAYilt u<p6ufloi, ret /At) <rw/*al* •araa' aiiToT^ xs.VOsti y.auatlx
'^t^a.'iriviaSa.t, t«5 ^6 -^vyjii ii a^ornu hu^irat arf». p^g- 640. Edit,
bteph. 8vc>.

Vol. IV, P to

210 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

to save his sycophants from blushing. But abandoned
Courtiers and prostitute Senates never wait lor the de-
claration of Heaven : and when the slaves of Rome sent
a second tribe of Monsters to replenish the Constel-
lations, we find that Augustus, Tiberius, Claudius, S;c.
who rose into Gods as they sunk below humanity, had
no more Stars in their favour than Teague in the Com-
mittee. 13ut of all cases, the Phenicians' seems the
hardest: who with their inrinite superstitions could yet
have no notion of Cronus's divinity, till they had read
his fortune in his Star. I am so utterly at a loss to know
what this can mean, that I will only say, if the reader
cannot see how they might come by this notion another
Avay, then, either he has read, or I have written, a great
deal to very little purpose.

VI. We come now to the last cause assigned by the
Ancients for brute-worship, as we find it in Eusebius *;
namely, That it was the invention of a certain king, for
his private ends of policy, to establish in each city the
exclusive worship of a ditferent animal, in order to pre-
vent confederacies and combinations against his Govern-
ment. That an Egyptian king did in fact contrive such
a political institution one may safely allow, because, on
this very supposition, it will appear that brute-worship
had another and prior original. For it is not the way
of Politicians to invent new Religions, but to turn those
to advantage which they find already in use. The cun-
ning, therefore, of this Egyptian monarch consisted in
founding a new institution of intolerance, upon an old
established practice in each city of different anlmal-
"u orship. But supposing this king of so peculiar a strain
of policy that he would needs invent a new Religion ;
How happened it that he did not employ hero-worship
to this purpose (so natural a superstition that it became
universal) rather than the whimsical and monstrous
practice of brute-worships not symbolical, when direct
hero-worship would have served his purpose so much
better ; religious zeal for the exclusive honour of a dead
citizen being likely to rise much higher than reverence to
a compatriot animal ? The only solution of the difficulty
is this, Brute-worship being then the favourite super-
* See Div. Leg. vol. ii. p. 306.

stition

Sect 4] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 211

stition of the people, the politic monarch chose that for
the foundation of his contrivance. So that we must
needs conclude, this pretended cause to be as defective as
the rest.

These were the reasons the Greek writers gave for
brute-worship in general. But besides these, they in-
vented a thousand fanciful causes of the worship of this
or that animal in particular i which it would be to no
purpose to recount.

On the whole, so little satisfaction did these w riters
afford to the learned Fourmont (who yet is for making
something or other out of every rag of Antiquity, which
he can pick up and new-line with an Etymology), that
he frankly owns the true original of brute-worship is the
most difficult thing imaginable to find out : Si on nous
demandoit (says he) de quel droit, tel ou tcl dieu, avoit
sous lui tel ou tel animal, pour certain, ricn de plus dij-
Jicile a deviner *.

However, amidst this confusion, the Greeks, we
see, w6re modest. They fairly gave us their opinions,
but tbrged no histories to support them. The Arabian
■writers were of another cast : it was their way to free
themselves from these perplexities by telling a story :
Thus Abennephi, being at a loss to account for the
Egyptian worship of a fly, invents this formal tale, That
the Egyptians being greatly infested with these insects,
consulted the oracle, and were answered, that they must
pay them divine honours. Ste then, says this dexterous
writer, the reason of our finding so many on the obelisks
and pyramids.

But of all the liberties taken with remote Antiquity,
sure nothing ever equalled that of a late French writer,
whose book, intitled, Histoire du Ciel, accidentally
fell into my hands as this sheet was going to the press,
Kircher, bewildered as he was, had yet some ground
for his rambles. He fairly followed Antiquity r un-
luckily indeed, for him, it proved the ig7iis fatuus ot
Antiquity ; so he was ridiculously misled. However, he
had enough of that fantastic light to secure his credit as
a fair writer. But here is a man who regards Antiquity

* Refl. Crit, sur les histoircs des anciens peuples, liv. ii. § 4.

X> 2 no

?a2 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV:

no more than if he thought it all imaginary, like his
countryman, Hardouin. At least, he tells us in express
words, that the study of the tedious and senseless writ-
ings of Herodotus, Plato, Diodorus, Plutarch, Por-
phyry, and such like, is all labour lost. The truth is,
these volatile writers can neither rest in fact nor fable ;
hut are in letters what Tacitus's Jlomans were in civil
government, Avho could neither bear a perfect freedom,
nor a thorough slavery *. Only with this additional
perversity, that when the inquiry is after Truth they be-
tray a strange propensity to Fable ; and when Fable is
their professed subject, they have as untimely an appe-
tite for Truth ; thus, in that philosophical Komance
called La vie de Sethos, we find a much juster account
of old Egyptian wisdom than in all the pretended His-
■toire de del. This Historian's System is. that all the
civil and religious customs of Antiquity sprung up
from AGRICULTURE ; nay that the very Gods and God-
desbes themselves were but a part of this all-bounteous
harvest "j" :

Nec ulla inferea est inaratce gratia ierrcp.

Now the two most certain facts in Antiquity are these,
" That the idolatrous worship of the heavenly bo-
dies arose from the visible influence they have on sub-
lunary things and " That the country-gods of all the
civilized nations were dead men deified, whose benefits
to their fellow-citizens, or to mankind at large, had
procured them divine honours." Could the reader think
either of these were likely to be denied by one who ever
looked into an ancient book; much less by one who
pretended to interpret Antiquity? But neither Gods
nor Men can stand before a system. This great adven-
turer assures us that the whole is a delusion ; that An-
tiquity knew nothing of the matter ; that the heavenlif
bodies were not worshipped for their influences ; that
Osiris, Isis, Jupiter, Pluto, Neptune, Mercury, nay their
very hero-gods, such as Hercules and Minos, were not

* This shews why Locke is no favourite of our historian. J'ai
le TREs-ENNuiEux traitc de Locke sur I'entendempit humain, Sec.
Vol. i. pp. 387, 388.

■\- S*e pp.. 99, 315, & passim, yoI. i. Ed. Par. 1739, 8vo.

<:\ . mortal

Sect. 4.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 213

mortal men nor women ; nor indeed any thing but the
letters of an ancient alphabet ; the mere figures \v hicli
composed the syniboiic directions to the Egyptian hus-
bandmen *. And yet, after all this, he has the modesty
to talk of SvsTEiMES BizAKREsf ; and to place the
Nexctonian sijslem in that number. It would be imper-
tinent to ask this writer, where was his regard to Anti-
quity or to Truth, Avhen we see he has so little for the
public, as to be \a anting even in that mere respect due to
every reader of common apprehension? and yet this
Sijslejn, begot by a delirious imagination on the dream
of a lethargic pedant, is to be called interpreting Anti-
quity^. However, as it is a work of entertainment,
where Agriculture has the top part in the piece, and
Antiquity is brought in only to decorate the scene, it
should, methinks, be made as perfect as possible.
A\ ould it not therefore be a considerable improvement
to it, if^ instead of saying the Egyptian husbandmen
found their gods in the symbolic directions for their la-
bour, the ingenious author would suppose that they
turned them up alive as they ploughed their furrows,
just as the Etruscans found their god Tages || : This
would give his piece the marvellous, so necessary in
works of this nature, conected too by the probable,
that is, some kind of support from Antiquity, which \t
now totally wants. Besides, the moist glebe of Egypt,*
we know, when impregnated with a warm Sun, was of
old famed for hatching men ^ and monsters.

To return. From what hath been last said, we con-
clude, That the true original of brute -warship was the

* See note [YYY] at the end of this Book.

t See p. 12-2 of his Revision do I'hisroire du Ciel.

X S'il y a meme quelque chose de sohde et de siiivi dans I'histoire,
que je vais donner de I'origine du ciel poetique, j'avoue que j'en suis
redevable a i'explication ingenieuse, mais simple, par laquelle rau"
teur des saturnelles [Macrob. Saturn, lib. i. cap. 17.] nous a eclairci
Toriginc du norn des ces deux signes. Hist, du ciel, vol. 1. c. i.

II Tagci- quidam dicitur in agro Tarquiniensi, cum terra arart-turfe
sulcus altius esset impressus, extitisse repente, & eum adfalus essp,
qui arabas. Is autem Tages, ut in libris est Etruscorum, pueiili
specie dicitur visus, sed senili i'uisse prudentia, &c. Cic. de Div,
lib. ii. cap. •>3.

eft-Jfi, A105 ^-jyoiTni, TEKE fi (eiJ^jo? APOYPA. II. ii. ver. 54.

p 3 u.se

214 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

use of symbolic icriting : and, consequently, that Sym-
bols were extreme ancient; for brute-worship was na-
tional in the days of Moses. But Symbols were
invented for the repository of Egyptian wisdom ; there-
fore the Egyptians were very learned even from those
early times : The point to be proved.

And now, had this long discourse on the Egyptian
Hieroglyphics done nothing but afford me this auxiliary
proof, which my argument does not want, I should cer-
tainly have made it shorter. But it is of much use be-
sides, for attaining a true idea of the eastern elocu-
tion (whose genius is greatly influenced by this kind of
writing), and is therefore, I presume, no iuipropcr in-
troduction to the present volume, whose subject is the
religion and civil policy of the Hebrew s. The excellent
Mr. Mede pointed to this use: and the learned Mr. Dau-
buz endeavoured to prosecute his hint, at large; but
failing into the visions of Kircher, he frustrated much
of that service, which the applicatio i of hieroglyphic
learning to scripture language would otherwise have
afforded.

A farther advantage may be derived from this long
discourse : it may open our way to the true Egyptian
Wisdom ; which by reason of the general mistakes con-
cerning the ongin, use, and distinct sjoecies of Hiero-
glyphic writing, harii been hitherto stopped up The
subject now lies ready for any diligent enquirer; and to
such an one, whose greater advantages of situation,
learning, and abilities, may make him more deserving
of the public regard, I leave it to be pursued.

But whatever help this may afford us towards a better
acquaintance with the ancient Egyptian Wisdom, yet,
what is a greater advantage, it will very much assist us
in the study of the G recian ; and, after so many instances
given of this use, one might almost venture to recom-
mend these two grand vehicles of Egyptian learning and
religion, the mysteries treated of in a former volume,
and the hieroglyphics in the present, as the cardinal
points on which the interpretation of Greek anti-
quity should from henceforth turn.

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 215

S E C T. V.

THE course of my argument now brings me to exa-
mine a new hypothesis against the high antiquity af
Egypt, which hath the incomparable Sir Isaac New-
ton tor its Patron ; a man, for whose fame Science and
Virtue seemed to be at strife. The prodigious discove-
ries he had made in the natural world, and especially
that superioi ity of genius which opened the way to those
discoveries, hath induced some of his countrymen to
think him as intimate with the moral ; and even to be-
lieve with a late ingenious Commentator on his Optics,
that as every tiling which Midas touched, turned to
gold, so all that Newton handled turned to demon-
stration.

But the sublimest understanding has its bounds, and,
what is more to be lamented, the strongest mind has its
foible. And this Miracle of science, who disclosed all
nature to our view, when he came to correct old Time,
in the chronology of Egypt, suffered himself to be se-
duced, by little lying Greek mythologists and story-
tellers, from the Goshen of Moses, into the thickest
of the Egyptian darkness. So pestilent a mischief in
the road to Truth is a favourite hypothesis: an evil, we
•have frequent occasion to lament, as it retards the pro-
gress of our enquiry at almost every step. For it is to
be observed, that Sir Isaac's Egyptian chronology was
fashioned only to support his Grecian; which he erected
on one of those sublime conceptions peculiar to his
amazing genius.

But it is not for the sake of any private System that I
'take upon me to consider the arguments of this illus-
trious man. The truth is, his discourse of the empire of
Egypt -contradicts every thing whicii Moses and the
PiioPHETS have delivered concerning these ancient peo-
ple. Though some therefore of his admirers may seem
to think that no more harm can derive to religion by h's
contradicting the History^ than by his overturning the
Astronomy, of the Bible, yet I am of a difierent ojji-
<iiion; because, though the end of the sacred history

p 4 was

2i6 THE DIVINE LEGATION ,. [Book IV.

was certainly not to instruct us in Astronomy, yet it
was, without question, written to inform us ot the va-
rious fortunes of tlie People of God ; with whom, the
history of Esypt was closely connected. I susi)ect,
therefore, that the espousing this hypothesis may be at-
tended with very bad consequences in our disputes with
Infidelity. The present turn, indeed, of Free-thinking
js to extol the high antiquity of Egypt, as an advantage
to their cause ; and consequently to urge Scripture,
which bears full evidence to that antiquity, as a faithful
relater of ancient facts; yet these advantages being clii-
merical, as soon as they are understood to be so, we
shall see the contrary notion, of the low antiquity of
Egypt, become the fashionable doctrine; and, what all
good men will be sorry to tind, the great name of New-
ton set against the Bible.

It is therefore, as I say, for the sake of Scripture,
and from no fooliih fondness for any j)rivate opinion,
that I take upon me to examine the system of this in-
comparable person.

His whole argument for the low antiquity of Egypt
may be summed up in this syllogism :

Osiris advanced Egypt from a state of barbarity to
civil policy. — Osjiiis and Sesostris were the same. —
Therefore Egypt was advanced from a state of barba-
rity to civil policy in the time of Sesostris.

And to fix the time of Sesostris with })recision, he
endeavours to prove him to be t}ie same with Sesac.
But this latter identity not at all affecting the present
question, I shall have no occasion to consider it.

Now the minor in this syllogism being the question-
able term, he has employed his whole discourse in its
support. All then I have to do, is to shew that Osiris
and Sesostris were not one, but two persons, living in
very distant ages.

And that none of the favourers of this system may
have any pretence to say, that the great Author's rea-
sonings are not fairly drawn out and enforced, I shall
transcribe them just as I find them collected, method-
ized, and presented under one view by his learned and
ingenious Apologist : — " He [Sir Isaac Newton] has

fouiid it more easy to lower the pretensions of the

" Ancients

Sect 5. J OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 217

" Ancients than to conquer the prejudices of the I\Io-
" derns. Many of his opinions, tliat are in truth well
" founded, pass for dreams ; and in particular his argu-
" nients for settling the time of Sesostris, which the
" Greeks never knew, have been answered widi scurri-
*' lity. — I shall lay together here the evidences that have
** convinced me of the truth of his conclusion, because
" he has not any w here collected all of them.

" 1. That Osiris and Bacchus were the same, was ge-
*' nerally agreed by the Greeks and P^gyptians, and is
" therefore out of question; and that the great actions
" related of Sesostris are true of Sesac, and the ditiier-
" ence between them is only nominal, is affirmed by
" Josephus.

" 2. Osiris and Sesostris were both Egyptian kings,
" uho conquered Ethiopia; and yet there never was
" but one Egyptian king that was master of Ethiopia.

" 3. lioth were Egyptian kings, that with a prodi-
" gious army and fleet invaded and subdued all Asia
" northward as far as Tanais, and eastward as far as
" the Indian ocean.

'* 4. Both set up })illars in all their conquests, signi-

fying what sort of resistance tlie inhabitants had made.
" Palestine, in particular, appears to have made little
" or none, to them.

" 5. Both passed over the Hellespont into Europe,
" met with strong opposition in Thrace, and were there
** in great hazard of losing their army.

" ti. Both had with them in their expeditions a great
" number of foster brothers, who had been all born on
" the same day, and bred up with them.

" 7. Both built or exceedingly embellished Thebes in
*' Upper Egypt.

" 8. Both changed the face of all Egypt, and from an
" open country made it impracticable for cavalry, by
*' cutting navigable canals from the Nile to all the
" cities.

" 9. Both were in the utmost danger by the conspi-
" racy of a brother.

" 10. Both made tiiumphant entries in chariots, of
** which Osiris's is poetically represented to be drawn by

'* tigers;

21 8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Cook IV.

" tigers ; Sesostris's historically said to be drawn by cap-
" tive kinois.

" II. I'oth reigned about twenty-eight or thirty years.

*' 12. P(:»th had but one successor of their own b;Ood.

" 13. Eacchus or Osiris was two generations before

the Trojan war: Sesostris was two reigns before it.
** Again, Sesac s invasion of Judaea in an. P. J. 3743,

was about two hundred sixty years before the invasion

of Egypt in his successor Setiion s time by Sennach.e-
" lib ; and from Sesostris to Sethon inclusively there

are ten reigns, according to Herodotus, which, if
" twenty-six years be allowed to a reign, make likewise
" two hundred and sixty years.

" In so distant ages and countries it is not possible

that any king, with many names, can be more clearly
" demonstrated to be one and the same person, than all
" these circumstances and actions together do prove
" that Osiris and Bacchus, Sesostris and Sesac, are but
" so many appellations of the same man : which being

established, it will evidently follow, that the Argo-
" nautic expedition, the destruction of Troy, the revo-
" lution in Peloponnesus made by the Heraclidas, &c.
" were in or very near the times in which Sir Isaac has
" ranged them*."

1. Before I proceed to an examination of these rea-
sonings, it will be proper to premise something concern-
ing the nature of the system, and the quality of the
evidence.

I . We are to observe then, that this system is so far
from serving for a support or illustration of the an-
cient story of these two heroes, that it contradicts and
subverts all that is clear and certain in Antiquity: and
adds new confusion to all that was obscure. The annals
of Egypt, as may be seen by Herodotus, Diodorus
Siculus, Strabo, Plutarch, and others, who all copied
from those annals, were as express and unvariable for
the real diversity, the distinct personality of Osiris and
Sesostris, as the history of England is for that of any
two of its own country Monarchs. For they were not

* Mr. Mann's dedication to his tract Of the true Years of the
Birth and Death 0/ Christ.

vague

Sect. 5-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 219

vague names, of uncertain or adjoining times ; one was
the most illustrious of their Demi-gods, and the other
of their Kings; both fixed in their proper a3ras; and
those vastly distant from one another. So that, 1 make
no question, it had appeared as great a paradox, to
an old Egyptian, to hear it affirmed that Osiris and
Sesostris were but one, as it would be now to an
Englishman to be told that Bonduca and the Empress
Matilda were the same. All Antiquity acquiesced in
their divenity ; nor did the most paradoxical writer, with
which latter Greece was well stored, ever venture to
contradict so well-established a truth. And what won-
der r The history of Egypt was not, like that of ancient
Greece or Suevia, only to be picked up out of the tra-
ditional tales of Bards and Mythologists : nor yet, like
that of early Britain, the invention of sedentary monks :
It consisted of the written and authentic records of a
learned and active Priesthood. In which, ttie only
transgression, yet discovered, against truth, is that na-
tural partiality common to all national historiographers,
of extending back their annals to an unreasonable length
of time. Let me add, that the distinct personality of
these two men is so far from contradicting any other an-
cient history, that it entirely coincides with them. Nay,
what is the surest mark of historic truth, there is, as per-
haps we may take occasion to shew, very stron gcoUateral
evidence to evince the real diversity of these two ancient
chiefs. — So far, as to the nature of the system.

2. The quality of the evidence is another legitimate
prejudice against this new chronology. It is chiefly the
fabulous history of Greece, as delivered by their Poets
and Mythologists. This hath afforded a plausible sup-
port to Sir Isaac's hypothesis ; by supplying him, in its
genealogies of the Gods and Heroes, with a number of
synchronisms to ascertain the identity in question. And
yet, who has not heard of the desperate conihsion in
which the chronology of ancient Greece lies involved ?
Of all the prodigies of falsehood in its mythologic story,
nothing being so monstrous as its dismembered and ill-
joined parts of Time. Notwithstanding this confusion,
his proofs from their story, consisting only of scraps,
picked up promiscuously from Mythologists, Poets,

Scho-

120 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Pook IV.

Scholiasts, &c. are arguecl from with so little hesitation,
that a stranger would be apt to think the Fabulous ages-
\\'ere as well distinguished as those marked by the Olym-
piads. But the slender force of this evidence is still
more weakened by this other circumstance, that almost
all the passages brought from mythology to evince the
identity, are contradicted (though the excellent person
has not thought fit to take notice of it) by a vast num-
ber of other passages in the same mythology ; nay even
in the same authors ; and entirely overthrown by writers
of greater credit ; the historians of Greece and Egypt:
which, however, are the other part of Sir Isaac's evi-
dence ; of weight indeed to be attentively heard. But
this he will not do : but, from their having given to
Osiris and Sesostris the like actions, concludes the
Actors to be one and the same, against all that those
Historians themselves can say to the contrary: Yet
what they might and what they could not mistake in,
was methinks easy enough to be distinguished. For as
Fable unnaturally joins together later and former times ;
and ancient fable had increased that confusion, for
reasons to be hereafter given : so Histoiy must needs
abound with similar characters of men in public stations ;
and ancient history had greatly improved that likeness,
through mistakes hereafter likewise to be accounted for.
Indeed, were there no more remaining of Antiquity
concerning Bacchus, Osiris, and Sesostris, than what we
find in Sir Isaac's book, we might perhaps be induced to
believe them the Same ; but as things stand in History,
this can never be supposed.

What I v\ ould infer therefore, from these observations,
is this : — We have, in the distinct personality of Osiris
and Sesostris, an historical circumstance, delivered in
the most authentic and unvariable manner, and by an-
nalists of the best authority. All succeeding ages agi'eed
in their diversity; and it is supported by very strong
collateral evidence. At length a modern writer, of
great name, thinks fit to bring .the whole in question.
And how does he proceed ? Not by accounting for the
rise and progress of what he must needs esteem the most
inveterate error that ever was ; but by laying together a
number of circumstances, from ancient story, to prove

the

Sect. 5 3 OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 221

the actions of Osiris and Scsostris to be sfreally alike ;
and a number of circumstances from ancient fable, to
prove that the Gods, whom he supposes to be the same
>vith Osiris, were about the age of Sesostris. So that
all the evidence brought by tliis illustrious writer
amounting, at most, but to difficulties against the best
established fact of history ; if we can, consistently with
the distinct personality and diflerent ages of these two
heroes, fairly account for the similar actions recorded of
them; and for the low age, as delivered by the mytho-
logists, of those Grecian Gods which are supposed to
be the Egyptian Osiris ; if, I say, this can be done, the
reader is desired to observe, that all is done that can
reasonably be required for the confutation of Sir Isaac
Newton's hypothesis, and for reinstating the ancient
history of their distinct personality in its former credit.

But I siiall do more ; i . I shall shew from the reli-
gious constitutions of Greece and Egypt, that the inci-
dental errors which the Ancients fell into, concerning
these two heroes, (of which errors our author has taken
the advantage, to run them into one) were such as hardly
any circumspection could avoid.

2. And still further, that the identity of Osiris and
Sesostris, in its necessary consco^uences, contradicts
Scripture, and the nature of things.

II. I proceed then to a particular examination of this
famous proof of the identity, as it is collected and di-
gested by the learned INIaster of the Charter-house.

The first observation I shall make upon it is, that, by
the same way of arguing, one might incorporate almost
any two heroes, one meets with, in early and remote
history. Tor as our great English poet well observes,

" Heroes are much the same, the point's agreed,
" From Macedonia's madman to the Swede ;
" The whole strange purpose of their lives, to find,
*' Or make an enemy of all mankind."

To shew the reader how easily this feat may be per-
formed, I \\ ill take any two of our own Monarchs, that
come first into my thoughts, — King Arthur, for in-
stance, and William the Conqueror. And now
let him only imagine, when arts and empire have learnt

222 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

to travel further West, and have left Great Britain in
the present condition of Egypt, some future Chronologer
of America, labouring to prove these Heroes one and
the same, only under two different names, by such kind
of Arguments as this :

I. Arthur and William were both great warriors;
a. Both were of spurious or uncertain birth; 3. Both
■were in the management of public aft'airs in their early
youth ; 4. Both came from France to recover Britain
from the Saxons; 5. Both proved victorious in their
expedition ; 6. Both got the crown of Britain by elec-
tion, and not by descent; 7. Both had other domi-
nions, besides Britain, to which they succeeded by right
hereditary ; 8. Both went frequently on military expe-
ditions into France ; 9. Both warred there with various
success y 10. Both had half-brothers, by the mother,
who, being made very powerful, and proving guilty of
manifold extortions and acts of injustice, were punished
by them, in an exemplary manner ; 11. Both had re-
bellious sons or nephews, whom they met in the field,
fought with in person, and subdued; 12. Both reigned
upwards of fifty years; 13. And both died in War.

When oar Chronologer had been thus successful with
his argument from similar circumstances, (as in the case
of Osiris and Sesostris), it is odds but he would go on ;
and to settle a chronology which made for some other
hypothesis he had in view, he would next attempt to
prove, from s'wiilitude of names, as before from similitude
of actions, that William the Conqueror and Wil-
liam THE Third, another Conqueror, were but one
and the same, (as in the case of Sesostris and Sesac).

Here the number of similar circumstances, in the
lives of Arthur and William, are, evidently, more cha-
racteristic of ONE, than those in the history of Osiris and
Sesostris. Yet we know that Artliur and William were
really two different men of two very distant ages. This
will shew the critics the true value of this kind of evi-
dence; and should reasonably dispose them to much
caution in building upon it.

II.

But it will be said, that the nature of the conformity
between Osiris and Sesostris is, in some respects, very

different

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 22.5

different from that between Arthur and William. I grant
it is so ; and, from those respects, shall now shew, how
the mistaken identity of Osiris and Sesostris may be cer-
tainly detected. For I go on, and say, though from this
instance it be seen, that a greater agreement might well
happen in the lives of two ancient Heroes, than can be
found in those of Osiris and Sesostris, while their dis-
tinct personality was acknowledged to be very certain
and real ; yet, in their case, it must be o\vned, that
there are peculiar and specific circumstances of simili-
tude, which could not arise from that general conformity
between the actions of two men of the same quahty and
character ; but must be allowed to have had their birth
from some fancied identity. For several of the actions,
given to both, agree only to the time of one : I mean as
Antiquity hath fixed their times. Thus, the vast con-
quests over Asia agree well with the time of Sesostris,
but very ill with the time of Osiris : and, again, the in-
vention of the most common arts of life agrees very well
with the time of Osiris, but very ill with that of Sesos-
tris. However, from this conformity in their story. Sir
Isaac concludes Osiris and Sesostris to be the same.
And so far we must needs confess, that it seems to have
arisen from some kind of identity ; a sameness of person,
or a sameness of name. This great writer contends for
the first; but as the first contradicts and subverts all
Antiquity, if the ascribed conformity of actions can be
well accounted for from their idcntitij of tiame, and that
identity be proved very probable from ancient story, the
reader will conclude that the fabulous conformity had its
rise from thence; and, consequently, that all Sir Isaac's
arguinents for their idtnt'ity of person make directly
against him. For if the conformity arose from identity
of name, they were two persons. 1 shall endeavour to
shew all this in as few words as I am able.

I. It was an old Egyptian custom, as we learn from
Diodorus Siculus, to call their later Heroes by the
name of their earlier Gods. This historian having spoken
of the CELESTIAL Gods, according to the Egyptians,
adds, They held, that besides these, there were other
EARTHLY Gods, bum mortal', "who through their wis^

dom.

224 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book I r.

dom, and common benefits to man/and, had acquired im-
mortality i that some of these had been kings of Egypt ;
and that part got new names, bei?!g called after those
of the celestial Gods ; and part kept their oxni *. But
this custom of calling the later Heroes after the names
of their earlier Gods, was not peculiar to Egvpt. Scrip-
ture inforujs us, that the Ass3riai!5 did the same. And
the practice must needs have been general. For, as we
have shewn, the original use of it was to support nascent
hero-worship -f. But there was another cause, more
peculiar to early Egypt; and that was the doctrine of
transn.igi^ation. For it being thought that the same
soul passed successively into many human bodies ; when
thev saw an eminent Character strongly resembling
some ancient Hero, they were inclined to lancy it the
old busy soul, w-hich had taken up its residence in a
new habitation : and therefore very equitably honoured
the present Hero with the name of the past. This rea-
son, Tacitus tells us, the Egyptians gave for the great
number of Hercules's — " Quern [^Herculcm'] indigent
" [jEgi/ptii] ortwn apud se &; antiquissimum perhibent,
" eosque qui postea pari virtute fuerint, in cognomen-
tum ejus adscitosX-' This was so notorious that Sir
Isaac could not help owning, it was their way to give
one common name to several men. Nay even the least
corporeal resemblance was sometimes sufficient to set
this superstition on work, and produce the effect in
question ; as we find from the same Diodorus's account
of the Grecian Bacchus. He tells us, that when Cad-
mus the Egyptian was come into Greece, and his
daughter Seniele had a spurious son dying in his in-
fancy, w hose person resembled the images of Osiris, the
grandfather, after having consulted the Oracle (whose
approbation w as contained in the advice, to observe the
customs of his fathers ), called him Bacchus, one of the

* — "'A^A8; y Ik T8t«v twi^Eia? ytpia-^ai ^tftuir, iira^^avla; //.)> Snjltfj,

jp'iav— 1. i. p. 8. Stejjh. ed. f tSee Div. Leg. b. lii. § 6.

{ Annal. 1. ii. c. 6o. — Omnes, qui fecerant fortiter, Hercules
vocabanttir, says Varro likewise (as quoted by Sei vius).

names

Sect. 5 ] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 225

names of Osiris : paid divine honours to the cnibahiied
carcass; and proclaimed aiiroad, thatOsiuis had chosen
to come once more amongst men under this iniantine
appearance*. From this custom of giving the names of
.celebrated personages of hiijh antiquity to later men,
who resembled them in qualities either of mind or body,
it was, that they not only, out of honour to Sesostris,
called him Osiris, but, out of contempt and hatred,
gave Moses the name of TypiioN', as appears from
some later accounts of this Typhon, when they had
now jumbled j\Ioses and liim into one; as they had
done their Bacchiis's, Herculcss, and Minos s; and as
they were very near doing, by Osiris and Sesostris.
Tlie accounts, I mean, are those which we find in Plu-
tarch, of Typhon's flying seven days, and begetting,
after his escape, two sons, JERUSy^LEM and JuD.-rus'j".
And further that this Typhon was the son of Isaac, and
of the race of Hercules J.

Causes like these could not fail to make this custom
very durable, amongst a people not at all given to
change. And in fact, we find it continued even to the
time of Cleopatra, who affected to be called the xevv
Isis||, as her brother was called the new- Bacchus^.
At length it became so general as to have no measure
but the fancy of every particilar. For Lucian, defend-
ing the excessive compliments he had given to one
Panthea, whose form he had compared to the images
of the Goddesses, justifies himself by examples; and
amongst the rest, by that of Egypt ; / shall not msist
(says he) upon the practice of the Egyptians, whoy
though thcij be the most religious of all people, yet em-
ploy

* Ka^i/.o» iy. Qr.ouii oilx run Alyv^llup, yivvrjccti triiv a.XXa7<; t/xvoi?
2£^eAy;»' ra-irr,* vrro t» JwoIe (p^iccfu'crom, ifxvov yiii£!T&m, >^ rtxiTv iifia,
ji.'ntuv 8pi<p'^ rri) o-]/iv oU> 'Ste'^ oi xar Alyvrrlav To» Oo'i^m yifo-

tsiicit yo/Ai^aa-i, ^cii-^yoviTa^xi ^' ix. tlu^ivxi to roi-irot, eite rtiv ^iu> (jly)
^uMiAtvav , tin Tvj? ^vctew; avyKoi^tsa-ni;- Ka^p.on Je aly^oy.tvov to
ytyofoc, ^^r)3jA.ov sj^ovla oiolrpEtV to, twi» 'nralepitiu no^AfAOt y^^vcioija.O'^im
Ts TO iS^s'ip'^ Ta? xaOjjxacaj avrZ -r^-oi^a-acrfiat St/a-ia?, w; eTrifpavEiatt
T(»o; y.oi'c und^uiTTHq Ocri^i^®- ytymriusvyii;. Lib. 1. p 14.

f. — ETTi Ufa ra Tu!puiit rriv ^uyrtv iifla. Yijui^a,^ yivicj^on, y.at rwS/vl*
yEKV/jVai 'UTCtToa.^ 'liQrja-oXviAOf »J laoaXov. Is. & Osir.

X laaiO-KU tS H^xy.AES; s Tvipu><

II Piui. in Aiit. 51 Diod. Sic. 1. i.

Vol. IV. Q

226 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

ploy the names of their Gods even to satiety and dis-
gust *.

To apply this practice to the case of the Heroes in
question. Osiris was the great Lawgiver of the Egyp-
tians: and tlie Founder of their Monarchy. Sesostris
vastly extended and ennobled their Empire ; and was,
at the same time, author of many beneficial institutions.
Now if ever an occasion greater than ordinary presented
itself, of putting in practice tlie custom of honouring
later Heroes with the name of the more earl}', it was
here, where the resemblance ^vas so remarkably s:rong.
And if what Clemens Alcxandrinus says be true, that
Sesostris sprung from Osiris f. there was still a farther
occasion of giving the later Hero the name of his tii'st
progenitor. However, that it \vas given him, is highly
reasonable to suppose. And this supposition w ill clearly
account for all that ingrafted likeness from which Sir
Isaac hath inferred their identity.

For when now they had given to both, the same
name; not distinguished, as were their Thoihs or
Hermes'sJ, (another famous instance of this general
custom) by the addition oi first and second. Posterity
would frequently confound them ^vith one another; and,
in this confusion, inadvertently give the actions of Osiris
to Sesostris, and of Sesostris to Osiris, But taking
nothing from either, both their histories would soon be-
come the same. And as, in this mutual transferring of
one another's actions, seveml were given to both, en-
tirely discordant to cither's age, we are ennabled to dis-
cover the true cause of this confonnity ; and thereby to
prove, that that, which it is plainly seen might be, really
n-as, the cause.

I. Thus Osiris (because Sesostris was so) is made a
great conqueror, at a time when Egypt was but just

* 'Ew yig Ta; AiyyTrliej, oItte^ onc't^aifjioysritioi Ewrt vxtlwj, o^uj
ToTf Sitoi? ivofj.a.(7iv «i? xo^iv Ewtj^fw^Etif;. Pro. Imag. in fin.

+ — Tlf a» "Oo-i^o, rlv «rgo7r«To^a Toy «Jt£ ^aioaXSnra* txhsvatt airoj
[tca-ur^ii] eroXtli^wf. Admon, ad. Gentes, p. 31. Edit. Colon.
1688, tol.

I The histories of the first and second Hermes are as much con-
founded with one another as those of Osiris and Sesostris, and from
the same cause ; vet, I imagine, the distinction of Jirst and second
wU hinder my one from supposing them to be the saaie.

emerging

Sect. 5-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 227

emerging from a state of barbarism, into civil policy ;
and lon^ before several of those nations, he was said to
conquer, had a being. But this seems to be one of the
latest corruptions in their history. Herodotus giving
none of these conquests to Osiris, but to Sesostris only :
whence I collect, it was the product of some age be-
tween him and Diodorus Siculus, who gives them to
Osiris with all their circumstances, and supported by
the evidence of pretended ancient monuments*. It ap-
pears too, to have been a Grecian addition, and at a
time when it was the fashion to make their fables, sys-
tematical -j'. For we are told j^, (and tiie tale was
apparently framed for no other end than to connect this
God with the rest of the College) that, when Osiris
made this expedition, he took Silenus with him as his
Governor; that he appointed Isis, Queen-regent in his
absence ; and flermes her privy-counsellor ; flercules he
made General of his army, and Neptune, admiral of his
fleet. And, that nothing might be wanting to complete
the cortege, he took with him a company of dancers and
singers ; amongst which were nine lively girls more par-
ticularly eminent ; w ith the king's brother, as master of
the maids, at their head; and these truly were to pass
for Apollo and the nine Muses. 'Jliis quaint improve-
ment on an Egyptian blunder, by some drivelling Greek
mythologist ||, as rank as it is, is one of the chief circum-
stances on which our illustrious author hath thought fit

* The columns at Nysa in Arabia.

•f Oi ^'s "EA^vIjve?, device trracila.^ lin^QaX'Koy.iioi. to, 'os^urci "Bthit^a

rJovar?, S/^yEin 'i7rmiile<; ■mavloiui twoJxiA^ov. Philo Bib. apud Euseb.
Pi ajp. Evang. 1. i. c. lo.

'jf. — Tot ^ till "Oriftt ^atn to. xolo^ rii" A'lyviclot xcilctrnsrtitlot, «^ 7>>ii
rut oKut ^y»)^o»ia» 'ici^i t>) ytva,uA "wa^aaovla, raitrt fjuv 'nra^ay.alcif>ia-cn
cvjiQu^ot rot EfjC*!!*, — xai j-^alvj'yof jixs» aTroTiiTTErv otTTiij-ij; T^; ii^ uvrci
^u^xi; Hfxy.Mcc — I'TrifxiX^la!; Ta|a» rut (iiv t^fa^ <l>c/i»ix>i y.ty.>\ini»iiii(^
[it^ut rut i'Ki Scc^axlr) ra'TTUt Bsc»^i». — iTvai ya.^ tIv "OaiPit (pt\ayiXula,

^xifovla. fjLVcmi) >cj yp^a7<;. Jio wtpayt^flai 'UT'kri^oq jjtHO'ii^yut, it oi{
"Bra^Ssva; Em/a S'vtce-fji.ctcci astiv, xara to. a>\a, "BTEwanJst/^E'vaj, ra.i
tcufa Tor? "E^^rT'ii' htofAoJiri^itoi.^ lAttiTa,^, rtiruv ^ -nyiTa^xi rot AiroM-uvin
i^iyaait, a.<p ii )tj Mucrryirriii xvrot Ivof/.a.o'^cu. L. 1. pp. lO, 11.

II The very learned Casaubon, speaking of the tables, which con-
cern Bacchus with the Nymphs and Muses, says, Est cnim Grxca-
nicac vanitatis hoc quoque inrentum, Bacchiais in majus semper attol-
Itntium. De Satyrie^Poesi, p. 41.

Q 2 to

22S

THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

to support Lis Chronology. And that \vhich is the
m,cre representation of an old raree-show of the Court
of k/jio- Osiris, brousrht by some stroller out of Egypt
into Greece, is made an authentic record to ascertain
the true age of all their Heroes. I am fully supported
in the conjecture, that the tale of Osiris's conquests was
invciited in some age between Herodotus and Diodorus
Siculus, by the testimony of two of the soberest and
most accurate of the Greek v\ riters, Strabo and Arrian ;
■w ho expressly tell us, that the stories of Bacchus's and
Hercules"s' exploits in the Indies were invented by the
,]\Iacedonians to aggrandize the glory of Alexander *.
The Egyptians had prepared the materials and made
them lit for use, by confounding Osiris and Sesostris,
under the common name of Bacchus.
, 2. On the other hand, Sesostris (because Osiris was
so) is made the inventor of arts, and the civilizer of a
^rude and barbarous peo})le, to whom he delivered the
first rudiments of Policy and Religion, many ages alter
they had erected a flourishing and powerful Empire. An
inconsistence so glai ing, that the ancient critics seeing
these things recorded of Sesostris, reasonably understood
Osiris to be meant. This doubtless made Aristotle say f
that Sesostris v/as many ages before jMinos : yet Euse-
bius places Minos in the times of the Judges. And in
the twelfth dynasty of Africanus, Sesostris is made to
reign, according to the calculation of Scaliger X, in the
i3Q2d year of the Julian period : that very point of time
on which the extravagant clironology of Egypt had thrown
Osiris. But there is a passage in iElian which proves still
more expressly that the Ancients sometimes understood
Osiris by Sesostris. The Egyptians (says this historian)
a^irm that Mercury taught Sesostris Ms laws || : and
that jVIercury the contemporary of Osiris was here meant,

* Arrian, 1. v. c. 3. Strabo, 1. ii. p. 771. andl. xv. pp. 1006, 7.
Casaub. ed. — Kci» ra -arep 'Hpccy.Xiai; al xa» Atatia-ii, Miycca^hrii y^iv ^er

Kxl iA.v^uio-/i, y.a.dx'm^ y.oii to. nu^x roTq "£AXr,a-(i. Strab. 1. XV.

f Ilo>.v yuf im^etUt TOK x?^""^ '''''' Mivw ^aaiMix* h 2£C":ir^i®'. Pol.
l.vii. c. 10.

% .Vide jMarsham Can. Chron. Secul. X. tit. Nilus Rex.
11 <baa)t AlyvirliOi ^iaur^tr •bo.p 'Ep/aS t« w^(/*a lx^«crwfi?»«j. ^ ar.
Hist. 1. xii. c. 4.

Sect. 5.] OF l^rOSES DEMONSTRATED. 229

is seen by another passnge of this historian, where the
same thing is said of all the Egyptians in general. The
Egyptians boast that Mercuuy taught them their
laws *.

But though mistake gave birth to this corruption in
the Egyptian history, yet, without doubt, it was a na-
tional vanity which supported it. For we are told by
Diodorus ■]', who made collections from their history,
that the reason, assigned by the Egyptians for that fa-'
mous military expedition, which they had transferred
from Sesostris to Osiris, was the Hero's beneficent pur-
pose of can-ying the new inventions of corn and wine to
all the sava2;e inhabitants of the earth ; whom it was his
purpose to reduce from a state of Nature, to Political
society. The intelligent reader sees plainly, that the
design of this story was to do honour to Egypt, as the
common benefactress of mankind. Though I will not
deny, that the extravagance of the conceit, at the same
time, shews how much they were at a loss for a rea-
sonable cause of so early an expedition. The difficulty
of all this did not escape the Sicilian. He frankly owns,
there is a vast discordancy and confusion in the accounts
of Isis and Osiris What seems strange to me is, that
this did not lead him to the cause here explained, w hen.
he had so well unravelled the like confusion in the parallel
case of Hercules and Alcasus. Their story had been
disordered, like this of Osiris and Sesostris, from
Alcacus's taking the name of Hercules. But Diodorus,
by the same kind of reasoning || I have here employed

* Alyiirlioi (pcctr) -sra^ E^^S ra. vlj^ii/.a. ly.i/.ea-u6y}Kx.i. Lib. xiv. C. 34-

"t" Toi/ ^£ "Oci^iii Afysciv, u<Tir(q liigytlty.ov oi1<t (piXo^o^of, r^a.TO'ri^ot
fAtyce, <TVf'yis-a.a6ai, Jia»oa|i/.£K»» e'7rt?s6iTv u.ita.ija,v rriv oly.UjjLivriy, oi^a|«t
TO yiti^ ruv kv^^ioiruv riit te tS? a.f/.miXis ^vlttctv xj rot (rvcfev rS ts vjv^Uh
jcj y.^t^iiiH y.icfTTH. L. i. p. lO.

X KaOoAs ^E •nroA?ii t»? Ert iicc<paiiiai 'aiipl Ttsrat rav Sewk. L. i. p. 15.

II O/zoXoya/AEva yoi^ onl©' wa^at ■CTa<ri> iVi toi? oAi;/A7rici? SeoT; HoaxXij;
aum'ywi'lo'alo rav 'Sjfoq th; ylyavla? 'moXifj.'iv , (pa,a\ rrt yri fji,v)^a,fji.uic af^Qrluf
yifivniXiuat tb; ylyafla; xxlci t»)» riXizlav, iin oi "E^^ive! (paj'it H^a.x'Ksci
ymea-^xv. yitiS ■z^fire^ov run T^wlVwv' aMa ^a?v^oi', w; avrol XiyHifi, y.altt
rr»i E^ '^^X^^ yivimv rav auQ^uTriiiv, iir iy.uvyt<; p.£> yoLp laocf Ai'ytTriioi? etjj
xa)afi9^er(r6ai ■etXeiw ruiv fAvpuv, am Tin T^uiy.av Ixi'flu 'luv j^tAiwii xj
aiOLy.ocriav . o^oiw; to, Te fiiraXov x^ rriv Xtotlyiv rto v:a.y\oino tUfiTrnv HpaxTvET,
h» T9 T«T 'iKi'moi T«5 rw) 'itthut (vf^y-ivuf, 7»; <i»6g«wa; to"?

Q 3 (*»»

330 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

to ascertain the diversity of Osiris and Sesostris, shews
that AlcfBus and Hercules were different men ; namely,
from actions, given to Alcaeus, which could not belong
to his age. But these being of different nations, the one
a Greek, the other an Egyptian ; this circumstance af-
forded him an opening which he wanted in the case of
Osiris and Sesostris, who were both Egyptians.

And here let me observe, that this ancient practice of
calling later heroes by the name of earlier, vAhcther of
their own or of foreign countries, brought still greater
confusion into some other of their histories ; making the
Ancients tlieinselves imagine an idoititij where none
was; as in Bacchus, Neptune, Hercules, Mars, Venus,
Minos, &c. which popular mistakes Sir Isaac en)ploys
to support another imaginary identity that they never
dreamt of.

From this state of Antiquity I would infer these two
things. First, that, notwiihstanding the conformity in
the histories of Osiris and Sesosti'is, there is 'great reason
to suppose the reality of their distinct personalities, be-
cause the same kind of similitude, ari.'-ing from the same
mistake, is found in the histories of many other ancient
heroes confessedly distinct. Secondly, that there must
have been, in Antiquity, some very convincing proofs
of the real diversity of Osiris and Sesostris, to keep
them, as it did, perpetually separate, notwithstanding
the sameness in their histories : when the like kind of
conformity had melted two or more Bacchus's, Iler-
cules's, Minos's, into one.

On the whole then, I have shewn, that a sameness of
name is sufficient to account for the original of the con-
formity in the history of Osiris and Sesostris ; and, having
done this, I have done all that is needful to. ascertain
their dwersity (rf person : there being nothing to oppose

i>i ijrcXAa.'* ^finasi 'BTccfa^i^Of^lvnt (^r./Miv, on Ku^afoii mt)) yvv tut Bzfiuii
tKtiina-tv Hgax?.5j;. owe^ iadoociau^ a^jjLO'vliiv ru yiyovo-n a-^i^on y.atld ts? Tgwtxs;
X^^'^ii 0T£ Tec 'SiXii^a, /xE^l T>)? oly.HfAttrii E^Jip/^JIo yia^y'itt,«; 'ScaXici, >^
vsT^rMii Tuv xcclitKaylun Tvjv p^wpxy taccvlci^ti. f/.»^Ko» k» tsr^eWEii' yiy»i/i~%
xaicc rui K^^alhi^ ^foi/a; inn yiy.tfuc/H Tvj; X'^?^'-' '"'^"'■X'-'0/*^>«» £T» T«»
avBgW'jri'v V7.e ra tuv >^ ^«A»ra yxlx Trjj Atyvrlov £15 T>!»

&3-j^x£»/Aev>!» •)(u(a.v y-^Xi^ Vffuv »tj ■&7)giwi')j. Lib. i. pp. I4, 15'

Sect. 5-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 231

to tlie full testimony of ancient history, which declares
for their diversity, besides this conformity of actions.

But I have done more : I have shewn, that a sameness
of namt was, in tact, the only cause of that conformity ;
and, consequently, that their persons were really different.
That it could be only a sameness of mine, I think, ap-
pears evidently from the giving to each hero, actions
unsuitable ta his age ; as great conquests to Osiris, and
civil inventions to Sesostris, For I persuade myselt^
(though Sir Isaac be obhged, for the sake of his hypo-
thesis, partly to support, and partly to palliate, this
convincing circumstance) no one can, in good earnest,
believe that Egypt was indeed emerging from a state of
barbarism at the time in which he places Sesostris. 'Tis
true, if men will yet suppose so, I have no better argu-
ment against it than the Bible ; and how far the credit
of that will go in this enlightened age is not very easy to
guess. In a word, such unsuitable actions ascribed to
each, nothing can account for, but a mistaken identity,
arising from the sameness of name ; for when this had
advanced, or brought down, the real antiquity of either,
the historian was to suit their actions to the imaginary
time. Iksides, we know they are not at all scrupulous
about property, when they find an achievement in their
way, capable of doing honour to a favourite Hero.
There is, as might be expected, a pregnant instance
of this, in the history of this very Sesostris ; of whom it
was recorded, that he divided the lands of Egypt amongst
the People, reserving an annual rent to the Crown *.
Now we are veiy certain that this was done, long before
his time, under the ministry of the Patriarch Joseph.
Here the theft lies open. While these Heroes were only
made to pilfer from one another, there was some difficulty
to get them convicted ; as where two cheats are taught
to convey their stolen goods into one another's hands,
to evade a pursuit : but here an honest man steps in
to make good his claim, and proves it beyond all ex-
ception.

* —KctlciiUfAOti rriv x.'^^av AtyvTrlUicrt avxat tStov t'^eyon to» /3«tf'i^£flt
WM^aairSan, twtl«|«»]a «7ro(pop»j» a.%o[iXim Kofi' tuxviov, Heiod. 1. ii.

c. 109.

Q 4 But

232 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

But it is our business only to shew that the confor-
mity, in the histories of Osiris and Sesostris, may be
well accounted for, from a sumenes^oj mme, Other-
M'ise, if the case required it, we should not want positive
arguments, supported by the soundest part of Antiquity,
to prove their difference of person. To mention one or
two only by the May; it has been observed before*,
that, in substituting Hero, to Planet -nor ship, the
Egyptian rulers, in order to bring die people more
easily into this later species of idolatry, called the Htro
by the name of a Celestial God. So Diodorus says..
that Sol first reigned i)i Egypt ; called so from the I/a-
minary of that name in the heaveiis. This was the
easier brought about, because the first Civilizers, to
gain the greater authority, pretended, as was very na-
tural, to be the OffsjM'ing of the Sun% that universal
God of all the uncivihzed people upon the earth. Eor
the same end likewise, namely, to accustom the people,
even while in the practice of Planet-worship, to the new
adoration, they turned the compiiment the other way ;
and called the Luminary by the name of the Hero ; the
same historian telling us, that they called the Sun, Osi-
ris, and the Moon, Isis. Now the end of this mutual
transferring of names being only to strengthen their neio
idolatry by giving it a support from the old, it must
reeds be invented on the first introduction of hero-wor-
ship. But hero-worship was as early as the first insti-
tution of civil policy. Therefoi'e the using the name of
Osiris to this purpose, is a demonstration that he was
as early as sober Antiquity supposed. Again, Herodo-
tus tells us, and of bis own knowledge, that no Gods,
besides Isis and Osiris, vvere worshipped by all the
Egyptians in the same unvariable manner j. This I
think a plain proof of their being the common benefac-
tors of all Egypt, in the invention of corn, wine, and
civil policy, as the Egyptian annals deliver ; their other
Hero-Gods, as particular and partial benefactors, being
worshipped variously. But this fixes them in their high

* See Div. Leg. Book iii. § 6.

•f ya,^ s Ta; ayrs; uTravls': OjMOiii;? AlyvTrlioi aeSoilui, •m'l\r,)i Ij-io?

QovIm, L. ii. c. 42.

Antiquity.

Sect. 5j OF MOSES DE^IONSTRATED. 233

Antiquity. Again, the calf and ox are owned to be the
peculiar symbols of Osiris: but the Golden Calf I
have proved to be an Egyptian symbol ; therefore Osiris
was, at least, as old as Moses. And again, our great.
Author owns *, that tiie king who invented agriculture
in Egypt, seems to have been worshipped by his sub-
jects in the ox or calf for this benefaction. ISow tiie ox
or calf was the symbol of Osiris. But agriculture, we
certainly know, was invented before the time oi Joseph,
which will bring us to seek for Osiris 700 years higher
than Sesac, who is our Authors ancient Osiris or Se-
sostris of Egypt.

To proceed : Such were the blunders in the history of
Osiris and Sesostris f , of which Sir Isaac hath taken ad-
vantage, to prove them to be one and the same. And
it is certain, as was said before, that, had not the sure
records of Antiquity kept them separate, this jumbling
of their actions into one another's life had lon<>; aiio in-
corporated them ; and left no room for Sir Isaac s dis-
covery : for the Ancients were fond of running many into
one, as appears particularly in the case of Bacchus,
whose history we come now to consider.

II. For Sir Isaac farther strengthens the evidence of
their identity from Egyptian History, with the Grecian
Mythology: in which Bacchus is clelivered to us as the
same vvith Osiris : and Bacchus being but two genera-
tions earlier than the Trojan war, the very age ot isesos-
tris, this, in his opinion, reduces all three to one. p. 191.

This identity of Bacchus and Osiris, Diodorus Siculas
has very accurately confuted J. But to discover the
general cause of this, and all other their mistaken iden-
tities, we must trace down the religion of Greece trom
its original.

It is a certain truth, agreed upon by ancient as well
as modern writers, that civilized (jreece received its
religion from Egypt. But the way in wtiich this com-
merce M as carried on is not so >vell understood. It is
generally supposed to have been done by adopting, and
worshipping the very Egyptian Gods tliCmselves. But

* See note [ZZZ] at the end of this Book
t See note [A AAA] at the end of this Book;
J Lib. i. p. 14.

this

234 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

this is a capital mistake. It was not till long after their
first acquaintance with Egypt, and instruction in their
religious Rites, that they adopted Egyptian Gods : which
I shall now endeavour to shew.

In the barbarous ages of Greece their only Gods were
those natural Divinities, the heavenly Luminaries *. '
But, on their first commerce with Egypt for the arts of
policy, they found there a new species of idolatry, the
worship of dead men ; which civilized Egypt had in-
vented; and which, as they improved in policy, had
almost worked out their first natural Deities ; the same
with those of all other uncivilized nations '(*• This new
species, the Greeks eagerly embraced : and beginning
now to take the Egyptian nation for their model in re-
ligious as well as in civil matters, they brought home
this mode of foreign worship, namely, dead men dei-
fied. Thus far is agreed on all hands. The material
question is, whether their object were Egyptian hero-
gods ; or whether, in imitation of that worship, they
made hero-gods of their own ? The common opinion is
that they took the Egyptian. I suppose, on the con-
trary, that they must needs make hero-gods of their own ;
and could not, at that time, receive the other. My
reason is this :

The greater celestial bodies were Deities in common,
as their influence sensibly extended over the whole ha-
bitable globe. But -hero-worship intioduced the new
idea of local tutelary Deities: and this of necessity.
For those Heroes were the distinguished benefactors of
their own nation, at the expence, frequently, of their
neighbours : and, for such benefits, they were deified.
Now several causes concurred to make men teach and
think, that the care and providence of their Heroes, now
become Gods, was still, as in life, confined to their own
dear Country : Such as the superior reverence which
rulers knew the. People would pay to a God, whose
Peculiar they ere supposed to be : for, when undis-
tracted with other cares, he would be supposed at full
liberty to attend to the minutest concerns of his own
People : Such again, as the selfishness and pride of the
worshippers, who would be for ingrossing a God to
* See Div. Leg. Book iii. f Id. ib.

them-

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 235

themselves ; and raiding honour to their Country from
this imaginary property. So that the opinion of local
tutelary Deities became, at length, one of the most ge-
neral and most undisputed doctrines of Paganism. It
is delivered to us, for such, by Plato : yet, as the origin
of hero gods from humanity was to be kept out of sight,
be carefully disguises the foundation of it. The Gods
(says he) formerly divided the ichole earth amongst
themselves by lot : )wt from any contention or quarrel
about their rights ; for it is absurd to suppose they did
mt knoxv zchat rcas Jit for every one's peculiar care ; or
knowing this, that they should endeavour by violence to

possess themselves of o?ie another s property : but all of
them receiving in an amicable manner, what fell to their
share '^^ in this just method (f distribution, each resided
on his own peculiar : which, having rendered proper for
our lutbitation, they lead and support us as shepherds do
their focks and herds in a pasture. — Every God there-

fore having his proper allotment, all his endeavours are
employed to adorji and benefit his own'\. This was so
flattering a notion, that, in after-times, the Pagans car-
ried it even into their Planet-worship : and each climate
was supposed to be under the pro])er protection of its
own Star or Constellation. So that the writer of The
wisdom of Solomon seems to make diis the distinguishing
mark of Paganism ; wiiere praising the God of Israel
for his ancient mercies to that people, he says, neither
is there any God but thou, that car est for all \,

Now, such a kind of tutelary God, the Egyptians
would be so far from offering to others, that they would
be careful to keep him to themselves. Hence tbe old

* la. <p'iKu)i ?,oifx,ci»ovlii — Serr. translates it — deorum quisque prout
hominum amore teiieretiir. I understand it — hajc amicoruni sortiti
— i. e. regions which belonged to gods who were in unity with one
another.

•f ©101 yag awacran yrjii ■ctots xaia, ts; Toirti? ^teXafyavov, a itar i^tv
(s yocp ai o^Qov tyoi Aojoy. Ssa; ufvoiTy ru 'm^tTCQtla, ty.cc^oK; otliruf, a^ ctv
yitu<7iiov\a.<; TO (JlolWov aAAoi? 'sr^oo-ijxov, tSto iri^H<; otvroTq sfi^aiii iiri^ci-

— a?i/\oj i^h nil xccT «A?ia; TOTra; y.Xri^u^vo'xdtf ^luv ly.tTiioi, ty.6crjj,av.
Vol. m. p. 109. Ser. Ed.

X Cap. xii. 13, Oure yap ^toi; ift lahyiv ci, ^ fiiXu Wfg* viailut, iW

practice

236 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

practice of chaining down their Gods (for hero-gods
were worshipped by statues in human form) when they
imagined them disposed to ramble; or to take a Hking
to any of their neighbours. And as the Egj-'ptians
would be averse to lending, so the Greeks would be as
little inclined to boiTow ; for they had now a race of
Heroes of their own ; those godlike men, who had re-
duced them from a savage to a civilized condition, and
had given them this very appetite ; the appetite to im-
prove their policy by the assistance of Egyptian wisdom.
As little too would their own Lawgivers, who brought
that wisdom home to them, be disposed to offer them
Egyptian Gods; as knowing how much stronger their
rex erence and adlierence would be to Gods made out of
their own parents and fellow-citizens. But if this were
the case, (and, in the course of the inquiry, it will be
proved from Jhct, as here from the reason of the thing)
it may be asked. What then was that RELicioy which
all agree the Greeks borrowed of the Eg}'ptians? I
answer, the trade itself of Hero-worship; or the
custom of deifying their dead benefactors. But again,
if this were so, and that the Bacchus, Apollo, Mars,
Jupiter, &:c. first worshipped by the Greeks, were in-
deed Grecian Deities, it will be then asked, how came
their resemblance to the Eg^-ptian to be so great, as that
later times should be generally deceived in thinking them
the SAME.' This is a reasonable question, and will de-
serve a particular discussion. There were several causes
of this resemblance.

I. Nothing could be more simple than the ritual
of the first Planet -xcorship, as may be easily collected
from the nature of that idolatry. But Hero-uorsh'ip
necessarily introduced a great number of complex Cere-
monies. For, the commemorating the peculiar benefits
received from the Hero-god, in his state of humanity,
%\ ould occasion many specific Rites ; and the shadowing
or concealing his original and especially the blemishes
in his moral character would necessitate the use of alk'
gorical. And w hat this last sort of Rites did not suffi-
ciently cover, the notion propagated amongst his wor-
shippers (on which was founded the rationale of their
worship) was made to supply, viz. That the De.moxs or

Helloes

Sect. 5.] OF INIOSES DEMONSTRATED. 237

Heroes had, like men, their inordinate virtues, passions
and appetites. Plutarch, in his tract Of the ceasing of
the oracles, has a remarkable passage to this purpose:
" There are in Demons, as in men, a disparity in their
*' virtues ; and, like as in the latter, a mixture of passion
" and imperfection. Of which, in some, we find only
" the faint and obscure traces yet remain, as the dregs
" of evanid matter; in others the vestiges are much
*' stronger, and indeed, indelible : and of this, we have
" certain marks and tokens dispersed up and down,
" and preserved in the sacrinces, in the mysteries, and
" in the ancient mythologic tales In like manner,
the general memory of the Hero's descent from mortals,
gave rise to the consultation of oracles and adoration
of STATUES in HUMAN FORM, Now, wlicu Greecc
borrowed of Egypt the superstition of Hero-worship,
they would of course borrow such of the Kites and prac-
tices .as were peculiar to that superstition; and adapt
them to their own Hero-Pods, as best suited everv one's
character. For the truth of which we have the express
testimony of Herodotus, who tells us, that the Egyp-
tians were the first authors of religious festivals, pro-
cessions, and offerings ; and that the Greeks learnt them
of that people j". ]3ut this resemblance, even without a
studious application of Egyptian rites, must have arisen,
from the very practice itself of Hero-worship ; as ap-
pears from what we have observed of the nature of those
ceremonies which Hero-worship necessarily introduced.
To contirm this, we need only consider the case of those
hero-worshippers of the north and west, the Gauls and
Suevi ; who did not, like the Greeks, borrow this mode
of idolatry from Egypt ; being indebted for it to nothing
but the corruption of our common nature. Now the
Gods of those Barbarians, and the Rites with which
their Gods were adored, resembled the religion of

>ej ci^iya, t&k f'-f" «0'6eiiE? itj aji/iai/jov tVi ^6til/ce»o», uierirep 'at^'i-rlufji.ei' Tor? ^£

Jtj IJt.vboX<,y'ia.i o-k/^scri x^ ^m^vf^uTliieriv Iviucr^ct^ftiva,.

\ — Tla,vr,yv^ia:; J'e c-^a. xj laofjLltoii; xj •jr^oeraywya? ■nr^wToi Sit^fu,iruii

c. 58.

Greece

238 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Greece and Rome So exactly, that these polite nations
thought the Gods of the Gauls and Suevi were the same
with their own ; only worshipped under different names*.
This WAS indeed a gross mistake; but natural to fall
into : So great a resemblance have Heroes of all times
and places ever borne to one another; whether they
were lawgivers, warriors, navigators, merchants, or art-
ists. Nor was their common rise from humanity, and
their occupations in social life, the only cause of this
resemblance. There was another; viz. their several
departments after they were become Gods: some pre-
siding over the elements, as earth, air, or water; others
over the passions and pursuits of men, as love, war,
trade, and the like. To this common resemblance it
was that at length almost every nation pretended, (as
we see by Diodorus) that the Gods came originally from
them. Now if the Gods of these 13arbarians, thou"h
ditierent in name, w ere for this resemblance, mistaken
for the Gods of another people, with whom they had
no commerce ; where was the wonder that the Grecian
Gods, who had the same name w ith those of a people
with whom Greece held a perpetual commerce, should
for the like resemblance, be believed to be originally
Egyptian ?

2. For, secondly, when the Greeks borrowed Egyp-
tian Rites to enrich the worship of their Gods, they
borrowed Egyptian names of honour, to adorn their
persons. Thus, for instance, the name of Bacchus,
one of the appellations of Osiris, w as given to the son
of Semele. Herodotus tells us, that these names they
did certainly borroAv ; and we see by his account, that
this was all which, in his tinie, was pretended to be
borrowed f* This observing historian, in his account of
the Pelasgi, further confirms this truth, by a very cu-
rious piece of history. " In former times, (says he) the

* See note [BBBB] at the end of this Book.

t Hxi^i" ■ad-^a. T« OYNOMATA Tuy ©f«» EH AIFTnTOY 1^4-
Xffit £? T»iv EXXao'a, ^iori jjLiy ya.^ iy. lut (iu^Qa^uv riyet isvuSa.yofitv'^ ura
ti^icrxoi £01'. ioy.iat ^ uy ^ctAira uir Alyv'^ln awr^flai, o,T( yccg or) (av
TlocrciSiuv^, Aioffy-n^tiv (ij? "cr^oTe^oe fiot raCra ei'^jjJki x^ "Hpr,^, xj
Ir'tiJ?) x^ ©e/xi^, x^ Xa^Wiiy, xj N^if/ii'^ay, xj Tfcv •Mfe'c Btuy, AlfvTrllotai
ale'iy.olt Ta «»e^«]« e-| I» ty) ^u^ri, 7\(fu T« Aiysc* a.vTot AiyuTrltot.

L, ii. c. 50.

*' Pelasgi

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 239

" Pelasgi in their religious worship used to sacrifice of
*' every thing without distinction, to their Gods, as I

was informed by the priests at Dodona. They gave
** neither name nor surname to any of their Gods : for
" they had heard of no such practice. But their titles
" were taken from what their worshippers conceived of
" their providence, directing and ordering all things
" fitly and harmoniously. But after a long course of
" time they heard of other Gods, and of their names,
" which came from Egypt, and in the last place of the
" name of Bacchus. Some time after they consulted
" the Oracle of Dodona concerning these names : for
'* this Oracle is supposed to be the oldest of any in
" Greece ; and, at the time I am speaking of, the only
" one. Of this Oracle therefore having asked advice,
" whether they should admit the names, which came
" from the Barbarians, into their religion ; they received
" for answer, that they should admit them. From that
" time * therefore they sacrificed with specific multifa-
" rious Rites, in which they honoured their Gods with
" these new appdlati072s. And, from the Pelasgi, the
" Greeks afterwards took up the custom. But the
" original of each God, and whether they are all from
*' eternity, and what are their several kinds of natures,
" to say the truth, they neither knew at that time, nor
" since. For Homer and Hesiod — were those who

made a Theogony for the Greeks; gave surnames
" to the Gods ; adjusted their various and specific Rites
" and Attributes ; and designed and delineated their se-
*' veral forms and figures -j-."

From

* See note [CCCC] at the end of this Book.

\ "E6t.o» 'ma.vla. nj^ort^ov ol TleXaufal Stors-t l^^vp^ofxttoi' uf lyii Iv
^u^ui/-/i oiSa, uxticraf, ETraivK/xi'iin ivofj.x litouZvlo tiStn aitiat. i y»p

aKYiXQiaoci xa. S\ 'm^oauvoiACurxv <r(piiX(; o-tto rS TO.irn, on xojfjLtii

hiX^otl®', iTrvkovIo IK T»)5 AlfvTrlii tx'my.oiji.iicc Ta titoy.cclx tuv ^cuii Tuv aXXur,
Aio»t/7a Si vTifov "aoKKa I'lrv&otlo. ixCla. ^^ivov i^^nirti^iu^ovlo 'Btc^I Tur
tmofjiaiTuu en Awdcjui)" to ya^ Sji [Acculriiov tSto »£»o^iro ap^xtoToloy Tui si
"EXXjiiti ^fniT'^ifl'MV £i'»ai" xj Ton ;^pc/'tov tstoh f^avo*' i'rru uv l^fi/ij-rj^ici^oHo
h TV) AuSunri ol Tli^ctayol il ccisXuvlcit ra. ivoixocia, to, o-tto tut /3a^€a^*)»
ijitotla. iitiiXi TO fAatTiriiov ^gas'Gai. aTro j^iv ^vj TaTtf t5 x^am i^iov, Toij£
tliiOfji.a<7i Turn ^luv ^fzaixaoi, •aa.^a. li DeXacr'ywv "EX^.vjce; l^iSi^atJo vrepot.
*£k8j» ^'e iyivtto Exar'^ twi' ^euv, eI'ti S' a.il rtauv 'Sia.iie^ oxoToi te Tiveq Ta
t"h*f ix. i7r»ri«T0 /*£XP* ^ W^W^* ft X; X^'5> i'i fiTini Kofu' Hc-ioSoi ycif

240 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

From this remarkable passage we may deduce the
following facts ; which, besides tlie evidence to the mat-
ter in question, are very corroborative of our general
explanation of Antiquity, i. It appears from hence,
that the Greeks borrowed the names of the Egyptian
Gods *, to decorate their ow n ; receiving them, as He-
rodotus litre supposes, by the hands of the Pelasgians.
2. That tliey received nothing but the names. 3. That
the humour of these ancient inhabitants of Greece v\ as
so far from disposing them to take Egyptian, or Stran-
ger-Gods, that they would not so much as venture on
their names till they had consulted the Oracle. 4. That
the Religion of navies came in with Hero-worship or
local tutelary Deities (to which species of Gods tiames
were an honorary attribution) ; and unknown to the wor-
shippers of the natural Divinities, as the Pelasgians and
all other uncivilized people. 5. That this Religion of
names was a thing of much consequence in the Egyptian
superstition, and even characteristic of it; which the
reader is desired to observe as of use to explain some
passages in the next section, concerning the propensity
of the Israelites to that superstition. 6. That one cause
of that ignorance, which, Herodotus here tells us, the
Greeks ever laboured under, concerning the original,
nature, and species of their Gods, and which, as now
appears, we had not unjustly charged upon them, when
we ventured to say the same in several parts of this
work; one cause, I say, was, that those names which
the Pelasgians had applied to their new Hero-Gods, the
Greeks, their successors, took and transferred to theirs.
7. And lastly, (which supports the general argument
we are now upon) the true sense of the concluding
words, which has hitherto been grossly mistaken, lies
open to us — For (says Herodotus) Homer and Hesiod —
were those who made a Theogony for the Greeks ; gave
surnames to the Gods ; adjusted their various and speci-
fic attributes, and rites of zvorship ; atid designed and
delineated their several forms and figtn^es. What hath

been

t^'On-^^QV — 8To> £i3-» of <any><ra!\i<;, Seoystit}* "EAAijiti t^^toTav ra,i; 7o7ak

L, ii. c. 52, 53.

* See note [DDDD] at the end of this Book.

Sect. 5.] OF IMOSES DEMONSTRATED. 241

been commonly understood l)y these words is, that in
Herodotus's opinion, the Greeks knew little or nothing
of what wc call their classical Gods, till Homer and
Hesiod tauglit them iiow they were to be marshalled,
and had assigned their several departments. A sense
not only confuted by the poems of those two writers,
who relate what they saw established in their own
times, but contradicted by what went just before, ^v here
the historian tells us that Melampm (whom Homer him-
self places three generations before the Trojan war)
first taught the Greeks the name, the rites, and the
mysteries of Bacchus*; the God last received (if we
may believe the same historian) after the Religion of
names were come in fashion. And we have no reason
' to doubt his evidence, when we see the several parts of
it so well coincide: for if JNIelampus first taught the
Greeks the worship of Bacchus, this God must needs
be the last received by them. But indeed, the whole
context excludes the common interpretation, and directs
us to one, very different. The Pelasgians (we are told)
received the religion of names from the Barbarians^
[i.e. the Egyptians]; by which, the Gods were divided
into their several classes. This new doctrine, the Pe-
lasgians conveyed down to the Greeks. But (says the
historian) the original of each God, and whether they
are all from eternity, and zvhat their several kinds and
natures are, to say the truth, they neitJier knew at that
time, nor since. He then immediately subjoins the rea-
son of their ignorance — For Homer and Hesiod — w;ere
those zvho made a Theogony for the Greeks ; gave sur-
names to the Gods; acljusted their various and specific
rites and attributes ; aiid designed and delineated their
several forms and figures : and a convincing reason it
is; for Homer's and Hesiod's being the popular and
only authorized books of Theology amongst the Crreeks,
which assign the names, the attributes, and ihe form to
each God, and their accounts being, at the same time,
overrun with fables and fictions, it was impossible even
for the Cirecks themselves to develop the confusion, and

lit ^0K£ci ^01 M£^i*jiA7ra; 0 'a^i^Geuv©' t?; Suc-i?;; TavT*)? K»
Ta AionJ<r», tots avofj-x, t'i* ^vff'trtv, tV 'SJol^^7^Tlt rS ^xf.?\S. c. 49.'

Vol. IV. R eman-

242 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

emancipate themselves from that ignorance here com-
plained of, namely^ of the true natures of their Gods :
which indeed, their Teachers seem to have known as
little of as themselves. For Homer when he speaks of
Jupiter, sometimes represents him as a God Jrorn eter-
vilij, at other times as only the head of the college of
their terrestrial Deities. This then was what Herodotus
meant to say; who is not speaking of the invextions
of Homer and Hesiod, but of their autiioritv. Whe-
ther they were the first who propagated or delivered
these things, was not the matter in question. Had it
been so, we know how Herodotus would have decided ;
who, in this very place, expressly tells us, who were
the first; namely, the Pelasgians ; who delivered them
to the Greeks; where Homer and Hesiod found them.
However, on the common interpretation, gross as it is,
Sir Isaac Newton builds one of his strongest arguments
in favour of his nezv Clnwio/ogj/. To proceed :

3. The Greeks not only borrowed the xames, but
likew^ise the symbols of the Egyptian Gods ; and fitted
them to their ow;n. A very natural superstition, as ap-
pears by the practice of the Hebrews in the wilderness ;
who, in the absence of ]Moscs, running back into Egyp-
tian idolatry, would needs worship the God of their
Fathers under an Egi/ptiun Sijmbol ; and with Egyptian
Rites likewise, and the people sat dorcn to eat and drink,
and rose up to play. Now had God, on this occasion,
persisted in the severity of his justice, where he tells
]\Ioses, that he would indeed give them the land of
Canaan, and drive out the inliabitants before them,
because he had promised Abraliam so to do, yet that
he would not honour them, as a select People, with his
peculiar protection : Had, I say, God thus cast them
off, and the people departed with their new Leader, the
GOLDEX CALF, luto Canaan ; and there made it the
visible representative of the God of their Fathers, and
woi shipj^ed it with Egyptian Rites ; who can doubt but
that tiie late posterity of this people, thus abandoned by
Ck)d, and given up ?o make and belie've a lie^ would have '
supposed that their Forefathers had worshipped Osiris,
and not Jehovah, under this golden calf? The case
needs no application.

This

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 243

This then was the whole of what Greece borroned
from Egypt in matter of religion, when it first leoiiit
the mode of Hero-worship from that superstitious people.
- But,

4. It must be owned, that soon after, they did indeed
adopt STRANGER Gods. At first the occasion was rare,
and the Worsliip particular and confined. Thus the
Athenians labouring under a destructive famine, and
relieved by Egypt with corn, did, in gratitude for that
benefit, make isis the patron- Goddess of their IVJys-
teries.

Their Migrations were another cause of this adoption :
for every region having a local tutelary Deity, the new
Colony thought themselves obliged to worship the God
of that place in which they came to settle. But, of this,
more in another place.

flowever, in process of time, the Greeks naturalized
all the greater Gods of Egypt. Yox we are to observe
that, as superstition grew in bulk, the principle of in-
tercommunity, arising from the very essence of Pa-
ganism, at length overspread all their National Reli-
gions, so as to taring things round again. ^V'e observed,
that those most early Idol gods, the Celestial liimumrics,
were common to all nations, and that Hero-zvorship
brought in the idea of local tutelary Deities : now, the
principle of intercommunity at length broke down
this incloBure, and turned all their Gods again upon the
Common,

" The grazed ox, and all her bleating Gods *."
But to be a little more particular concerning these va-
rious revolutions in the genius of Paganism. The first
idolatry was Planetary : and so long, their Gods were
in common. But Hero-worship, by bringing in local
tutelary Deities, made their Gods peculiar. As the times
grew polished, and the absurdity of mortal Gods be-
came better understood, the Managers of this super-
stition were obliged to hide their origin from Earth, and
to pretend they had ever been Celestial. This soon
wore out their peculiarity, and brought in again the
notion of their general providence : which, by means of

* Milton.

R 2 an

244

THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

an increasing superstition, ended in an universal inter-
community. To explain all these particulars, as they
deserve, would require a volume. And not much less
perhaps might be collected from what hath been occa-
sionally said of them, in the course of this \vork. Only
one attendant circumstance in these revolutions, it may
not be improper to take notice of, as it greatly contri-
buted to fix the later Greeks in their mistake concerning:
the origin of their Hero-Gods. It was this : The learned
Egyptians, as we have observed, at length contrived to
hide the deformity of their idolatry by pretending that
tlie whole had a reference to the only God. Thus
their various Bntte-zcorship, they said, was severally
relative to the various attributes of the Divinity. The
same kind of refinement they brought into their Hero-
worship : and each of their greater Gods they made
significative, some way or other, of the first Cause.
But to perfect this part of their symbolical Theology, it
was necessary to make large additions to the Legends
of those Gods. And thus the several parts of Isis's
history became relative to the divine Nature. But Isis
being now possessed of all the attributes, which happened
to be severally divided amongst the various Grecian
Goddesses, the Greeks began to think that these were
all originally derived from her. This was the established
doctrine in the time of Apuleius : who makes Isis address
herself to him in these words : E71 assiim — rerum natitra
parens — cujus mimen unicum viiiliiformi specie, ritu
vario, nomine miilt'ijiigo, iotus veneraiiir orbis. Ale
primigenii F/nyges Fessinunticam nominant Deum
matrem ; hinc AutocJiiliones Atiici Cecropiam Miner-
vam ; illinc jiuctuuntes Cyprii patriam Venerem ;
Cretes Sagitiiferi Dictynncim Diaham ; SicuU trilin-
gues Siygiwi Proserpinam ; Ekusinii vetustam Deam
Cererem ; Junonem alii^ alii Bellonam, alii Hccaten,
Rhamnusiam alii — JEgyptii ceremoniis me pfvrsus pro-
priis percokntes appellant x'ero nomine Isidem *.

Osiris too, becoming equally symbolical, made his
foi'tune in the same manner, as appears by this ancient
epigram :

* Metam. 1. xi. p. 378.

Ogygia

Sect. 5.J OF MOSES DEMONSTI^ATED. 24.^

Ogygia me Bacchum "cocat,
OsiRiN JEgyptus put at,
Alysi Phanacen nomhicmt, -
Dionyson Indi e^ristimant,
Romana Sacra Liberum,
Jrabica gens Adoneum,
Lucaniacus Pantheum *.

Thus have I explained the several causes which occa-
sioned the later Greeks to think their own Gods were
originally Egyptian; for understanding that the Rites,
the Names, and the very Symbols of their Gods were
borrowed from thence, they concluded the same of the
Gods themselves. And with good appearance of reason,
as they found too that the ages immediately preceding
theirs, had certainly adopted Egyptian Gods; Avhich
Gods had all the attributes of the Grecian. Now when
this opinion was once generally embraced, they would,
of course, invent a Legend for the Gods, conformable
to the E^ptian history of them. And thus we see the
reason why they made their Bacchus but two genera-
tions earlier than the Trojan war, of which age he was ;
and yet made him Osiris, the conqueror of India, which
he was not -f. But their more intelligent historians per-
ceived the absurdity ; and so, reasonably satisfied them-
selves in supposing a double Bacchus: but being, as
Herodotus observes, very ignorant of the true origin of
their Religion, it was a mere gratuitous solution : which
hiade it easy for Sir Isaac to evade it ; by only supposing,
in his turn, that it was their wrong notion of the high an-
ti(]uity of Egypt which made them split one Bacchus
into two. And yet in another instance, he frankly enough
allows of this ancient practice of the communication of
names ;]:. But he gives the fact reversed ; for they were
the earlier Greeks who worshipped two Bacchus's. And
it was late, as we find by Diodorus, ere they incor-

* Ausonius, Ep. xxx.

t See note [EEEE] at the end of this Book.

t The Phenicians, upon their first coming into Greece, gave the
name of Jao-pater, Jupiter, to every king. Chron. of Ancient Kings
amended, p. 150.

R 3 porated

240 THE DH^IXE LEGATION [Book IV

porated them into one *. Now had the cause of their
duality been ^^hat the great writer supposes, the fact
had been just contrary ; and earlier times had worshipped
om Bacchus, and the later, tico. The truth of the case
then is this : when they first worshipped Hero-Gods,
they had but one Bacchus and one Hercules, &c. and
these were Grecian: when they afterivards borrowed
tlie Egyptian Gods, they had two of each. And this
is not said at random ; for Herodotus t and Diodorus %
expressly tell us, that two Bacchus's and two Hercules s
were worshipped by different Rites, and as Gods of dif-
ferent original, the one Grecian, the other Egyptian.
And at length, for the causes explained under the next
head, the two of each were again reduced to one. For
we shall now see, that design as well as mistake contri-
buted to confound the Grecian Bacchus \\\\.\\ the Egyp-
tian.

III. For our illustrious Author makes another use of
the Grecian mythology, to support his system. He
examines the genealogies of their Gods and Heroes ;
and finds them to coincide exactly with the time of
SososTRisjj: A farther evidence of the truth of his
hypotliesis.

There are but few cases in which one would seriously
admit the testimony of a Mythologist. Least of all,
in settling of dates. The most learned of the moderns

complain

TK,- ra •arpV£;£ri5S ■=r^a|.-ic- oioTTEj) tb; METAFENEZTEPOYS oty^fuva^,
AINOOYNTAS raX^Sf;, ■crXacjjfisjIa!; ot iii t»!v Ojx«»t^ia>j itxyiyovitxi
tofniaai Aioivjoy. L. iv. p. 148.

■f — Kat ooKiaat c) /aoi 8Toi opSoTotla E?>A^jiw» ■sjoi/ii)', 01 Si^x Hfccxhini
• JgtiCTa/iExoj ty%>ixi' ru ^£», AQANATfli OXyfcTTio) SI Eywu'/xij;*, Svaci"

S' htfO), ae"H^a{, Itxyi^nffi. Herod. 1. ii. c. 44.

I Mv&o^.oyiiri SI tive; tricot Aiinverov yifotsitu •BJo^^■ roT^ ^po*o»5
flTfoTf^SvIa Tara. (pxat yap tx Ats? x^ n£f<r£^o»i; Aioi/vaoy yiyta^ai, Toy vvi
Ti;i.> ZaSi^io efOjLta^o^Evov" a t'jj' t£ 7/»e5-i>, xJ ra; Stiria;, xj Tt^aj
NYKTEPINAZ xJ KPYC>IAZ 'SJu^inrxync-i, cia Tr.y altr^ritw -rriv Ix rSf
^^►Bs-ia; E7raJ^o^a6a5■a?. Died. 1. IV. p. 148. These nightly and secret
llites shew them to be Lgyptian. As for what is said of the other
Bacchus's being the son ot Proserpine, this was only a fancy of the
Greeks, on observ ing the mysteries of Bacchus and those of Ceres or
Isis to have a great resemblance : but this was only occasioned by
their being loth Egyptian Rites.

II Page 191. & seq. of the Chron. of Ancient King<Joms amended.

Sect. 5 ] OF lAIOSES DEMONSTRATED. 247

complain greatly of tiiem for confounding all time in
their pretended relations of fact. The excellent bishop
Stillingfleet thus expresseth hin^sclf : JVc see those
[Thucydides and Plutarch, whose confession he had
(juotedj xclio zcere best able to judge oj tlie Greek Anti-
quities^ can Jind no sure jootbig to stand on in them ; and
what basis can we find for our faith, xchere they could
find so little for their knowledge ? And those zcho hare
been more daring and Tciiturous than these pei^sons men-
tioned, xvhat a labyrinth have they ru)i themselves into ?
How many co? fusions and contradictions have they in-
volved themselves in? sometimes writing the passages
of other countries for those of Greece, and at other
times so confounding times, persons, and places, that
one might think they had only a design upon the under-
standings of their readers, to make tliem play at blinds
man's buff in searching for the kings of Greece *. And
the candid and accurate bishop Cumberland speaks
so much to our purpose, that I shall add his words to
the foregoing: llieir mythic writers co) found and lose
all the times of their Gods; which advantage divers
Christians make use of against them : and this xcas a
good argwncnt ad liominem, as it is called, but is not
sufficient to prove, that idolatry, and the heathen Gods,
are qj' s,o late ax original, as some, both Heathen
and Christians, have affirmed them to be -f. Now
though, in answer to what Sir Isaac Newton brings from
such writers, it were enough to say, a\ ith those w ho have
considered their character before me, that they arc so
perplexed, contradictory, and infinitely fabulous, that
nothing certain can be gathered from their accounts,
for the regulation of ancient time ; yet that they may
never appear again amongst w itnesses of credit, or be
heard in matters of fact, 1 shall endeavour to shew, from
what sources those accounts arose, from which the low
date of the Egyptian Gods is inferred : w hence it will
appear that they are a heap of fictions, invented and
contrived, as usual, only for the support of greater.

1. The first source Avas the address of the Egyptian"
PRIESTS, to screen their Hero-worship from the inqui-

* Orig. Sacr. p. 41. 8th edit,
t Sanchoniatho, p. 13-2, 133.

R 4 sition

248 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

sition of the curious. We have observed, from a fa-
mous fable, invented by these men * to record the
danger which this superstition incuned, and from tlieir
art in evading that danger, that the original of their
Hero-Gods was a subject maliciously pursued by the
Free enquirers of those times. For the discredit at-
tendiiig this superstition was, that these Gods had been
:mex ; and the proof of their humanity was taken from
their late existence. Now w hat did these Masters in
their trade do, to evade this evidence? We have seen
before what they did to obscure the enquiry. ^Vhy, by
an equal eftbrt of their skill, they invented a set of fables
(one of w hich has been examined above) concerning these
Gods : which brought their births even lou er dou n than
to the times of their established worship. A^'hat they
gained by this was considerable : They threw a general
confusion over the \vhole historv of these Gods : and in
a short time made men as indisposed to give credit to
the old stories of them (from Avlience the dangerous truth
of their humanity might he collected) as these iietv
fables, which it was impossible they should believe, for
the reason just now assigned. Hence, the first source
of the luii- dates of these Hero-Gods.

2. The second, was the extravagant vanity of the
Greeks in pretending, at length, to be original even to
the Egyptians themselves. For we are to observe, that
there were three distinguished periods in the Religion of
Civilized Greece ; two of vvhich we have described
already. The first was, when the Greeks borrowed
Egyptian liites and Ceremonies to adorn their own
Hero-gods : the second, when they adopted the very
Egyptian Gods : and the third, when, on the contrar}',
they p4-etendcd that tlie Egyptians had adopted Theirs.
On their first acquaintance with Egypt, they were modest,
and lairly allowed its superior Antiquity. But as they
advanced in arts and empire, they grew intoxicated with
their good fortune ; and v\ould now contend w ith Egypt
(become by this time as much fallen and depressed in
both) for the honour of priority ; and soon after (as

* The fable I mean is that of Typbon's persecution of the Gods
ajid their flight into Egypt ; which the Greeks borrowed and fitted
iip with their own names of the Gods,

was

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 249

was no wonder when they had ventured so far), with all
the rest of mankind *. And then it was, that having,
before this time, thoroughly confounded the Grecian
and Egyptian Bacchus with design (a confusion first oc-
casioned by mistake) they invented many fables to coun-
tenance their absurd pretensions. Hence their idle tale
of Apis, the son or grandson of Phoroneus, becoming
Osiris; without any other reason in the world than
that the son of Phoroneus chanced to have the same
name with the symbol of Osiris. Hence, again, the
fable of lo, the daughter of Inachus, becoming Isis ;
for scarce so good a reason ; only an approaching simi-
litude of names. Yet these two wretched fables, Sir
Isaac Newton (surprising as it is) hath drawn in for the
main supports of his hypothesis •\. But as much credit
as his countenance hath given to them, he who can sup-
pose lo to be stolen out of Greece, carried into Egypt,
and there made a Goddess, may as well believe an Eu-
ropean ship to be now busied in bringing hither an
Indian savage to be made a queen.

But another story of the same stamp, carries its con-
futation along with it, as Herodotus rightly observed \.
For, to bring Hercules, as they had done Isis and
Osiris, out of Greece into Egypt, in a manner suitable
to his character, they pretended that, when he had
\ landed on that inhospitable shore, and was led by the
Natives, crowned with garlands, to be offered up at the
altar of Jupiter, he broke loose from his leaders, and
slaughtered all who were assembled for the Sacrifice :
and in tliis rough manner, I suppose, taught them to
abolish those inhuman rites, and to worship their chas-
tiser as a God : which M ould seem to have been the
first bringing in of club-law into Religion. But, as
Flerodotus observes, the inventor of this table hath laid
his story so ill together, that he hath only betrayed his
own ignorance of Egyptian Manners. For, from the

* A(r#6*»«i7t ^' ai'Taj tk twk 'EA>ii»6;ii Kstlap^ufjialx, eclf)' m fAV on ye
(ptJiocro^ia, e(,Xf\a, ytv%' «i/9§w7rw» ^p|e, Ba^Sagoi; wgoi^aTrloylsj. Dio-
genes Laertius, Prooem. Segm. 3.

t Page 19'i. of his Chronology.

aV'tIo') 4'C' ii. c. 45.

most

2,50

THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

most early time, the inhabitants of the Nile were so far
from offering up human victims, that they held it un-
lawful to sacrifice above three or four species of animals.
l>ut the Egyptians owed them a good turn for this slander
of liumon sacrijices ; and indeed paid them with usury.
For Herodotus tells us, the Priests informed him, that
when Menelaus went to Egypt to enquire after Helen,
and lay wind-bound in their ports, he cut up two
children of the natives, to divine by their entrails *.

This humour of priority was so rooted in the Greeks,
that Diodorus seems to insinuate, they always disputed
it with the Egyptians -f . And so far indeed is true, that
it was one of their most early vanities J : and though
afterwards, on their most intimate acquaintance with
Egypt, it was in some degree corrected, yet it burst out
again, and lasted, as we see, even to the time of Dio-
genes Laertius. But this is the pleasant part of the story ;
The Egyptians were not content to complain, as well
they might, that the Greeks had stolen away their Gods
and Heroes ; but they would needs make reprisals on
them. Thus, as Diodorus tells us, when they charged
the Greeks with taking av\ ay their Isis, to aggravate the
theft they pretended that Athens itself was originally but
an Egyptian Colony ||. This was a home stroke : but
the Greeks as handsomely returned it ; by affirming that
one of the Egyptian pyramids was built by Rhodope, a
Grecian whore ^. This setting up one false claim to
oppose another, was in the very spirit of ancient Pa-
ganism **. So again, the Egyptians maintaining that
civilized Greece was indebted for the mode of Hero-
worship to them ; did, in order to support a just claim,
which wanted none of these arts, pretend to Antiquity

* AetQiv yap Svo ■araiJia oLvo^iuv iici-^to^iint, iPioy.ci <T(piX Ivolriirt . Herod.

1. ii. c. 1 10.

Tli^l SI T?; Ta (Sla rr/iii/ yiva^ u»^a,ioz'fi['^ a fj.o>ov a^^iirWafTiv
"£ ?i»ve;, aXAa k^.itoXXo* tuiv Ba^Saoii/ lavlaj a.ino)(^ovx<i >^iU!\f;. — p. 6.
X See § 3. pp. 84 & seq.

li Kai Ta? 'A9/)>aia{ St (pa<J■^v aTreixaj lUxi 'L»iTu\i tuv i| Alyvwiis,
Died. p. 17.

5[ See note [FFFF] at the end of this Book.

** In the former part of this work wheie we have shewn, that the
Converts from Gentihsm unhappily practised it even after they had
professed a Religion which condemns all vhe ohlique arts of falsehood,
and unjust retaliation.

most

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 251

most extravagantly A'/i^//. The Greeks, not to be l)cliind-
haiul with thein, and to support a false claim which did
want these sort of arts, having protended that the Egyp-
tians borrowed all from them, brought down the age of
these disputed Gods as much too low. Unluckily, the
great Author, who saw the unreasonable Antiquity of
the one system, did not advert to the unreasonable No-
velty of the other.

13ut we are not to think the Greeks firm and steady
in this natural consequence of their unjust pretensions.
Nothing is so inconstant as falsehood. When, therefore,
on tlie issue, it was seen that all the Records of former
times codtradictcd this novelty; and, consequently, that
tlieir darling claim itself was likely to be in danger, they
shifted their support, and then contended, in imitation
of the Egyptians, for as extravagant an Antiquity *.

IV". Hitherto Sir Isaac Newton was drawn in by
Antiquity ; which had sunk with him, and foundered
in the treacherous soil of Mythology. But the greatest
part of his reasoning, from these Genealogies, stands
upon an error of his own. The age preceding the de-
struction of Troy is full of the loves and intrigues of the
greater Divinities : who supplied that expedition from
their own loins with Demi-Gods once removed. Sir
Isaac, who supposed, as indeed he well might from
physical observation, that the Gods left off getting
children when they died, concludes, from the mythologic
accoiuit of their Offspring, that they must needs have
lived but two or three generations before the war of
Troy. But our great Philosopher took this tiling a deal
too seriously. The truth is, he concerned himself no
farther with the fabulous history of ancient times than
just served the purpose of his system. Otherwise, he
might have found, on the most cursory survey, that one
ot the essential attributes of a Pagan God was the getting
of Bastards : and that, for one he fairly had in lite, his
worshippers fathered an hundred upon him after his
decease. This amorous commerce between Heaven and

a<p a yiyotuq E^yj»i;9/) woAe^^ tok S' vttI^ ' H^ax>.£iai; r^Aa? e'Iw xctlotuSa-t
ToK ekIs? v/ao-tv' oil uSi, ^iXTtt^a'imv' Tuiy fjXv uv vjJe i oju'Xk a^yQjg-a.
t^'Bu^K Tov wo?.£^»v ofawo?t£/xw«<7a tA''ye%. I'latO, vol. ill. p. lo8. E.

Earth

252 Tlffi DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Earth never ceased till near the latest times of Paganism ;
as we learn from the primitive Apologists ; who, referring
to their perpetual intrigues in niythologic story, rally the
idolaters, of their time, with great vivacity, on the de-
■crepid old age and sudden debility of their Gods.

It being then notorious that, in the later ages of Pa-
ganism, Earth swarmed as thick with the progeny of
Heaven, as in the early times of that religion, Heaven
swarmed with the progeny of Earth, Sir Isaac's calcu-
lation, from the time of the sons and grandsons of the
Gods, what must needs be their own, is altogether fal-
lacious. But as, in this inquiry, we have still attempted
to account for the fables of Antiquity, in order to detect
their various impostures, and prevent their future mis-
chief, we shall now consider the original of those in
question,

1. The first cause of this doubly-spurious Offspring,
was the contrivance of wives to hide their adultery ; of
virgins to excuse their incontinence ; and of parents to
cover the dishonour of their House *. The God bore
the blame, or rather the Mortal reaped the glory ; and
Passion, as is usual, was advanced into Piety. Great
men too, employed it, (for then Great men had some
regard for their Race and Name) to conceal the igno-
miny of a low-born commerce. In a word, both sexes
soon learnt the sweets of a holy intrigue ; where a pre-
tended converse with a God or Goddess preserved the
reputation of the weaker, and procured power and au-
thority to the stronger sex. Sometimes the pretended
amour was mutually concerted between the real parties :
as that of Anchises and a Country wench ; who, in regard
to his honour, was to pass for a Venus. So Homer f :

" Divine jEneas brings the Dardan race,
" Anchises' son by Venus' stol'n embrace ;
" Bom in the shades of Idas secret grove,
" A mortal mixing with the Queen of Love,"

I\Ir. Pope,

* See note [GGGG] at the end of this Book.

"iJ/j; xy/ifjLoTcn, Be-i $^ol2 ivtri^utra. I^. f. ver. 819.

Yet this is one of the instances Sir Isaac brings 10 prove the low agft
of the Goddess Venus. See p, 191. of his Chronology.

And,

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DE^IONSTRATED. 253

And, ill a much later age, the Wife of Philip of IMa-
cedon and her Court-gallant. Sometimes again, one of
the parties was deceived by the mask of divinity which
the other liad impiously assumed, as seems to have been
the case of Astioch^ * :

*' Two valiant brothers rule th' undaunted throng,

*' lalmen and Ascalapus the strong :

" Sons of Astioche the heavenly fair,

*' Whose virgin charms subdu'd the God of war :

" In Actors court, as she retire! to rest,

" The strength of Mars the blushing maid comprest."

Mr. Pope.

And of the priestess Pthea.

- Quem Rhea Sacerdos

VvMTivvn partu s-uM luminis edidit auras,
- - - Mista Deo Mulier \.

And of Alcmene the mother of Hercules. It was cer-
tainly the case of the virtuous Paulina, in the reign of
Tiberius : ^vho, being made to believe that the God
Anubis was fallen in love v, ith her, went to the appointed
assignation with a mind equally balanced by conjugal
chastity and superstition. The story is very curious,
and told by Josephus '\. in all its circumstances. In
short, if we may believe Ovid, who was exquisitely
skilled in the mythologic story, this was one of the most
common covers of lust and concupiscence. The pre-
tended nurse of Semele is made to caution her mistress
agianst the addresses of Jupiter, in the following manner :

Opto

Jupiter lit sit, ait; Metuo t amen omnia, multi
Nomine Divorum thalamos iniere punicos ||.

2. Another cause was the an)bition of the pretenders
themselves to heavenly birth, in order to support their
authority amongst their barbarous subjects or followers.

Thus

On? TexEK Arvoy^ft, So/AO) "AxIs^o; 'A^i'tSao,
na§9£i'(^ AIAOIH, lirt^uiov ila-avK,Qa,a-iXy

A^-ijiX^allfZ' 0 01 wa^EAf'lalo AAWPH. U. |3. ver. 512.

t JEn. 1. vii. ver. 659. See Dionys. llalicarn. Aiitiq. Rom. 1. i. p. 62.
:!: Antiq. Jud. 1. xviii. c. 3, See, for this general practice, Herod
1. i. c. 181.

II Metara. I. iii. fab. 3.

254 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Thus we are told, that the two Amazon queens, Mar-
thesia and Lauipcto, gave out that they were the
daughters of jNIars, we siicces,sibus dccssct aiictoritus (says
the historian) genitas sc ]\Iarte prccdkabant *. And
thus Romulus and Remus pretended to tlie same re-
lation : But this matter is explained more at large in the
discourse on the ancient Lawgivers f.

3. A third cause was the flattery of sycophants and,
corrupt Courtiers. To this practice Clepolemus alludes,
in his address to Sarpcdon :

" Know thy vain self, ?:or kt thdr jlatt'ry move,
" Who style thee son of cloud -compelling Jov£.
*' How far unlike those chiefs of race divine !
" How vast the diff'rence of their deeds and thine X ! "

Mr. Pope,

4. A fourth cause was a mere figure of speech com-
mon in the eastern phraseology : which, to express the
qualities of the subject, called a prudent and powerful
monarch || the son of Jupiter ; a violent and inhuman
ravager or an expert and able seaman, the son of
Neptune ** ; a sharper, a banker, or a large trader, the

son

* Justin. Ilist.l. ii. c. 4. f Div. Leg. Book ii.^^.

I 'Vvj^ojAUoi cri (fixer) Ato; yotoii aXyio^oio

Oi Aio; i^iysnorlo ettJ ■m^oli^ay ui^^u^av- W e, ver. 635.

j| The words of Callimachus, in his Hymn to Jupiter, are so ap-
posite to our purpose, that the learned reader will not lliink them
quoted impertinently ;

Ttypfvifi; S AfT®-' tTTciy^ri^cc; Je p^tlan;;

' AfitiJ.i^®'' <t><ii5a Je, >,v^»; iir il^irai; oiaa;.

'Ex oe At05 j3a<7»A-^£5* ETTii Aio; is^\v a,va,;t\u)i

©EioTE^ov. Ver. 76, & seq.

^ Priestantissimos virtute, prudentia, viribus, Jovis Jilios, poetae
appellaverunt, ut iEacum, ftlinoa, & Sarpedona : Ferocissimos et
immanes et alienos ab omni humanitate tanquam e mai-i genitos,
Neptuni filios dixerunt, Cyclopa, & Cercyona, &. Scyrona, &
Lsestrvgonas. A. Gellius, lib. xv. c. 21.

** Thus in the Argonautic expedition Typhis the pilot, and his
mate Ergynus, were called the sons of Neptune. And when these
died in the voyage, they were succeeded by Anca;us and Euphemus ;
and both of these, we are told, were the sons of Neptune, likewise.
I chose to give the reader this instance, because, from this figure of
speech, thus qualifying men any way distinguished in the Argonautic
liraes^ Sir Isaac Newton infers the low age of the Grecian Deities.

Sect. .5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 255

son of Mercury ; a cultivator of the fine arts, the son
of Apollo ; a great warrior, the son of Mars ; a beau-
tiful woman, the daughter of V^enus ; and a good phy
sician, tiie offspring of vEsculapius. Thus Homer,

" In thirty sail the sparkling waves divide,
" Which Podalirius and Machaon guide.
" To these his skill their P«mz^-G'of/-i mparts,
" Divine professors of the healing arts *."

Mr. Pope,

And that the poet meant no more than that they were
excellent in their profession, appears from his giving
to all the Egyptians the same original, where, speaking
of their superior eminence in the art of physic, he
says,

" These drugs, so friendly to the joys of life,

" Bright Helen learn'd from Thone s imperial wife ;

" Who sway'd the sceptre, where prolific Nile
With various simples clothes the fatned soil' —

" From PcEon sprung, their patron God imparts

" To all the Pharian race his healing arts -f /'

Mr. Fextcn.

5. The last cause I shall mention were the dotages
of judicial Astrology. But whether giving to eacli of
their Gods a Star over which to preside was the cause
or effect of this folly, may be disputed ; because, 1 be-
lieve, it was sometimes one, and sometimes the other.
Yet it gave frequent occasion to call an extraordinary
person the son of that God or Goddess under whose
planet he was bom.

Thus have I endeavoured to discover and lay open
the true causes of all that confusion which goes under
the name of the History of the heroic ages. Those false
facts, therefore, and the mistaken conclusion drawn from
them by Sir Isaac Newton to support the identity of
Osiris and Sesostris, being detected, general tradition,
which vouches for their real diversity, is reinstated in

Tut aifl r,ye.i7^riV A(rxA)7Wi5 tva isx7^s,

ToK ^' rqtiiKatlci yXct^v^xi tie; Iri^owtlo. I^. /2. ver. 73 I .

Ai^euitvf' 5 yaf Yl»kr,iiiio<i ilji yEVjfl^ijj. q}. viir. 231.

its

256 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

its credit: whose testimony likewise, as I have gone
along, I have not neglected occasionally to support by
divers corroborating circumstances.

I might indeed have taken a very different route through
this Land of Fables, to the confutation of his hypothesis ;
by opposing adventure to adventure, and genealogy to
genealogy ; and have formed upon them, as others have
done before me, a system of chronology directly opposite
to our illustrious Author's. But this, instead of relieving
the reader, would only have put him in mind of the old
man's complaint ; Ijicertior sum multo quam dudum.
I have therefore attempted a way of greater certainty,
in an explanation of the general principles and practices
of ancient Superstition ; of which, their mythologic his-
tory was the fruits : And by this it appears that all
these pretended Facts, on which Sir Isaac Newton sup-
ports his hypothesis of the identity of Osirts and Sesos-
TRis, are mere Fables, invented to confound all times
and aeras, and therefore most unhappily chosen for one
of the means of regulating and reforming the ancient
Chronology.

III.

But although I could have given no reasonable ac-
count of these mistaken facts, from which Sir Isaac
Newton infers the identity, I was still able to prove the
falsehood of that supposed identity, by the consequences
that follow from it : not only by those which our great
Author would not, but by those which he would, ven-
ture to admit. Both of which directly contradict scrip-
ture and the nature of things. So that, as before
I proved the error of his conclusion from the falsehood of
his premisses ; I now begin at the other end, and shall
prove the falsehood of his premisses from the error of his
conclusion.

I. I have, in the third and fourth sections of this book,
shewn at large, from sacred Scripture, illustrated and
confirmed by profane Antiquity, that Egypt was a polite
and powerful Empire at the egression of the Israelites.
This is alone sufficient to overthrow Sir Isaac Newton's
whole system. But to make the truth still more evident,
it may be proper to take a particular, though short, view
of the necessary consequences which follow from the sup-
posed

Sect. 5-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 1257

posed identity of Osiris and Scsostris. These may be
divided into two parts ; such as our great author hath
ventured to ou n ; and such as, for their apparent falseliood,
he was obliged to pass over in silence.

To begin with the latter. Those very histories on
■which Sir Isaac builds his identity, tell us that Osiris
and his wife and sister Isis were the professed patron
and patroness of nascent arts, the very instruments of
husbandry being invented in their time; that he first
tauyht the culture of the vine * ; and abolished the bad
habit, his savage Subjects had of eating one another :
and that she taudit them to sow corn 'I ; and gave them
their first system of laws||. — But if Osiris vi^ere Sesostris,
all these fine discoveries were made but two generations
before the 'JVojan war, and full five hundred years after
the egression of the Israelites from Egypt : And then
w hat are we to thuik of the Bible ? But the gross absur-
dity of these things hijidered our Author from receiving
them into the consequences of his new system : yet these
standing on the same authority with the consequences,
he hath thought fit to receive, he was obliged to pass
them over in silence. But though he be silent, we
should not. On the contrary, we must insist that he
hath transgressed the plainest rules of fair reasoning,
which required him, either to receive the consequences
he hath rejected, or to reject those which he hath re-
ceived ; or lastly, to shew, that they stand upon a dif-
ferent authority. But he will do nothing of this ; he
picks and chuses as he likes best, and, what is not for
his purpose, he leaves without notice, l^iodorus says,
that Osiris abolished the custom of human sacrifices;

* 'Ev^ilit J uvrov ytve<r6xi ^»<A tS? a^TrcAa •crif't rh' Vva-av, rif
ffyactat rS TavTU? xa^TrS •apoaiirtvornra^la., w^wtoi' oUai x^vt^asQcct xj

c"m, x^ tiir i7vfiioijiiSr)ii xvt5 Xj' T^grjiriv. t)ipd. SlC. 1. i. p. lO.

■f" neuron yxp 'mxv(7-xi t«? aAAjjXo^ayia; to t5> av^^uTtuv y:ei^.
I(].p. g.

X Ev^uar; fAt To» T£ T« <av^a xj t?? xpS?? xapTror, {(pvofMvoii

av^^uiriiiv) TB St Ocip^©- i'lCtvQintTafA.ens Tvtv tbtoiv -/.xli^yxijixv Tan xxfTruf.
Id. ib.

II QiTtxi Si ^acri »o^.iH{ T^K "icriii, xaO' S; a?.>i^Aoi; StSonxi TS; «»9^«^a?
TO SiKXtov xj T?? a6iVft» xj vQ^euf is»Cg-xa-l)xi, Six to» «9ro T?f T»/Afc-

^la? <poQ6i. Id, ib.

Vol. IV. S that

258 THE DIVINE LEGATION [BooklV.

that he built the city of Thebes ; that he regulated the
worship of the Gods; and conquered many nations.
These things Sir Isaac, who takes Osiris for Sesostris,
readily admits. The same historian says, that this
Osiris first cultivated the vine ; restrained his Subjects
from eating one another; and found out the arts of life;
that his wife Isis invented agriculture, and gave the first
law to the Egyptians ; but all this. Sir Isaac tacitly re-
jects. Yet if one part of the Sicilian's account be of
better authority than the rest, it is that, ^^'hich says,
Isis mt'ented agricidtiirt : for he expressly tells us, "that
so it was found written on a large column, in hierogly-
phic characters, half consumed by time, then standing
in the city of Nysa in Arabia * : and, without his telling,
Me are well assured, that her ?}2i/steries had very early
brought the knowledge of the fact to all the neighbouring
nations.

II. Amongst the consequences which the great Au-
thor hath thought fit to admit ; some are these, That
iustruments of war; hoy^ses for mHitarif service ; animal
food; the exact distributioti of property^ alphabetic
letters; and the zvell-pcopling of Egypt; were all the
pi'oduct of the Sesostrian age.

I . Vulcan, • he says, who lived even to the times of
the Trojan war, invented Armour, and was, on that
account, deified by the Egyptians. His words are these,
He [Vulcan] reigned tliere [in Cyprus and Byblus] till
a very great age, living to the times of the Trojan war,
and becoming e receding rich — And for assistiyig the
Egyptia7is zcith armour, it is probable, that he was dei-
fied by his friends the Egyptians, by the name of Baal-
Canaan or Vulcafi : for I'^ulcan was celebrated princi-
pally by the Egyptians, and was a king, according to
Homer, and reigned in Lemnos; and Ciiiyras was an
inventor of arts, and found out copper in Cyprus, and
the smith's hammer, and anvil, and tongs and laver ;
and employed workmen in making armour, and other
things of brass and iron, and was the 07ily king cele-
brated in history for working in metals, and was king

H'lc. 1. i. p. i6.

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 259

of Leinnos, and the husband of Venus ; all which arc the
characters of Vulcan : and the Egyptians about the
time (f the deatli of Cinyras, viz. in the reign of' their
king Amenophis, built a very sumptuous temple at Mem-
phis to Vulcan, pp. 223—225. Here we have a Hero,
living till the time of the Trojan war, not only the in-
ventor of arms, but likewise of the very tools employed
in making them. That this was our Author's meaning,
is plain from what he tells us of the Egyptians fighting
with clubs in the time of Sesostris (p. 215) ; vv^hich cer-
tainly was for want of better weapons : and still plainer,
from what he tells of Vulcan's being made a God ; which,
certainly, was for a new Invention. If I should
now shew, by a formal enumeration of particulars, how
all here said, contradicts the bible, the reader would
think me disposed to trifle with him. Instead of this,
I shall but just observe, how ill it agrees with Homer:
who seems, indeed, to make Vulcan the Patron-God of
the Armourers, but, at the same time, makes both him,
and the invention, the product of a much earlier age.
From the poem of the Trojan war it appears that mili-
litary weapons had been then of tried use ; and Vulcan,
and his wife Venus, Deities of long standing. Nor can it
be objected that the poet hath here given us the picture
of his own times. He was a stricter observer of deco-
rum : as may be seen amongst other instances, from a
celebrated one taken notice of by the critics, that though,
in his days. Cavalry were common, yet he brings none
to the siege of Troy, because those times had not yet
learnt their use. Nor was he less knowing than exact ;
for he was possessed of the songs and poems of his an-
cestors; in which he found all the ])articulars of that
famous expedition *. Now, if military weapons, at the
time of the Trojan war, had been long in use amongst
the Greeks, it is hardly possible they should have been
just invented in Egypt.

2. Our author makes Scsostris's conquest of Libya
the occasion of furnishing Egypt v.ith Horses, After
the conquest of Libya (says he) by which Egypt zvas
furnished with horses, and furnished Solomon and his
friends, he prepared a fleet, &c. p. 21.5. The illus-

* See note [HIIHIl] at the end of this Book.

S 2 trioLis

26o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

trious Writer is here speaking of the original of tliose
civil advantages, for which ancient Eg3'pt was so much
celebrated. He had before, and afterwards, told us his
thoughts of their astt^onomy, navigation, letters, names,
and u eapom of uar. ^Ve cannot therefore but under-
stand what he here says, of tlie Libyan horses, to mean,
that the conquest of that country was the first occasion
of Egypt's abounding in Horse. But this directly con-
tradicts holy Scripture, which assures us that they
abounded in Horse long before. Their pursuit of tl\e
Israelites is thus described, — Jnd Pharaoh nuide ready
his chariot, and took his people zcith him. And he took
six hundred chosen chariots, and all the chariots of
Egypt, and captains over every one of them. — The
Egyptians pursued after them ( all the horses and cha-
riots of Pharaoh and his horsemen and his army.) —
And the Egyptians pursued after them to the midst of
the sea, even all Pharaoh^s horses, his chariots and his
horsonen*. Sir Isaac (p. 167.) seems to have been
aware cf this evidence against him, and endeavours to
turn it on the side of his hypothesis. In the days of
-\IosES (says he) all the chariots of Egypt, with u hich
Pharaoh pursued Israel, were but six hundred.
E.iod. xiv. 7. This is a strange mistake. The six hun-
dred, mentioned in the place quoted, are expressly said
to be the chosen chariots, that is, the king's guard i for
over and above these, all the chariots of Egypt, an in-
definite nuniber, were in the pursuit Besides, the
number of horses is not to be estimated fi^om the cha-
riots, because there was an army of horsemen likewise in
this expedition.

However, by Sir Isaac's own confession, it appears
that Egypt abounded w ith Plorse much earlier than the
time he here assigns. For the vast number of Phiiistim
Horse brought into the field, in the second year of the
reign of Saul, in an army consisting of thirty thousand
chariots and six tliousand horsemen, came all, in our
authors opinion, from Egypt. Tlie Canaanites (says
he) had their Horses from Egypt ; and— from the great
army of the Philistims against Saul, and the great
mimber of their Horses, I seem to gather that the
* E.\od. xiv. 6, 7—9 — 23,

shepherds

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 261

shepherds had newly rel'mqu 'whed Egypt, and joined
them. p. 167. — Now if they had such plenty of horse
in the time of Saul, how was it that they were first fur-
nished from Libya in the time of Sesac ?

But another circumstance in sacred History will shew
us, that Egypt, which supplied Canaan, abounded in
Horse still much earlier. In the law of Moses, we find
this prohibition, personally directed to their future
King : he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause
the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he
SHOULD multiply HORSES: forusmuch as the Lord
hath said unto you. Ye shall henceforth return no more
that way*. Now the reason, here given, being to pre-
vent all commerce with Egypt, we must conclude, if it
appear that Egypt, at this time, supplied other nations
with horses, that the law extended to their Judges as
well as Kings. But they did supply other nations. For
we find the confederate Canaanites (who, by Sir Isaac's
confession, had their horses from Egypt) warring against
Joshua, they and all their hosts with them, much people,
even as the sand that is upon the sea- shore in multitude,
with Horses and chariots very many f . The law there-
fore did certainly respect the Judges. And the rea-
soning is confirmed by fact. For Joshua, when he had
defeated these confederate hosts, houghed their Horses
and burnt their chariots with fire \, according to the
commandment of the Lord : observing it in the same ri-
gorous manner in which it was obeyed by their Kings,
to whom the law was personally addressed : For thus
Ahab destroyed the horses and chariots of Benhadad jj.
So that I now conclude the other way from this Law,
that a general traffic with Egypt for Horses was very
common in the times of Moses and Joshua. Conse-
quently Egypt was not furnished with Horses from
Libya in the time of Sir Isaac Newton's Sesostris.

But it may give strength to this argument, as well as
light to the sacred Text, to inquire more particularly into
the reasons of this prohibition; which we shall find
so weighty and various as to appear worthy of its Au-
thor, and accommodated only to a Law of divine ori-
ginal.

• Deut. xvii. 16. f Jos. xi. 4.

X Jos. xi. 9. II 1 Kings XX. 21.

S3 1. The

a62 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

1. The first reason (which was expressly delivered
^vith the Law) is, properly, religious. He [the King],
says the Law, shall not nniltiply Horses to himself, nor
cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he
should multiply Horses: forasmuch as the Lord hath said
unto y()U, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way ;
i. e. He should not establish a body of Cavalry, because
this could not be effected without sending into Egypt,
Avith which people the Lord had forbidden any commu-
nication, as, of all foreign commerce, that was the most
dan<2;erous to true Religion*.

When Solomon had violated this Law, and multiplied
Horses to such excess that, we are told, he had forty
thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and txcelte
thousand Horscmen'\, it was soon attended with those
fatal consequences which the Law had foretold. For
this wisest of Kings having likewise, in violation of
another La^v of Moses, married Pharaoh's daughter ;{:,
(the early fruits of this commerce) and then, by a repe-
tition of the same crime, but a transgression of another
law, had espoused more strange women || ; they first of
all, in defiance of a fourth Law, persuaded him to build
them idol Temples for their use ; and afterwards, against
a fifth Law, still more fundamental, brought him to
erect other Temples for hisown^. Now the original
of all this misehief was the forbidden traffic with Egypt
for Horses : For thither, w e are told, the agents of So-
lomon were sent to mount his Cavalry. And Solomon
gathered chaiiots and horsemen : and he had a thousand
and four hundred chariots, and twelve thousand horse-
men, "which he placed in the chariot- cities, and with the
liing at Jerusalem — And he had Horses brought out of
Egypt, aiul linen-yam: the kings merchants received
the linen-yarn at a price. And they fetcht up and
brought fort J i out of Egypt a chariot for six hundred
shekels of silver, and an Horse for an hundred and
ffty*'^. Nay, this great King even turned factoi' for
the neighbouring monarchs. And so brought they out
Horses for all the kings of the Hittites, and for the

* See the next section. t i Kings iv. 26. J lb. iii. 1.
II 1 Kings xi. 1. 5[ lb. xi. 7, 8.

** 2 Chron.'i. 16, 17.

kings

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 263

kings of Syria by their means *. This opprobrious
commerce M as kept up by his Successors ; and attended
■with the same pernicious consequences. Isaiah, with
his usual majesty, denounces the mischiefs of tliis traffic ;
and foretels that one of the good effects of leaving it,
would be the forsaking their idolatries. Wo to them
that go dozvn to Egypt for help, and stay on Houses,
and trust i?i chariot s^ because they are many; and in
HORSEMEN, bccausc they are very strong: but they
look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the
Lord. — For thus hath the Lord spoken unto me, Like
as the lion, and the young lion roaring on his prey,
when a multitude of shepherds is called forth against
him, he will not be afraid of their voice, nor abase him-
self for the noise of them: so shall the Lord of Hosts
come down to fght for mount Zion, and for the hill
thereof — Turn ye unto him from whom the children of
Israel have deeply revolted. For in that day every man
shall cast away h is idols of silver, and his idols of gold,
which your oxen hands have made unto you for a sin f.

2. The second reason against multiplyiiig Horses I
take to have been properly political. The Israelites,
separated by God for his peculiar People, under his go-
vernment as King, must needs have been designed for
the proprietors of one certain country. Accordingly the
land of Canaan, the possession of the seven natiotis,
was marked out for their proper inheritance. Within these
limits they were to be confined ; it being foreign to the
nature of their Institution to make conquests, or to ex-
tend their dominion. But the expulsion of the seven
natio7is being, as we shall see presently, to be effected
by the extraordinary assistance of their king, jeho-
VAH, their successes must, of course, be full and rapid.
But nothing is so impatient of bounds as a Multitude
flesht with easy victories : the projects of such a people
are always going on from conquest to conquest; as ap-
pears from the Mahometan Arabs, under the same cir-
cumstances, led out to conquest by a fal^ Prophet, as
the Israelites by a true. Now to defeat this so natural
a disposition, in a nation not designed for Empire, a
Law is given against multiplying houses; than
• '1 Chron. i. 17. f Is. xxxi. 1. 4. 6, 7.

S 4 which

264 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

which nothing can be conceived more effectual. The
Country that confined them, was rocky and mountain-
ous, and therefore unfit for the breed and sustentation
of horse. Telemachus is commended for giving this
reason for refusing the horses of Menelaus :

J laud male Telemachus, proles patientis Ullrei ;
Kon est apt us equis IthaccE locus, ut neque plants
Porrcctus spatiis, nec inultce prodigus herbcB *.

Besides, when they had once gotten possession of these
mountains, they had little need of horse to preserve their
conquest ; as all skilled in military matters very well
understand f. The Israelites therefore, had they been
either wise or pious, svould soon have found that their
true strength, as well political as religious, lay in In-
fantry : As that of Egypt, for a contrary reason, was in
their Cavalry. Hence that people, who well under-
stood their advantages, so industriously propagated the
breed of Horses, as the surest defence of their territo-
ries. There is a remarkable passage, in the history of
these times, to support what I here advance. When
Benhadad, the gentile king of Syria, whose forces con-
sisted of chariots and horsemen, had warred with ill
success against the king of Israel, the Ministers, in a
council of war, delivered their advice to him in these
terms: Their Gods are Gods of the hills, therefore
they rcere stronger than u-e : but let us fght against
them in the plain, and surely we shall be stronger
than they. — And he hearkened unto their voice, and did
so \. From tliis passage I collect, i. That the army of
Israel, consisting all of Infantry, had chosen the situa-
tion of the hills; and this with proper military skill.
2. That their constant success in such a disposition of
their forces occasioned this advice of the Ministers of
Benhadad. These men, possessed with the general no-
tion of local tutelary Deities, finding the arms of Israel
always successful on the hills, took it for the more emi-
nent manifestation of the power of their Gods. Their
Gods, say they, are Gods of the hills. Their supersti-
tion dictated the first part of tlieir advice ; and their

* Hor. + See note [IIII] at the end of this Book.

X 1 Kings XX. 23, & seq.

skill

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 265

skill in war, the second, — let ns fight against them in
the plain. The operations of the war had been hitherto
most absurd: they had attacked an army of Infantry
with one of Cavalry, on hills and in defiles.

But this want of Horse (which kind of military force
neither the product of their country could well support,
nor the defence of it need) would effectually prevent any
attempt of extending their dominions either into the Lesser
Asia, Mesopotamia, or Egypt. All which neighbouring
countries being stretched out into large and extended
plains, could not be safely invaded without a numerous
Cavalry. In diis view, therefore, the wisdom of the
Law can never be sufficiently admired.

3. But the third reason of the prohibition was evi-
dently to afford a lasting manifestation of that
EXTRAORDINARY PROVIDENCE by which the Israelites
were conducted, in taking possession of the land of
Canaan. I have shewn that, when once settled, they
might very well defend the possession without the help
of Cavalry: But to conquer it without Cavalry, and
from a warlike people abounding in Horse, was more
than a raw unpractised Infantry could ever have per-
formed alone. No more need be said to convince mili-
tary men of the extreme difference of the two cases. To
others it may be proper to observe,

I. That in the invasion of a country, the invaded may
chuse their ground ; and as it is their interest to avoid
coming to a decisive action, so, being amidst their own
native stores and provisions, they have it in their power
to decline it. On the contrary, the invader must attack
his enemies wherever he finds them posted. For, by
reason of the scantiness and uncertainty of supplies in an
enemy's country, he has not, for the most part, time to
draw them, by military stratagems, from their advan-
tages. We find this verified in the history of Benhadad,
mentioned above. He had invaded Israel; but this
people disposing of their Infantry with soldier-like ad-
dress, he was forced to fight them on the hills, where
only they were to be met with. After many unsuccess-
ful engagements, his Ministers proposed a new plan of
operation ; to attack the enemy in the plains. And
truly the advice was good : but how to put it in execu-

266 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

tion was the question ; for they being the assailants, the
Israelites were masters of their ground. So that, after
all, there was no other way of bringing them into the
plains but by beating them from the hills. And there
they must have stuck, till famine and desertion had
ended the quarrel. In this exigence, their blasphemy
against the God of Israel enabled them to put their
counsels, against him, in execution. They fancied,
according to the superstition of that time, and so gave
out, that he was God of the hills, but not of the valleys.
His omnipotence being thus disputed. He placed his
people in the plains ; and sent his Prophet to predict the
coming vengeance on his enemies. And there came a
man of God, and spake unto the king of Israel, and
said. Thus saith the Lord, Because the Syrians have
said, the Lord is God of the hills, but he is not God of
the valleys ; therefore 'will I deliver all this great mul-
titude into thine hand, and ye shall know that I am the
Lord*.

2. Secondly, we may observe, that the possessors of
mountainous regions may so dispose their Fortresses,
with which they cover their country, as to make an in-
vader's Cavalry absolutely useless ; and consequently to
have no occasion for any of their own. But the inva-
ders of such a place where Cavalry is in use, and conse-
quently the defences disposed in a contrary manner, so
as best to favour the operations of Horse, the invaders,
I say, go to certain destruction without a body of Horse
to support their Infantry. This then being the very si-
tuation of affairs when the Israelites invaded Canaan,
and conquered it, (for till then they had not begun to
transgress the Law against Cavalry) I conclude that they
must have been miraculously assisted. The Ara-
bians, in a like expedition, thought it so extraordinary
a thing to conquer without Horse, that ]\Iahomet made
it a law, when this happened, for the spoils not to be
divided according to the stated rule, but for all to go to
the Prophet himself, as a deodand or a gift from God
alone -f. Yet Mahomet never pretended to make his

con-

* 1 Kings XX. 28.

f £Y id, quod concessit in prcedam Deus legato suo ex illis : Noti
impulistis super illui ullot equos, neque camlos [i. e. non ac^uisistis

illud

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 267

conquests without Horse, but used them on every occa-
sion of need.

To return, we see then how httle reason Sir Isaac
Newton had for saying that Sesostris's conquest of
Libya was the occasion of Egypt's being furnished with
horse, so as to supply the neighbouring countries. But
the instance was particularly ill chosen : for Sesostris,
whom he makes the author of this benefit to Egypt, did,
by his filling the country with canals, defeat the chief
use and service of Cavalry ; with which, till this time,
Egypt had abounded ; but w hich from henceforth we
hear no more of*.

3. Again, in consequence of the same sy'stem, our
great author seems to think that animal food was not
customary amongst the Egyptians till about this time.
The Egyptians (says he) originally lived on the fruits of
the earth, and fared hardly, and abstained from ani-
mals, and THEREFORE abominated shepherds: Menes
[the third from Sesostris] taught them to adorn their beds
and tables with rich furniture and carpets, and brought
in amongst them a sumptuous, delicious, and voluptuous
•way of life. p. 241 . Now, whoever brought in the eating
of fesh, and a voluptuous Ife, did it (as we are assured
from Scripture) before the time of Joseph. I have
proved, in my account of their Physicians as delivered
in the Bible, tliat they were then a luxurious people f.
From the dream of Pharaoh's baker, compared with
Joseph's interpretation it appears, they eat animal

food ;

illud ope equorum aut cameloruni] ; sed Dens prttvalere facit legatos
suos, super quem vult : nam Deus est super omnem rem potens. Sur.
59. Alcor. ver. 6.

A'tyvTri'-ji, TtiTT^it iiaciv iTtitaalfAriv, onAU^tvainltri* maicrav, itita. rarut'
alto ya^ tutb tS y^om A'iyvlfl®' imra. wsJiaj luaca-a, inirirl^, atoi-
t>.a,^tv\&- yiyon. Heiod. Hist. lib. ili. cap. io8.
t See p. 95, and following, of this volume.

J " And the chief baker said unto Joseph, I also was in my dreanr,
" and behold I had three white baskets on my head, and in the upper-
" most basket there was of all manner of Bake-meats for Pharaoh,
" and the birds did eat them out of the basket. — And Joseph an-
" swered and said — The three baskets are three days. Yet within
" three days shall Pharaoh lift up thy head from off thee, and shall
" hang thee on a tree ; and the birds shall eat thy flesh from ofl' thee.*
Gen. xl. 17, & seq.

268 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

food; and, from the story of Joseph's entcrtaiiiinent of
his bicthrcn, it appears, that their enmity to shepherds
was not occasioned by these Hebrews eating animal food,
Avhich, Sir Isaac says, the Egy|)tians abstained from.
And lie -said to the ruler of his house. Bring these 7uen
hone, and s,LAY, and make rendj/ : J'or these men shall
dine with me at noon. And the man did as Joseph bade:
and the man brought the men into Joseph's house — and
they set on jor him by himsc/f, and for them by them-
selves, atid for the Egyptians, zvhich did eat u ith him,
by themselves, because the Egyptians might not eat
bread with the Hebrexvs, for that is an abomination to
the Egyptians. — And he took and sent messes unto them
from before him *. Here^ we see the common provision
for their entertainment was animal food. And no one
can doubt whether Joseph conformed to the Egyptian
diet. He sat single out of state, with regard to the
Egyptians ; the Egyptians sat apart, with regard to the
Shepherds ; and Both were supplied from the Gover-
nor's table, which was furnished from the Steward's
slaughter-house. The truth of this is farther seen from
the murmuring of the Israelites in the wilderness, when
they said, JVould to God we had died by the hand of the
Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh-
pots, and when we did eat bread to the full ■\. Now
we can scarce suppose the Egyptians would permit their
slaves, whom they kept in so hard oppression, to riot
in flesh-pots, while, as Sir Isaac supposes, they them-
selves fared hardly and abstained from Anunals.

4. Again, he supposes, that the exact division of the
land of Egypt into Property was first made in the time
of Sesostris. Sesostris (says he) upon his returning
home, divided Egypt by measure amongst the Egyp-
tians ; and this gave a beginning to surveying and geo-
metry, p. 218. And in another place, he brings down
the original of geometry still lower ; even as late as
Maeris, the fifth from Sesostris. Maris (says he)— for
pj^eserving the divisioti of Egypt into equal shares
amongst the soldiers — xvrote a book of surveying, which
gave a beginning to geometry, p. 248. Let the reader
now consider, whether it be possible to reconcile this
* tien. xliii. 16, 17 — 32 — 34. f Exod, xvi. 3.

with

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 2G9

with the following account of Joseph's administration.
And Joseph bought all the land oj Egypt for Pharaoh ;
for the Egi/piians sold EVERY man his field, because
the f amine prevailed over them : so the land became Pha-
raolis. And as Jbr the people, he removed them to
cities from one end of the borders of Egypt, even to the
other end thereof. Only the land f the Priests bought
he not; for the Priests had a portion assigned them of
Pharaoh, and did eat their portion xvhich Pharaoh gave
them ; therefore they sold not their lands. Then Jo-
seph said unto the people, Behold I have bought you
this day, and your land for Pharaoh : lo here is the seed
for you, and ye shall sow the land. And it shall come
to pass, in the increase, that you shall give the ffth
part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own,
for seed of the f eld, and for your food and for them of
your oxen houshoL's; and for food J or your little ones.
And Joseph made it a law over the land cf Egypt unto
this day, that Pharaoh sJiould have the f fth part ; ex-
cept the land of the Priests only, which became not
Pharaoli's *. Here we have the description of a coun-
try very exactly set out and settled in private property.
It would aftbrd room for variety of reflections : I sliall
confine myself to the following. If private property had
not been, at this time, established with the utmost order
and exactness ; what occasion had Joseph to recur to
that troublesome expedient of transplanting the People,
reciprocally, from one end of Egypt to the other? IJis
purpose in it is evident : it was to secure Pharaoh in his
new property, by defeating the ill effects of that fond-
ness which people naturally have to an old paternal in-
heritance. But what fondness have men for one spot,
rather than another, of lands lying in common, or but
newly appropriated? Were the Egyptians at this time,
as Sir Isaac Newton seems to suppose, in the state of
the unsettled Nomades, they would have gone from one
end of Egypt to the other, w'ithout Joseph's sending; and
without the least regret for any thing they had left behind.

But without weakening the great man's conjecture by
Scripture-liictory, How does it appear from the simple
fact of Sesostris s dividing the large champaign country
• Gen. xlvii. ao, & seq.

270 THE DIVINE LEGATION [BooklV.

of Egypt into square fields, by cross-cut canals, that
tliis was a dividing Egypt by measure, and giving a be-
ginning to surveying and geometry? If we examine
the cause and the eft'ccts of that improvement, we shall
find that neither one nor the other part of his conclu-
sion can be deduced from it. The cause of making
these canals was evidently to drain the swampy marshes
of that vast extended level; and to render the whole
labourable*. But a work of this kind is never
projected till a people begin to want room. And they
never want room till private property hath been well
established; and the necessaries of life, by the ad-
vancement of civil arts, are become greatly increased.
As to the effects; Ground, once divided by such boun-
daries, was in no danger of a change of land-marks ;
and consequently had small occasion for future surveys.
So that had not the Egyptians found out geometry be-
fore this new division, 'tis probable they had never
found it out at all. The most likely cause, therefore, to
be assigned for this invention, was the necessity of fre-
quent surveys, while the annual overflowings of the Nile
were always obliterating such land-marks as were not,
like those cross-cut canals, wrought deep into the soil.
But these put a total end to that inconvenience. In-
deed, Herodotus seems to give it as his opinion, that
geometry had its rise from this improvement of Sesos-
tris ■\. But we are to remember what hath been said of
the incredible Antiquity which the ancient Greek
writers, and particularly Aristotle;}:, assigned to this
Hero : the natural consequence of the Egyptian's having
confounded the ages and actions, though never the per-
sons, of Osiris and Sesostris.

5. The next inference this illustrious Writer makes
from his system is, that letters zvere unknown in Egypt
till the time of David. When the Edomiies (says he)
Jled from David with their young king Aadad i?ito
Egypt, it is probable that they carried thither also the
use of letters : for letters were then iji use amongst the
posterity of Abraham — and there is no instance of let-

* See note [KKKK] at the end of this Book.
Herodot. 1. ii. c. log. ' J See p. 228.

ters,

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 271

ters, for zvriting down sounds, being in use before the
days of David in any other nation besides the posterity
of Abraham. The Egyptians ascribed this invention to
Thoth the secretary of Osiris ; and therefore tetters be-
gan to be in use in Egypt in the days of Thoth, that
is, a little after the flight of the Edomites from David,
or about the time that Cadmus brought them into Eu-
rope, p. 209. It appears from the two stone-tables of
the Law, and from the engravings on Aaron's breast-
plate, that letters were in common use amongst the
Israelites at the time of their egression from Egypt.
Now supposing alphabetic writing to be amongst the pe-
culiar advantages of the chosen people, was it not more
likely that the Egyptians should learn it of them during
their long abode in that country, than from the fugi-
tive Edojnites, if they had indeed carried thither (which
however is a mere conjecture) the use of letters ? But
M'hen we consider that alphabetic writing was introduced
amongst the chosen people some time between the age
of Jacob and that of Moses, it seems most probable that
they learnt it of the Egyptians. But, for a full confuta-
tion of this fancy, and of the arguments that support it,
I am content to refer the reader to what I have occa-
sionally observed, though to other purposes, in my dis-
course of tlie Egyptian hieroglyphics *.

6. Lastly, he observes, that Egypt was so thinly
peopled before the birth of Moses, that Pharaoh said
of the Israelites, " Behold the people of the children of
" Israel are more and mightier than we;" and that to
prevent their multiplying, and growing too strong, he
caused their male children to be drowned, p. 186. Yet
this country, so thinly peopled at the birth of Moses,
was, we find from Scripture, so vastly populous, by the
time Moses was sent upon his mission, that it could keep
in slavery six hundred thousand men besides children f ;
at a time, when they were most powerfully instigated to
recover their liberty ; which yet, after all, they were unable
to effect but by the frequent desolation of the hand of God
upon their insolent and cruel masters. And is this to
be reconciled with Sir Isaac's notion of their preceding
thinness ? But he likewise supports himself on Scripture.
* See p. 1 iG. & seq. ^ E.\od. xii. 37.

Egypt

272 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Egypt was so thinly peopled — that Pharaoh said —
Behold the people of the children of Israel are Jiiorc and
mightier than we. Strange interpretation ! The Scrip-
ture relation of the matter is in these words ; And Pha-
raoh said unto his peopkt Behold the people of the chil-
dren of Israel are more and mightier than tve. Come
on, let us deal iviseli/ xtith them : lest they multiplij, and
it come to pass, that when there falleth out any war,
they join also unto our enemies, and fght against us, and
so get them up out of the land. Therefore they did set
over them Taskmasterst to afflict them with their bur-
dens.— But the jnore they afflicted them, the more they
grew and multiplied*. By the whole turn of this re-
lation it appears, that the more and mightier signify only
more prolijic and healthy. And that was in truth the
case. The Egyptians of this time, as we have shewn -f,
were very luxurious : While the manners of the Israe-
lites concurred with their condition to render them hardy
£Uid fruitful, by an abstemious and laborious course of
life. On this account the king expresses his fear. But
of what ? certainly not that they should subdue their
masters ; but that they should escape out of bondage :
which, even to the very moment of their egression, was
the sole object of the Egyptian's fear. — Lest (says he)
they multiply ; and it co7ne to pass, that, when there
falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and
fght against us, and so get them up out of the
LAND. This was a reasonable apprehension : for Egypt
was in every age subject to the incursions of that fierce
and barbarous people the Arabians, on that very side
which the Israelites inhabited : who, possessing their
own District, unmixed with Egyptians, had the keys of
the country in their hands, to admit or exclude an in-
vader at their pleasure. A circumstance which would
make the smallest province formidable to the most power-
ful kingdom. To prevent then so probable a danger,
their taskmasters are ordered to increase their oppres-
sions ; and they groan under them without power to
resist, till set free by the all-powerful hand of God,

Thus we see how Sir Issac Newton's system stands
with regard to sacred antiquity. What is still
• Exod. i. 9. & seq. f See p. 95. & seq.

worse,

Sect. 5-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 273
worse, is it not only repugnant to the Bible, but even to

ITSELF.

III. We have observed, that, by the casual con-
founding of the proper actions oi" Osiris and Sesostris
with one another, each came to be, at the same time,
the INVENTOR, and the peiifecter, of the arts of life.
This, which migjlit have led our Author, the most pene-
trating of all writers, to the discovery of the ancient error
in their history, served only to contirrn him in his own ;
as placing the invention of civil arts low enough for the
support of his general Chronology. However, it is very
certain, that the making their invention and perfection
the product of the same age is directly contrary to the
very nature of things. Which if any one doubt, let
him examine the general history of mankind ; where he
will see that the advances, firom an emerging barbarity,
through civil policy, to refined arts and polished manners,
when not given them, ready fitted to their hands, by
neighbouring nations forward to impart th5m, have been
ever the .slow and gradual progress of many and succes-
sive ages. Yet these, our illustrious Author (in conse-
quence of the supposed identity of his two Heroes) makes
to spring up, to flourish, and to come to their perfection,
all within the compass of one single reign. Or rather,
which is still more intolerable, he makes this extraor-
dinary age of Scso. lris to be distinguished from all others
by an inseparable mixture of savage and polished manners.
Which is so unnatural, so incredible, so impossible a cir-
cumstance, that, were there only this to oppose against
his system, it would be a sufticient demonstration of its
falsehood.

To shew then, that Sir Isaac Newton, by fairly and
honestly taking in these consequences of liis systv^in, hath
indeed subjected it to this disgrace, I shall give two in-
stances. The one taken from his account of the state of
JFar, the other oiihe staic of Ardiitecture, during this
period.

1., Our Author having made the Egyptian Hercules
to be Sesostris, is forced to own that the war in Libya
was carried on with clubs. Afltr these things, he
[Hercules or Sesostris] invaded Libija, and fought the
Africans with clubs, and thence is painted with a club

Vol. IV, T in.

274 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

/// his hand. Here, the great Writer liath given us the
verv picture of the Iroquosian or Huron Savages warring
with a neighbouring tribe. And without doubt intended
it for such a representation ; as appears, first, from his
immediately adding these words of Hyginus : jij'ri
/Egypt ii PRiMUM fnstibus d/>?iicaveriint, postea Belus
Neptionjilius gladio bdligcratiis est, unde bellum dictum
est. p. 21,5. For we are to observe that the title of the
chapter, in \vhich these words are found, is, (jtiis quid
invenerit * ; and secondly, from his supposing V^ulcan
(whom he makes to live at this time) the inventor of mi-
litary weapons. Yet this, according to the great Author,
was after Sesostris's conquest of the Troglodytes and
Ethiopians : it was after his Father s building a fleet on
the Red sea, with which he coasted Arabia Felix, went
into the Persian Gulf, and penetrated even into India:
[pp.214, 215.] and but a little before Sesostris's great
expedition for the conquest of the habitable world. At
which time \^'e see him set out with the most splendid
retinue of a Court, and the most dreadful apparatus of
War; we find him defeat great armies; subdue mighty
kingdoms (amongst the rest Judeea, where all kind of
military arms ofiensive and defensive had been in use for
many ages) ; people large cities ; and leave behind him
many stately monuments of his power and magnificence.

2. Thus again. Sir Isaac tells us, that Tosorthrus or
iEsculapius, an Egyptian of the time of Sesostris, dis-
covered the art of building with square stones f . Yet
his contemporary, Sesostris, he tells us, divided Egypt
into 30 nomes or counties, and dug a canal from the
Nile, to the head city of every nome ; and u ith the eai^ih
dug out of it, he caused the ground of the city to be
raised higher, and built a temple in every city for the
zcorsliip of the nome; S^c. p. 218. And soon after,
Amenophis, the third from him, built Memphis ; and
ordered the xcorship of the Gods of Egypt ; and built
a palace at Abydus, and the Memnonia at This and
Susa, a fid the jjiagnif cent temple of Vulcan in Memphis ^.

* Fab. cclxxiv.

f — The building uith square stones (sa\-s he) being found out by
Tosorthrus, the ^Esculapius of ligypt. Page 247.
X See note [LLLL] at the end of this Book.

Now,

Sect. 5 ] OF IVrOSES DEMONSTRATED. 275

Now, in this odd mixture of barbarity and politeness,
strength and impotence, riches and poverty, there is
such an inconsistency in the character of ages, as shews
it to be the mere invention of professed fabuUsts, whose
known talent it is to

" Make former times shake hands with lattei*,
" And that which was before come after

though composed of tales so ill concerted, and contra-
dictory, as shews, they wrote upon no consistent plan,
but each as his own temporary views and occasions re-
quired.

When I entered on a confutation of Sir Isaac Newton's
Egyptiati Chrotiology (for with that only I have here to
do), I was willing for the greater satisfaction of the
reader to set his arguments for the kkntitij of Osiris and
Sesostris, on which that Chronology was founded, in
the strongest and clearest li^ht. On this account I took
them as I found them collected, ranged in order, and
set together in one view, with the greatest advantage of
representation, by the very worthy and learned Master
of the Cliarterhouse, in a professed apology for our
great Philosopher. But this liberty the learned writer
hath been pleased to criticise in the Latin edition * of
the tracts to which that apology ^vas prefixed — " I am
*' not ignorant (says he -f) that the author of The Divine

" Legatioti

* De veris annis D. N. Jesu Christi nutali <§• emortuali Disser'
taiiones duce Cliranulogicce.

t " Non nescimus nuperrime accidisse, ut Vir ingenio & cru-
" (litione praestans, quum ratus sit ad divinam legationem Musis
" detnonstrandum aliquo modo pertinere, ut probetur Osii is non esse
" idem cum Sesostri, omnia hue allata in lusuiu jocumque vei terit,
" instituta comparatione Arthuri illius fabulosi cum WilheUno Nor-
" manno, quos ajque bonis rationibus in unum hominem conflari
" posse ait (quamvis nihil ff re habeant inter se commune aut simile)
" ac no9 Osirin cum Sesostri couiundmius. Et dc hac re disputa-

tionem in 70 paginas et ultra producit. In qua tamen ha?c
" nostra de Sesostri neque negat, neque refellit, scd irridet. Alia
" vero quaedam Newtoni dicta de sero inventis ab aliquo rege artibus,
" armis, instrumentis oppugnat, et ea quidem parte cansEe vincit.
" Nam ut ista longe ante Sesostris jetateia apud /Egyptios reperta

sint, Scriptura sacra jubet credere ; ab uUo unquam regum inventa
" esse haud ita certum. Sed ea prius non atligimus, ut quae nihil
" ad propositura nostrum attinent, neque nunc nos movent, ut pedem

T 2 retruliamus

276 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

" Legation su|)posing it, some how or other, to concern
" Moses's divine mission, to prove tliat Osiris was not
" the same with Sesostris, hath lately turned all that is
" here said into ridicule, by a comparison made between
" the fabulous Arthur and William the Norman^
" ^vho, he says, may be made one by as good reasons
" (though they have scarce any thing alike or in common
" with one another) as those which we have brought to
" confound Osiris with Sesostris : and on this point he
" draws out a disputation through seventy pages and

upwards ; in which, however, he neither denies nor
" confutes, but only laughs at what we have here said
" of Sesostris. It is true indeed that some other of
" New ton's assertions he does oppose ; such as those
" concerning the late invention of arts, arms, and in-
" struments by some certain king; and in this part of
" the argument he gets the better. For that these things
" were found out by the Egyptians long before the age
" of Sesostris, holy Writ commands us to believe : but

whether found out by any of their kings, is not so
" certain. However, these were matters we never
" touched upon, as relating nothing to our purpose ;
" nor do they yet induce us to recede from that con-
" elusion of the famous Newton, that Sesac was Se-
" sostris, Osiris, and Bacchus. But the cause being
" now brought before the Public, let the learned deter-
" mine of it." Thus far this candid and ingenuous
writer.

lie says, the author of The Divine Legation supposes
that it some how or other concerns Alosesi; divine ?nission
to prove Osiris not the same xcith Sesostris; which
seems to imply that this learned person doth not see
HOW it concerns it. And yet afterwards he owns, that
Scripture (meaning the writings of ■Moses) xvill not allow
lis to believe with Sir Isaac, that the invention of ' arts,
arms, and i7istruments, was so late as the time of Se-
sostris. Now it follows (as I have shewn) by certain
consequence, that if Osiris and Sesostris were one and
the same, then the invention of arts was as late as the

time

•' retraluiinus ab istu CI. Newtoni conclusione Sesacum, Sesostrim,
" f)sirin et Bat chum fuisse. Lite jam contestHla judicent evuditi."
In Dedic. pp. xii. xiii.

Sect. 5.] OF T^rOSES DEMONSTRATED. 277

time of Sesostris. But this contradicting Scripture or
the writings of Moses, as the learned person himself con-
fesseth, the reader sees plainly, how it concerns Muses s
mission to prove Osiris not the same u ith Sesostris.

The learned writer, speakins of the comparison I had
made between Arthur and William the Norman, says,
thei/ have scarce any thing alike or in common with one
another. I had brought together thirteen circumstances
(the very number which the learned writer thinks suf-
ficient to establish the identity of Osiris and Sesostris)
in which they perfectly agree. I am persuaded he does
not suspect me of falsifying their history. He must mean,
therefore, that thirteen in my comparison, prove nothing,
which, in his, prove every thing.

He goes on, — in a disputation of seventy pages and
upxoards, the author of The Divine Legation neither de-
nies nor confutes, hut only laughs at what xce have said
of Sesostris. What is it the learned writer hath said of
Sesostris ? Is it not this ? That between his history and
that of Osiris there are many strokes of resemblance :
From whence he infers (with Sir Isaac) that these two
Heroes were one and the same. Now if he means, I
Have neither denied nor confuted this resemblance, he
says true. I had no such design. It is too well marked
by Antiquity to be denied. Neither, let me add, did
I laugh at it. What I laughed at (if my bringing a si-
milar case is to be so called) was his inference from this
resemblance, that therefore Osiris and Sesostris were
one and the same. But then too I did more than lauiyh :
I both denied and confuted it- First I denied it, by
shewing that this resemblance might really be, though
Osiris and Sesostris were two different men, as appeared
by an equal resemblance in the actions of two different
men, the British Arthur and William the Norman. But
as the general history of ancient Egypt would not suffer
us to believe all that the Greek writers have said of this
resemblance, I then explained the causes wliich occa-
sioned their mistaken accounts of the two persons, from
whence so perfect a resemblance had arisen. Secondly,
I confuted what the learned person had said of Sesostris,
by shewing, from the concurrent testimony of Antiquity,
and from several internal arguments deducible from that

T 3 testimony,

Q78 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

testimony, that Osiris and Scsostris were in fact two
different persons, living in two very distant ages.

The learned writer proceeds, — It is true indeed that
some other of Nexctons assertions he does oppose ; such
as those concerning the late invention of arts, arms, and
instruments ; and in this part of the argument he gets
the better. But if I have the better here, it is past dis-
pute 1 overthrow tlic wlioie hypothesis of the identity of
Osiris and Sesostris. Tor, as to the resemblance,
Avhich Antiquity hath given them, that, considered singly
when the pretended late invention of arts hath been
proved a mistake, will indeed deserve only to be laughed
at. But were it, as Sir Isaac Newton endeavoured to
prove, that the invention of arts was no earlier than the
time of SesQ^tris or Sesac, there is then indeed an end
of the ancient Osiris of Egypt; and the Hero, so much
boasted of by that people, can be no other than the Se-
sostris of this author. For the very foundation of the
existence of the ancient Osiris was his civilizing Egypt,
and teaching them the Arts of life : But if this were done
by Sesostris, or in his reign, then is he the true Osiris
of Egypt. As, on the contrary, were the invention of
arts as early as Scripture-history represents it,
then is Egypt to be believed, when she tells us that
Osiris, their Inventor of arts, was many ages earlier
than Sesostris their Conqueror : And consequently, all
Sir Isaac Newton's ideyitity separates and falls to pieces.
In a word, take it which way you will. If Osiris were
the same as Sesostris, then must the invention of Arts
(for all Antiquity have concurred in giving that invention
to Osiris) be as late as the age of Sesostris, the Sesac
of Newton : but this, Scripture-history will not
suffer us to believe. If, on the other hand, Osiris and
Sesostris ^vere not the same, then was the invention of
Arts (and for the same reason) much earlier than the
age of Sesostris ; as indeed all mankind thought before
tl^je construction of this new Chronology. These were
the considerations which induced that Great man, who
so well understood the nature and force of evidence, to
employ all the sagacity of his wonderful talents in proving
the invention of Arts to be about the age of his Sesostris
or Sesac. And is it possible he should have a follower

who

Sect. 5-] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 279

who cannot see that he hath done this ? or the necessity
he had of doing it? It will be said, perhaps, " that Sir
Isaac has, indeed, argued much for the low invention of
Arts : but had neither inforced it under the name of an
argument, nor stated it in the form here represented."
The objection would ill become a follower of Newton,
who knows that his JMaster s method, as well in these
his critical as in his physical inquiries, was to form thq
principal members of his demonstration with an unorna-
mented brevity, and leave the supplial of the small con-
necting parts to liis I'eader's sagacity. Besides, in so
obvious, so capital, so necessary an argument for this
identity, it had been a ridiculous distrust of common
sense, after he had spent so much pains in endeavouring
to prove the low imentioji of Arts, to have ended his
reasoning in this formal way : " And now, Reader, take
notice tljat this is a conclusive, and perhaps the only
conclusive argument for the identity of Osiris and Sesos-
tris." Lastly, let me observe,. that the very reason which
induced Sir Isaac to be so large in the establishment of
his point, the loxv invention of ' Arts, induced me to be
as large in the subversion of it. And now some satis-
factory account, I hope, is given of the seventy long
pages.

What follows is still more unaccountable — Horcever
these icxre matters (says the learned writer, speaking of
the invention of Arts) we never touched upon, as relating
nothing to our purpose. Here I cannot but lament the
learned writer s ill fortune. There was but this very
circumstance in the book he would defend, which is
essential to his purpose, and this he hath given up as
nothing to his purpose •■, and more unlucky still, on a re-
view of the argument, he hath treated it as an error in
his author, who took so much pains about it ; but yet
as an error that doth not at all affect the point in ques-
tion. For,

He concludes thus — Nor do they yet induce mc to re-
cede from that conclusioji of the famous NciVton, that
Sesac was Scsostris, Osiris and Bacchus. — Sesac, as I
said before, I have no concern with. And as to Bac-
chus, it is agreed that this was only one of the names
of Osiris. The tiling I undertook to prove was, that

T 4 Osiris

a8o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Osiris and Sesostris were not the same person : but in
doing this, I did not mean to say that Osiris was not
one of the names of Sesostris. This is a very different
thing : and the rather to be taken notice of, because I
suspect a quibble in the words of the learned writer,
which \vould confound the difference. Nor is my sus-
picion unreasonable. For I have met with some of his
most learned followers, M ho have ventured to say, that
Sir Isaac meant no more than that Sesostris was an
Osiris. But if he meant no more, I would allow him to
mean any thing; and never to have his meaning dis-
puted. I, for my part, and so I suppose every body
else, understood him to mean, " That the old Osiris,
famous, amongst the Egyptians, for Legislation and the
invention of the Arts of life, was the very same man
with Sesostris, whom these Egyptians make to be a dif-
ferent man, of a later age, and famous for the Conquest
of the habitable world." This was the proposition I un-
dertook to confute. Wherein I endeavoured to shew,
" that there was a real. Osiris, such as the Egyptians
represented him, much earlier than their real Sesostris."
And now (to use this writer's words) the cause being
brought before the Public, let the learned deterniine of'
it. As to the other point, that Sesostris went by the
name of the earlier Hero, this I not only allow, but
contend for, as it lays open to us one of the principal
causes of that confusion in their stories, which hath pro-
duced a similitude of actions, whereon Sir Isaac Newton
layeth the foundation of their identity.

But if Sir Isaac Newton and his learned Advocate
have paid too little deference to Antiquity, there are,
who, in a contrary extreme, would pay a great deal too
much. The learned Dr. Pococke, in his book of Tra-
vels, introduceth bis discourse On the mytliology of the
ancient Egyptians in this extraordinary manner : " As
" the mythology, or fabulous religion of the ancient
" Egyptians, may be looked on, in a great measure, as
" the foundation of the heathen Religion in most other
" parts ; so it may not be improper to give some ac-
" count of the origin of it, as it is delivered by the most
" ancient authors, which may give some light both to
" the description of Ei^ypt, and also to the history of

" that

Sect. 5.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 2B1

" that country. Wc may suppose, that the Ancients
" were the best judges of the nature of then- Religion;
" and consequently, that all interpretations of their
" INIythology, by men^ of fruitful inventions,
" that have no sort of foundation in their w ritings, are
" forced, and such as might never be intended by them.

On the contrary, it is necessary to retrench several

things the Ancients themselves seem to have invented,
*• and grafted on true history ; and, in order to account

for many things, the Genealogies and Alliances they
" mention must in several respects be false or erro-
" neous, and seem to have been invented to accommo-
" date the honours of the same Deities to different

persons, they were obliged to deify, who lived at dif-
" ferent times; and so they were obliged to give them
" new names, invent genealogies, and some different
" attributes," pp. 221, 222.

He says, ITc may suppose that the ancients were the
best judges of the nature of their religion, and of their
mythology. But the Ancients, here spoken otj were
not Egyptians, but Greeks ; and the Mythology here
spoken of was not Cireek, but Egyptian : Therefore
these Ancients might well be mistaken about the nature
of a Religion which they borrowed from strangers ; the
principles of which, they tell us, w-ere always kept se-
creted from them. But this is not all ; they in fact were
mistaken ; and by no means good judges of the nature
oj' their Religion, if we may believe one of the most au-
thentic of these Ancients, Herodotus himself, where
discoursing of the Greeks he expressly says, — " But the
" origin of each God, and whether they are all from
" eternity, and what is their several kinds or natures,
" to speak the truth, they neither knew at that time nor
" since

The learned Traveller goes on — and consequently
that all interpretations of' their Mythology by men of
FRUITFUL inventions, that have no sort of founda-
tion in their writings, arc forced, atul such as might
never be intended by them. This is indeed a truth,
but it is no consequence, and therefore not to the pur-
pose. For, whether the Ancients were, or were not,
* See above.

the

28-2 THE DH'INE LEGATION [Bkoo IV.

the best judges ; whether the Modej-m have, or have not,
fruitful inve)Uions, yet if their interpretations have no
sort of foundation in ancient xcritings, it is a great
chance but they arc forced ; and as great, that the^An-
cients never intended what the Moderns ascribe to thein.
However, he gets nothing by this hypothetical proposi-
tion, unless it be the discredit of begging the question.

13ut the most extraordinary is his making it an addi-
tional reason for leaving the Moderns and sticking to the
Ancients, that the Ancients seem to have itivented and
grafted on true history ; and, in order (he says) to ac-
count for many things, the genealogies and alliances they
mention must in several respects be false or erroneous,
and seem to have been invented, &;c. Now, if the Ancients
were thus mistaken, tiie INIoderns sure may be excused
in endeavouring to set them right : To common sense,
therefore, this ^vould seem to shew the use of their inter-
pretations. But this use is better understood from our
Author's own success ; who, in this chapter concerning
the Egyptian mythology, has attempted to give us some
knowledge of Antiquity, without them. And here we
find the ancient account, to which he so closely adheres,
is not only fabulous by his own confession, but contra-
dictory by his own representation ; a confused collection
of errors and absurdities j that very condition of Anti-
quity which forced the Moderns to have recourse to
interpretations', and occasioned that variety whereon
our author grounds his charge against them. A charge,
however, in which his Ancients themselves will be in-
volved ; for they likewise had their interpretations ; and
were (if their variety would give it them) as fruitful at
least, in their inventions. For instance. How discor-
dant were they in their opinions concerning the origin of
ANIMAL WORSHIP ! Was our Author ignorant that so
odd a superstition wanted explanation? By no means.
Yet for fear of incurring the censure of a fruitful inven-
tion, instead of taking the fair solution of a modern Cri-
tic, or even any rational interpretation of the ancient
!Mythologists, whom yet he professes to follow, he
contents himself with that wretched fable " of Typhon's
dividing the body of Osiris into twenty-six parts, and
distributing them to his accomplices ; Avhich being after-
wards

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 283

wards found by Isis, and delivered by her to distinet
bodies of priests to be buried with great secrecy, she
enjoined them to pay divine honours to him, and to con-
secrate some particular animal to his memory." From
this account (says our author very gravely) xvc may see
the reason •why so many sacred animals were worshipped
in Eoypt. p. 226. Again, the Greek account, in Dio-
dorus, of Osiris s expedition, has been shewn to be a
heap of impossible absurdities; yet our author believes
it all ; and would have believed as much more, rather
than have run the hazard of any 7nodej'n inrention.

And now, we presume, the minor of Sir Isaac
Newton's general argument, that Osiris ajid Sesostris
''jcere the same, is intirely overthrown. For, 1. It hath
been proved, that the premisses, he employs in its sup-
port, do not infer it. 2. That the consequence of his
conclusion from it, contradicts sacred Scripture; and
3. That it disagrees with the very nature of things.

So that our first proposition, That the Egyptian
learning celebrated in Scripture, and the Egyptian su-
perstitio7i there condemned, 7cere the 'cery Learning and
Superstition represented by the Greek writers, as the
honour and opprobrium of that people, stands clear of
all objection. What tiiat Learning and Superstition
were, we have shewn very largely, though occasionally,
in the courye of this inquiry ; whereby it appears, that
then Lea tiling in general was consummate skill in civil
POLICY AND THE ARTS OF LEGISLATION; and their
Superstition, the wouship of dead men deified.

SECT. VI.

I COME, at length, to my second proposition:
which if, by this time, the Reader should have for-
gotten, he may be easily excused. It is this. That the
Jewish people zvere extremely fond of Egyptian manners,
and did frequently fall into Egyptian superstitions : and
that many of the laws given to them by the ministry of
Moses, were instituted, partly in compliance to their pre-
judices, and partly in opposition to those superstitions.
The first part of this proposition — the people's fond-
ness

THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

ness for, and frequent lapse into, Egyptian supersti-
tions,— needs not many words to evince. The thing, as
we shall see hereafter, being so natural in itself ; and,
as we shall now see, so fully recorded in holy Scripture.

The time was now come for the deliverance of the
chosen People from their Egyptian bondage : For now
VICE and idolatry were arrived at their height; the
former (as St. Paul tells us) by means of the latter ; for
as they did not like to retain God in their hioidedge,
God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those
things which are not convenient ; being filed rcith all
unrighteousness*, &c. The two most populous regions
at that time in the world were Canaax and Egypt:
The first distinguished from all other by its violence and
unnatural crimes; the latter by its superstitions and
idolatries. It concerned God s moral government that
a speedy check should be put to both ; the inhabitants
of these two places being now ripe for divine vengeance.
And as the Instruments he employed to punish their pre-
sent enormities were designed for a barrier against
future, the Israelites went out of Egypt with a high
hand, which desolated their haughty tyrants ; and were
led into the possession of the land of Canaan, whose in-
habitants they were utterly to exterminate. The dispen-
sation of this Providence appears admirable, both in the
time and in the modes of the punishment. Vice and
IDOLATRY had now (as I said) filled up their measure.
Egypt, the capital of false Religion, being likewise the
nursery of arts and sciences, was preserved from total
destruction for the sake of civil life and polished man-
ners, whicli were to derive their source from thence :
But the Caxaaxites were to be utterly exterminated,
to vindicate the honour of humanity, and to put a stop
to a spreading contagion which changed the reasonable
Nature into brutal.

N(jw it was that God, remembering his Covenant
with Abraiiam, was pleased to appoint his People, then
groaning under their bondage, a Leader and Deliverer.
But so great was their degeneracy, and so sensible was
Moses of its effects, in their ignorance of, or alienation
from the true God, that he would Avillingly have declined
* Rom. i. 28.

the

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 28:,

the office : And when absolutely commuudcd to under-
taJvC it, he desired liowever that God would let iiiin
know by what name he would be called, when the peo-
ple should ask the name of the God of their fathers. —
And Moses said unto God, Behold when I come unto
the children of Israel, and say unto them, The God of
your fathers hath sent me unto you ; and they shall say
wito nie, WHAT IS his Name? zchat shall I say unto
them * ? Here we see a people not only lost to all
knowledge of the Unity (for the asking for a name ne-
cessarily implied their opinion of a plurality), but like-
wise possessed with the very spirit of Egyptian idolatry.
The 7'eligion of names, as we have shevvnf, Avas a
matter of great consequence in Egypt. It was one of
their essential superstitions : it was one of their native
inventions : and the first of them which they communi-
cated to the Greeks. Thus when Hagar, the handmaid
of Sarai, who was an Egyptian woman, saw the angel
of God in the wilderness, the text tells us j, She called
the name of the Lord that spake unto her, Elroi, the
God of ' vision, or the visible God: that is, according to
the established custom of Egypt, she gave him a name
of honour : not merely a name of distinction ; for such,
all nations had (who worshipped local tutelary deities)
before their communication with Egypt ||. But, after
that (as appears from the place of Herodotus quoted
above, concerning the Pelasgi), they decorated their
Gods with distinguished Titles, indicative of their spe-
cific office and attributes. A name was so peculiar an
adjunct to a local tutelary Deity, that we see by a pas-
sage quoted by Lanctandus from the spurious books of
Trismegist (which however abounded with Egyptian no-
tions and superstitions) that the one supreme God had
no name or title of distinction ^. Zachariah evidently

alluding

* Exod. iii. 13. • t Page 222, & seq, J Gen. xvi. 13.

II See note [MMMM] at the end of this Book.

1[ llic Rcripsit hbros — in quibus majestatem summi ac singularis
dei asserit, iisdeinque noniinibus a[)pellat, quibus nos, Deum & Pa-
TKEM. Ac no quis ^^oME^ ejus lequireret ANHNYMON esse dixit;
eo quod nominis propnetate non egeat, ob ipsam scilicet unitateni.
Ipsius haec verba sunt, 0 Je ©to; eT? ; 0 oi eT? ito'/AaT©- « •nr^ooEtlai ; tr*
ya§ « uv wcwi/y^of. Deo igitur noaien non est, quia solus est : nec

opus

286 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

alluding to these notions, when he proplicsics of the wor-
ship of the supreme God, unmixed with idolatry, says,
In t/iat day shall there be one Lord, and his xamk
ONE*; that is, only bearing the simple title of Lord:
and, as in the Avords of Lanctantius below, ac ne quls
NOMEN ejus requireret, AN-QNTMON esse dixit i eo
quod tiominis proprietate nan egeat, ob ipsam scilicet
UNiTATEM. Out of indulgence therefore to this weak-
ness, God was pleased to give himself a Name. J?id
God said unto Moses, i am that i am: And he said,
Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, i am
hath sent jne unto you ■\ . Where we may observe (ac-
cording to the constant method of divine Wisdom, when
it condescends to the prejudices of men) how, in the
very instance of indulgence to their superstition, he gives
a corrective of it. — The Religion of names arose from an
idolatrous polytheism ; and the nai^ie here given, im-
plying eternity and self-existence, directly opposeth that
superstition.

This compliance with the ReUgio)i of names was a new-
indulgence to the prejudices of this people, as is evident
from the following words : And God spake unto Moses,
and said unto hi?n, I am the Lord: and I appeared unto
Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the Name
OF God Almighty, but by my Name Jehovah xvas
I not knozcn to them'^. That is, as the God of Abra-
ham, I before condescended to have a Name of distinc-
tion: but now, in compliance to another prejudice, I
condescend to have a Name cf honour. This seems to
be the true interpretation of this veiy difficult text, about
which the commentators are so much embarrassed. For
the word Jehovah, whose name is here said to be un-
known to the Patriarchs, frequently occurring in the
book of Genesis, had furnished Unbelievers with a pre-
text that the same person could not be author of the two
books of Genesis and Exodus. But Ignorance and
Scepticism, which set Infidelity on work, generally bring
it to shame. They mistook the true sense of the text.

The

opus est proprio vocabulo, nisi cum discrimen exigit multitudo, ut
unamquamque personam aua nota et appellatione designes. Div,
Inst. 1. i. c. 6.

* Ch. xiv. 9. t Exod. iii. 14. % lb. vi. 3;

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 287

The assertion is not, that the word Jehovah was not
used in the patriarchal language; but that the NA]\rE
Jehovah, as a title of honour, (u liereby a new idea was
affixed to an old xcord) was unknown to them. Thus,
in a parallel instance, we say rightly, that the King's
SUPREMACY was unknown to the English Constitution
till the time of Henry viii. though the v.'ord was in use,
and even applied to the chief Magistrate, (indeed in a
different and more simple sense) long before.

The common solution of this difficulty is as ridiculous
as it is false. You shall have it in the words of a very
ingenious Writer. — " The word Jehovah signifies the
" being unchangeable in his resolutions, and conseqently
" the being infinitely faithful in performing his promises.
" In this sense, the word is employed in the passage of
" Exodus now under examination. So that when God
" says, by my name Jehovah xcas J not knori n to thejn,
" this signifies — as one faithful to fulfil my promise,
" was I not known to them. i. e. I had not then ful-
" filled the promise which I had made to them, of
" bringing their posterity out of Egypt, and giving
" them the land of Canaan By which interpretation,
the Almighty is made to tell the Israelites that he was not
known to their forefathers as the God who had redeemed
their posterity from Egypt, before they had any posterity
to redeem. A marvellous revelation, and, without
doubt, much wanted. To return.

Moses, however, appears still unwilling to accept
this Commission ; and presumes to tell God, plainly,
Behold they xvill not believe wc, nor hearken to my voice:
for they will say, The Lord liaili not appeared unto

thee.

* — il signifie I'ctre wimuahle dans ses resolutions, et par conse-
(juent I'etrc injiniment Jiddle dans ses promesses, et c'est dans cette
acception que ce noiii est emploie dans le passage de I'Exode, que
nous exaniinons. Qu'aiiisi quand Dieu dit, Je nc leur ai point estt
connii cn man nom de Jehovah, cela signifie, Je ne mc suis point fait
connoitrc, coimne Jidelle d. remplir ftiis promesses, c'est-a-dire, je
n'ai pas encore KKMPLi LA PKOMESSK, qui Jc Icur avois futte, de
retirer de I'Egypte Iciir posterite, et dc lui donner la terre de Chanaan.
— ■M.Astruc, Conjectures sur le livre dc la Gcnese, p. 305. He says
very truly, that, in this solution, he had no other part to perform,
que suivre la Joule dcs Commentatcvrs tant Chretiens que Juifs,
p. 301-

288 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

thee*. But could this be said or thought by a People,
who, groaning in the bitterest servitude, had a message
from God, of a long promised deliverance, at the very
time that, according to the prediction, the promise was
to be fulfilled, if they had kept him and his dispensations
in memory ? When this objection is removed, Moses
hath yet another ; and that is, his inability for the office

. of an ORATOR. This too is answered. And when he
is now driven from all liis subterfuges, he with much
passion declines the whole employment, and cries out,
O my God, send I pray thee by the hand of him xchoni
thou wilt sendlf. This justly provokes God's dis-
pleasure : and thereon, he finally complies. From all
this backvvardness, (and the cause of it could be no
other than v. hat is here assigned ; for Moses, as appears
by the former part of his history |, was forward and
zealous enough to promote the welfare of his brethren)
we must needs conclude, that he thought the recovery
of this People from Egyptian superstitions to be
altogether desperate, i^id, humanly speaking, he did
not judge amiss ; as may be seen from a succinct account
of their behaviour during the whole time God \Aas

. working this amazing Deliverance.

For now Moses and Aaron discharge their message ;
and having confirmed it by signs and wonders, the People
believed : but it was such a belief, as men have of a new
and unexpected matter, well attested. — They bow the
head too, and woi^ship || ; but it appears to be a thing
they had not been lately accustomed to. And how little
true sense they had of God's promises and visitation
is seen from their murmuring and desponding ^ when
things did not immediately succeed to their wishes ;
though Moses, as from God, had told them beforehand,
that Pharaoh would prove cruel and hard-hearted; and
would defer their liberty to the very last distress**. And
at length, when that time came, and God had ordered
them to purify themselves from all the idolatries of Egypt,
so prodigiously attached were they to these follies, that
they disobeyed his command even at the very eve of

* Exod. iv. 1. t Chap. iv. 3.

X Chap, ii. 12. II Chap. iv. 31.

IT Chap. v. '2i. ** Chap. iii. 19, 20, 11.

their

Sect.f).] OF jMOSES DEMONSTRATED. 289

their tieliverance *. A ihing altogether incredible, but
that ^ve have God's own word for it, by the [)rophct
Ezekicl : In the ilaii (says he) tltat Ihf'ted up mine hand
unto them to bring them fort li of the land oj' Egypt,
into a hind that I had spied for them flowing with milk
and honey, xvhich is the glory of all lands : Then said I
unto them, Cast ye away every man the abominations of
his eyes, and defile not yourselves with the idols of Egypt:
I am the Lord your God. But they rebelled against
me, and would not hearken unto me ; they did not creri/
man cast away the almninations of their eyes, neither
did they forsake the idols of Egypt : Then I said, I will
pour out my Jury upon them, to accomplish my anger
against them in the midst of the land of Egypt. But I
wrought for my name's sake, that it should not be pol-
luted before the heathen, amongst whom they were, in
"whose sight 1 made myself known unto them, in bringing
them forth out of the land of Egypt. JVherefore I
caused them to go forth out of the land of Egypt, and
brought them into the wilderness f.

From all this it appears, that their Cry, by reason of
their bondage, which cajne up tinto God, was not for
such a deliverance as was promised to their forefathers,
to be brought up out rf Egypt : but for such a one as
might enable them to live at ease, amongst their fesh-pots,
in it.

But now they are delivered : and, by a series of mi-
racles perfornied in their behalf, got quite clear of the
power of Pharaoh. Yet on every little distress. Let us
return to Egypt, was still the cr}^ Thus, immediately
after their deliverance at the Red-Sea, on so common
an accident, as meeting with bitter waters in their route,
they were presently at tlieir iVhat shall we drink \ ?
And no sooner had a miracle removed this distress, and
they gotten into the barren wilderness, but they were,
again, at their IVhat shall we eat \\ ? Not that indeed
they feared to die either of hunger or of thirst ; for they
found the hand of God was still ready to supply theii*
wants ; all but their capital want, to return again iuto

• See Bote [NNNN] at the end of this Book.

t Ezek. XX. 6, & seq. X Exod. «v. 24. || Ch, xvi. 2.

Vol. IV. U Egypt {

290 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Egypt; and these pretences were only a less indecent
cover to their designs : which yet, on occasion, they
were not ashamed to throw oft", as where they say to
Moses, when frightened by the pursuit of the Egyptians
at the Red-Sea, Is not this the word that xve did tell
thee i)t Egijpt, Let us alone that XiX may serve the
Egyptians *. And again, JVould to God, we had died
by the hand of the Lord in tJie land of Egypt, when we
sat by the flesh-pots and did eat bread to the full f. That
is, in plain terms, " Would we had died with our
" brethren the Egyptians/' For they here allude to the
destruction of the Jirst-born, when the destroying angel
(which was more than they deserved) passed over the
habitations of Israel.

But they have now both flesh and bread, when they
cry out the second time for water : and even while, again,
at their Jiliy hast thou brought us up out of Egypt \,
a rock, less impenetrable than their hearts, is made to
pour out a stream so large that the water run down like
rivers \\ : yet all the effect it seemed to have upon them
was only to put thcni more in mind oi the way of Egypt,
and the waters of Sihor ^.

Nay even after their receiving the law, on their free
and solemn acceptance of Jexhovah for their God and
King, and their being consecrated anew, as it were,
for his peculiar People, Moses only happening to. stay
a little longer in the iMount than they expected, They
fairly took the occasion of projecting a scheme, and, to
say the truth, no bad one, of returning back into Egypt.
They went to Aaron, and pretending they never hoped
to see JMoscs again, desired another Leader. But they
^^■ould have one in the mode of Egypt ; an Image, or
visible representative of God, to go before them **.
Aaron complies, and makes them a GOLDEisr Calf, in
conformity to the superstition of Egypt; whose great
God Osiris was worshipped under that representation ft '■>
and, for greater holiness too, out of the jewels of the
Egyptians. In this so horrid an impiety to the God of

* Exod. xiv. 12. t Clictp. xvi. 3.

J Chap. xvii. 3. |1 Ps. Ixxviii. 16;

^ .ler. ii. 18. Exod. xxxii. 1.

It 'O MOZKOS«Tor, : AniS xa;\s»«:»®-. Herodot. 1. lii. 28.

their

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 291

their fathers, their secret drift *, if we may believe
St. Stephen, was this; they wanted to get back into
Egypt; and while the Calf, so much adored in that
country, went before them, they could return with an
atonement and reconciliation in their hands. And
doubtless their worthy iMediator, being made all of sa-
cred, Esiyptian metal, Avould have been consecrated in
one of their temples, under the title of osiris redvctou.
But Moses's sudden appearance broke all their measures :
and the ringleaders of the design were punished as they
deserved.

At length, after numberless follies and perversities,
they are brought, through God's patience and long-
suffering, to the end of all their travels, to the promised
place of rest, which is just opening to receive them ;
When, on the report of the cowardly explorers of the
Land, they relapse again into their old delirium, I There-
fore hath the Lord brought us unto this land, to fall by^
the sword, that our whes and our children should be a
prey ? were it not better for us to return into Egypt ?
And they said one to another. Let us make a captain, and
let us return into Egypt f . This so provoked the Al-
mighty, that he condemned that Generation to be worn
away in the vvilderness. How they spent their lime there,
the prophet Amos will inform us, Have ye offered unto
me (says God) any sacrijices and offerings in the Wil-
derness forty years, O house of Lsrael \ ?

In a word, this unwillingness to leave Egypt, and this
impatience to return thither, are convincing proofs of
their fondness for its customs and superstitions. When
I consider this, I seem more inclined than the generality
even of sober Critics to excuse the false accounts of the
Pagan writers concerning the Exodus ; who concur in
representing the Jews as expelled or forcibly driven out
of Egypt ; For so indeed they were. The mistake was
only about their driver. The Pagans supposed him to
be the King of Egypt ; when indeed it was the God of
Israel himself^ by the ministry of Moses.

• — " To whom our fathers would not obey, but thrust him from
" them, and in their hearts turned back again into Egypt, sayino
" unto Aaron, Make us Gods to go before us," &c. A< ts vu= 39, 40.

i Numb. xiv. 3, 4. I Am. v. 25.

u 2 Let

■2gi THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Let us view themnext, in possession of the promised
LAND. A land J/owing with milk and honctj, the gloni
of all lands. One would expect now their longing after
Egypt should have entirely ceased. And so without
floubt it would, had it arose only from the flesh-pots ;
but it had a deeper root; it was the spiritual luxuiy of
Egypt, their superstitions, with which the Israelites
were so debauched. And therefore no wonder they
should still continue slaves to their appetite. Thus the
prophet Ezekiel, Neither left she her whoredoms
broil o;ht from Egi/pt *. So that after all God's mercies
conferred upon them in putting them in possession of the
land of Canaan, Joshua is, at last, forced to leave them
with this fruitless admonition : N'ow therefore fear the
Lord, and serve him in sincerity and in truth ; and put
AWAY the Gods uhich your fathers served on the other
side of the flood and in Egypt It is true, we are told
that the people served the Lord all the daijs of Joshua,
and all the days f the elders that outlived Joshua, xcho
had seen all the great icorl s of the Lord that he did for
Lsrael't- But, out of sight out of mind. It is then
added — Jnd there arose another generation after them,
ichich knew not the Lord, nor yet the xcorhs xvhich he
had done for Jsrael — And they forsook the Lord God
of their fathers, u-hich brought them out of the land oj
Egypt, and folloaed other Gods, of the Gods of the
people that were round about them \\. And in this state
they continued throughout the whole administration of
their .Judges ; except, when, fi-om time to time, they
were awakened into repentance by the severity of God's
judgments ; which yet were no sooner passed, than they
fell back again into their old lethargy, a forgetfulness of
I'.ib mercies.

Nor did their fondness for Egypt at all abate when
tliev came under the iron rod of their kings; the JMa-
gistratethey had so rsbelliously demanded ; and who, as
they pretended, v,as to set all things right. On the
contrai'v, this folly grew still more inflamed ; and in-
stead of one Calf they \\ould have two. ^Vhich
Ezekiel hints at, where he says. Ke^ ^^e multiplied

• Ezek. xxiii. 8. f Josh. xxiv. 14.

I Judges ii. 7, || lb. ii. 10 — 12,

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEAfONSTRATED. 295

her whondcmi.s in callhig to remembrance the dai/s of
her youth 'icho'cin. she had plai/cil the harlot in Egypt *.
And so favourite a supcrstitiun ncre the Cai.vks of
Dan and Beth-el, tliat they still kept their ground against
all those general Ket'oraiations which divers of their
better sort of Kings had made, to purge the land of Is-
rael from idolatries. It is true, their extreme fondness for
Egyptian superstition u as not the only cause of this inve-
terate adherence to their Ca lves. There were tu o others :
Ihey flattered themselves that this specific idolatry
was not altogether so gross an affront to the God
(jf their fathers, as many of the rest. Other of their
idolatries consisted in worshipping Strange Gods in
conjunction with the God of Israel; this of the
CA LVES, only in worshipping the God of Israel in an
idolatrous manner : as aj^pears from the history of their
erection. And Jeroboam f said in his heart, Now shall
the kingdom return to the house of David : if this people
go up to do sacrifice in the Jiouse of tJie Lord at Jeru-
salem, then shall the heart of this people turn again unto
their lord, even unto Rehoboam King of Judah, and they
shall kill me, and go again to Rehoboam king of Judah.
Tyhereupon the King took counsel, and made tu:o calves
of gold, and said u)ito them. It is too much for you to
go up to Jerusalem, Behold thy Gods, O Israel, which
brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And he set
the one in Beth-el, and the other put he in Dan %• — It
is too much for you (says he) to go up to Jerusalem.
Who « ere the men disposed to go up ? None surely
but the worshippers of the God of Israel. Consequently
the CALVES, here offered to save them a journey, must
needs be given as the representatives of that God. And
if these were so, then certainly the calf /;/ Horeb :
since, at their several consecrations, the ver^' same pro-
clamation was made of all tluce : Behold thy Gods,

0 Israel, ivhich brought thee up out oj' the land of Egypt.
The other cause of the perpetual adherence of the

Kingdom of Israel to their Golden Calves was their

* Ezek. xxiii. 19.

t It is to be observed of this Jeroboam, tli:it be bad sojourned in
Kgypt, as a refugee, during the latter part of the reign of Solomon.

1 Kings xi. 40. I 1 Kings xii. 26. & se^.

u 3 being

294 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

being erected for a prevention of reunion \^ ith the King-
dom of Judah. Jftkiy ptopk (says the pohtic contriver)
go up to do sacrijice hi the house of the Lord at Jeru-
salem, then shall the heart of this people turn again
unto their lord, even unto liehoboam ld?ig of Judah.
The succeeding kings, therefore, we may be sure, were
as careful in preserving tlicm, as He was in putting them
up. So that, good or bad, the character common to
them all was, that he departed not from the sins of Jero-
boam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin ; namely,
in worshipping the Calves in Dan and Beth-el. And
those of them who appeared most zealous for the Law of
God, and utterly exterminated the idolatry of Baal,
yet connived at least, at this political worship of the
CALVES. — Thus Jehu destroyed Baal out of Israel.
Hou beit from the sins of Jeroboam the .son of Nebat who
made Israel to sin, Jehu departed not, to zcit, the golden
CALVES that xcere in Beth-cl, and tliat ivere in Dan*'.

But the Israelites had now contracted all the fashion-
able habits of Egypt. We are assured that it had
been long peculiar to the Egyptian superstition for
every city of that empire to have its own tutelary God,
besides those which were worshipped in common : But
now Jeremiah tells us the people of Judah bore a part
\\ ith them in this extravagance : f There are thy Gods
that thou hast made thee? Let them arise, if they can
save thee in the time of thy trouble: for according
to the number of thy cities, are thy gods, o
Judah ^.

And by the time that the sins of this wretched People
were ripe for the punishment of their approaching Cap-
tivity, they had polluted themselves with all kind of
Egyptian abominations: as appears from the famous
VISIONS of EzEKiEL, whcre their three capital idola-
tries are so graphically described. The prophet repre-
sents him>elf as brought, in a vision, to Jerusalem : and,
at the door of the inner gate that looked towards the
north, he saw the seat of' the image of jealousy
uhich provoke th to Jealousy X. Here, by the noblest
stretch of an inspired imagination, he calls this seat of
their idolatries, the seat of the Lnage of Jealousy, whom

* 2 Kings X. -28, & seq. f Ch. ii. -iS. J Ezek. viii. 3.

Sect 6.J OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 295

lie personifies, and the more to catch the attention of
this corrupt people, converts into an Idol, the image
OF JEALOUSY u'fiich prot'okcth to jealousy; as if he had
said, God, in his wrath, hath given you one idol more,
to avenge himself of all the rest. After this sublime
prelude, the prophet proceeds to the various scenery of
the inspired Vision.

I. The first of their capital idolatries is described in
this manner : And he brought me to the door of the
court; and xvhen I looked, behold, a hole in the afall.
Then said he unto me. Son of man, dig now in the wall;
and when I had digged in the xvall, behold, a door. Atul
he said unto me, Go in, and behold the zcicked abomina-
tions that they do here. So I xvent in, and saw ; and
behold, every form of creeping things, and abo-
minable BEASTS, and all the idols of the house of
Israel, pourtrayed upon the wall round about.
And there stood before them seventy men of the an-
cients of the house of Israel, and in the midst of them
stood Jaazaniah the son of Shaphan, with every man his
censer in his hand; and a thick cloud of incense went up.
Then said he unto me, Son of man, hast thou seen what
the ancients of the house of Israel do in the dark,
every man in the chambers of his imagery*?

1. The first inference I draw from these words is,
That the Superstition here described was Egyptian
This appears fi-om its object's being the Gods peculia
to Egypt, every form of creeping things and abominable
beasts ; which, in another place, the same prophet calls,
with great propriety and elegance, the abominations of
the eyes of the Israelites '|"-

2. The second inference is. That they contain a very
lively and circumstantial description of the so celebrated
mysteries of Isis and Osiris. For, i. The rites are
represented as performed in a secret subterraneous place.
And hen I looked, behold, a hole in the xvall. Then
said he unto me. Son of man, dig noxc in the xvall ; and
xvhen I had digged i?i the wall, behold, a door. And

* Ezek. viii. 7, & seq.

t Chap. XX. 7, 8. This shews brute-worship in Egi/pt to have
been vastly extensive at the £.roc/M« ; the time the prophet is here
speaking of.

u 4 he

296 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book lA'.

he said loiio me, Go in — Haat thou seen xcliat the An-
cients of the house of Israel do in the dark r This
secret place was, as the Prophet tells us, in the Temple.
And such kind of places, for this use, the Egyptians liad
in their Temples, as we leeun from a similitude of Plu-
tai ch's. Like the disposition (saj^s he) and oi^donance of
their Tempks; zchich, in one place, oilarge and extend
themselves into long wings, and fair and open aisles; in an-
other y sink into dark and secret subterranean Vestries, like
the Adyta of the Thehans * : which Tacitus describes in
these V, ords — " atque alibi angustiffi, et profunda altitudo,
nuUis inquirentium spaciis pcnetrabilis ' 2. These
rites are celebrated by the Sanhedrim, or the elders
of Israel : And there stood before them seventy men of
the ancients of the house of Israel. Now it Lath been
shewn in the Account of the My STERiES, that none but
princes, rulers, and tiie u isest of the people, were ad-
mitted to their more secret celebrations. 3. The paint-
ings and imagery, on the walls of this subterraneous
apartment, ansuer exactly to the descriptions the ancients
have given us of the niystic cells of the Egvptians
Behold every form (f creeping things and akminable
beasts, and all the idols of the house of Israel pcuri rayed
upon the wall round about. So Ammianus Marcellinus
— " Sunt et syringes subterranei quidam et flexuosi se-
" cessus, quos, ut fertur, pcriti, rituuni vetustorum —
" penitus operosis digestos fodinis, per loca diversa
" struxerunt: et excisis parietibus voiucrum ferarumque
" genera multa sculpserunt, quas hieroglyphicas literas
appellarunt ||."' There is a famous antique monument,
once a consecrated utensil in the rites of I sis and Osiris,
and now well known to the curious by the name of the
IsiAC or Bembine Table; on which (as appears by

€>y,Qa.tot: ioiy.lra, icj c-rjy.t,T%. — ri£;i Isr. >cj 0«r" p. 632. Steph. ed.
f Ann. xi. r. 6-2.

J Thus described by a learned Antiquary, Adyta .Egj'ptiorum, in
quibus sacerdotes sacra operari, ritusque et cteremonias suas exercere
solebant, suhterranea loca eraiif, singular! quodam artificio ita con-
structa, ut nihil non mysteriosi in iis occurreret. Muri ex omnt
parte jilaii turn /ii,eroi;li/p/iicis picturis, turn scvlpturis — Kircher.

]j Lib. x.xii. c. 15.

the

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 297

the order of the several cojiipiirtnients) is pourtrayed all
the imagery that adorned llie wails of the Mijstic Cell.
Now if one were to describe the engravings on that
table, one could not find juster or more emphatic terms
than those which the Prophet here employs.

3. The third inference I would draw from this vision
is, that the Egyptian superstition was that to which tlie
Israelites were more particularly addicted. And thus
much I gather from the following words, Behold, every
form qj cix'cpiug things, and abominable beasts, and all
THE IDOLS OF THE HOUSE ofIshael, poui'troyed upou
the xvall rsund about. I have shewn this to be a de-
scription of an Egyptian mystic cell: which certainly
was adorned only with Egyptian Gods : and yet those
Gods are here called, by way of distinction, all the idols
of the house oj Israel : which seems plainly to infer
this People's more particular addiction to them, liut
the words, house of Israel, being used in a vision
describing the idolatries of the house of Judah, I take it
for granted, that in this indefinite number of All the
idols of the house of Israel, were eminently included
those two prime idols of the house of Israel, the calves
of Dan and Ikth-el. And the rather, for that I find
the original Calves held a distinguished station in the
paintings of the Mystic Cell ; as the reader may see by
casting his eye upon the Eembine Table. And this, by
the way, will lead us to the reason of .Teroboam's erect-
ing two Calves. For they were, we see, worshipped in
pairs by the Egyptians, as representing Isis and Osiris.
And what is remarkable, the Calves \\crc male and fe-
male, as appears from 2 Kings, ch. x. ver. 29. compared
with Rosea, ch. x. ver. 5. where in one place the mas-
culine, and in the other the feminine term is employed.
But though the Egyptian Gods are thus, by way of
eminence, called the idols of the house of Israel, yet
other idols they had besides Egyptian ; and of those good
store, as we shall now see.

For this prophetic vision is employed in describing
the three master-superstitions of this unhappy people,
the Egvptian, the Phenician, and the Pehsian.

IL The Egyptian w;e have seen. The Phexician-
follows in these words; He said also unto me. Turn

thee

398 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater abominations
that they do. Then he brought me to the gate of the
Lord's house, n hich was towards the north, and behold,
there sat womex weeping for Tammuz*.

III. The Persian superstition is next described in
this manner: Then said he unto me. Hast thou seen
this, O son of man ? Turn thee yet again, and thou
shall see greater abominations than these. And he
brought me into the inner court of the Lord's house,
and behold, at the door of the temple of the Lord, betxveen
the porch and the altar, were about Jive and txcenty men,
with their backs towards the temple of the Lord, and

THEIR FACES TOWARDS THE EAST ; AND THEY WOR-
SHIPPED THE SUN TOWARDS THE EAST-f-.

" 1 . It is to be observed, that when the Prophet is bid
to turn from the Egyptian to the Phenician rites, he is
then said to look towards the north ; which was the si-
tuation of Phenicia with regard to Jerusalem ; conse-
quently, he before stood southward, the situation of
Egypt, with regard to the same place. And when,
from thence, he is bid to turn into the inner court of
the Lord's house, to see the Persian rites, this was east,
the situation of Persia. With such exactness is the re-
presentation of the whole Vision conducted.

2. Again, as the mysterious rites of Egypt are said,
agreeably to their usage, to be held in secret, by their
Elders and Rulers only: so the Phenician rites,
for the same reason, are shewn as they were celebrated
by the People, in open day. And the Persian wor-
ship of the sun, which was performed by the Magi, is
here said to be observed by the Priests alone, fve and
twenty men with their faces towards the east.

These three capital Superstitions, the Prophet, again,
tlistinctly objects to them, in a following chapter. Thou
hast also committed fornication with the Egyptians
thy neighbours, great of flesh and hast increased
thy whoredoms to provoke me to anger. Thou hast
played the whore also with the Assyrians, because thou
zvast iinsatiable: yea thou hast played the harlot with
them, and yet couldst not be satisfied. Thou hast more-

* Ezek. viii. 13, & seq. f It>- i5i ^ scq.

* See note [OOOOJ at the end of this Book.

over

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 299

over nmltipficd thy fornication in the land of Canaan
unto Chaldea, and yet thou xcast not satisfied herewith *'.

And when that miserable Remnant, who, on the
taking of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, had escaped
the fate of their enslaved countrymen, were promised
safety and security, if they would stay in Judea ; they
said, No, but we will go into the hind of Rgyvt, where
•we shall see no zvar, nor hear the sound of the trumpet,
nor have hunger of ' bread, and there will we dwell •f.

Thus we see what a surprising fondness this infatuated
people had for Egypt, and how entirely they were seized
and possessed with its superstitions. Which the more I
consider, the more I am confirmed in the truth of Scrip-
ture-history (so opposite to Sir Isaac Newton's Egyptian
Chronology), that Egypt was, at the egression of the
Israelites, a great and powerful empire. For nothing
so much attaches a people to any particular Constitution,
or mode of Government, as the high opinion of its
power, wealth, and felicity; these being ever supposed
the joint product of its Religion and civil Policy.

II. Having thus proved the first part of the Proposi-
tion, That the Jewish people xcere extremely fond of
Egyptian manners, and did frequently fall into Egyptian
superstitions, I come now to tlic second ; That many of
the Laws given to them by the ministry of IVIoses were
instituted partly in compliance to their prejudices, and
partly in opposition to those and to the like superstitions.
But to set what I have to say in support of this second
part of the Proposition in a fair light, it may be proper
just to state and explain the ends of the Ritual Law.
Its first and principal, was to guard the chosen people
from the contagion of idolatrv : a second, and very
important end, was to prepare them for the reception of
the Messiah. The first required that the Ritual Law
should be objective to the Pagan superstitions j and
the second, that it should be typical of their ^reat
Deliverer. Now the coincidencies of these two ends,
not being sufficiently adverted to, hath been the principal
occasion of that obstinate aversion to the truth here
advanced, That iuuch of the Ritual was given, partly

* Ezek. xvi. 26, & seq. f Jerem. xlii. 14.

300 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

in compUatice to the Peoples prejudices, and vautly in
appositio)i to Egyptian superstitions : These men tliink-
ing the falsehood of the Proposition sufficiently proved
in sllev^•ing the Ritual to be typical ; as ii the one end
excluded the other : w hereas we see they were very con-
sistent ; and hereafter shall see, tliat their concurrency
affords one of the noblest proofs of the divinity of its
original.

And now, to go on m ith our subject : The intelligent
reader cannot but perceive, that the giving a ritual in
opposition to Egyptian superstition, was a necessary
consequence of the People's propensity towards it. For
a people so prejudiced, and who v.ere to be dealt with
as free and accountable Agents, could not possibly be
kept separate from other nations, and pure from foreign
idolatries, any otherwise than by giving them laws in
opposiTiox to those superstitions. But such being the
corrupt state of man's Will as ever to revolt against what
directly opposeth its prejudices, wise Governors, when
under the necessity of giving such Laws, have, in order
to break and evade the force of human perversity, al-
w-ays intermixed them with others which eluded the per-
versity, by flattering the prejudice; where the indulgence
could not be so abused as to occasion the evil which the
lo'us of opposition Avere designed to prevent*. And in
this manner it was that our inspired Lawgiver acted with
his people, if we will believe Jesus himself, where,
speaking of a certain positive institution, he says, Moses
for the HARDNESS OF vouE HEARTS xcrotc you this pre-
cept ■\. Plainly intimating their manners to be such,
that, had not Moses indulged them in some things, they
would have revolted against ailjl. It follows therefore,
that Moses's giving Laws to the Israelites, in compliance
to these their prejudices, was a natural and necessary
consequence of Laws given in opposition to them. Thus
far from the nature of the thing.

* See this reasoning inforced, and explained more at large in the
proof of the next proposition,
t Mark x. 5. and Matt. xix. 8.

X This is still further seen from God's being pleased to be con-
sidered by them as a local tutelary Deity : which, when we come to
that point, we shall shew was the prevailing superstition of those
times.

Matter

Sect. G.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 301

Matter of fact confirms this reasoning. We find in
the Law a surprising relation and resemblance between
Jewish and Egyptian rites, in circumstances both oppo-
site and similar. But the learned Spencer hath fully
exhausted this subject, in his excellent work, De legibus
Hebrceorum ritualibiis eariwi ratiombus ; and thereby
done great service to divine revelation : For the ritual
LA^r, when thus exj)laincd, is seen to be an Institution
of the most beautiful and sublime contrivance. Which,
without its CAUSES (no where to be found but in the
I'oad of this theory) must lie for ever open to the scorn
and contempt of Libertines and Unbelievers. This
noble work is no other than a paraphrase and comment
on the third part of a famous treatise called More Ne-
voc/iim, of the Rabbi Moses J\L\nioNiDEs : of whom
only to say (as is his common Encomium) that he was
the first of the Rabbins raho left off trifling, is a poor
and invidious comtnendation. Thither I refer the impar-
tial reader ; relying on his justice to believe that I mean
to charge myself with no more of Spencer's opinions than
^^•hat directly tend to the proof of this part of my Pro-
position, by shewing, That there is a great and surprising
relation and resemblance between the Jewish and Egyp-
tian rites, in circumstances both opposite and similar.

I ask nothing unreasonable of the reader, when I de-
sire him to admit of this as proved ; since the learned
Hermax Wrrsius, in a book professedly written to con-
fute the hypothesis of Maimonides and Spencer, confesses
the fact in the fullest and amplest manner *.

* Ita autem commodissime me prucessuriuu cxi.ifi»io, si prinio lon^a
cxemplorum inductione ex doctissimorum xirorum nicnte, et eoniin pic- ■
rumque verbis, demonstravcro, MAitNAM atque mirandam plane

CONVENIENTIAM IN RELIGIONIS NEGOTIO VETERES INTER jEGYPTIOS

ATQUE iiEBRSOs ESSE. Qii(C cum foi'tuita esse nonpossit, nccessc est
vt vel /Egyptii sua ab HebiaMs, xel ex adrerso llebra?i sua ah
vEgyptiis abeant. And again, Purro, si, levuto aiitiqvitatis obscurioris
veto, gentium omnium ritus oculis li'^ilantibus intucamur, ^^gyptios !)■
llebrajos, pr/E omnibus alus moribus similli.mos fuisse compe-
riemus. Neqvc hue Kii cherum fefellit, evjus hocc sunt verba : Hebraji
tantam habent ad ritus, sacrificia, cajj-inionias, sacras discipliiias
jEgyptiorum afiiniiateni, ut vel JEgyptios he brai zanies, vel Hebrieos
agi/ptizantes fuisse, plane niihi persuadeani. — Sed quid verbis opus
est? in rem prcEsentem veniamus, [^Egyptiaca, p. 4.] And so he goes
on to transcribe, from Spencer and Marsliam, all the eminent parti-
culars of that resemblance.

"What

302 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

What is it then (a stranger to Controversy \vould be
apt to inquire) which this learned man addresses himself,
in a large quarto volume, to confute ? It is the plain and
natural consequence of this resemblance, namely, That
tJie Jewish Ritual icas given partly in compliance to the
People's prejudices, and partly in opposition to Egyptian
supei^stitions ; the Proposition we undertake to prove.
Witsius thinks, or is rather willing to think, that the
Egyptian Ritual was invented in imitation of the Je« ish.
Por the reader sees, that both sides are agreed in this,
That either the Jeivs borrow ed from the Egyptians, or
the Egyptians from the Jews ; so strong is the resem-
blance which forces this confession from them.

Now the only plausible support of Witsius's party
being a thing taken for gi"anted, viz. that the rites and
customs of the Egyptians, as delivered by the Greeks,
were of much later original than these writers assign ro
them ; and my discourse on the axtiquities of
Egypt, in the preceding section, proving it to be en-
tirely groundless ; the latter part of the proposition, riz.
Tliat many of the laws given to the Jews, by the ministry
of Moses, were instituted partly in compliance to their
prejudices, and partly in opposition to Egyptian super-
stitions, is sufficiently proved.

But to let nothing that hath the appearance of an ar-
gument remain unanswered, I shall, in as few words as
may be, examine this opinion, That the Egyptians bor-
rowed from the Israelites; regarding both Nations in
that very light in which holy Scripture hath placed them.
The periods then in which this must needs be supposed
to have happened, are one or other of these: i. The
time of Abraham's residence in Egypt; 2. of Joseph's
government ; 3. of the slavery of his, and his bre-
thren's descendants ; or, 4. Any indefinite time after
their egression from Egypt.

Now not to insist on the utter improbability of a potent
nation s borrowing its religious Rites from a private
Family, or fi'om a People they held in slavery ; I answer,
that of these four periods, the three first are beside the
question. For the characteristic resemblance insisted
on, is that which w e find between the Eg\'ptian ritual,
and v\hat is properly called mosaic al. And let it not

Sect. 0.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 303

be said, that we arc unable to distinguish the Rites which
were purely legal from such as were patriarchal * :
for Moses, to add the greater force and efficacy to the
whole of his Institution, hath been careful to record e^ch
specific Rite whicli vvas properly Patriarchal.

Tims, though Moses enjoined c^RCUMCISI0^', he hath
been careful to record the patriarchal institution of it
with all its circumstances — Moses gave unto you chx um-
Cision (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers)
says Jesus f. So again, where he institutes the Jewish
sabl)atii of rest, he records the patriarchal observance of it,
in these woi'ds : — In six daijs the Lord made heaven and
earth, &^'c. and rested the seventh day : whejxfore the
Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallozved it

The last period then only remains to be considered,
namely, from the Egression. Now at that time and
from thenceforward, we say, the Egyptians would not
borrow of the Israelites, for these two plain and con-
vincing reasons. 1. They held the Israelites in the
greatest contempt, and abhorrence, as shepherds,
slaves, and enemies, men who had brought a total
devastation on their Country : and had embraced a Re-
ligion whose Ritual daily treated the Gods of -^gypt with
the utmost ignominy and despite ||. But people never
borrow their religious Rites from those towards wliom
they stand in such inveterate distance. 1. It was part
of the Religion of the old Egyptians to borrow from
none ^ : most certainly, not from the Jews. This is
the account we have, of their natural disposition, from
those Ancients who have treated of theii' manners. While,
on the other hand, we are assured from intallible au-
thority that the Israelites, of the time of Moses, were in
the very extreme of a contrary humour, and were for

BOIIROWING

* See note [PPPP] at the end of this Book.

f 1 John vii. 22. See note [QQQQ] at the end of this Book.

X Exod. XX. 11. And see note [llRRPi] at the end of this Book.

II See Spencer, De Leg. Heb. Rit. vol. i. p. 296.

% JE^TjpliiJctniari videntur qiiicquid ol yonTq a •nra^£^Ei|av, parejites
non co7jmionslrarunt, Witsii ^gi/ptiaca, p. 6. — nal^ioic-i ^1 ^^tufumi
HQfAOKTi, a,XM)i tsoiua, e^n^lesJvlai. lierodot. 1. ii. C. 7^^- — 'EXMiVty.oTcrt
yo/Liaioici ^tiynfft p^pao-fiar to (rvfjilTicii tlveTy, f/.riS'' AAAflN MHAAMA
MHAAMflN utid^uTraii tif^xloict. ol f/.i\i k'v «>.?.ci AlyuTtliot uru t£t«
fvXuiriTiiffi. c 9 1.

304 THE DIVINE LEGATIOX [Book TV.

BORROWING all they could lay their hands on. This is
so notorious, that I was surprised to find the learned
Witsius attempt to prove, that the Egyptians -ucre
greatly inclined to borroicing * ; but much more sur-
prised with his arguments ; which are these, i . Clemens
Alex, says, that it was the custom of the Barbarians, and
particularly the Egyptians, to honour their legislators
and benefactors as Gods. 2. Diodorus Siculus confirms
this account, where he says, that the Egyptians were
the most grateful of all mankind to their benefactors.
And 5. The same historian tells us, that when Egypt
was become a province to Persia, the Egyptians deified
Darius, while yet alive ; which honour they never had
done to any other king-}-. — Tins is the whole of his evi-
dence to prove the Egyptian genius so greatly inclined
to foreign Rites. Nor should I have exposed the naked-
ness of this learned and honest man, either in this place
or in any other, but for the use which hath been made
of his authority ; of which more hereafter. But Witsius,
and those in his way of thinking, when they talk of the
Egyptians' borrowing Hebrew rites, seem to have enter-
tained a wrong idea of that highly policied People. It
v,-as not in ancient Egvpt, as in ancient Greece, where

every

* His words are these: Magna quidcm laterum contentione rccla-
7>iGt Doctissimus Spencerus, prorsusquc incrcdibUe esse conleniUt, con-
siderato gentis utriusgue genio, ut ab Hebrxis ^Egyptii in suam tarn
multa nligiuiiejn adscivennt. At quod ipsi incrcdibile tidcfur, id mihi,
post alios truditime atque judicio clarissimos, pcrquam probabilc est :
IPSO ^Egyptiorl ji ID suADENTE GENIO. 1)1 CO quippc prcest(intissi/ui
Jluclores consaitivnt , solitos fjiisse ^gi/ptios maxima eos exist imatione
prosequi, quos sapicntia atque vtrfute exceUciitiorcs ccrnerent, c^- a
quibus se ingcntibus bcneficiis afectos esse meminerant : adeo quidcm
ut ejusmodi mortales, non defunctos solum, sed superstites, pro
Diis iaberent. Lib. iii. c. i-i. p. ■26-2.

t Clemens Alexandrii.us clarum esse dicit, Barbaros exirnie semper
honorasse sues legumlatores ^- praceptores Deus ipsos appellantes. — Inter
Barbaros aiitem maxime id pra^stiterutit .•Egyptii. Quiiietiam genus
^gypfium ddigentissime iilos in Dcos retulit. Assentitur Diodorus;
^gyptins denique supra cceteros Moriaics quicquid bene de ipsis mcretur
grata mente prosequi affmnant. — Xeque popularibiis mode suis atque
indigeiiis — sed Peregrinis — Facit hue Darii Persarum regis exemplum,
quod Diodori iterum verbis exponam. Tandem Darius legibus JEgyp-
tiorum aiiimum appulisse dicitur — Nam cum Sacerdotibus JEgypti fa-
miliaritatem iniit, &c. — Proptcrca tuntum honoris consecutus est, vt
superstes adhuc Diri appellatione?n quod nulli reguni aliorum contigit,
promeruerit. Lib. iii. c. 12. p. 263.

Sect 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 305

every private man, who had travelled for it, found him-
self at liberty to set up wliat li/ivg vmiity he pleased.
For in that wary Monarchy, Religion was in the hand of
the magistrate, and under the inspection of the Public:
so that no private novelties could be introduced, had
the people Ijcen as mucli disposed, as they Aveie indeed
averse, to innovations ; and that any public ones w.ould
be made, by rites borrowed from the Hebrews, is, as
we have shewn above, highly improbable.

Hitherto I have endeavoured to disci'cdit this propo-
sition, ( that the Egyptians borroxved of the Isfaelites )
from the nature of the tiling. I shall now shew the
falsehood of it, from the infallible testimony of God him-
self: who, upbraiding the Israelites with their borrowing
idolatrous Rites of all their neighbours, expresses himself
in this manner, by the pi-ophet Ezekiel : The contrary
is 171 thee from other Women, avhereas none fol-
LowETH THEE TO COMMIT AV'iiOREDoMs : ami in that
thou gives t a reward, and no reward is given to thee,
therefore thou art contrary *. The intelligent reader
perceives that the plain meaning of the metaphor is this,
Ye Jews are contrary to all other nations : you are fond
of borrowing their Rites, while none of them care to
borrow yours. But this remarkable fact, had it not been
so expressly delivered, might easily have been collected
from the whole course of sacred history. The reason
will be accounted for hereafter. At present I shall only
need to observe, that by the words, JVhereas none fol-
loiveth thee to commit whoredoms, is not meant, that no
particular Cientile ever embraced the Jewish religion ;
but, that no Gentile people took in any of its Rites into
their own national Worship. That this is the true sense
of the passage appears from hence, 1 . The idolatry of
the COMMUNITY of Israel is here spoken of: and this,
as will be shewn in the next book, did not consist in re-
nouncing the ReligioQ. of Moses, but in polluting it with
idolatrous mixtures. 2. The embracing the Jewish re-
ligion, and renouncing idolatry, could not, in figurative
propriety, be called committing whoredom, though pol-
luting the Jewish Rites, by taking them into their own
superstitions, gives elegance to the figure thus applied.
* Ezek. xvi. 34.

Vol. IV. X The

306 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book. IV.

The Reader, perhaps, may w onder how men can stand
out against such kind of evidence. It is not, I will assure
hitn, from the abundance of argument on the other side ; or
from their not seeing the force on this ; but from a pious,
and therefore very excusable, apprehension of danger to
the Divinity of the Law, if it should be once granted that
any of the Ceremonial part was given in compliance to
the peoples prejudices. Of which imaginary danger
lord Bolino;brokc hath availed himself, to calumniate
the Law, for a compliance too evident to be denied.

The apprehension therefore of this consequence being
that which makes Believers so unwillins to own, and
Deists, against the very genius of their infidelity, so
ready to embrace an evident truth ; I seem to conie in
opportunely to set both parties right : while I shew, in
support of my tuird propositiox, that the conse-
quence is groundless ; and that the fears and hopes,
built upon this supposed compliance, are vain and fan-
tastic : which, I venture to predict, will ever be the
issue of such iears and hopes as arise only from the Reli-
gionist's honest adherence to common sense and to the
woi-cl of God.

11.

Our TH?RD PROPOSITION is, That Moses s Egyptian
learning, and the Laios he instituted in compliance to the
People's prejudices, and in opposition to Egyptian su-
perstitions, are no treasonable objection to the divinity of
h is ??rission.

The first part of the Proposition concerns Moses's
Egyptian ivisdoni. Let us previously consider what
that was. iVIosKs (says the holy martyr Stephen) was

LEARNED IN ALL THE AVISDOM OF THE EGYPTIANS,

mid mighty in words and deeds *. Now where the
WISDOM of a Nation is spoken of, that which is charac-
teristic of the Nation must needs l)e meant : where the
rcisdom of a particular man, that which is peculiar to his
quality and profession. St. Stephen, in this place,
speaks of both. In both, tlierefore, he must needs mean
CIVIL or POLITICAL wisdom because, for that (as we
have shewn) the Egyptian nation was principally dis-
tinguished : and in that consisted the eminence of cha-
* Acts vii. 22.

racter

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 307

racter of one who had a royal adoption, was bred up at
court, and became at lentith the Leader and Lawgiver
of a numerous People. More tiian this,— St. Stephen
is here speaking of him under this public character, and
therefore he must be necessarily understood to mean,
That Moses ivas consummate in the science of Legislation.
Tlie words indeed are, all the learning of the Egijp-
tians. But everv good lo>2;ician kno\\s, that where tlie
thing spoken of refers to some particular use (as here,
Moses's LEAUNixci, to his conducting the Israelites
out of Egypt) the particle all does not mean all of
every kind, but all the parts of one kind. In this re-
strained sense, it is frequently used in the sacred
Writings. Thus in the Gospel of St. John, Jesus says,
JFhen he the Spirit of truth is come he u ill guide you
into ALL truth*. But further, the concluding part of
the character, — and mighty in wouds and deeds, will
not easily suffer the foregoing part to admit of any other
interpretation; ?v $\ Svvxro^ ly AOroiS Iv EProiS.
This was the precise character of the ancient Chief :
who, leading a free and willing People, needed the arts
of peace, such as persuasion and law-jiaking, the
AOroi ; and the arts of war, such as conduct and
courage, the EPFA in the text. Hence it is, that
Jesus, who was The Prophet like unto Moses, the Le-
gislcitor of the new covenant as the other was of the old,
and the Conductor of our spiritual warfare, is charac-
terized in the same words, h^x-rl^ \v EPrX2» >^ A0rX2t
ivxiliQv T» 0EOT><J Tinxflof T» AaS ■A^. — A prophet, mighty
in DEED and word, before God and all the people.
This wisdom, therefore, in which .Moses was said to be
versed, we conclude, was the to zrpxfixccTtKov rrjf qnXocotpla^f
in contradistinction to the to 3^iwf»i1»xoV. Hence may be
seen the impertinence of those long inquiries, which, on
occasion of these words, men have run into, concerning
the state of the speculative and mechanic arts of Egypt,
at this period.

Tills being the \viSdom, for which Moses is here ce-
lebrated, the Deist hastily concluded, that therefore
the establishment of the Jewish Policy was the sole con-
trivance of Moses himself; He did not reflect, that a
* John xvi. 13. t Luke xxiv. 19.

X 2 fundamental

308 THE DIFINE LEGATION [Book IV.

fundamental truth (which he Avill not venture to dispute
any more than the Bchever) stands very much in the way
of his conclusion ; namely, That God, in the moral
government of the 'icorld, never docs that in an extra-
ordinary icay, which can be equally icell effected in an
ordinary.

In the separation of the Israelites, u civil Policy and
a national Religion were to be established, and incor-
porated with one another, by God himself For that
end, he appointed an under-agent, or instrument : who,
in this work of Lemslation, was either to understand the
government of a People, and so, be capable of com-
prehending the general plan delivered to him by Gou,
for the erection of this extraordinary Policy : or else he
was not to understand the government of a People,, and
so, God himself, in the execution of his plan, was, at
every step, to interfere, and direct the ignorance and
inability of his Agent. Now-, as this perpetual inter-
position might be spared by the choice of an able Leader,
we conclude, on the maxim laid down, that God
would certainly en)ploy such an one in the execution of
his purpose.

There was yet another, and that no slight expediency,
in such a Leader. The Israelites were a stubborn
People, now first forming into Civil government ; greatly
licentious; and the more so, for their just coming out
of a state of slavepy. Had ]Moses therefore been so
unequal to his designatidii, as to need God's direction
at every turn to set liim right, he would soon have lost
tiie authority requisite for keeping an unruly multitude
in awe; and have sunk into such contempt amongst
them, as must have retarded their designed establish-
ment.

But it will be said, If there wanted so able a Chief
at the first setting up of a theocracy, there would
still be the same want, though not in an equal degree,
during the whole continuance of that divine form of
government." It is likely there would, because I find,
God did make a jjroper provision for it ; first in the
erection of the schools of the prophets : and after-
wards, in the establishment of the great Saxhedrim,
^^iiich succeeded tliem. But sacred history mentioning

these

Sect. 6.] OF -MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 309

these Schools of the propiiets, and tlie assembly of the
Seventy elders, only occasionally, the accounts ue have
of both are very short and imperfect. Which is the
reason why interpreters, who have not well weighed the
causes of that occasional mention, have sufltred them-
selves to be greatly misled by the Rabbins.

I. Tile most particular account we have of the Schools
of the prophets is in the first book of Samuel, and on this
occasion : David, in his escape from the rage of Saul,
fled to his protector, Samuel, who then presided over a
School of the prophets, at Naioth in R,amah*. When
this was told to Saul, he sent messengers in pursuit of
him ■f. And, on the ill success of their errand, went
afterwards himself But as it Mas the intent of tlie
historian, in this mention of the Schools of the FropJiels,
only to acquaint us with the effect they had on Saul
and his messengers, when the spirit of God came upon
them, we have only a partial view of these Collegiate
bodies, that is, a view of them while at their devotions
only, and not at their studies. For Saul and his mes-
sengers coming when the Society was propliesying ||, or
at divine worship, the spirit of God fell upon them, and
they prophesied also. And thus the Chal. Par. under-
stands prophesying, as did the apostolic writers, who use
the word in the same sense, of adoring God, and singing
praises unto him. For we may well suppose these So-
cieties began and ended all their daily studies with this
holy exercise.

But from hence, m riters of contrary paities have fallen
into the same strange and absurd opinion ; while they
imagined that, because these Schools were indeed nur-
series of the Prophets, that therefore they were places
of instruction for 1 don't knov\- what kind of art of
PROPHESY. Spinoza borrowed this senseless fancy from
the Rabbins, and hath delivered it down to his fol-
lowers^; from whence they conclude that prohhesy
was amongst the mechanic arts of the Hebrews, But
an inquirer of either common sense or common honesty
would have seen it was a College for the study of the

* I Sam. xix. 18. f Ver. 21,

X Vcr. '23. II Ver. 20.

^ See note [SSSS} at the end of this Book.

X 3 Jewish

310 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Jewish Law only ; and, as such, naturally and properly,
a seminary of Prophets. For those who were most
knowing as well as zealous in the Law, were surely the
most fit to convey God's commands to his People.

This account of the nature of the Schools of the pro-
phets helps to shew us how it became a proverb in
Israel, Is Saul also amongst the Prophets*?
which, I apprehend, has been commonly mistaken. The
proverb was used to express a thing unlooked for and
unlikely. But surely the spirit oj'dod falling occasionally
on their supreme Magistrate, at a time when it was so
plentifully bestowed on private men, could be no such
unexpected matter to the people ; who knew too, that
even Idolaters and Gentiles had partaken of it, w hile
concerned in matters which related to their Economy.
But more than this. They could not be ignorant that
the spirit of God had usually made its abode with Saul ;
as appears from the following words of the sacred histo-
rian, But the spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and
an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him-f. From all
this I conclude that the people s surprise, which occa-
sioned this proverb, was not because they heard the
spirit of God liad fallen upon him : but a very different
reason, which I shall now endeavour to explain.

Saul, with many great qualities, both of a public
man and a private, and in no respect an unable Chief,
was yet so poorly prejudiced in favour of the human
Policies of the neghbouring Nations, as to become
impiously cold and negligent in the support and ad-
vancement of the Law of God; though raised to
regal power from a low and obscure condition, for this
very purpose. He was, in a word, a mere Politician,
w ithout the least zeal or love for the divine Constitution
of his Country. This was his great, and no wonder it
should prove his unpardonable crime. For his folly had
reduced things to that extremity, that either He must
fall, or the Law. Now, this Pagan turn of mind was
no secret to the People. When, therefore, they were
told that lie had sent frequent messengers to the supreme
School of the prophets, where zeal for the Law was so

* 1 Sam. xix. 24.

t Ch. xvi. 14. — Aud see oole [TTTT] at the end of this Book.

eminently

SectC] OF :\IOSES DEMONSTRATED. 311

eminently professed ; and had afterw ards gone himself
thither, and entered \vith divine raptures and ecstasy
into their devotions ; they received this extraordinary
news with all the \\onder and amazement it deserved.
And, in the height of their surprise, they cried out, Is
Saul also amongst the prophets? i. e. Is Saul, who
throughout his whole reign, hath so much sliglited and
contemned the Law, and would conduct all his actions
by the mere rules of human Policy, is he at length be-
come studious of and zealous for the Law of God? And
the miracle, of such a change in a Politician, brought it
into a proverb before the mistake wa^ found out.

This matter will receive farther light from what we
are told, in the same story, concerning David; a man
of so opposite a character, with regard to his sentiments
of the Law, that it appears to have been for this difference
only that he was decreed by God to succeed the other,
in his kingdom. Now David, tlie story tells us, sojourned
for some time in this School. — So David Jled and escaped,
and came to Samuel at Ramah, and told him all that
Saul had done to him, and he and Samuel went and
DWELT IN Naioth*. And here it was, as we may
reasonably conclude, that he so greatly cultivated and
improved his natural disposition of love and zeal for tlie
Law, as to merit that most glorious of all titles, the
MAN AFTER God's OWN HEART; for, till HOW, his Way
of lite had been very distant from accomplishments of
this nature; his childhood and youth were spent in
the country ; and his eai ly manhood in camps and
courts -f-. But it is of importance to the cause of truth
to know, that this character was not given him for his
private morals, but his public ; his zeal for the ad-
vancement of the glory of the Theocracy. This is seen
from the first mention of him under this appellation, by
Samuel, who tells Saul — But noxo thy kingdom shall
not continue. — The Lord hath sought him a man after
HisoAVN HEART, and the Lord hath commamled hint to
be Gaptain over his People %■ And again, Ciod himself
says, / have chosen Jerusalem that my name 7night he

* 1 Sam. -<ix. 18.

+ See note [UUUU] at the end of this Book.
I 1 Sam. xiii. 14.

X 4 thers,

312 THE DIVINE LEGATION [BooklV.

there, and have chosen David to be over my people
Israel *. Here David s vicegerency, wc see, is repre-
sented to be as necessary to the support of tiie Eco-
nomy, as God's peculiar residence in Jerusalem. Con-
formably to these ideas it nas, that Hosea, pro{)hesying
of the EestoTalion of the Jews, makes the God of Israel
and his Vicegerent inseparable parts of the Economy.
— Afterwards shall tJic children of Israel return, and
seek the Lord iheir Gon and Dawt) their Kin of;
i. e. they shall have the same zeal for the dispensation
Avhich king David had ; and on account of which
they shall honour his memory. Now if we would but
seek for the reason of this pre-eminence, in David's
public, not in his private character, we should see it
afforded no occasion of scandal His zeal for the
Lav.- was constantly the same ; as is u'ianifest by this
distinguishing circumstance, that he never fell into Ido-
latry. But the phrase itself, of a man after God's own
heart, is best explained in the case of Samuel. Eli the
prophet was rejected, and Samuel put in his place just
in the same manner that David superseded Saul, On
this occasion, when God's purpose was denounced to
Eli, we find it exj)ressed in the same manner — And I
mil raise me up a faithful priest, that shall do

ACCORDING TO THAT AVHICH IS IN MINE .HEART |j.

What was then in God's heart (to speak in the language
of humanity) the context tells us. The establishment
of his Dispensation. Thus, we see, the man after Gods
ozi n htart is the man who seconds God's viev.s in the
support of the Theocracy. No other virtue was here in
question. Though in an indefinite way of speaking,
v. here the subject is only the general relation of man to
God, no one can, indeed, be called a man after God's
Occn heart, but he who uses his best endeavours to imi-
tate Gods purity as far as miserable humanity will allow,
in tht uniform practice of every virtue.

By this time, tiierefore, I presume, the serious Reader
will he disposed to take for just what it is worth, that re-
fined observation of the noble author of the Character-
istics, where he says, " It is not. possible, by the Muses

* 1 Cliron. vi. 6. f llos. iii. 5.

j See note [XXXX] at the end of this Book. . |i 1 Sam. ii. 35.

" art,

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 313

" art, to make that royal Hero appear amiable in human
" eyes, \\\\o found such favour in the eye of Heaven.
" Such arc mere human hearts, that they can hardly
" find the least sympathy with that only one which
" had the character of being after the pattern of the
" Ahnighty*." — His lordship seems willing to make any
thing the test of truth, but that only which has a claim
to it, RIGHT REASON. Somctimes this test\s, ridicule;
here, it is the art of poetry — it is not possible (says
he) for the Iluses art to make that royal Hero appear
amiable in human eyes. Therefore, because David was
not a character to be managed by the Poet, for the Hero
of a fiction, he was not a fit instrument in the hands of
God, to stvppprt a Theocracy : and having nothing
amiable in the eyes of our noble Critic, there could be
nothing in him to make him acceptable to his Maker.
But when classical criticism goes beyond its bounds, it
is liable to be bewildered : as here. The noble Author
assures us that David was the only man characterized, to
be AFTER God's own heart, whereas we see the very
same character is given of Samuel ; and both honoured
with this glorious appellation for the same reason.

\\. As for the great Sanhedrim, it seems to have
been established after the failure of Prophecy. And
concerning the members of this body, the llabbins tell
us^ diere was a tradition, that they were bound to be
skilled in all sciences ('. So far is certain, that they ex-
tended their jurisdiction to the judging of doctrines and
opinions, as appears by their deputation to Jesus, to
know by what authority he did liis great works. And
as the address of our blessed Saviour on this occasion
deserves well to be illustrated, I shall set down the oc-
currence as it is recorded by St. Matthew: — " When
" he was come into the temple, the chief priests and
" the elders of the people came unto him as he was
*' teaching, and said, By what authority dost thou these
" things ? And who gave thee this authority ? And Jesus
" answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one.
" thing, which if you tell me, I in like wise will tell you
" by what authority I do these tilings. The baptism of

* Advice to an Author, Sect. 3. vol. i.
f See Smith's Select Discourses, p. 258.

" John,

514 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

" John, whence M'as it? from heaven, or of men? And
" they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say,
" From heaven, he will say unto us. Why did ye not
*' then believe him ? Hut if ue shall say. Of men ; we fear
" the people : for all hold JoJin as a proj)het. And
" they answered Jesus, and said. We cannot tell. And
" he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what au-
" thority 1 do these things*." V/e are not to suppose
this to be a captious evasion of a question made by those
\^ hose authority he did not acknowledge. On the con-
trary, it was a direct reply to an acknowledged juris-
diction, (as Jesus was obedient to all the institutions of
his coimtry) convincing them that the question needed
not, even on the principles of that jurisdiction, any pre-
cise answer. They sent to him to know the authority on
which he acted. He asks them whether they had yet
determined of John's : they say, they had not. Then
replies Jesus, " I need not tell you my authority ;
since the Sanhedrim's not having yet determined of John's,
shews such a determination unnecessary ; or at least, since
(both by John s account and mine) he is represented as
the forerunner of my mission, it is fit to begin with his pre-
tensions first." The address and reasoning of this reply
are truly divine.

The foregoing observations concerning this method of
divine wisdom, in the establishment of the Jewish Theo-
cracy, will be much supported, if we contrast it with
that which Providence was pleased to take in the pro-
pa "ration of Christianity.

The blessed Jesus came down to teach mankind a
spiritual Religion, the object of each individual as such ;
and offered to their dcceptance on the sole force of its
own evidence. The Propagators of this religion had no
need to be endoAved w ith worldly authority or learning ;
for here was no Body of men to be conducted : nor no
civil Policy or government to be erected or administered.
Had Jesus, on the contrary, made choice of the Great
and Learned for this employment, they had discredited
their own success. It might have been then objected,
that the Gospel had made its way by the aid of human
power or sopliistry. To preserve, therefore, the splen-

.* Chap. xxi. Q3, & seq.

dour

Sect. r>.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 315

dour of its evidence unsullied, the meanest and most
illiterate of a barbarous people were made choice of, for
the instruments of God s last great Revelation to man-
kind : armed with no other power but of Miracles, and
that only for the t^redence of their mission ; and with
no other wisdom but of Truth, and that only to be
proposed freely to the understandings of Particulars. St.
Paijl, vvho had fathomed the mysterious depths of divine
wisdom under each Economy, was so penetrated with
the view of this last Dispensation, that he breaks out
into this rapturous and triumphant exclamation, JVhere
is the JVise ? JPliere is the Scribe ? JVhere is the Dis~
puter of this world? Hath not God made foolish the
xi isdom of this world * ?

But further, Divine wisdom so wonderfully conf rived,
that the inability and ignorance of the Prof)agators of
Christianity w cro as useful to the advancement of tliis
Religion, as the authority and wisdom of the Leader of
the Jews were for the establishment of theirs.

I shall only give one instance out of many which will
occur to an attentive reader of the Evangelic history.

When Jesus had chosen these mean and weak instru-
ments of his power, he suffered them to continue in their
national prejudices concerning his Character ; the nature
of his kingdom j and the extent of his jurisdiction ; as
the sole human means of kee[)ing them attached to his
service, not only during the course of their attendance
on his ministry, but for some time after his resurrection,
and the descent of the Holy Ghost upon them ; that
Power which was to lead them into all truth ; but by just
and equal steps. Let us see the use of this, in the fol-
lowing circumstjince : From the order of the whole of
God's Dispensation to mankind, as laid down in Scrip-
ture, we learn, that the otler of the Gospel was to be
first fairly made to the Jews ; and then afterwards to the
Gentiles. Now when, soon after the ascension of our
Lord, the Chui'ch was forced, by the persecution of
the Synagogue, to leave Judea, and to disperse itself
through all the regions round about ; had the Apostles,
on this dispersion, been fully instructed in the design of
God to call the Gentiles into his church, resentment for
* 1 Cor. i. 20,

their

3i6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

their ill usage within Judea, and the small prospect of
better success amongst those wlio were w ithout, which
they of Jerusalem had prejudiced against the Gospel,
would naturally have disposed them to turn inniiediately
to the Gentiles. By which means God's purpose, with-
out a supernatural force upon their minds, had been de-
feated ; as so great a part of the Jews would not have
had the Gospel jirst preached unlo tJiem. But now
pushed on by this commodious prejudice, that tlie benefits
ijelonged properly to the race of Abraham, they directly
addressed themselves to their brethren of the dispersion :
where meeting with the same ill success, their sense of
the desperate condition of the house of Israel would now
begin to abate that prejudice in their favour. And then
came the time to enlighten them in this matter, without
putting too great a force upon their minds ; which is not
God's way of acting with free agents. Accordingly, his
purpose of calling the Gentiles into the Church was now
clearly revealed to Peter at Joppa ; and a proper sub-
ject, wherewith to begin this great work, was ready pro-
vided for him.

But though ignorance in the Propagator of a divine
truth amongst particulars, may serve to these important
ends, yet to shew still plainer how pernicious this inabi-
lity w ould be wherever a Society is concerned, as in the
establishment of the Jewish Religion, I shall produce an
occasional example even in the Christian.

For when now so great numbers of the Gentiles were
converted to Christ, that it became necessary to form
them into a Church ; that is, a religious Society ; which
of course hath its Policy as well as the Civil i so hurtful
■was ignorance in its governing members, that divers of
them, though graced with many gifts of the holy Spirit,
caused such disorders in their assemblies as required all
the abilities of the learned Apostle to reform and
regulate. And then it w as, and for this purpose, that
Paul, the proper Apostle of the Gentiles*, was, in an
extraordinary manner, called in, to conduct, by his
learning and abilities, and w ith the assistance of his com-
panion Luke, a learned man also, this part of God's

* Tlie gospel of the uncircumcision ivas committed unto me, as the
gospel oj the circumcision uas unto Peter. Gal. ii. 7.

purpose

Sect. 6.] OF iAiOSES DEMONSTRATED. 317

purpose to its completion. The rest were properly
Apostles of the Jews; wldch people having a religious
Society already formed, the converts from thence had a
kind of rule to go by, which served them for their pre-
sent occasions; and therefore tiicse needed no great
talents of parts or learning; nor had they any. But a
new Society was to be formed amongst the Gen,tile con-
verts; and this required an able conductor; and such
an one they had in Paul. But will any one say that his
learning afforded an objection against the divinity of his
mission ? We conclude, therefore, that none can arise
from the abilities, natural and acquired, of the great
Jewish Lawgiver. The point to be proved.

II. We come now to the second part of tlie Propo-
sition, That the Lcncs instituted in compliance to the
Peoples prejudices, and in opposition to Egyptiaji super-
stitions, are no reasonable objection to the divinity of
the Jeuish Religion. That most of these Laws were
given in opposition to Egyptian superstitions, believers
seem not unwilling to allow ; as apprehending no conse-
quence from such a concession that will give them trou-
ble. The thing which startles them is the supposition
that some of these Laws were given in compliance to the
Jewish prejudices ; because infidels have inforced this
circumstance to the discredit of ]\Iosess pretensions.
To satisfy behevers, therefore, 'I shall shew, " that the
Laws in compliance were a consequence of the Laws in
oppositioji" And to reconcile them to both sorts, I shall
attempt to prove, from the double consideration of
their necessity and fitness, that the institution of
such Laws is no reasonable objection to the divinity of
their original.

I. If God did indeed interfere in the concerns of this
People, it will, I suppose, be easily granted, that his
purpose was to separate them from the contagion of that
universal idolatry, which had now overspread the whole
earth; and to which, especially to the Egyptian, they
were most inveterately prone.

There were two ways, in the hand of God, for effect-
ing this separation : either to overrule the Will ; and
this required only the exercise of his pow'er: or, by

leaving

3i8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

leaving the Will at liberty, to counterwork the passions ;
and this required the exercise of his wisdom.

Now, as all the declared purposes of this separation
shew, that God acted with the Israelites as jioral
AGENTS, we must needs conclude, notwithstanding the
peculiar favour by which they were elected, and the ex-
traordinary providence by which they were conducted,
that yet, amidst all this display and blaze of almighty
Power, the avill ever remained free and uncontrolled.
This not only appears from the nature of the thing, but
from the whole history of their reduction out of Egypt.
To give only one instance: AIoscs tells us, that God
led the IsraeHtcs into the land of Canaan, not by the
direct way of the Philistines, lest the sight of danger, in
an expedition against a strong and warlike People,
should make them chuse to return to Egypt, and seek
for refuge in their slavery : But he led them about, by
the way of the Wilderness, to inure them by degrees to
fatigue and hardships ; the best foundation of military
prowess*. And when God, to punish them for their
cowardice, on the report of the faithless explorers of the
land, had decreed that that generation should be uorn
away in the Wilderness -f-, the wise policy of this sen-
tence was as conspicuous as the justice of it.

If then the Wills of this people were to be left free,
and their minds influenced only by working on their i)as-
sions, it is evident, that God, when he became their
Lawgiver, would act by the same policy in use amongst
human Lawgivers for restraining the vicious inclinations
of the People. The same, I say, in kind, though dif-
fering infinitely in degree. For all People, whether
conducted on divine or human measures, having the
same nature, the same liberty of Will, and the same
terrestrial situation, must needs require the same mode
of guidance. And, in fact, we find the Jewish to be in-
deed constituted like other Civil governments, with re-
gard to the integral parts of a Political society.

According to all human conception, therefore, we see
no way left to keep such a People, thus separated, free
from the contagion of idolatry, but,

* Exod. xiii. 17. f Numb. xiii. and xiv.

First,

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 319

First, by severe penal Laws against idolaters ;

And, Secondly, by framing a multifarious Ritual,
whose whole direction, looking contraiy to the forbidden
superstitions, would, by degrees, wear out the present
fondness for them; and at length bring on an haljitual
aversion to them. This is the way of wise Lawgivers ;
who, in order to keep the Will from revolting, forbear
to do every thing by direct force and fear of punish-
ment ; but employ, where they can, the gentler metiiods
of restraint.

Thirdly, but as even in the practice of this gentler
method, when the passions and prejudices run high, a
direct and professed opposition will be apt to irritate and
inflame them ; therefore it will be further necessary, in
order to break and elude their violence, to turn men's
fondness for the forbidden practice into a harmless chan-
nel ; and by indulging them in those customs, which
they could not well abuse to superstition, enable the
more severe and opposite institutions to perform their
work. Such, for instance, might be the iight'mg up of
lamps in religious Worship : which practice, Clemens
Alexandrinus assures us, came first from the Egyptians*:
nor would \V'itsius himself venture to deny it f. But, ..
for the same reason, we conclude that the brazen ser-
pent was no imitation of an Egyptian practice, as Sir
J. Marshaln would persuade us ; because we see how
easily it might, and did sufter abuse. Which conclusion,
not only our principle leads us to make, but matter of
fact enables us to prove

Such a conduct therefore as this, where the \\\\\ is
left free, appears to be necessary.

IL I^t us see next whether it were fit, that is.
Whether it agreed with the wisdom, dignity, and purity
of Gon.

1. His WISDOM indeed is the Attribute peculiarly
manifested in this method of government ; and certainly
with as great lustre as we should have seen his poweu,

* Aiyiirlioi >,vyiHi Kaiit* 'm^uroT natrtSuicct, Strom. 1. i. p. 306.
Edit. Colon. 1688. fol.

+ Earum [lucernurum] prima ad religionem accensio, utrum He-
brasis debeatur, an vEgyptiis, baud fucilf dixero. JE'jypl p. 190.

J See above.

had

320 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

had it been his good pleasure to have oveiruled the
Win. To give an instance only in one particular, most
liable to the ridicule of unbelievers; 1 mean, in that
part of the Jeuish Institute which concerns clean and
tinclean meats ; and descends to so low and Uiiuute a
detail, that men, ignorant of the nature and end of this
regulation, have, on its apparent unjttness to engage the
concern of God, concluded against the divine original
of the Law. But would they reflect, that tbe purpose
of separating one People from the contagion of universal
idolatry, and this, in order to facilitate a still gi'eater
good, was a design not unworthy the Governor of the
Universe, they would see this part of the Jewish Insti-
tution in a different light: They would see the brightest
marks of divine wisdom in an injunction which took away
the very grounds of all commerce \\ ith foreign Nations.
For those who can neither eat noi" drink tosether, are
never likely to become mtimate. This will open to us
the admirable method of divine Providence in Peter's
lision. The time was now come that the Apostle should
be instructed in God's purpose of calling the Gentiles
into the Church : At the hour of repast, therefore, he
had a scenical representation of all kind of meats, c/ea?i
and unclean ; of which he was bid to take and eat indif-
ferently and without distinction *. The primary design
of this vision, as appears by the context, was to inform
him that the partition-tpall was now broken down, and
that the Gentiles were to be received into the Church of
Christ. But besides its hgurative meaning, it had a
literal; and signified, that the distinction of meats, as
well as of MEN, was now to be abolished. And how
necessary such an information was, when he was about
to go upon his mission to the Gentiles, and was to con-
ciliate their benevolence and good-will, I have observed
above. But although this was the principal cause of
the distinction of meats into clean and unclean, yet an-
other was certainly for the preservation of health. This
institution was of necessity to be observed in the first
case, to secure the great ol)ject of di separation : and in
the second case (which is no trivial mark of the wisdom
of the Institutor) it might be safely and commodiously
- * .Acts X. 10, et seq.

observed

Sect. 6.J OF MOSES DE^ilONSTRATED. 321

observed by a People thus separated, nho were conse-
quently to be for ever confined within the linjits of one
country. And here the absurdity of tin's part of Maho-
metanisin evidently betrays itself Mahomet would
needs imitate the Eaw of JMoses, as in other things, so
in this the distinction of meats, clean and unclean; with-
out considering that in a Religion formed for conquest,
whose followeis were to inimbit Regions of the most
different and contrary qualities, the food which in one
climate was hurtful or nutritive, in another changed its
properties to their contraries. But to shew still more
clearly the ditference between Institutions formed at
hazard, and those by divine appointment, we may ob-
serve, that when Judaism arrived at its completion in
Christianity, the followers of which were the inhabitants
of all Climes, the distinction between meats clean and
unclean was abolished ; which, at the same time, serv-
ing other great ends explained above, shew the Dispen-
sation (in the course of which these several changes of
the Economy took place) to be really Divine.

2. As to the DiGviTY and Majesty of God, that,
surely, does not su^^er, in his not interfering with his
power, to force the Will, but permitting it to be drawn
and inclined by those cords of a man, his natural mo-
tives. The dignity of any Being consists in observing a
conformity between his actions, and his quality, or sta-
tion. Now it pleased the God of heaven to take upon
himself the office of supreme Ma<i;i»ira)e of the Jewish
Republic. But it is {;'S we have slle\^n) the part of a
wise Magistrate to restrain a People, devoted to any
particular superstition, by a Ritual directly opposite in
the general to that superstition ; and yet sunilar in such
particular practices as could not be abused or perverted :
because compliance n ith the fwpular prejudices in things
indifferent, naturally eludes the force of their propensity
to things evil. In this wise Policy, therefore, the dig-
nity of the God of heaven was not impaired.

3. Nor is his puiuty any more aliectcd by this sup-
posed conduct. The Rites, in question, are owned to
be, in themselves, indifferent; and good or evil only as
they are directed to a true or false object.

If it be said " that their carnal nature, or wearisome
Vol. IV. Y multi-

322 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

multiplicity, or scrupulous observance, render tliem un-
worthy of the purity and spiritual natiu'e of God To
Believers, I reply, that this objection holds equally
against these Rites in whatever view they themselves are
M ont to regard them : — To Unbelievers ; that they for-
get, or do not understand God's primary end, in the
institution of the Jewish Ritual ; which was, to preserve
the people from the contagion of these idolatrous prac-
tices with which they were surrounded. But nothing
could be so effectual to this purpose, as such a Ritual.
And since the continual proneness of that People to
idolatry hath been shcun to arise from the inveterate
prejudice of intcrcovununitij of xcors/iip, nothing could
be so effectual as the extreme minuteness of their
Ritual.

If it be said, " that the former abuse of these in-
dulged li/tcs to an abouiinable superstition had made
them unfit to be employed in the service of the God of
purity :" I reply, that there is nothing in the nature of
things, to make them io//it. That a material substance,
materially soiled, stained, and infected, is unfit to ap-
proach and be joined to one of great cleanness and pu-
rity, is not to be denied. But let us not mistake words
for things ; and draw a metaphysical conclusion from a
metaphorical expression. The soil and stain, in the
case before us, is altogether figurative, that is, unreal.
And in truth, the very objection is taken from the coni-
mand of this very Law, to abstain from things polluted
by idolatry : But vve now understand, that the reason of
its so severely forbidding the use of some things that
had been abused to superstition, was the very same with
its indulging the use of others which had been equally
abused; namely, to compass, by the best, though dif-
ferent yet concording means, that one great end, t//c
EXTIRPATION OF IDOLATRY. Notwithstanding this,
the Law concerning things polluted, like many other of
the Jewish ol)servances, hath occasionally been adopted
by different Sects in the Cliristian church. Thus our
Puritans, wlio seem to have had their name from the
sul)ject in debate, quarrelled with the established use of
the cross in baptism, the surplice, and the j)osturq of
communicating, because they had been abused to the

support

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 3-23

support of popish superstition*. I chuse this instance,
that the Men whom 3 am arguing against, may see the
issue of their objection; and that They, from whom the
instance is taken, may be shewn tiie unreasonableness
of their separation ; as far at least as it was occasioned
on account of ceremonies.

If, lastiy, it be said, " tliat these Rites, which once
had been, might be again, abused to superstition; and
were therefore itrijit to be employed in this new service ;"
I, reply, ttiat this is a mistake. For, i. We go on the
supposition, that the Jews were indulged in no practices
capable of being so abused. 2. That though they might
in themselves be subject to abuse, yet they carried their
corrective with them : which was, first, their being in-
termixed with a vast number of other Rites directly op-
posite to all itlolatrous practice; and, secondly, their
making part of a burdensome multifarious Worship,
wiiich would keep the people so constantly employed, as
to alFord them neither time nor occasion, from the cause
in question, of falling into foreign idolatries.

But how can I hope to be heard in defence of this
conduct of the God of Israel, when even the believinrf
part of those whom I oppose seem to pay so little atten-
tion to the reasoning of Jesus himself ; who has admi-
rably illustrated and vindicated the wisdom of this
conduct, in the familiar parable of new cloth m old gar-
meiitSi and new wine in old bottles '\ : which, though
given in answer to a particular question, was intended to
instruct us in this general truth, That it is the way of
God to accommodate his Institutions to the state, the
condition, and contracted habits, of his creatures.

But as this notion hath been condemned ex cathedra ;
and the ^gi/ptiaca of Herman Witsius recommended
to the clergy, as a distinct and solid confutation of
Spencer's book, de legibus Hebrcconm rituaUbus ; I shall

* See note [Y YYY] at the end of this Book.

t And he spake also a parable u7ito them, Nu man pittteth a piece of
a new ganncnt vpon an old : if oihevwise, then both the new mnlicth a
rent, and the piece thai was taken out of the ncv;, agreeth not with the
old. And no man putteth new wine into old bottles, else the nezv wine
will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish .
Luke V. 36.

X Waterland's Charge to the Clergy of Middlesex.

Y 2 examine

324 THE DI\aNE LEGATION [Book IV.

examine w hat that learned Foreigner hath to say againit
it. All Witsius's reasoning on this point is to be found
in the fourteenth chapter of his third book ; uhich I
shall endeavour to pick out, and set in the fairest
light. ■ ■

1. His first argument is, " that it is a dishonouring
of Qqd, ,,ulp has the hearts of me^ in his {^ow'e'r, and
can turn them as he pleases, to conceive' of ' him as
standing, in neied pf the tricks of, crafty Politicians ; not
, but, . he confesses, that God deals with riieri 'as irea-
sonablo creatures, and attains his end by fit aiid adequate
means ; and, in the choice of these means, manifests a
wisdom perfectly admirable." Yet, for all this,' he says,
", w'e cannot, without the highest contumely, presume
to compare the sacred Policy of, Heaven with the arts
and shifts of the beggarly politics of this world *." — All
I find here is only misrepresentation. Spencer never
compared the wisdom Qt CioD, in the institution of the
.Jewish republic, to the t}\i^ch -dntl i/iij't.s- of politicians ;
but to their leg/tin/ale arts oi Government, conducted
op the rules of strict morality. And if, as this writer
I owns, God dealt xcith the Israelii cs as reasonable crea-
tures, a/ul altained his end hxj fit and adequate means,
he must needs use a wisdom the same in kind, though
vastly different in degree, with w hat . we ''c.4ll human
poHcy. , Jlut indeed, he seems reconcfled to the thing :
it is the name only which he dislikes. If his followers
;5ay otherwise, I desire they would explain, in some in-
telligible manner, their idea of that wisdom, in God's
civil government oi a people, which is not founded in the

* Veium enimvero qiiantaracunqiie hoec civilis prudentia: speciem
habeant, prajter Dei verbuni ciincta dicuntur, Sc hupiani commpnta
Euntingenii, divini nuraiiiis majcstate baud satis digna. NinHiurn
cauti catique in seculo mortales Deum ex sua metiuntur indole :
arcanasque iinperandi artes, & vatramenta politicorum, quae vix
terra prober, coelo locant. Quasi vero in populo sibi formando fir-
niandoque iis astutiarum ambagibus indigeat is, qui, mortalium corda
in niunu su.j habens, ea, quorsum vult, tlectit. Npn nego equidem
iJeum cum hominibus, uti cum creaturis ratidnalibus, ageiitem,
media adhiberc iis persuadendis idonea, inque eorum mediorum delectu
«apieiitiam ostendere prorsus admirabilem. Attamen Dei sanccissima
ista si-pientia cum politicorum astibus ac vafritie comparari sine
insigni illius contiimelia non potest, p. 28-2.

exercise

Sect. 6.J OF IMOSES DEMONSTRATED. 325

exercise of almighty power, aiid is yet different in kind
j^'Oiiji .what \ve call Policy.

g l,lis second J argument is, " That, as God erected
a new Republic, it was his will that it should appear wew
tp the Israelites. Its structure was not to be patched up
oi^t of tiiq rubbish of the Canaanitish or Egyptian Rites,
but was formed according to the model brought down
from heaven, and shewn to Moses in the Mount. Nor
was it left to the people to do, the least thing in religious
matters, on their own head. All was determinately or-
dered, even to the most minute circumstance; which
was so bound upon them, that they could not do, or
omit, any the least thing contrary to the Law, without
becoming liable to immediate punishment *." — If, by
this NEWNESS of the Jewish Republic, be liieant, that
it was different in many fundamental circumstances from
all other civil pohcies, so as to vindicate itself to its divine
Author; 1 not only agree with him, but, which is more
than he and his recommender could do, have proved it.
But this sense makes nothing to the point in question. If
by.NE'WNE.ss be meant, that it had nothing in commdn
with any of the neighbouring Institutions ; To make this
credible, he should have proved that God gave them new
hearts, new natures, and a ne\v woii'd, along with their

;liew Government. There is the same ambiguity in what

.he, says of the appearance of newness to the Israelites.

.^or it may signify either that the Institution appeared so
new as to be seen to conie from God ; or that it ap-
peared so new as not to resemble, in any of its parts,
the Institutions of men. The first is true, but not to

,,the purpose : the latter is to the purpose, but not true.
- — From the fact, of the Law's coming dorm entire from
heaven, he concludes that the genius and prejudices of

,the Israelites were not at all consulted ; From the same

' * Uti revera novam molie!)alur rempublicam, iU et novum, qualis
erat, videri earn Israclitis voluit. Qiiippe ciijus forma sive specfes,
11011 ex rituuin ruderibus Canaaniticorum aut jEgyptiacoium efficta,
sed ccelitus delapsa, Mosi primum in sacro monstrata monte erat, ut

' ad illud instar cuncta in Israele coniponerentur. Neque permissum
esse populo voluit, iit in religionis negotio vel tantilliim suo ageret
arbitratu. Omnia determinavit ipse, ad minutissimas usque circum-
stantias; quibus ita eos aliigavit, ut non sine pryesentaneo vitcB
discrimine quicquam vel omittere, vel aliter agere potueriiit.
p. 282, 283.

T 3 fact,

326 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

fact, 1 conclude, that they were consulted : which of us
has concluued ri^ht is left to the judgment of the
public. Let me only observe, That ignorant men may
compose, and have composed Laws in all things opposite
to the bent and genius of a people ; and they have been
obeved accordindv. But, when divine wisdom frames
an Institution, we may be sure that no such solecism as
that oipiiitbig new xcine into old bottles will ever be com-
mitted.— But the people xi cre ?iot consulted even in the

least thino- that concerned religious matters. How is

. . . "
this to be reconciled with their free choice of God for

their King ; and with his indulgence of their in^pious
clamours afterwards for a Vicegerent or another km":
This surely concerned religious matters, and very ca-
pitally too, in a Policy w here both ihc Societies were
perfectly incorporated. — But every thing was determined
even to the most minute circumstances, and to be observed
under the severest penalties. What tins makes for his
point, I see not. But this I see, that, if indeed there
were that indulgence in tlie Lav,- w hich I contend for,
these two circumstances of uiirutc prescription, and
severe penalties, must needs attend it : and tor this plain
reason; Men, when indulged in their prejudices, are
very apt to transgress the bounds of that indulgence ; it
is therefore necessarv that those bounds should be mi-
nutelv marked out, and the transgression of them sevCTely
punished.

3. His third argument is- — " That no religious Rites,
formcrlv used by the Israelites, on their o^^n head, were,
after the giving of the law, peumitied, out of regard
to habitude i but all things puescribed and com-
manded: and this so precisely, that it was unla^^•ful
to deviate a finger's breadth either to the right hand or
to the left*." — This indeed is an observation which I
cannot reconcile to the learned writer's usual candour
and ingenuity. He is writing against Spencers system :
and here he brings an argument against it, which he saw

* Nec ulli in religione ritus fuerunt, ab Israclitis olim sine numine
usurpali, quibus propter assiietudinem ut in pobierum quoque uterentur
Itge lata pumisit : stA frxscnptajusfaque sunt omnia. Et quidem
ita disiincte, ut nec transversum digitum dextrorsum aut siuistrorsum
dficlinare fas fuerit. Deut. v. p. 283.

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 327

in Spencer's book liad been brought against Grotius (who
was in that system), and which Spencer answers in de-
fence of Grolius. Therefore, as this answer will serve
in defence of Spencer himself against Witsius, I shall
give it at at the bottom of the page For the rest, I
apprehend all the force of this third argument to lie only
in a quibble on the equivocal use of the word permission,
which signifies either a iac'tt connivance, or legal allow-
ancc. Now Spencer used the word in this latter sense f.
But permission, in this sense, is very consistent ^^ith
every thing's being e rpresslj/ prescribed and commanded
in the laxc.

4. His fourth argument proceeds thus, — " But farther,
God neither /?6';'wi^^6Y/ nor commnndedt that the Israelites
should worship him after the PagLUi mode of worship.
For it had been tlie same tiling to God not to be wor-
shipped at all, as to be worshipped by Rites used in the
service of Demons. And Moses teaches us that the
Laws of God were very different from what Spencer
imagined; as appears from Deut. xii. 30, 31, 32. and
from Lev. xviii. 2, 3, 4. Here the reason given of for-
bidding the vanities of Egypt, is, that Jehovah, who

* Testium meorutn agmen chiudit (irotius — Autlioris verba sunt
ha3c : " Hicut /ines sacrijiciorum diitrsi sunt, — ita tt rifus, qui aut
" ab Hcbneis ad alias gcn(cs vencrc, aut, quod aedibilius est , a Syr is
" 4" S^gjiptiis usuipati, currccti sunt ab Hebrwis, ab aliis gentibus
" sine ta cmcndatiuiie ursurpati. IJic in Groiiuin paulo auiinosius
" insurgit auctor nupcius : nam hoc, ait ille, cum impiitatc tt ab-
" surditate conjunctum c.^l ■ Quid itu ? Num enini, rtspondet iile,
" Deum sanctissima sua histiftita, qme ipse prolixe sancixit, et conscribi
" ill rc/igiosaiii obsci vntionem, per inspirationein nuininis sui, voluit
" credemus ab idolatria Si/rurum J^- Algyptiorum tnutuo sumpsisse ?
" Ncquc ca pro libitu Ebriei assumps^rtnU, aut asstimpta cmendarunt,
. " sed omnia if singula dirinitus in lege pnescripta sunt, et juxta eju»
" normum exacfis:dme obscrxari debuerunt." At opinio Grotii multo
solidior est, quani ut niucione tarn obtuso contoiii possit. Non enim
assej-it ille, vel saniis cjuispiam, Ilebi jeus rituni uliiini a gentibus,
pro libitu sue, sumpsisse, vel suuiptum pro in^enio suo correxisse.
id unum sub locutione ligurata, contendit Giotius, Dcuni nenipe
ritus aliquos, usu veteri conlirmatos (emendalos tanien, et ignem
quasi purgatorium passos) a gentibus accepisse, et Ilebrteis usui-
pandos tradidisse ; ne populus ille, l ituum etiinicoruni amore praeceps,
ad cultuni et superstitioneni Gentilium rueret, ni more plurimum
veteri cultum prsestare concederetur. De Leg. Ileb. rit. vol. ii,
p. 748. 749.

t bee note [ZZZZ] at the end of this Book. •

Y 4 brought

32S THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

brought them out fro>ii amongst that people, will, from
henceforth, allow no farther communication with Egypt.
Small appearance of any indulgence. And hence indeed
it is, that most of the ritual Laws are directly levelled
Etgainst the Egyptian, Zabian, and Canaanitish super-
stitions, as Maimonides confesseth — As to what this
learned man says, that we may as well not worship God
at all as worship him by Rites w hich have been employed
in Paganism, we have already overturned the foundation
of that fanatical assertion. It is true, the argument
labours a little in the hands of SpeiVcer and Maimo-
nides; while they suppose the Devil himself to be the
principal Architect of Pagan Superstition : for to believe
that God -would employ any Rites introduced by this
evil Spirit is indeed of somewhat hard digestion. But
that writer, who conceives them to be the inventions of
superstitious and designing men only, hatli none of this
difficulty to encounter. As for the observation, that
most of the ritual Laws zeere levelled against idolatrous
superstition, we are so far from seeing any inconsistency
between this truth and that other, " that some of those
ritual Laivs did indulge the people in such habituated
practices, as could not be abused to superstition," that,
on the contrary, we see a necessary connexion between
them. For if severe Laws were given to a people against
superstitions, to which they were violently bent, it v\ ould
be very proper to indulge them in some of their favourite
habits, so far forth as safely they could be indulged, in
order to break the violence of the rest, and to give the

* Porro nec pcrmisit, uecjiissit Deus, ut eo se modo Israelite
colerent, <iiio niodo Deob suos colebaiit Gentiles ; veritus scilicet lie
per veteres istas vanitates DaMiioni cultum deterrent, si minus Deo
iicuisset. Nam et inanis ille metiis erat : ciuiim Deo piopemodiim
•perinde sit, sive quis Damoni cultum deferat, sive per vanitates
ati^juas veteres Deo cultum delerie prsesumat. Et longe aliter Deum
instiiuisse Mos(^s docet, Deut. xiii. 30, 31, 32. adde Levit. xviii.
"'2, •s, ^. Audin', Spencere, qua ratione ab /Egyptiacis vanitatibus
■ad suoruni observantiani pra^ceptorum Israelitas Deus avocet ? ¥.0 id
facit nomine, quod ipse Jehova et Deus ipsorum sit, qui ex jEgypto
fos efipiens nihil posthac cum ^/Egyptiorum vanitatibus commune
habere voluit iloc protecto non est, id quod tu dicis, allicere eos
per umbratiles veterum jEgypti rituain reliquias. Atque bine factum
est ut pliirima l)eus legibus suis ritualibus inseruerit, i^lgyptiorum,
Zabiorum, Cana uiasoium institutis Ia 'z<7a^aXX^AB opposita — Cujus rei
varia a nobis exempla alibi allata sunt. p. 283, 284.

body

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 329

body of opposed Laws a fuller liberty of working their
cttect. And if tiicy had Laws likeuise given them in
indulgence, it would be necessary to accompany such
Laws Avith the most severe prohibitions of idolatrous
practice, and of the least deviation from a tittle of the
Institute. In a word, La^vs in direct opposition, and
Laws in co)if ormity or compliance, had equally, as we
say, the same tendency, and jointly concurred to promote
the same exid ; namely, the preservation of the Israelites
from idolatry *.

5. His tifth argument runs thus. — " Indulgence was
so far from being the end of the Law, that the Ritual
was given as a most heavy yoke, to subdue and conquer
the ferocity of that stift-necked people, Gal. iv. i, 2, 3,
Col. ii. 2 1 f ." — By this one would imagine, his adversaries
had contended for such a kind of indulgence as arose
out of God s fondness for a chosen People; when indeed,
they suppose it to be only such an indulgence as tended
tiie more effectually and expeditiously to subdue and con-
quer the ferocity of their savage tempers ;

— ' u i - Quos optimus
Faller 8^ ejfugere est triumphus.

If, therefore, tJiat were the end of the Law which
A\"itsiu3 himself contends for, ye may be assured that
this indulgence was one qf the means. But the prin-
cipal and more general means being Laws in direct op-
position, this justified the character the Apostle gives
of the Jewish Ritual, in the two places urged against us.

6. His sixth argument is, — " That the intent of the
Law was to separate the Israelites, by a partition-wall,
as it were, from all other people, which, by its diversity,
might set them at a distance from idolaters, and create
an aversion to idolatry t." — As to the first eft'ect of the

'lOfo-r vft 'AH

* See note [AAAAA] ;it the end of this Book.

f Id sibi primuui in rituum jussione propositum habuit Deus, lit
laboriobis ibtis exercitiis Jcrocium populi indomitam, veluti dij/icillimo
Jugo, siibigcref, Gal. iv. i, a, 3, Col- ii. 21. p. 286.

X Deinde haec quoque Dei in l ituuni jussione intenlio fuit, iit eorum
obscrvantia, veluti parkfe intcrgcrino, eos a gentium communione
louge semoveret, Eph. ii. 14, 15. — Quum autem legem pr<Eceptorum
in ritibus inimicUias Apostolus vocat, hoc inter caetera innuit, fuisse
' earn symbolum atque insti umentum divisionis atqiie odii inter
Israclem ik gentes. p. 287, 288.

diversity

330 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

diversity of the Je\^ ish Law, the keeping the people
distinct ; if the learned writer would thereby insinuate
(which is indeed to his poiiit) that diis distinction could
be kept up only wiiile the Jews and other nations had
no similar Rites ; it could never, even by the means he
himself prescribes, be long kept up at ail. For if the
Jews were not indulged in the imiiation of any Pawan
Rites, the Pagans might indulge themselves in the imi-
tation of the Jewish : as indeed they are supposed to have
done in the practice of circumcision : and so this par-
tition-xcall, if only boilt of this untempered mortar of
Witsiuss providing, would soon tumble of itself But
the very case here given shews no necessity for all the
laws to be in opposition, in order to secure a separation ;
the Jews being as effectually separated from all their
neighbours when most of them used tlie rite of circum-
cision, as when these Jews practised it without a rival.
And the reason is this. Circumcision" was not given
to Abraham and to his race as a mark of distinction and
separation from all other people, but, what its constant
use made it only fit for, a standing memorial of the co-
venant between God and Abraham. And ye shall cir-
ciimcise (says God) the Jlesh of your foreskin, and it
shall be a TOKEN of the covenant between me and
you. Gen. xvii. 1 1 . But though it was not given as a
mark of separation, yet it effectually answered that pur-
pose : for it preserved the memory, or was the token, of
a covenant, which necessarily ke{)t them separate and
distinct from the rest of mankind. As to the other effect
of this diversity of the Jewish Law, namely the creating
an aversion to the Kites of all other nations ; in this, the
learned writer hath betrayed his ignorance of human
nature. For we always find a more inveterate hatred
and aversion, between people of differing Religions where
several things are alike, than where every thing is dia-
metrically opposite : of which a plain cause might be
found in the nature of man, whose heart is so much cor-
rupted by his passions. So that the retaining some
innocent Egyptian practices, all accompanied w'ith their
provisional opposites, would naturally make the Jews
more averse to Egypt, than if they had differed in every
individual circumstance.

7. His

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 331

7. His last argument concludes thus, — The cere-
monies of the Jewish Ritual were types and shadows of
heavenly things : It is therefore highly improbable that
God should chuse the impious and diabolic Sacra of
Egypt, and the mummery of Magic practices, for the
shadows of such holy and spiritual mattei s Thus he
ends, as he began, with hard words and soft arguments.
No one ever pretended to say that such kinds of practices
- were suffered or imitated in the Jewish Ritual. All the
indulgence supposed, is of some harmless Rite or innocent
Ornament, such as the /ig/iting up of Lamps, or wcarhig
a Linoi garmtnt. And let me ask, whether those things,
though done, as we suppose, in conformity to an Egyptian
practice, were more unfit to be made a type or shadow
of heavenly things, than the erection altar -aithaut

jsteps.; done, as they will allow, in direct opposition to
Pagan practice. But it Mill be shewn under the next
head, that the supposition that the Jewish Ritual was
framed, j)artly in compliance to the people s prejudices,
and partly in opposition to idolatrous superstitions, and,
at the same time, typical of a future Dispensation, tends
greatly to raise and enlarge our ideas of the divine
VV'isdom.

But it is strange, that such a writer as Witsius
(whatever we may think of the admirers of his argument)
should not see, that the character given of the ritual
LAW by Cod himself did not imply that it had a mixture
at least of no better stuff than Egyptian and other Pagan
practices.

God, by the prophet Ezekiel, upbraiding the Is-
raelites with their perversity and disobedience, from the
time of their going out of Egypt to their entrance into
the land of Canaan, speaks to them in this manner. —

Ver. 1. " And it came to pass in the seventh year,
" in the fifth month, the tenth day of the month, that
" certain of the elders of Israel came to inquire of the
" Lord, and sat before me.

* Denique & hie cKrimoniarum scopi'S fait, ut rerum spiritualiitm
^ ■ figitrcE atque nmhrce essent, &. exsturet in us artificiosa pictura Christi,
ac gratiEe per ipsum iinpetramiaj — Non est autem probabile, Deum
ex impiis ^gjptiorum ac diabolicis sacris, ex veteribus vanitatibus,
ex mue;icffi artis imitaruentis, picturas fecisse rcrum spiritualium
atque caleslium. p. 289.

" 2. Then

332 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

2. " Then came the word of the Lord unto me, saying,

3. " Son of man, speak unto the elders of Israel, and
" say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Are ye
" come to inquire of me? As I live, saith the Lord God,

I will not be inquired of by you.

4. " Wilt thou judge them, son of man, wilt thou
" judge them ? cause them to know the abominations of
" their fathers ; ■ '

5. " And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God ;
" In the day when I chose Israel, and lifted up mine
" hand unto the seed of the house of Jacob, and made
" myself known unto them in the land of Egypt, when
" I lifted up mine hand unto them, saying, I am the
" Lord your God,

6. " In the day that I lifted up mine hand unto them,
" to bring them forth of the land of Egypt, into a land
" that I had espied for them, flowing with milk and
" honey, which is the glory of all lands :

7. '* Then said I unto them, Cast ye away every man
*' the abominations of his eyes, and defile not your-
" selves with the idols of Egypt : I am the Lord your

God.

8. " But they rebelled against me, and would not
hearken unto me: they did not every man cast away

" the abominations of their eyes, neither did they for-
" sake the idols of Egypt : then I said, I will pour out
" my fury upon them, to accomplish my anger against
" them, in the midst of the land of Egypt.

9. " But I wrought for my name's sake, that it should
" not be polluted before the heathen, among whom they
" were, in whose sight I made myself known unto
" them, in bringing them forth out of the land of

Egypt.

10. *' Wherefore I caused them to go forth out of
" the land of Egypt, and brought them into the wil-
" derness.

11. " And I gave them my statutes, and shewed them
" my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live
" in them.

12. " Moreover also, I gave them my sabbaths to
" be a sign between me and them, • that they might know
•* that I am the Lord that sanctify them.

.Qisa . 13. " But

Sect. G.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED, 333

13. " But the house of Israel rebelled against me in
" the wilderness ; they walked not in my statutes, and

they despised my judgments, which if a man do., he
" shall even live in them ; and my sabbaths they greatly
*' polluted: then 1 said, I would pour out my fury upon
" them in the wilderness to consume them.

14. " But I wrought for my name's sake, that it
" should not be polluted before the heathen, in whose
" sight I brought them out.

15. " Yet also I lifted up my hand unto them in the
" wilderness, that I would not bring them into the land
" which I had given them, flowing with milk and honey,
" which is the glory of all lands ;

16. " Because they despised my judgments, and
" walked not in my statutes, but polluted my sabbaths :
" for their heart went after their idols.

1 7. " Nevertheless, mine eye spared them from de-
" stroying them, neither did I make an end of them in
" the wilderness.

18. " But I said unto tlroir children in the wilderness,
" Walk yc not in the statutes of your fathers, neither
" observe their judgments, nor defile yourselves with
" their idols.

19. I am the Lord your God ; walk in my statutes,
" and keep my judgments, and do them ;

20. " And hallow wy sabbaths ; and they shall be a
" sign between me and you, that ye may know that I
" am the Lord your God.

21. " Notwithstanding the children rebelled against
*' me : they walked not in my statutes, neither kept mv
'* judgments to do them, which if a man do, he shall
" even live in them; they polluted my sabbaths : then
" I said, I would pour out my fury upon them, 10 ac-
" complish my anger against them in tlie wilderness.;

22. Nevertheless, I withdrew mine hand, and wrought
" for my name's sake, that it should not be polluted in
" the sight of the heathen, in whose sight I brought
'* them forth. .

23. " I lifted up mine hand unto them also in -the
" wilderness, that I would scatter them among the
*' heathen, and disperse them tlirough the countries ;

24. " Because they had not executed my judgments,

" but

334 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

" but had despised my statutes, and had polluted my
'* sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers idols.

25. " Wherefore I gave them also statuies

" THAT were not GOOD, AND JUDGMENTS WHERE-
" BY THEY SHOULD NOT LIVE;

26. " And I polluted them in their oun gifts, in that
** they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth
" the womb, that I might make thism desolate, to the
*' end that they might know that I am the Lord*.''

Could the Prophet have possibly given a plainer or
more graphical description of the character and genius
of the RITUAL LAM', than in those last words? Yet to
suit it to theologic purposes, System-makers have en-
deavoured, in their usual manner, to interpret it away,
as if it only signified God's suftbring the Israelites to fall
into idolatry. Now if it were not indulged to these men
to make use of any arms they can catch hold of, one
should be a little scandalized to find that they had bor-
rowed this forced interpretation from the Rabbins; who
holding their Law to be perfect, and of eternal obliga-
tion, were indeed much concerned to remove this op-
probrium from it. Kimchi is recorded for his dexterity
in giving it this meaning : though done with much more
caution than the Christian writers who took it from him.
He supposed that tlie statutes mt good M ere the Tri-
butes imposed on the Israelites while in subjection to
their Pagan neighbours- And this takes oti' sometiiing
from the unnatural violence of the expression, of
GIVING STAiUTES, Avhcn understood only to signify
the permission of abusing their fiee-will, when they fell
into idolatry.

Now, because the right explanation and proper in-
forcement of this famous passage will, besidfs its use in
the present argument, serve for many considerable pur-
poses, in the sequel of this work, it may not be time
niispent to expose this spurious pilfered interpretation.
And, as the last inforcer of it, and tlie most satisfied
with his exploit, the late Author of the Connections be-
tween Sacred and Projane History, takes the honour of
it to himself, I shall examine his reasoning at large.

Dr. Spencer, and (I suppose) every capable judge

* Chap. XX. \er. i — 16. inclusive.

before

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 335

before him, understood the statutes and judgments in
the eleventh verse, to signify the moral law; and the
statutes and judgments in tlje twenty-fifth verse, to sig-
nify the KiTUAL. But Dr. Shuckford, who always
takes a singular pleasure in carping at that faithful Ser-
vant of Common-sense, directs the defence of his bor-
rowed novelty, against tlie great Author of the Reasons
of the Ritual Lazo, in the following manner — The
persons spoken of, who had the statutes given to them,
which were not good, were not that generation of men
to whom the u-ltok Lazo was given, but their children
or posterity. To this pof^terity, God made no additions
to his lan s ; the whole being completed in the time of
their forefathers. Therefore all he gave to them of
statutes not goad was the PEiiMii-siox of falling into the
Pagan idolatries round about, *.'" This, I believe, his
followers will confess to be his argument, though repre-
sented in fewer words, yet with greater force : for a per-
plexed con)bination of needless repetitions, which fill
two or three large pages, have much weakened and ob-
scured his reasoning.

However, it concludes in these very terms : " And
" thus it must be undeniably plain, that the Prophet
" could not, by the statutes not good, mean any part
" of the Ritual law: for the whole Law was given to
** the fathers of those whom the Prophet now speaks
*' of ; but these statutes were not given to the fathers,
** but to the descendants. If we go on, and compare
" the narrative of the Prophet with the history of
" the Israelites, we shall see further, that the sta-
" tutes and judgments not good are so far from being
** any part of Moses s law, that they were not gixx-n
*' earlier than the times of the Judges f;" i- e. the Is-
raelites then fell into the idolatries, here called (as this
learned interpreter will have it) statutes and judgments

And now, to canvass a little this decisive argument —
Thus (says lie) it must he undeniably plain — Thus .' that
is. Grant him his premisses, and the conclusion follows.
Without doubt. But the whole context shews that his
premisses are false.

* Con. V. p. 159 — i6j. t Ibid. p. 161.

First

336 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

First then let it be observed, that the occasion of the
Prophecy, in the xxth chapter of Ezekiel, was this, —
The Jews, by certain of their elders, had, as was usual
in their distresses, recourse to the God of Israel for di-
rection and assistance [ver. i.] On this we are in-
formed [ver. 3.] that the word of the Lord came to
Ezekiel, bidding him tell these Elders, that God would
not be inquired of by them : for tliat their continued re-
bellions, from their coming out of Egypt, to that time,
had made them unworthy of his patronage and protec-
tion. Their idolatries are then recapitulated, and di-
vided into three periods. The first, from God's
message to them while in Egypt, to their entrance into
the promised land — Thus saith ihe Lord God, In the
.day when I chose Israel, and lifted up mine hand unto
the seed of lacob, and made myself knoxcn unto them in
the land of Egypt, &c. and so on, from the tifth to the
twenty-sixth verse inclusively. The second period
contains all the time from their taking possession of the
land of Canaan, to their present condition \\hen this
prophecy \vas delivered — Thertfore, son of man, speak
unto the house of Israel, and say unto them, Thus saith
the Lord God, Yet in this your fathers have blasphemed
me, in that they have committed a trespass against me.

For M'HE-V I HAD BROUGHT THEM INTO THE LAXD,

for the which I If ted up mine hand to give it to them,
then they saw every high hill, Sec. and so cui, from the
twenty-seventh to the thirty-second verse inclusively.
The THIRD period concerns the iniquities, and the con-
sequent punishment of the present generation, which
had now applied to him in their distresses — As I live,
saith the Lord God, surely with a mighty hand, and
with a stretched-out arniy and with fury poured out,
■WILL I RULE OVER YOU, &c. And this is the subject,
of w hat we find between the thirty-third and the forty-
fourth verse, inclusively.

This short, but exact analysis of the Prophecy, is
more than sufficient to overturn Dr. Shuckford's system,
founded on a distinction between the fathers and the
children in the eighteenth verse, (which is within the
first period) as if the fathers related to hat happened
in the wilderness, and the childreji, to what happened

under

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 337

under the judges ; whereas common sense is sufficient to
convince us, that the whole is confined to the two gene-
rations, between the exodus from Egypt and the entrance
into Conaan.

But the confutation of a foolish system, dishonourable
indeed to Scripture, is the least of rny concern. Such
things will die of themselves. iNIy point, in delivering
the truths of God as they lie in his Word, is to iiius-
trate the amazing wisdom of that Dispensation to which
they l)elong. Let me observe therefore, as a niatt'.r of
much greater moment, that this distinction, which the
text hath made between the FAXHtiis and the vHil-
DRE\, in the first period, durisig their al)ode in the
wilderness, affords us a very nobic instance of ihat di-
vine viercy which extends to tlwusimds.

The Prophet thus rejjresents the fact. When God
brought his chosen people oat of Egypt, he gave thon
his statutes, and shewed them his judgments, u lueh if a
vum do, he shall live in thtm. Moreover also, he go ve
them his sabbaths, to be a sig/i between him and them *.
That is, he gave them the moral law of the Decalogue,
in which there was one positive institution f, and no
more; but this one, absolutely necessary as the t.^f-en of
a covenant, to be a perpetual memorial of it, and, by
that means, to preserve them a select people, unmixed
with the nations. What followed so grarioi's an(] ge-
nerous a dispensation to the house of Isr.iel? VVhy,
they 7'ebellcd against him in the wilde mess ; they xcallad
not in his statutes, and they despised hisjudgnunts, and
his Sabbaths they greatly poiluLi'd%. On whic!), he
threatened to pour out his Jury upon Ihci u in Cfie 'it'll :er~
vess, and consume thcfu ||. Eut, in regard to his own
glory, lest the Heathen, before whom be brouglit them
out of Egypt, should blaspheiuc, he thought fit to spare
them^f. Vet so far punished tliat pjeneration, as never
to suffer them to come into the land ol Canaan**. Their
children he spared, that the race nught not be consumed
as he had first threatened f t' And hopi;: j better things
of them tiian of their Fathers, he said to them in the
st'ilderness, fValk ye not in the statutes of your Jaihcrs,

* Kzek. XX. 1 1, I'i. + The Sabb ith. X Ver. 13. || Ver 16.
f \'er. 14. •• Ver. 16. -ff Ver. 17.

Vol. IV. Z neither

338 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IT.

neither obstrx e their judgments, nor defile yourselves
with their idols. Jl\dk in my statutes, and keep my
judgments, and do them ; and hallow my Sabbaths ; and
they shall be a sign between me and you*. Here we
see, the Children, or imtnediate pro<^eny, were again
offered, as tlicir sole rule of government, what had
been given to, and liad been violated by their Fathers ;
namely, the moral law of the Decalogue, and the posi-
tive institution of the Sabbath. AV'ell, and how did
they behave themselves on this occasion? Just as their
fathers hacl done before them — Notwithstanding jthe
repetition of this offered grace] the Children rebelled
against 7ne, thiy walked not in my statutes, they pol-
luted my Sabbat hs \. — What followed? The sanje
denunci.ilion which had hunsf over the Fathers, utter
destruction ///e ri77(/e/v/c'6,s :|:. However, mercy again
prevails over jiidgmcnt ; and t!ie same reason for which
he spared their Fathers, inclines him to spare them; lest
his name should be polluted in the sight of the hea-
then II . However due punishment attended their trans-
gressions, as it had done their Fathers'. Their Fathers
left their bones in the wilderness : but this perverse race
being pardoned, as a People, and still possessed of the
privilege of a select and chosen Nation, were neither to
be sciittercd amongst the Heathen, nor to be confined
foi: ever in tlie wilderness : Aluiiahtv \Visdom therefore
ordained that their punishment should be such, as siiould
continue thetn, even against their Wills, a separated
race, in ijossession of the land of Canaan. What this
punishment was, the following words declare; — Be-
cause they had not executed my judgments, but had
despised my statutes, and had polluted )ny Sabbaths, and
their eyes xiere after their J at hers idols. Wherefore

I GAVE THEM ALSO STATUTES THAT WERE NOT GOOD,
AKD JUDCMEXTS WHEUEBV THEV SHOULD NOT LIVE^,

That is, because tliey had violated my fiust system of
laws, the I^ecai.ogue, I added to them [I gave them
ALSO, words which imply the giving as a supplement]
my second system, the ritual lav/; very aptly cha-
racterized (when set in opposition to the moral law)

* Ver. 18, 19, ao. t Vir. 21. % Ver. ai.

II ^'er. 22. ^ Ver. 24, 25,

^ect'e.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 339

by statutes that rvcre not good, and by jud'^ments ivhere-
by thti) should not live.

What is here observed, open* to us the admirable
reasons of both punii'sments : and why there was a for-
bearance, or a sev'^ond trial, before the yoke oj Ordinances
w as imposed. For we must never forget, tiiat the God
of Israel transacted with his peoijle according to the mode
of human Governors. Let this be kept in mind, and we
fehall see the admirable pro^^ress of tiie Dispensation.
God brought tiie Fathers out of Egvpt, to put them in
possession of tlie land of (.'auaan. He gave rhem the
jioiiAL LAW to distinguiiii them for t'le worshippers of
the true God : And he iiave them the pom rrvE Law
of the Sa!)bath to distinguish them for (Jod's peculiar
people. These Fathers proving perverse anil rel>el!ious,
their puni.?hment was deatli in the wilderr.ess, and ex-
clusion from that good Ian J which was reserved for their
Children. But then tliese Children, in tlial very Wilder-
ness, the scene of their Fatiiers' crime and calamity, fell
into the same transgressions. Wlmt was now to be done?
it was plain, so inveterate an evil could be only checked
or subdued l)y the curb of some severe Institution. A
severe Institution was [jreparqd ; and the ritual Law
was established. For the tiist oHence, the punislunent
was personal : but when a repetition slieued it to be in-
bred, and, like the Le})rosy, sticking to the whole race,
the punishment was properly chan;;;ed to national.

How clear, how c^-herent, is every t!fis>g, as liere ex-
plained ! How consonant to reason ! How full of divine
wisdom ! Vet, in defiance of Scripture and Common
sense (w hich have a closer connexion than the Enenues
of religion suspect, or than tlie common advocates of it
dare venture to maintain) comes a Doctor, and tells us,
t!iat these Children in the ll^ilderKCss of ihe time of
Moses, w evc ChiUb'en oj the land oj Canaan in the time
of tlic Judges; and that the statutes a'iven which were not
good, were Pagan idolatries, )>ot given, but suffered;
indeed not suffered ; because severely, and almost alu ays
immediately punished.

What misled our Doctor (whose Connections, by what
Ave have seen, appear to be little better than a chain of
errors^ seems to have been this, The liitual hno n OiS

2 2 given

340 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

given during' the life of the Fathers^ and soon after
their transgression mentioned in tlie 13th verse of this
Prophecy. So lie could not conceive how the Prophet
should mean that this Law was given to the Children.
But he did not consider, that the proper punishment of
the Fathers was extinction in the wilderness : the proper
punishment of the Children, who were reserved to
possess the holy land, was the infliction of the rituaj.

LAW.

Tiie Doctor, however, notwithstanding all his com-
placency in this his adopted system, yet appears conscious
of its want of strength ; for he owns that an objection
may be made to it from the following words of the Pro-
phecy— But I said luUo their childrc7i in the wil-
DERX £ss, Walk ye not in the statutes of your Fathers —
walk in my statutes — and hallow my Sabbath *. And
again, of these Children — then I said I u ould pour out
my fury upon them to accomplish mine anger agaiiist
them IN THE WILDERNESS And again, — / Ifted
up my hand unto them also in the "wilderness \.
" Here (says the learned Doctor) the prophet may
'* seem to hint, that God's anger against the Chil-
'* dren was while they were in thexcilderness." p. 169.

May seem to hint! The Doctor must be immode-
rately fond of precise expression, when he esteems this
to be no more than a hint or doubtful intimation.

But Moses having omitted to tell us, that these
Children did indeed play these pranks in the Wilder-
ness, he \\ ill not take a later Prophet's word for it. y/.y
Moses (says the Doctor) wrote before Ezekiel prophe-
sied; his prophecy could not alter facts. It will be
more tlian the Doctor deserves, if the Freethinker
neglects to reply, that both the Prophet and the Doctor
here seem to hiiit ; the former, that God's anger against
the Children was while they were in the wilderness ; the
latter, that Moses and PLzekiel contradict one another.
But to let this pass. — Prophecy, he says, could not alter
facts ; by which he means that Prophecy, any more than
the author of Prophecy, could not make that to be un-
done which was already done. W ho ever thought it
could ? But might not Ezekiel's Prophecy explaiu
* Ver. 18, 19, 20. t Ver. -31. J Ver. 23.

facts.

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 341

facts, and relate them too, which a former Prophet had
omitted ? However, Ezekiel is not the only one who in-
forms us of this fact. Amos upbraids these sojourners
in the xvildenicas with a still more general apostasy,
*' Have ye offered unto me sacrifices and offerings iv
*' THE wiLDERXESs forty years, O house of Israel?
** But 3'e have born the tabernacle of your jNIoloch and
" Chiun, your images, the Star of your God, which ye
*' made to yourselves *." Now if the Israelites com-
mitted idolatry all the time they sojourned in the Wilder-
ness, the crime necessarily included the Children with
the Fathers.

The Doctor's second expedient to evade the deter-
minate evidence of the text is as ridiculous as the first is
extravagant. The text says, — / will pour out my fur\f
upon them to accomplish mine anger against them lY
THE wilderxess. — '* Thcsc words, in the wilderness,
*' (saj's the acute Expositor) do not hint the place where
" the anger was to be accomplished, but rather refer to
*' anger, and suggest the anger to be, as if we might
** almost sa}' in English, the wilderness-anger."*
p. I"!.' — If the Doctor's Rhetoric is to be enriched with
this new piirase, I think his Logic should not be denied
the benefit of a like acquisition, of which it will have
frequent use, and tliac is, wilderness-reasoning.
And so much for this learned solution.

But the absurdity of supposing with these men, that
the words, / gave them also statutes that were not good,
and judgments whereby they should not live, might sig-
nify, their taking (without giving) Baal and Ashteroth
for their Gods, (p. 163.) is best exposed by the Prophet
i)iinself, as his words lie in tlie text. Consider then the
case of these Rebels. God s first intention (as in the
other case of their Fathers' rebellion) is represented to
be the renouncing them for his people, and scattering
them amongst the nations. Then I said I would pour
mit my Jury upon them to accomplish my anger against
them in the zvilderness -)•. But his mercy prevails—
Nevertheless I withdrew mine hand, and wrought for
my mimes sake, that it should not be polluted in the sight
of the Heathen, in whose sight I brought them forth \.
* Cliap. V. ver. 25, 26. t Ver. «l. J Ver. 23.

z 3 l8

342

THE DIVINE, LEGATION [Book IV.

In these two verses, we see. that the puiiishment in-
tended, an;l the njercy shewn, are d-'liver^d in general ;
wifhoiit the circumstances of t!ie puni'-lnrient, ur the con-
liiiions of the mercy, Tlje tiiree loliov« ing verses, in tlie
mode of tlie eastern composiiion, wliich deliijhts in re-
petition, informs us more pariiculuriy of these circitm-
stmices, which vvere dispeksio.v, &.c. and of these ccn-
ditiuns, which v,e\e the impositi .n of a Ritual Laxo —
/ lifted up my hand unto than also in tht xvildtrnc.ss,
th'it I ivould scATTFR THEM ujnoHgst the heaihcn, and
DISPERSE THF.M ihrough the countries ; because they
had not executed naj judgi/ients, but had despised my
statutes^ and had poliuied my -Sabbaihs, and their eyes
li'ere after their Fathers idols Here, the intended
punishincnt is explained sjyccifically, that is, with its
circumstances. — The n]ercy follows ; and the terms, on
%vhicij it was bestowed, arc hkc«!?e explained — JFhtre-
Jorc I gaic thcjp. a/so Statutes that zrere xot good, and
JudgmpUs nhrtby they should not live j". And now
the besgarly sliiits of the new interpretation appear in
all their ivkeduess. Whatever is meant by statutes not
geod. the end 01 giving them, we see, va as to preserve
them a peculiar people to '.tie Lord ; for the punisliment
of (iispersion w as remitted to tlieni. linl if bv stacutes
7iOt good he mc'Antihe ixermitting them to fall into Ido-
latries, (a)d is a!)surdly represented as decreeing an end
(the keeping his people sepiarate) ; and at the same tia::e
jjroviding means to defeat it : For every lapse into ido-
latrv was a step to their dispi rsion •■ind utter consumption ^
by absorbing them iuto lheK:ttions. \\ e must needs
contiade therefore, that, l)y srATUTES xor good is
li^eant the ritual law, the only mcan^ of attaining
that end of mercy, 'ihe preserving theui a separate
people.

Who now can chuse b'Jt smile to hear our learned Ex-
positor quoting these v\ ords of the book of Judges, —
The CiiiLL'iiEN- of Israel did evil in the sight of the
Lord, and foUoxced otJur Gi.ds, oj the GodsoJ the people
that were round about them^ a)id provoked titc Lord to
anger ^ and served Baal and Ashttroth \ ; and then
gravely adding, — " So that here the scene opens which

* Ver. 23, 24. f V'er. 25. \ Cap. ii, ver. 11, 12, 13.

" Ezekiel

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 343

" F-zekiel alludes to ; and accordingly, wliat Ezekiel
" mentions the punishaiPnt of lir^se wickednesses begun
'* now to come upon tlicin." p. lOj.

However, it must be on nod, that if words alone could
shake the solidity of the interpretation 1 have here given,
these which immediately follow the contested [)assjge of
statutes not good, would be enough to alarm us And
I polluted tlivm (says the textl in their oitn gifts, in that
thej caused to pass through the Jire all that openeili the
xvomb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that
they Ji'ight know that I am the Lord *. The common
interpretation of w hich is this : " I permitted them to jall
" into that wicked inhumanity, whereby they were pol-
" luted and contaminated, in making their Children to
" pass through the tire to Aioloch, in order to root them
out and utterly to destroy them."
Dr. Spencer (who follows the general sense of the pro-
phesy which I liave here explained and siippoi't'. ii) ap-
peared but too sensible h.ow much this text stood in his
^\ ay. He endeavours therefore to shew, that " it relates
" to God's rejecting the tirst-born of the Israelites from
*' the priesthood, and appointing the tribe of Levi to
" the sacred otiice in t';eir stead :" and that, tlierel'ore,
the verse should be reridcred thus, / pronounced them

polluted in their gijts \\. c. unfit to offer me any oblation],
/// that [passed bif a'l tIt'U openeth the ivomh [i. e. the

, first-l)ornJ in order to huuihk ih.em, that thci^ might know
that 1 am the Lord. And tiiis rendering may be the
riglit, for any thing Dr. Shucklord has to oppose to the
contrary (pp. i('8, ibj)) ; the main of which ii, what
has be'^i already confuted, (or rather, what the very
terms, in which the assertion is advuiiced, do thetuseives
confute) !iaiucly, that the Children in the wilderness were
not the immediate issue of those who died in the 'zpilder-'
ness, biit a remote posterity. As for his Hebrew criti-
cism, that tlic word ntaas, and not naiiar, would
pruir.ibly have been used by the IVopiiet, if rejecting

Jrovi the priesthood had i>een the- sense in' ended by him,
(p. itig) this is the slenderest ot all reasoning, even
tliough it had been applied to a Itiietorician by !)nite.ssion,
and in a language very copious, and perfectly wed imder-

• Ver. 26.

z 4 stood ;

544 THE DIV'INE LEGATION [Book IV.

stood : How evanid is it therefore, when applied to a
Prophet under the impulse of inspiration, and speakina
in the most scanty of all languac!;es ; the small knowledge
of which is to be got from one single volume of no large
bulk, and conveyed in a mode of writing subject to per-
petual equivocations and ambiguities ! From the mischiefs
of which, God in his good providence preserved us by
the Septuagint Translation, made while the Hebrew was
a living language, and afterwards authenticated by
the recognition of the inspired writers of the New Tes-
tament.

However, the truth is, that this explanation of the
learned Spencer must appear forced, even though we
had no better to oppose to it : But when there is a better
at hand, which not only takes off all the countenance
■which this 26th verse alFords to Dr. Shuckford's interpre-
tation q{ statutes not good, but so exactly quadrates with
the sense here given, that it completes and perfects the
narrative, v,'G shall be no longer frighted with its formi-
dable look.

To understand then what it aims at, we must consider
the context as it has been explained above. The 21st
and 22d verses (it hath been shewn) contain God's "^uy-
1)0ses of Judgment and of mrcy in general. The 23d,
24th, and •25th, explain in what the intended Judg}?ient
would have consisted, and how the prevailing merci^
was qualified. The Israelites were to be pardoned ; but
to be kept under, by the yoke of a ritual Law, described
only in general by the title of statutes not good. The
26th verse opens thr matter stiil further, and explains
the nature and genius of that yoke, together with its
effects, both salutary and baleful. The salutary, as it
•was a barrier to id(;!atry, tb.c most enormous species of
■which '.vas thr.t of causing their children to pass through
the Jne to Mi lech : the baleful, as it brought on their
desolation when tney becaiue deprived of tiie Temple-
worship. But to be more particular — I 'polluted them
in their oivn giji-^ By gifts 1 understand that homage
(universally expressed, in the ancient world, by llitcs
of sacrifice) which a People ow ed to their God. And
how were these gijts polluted ? By a multifarious;
Ritual, which, being opposed to the idolatries of the
1 2 Nations,

S«ct. 6.] OF ISIOSES DEMONSTRATED. 345

Nations, was prescribed in reference to those idolatries ;
and, consequently, was incumbered with a thousand Ce-
remonies, respecting the choice of the animal ; the
qualities and purifications of the Sacrificers ; and the
direction and efficacy of each specific Offering. This
account of their pollution, by such a Ritual, exactly
answers to the character given of that Ritual, [statutes
not good, (^'c] in the text in question. Then follows
the reason of God s thus pollutuig than in their ozcn gif ts
■ — in that [or, because that] they caused to pass through
the Jire all that openeth the womb — i. e. the polluting
Ritual was imposed as a punishment for, as well as
EARRiER TO their idolatries ; characterized under this
most enormous and horrid of them all, the causing of
their children to pass through the Jire to Moloch. Then
follows the humiliating circumstance of this ritual yoke,
— that I ?night make them desolate, i. e. that they should,
even from the nature of that Ritual, be deprived, when
they most wanted it, of their nearest intercourse with
their God and Kin;;. A real state of desolatioji / To
understand w hich, we are to consider, that at the time
this Prophesy was delivered, the Jews, by their accu-
mulated iniquities, were accelerating, what doubtless the
Prophet had then in his eye, their punishment of tiie
seventy years Captivity. Now, by the peculiar Con-
stitution of the ritual Law, their Religion became, as it
were, local ; it being unlawful to ofter sacrihcc but in
the temple of Jerusalem only. So that when they were
led captive into a foreign land, the most solemn and es-
sential intercourse between God and them ( the morni)ig
and evening sacrifice) was entirely cut oft": and thus, by
means of the ritual Law, they were emphatically said
to be?viule dtfolate. The verse concludes in telling us,
for what end this punishment was inflicted — that they
might know that I am the Lord. Wow would this a|)-
pear trom the premisses? Very evidently. For if, uhile
tiicy were in Captivity, they were under an interdict,,
and their Religion in a state of Suspension, and yet that
thfy V ere to continue Gods select pcoj)le (for the scope
of the vviiole Prophecy is to shew, that, notwithstanding
all their provocations, G jd still worked for his naines
sake), men, in order to be restored to their Religion,

they

345 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book TV.

ihey were to be reinstated in their o-.A n Land : which
v.ork, Prophecy always describes as the utmost manii'es-
tadon of Gods pc^er. Their redemption from tr.e
A}isyr>aii captivity particularly, being frequently com-
pared, by the Prophets, to that of the £i' v/?//<7/?. From
hence tlierefore all men might knazv and collect, that the
God of Israel zi-as the Lord.

This famous text then, we see, may be thus aptly pa-
raphrased— And I polluted them in their ozcn gif ts, in
that ihcif caused to pass through the fire all that openeth
the ■ucrnb, that I might 77iake them desolate, to the end
that thcif might knvw that I am the Lord ; i. e. " I
loaded the religious Worship due to me, as their Goil
and Kina, with a number of operose Ceremonies, to
punish their past, and to oppose to their future, idola-
tries ; the most a!)ominable of which was their making
tlicir cliildrcn to pass through the fire to Moloch : And
furilirr, that I might have the Ceremonial La-.v ahvavs
at hand as an instrument for stiii more severe punish-
ments, when tl e full measure of their iniquities should
bring tiicm iiito Captivity in a strange land, I so con-
trived, by the very constitution of tiieir Religion, that
it should then reniain under an interdict, and all stated
intercourse be cut otf between me and them; From
which evil, would necessarily arise this advantage, an
occasion to manifest mv power to the Gentiles, in
brin-iing iiiy Feonle again, after a due time of penance,
into tiicir o">vn land."

Here we sec, the text, thus expounded, connects and
coujpletcs the whole narmtive, concerning the imposi-
tion of the ritual Law, and its nature and consequences,
from the 2 1st to tlie '20tli verse iiiciusivcly : and opens
the history of it by due degrees, which the njo^tjust and
elegant compositions require. V.'e are first iniormcd of
the threatened judgment, and of the prevailing mercy in
general: — we are then told the specific nature of that
judgment, and the circumstance attending the accorded
mercy; — ana lastly, the Prophet explains the nature and
genius of ti.a.t attendant circumstance ; together with its
adverse as well as beniunant ettects.

I have now d'^prived the Connecter of all his argu-
menls but one, for tins strange iuterpretalion oi statutes

not

Sect. 6.] OF :M0SES DEMONSTRATE!^. 347

?iot gcnd; and that one is. "That the worshippers of
E(t,y! and A.'>hteyoth, in the book (;f Judges, and the
slaves to siatuics not good in the prophet Ezekicl, hav-
ing tlie common name of Children, must needs be the
same individcaL-; :"' Eut this I iiuike a conscience of
taking truni him.

Yet such confidence has the learned person in his
goofJlv exposition, tiiat he concludes l)is rea.-oain<^ against
the o!>vious sense of the Prophecy, in this extraordinary
uianncr — " Dr. Spencer imagined, this text alone was
" sufficient to support his hypothesis; but I cannot but
" think, it' what has been oftercd be fairly considered,
" >jo liON i.ST wiaxER can ever cite it again for that
" purpose." p. ; f)".

Vv'hat is Dr. Spencer s hypothesis ? Just this and no
other, that Moses gave the rituui Law to the Jews be-
cause of tiic hardness oj their hearts*; the very Hypo-
thesis of Jesus C brist himbcif

But the CoNNECTKR thinks, that, if what he has
offered be fairly considered, no honest wuiter can
ever cite it again jor that purpose. This smells stroiig
of the Bigot. One can hardly tliink one's self in the
closet of a learned and sob<;r Divine ; but rather in some
wild Conv! ntitle of Aletiiodl^ts or liutchinsonians ;
whose criticisms are all Revelations : wliicli, though you
cannot embrace but at the exfteuce of coimmon sense,
you ar.j not allowed to question without renouncing
coi'MOv honesty.

I have Jair/i/ considered (as the Connecter exj)ect3 his
Reader should do)h:hat he has off ercd against Dr. Spen-
cer s hypothesis ; and if there be any truth in the con-
clusions of human reason, I think a writer may go on
very advantaneoiisiy, as well as uiln a go(jd conscience,
to defend that liijpothesis. How such a writer shall be
qualitied by fiigots, is another point. Many an honest
Man, I am persuaded, will still adhere to Dr. 6huck'
Jords hypothesis-^ and with tlie same good taith, with
wliich he himself supported it : for though hi-D charity
will mti allow that title to those who dissent from hiui,
yet God forbid, that I should not give it to Him.

But it is now time to proceed to the third period of
• Matt. XIX. 8,

THIS

348 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Rook IV.

THIS Prophecy. For the principal design of this Work
is to vindicate and illustrate sacred Scripture, though ia
niy progress I be stili obliged, from time to time, to stop
a httle, while I remove the most material obstructions
which lie in my way.

This Prophecy hitherto contains a declaration of the
various punishments inflicted on the rebellious Israelites,
from the time of JMoses's mission to the preaching of
Ezekiel. \Ve have shewn that their punishment in the
first period, was death in the wilderness : their punish-
ment in the second period, was the fastening on their
■necks the yoke of the ritual Luxe.

Their punishment in the third period is now to be
consideretl : and we shall see that it consisted in ren-
dering the yoke of the ritual Law still more galling, by
•\vithdra\\ing from them that extr^ioudinary provi-
PENCE, which once rewarded the studious observers
of it, with many temporal blessings. The punishment
was dreadful : and such, indeed, the Prophet describes
it to have been. But we may be assured, their crinaes
deserved it, as having risen in proportion with it ; and
this likewise, he tells us, was the case. Their idolatries
were at iirst, and so, for some time, they continued to
l)e, the mixing Pagan worship with the worship of the
God of Israel. But though they had so often smarted
for this folly, they were yet so besotted with the Gods
of the nations, the stocks and stones of t/ie high places,
that their last progress in impiety was the project of
casting off the God of Israel entirely, at least as their
TUTELAR Crod, and of mixing themselves amongst tlie
Nations. They l)ad experienced, that the God of Is-
rael was a JEALOUS God, who would not share his
glory with another; and they ho[)ed to avoid his wrath
by renouncing their Covenant v,'ith him, and leaving him
at liberty to chusc another people. To such a degi-ec
of impiety and madness v^as this devoted Nation arrived,
when Ezekiel prophesied at the eve of their approaching
Captivity. All this will t e made plain, by what follows.

We have seen their behaviour in the two former pe-
riods; in Egypt, and in die Wilderness. The third
begins with a description of their Manners when they had
taken possession of the land of Canaan.

Ver. 27.

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 349

Ver. 27. *' Son of man, speak unto the liouse of Is-
*' rael, and say unto them. Thus saith the Lord God;
" Yet in this your fathers have blasphemed me, in that
" they have committed a trespass against me.

28. " For when I had brought them into the land,

for the v\ hich I lifted up my hand to give it to them,

then they saw every high hill, and all the thick trees,
" and they offered there their Faci ifices, and there they
" presented the provocation of their offering."

This was their continual practice, even to the delivery
of this Prophecy ; at which time, their enormities were
come to the height, we just mentioned ; to contrive in
their hearts to renounce the God of Israel, altogether.
But being surrounded with calamities, and a powerful
enemy at their door, they were willing to procure a pre-
sent relief from him, whom tl icy had so much offtnided ;
though at this very instant, they were projecting to offend
still more. The singular impudence of this conduct was,
apparently, the immediate occasion of this laiiious Pro-
phecy; as we shall now see.

Ver. 30. " Wherefore say unto the house of Israel,

Thus saith the Lord God ; Arr- ye polluted after the
** manner of your fathers ? and commit ye whoredom
** after their abominations ?

31. For when ye offer your gifts, w})cn ye make
" your sons to pjss through the tire ; ye pollute your-

selves with all your idols evex to this dav : and
*' shall I be enquired of by you, O house of Israel?
*' As I live, sailh the Lord God, 1 will nut be enquired
*' of by you."

That this recourse to the God of their Fathers was
cnly a momentary impulse, arising from their pressing
necessities, is evident fiom what immediately follows;
the mention of that specific crime which brought upon
^hem the punishment annexed to the third period. —

Ver. 32. "And that which cometh into voua

** MIND, SHALL NOT BE AT ALL, THAT YE SAV, WK
WILL BE AS THE HEATHEN, AS THE FAMILIES OF
" TlIE COUNTRIES, TO SERVE M'OOD AND STONE.

33. " As I live, saith the Lord God, Surely with a
" mighty hand, and with a stretclied-out arm, and
with vuav poured out, will 1 iiule over you.

34. " An::

350 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

34. " And I WILL BR ! VG YOU OUT FROJI THE P£0-
*' PLE, A\'D V'TLf GATiiEK YOU OUT OF THE COLN-
" TRli S WHEREIN YE APvE SCATTERED, vvilh a migi.ty

" hand, tind with a stretchcd-out arm, and with

'* FUR.Y POURED OUT.

^'i. " And I will Imw^y von into tlie avilderxess of
** ti:e people, and there wjil 1 plead with you face
*' to face.

36. " Like as T pleaded with your fatlicrs in the n-il-
" (krness of the land of Egyj^t, so n ill I plead w ith you
" face to face."

By all tills it appears, that the Jews of this time were
little anxious to avo'ul their ap])ro?.chini; Captivity, de-
r.ounced and threatened by all their Prophets. What
they wanted was a light and easy servitude, w hich might
enable them to ndnglc with, and at last to be lost
•amongst the Nations ; like the Ten Tribes which had
gone before tlicm. Against the vilcness of these hopes
is this part of the Prophecy directed, (iod assures
them, he will bring them out of the Assi/rhm Captivity,
as he had done out of the Egyptian; but not in mercy,
as that deliverance was procured, but in judgment, and
^riih fur]) poured out. And as he had brought their
Fathers into the u-ikkiTCss of the land of Egypt, so
would he bring them into tl»e wilderness of the
people, that is, the land of Canaan, which they would
find, on their return to it, was l)ecome dcsart and unin-
habited: and therefore elegantly called, tlie Xi'ildcniess
of the people. But w hat now w as to be their reception,
on their second possession of the promised Land. ^ a very
diiibrcnt welcome from the first. God indeed leads
them here again w ith a mighty hand and a stretched-out
ann; and it was to take possession; but not, as at first,
of a land jhrving with milk and honey, but of a prison,
a house of correction w here they were to pass under the
rod, and to remain in bonds.

Ver. 37. *' And I -will cause you (says God) to
" pass under the rod, and I will bring you
" into the bond of the covenant."

Words which strongly and elegantly express subjection
to a ritual Law, after the extraordinary Providence,
which so much alleviated the yoke of it, was withdraw n ;

And

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 351

And we find it withdrawn soc.n after their return from
the Captivity. — But, the Propliecy, carrying on the
comparison to the Egyptian dehvcrance, adds — ■

Ver. 38. " And I will purge out i'rom amongst you
" the Rebels, and them that transgress against me : I
" will bring them forth out of the country wiiere they
" sojourn, and they shall not enter into the land of
" iM-ael."

These Rebels, like their Fathers in the zvilderness,
•were indeed to be brought out of Cajitivity, but uere
never to enjoy the prouiised Land ; and the rest, like tiie
can.DaEX in the xvildtrncss, were to have tlie yoke of
the ritual Law sbJl made more galling. And thus the
co.MPAKisoN is completed.

These were tlie three different punishments inflicted In
these three diiferent periods. The first person- a l ; the
second and the third, national; only the third made
heavier t'lan tlie second, in proportion to their accumu-
lated offences.

Lut as, in the height of God's vengeance on the sins of
this wretched people, tiie distant prospect always termi-
nated in a mercy ; So, with a mercy, and a promise of
better times, the whole of this prophetic Scene is closed ;
in order that the Nation to which it is addressed, should,
however criminal they were, not be left in an utter state
of desperation, but be afforded some shadow of repose,
in the prospect of future peace and tranquillity. For
now, turniLig again to these temporarii Imiuirers after
Go<l, ilie Prophecy addresses them, in this manner:

Ver. 39. " As for you, () liouse of Israel, thus saith
" the L<jrd God; Go ye, serve ye evciy one his idols,
*' and liercafter also, it' ye will not hearken unto me :
" ljut pollute you my holy nauie no more with your
" gifls, and with your idols."

As nmch as to say, Go on no longer in this divided
worship ; halt no more between two opinions ; if Baal
be your Crod, serve him; if the God of Israel, then
serve him oirly. The reason follows :

Ver. 40 — 43. " For in mine liohj mountain — thcrt
" sliall ail the house oj Israel — scree me. There icill
" / accept them, and there will I reqidre your offer'
ith all your holy things — and there shall ye

" remember

g5« THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV,

** remember your xoays, and all your doings wherein ye
" have been dejiled. and ye shall lothe your-

*' SELVES IN YOUR OWN SIGHT." i.e. " Fof thcil,

a new order of things shall commence. ]\Iy people, after
their return from the Captivity, shall be as averse to
idolatry, as till then they were prone and disposed to it :
and the memory of their former follies shall make them
lothe themselves in their own sight." And this, indeed,
was the fact, as we leani by their whole history, from
their restoration to their own Land, quite down to the
j)rcsent hour.

The idea of jiercy is naturally attached to that of
repentance and reformation ; and with jiercy the Pro-
phecy concludes.

Ver. 44. " And ye shall know that I am the Lord,
" ichen I hare wrought icith you for my name's sake,
" not aceording to your wicked ways, nor according to
" year corrupt doings, O ye house of Israel, saith the
" ^Lord Godr

The Reader hath now a full explanation of the whole
Prophecy : whereby he may understand how justl\ it
Lath acquired its eminent celebrity. Its general subject
beinc no less than the Fate and Fortunes of tlie Jewish
Republic ; of which the several parts are so important,
so judiciously chosen, so elegantly disposed, and so
nobly enounced, that we see tlie divinity of the original
in every step v.e take.

But to return to the peculiar purpose of this Comment.
Which is given to shew, that God himself has delivered
the ritual Law of the Jews, under the character of
Statutes that "ucre not good, and Judgments whereby
they should not live*.

Tlie use 1 would make of it against Witstus, with
whom I have been concerned, is to shew, that if such
be the genius of the ritual Lav,-, it is no wonder it should
have, in its composition, an alloy of no better materials,
than Egyptian and other Pagan Ceremonies ; cleansed
indeed and rehned from their immoralities and super-
stitions : And conversely, that a composition of such an
alloy vvas very aptly characterized by Statutes not good,
wid Judgments whereby they could not live.

Thus

Jtect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 353

Thus bavins before seen wbat little force there was in
Witsius s arguments, and now understanding i^ow little
reason he had to be so tenacious of his opinion; tlie
reader may think he scarce merited the distinction of
being recommended to a learned Body as the very bul-
wark of the faith, in this matter. But let what will
become of his arguments, he deserves honour for a much
better thing than orthodox disputation : 1 mean, for an
honest turn of mind, averse to imputing odious designs
to his adversaries, or dangerous consequences to their
opinions*.

On the whole then, we conclude, both against Deist
and Believer, that the Ritual Law's being made in
reference to Egyptian superstition is no reasonable ob-
jection to the divinity of its original.

But the Deist may object, " That though indeed,
when the Israelites were once deeply infected with that
supei stition, such a ritual might be necessary to stop and
cure a growing evil ; yet as the remedy was so multiplex,,
burdensonje, and slavish, and therefore not in itself
eligible, how happened it, that God, who had this
family under his immediate and peculiar care, should
suffer them to contract an infection which required so
inconvenient and impure a remedy ?

I have been so accustomed to find the strongest ob-
jections of infidelity end in the stronger recommendation
of revealed Religion, that I have never been backward,
either to produce what they have said, when they write
their best, or to imagine what they would say, if they
knew how to write better. To this therefore I reply,
That the promise God had made to Abraham, to give
his posterity the land of Canaan, could not be peiformed
till that Family was grown strong enough to take and
keep possession of it. In the mean time, therefore,
they were necessitated to reside amongst idolaters. And
we have seen, although they resided unmixed, how
violent a propensity they ever had to join themselves to
the Gentile Nations, and to practise their Manners.
God, therefore, in his infinite wisdom brought them
into Egypt, and kept them there during this period ; the
* See note [CCCCC] at the end of this Book.

Vol. IV. A A only

354 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV"

only place where they could remahi, for so long a time,
safe and unconfoundcd vvitli the natives ; the ancient
Egyptians being, by numerous institutions, forbidden all
fellowship w ith strangers ; and beai ing, besides, a par-
ticular aversion to the profession* of this Family. Thus
we see, that the natural disposition of tlie Israelites,
which, in Egypt, occasioned their superstitions ; and, in
consequence, the necessity of a burthensome Ritual,
would, in any other Country, have absorbed them in
Gentilism, and confounded them with Idolaters. From
this objection, therefore, nothing conies but a new
occasion to adore the footsteps of eternal Wisdom in his
Dispensations to his chosen People.

III.

The last proposition is, That the rery circumstances
of Moses's Egyptian learning, and the Lazes instituted
in cotnpliance to the people's prejudices, and in opposition
to Egyptian superstitions, are a strong co)iJirmation of
the divinity of his mission.

Egypt was the great School of legislation for the rest
of Mankind. And so revered were her oracular dictates,
that foreigh Lawgivers, who went thither for instruction,
never ventured to deviate from those fundamental prin-
ciples of Government which she jjiescribed. In Re-
LfcioN, particularly, wliich always made a part of
civil Policy, they so closely adhered to Egyptian maxims,
that Posterity, as we have seen, were deceived into an
opinion that the (J reek Lavvyvers had received their very
Ciods from thenoe.

What therefore uiust we tliink had been the case of a,
Native of E<2ypt; bred up from his infancy in Egyptian
wisdom, and. at length, become a member of their
Legislative body? would such a man, when going to
frame a civil Policy and Religion (though we suppose
nothing of that natural afiection, which the best and
wisest men have ever boi'ne ibr their own country in-
stitutions), be at all inclined to deviate from its funda-^
mental priiiciples of Government ?

Yet here wc have in Moses, according to our Advcr-
■aries- account of him, a mere human Lawgiver, come
* The profession of Shepherds,

■ frcsk

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 355

fresh out of the Schools < f Egypt, to reduce a turbulent
People into Society, acting on fundamental Principles
of Religion and Policy directly opposite to all tlie max-
ims of Egyptian Wisdom.

One of the chief of which, in the religious policy
of Egypt, was, That the government of the World had,
by the supreme Ruler of the universe, been committed
into the hands of subordinate, local, tutelary Deities;
amongst w horn the several Regions of the earth were
shared out and divided : that these M'ere the true and
proper objects of all public and popular religion ; and
that the knowledge of the one true God, the Creator
of all things, was highly dangerous to be communicated
to the People ; but was to be secreted, and shut up in
their mysteries ; and in them, to be revealed only
occasionally, and to a few ; and those few, the wise,
the learned, and ruling part of mankind *. Now, irt
plain defiance and contempt of this most venerable
Principle, our Egyptian Lawgiver rejects these doctrines
of inferior Deities, as impostures, and /i/hig vamtita ;
and boldly and openly preaches up to the People, the
belief of the oxe true God, the Creator, as the sole
object of the Religion of all mankind -|-.

Another fundamental maxim, the religious policy
of Egypt, was to propagate, by every kind of method,
the doctrine of a future state of reavards and
punishments; as the necessary support of all Religion
and Government. Here again, our Lawgiver (no Deist
can tell why^) forsakes all iiis own principles ; inten-
tionally rejects a support, which was as really -beneticial
to mankind, in all his interests, as the other notion, of
inferior Deities, was but thought to be ; intircly omits to
mention it in his Institutes of Law and Religion ; and is
studiously silent in all those particulars which lead to the
propagation of it||. But of this, more at large, in a
future volume.

• Again, it was of the civil policy of Egypt to pre-.

* See an account of these Mysteries in the Second Vohime.
' t See note[DDDDD] ;it the end of this Book.
' • I See Vic-w of Lord Bulingbroke's I'fiilosvp/nj , Vol. x ii. ' Letter I \'-. i

II See note [KEEluE] at .the end. of this Bpok.

A A 2 fer

35$ THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

fer an hereditary despotic Monarchy to all other forms of
Government: Moses, on the contrary, erects a Theo-
cracy on the free choice of the people ; to be adminiatere4
Aristocratically.

Add to all this, that his deviation from the Policy of
Egypt was encountering the strongest prejudices of his
People ; who were violently carried away to all the cus-
toms and superstitions of that Policy.

And now let an ingenaou,s Deist weigh these instances,
ipany more that will easily occur to him, and thet^
fairly tell \is his sentiments. Let him try, if he can
think it was at all likely, that Moses, a mere human
Lawgiver, ^ Native of Egypt, and learned in all its
political Wisdom, should, in the formation of a Civil
policy, for such a People as he undertook to govern, ac^
directly contrary to all tlie fundamental principles in
which he had been instructed?

I. To this perhaps it may be said, — " That Moses
well understood the folly and falsehood of inferior Gods :
— that he did not believe the doctrine of a future state
of rewards and punishments ; — that he was too honest
to employ fraud : — that his love to his People made him
indisposed to an hereditary despotic Monarchy ; — and
that the theologic i)rinciples of Egvpt led him to the
invention of a Theocracy." To all thfe, I answer,

1. As to his see'uig the falsehood oj inferior Gods. —
So did many other of the old Lawgiverti, instructed in
Egyptian policy ; yet being taught to tliink Polytheism
\iseful to Society, they did not, for all that, the less
cultivate their abominai^le idolatry.

2. As to his not believing a future state^ and his ho-
nesty in not teaching tchat he did not believe. — Such
Objectors forget that they have already made him a
fraudulent impostor, in his pretension to a divine em-
ployment. Now if the end of civil Government made
him fraudulent in that instance, it would hardly suffer
him to be scrupulous in this ; even allowing the extra-
\agance of this fancy, that he did not believe a future
state; because, as hath been proved at large*, the pro-
pagation of this doctrine is, and was always believed to

* See the first three volumes.

be.

Sect. 6.] OF AIDSES DEMONSTRATED. 3.57

be, the firmest support of civil government : But of tliis
more at large, hereafter.

3. With regard to Ids concern for the happiness of
his people ; — I will readily allow this to be very consist-
ent with Heroic or Legislative fraud. But this happi-
ness the ancient Lawgivers thought best procured by the
Egyptian mode of Government. And indeed they had
EXPERIENCE, the best guide in public matters. For
thie excellent education which the Egyptians gave their
Kings, in training them up to the love of the Public,
and high veneration for the Laws, prevented the usual
abuse of power; and gave to that people the longest
and most uninterrupted course of prosperity that any
Nation ever enjoyed*. It is xxo wonder, therefore,
that this should make moxauchy (as it did) the first
favourite form of Government, in all places civilized by
the aid of Egypt.

4. But, the theologic principles of Egypt led Moses
to the invention of a Theocracy. — NVithout doubt
those principles, as we shall see hereafter, occasioned
its easy reception amongst the Hebrews. But tliere is
one circumstance in the case that shews its invention
must have been of God, and not of Moses. For this
ground of its easy reception was the notion of local tu-
telary Deities. But this notion, Moses, in preaching
up the doctrine of the one true God, entirely took away.
This, indeed, on a supposition of a Divine Legation,
has all the marks of aduiirable wisdoin ; but supposing

• it to be Moses's o\a n contrivance, we see nothing but
inconsistency and absurdity. He forms a design, and
then defeats it ; he gives with one hand, and he takes
away ^^ ith the other.

IL But it may be farther objected, — " That, as it
was the intention of Moses to separate these people from
all others, he therefore gave them those cross and op-
posite institutions, as a barrier to all communication."
To this I answer,

T. That were it indeed God, and not Moses, who
projected this separation, the reason would be good.
Because the immediate end of God's separation was
* See note [FFFFF] at the end of this Book.

A A 3 twofold,

358 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

twofold, to keep them unmixed ; and to secure them
from idolatry : and such end could not be effected but
by opposing those fundamental principles of Egypt,
\vith the doctiine of one God, -and the institution of a
Theocracy, But then this, which would be a good
reason, will become a very bad objection. Our Deist
is to be held to the question. lie regards Moses as a
mere human Lawgiver. But the sole end which such a
one could propose by a scparatio]!, was to preserve his
people pure and unmixed. Now this could be effected
only by la'>\ s which kept them at home, and discouraged
•and prevented all foreign commei ce : and these, by the
same means, briiiging on general poverty, there would
be small danger of their being much frequented, while
they laboured under that contagious malady. This we
know was the case of Sparta. It was their Lawgiver's
chief aim to keep them distinct and unmixed. But did
he do this by institutions which crossed the fundamental
principles of the Religion and Policy of Greece r By
no means. They were all of them the same, i'he me-
thod lie employed was only to f ame such Lav;s as dis-
couraged commerce and foreign intercourse. And these
.proved effectual. I the rather instance in the Spartan,
than in any other Government, because the end, which
r\Ioses and Lycurgus pursued in common, (though for
diff'eient purposes) of keeping their people separate,
occasioned such a likencas m several paits ot Uic two
Institutions, as was, in my opinion, the real origin of
that tradition mentioned in the first book of ^Maccabees,
That there was a Family-relation between the two
People.

2. But, secondl}', as it is very true, that the mere
intention of keeping a people separate and unmixed
(which is all a human Lawgiver could have in view)
w ould occasion I^ws in opposition to the customs of
those people with whom., from their vicinity to, or fond-
ness for, they were in most danger of being confounded ;
so, when I insisted on those Ariti-Egvptian institutions,
which I gave as a certain proof of Moses's Divine Le-
gation, 1 did not reckon, in my account, any of that
vast number of ritual .and municipal laws, which, Ma-

netho

Sect. 6.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 359'

netho confesses, were given priiicipallii in opposition to
Egyptian customs*. This a mere separation would
require : But this is a very different thing from the op-
position to FUXDAMENTAi s, here insisted On ; which a
mere separation did not in the least require.

III. Out it ma) be still further urged, " That resent-
ment for ill usage might dis[iose Moses to obliterate the
memory of the place they came from, by a Policy con- ■
trary to the fundamental Institutions of Egypt." Here
again our objecting Deist will forget himself i. He
hath urged a conformity in the law to Egyptian.
Rites ; and this, in order to discredit Moses's Divine
Legation: and we have allowed him his fact. What-
ever it was therefore that engaged Moses to his general
OPPOSITION', it could not be resentment: for that had
certainly prevented all kind of conformity or similitude.

2. But, secondly, such effects of civil resentment, tlie
iiatural manners of men will never suffer us to suppose.
We have in ancient history many accounts of the settle-
ment of new Colonics, forced injuriously from home by
their fellow-citizens. But v.e never find that this iuibit-
tered them against their Country-institutions. On the
contrary, their close adherence to their native customs,
notwithstanding all personal wrongs, has in every age
enabled learned men to find out their original, bv strong
charactcri>tic marks of relation to the mother city. And
the reason is evident : ixnatf, love of oxf/s coun-
TRv, whose attractive power, contrary to that of natural
bodies, is strongest at a distance; and Inveterate
3IAXXERS which stick closest in distress (the usual state
of all new Colonies) are qualities infinitely too strong to
give May to resentment against particular men for per-
sonal injuries.

It is not indeed unlikely but that some certain specific
Law or custom, wliich did, or was imagined to contri-
bute to their disgrace and expulsion, might, out of re-
sentment, be reprobated by the new Colony. And tiiis

* O wfaiToy fAiii eivToT^ iiouov eSeIo, i/.r,re 'a^oa-/.v\iiti Siejj. ^^te Tut
fXccPuroi E» Alyv'Jrlui Scjxirsvo//i£f«v li^uv ^uuv uirip^^tcOxi jAn^ito;, zyatlin Ti
&vetv avccXii)/' 9xjiixif\i<T^a,i ftrj^Evi 'mXnv ruv a'viiuiji.ij^fA.itoiv. ToiaDra
»ofx.o6£l))3'a? wAiTra aXXas, fj-a/Kirot. Tsr? AiyKTrlioi; £Si(T//ot; txavTiB^tir*,

ApwJ Joseph, cont. Ap. 1. i. p. 460, 4G1. Haverch. Ed. "

- ^ A A 4 is

36o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

is the utmost that the history of mankind will suffer us
to su[)po3e.

On the whole, therefore, I conclude that Moses's
Egyptiax learning is a strong confirmation

of the DIVINIT^f OF HIS MISSION.

The second part of the proposition is no less evident.
That the laws instituted in compliance to the people's pre-
judices, atul in opposition to Egyptian superstitions,
support the same truth with equal strength. Had
]\Ioses's Mission been only pretended, his conduct, as
a wise Lawgiver, had doubtless been very different. His
business had been then only to support a false pretence
to inspiration. Let us see liow he managed. He pre-
tended to receive the whole frame of a national Institution
from God ; and to have had the pattern of all its parts
brought him down from Heaven, to the Mount. But
when this came to be promulged, it was seen that, the
CEREiiONiAL LAW being politically instituted, partly
in compliance to the people's prejudices, and [tartly in
opposition to Egyptian superstitions, several of its Rites
had a reference to the Pagan superstitions in vogue.
This, as we see, from the objection of tlie ignorant in
these times, might have been an objection in those. And
as an Impostor could not have foreseen the objection,
his fears of a discovery would have made him decline
so hazardous a system, and cautiously avoid every thing
that looked like an imitation. It is true, that, on en-
quiry, this unfolds a scene of admirable and superior
wisdom : but it is such as an Impostor could never have
projected ; or at least would never have ventured to leave
to the merry of popular judgment. We conclude,
therefore, tiiat this conduct is a clear proof that Moses
actually received the Institution from God. Nor does
this in anyu'ise contradict what we have so much insisted
on above, Tliat a mere human Lawgiver, or even an
inspired one, acting with free agents, is necessitated to
comply with the passions of the People ; a compliance
which would necessarily induce such a relation to Egypt
as we find in the ritual Law : for we must remember too
what hath been likewise shewn, that the ends of a divine
and human Lawgiver, both using the common means of
a SEPARATION, UTO vastlj' different ; the latter only

aiming;

Sect. 6.] OF AIOSES DEMONSTRATED. 561

aiming to keep the people unmixed ; the former, to keep
them pure from idolatry. Now, in both cases, where
the People are dealt with as free agents, some compliance
to their prejudices will be necessary. 15ut as, in the
Institutions of a human Lawgiver pretending only to
inspiration, such compliance in the Ritual would
be subject to tiie danger here spoken of ; and as com-
pliance in the Fundamentals, such as the object of
Worship, a future State, and mode of civil Government,
would not be so subject ; and, at the same time, would
win most forcibly on a prejudiced people, to the pro-
moting the Legislator's end; we must needs conclude
that these would be the things he would comply with
and espouse. On the other hand, as a divine Lawgiver
could not comply in these things ; and as a Ritual,
like the Mosaic, was the only means left of gaining his
end ; we must conclude that a divine Lawgiver wotiid
make his compliance on that side.

1. Let me only add one corollary to our UELitvtN'G
Adversaries, as a farther support of this part of the
proposition ; " That allowing the Ritual-law to be ge-
nerally instituted in reference to Egyptian and other
neighbouring Superstitions, the divine wisdom of the
contrivance will be seen in redoubled lustre. One reason,
as we have seen above, of the opposition to the notion of
sudt a reference is, that the ritual law m^as typical,
not only of things relating to that Dispensation, but to
the Evangelical. This then they take for granted ; and,
as will be shewn hereafter, with good reason. Now an
Institution of a body of Rites, particularly and minutely
levelled against, and referring to, the idolatrous prac-
tices of those ages ; and, at the same time, as minutely
typical, not only of all the remarkable transactions under
that Dispensation, but hkewise of all the great and con-
stituent parts of a future one, to arise in a distant age,
and of a genius directly opposite, must needs give an
attentive considerer the most amazing idea of diving
Avisdom *, And this I beg leave to offer to the consi-
deration

* Hear what the learned Spencer says on this occasiofi : " Atqu6
" hac in re Deus sapientiaj sua; specimen egregium edidit, et illi noft
" absimile quod in mundo frequenter observamus: in eo enirn,

notante Verulamio, dam mtura aliud agit, provideMia aliud elicit ;

" 11^

362 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV'

deration of the unpr- judiced Reader, as another strong

INTERNAL ARGUMENT THAT THE RlTUAL LAW WAS
NOT OF MERE HU3IAN CONTRIVANCE,

2. Let me add another corollary to the i'nbelieving
Jews. We have seen at large how expedient it was for
the Jews of the first ages, that the Ritual or ceremonial
Law should be directed against the several idolatries of
those ages. It was as expedient for ti>e Jews of the
later ages that this Law should be typical likewise.
For had it not been tj/pica!, God would have given a
Law whose reason would have ceased many ages before
the Theocracy was abolished : and so have atibrded a
plausible occasion to the Jews for changing or abrogating
them, on their own head.

3. Let me add a third corollary to the unbelieving
Gentiles. Th.e Law's being typical obviates their
foolish argument atjainst Revelatiun, that the abolition
of the Mosaic religion and the establishment of the C/iri-s-
tian in its stead, impeaches the wisdom of God, as im-
plying change and inconstancy in his acting ; for by his
making the Law typical, the two religions are seen to
be the tw o parts of one and the same design.

The great jMaimonides, who , first * explained the
CAUSES of the Jewish Ritual in any reasonable manner
(and w ho, to observe it by the way, saw nothing in the
LAM" but temporal scnictiom), was so stiuck with the
splendour of divinity, which this light reflected back
upon the law, that in the entry on his subject he breaks
out into this triumphant boast, ea tjbi explicalo ut

PLANE NON AMPLIUS DUBITARE QUEASET DIFFEREN-
TIAM HABEAS QUA DISCERNERE POSSIS INTER ORDI-
NATION ES

" nam frondibus quas natiira, ronsuetiidinem sium reliiieiis, paiitj
" utitur providentia ad ckH injnriis a fnicUi tenello piopulsandns.

Pari modo, cum IlebnEorunj natio, consuetudinem suam exuere

nescia, ntus antiques impense desideraret. Deus eorum desiderio
<' se morigerum prsbebat ; sed eorurn ruditate & impotentia puerili
" ad fines egregios &i s ipientia sua dignos utebatur. Sic enim ritus
" antiquos populo indultos, circumstantiis quibubdam demptis aut
^' additis, immutavit, ut rerum coelestium schema reprajsentarent,

oculis purgatioribus facile percipiendum ; adeo ut Deus pueriiibus
" Israelitarum studiis obsequens, divina promoveret." De Leg,
Heb. Rit. p. 218.

* In hisJMore Nevoch. Par. III. — And s€e note [GGGGG]. at
the. end of this Boe

Sect. 6.] OF. MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 363

TsTATIONES LEGUM CONDITARUM AB IIOMINIBUS ET
INTER ORDINATIONES LEGIS DIVINA",.

• Thus the Header sees what may be gained by fairly
and boldly submitting to the force of evidence. Such a
manifestation of the divinity of the Law, arising out of
the Deist's own principles, as is sufficient to cover him
with confusion !

And what is it, we lose ? Nothing sure very great or
excellent. The imiiginary honour of being original in
certain Rites (considered in themselves) inditferent ; and
becouiing good or Dad by comparison, or by the autJwrity
which enjoins them, and by tiie object to which they are
diiectcd.

Tiic Deist indeed pretends that, in the things borrowed
from Egypt, the hrst principles of Law and Morality,
and the very tritest cut^toms of civil life, are to be in-
cluded. The extravagance of this fancy hath been
exposed elsewhere*, liut as it is a species of folly all
parties are apt to give into, it may not be amiss to con-
sider this matter of traductive customs a little more
particularly.

There is nothing obstructs our discoveries in Antiquity
(as far as concerns the noblest end of this study, the
knowledge of mankind) so much as that false, though
undisputed Principle, that the general customs of men,
-whether civil or religious, (in wliich a common hkeness
connects, as in a chain, the Manners of its inhabitants,
throughout the whole globe) are traductive from one
.another. When, in truth, the origin of this general
•similitude is from the sameness of one common Nature,
improved by reason, or debased by superstition. But
when a custom, w hose meaning lies not upon the surface,
but requires a profounder search, is the subject of in-
quiry, it is much easier to tell us that the users borrowed
it from such or such a people, than rightly to inform us,
what common principle of reason or superstition
gave birth to it in both.

How many able writers have employed their time and
learning to prore that Christian Rome borrowed their
superstitions from. the Pagan city 1 They have indeed
* Sec book ii«

shewn

364 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Boole IV.

shewn an exact and surprising likeness in a great variety
of instances. But the concki^iion from thence, that, there-
fore, the CathoUc borrowed from the Heathen, as plau-
sible as it may seem, is, I think, a very great mistake ;
which the followers of this hypothesis might have under-
stood without the assistance of the principle here laid
down : since the rise of the superstitious customs in
question were many ajics later than the conversion of
that imperial city to the Christian Faith : consequently)
at the time of their introduction, there v.ere no pagan
prejudices which required such a compliance from the
ruling Clergy. For this, but principally for the ge-
neral reason here advanced, I am rather induced to
believe, that the very same spirit of superstition, ope-
rating in equal circumstances, made both Papists and
Pagans truly originals.

But does this take off from the just reproach which the
Reformed have cast upon the Church of Rome, for the
practice of such Rites, and encouragement of such Su-
perstitions? Surely not; but rather strongly fixes it. In
the former case, the rulers of that Church had been
guilty of a base compliance with the infirmities of their
new converts : in the latter, the poison of superstition
is seen to have infected the very vitals of its Hie-
rarchy *.

But then, truth will fare almost as ill when a right, as
when a wrong principle, is pushed to an extravagance.
Thus, as it would be ridiculous to deny, that the Roman
laws of the Twelve Tables were derived from the Greeks,
because we have a circumstantial history of their traduc-
tion : 80 it would be equally foolish not to own, that a
great part of the Jewish ritual was composed in reference
to the superstitions of Egypt; because their long abode
in the country had made the Israelites extravagantly fond
of Egyptian customs : but to think (as some Deists seem
to hav^e done) that they borrow ed from thence their com-
mon principles of morality, and the legal provisions for
Lhe support of such principles f, is, whether we con-
sider the Israelites under a divine or human direction, a

* See note [HIIIIHH] at the ehd.
7 See Marsham.

thing

Sect. 6.] OF MOS?S DEMONSTRATED. 364

thing equally absurd ; and such an absurdity as betrays
the grossest ignorance of human nature, and the history
of mankind.

And thus much concerning the antiquity of Egypt,
and its effects on the Divine Legation of Moses.

?ND OF the fourth BOOK,

.36G THE DIVIXE LEGATION [Eook IV;

NOTES ON BOOK lY.
P-74. [A]

Prideaux, in his learned Conuexmis, has indeed
•^^^ told us a very entertaining story of Zoroastres :
whom, of an early Lawgiver of the Bactrians, Dr. Hyde
had made a lute false prophet of the Persians, and the
preacher-up of one God in the public religion ; which
doctrine, however, this learned man supposes to be
stolen from the Jews. But the truth is, the whole is a
pure fable ; contradicts all learned antiquity ; and is
supported only by the ignorant and romantic relations
of late Persian writers under the Califes ; a\ ho make
Zoroastres contemporary with Darius Hystaspis, and ser-
vant to one of the Jewish prophets ; yet, in another fit
of lying, they place him as early as Moses : they even
say he was Abraham ; nay, they stick not to make him
one of the builders of Babel. It may be thought strange
how such crude imaginations, however cooked up, could
be deemed serviceable to Revelation, when they may
be so easily turned against it ; for all falsehood is natu-
rally on the side of unbelief. I have long indeed looked
when some minute plnlosopher would settle upon this
corrupted place, and give it the infidel taint. And just
as 1 thought, it happened. One of them having
grounded upon this absurd whimsy the impious slander
of the Jews having received from the followers of
Zoroastres, during the captivity, justcr notions of God
and his providence than they had before. — See 2he Mo-
ral Philosopher, vol. i. and vol. ii. p. 144. Another
of these Philosoplm's makes as good an use of his Indian
Bracmanes, and their Vedam and Ezourvedani ; for this
Vedam is their Bible, as the Zend or Zendavesta is the
Bible of the fire worshippers in Persia, and both of them
apparent forgeries since the time of Mahomet to oppose
to the Alcoran. Yet M. Voltaire says, of his 'iLuy.iXiov^
the Ezourvedani, that it is apparently older than tiie con-
quests of Alexander, because the rivers, towns, and

countiics.

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 367

countries, are called by tlitir olil names, before they
were new christened l>y the Greeks. — Cet ancien Com-
mentaire du Vedain ine parait cent avant les conqnetes
d'Alexandre, car on n'y trouve aucun des noms que le
vaiiiqueurs Grecs iniposerent aux fleuves, aux villes,
aux contrees. Additions a I'llist. Generale, p. 23, 24.
Which is just as wise, as it would be to observe, that
the Sarazin and Turkish annals were written before the
conquests of Alexander, because we find in theui none
of the names which the Greeks imposed on the rivers,
the cities, and the countries, A\liich they conquered in
the Lesser Asia, but their ancient names, by which they
were known from the earliest times. It never came into
the Poet's head tliat the Indians and Arabians might.be
exactly of the same humour, to restore the native names
to the places from \\hich the Greeks had drivien them.

P. 7,5. [BJ iJ^im St -rm 'E%fxL>v yim rr,v EnOHTEIAN
«\al£e£7o-fia. T^f ©EhpiAS t5 t^v oXi^v oto.»i15 ^ AHMIOTP-
rOT ©£a, T?)? £K auToi/ aAnSsf fuVsgfia?. Prtep. Evang.
1. i. c. ix. p. 20. As the imaginary interest of religion
engaged Dr. Prideaux to espouse the Persian tale of
Zoroastres ; so the same motive induced those excellent
persons, Stillingtleet, Cudworlh, and Newton, to take
the affirmative in the general (jucstion, whether the one
true God had ever been j)ublicly \\orshipped out of
Judea, between the introduction of general idolatry, and
the birth of Christ. As this determination of the gene-
ral question is no less injurious to Revelation than the
particular of Zoroastres, \\e may be assured no less'
advantage would be taken of it, Lord.Oolingbroke saw'
to what use it might be applied, and has therefore in-
forced it to tlie discredit of Judaism : indeed, ^\ ith his
usual address, by entangling it in a contradiction. But
those other venerable names will make it necessary
hereafter to examine both the one and the other question
at large. ^

P. 82. [C] See Shuckford's Sacred and Profane His-
tory of the World connected, vol. ii. edit. 1 p. 31 7 — 327."
Our countryman Gale, in the like manner, is for de-
riving all arts and sciences, ^\ ilhout exception, -froni-

. the

368 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

the Jews — Aiithvictic, he says, it is evident, had its
" foundation from God himself; for the first computa-
" tion of time is made by God, Gen. i. 5, &c. And as
*' for navigatioiiy though some ascribe it to the Pheni-
" cians ; yet it is manifest the first idea thereof was
" taken from Noah's ark. It is as plain that geographif
*' traduced its first fines from the Mosaic description of
*' the several plantations of Noah's posterity." — -Court
of the Gentiles, part i. p. 1 8. Who would not think
but the learned man, and learned he really was in good
truth, was disposed to banter us, had he not given so
sad a proof of his being in earnest as the writing threei
bulky volumes to support these wonderful discoveries.

P. 83. [D] See Canon Chron. Secul. v. tit. Circum-
c'lsio, I decline entering into this controversy for two
reasons: 1. Because, which way soever the question be
decided, the truth of the Mosaic account will be nothing
affected by it; for the Scripture no where says, that
Abraham was the first man, circumcised ; nor is the
prior use of this rite amongst men, any argument against \
God's enjoining him to observe it. The pious bishop
Cumberland little thought he was disserving religion,
when he followed an interpretation of the fragment of
Sanchoniatho, which led him to conclude [Remarks on
Sanchon s Phoen. Hist. p. 1 50.] that whole nations had
practised circumcision before Abraham : but I quote
this great man, not for the weight of his opinion in a
maiter so unconcerning, but as an example of that can-
dour of mind and integrity of heart, w ithout which the
pursuit of truth is a vainer employment than the pursuit
of butterflies. A less able and a less ingenious man,
with not a tenth part of this noble writer's invention,
would have had a thousand tricks and fetches to recon-
cile the first institution of this rite in Abraham to the
high antiquity he had given to Cronus. Another ex-
ample of a contrary conduct, in a writer of equal ac-
count, will shew us how much this ingenuity is to be
esteemed in men of learning, The excellent Dr. Ham-
mond, misled by the party- prejudices of his time, had
persuaded himself to believe, that the prophecies of the
Apo.qalypse related only to the first ages of the Christian

Church;

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 369

Church ; and that the book was written, not, a? Ircna?us
supposed, about the end of Doinitian's reign, but, as
Epiphanius affirmed, in Claudius Csesar's. To this,
there were two objections; First, that then the prophecy,
wliich, on Hammonds Svstem, related to the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem, would be of an event past : while the
prophecy speaks of it as a thing future. 'J o tliis he
replies, That it \vas cmtomary with the Prophets to
speak of tilings past as of things to come. So far was
well. But then the second objection is. That if this
w ere the time of writing the Ilevelations, Antipas, who
is said, c. ii. ver. 13. to have been martyred, was yet
alive. No matter for that, it was custouiary zcith the
Fi'upJiets, as he tells us on the other hand, to speak of
things to come as of things past. And all this within
the compass of two pages. 2. The other reason for my
not entering into this matter is, because it is not my in-
tention to examine (except occasionally) any particular
question of this kind. Ttiis hath been done already.
What I propose is to prove in genera], that many ot the
positive institutions of the Hebrews were enjoined in op-
position to the idolatrous customs of the F'gyptians ; and
that some bearing a conformity to those customs, and
not liable to be abused to superstition, were indnlged to
them, in wise compliance with the prejudices which long
use and habit are accustomed to in Juce.

P. 87. [E] The recovery of exhausted fertility by
compost, seems not to have been a very early invention.
For thougii Homer descriljes Laertes in hib rural occupa-
tions as busied in this part of agriculture; yet Hesiod, in
a professed and detailed poem on the subject, never once
mentions the method of dunging land. — Not that I regard
this circumstance as any sure proof to determine the
question of Hesiod s priority in point of time. It may
be well accounted for, by supposing, that they described
particular places in the state they were then found, some
more and some less advanced in the arts of civil life.

P. 89. [F] Here let me observe, that this represen-
tation of the high and flourishing state of i'-gypt, in these
early times, greatly recommends ttie truth ot the Saniari-

VoL. IV. Ua tan

370 THE DHIXE LEGATION [Book IV.

Ian chronolog}', and shews how mudi it is to be pre-
ferred to the Hebrew. See the learned and judicious
M. Leonard in his Ob serrations sur I'aut'njuite dcs
Hieroglifphes scknt'ijiques, p. 339, 2d vol,

P. 90. [G] The various disasters to which determined
disputants are obnoxious from their own proper tem-
pers, would make no unentertaining part of literary
history. A learned writer undertaking to confute the
Egyptian pretensions to their high antiquity, thinks it
proper first to shew, that they did indeed pretend to it.
And this, it must be owned, he does effectually enough.
His words are these: " Et profecto, ab antiquissiimis
" TEJiPOKiBUS hac vanitate infecti erant : dicebat enim,
" ipso Isaiae tempore, purpuratorum quisque Pharaoni
" se esse Jiimrn rcgiim anliquissimorum." — Spicilegia
ant'iq- Egypt. S^c. autnrc GtiL Jameson. Now, could
any thing l)e more ut^hrcky? The author only meant ta
introduce his system by this flourish ; and in introducing
it, he confutes it. For can there he a better evi<lence of
the high antiquity of any people, than tb :it they claimed it
from the most avdent times? from times long preceding
that general vanity of a high antiquity, which had in-
fected the nations, and prompted them to support their
claims against one another, by forged evidence and un-
philosophic reasoning? Not to sav, that this high an-
tiquity is acknowledged by the Prophet also : the force
of whose exultation depends on the truth of it. For
what reason was there to insist so much on the power and
v-isdou) of Ciod in destroying the counsel of Egypt ^ if
Pharaoh and his Counsellors, only pretended to be, but
were not, xcise : nor yet, the sons of ancient kings ?

P. 93. [H] Chaeremon, wLo, as we are told by
Josephus, wrote the hiitory of Egypt, calls iNIoses and
Joseph scribes ; and Joseph a sacred scribe, ij-yrurSai
duTUt> ypxfxjAxlsx? MccJuVw ti y.ou IXISHHON. y.x\ txtqv
lEPOrPAMMATEA, cont. Ap. lib. i. It is true, the
liistorian lias confounded times, in making Joseph con-
temporary with Moses : but this was a common mistake
■amongst the Pagans. Justin the epitomizer of Trogus
Pompcius calls Moses the son of Josepli- — Filius ejus

[Joseph]

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 371

[Joseph] Moses Jidt, qiierti prater pater nee. scientice
hceredttalem, isc. lib, xxxvi. cap. 2. Tiiose learned
men Lhereloie are mistaken, who, ior this reason, wonld
have it that Chaereinon, by Jose[)h, meant Joshua.
Besides, tiie superior title here given to Joseph shews
plainly ue are to understand the patriarch, and n(;t the
companion of Moses : for though it appears from Scrip-
ture that Jose[)h and Moses were related to, and edu-
cated by the Egyptian Priesthood, yet we have not the
least reason to tliink that Joshua hdd ever any concern
M'ith them ; being held with the rest oi his brethren in a
state of servitude, remote from the benefit of that educa-
tion, which a singular accident had bestowed upon
jMoses.

P- 93- [I] Hence we may collect, how ill-grounded
that opinion is of Eupolemus and other authors, ancient
and modern, who imagine, that Abraham first taught the
Egyptians astrology. And indeed the contending for
this original of the sciences seems to contradict another
argument much in use amongst Divines, and deservedly
so ; which answers tlie objection of infidels against the
authority of the Bible, from several inaccuracies in
science to be met with in sacred history, by observing it
was not God's purpose, in revealing himself to mankind,
to instruct- them in the sciences.

P. 94- r K] EuJ'o^oi/ f*£^ 8> Xsfaipfuf ipjKTi Mfju^t'ra Ji«>c8(rai'
SoXwtra <Je, ^^^X"^^ I«iTrf- nr0ArOPAN ^t, 0»\8>£w?
HAIornOAlTur. Plut. dc Is. &Osir. p. 632. Steph. ed.
Here we see, each sage went for that science he was
disposed to cultivate, to its proper mart : for not only
Pythagoras studied astronon)y at Heliopt)iis, where it
was professed with the greatt- si. celebrity ; but Eudoxiis
learnt his geometry at Meuiphis, ^ hose priests were the
most profound mathematicians ; and Solon was instructed
in civil wisdom at Sais, whose patron deity being Mi-
nerva (as we are toKl by Herodotus and Strabo) shews
that ooUticks was there in most request : and this doubt-
less was the reason why Pytijagoras, Avho, during his
long abode in Egypt, went through all theii' schools,

B £ 2 chose

372 THE DIVINE LEGATIOX [Book IV.

chose Minerva for the patroness of his legislation. Sec
Div. Leg. Vol. 1. bookii. sect. 2, 3.

P. 96. [L] I cannot forbear on this occasion to com-
mend the ingenuous temper of another learned writer,
far gone in the same system : w ho, having said all he
could think of to discredit the antiquity and wisdom of
Egypt, concludes in this manner : — " Tandem quaeres,

in qua doctrina .Egyptiorum propter quam tanto-

pere celebrati erant in ips'ts Scriptitris, viz. 1 Reg.
" iv. com. 30. et vii. actorum, com. 22. Respondeo.

non nego magnos P/iilosopho.s, Geometras, & Medi-
"' cos, et aliarum artium peritos fuisse in Egypto, tem-
" pore 3»Iosis, et [)0stea quoque. Scd sensim et gradatim
" ilia doctrina exolevit, ut omnino nihil aut parum ejus
" permanserit." — G. Jameson, Spicilegia Antiq. ^Egypt.
p. 400, 1.— You v\ ill ask now, AV'hat is become of his
system - No mutter. He is true to a better thing, the
sacred Text : for the sake of which he look up the system ;
and for the sake of which, upon better information, he
lays it down again : and, like an honest man, sticks to
his Bible at all hazards.

P. 105. [M] Diodorus Siciilus, lib. i. savs, that
Meiampus was in the number of those civilizers of
Greece, who went, to fit themselves for that employ-
ment, into Egypt: and, as Orpheus proceeded thence a
legislator and philosopher ; so 3.1elampus, vshose bent
lay another way, commenced physician and diviner ;
those two arts being, as we have said, professed together
in Egypt. ApoUodorus says, he was the first who cured
^liseases by medicinal potions. Tr> Sni. (pocpy-xnuv y.xl Kx^xp-
fxiov 3-£p«7r£»aj/ zs-pZroc iipwug — -meaning the first among
the Greeks. As this (i)-cek went to Egpyt to be in-
structed in his craft, so we meet with an Egyptian wha
went to practise the very same trade in Greece :

IATPOMANTI2 HAIX AHOAAXiNOS, p^OcK*
Tflf?' ixxx^mpn xuuSxXuv ^polotp^i^uv.

IxfT. p. 316. Stanl. ed.

Notes.] OF MOSKS DEMONSTRATED. 375

As to what is said ot his being the son of Apollo, we must
understand it in the sense of Homer, where he speaks of
the E<ivptian physicians in general :

IHTP02 <?£ £x«r(^ £'Tr»ra/>i£i/(^ -crf/ji zrai^cev
'AtSft^Vav- ri yu^ nAJHONOL EIII FENEQAHS.

P. 1 I .). [N] Nothing can be more unjust or absurd
than the accusation of Joseph's making the free monarchy
of Egypt despotic : for allowing it did indeed at this time
suffer such a revolution, who is to be esteemed the author
of it but Pharaoh himself.'' Joseph indeed was prime
minister; but it does not appear that his master was of
that tribe of lazy monarchs, who intrust their sceptre to
the hands of their servants. Moses describes him as
active, vigilant, jealous of his authority, anxious for his
country, and little indulgent to his officers of state. But
the terms in which he invests Joseph in his office, shew
that office to be purely ministerial ; Thou shalt be over
my house, and according to thtj u ord shall all my people
be ruled, o\lv in the thhoxe will I be okeater
THAN THOU. [Gcn. xli. 40.] i. e. thou shalt administer
justice, but I will reserve to myself the prerogative of
giving Unc. It is highly reasonable therefore, when we
find, in so concise a history as die Mosaic, Joseph bid-
ding the people give their money, their cattle, and their
lands for bread, to suppose that he only delivered to
them the words of Pharaoh, who would supply their
wants on no other conditions.

P. 1 1 f). [O] This is the general sentiment of Anti-
quity: and as generally embraced by modern writers.
Kircher makes it the foundation of his Theatruni Hiero-
gli/phiciDif, and so conse([uently hath written a large
volume full of the most visionary interpretations. The
great principle, he goes upon, as he himself tells us, is
this : — Hieroglyphica .Egyptiorum doctrina nihil aliud
est, quam Arcaria de Deo, divinisque Ideis, Angelis,
DaBmonil)us, cseterisque mundanarum potestatum classi-
bus ordinibusque scientia, Saxis potissimum insculpta.
CEdipus jEgyptiaCus, tom. iii. p.' 4. Dr. Wilkins follows
the received opinion in the general division of his subject,
in his Essay towards a real Character : For speaking of
B B 3 notes

374 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

notes for secrecy, such (says he) were the Egyptian
hieroglyphics. — Yet he adds, with his usual penetration,
— it scans to me questionable whether the Egyptians did
not at first use their hieroglyphics m a mere shift for the
want of letters, as was done by the Mex icans, p. 12. —
And this was all his subject led him to say ot the Egyp-
tian Hiercghfphics. Servius had gone further, and
asserted the priority of hieroglvphics without a doubt.
Annus enini secundum iEgvptios indicabatur, ante in-
ventas literas, picto dracone caudam suam mordente.
Apud Virg. iEn. 1. v. ver. 85.

P. 120. [P] The ship and pibt, bearing this signi-
fication, would, of course, be much used in the descrip-
tions of their mysteries, in which, as we have shewn,
the knovvled(!;e of the Governor of the universe was part
of the xTrlfprilx : and so we find it more than once deli-
neated m t le Bembine Table. Kircl.er, according to
custom, makes it full of sublime knowledge ; but the
plain truth is no more than this bbove. — Tacitus, speak-
ing of the religion of the Sueviuns, says they Nxorshipped
Isis; he could not conceive how ihis came about,
only the fiiiure of a galley, under which image she was
repre^enied, shewed tliat the v, orship was imported from
abroad. " Pars Suevorum & Isidi sacrificat : unde
causa Sc origo pert^rino sacro, parum coniperi, nisi qnod.
signum ipsum, in modum LiBCiiN.i- figuratum, docet
advectam religionem." De Morib. Germ, c ix. The
latter part of which period "^ir. (n.rtlon has thus trans-
lated, unless thejigure of her image j annul like a galley
shewed, S^'C. But )iisi quod does not -iijnify unless, as
implying any doubt, but saving only. So the same
author, De Mor. (icr. c. xxv. " Gccidere solent non
" disciplina et severitate, bexi impetu et jra, ut inimicmn,
*' nisi yi^w/ impune." Tacitus coidd tell no more of the
original than ihis, that the uorship of isjs was imported,
because her image was m de in the figure ot a g illey. In
tliis he was positive : but for all tliis, not the less mis-
takea. It was irdee i ni^ported ,• but the gu'ley was no
, fjfiark of that origin;! I. Strabo tel's us, in his fourth book,
that, in an island near Brit.iin " v performed the same
anysterious rites to Ceres anci Proserpine as were used in

: i : Samo-

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 37,5

Samothrace. Ceres and Isis w ere the same. The Piie-
nician seamen, without doubt, brought theui thither, as
likewise to the Suevians inhabiting the coasts of the Ger-
man ocean. The Governor of the universe was taught in
these mysteries. Isis was represented by tlie later
Egyptians to be the Governor of the universe, as we have
seen before, in a discourse on the Metamorphosis of
Apuleius. But the governor of the universe was deli-
neated, in their liicroglyphics, by a ship and pilot.
Hence, amongst the Suevians, Isis was worshipped
uixler the form of a gciUtij, and not because her religion
was of foreign gTov\ tli : And so amongst the Romans,
which Taciius did not advert to. For in the cukndarium
i^usticum amongst the inscriptions of Gruter, in the
month of March, an Egyptian holyday is marked under
the tide of Isidis navigiu:\i. The ceremonies on this
holyday are described in Apuleius Met. 1. ii. — It was a
festival of very high andquity amongst the F'gyptians :
and seems to be alluded to in these \vords of the Prophet
Isaiah: lio to the land shadowing with winjis — that
sendeth ambassadors hy tlie sea even in vessels of bul-
rushes upon the waters, saying. Go ye swift messen-
gers, S^c. chap, xviii. ver. 1, 2.

P. 122. [Q] The originnl is, )cai tuv aojttwv ^tfluTrwa-fi/
T8? »j^s? Twy rot^^'w^ ^x^x)^l)ifia?. '1 here is a small lault
in this readhig ; it should be t«j TE Up-af, \\ ith the con-
junction : The corruption lielpcd to mislead Cumberland,
v\'!io translates, — and formed the saered characters oj the
other elements [p. 38. of his Sanchoniathds Phenician his-
tory'] ; w hich looks as if the learned prelate understood
■hy foi^tluu, the elements of nature; Calumox Ouranos
having (as he supposed) been mentioned before, as de-
lineated or engraved by Taautus i l)nt ITOIXEIIIN sig-
nifies the elements of hieroglyphic writing, and Xomuv
refers not to that, but to ^tuv just above; which further
appears from what follows — tok ^£ XoiwoTi; Beo7<; ; other-
wise, only Dagon is left, for these words, ror? Ac-ttok
S-toK to be applied to. — Sanchoniatho had said that
Taautus represented the gods in a new invented hiero-
glyphic character; and then goes on to tell us that he in-
vented other hieroglyphic characters, whether by figures

B B 4 or

376 THE DIVINE LEGATION [BooklV.

or iToarks •, for I appreliend that tuu roix^tm xa.pcx.yCyipx?
principally designs that part of hieroulyphic writUig
which was by marks, not figures : for without doubt, at
first*, t!ie E<i;yptians used tlic same method as the
Mexicans, \Aho, we are told, expressed in their hiero-
glyphic writin'T, those things which had forirSj by figures;
others bv arbitrary marks. Seep. iiS, note (-)-). But
AV8 shall see, that when the I'Uiyptians employed this
w riting for the vehicle of their secrets, they then invented
the forms of tilings to express abstract ideas. However,
that this is the meaning of foi^ucov is further evident from
this place of Eusebius, where he speaks of a quot;ition
of Philo's, fi'om a work of Sanchoniatho, concerning the
Plienician elements, ^oivUuv roi^iluv ; which work, as
appears by his account of the quotation, treated of the
nature of several animals. I^ut we have sheun how
much the study of natural history contributed to the com-
position of hieroglyphic characters.

P. 123. [R] At the time this account was first given
to the public, the learned Dr. Kichard Pococke coming
fresh from I'-gvpt, t'lought it incumbent on him to con-
tradict that Egyj)tian learning which was only conceived
ut home, lint as, by a common practice of prudent men,
he had not mentionerl me by name, it was thought I had
no right to reply. Let the reader Judge of one, by the
other. Tiiis learned and indeed candid writer, in his
book of travels, has a chapter, On the iDicknt hkrogly-
phics of Egi/pf : in which he exprrsseth himself as
follows : — " li hiero<jly[ihical figures stood for words or
" sounds that signified certain tilings, the power of hie-
" roglyphics seems to be the same as of a number of
" letters composing such a sound, that by agreement
" was made to signify such a thing. For liieroglyphics,
" as words, seem to have stood for sounds, and sounds
" signify things ; as for instance, it might have been
*' agreed that the figure of a crocodile might stand for
" the sound that meant what we call malice : the chil-
'* dren of the priests were early taught that the figure of

* This Eustathiiis intimates in these words, speaking of the most
ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics, — rtvoc U^oy\v(p5ylH, >^ Xoittsj Si
^a^xxiti^a^ £i{ crvj/ia.crw uv ^ntyitii iSaAoi'lo.-' — ia Iliad^ vi. ver. itiS.

" a cro-

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 377

" a crocodile stood for such a sound, and, if they did

" not know the lueaning of the sound, it would certainly

" .stand '^ith thcni lor a sound; though, as the sound,

" it signified also a quality or thing; and they might

" afterwards" be tai^ght the meaning of this sound;

as words are only sounds, which sounds we agree

" shnll signify such and such things; so that, to chil-

" dren. words only stand for sounJs, which relate to

" '^MCh things as they know nothing of; and, in this

*' sense, we say children learn many things like par-

" rols, what they do not understand, and their me-

" niories are exercised only about sounds, till they

*' are instructed in the meaning of the words. This 1

thought ii might h" nrcper to observe, as some say

" lllLROGLYPi! ICS STOOD FOR TIIIXGS AND NOT FOR

*' WORDS, — if sounds articulated in a certain manner
" are words. And though it may be said, that in this

case, when ditFerent nations of different languages
" atrree on common characters, that stand for certain
*' things they agree on, that tiien such figures stand for
" things : this wifl be allowed ; but then they stand for
" sounds too, that is, the sounds in each language that
" signify sucli things : and, as observed before, to chil-
*' dr(;n, who know nothing of the several things they
" stand for, to them they arc ouly marks that express
" such and such sounds : so that these figures stand not
" for things alone, but as words, for sounds and things *."

The design of this passage, the reader sees, is to
oppose the principle I went upon, in explaining the
nature of Rgyj-tian hieroglyphics, that they stood Jor
things, and not Jor uords. But that is all one sees ;
for tlie learned writer's expression conforming to his ideas,
will not suffer us to do more than guess at the proof
which he advances : it looks, however, like this, — That
hieroglyphics cannot be said to stand for things only ;
because things being denoted by words or sounds ; and
hieroglyphics exciting the idea of sounds (which are the
notes of things) as well as the idea of the things them-
.selves, hieroglyphics stand both for sounds and things. — ■
This seems to be the argument put into common English.

♦ Pp. 228, 229. of a book intitled, " A Description of the
East," &c.

But,

37« THE DIVINE LEGATION. [Book lY.

But, for fear of mistaking him, let us confine ourselves
to his own words.

If hieroglyphical figures (says he) stood for words or
sounds that signijied certain things, the power of hiero-
glyphics seems to be the sirne us of a number of letters
composing such a sound that by agreement um made to
signify such a thing. Without doubt, if hieroglyphics
stood for sounds, they were ot the nature of words, which
stand for sounds. But tiiis is only an hypothetical pro-
positition : let us see therefore how he addresses himself
to [)rove it — For hieroglyphics, as avords, seem to have
stood for sounds, and sounds signify things ; as for in-
stance, it MVGW'i have been agreed that the figure of a
crocodile might stand for the same sound that meant
what we call ynalice. Tlie propriety of the expression
is suited to the force of the reasoning, i. Instead of
saying, but hieroglyphics, the learned writer says, for
hieroglyphics; which not expressing an illation, but im-
plying a reason, obscures the argument he would ilkis-
trate. 2. He says, Hicroghiphics, as words, seem to have
stood for sounds. Just before he said, hieroglyphics
stood for words or sounds. Here they are as woj 'ds, or
like words, and seem to stand for sound. Wliat are we
to take them for ? are words sound ? or, do they stand
for sound ? He has given us our choice. But we go on.
3- For, he corroborates this seeuiing truth bv an instance,
in which the possibility of its standing for a sound is made
a pi'oof of Its so doing. It might (says he) have
heeii agreed that the figure of a crocodile might
stand, ^c.

But he is less diffident in w hat follows. The children
of the priests were early taught that the figure of a
crocodile stood for such a sou)id, and if they did not
know the meaning of the sou?id, it icould certainly stand
xvith them for a sound. This indeed is an anecdote :
but \Uiere did he learn that the children, before they
could decipher the sounds of their own language, were
taught hieroglyphics ? Till now, hieroglyphics, when
got into exclusive hands, were understood to be reserved
for those instructed in high and mysterious science. But
let us suppose that they were taught to children amongst
tiieir first elements : yet even then, as we shall see from

the

Notes] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 379

the nature of the thing, tliey could never stand as marks
for words or sounds. When a cliild is taught the povtxr
of letters, he learns that the letters, which compose one
word, mulict, for instance, express the sound; which,
naturally arisino; from a combination of the several po. ers
of each letter, slicws him tliat the lettt'rs stand for such a
sound or word. But when he is taught that the tia,ure or
picture of a crocodile signifies malice, he is naturally and
necessarily conceives ^though he knov/s not the meaning
of the word) that it stands for some thing, signified by
that word, and not for a sound : because there is no
natural connexion between Jiguve and a sound, as there
is between figure and a thing. And the only reason why
the word malice intervenes, in this connexion, is because
of the necessity of the use of words to distinguish tilings,
and rank them into sorts. But the veriest child could
never be so simple as to conceive that, when he was told
the figure of a beast with four short legs and a long tail
signified malice, that it signified the sound of malice : any
more than if he were told it signified a crocodile, that it
signified the sound of the word crocodile. The truth is,
the ignorant often mistake words for things, but never,
things for word-; : that is, they frequently mistake the
name of a thing for its natui c : and rest contented in
the knowledge which that gives them : Like him who, on
the sight of a pictured elephant, inqifiring what the
creature wns, oji his being answered, that it was the
great Czar, asked no further, but went away well satis-
fied in his acquaintance witli that i!histrious Stranger.
Yet I apprei)end he did not understand his informer to
mean that it sign'fied only the sound of tliat word.
Peri;aps the learned writer will object, that the cases
are ditferent ; that the elephant was a mere picture, and
the crocodile a sism or mark. But I have sliewn at large
that the ancient Egyptian hieroglvpliics were at first mere
pictures; and that all the alteration they received, in be-
coming marks, was only the having their general use of
conveying knowledge rendered more exiensive and expe-
ditious, more mysterious and prolbuiid ; while they still
continued to be tlie marks of things.

To proceed; our a- ithor considers next what he ap-
prehends may be tliought an objection to his opinion.

And

3?o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

And though (says he) // may be said that, in this case,
where diff erent nations of different languages agree on
common characters, that stand for certain things they
agixe on, that then such Jigures stand for things. To,
wliich he answ ers, This xcill be alloiced ; but then they
stand] or sounds too, that is, the sounds in each language
that signify such things. He w ho can grant so much,
and uitliout injury to iiis system, need be under no fear
of ever givint; his adversary advantaires. He may, if he
pleases, say next, when disputinii about the colour of
an object, — that it is black, u iUbe allou'ed ; but then it
is ichite too. For a mark for thirgs can no more be a
mark iov sounds, than black can be white. The reason
is the same in both cases ; one quality or property ex-
cludes the other: thus, if hieroglyphic marks stand for
things, and are used as counnon characters by various
nations differing; in speech and language, they cannot
stand for ; because these n;en express the same

thing by different sounds j unless, to remove this difh-
cultv, he will go fartlicr, and say, not, as he did before,
that one hieroglyphic xrord (to use his own language)
stood for one sound, but that it stands for an hundred.
Again, if hierogly[)liic marks stand tor sounds, they cannot
stand for things : not those things wliicii are not signified
by such sounds ; this he himself will allow : nor yet, I
affirm, for those which are thus signified; because it is
the sound which stands for the thing signified by the
sound, and not the hieroglyphic mark. But all this
mistake proceeded from another, namely, that worvs
stand both f or sounds and things, which we now come
to. For he concludes thus, So that these figures (viz.
hieroglyphics) stand not for thi/igs alone, but, as
w^ORDs, for sounds and things. An unhappy illustration !
which has all the defects, both in point of meaning and
expression, that a proposition can well have. For, if
by xi ords, be meant articulated sounds, then the expres-
sion labours in the sense, as affirming, that sounds stand
for sounds. And that he meant so is possible, because
in the beginning of the passage quoted, he uses words
for articulate sounds. — Hieroglyphics, says he, stood for
words OR sounds. But if, by words, he meant letters,
(and that he might mean so is possible likewise, for he

pre-

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMOXSTllATED. 381

presently afterwards uses words in that sense too — Hltro-
glyplncny as xcords, says lie, sean to stand f ur soutids)
then the proposition is only t'u!sc : the plain truth being
this, letters stand for sounds only ; which sounds they
ualurally produce; as-sounds arbitrarily denote things.

liut to be a little uiore puiticulur; as in this dis-
tinction lies the jud .^uicnt which is to be made, if ever
it be rightly made, of the controversy between us. All
this confusion of counter-reasoning proceeds, as we ob-
served before. First, from not reflecting that letters,
which stand for words, hace not, and hieroglvphics,
which stand for things, once had noty an arbitrary, but
a natural designation For, as the i)owers of letters natu-
rally produce words or sounds, sotlie figures of hierogly-
phics naturally signify things : either more simply, by
representation, or more artificially by analogy : Secondly,
from his not considering, that as we cannot think nor
converse about things either accurately or intelligibly
without words, so their intervention l)econjcs necessary
in explaining the marks of things. But therefore, to make
hieroglyphics the marks of soimds, because sounds ac-
company things, would be as absurd as to make letters
the marks of things, because tlnngs accompany sounds.
And who, before our author, would say thixt letters sig-
nified thi/igs as well as sounds? unless he had a mind to
confound all meaning. If he chose to instruct, or even
to be understood, he would say, that letters naturally
producetl sounds or word-; ^nd that words arbitrarily
denoted things : and iiad oiu* author spoken the same
intelligible language, and told us that hieroglyphics na-
turally expressed things, and th.it things were arbitrarily
denoted by words, he would indeed have spared both of
us the present trouble ; but then he had said nothing
new. As it is, I cannot but suspect that this h^arned
writer, though he had been in Egypt, yet found his hie-
rogli/phics at home, and mistook these for the Egypiian.
No other agreeing with his description of picture cha-
racters standing i'ov so/cnds, but that foolish kind o( rebus-
writing called by the polite vulgar, hieroglyphics, tiie
childish amusement of the illiterate; in which, indeed,
the figures stand only for sounds ; sounds, divested of

sense

382 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

sense as well as things. Nor is Dr. Pococke the only
polite writer who has fallen into this rid.culous mistake.
See a paper called The World, N° XXIV.

P. 131. [S] It may not be improper, in this place,
just to take notice of one of the stranijest fancies, that
ever got possession of the pericranium of an Antiquary.
It is this, that the Chinese borrowed their real charac-
ters or hieroglifphic marks from the Egyptians. The
author of it expresses his conceit in this manner —
*' Linguam autem primitivam & barbaram vel puram,
vel saltern parum immutatam, et politam iEgyptiorum
consuetndine, retinere poterant [Sinenses,] et solum hoc
sibi ab ipsis derivare, ef adoptake scr[bexdi
GENUS, ratione habita non ad linguam ^'Egvptiacam, sed
unice ad idea-i his Characteribus expressas, quos et ser-
monis sui nativi, immo etiam et lingua? suae syllabis sepa-
ratim sumptis eoelcm tempore appHcaverunt." I)e Inser.
iiEgyf)tica Epist. p. .33. Autaore Turbervil. Needham.

Erom what haih been observed of the nature and origin
of a REAL CHARACTEii in general, supported by what
the Chinese tell us of the very high antiquity of theirs,
it is impossible to fiK upon any period of time w hen the
Egyptians (whether invited, or simply enabled by their
improvements in navigation and commerce to penetrate
into China) could find this highly policicd people without
a rcY// character.

The q-iestion then will be. What possible inducements
the Chinese could have to exchange their real characters
for the Eg) ptian ? Benefit by this ' cliange they could
receive none, because one real character is just as good
as another : And men at their ease, are rarely disposed
to change native for foreign, but vtith the piospect of
some advantage. To this it may be said, " that one
alphabetic character likewise is ju«;t as good as another:
and yet nothing has been more common than lor one
nation to change its own alpliabet for the alphabet of
another." An instance, witiiout doubt, very apposite.
To change the shapes of four and twenty letters is but
a morning's work ; and I suppose a small share of ci-
vility and complaisance might go thus far, between

neigh-

Notes.] OF :\[OSES DEMONSTRATED. 383

neighbours. But to throw away a million of old markg,
and to have a million of new to learn, is an amusement
of quite another nature. I apprehend, that such a pro-
posal (had the Egyptians made it, vvith an offer of all
their learning; along with it) would have much alarmed
the indolent vuienterprising temper of the Chinese. But
the Critic seems to think, that an old character, like an
old coat, would be willingly exchanged for a nev.- one.
Alas ! Time and Antiquity, which make such havock witli
the muddy ^vestures of decay, give a new gloss, as wdt
as a stronger texture, to the spiritual clothing of ideas.
And if their old characters were like any old coat, it
must be such a one as Settle wore in Elysium ; which,
as the Poet sings, had, together with its owner, received
a new lustre in this its state of beatification :
" All as the Vest, appear'd the Wearer's frame,
*• Old in new state, another yet the same."
The truth is, the Chinese, who have preserved spe-
cimens of all the various revolutions in their real cha-
racters, have the highest veneration for the most ancient.
Now is it possible to conceive that a people, thus cir-
cumstanced and disposed, should part with their native
characters, the gift of their Demi-gods and Heroes, to
receive others, of the same sort, from strangers : re-
commendable for no advantage which their own did not
possess, and partaking of all the inconveniencies to which
their own were subject. Had the Egyptians indeed
offered them an alphabet (which, were they disposed
to be so communicative, we know, they had it in their
power to do, at what time soever it can be reasonahly
supposed they fh-st visited the coasts of China), the offer
had been humane, and, without doubt, the benefit had
been gratefully accepted. But that the Egyptians did
nothing of all this, appears from the Chinese being
without an alphabet to this very day. And yet I am
persuaded, it was the confounding of these two things,
one of which was practicable and useful, the other useless
and impracticable, I mean the communication of an
Alphabet, which was common in the ancient world ; and
the communication of a real Character, which was never
heard of till now, — I say, it was the confounding of
these two things that gave birth to this strange conceit.

And

384 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

And then the similitude of shape bet'-vecn the Etryptiaa
and the Cliiiu-se marks, was thonglit to cuirplete tlie
discovery. The Letter-writer ciid not seem to reflect,
that the shapes of real characters, after orcat impreve-
ments made in fhem by a long course of time, such as
the Egyptian and the Chinese, must needs iiave a great
resemblance, whether the characters were formed by
ANALOGY or INSTITUTION, In the first case, nature
made the resemblance, as being the common archetype
to both nations. In the latter, necessity, for only straight
and crooked lines being emj)loyed to Jorm tliese marks,
there must needs arise from a coinhinalion of sucti lines
infinitely varied, a striking resemblance between the
real characttrs of two people, though most distant
in genius and situation, liut the folly, which such
Conjectures are apt to fall into, is, that, if the jorms
of the marks be alike, the pou-crs must be alike also.

What is here said will enable us likewise to appreciate
-another ingenious contrivance of one M. de Gidgnes, of'
the Academy Royal of Inscriptions, &:c. to get to the
same discovery. Upon a supposition of the truth of
what I had laid down, that the first Egyptian alphabet
was taken fi'om their hieroglyphic characters *, this Aca-
demician fell to work, to analyse, as he terms it, the
Chinese characters ; w hen to his great sur[)rise, he found,
that their contents were only a certain number of
LETTERS belonging to the Oriental Alphabets, packed
up, as it were, for carriage: which, when taken out,
developed, and put in order, formed an Egyptian or
Phenician nwd, that expressed the idea for wiiich the
Chinese m// Character stood, as its Representatives.
How precarious, anti of how little solidity this lanciful
Analysis is, ujay be understood by all who liave seen
these Chinese marks and Oriental alphabets; both of

which

* M. Warburton avoit pense que le premier Alphabet avoit cm-
prunte ses eleiiiens des Ilieroglyplies memes ; et M. 1' Abbe Barthe-
lemy avoit mis cette exeellenle theorie dans un plus grand jour, en
plafant sur uiip colonne diverses lettres yilgvpueunes, en corres-
pondance avec ies Ilieroglvphes qui les avoient produits. On pouvoit
done presumer que les j^tiyptn-ns avoient comm'miquc aux CInnois
les caracleres que je veuois de decnuvrir, mais qu'sls les regardoient
eu}f-m6mes alors comme des signes llierogljphiqnes, & non comme
des lettres proprement dites. — j3e I'Origine des Chinois, p. 03, 64.

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 385

which co)isist of the same straight and curve lines va-
riously combined; so that it cannot be otherv\ise but
that in every Chinese mark should be found, that is,
easily imagined, a composition of any alphabetic letters
which tlie profound Decipherer stands in need of But
the pleasantry of the conceit lies here, that though the
Chinese have alphabetic characters (which this ingenious
Author has, with great astonishment, now first disco-
vered) yet they themselves know nothing of the matter,
as he at the same time has assured us*.

I might likewise insist upon this scheme's labouring
under the same absurdity with M. Needham's. For
though when M. de Guignes speaks of that part of the
Chinese real character whose marks are symbolic, or
formed upon analogy, p- 71, 72. he is wilting to have it
believed (what his title-page enounces), thnt China was
inhal)ited by an Egyptian Colony, which carried along
with them the Hieroglyphics they now use : yet where
he examines that other part, consisting of arbitrary
marks,^ or marks by institution, p. 64 & se(]. he supposes
them, as we see above, communicated to the Chinese
by the Egyptians. On pouvoit done presitmtr (says he)
que les Egyptiens avoicnt commiDi'que aiw CImwia les
caracth^es queje vtmis de decoia rir.

To conclude, the learned world abounds with dis-
coveries of this kind. They have all one common Origi-
nal ; tlie old inveterate error, that a similitude of customs
and manners, amongst the various tribes of mankind
most remote from one another, must needs arise from
some communication. Whereas human nature, without
any other help, will, in the same circumstances, always
exhibit the same appearances.

P. 131. [TJ L'Alphabeth Ethiopien est de tous ceux
que Ton connoit qui tient encore des Hieroglyphes.
Fourmont, Ileflexions Crit. sur les Hist, des Anc.

• Les caracteres Chinoise dans I'etat oil nous les avons a present,
constituent irois sortes de caracteres; Ti'^pistolique ou alphabe-
TiQUE, le hieroglyphique & le syinbolique ; c'est un nouveau rapport
des plus singuliers avec I'Egypte, qui n'a point ttc connii jusque k
present, que les Ciiinois euxmemes iunorent, el qui nie jette
dans le plus grand ctonnement, un examcn attentif— me I'a i'ait con-
noitre, &c. Mem. de Lit. Tom. 29. p. 15.

Vol. IV. C c Peuples,

386 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Peuples, toil), sec. p. 5)01. Kircher illustrates this mat-
ter in his account of the Coptic alpiiabet. But as on
his system every thing tiiut relates to E^ypt is a mystery,
the shapes and names of the letters of their alphabet we
may expect to find full of profound wisdom : yet, me-
thinks, nothing could be more natural, than for a people
long used to hieroglyphic characters, to employ the most
celebrated of them, when they invented an alphabet, in
forming the letters of it: and if the Chinese, who yet
want an alphabet, were now^ to make one, it is not to be
doubted but tliey \\ ould use the most venerable of their
characteristic marks for the letters of it. However, let
us hear Kircher for the fact's sake : — Ita /Egyptiis natura
comparatum fuit, ut quemadmodum nihil in omnibus
corum institutis sine myslerio peragebatur, ita & in
lingua communi, uti ex alphabeto eorundem, mysteriosa
literarum institutione ita concinnato, ut nulla fere in
eodem litera reconditorum sacramcntorum non undiqua-
que plena reperiretur, patet. De primaevis yEgypti-
orum Uteris varias diversorum sunt opiniones. Omncs
tamen in hoc consentiunt, plerasque ex sacrorinn anima-
Uum forma, incessu, aliarurnqnc corporis partiuni sit/bus
&f fii)mmctr'w desumptas. Ita Demetrius Pbalereus, qui
septem vocales assignans, septem Diis consecratas, ait,
ccEteras ex animaliuni forma desumptas. Eusebius ad-
struit idem. — Theatr. Hierogl. p. 42. tom. iii. of hi«
CEdip; iEgypt. As for this fancy, mentioned by Deme-
trius Pbalereus, it had a very diftisrent original from
what Kircher sup[)oses; being only an enigmatic inti-
mation of the different natures of vowels and consonants.
The latter being brute sounds without the aid of the
former, by which they arc as it were animated.

P. 131. [U] The very leanied and illustrious author
of a work intitled, Recueil d .Vntiquites Egyptiennes,
Etrusques, Grecqiies et Uomaines, vol. I. M. the Count
Caylus, after having confuted the idle conjectures of
certain learned men concerning the contents of a sepul-
chral linen, marked over with Egj-ptian alphabetic cha-
racters, proceeds thus: — II me semblc qu'on tircroit de
plus grands avantages de ce monument, si au lieu de
s'obstiner a percer ccs t^nebres, on tachoit, de reraonter

par

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 387

par son moyen a I'orii^ine de r^cnture, tt d'en '^ui* re le
developpeinent et les progres: si Ton cherclioit enfin k
connoiti e la forme des anci.nnes Icttres, et le nays ou
Ton a commence k les employer, Ces questions et tant
d'autrcs seniblables ne pourroiit jan>ais eii e eclaircies par
les temoignages des auteurs Grecs et Latins. Souvent
peu instruits des antiqnites de leur pays, ils n'oiit fait
que recueillir des traditions incertaines, et miiltipli' r des
doutes, auxquels en prefereroit volontiers Tignorance la
plus [)rofonde : c'est aux monumeiis qu'on doit recourir.
Q iand ils parleront clairement, il faudra bien que les
antiens auteurs s'accordent avec eux. Avant le com-^^
mencement de ce siecle on ne connoissoit point lecriture
courante des Egyptiens, et plusieurs critiques la confon-
doient tant6t avec celle des anciens Hebreux, et tantdt
avec les hieroglyplies ; mais dcouis cette epoque il nous
est venu plusieurs fragmens, (jui out rix6 nos idees; et ii
faut esperer que de nouvelles recberches nous en procure-
ront un plus grand nombre. Conservons avec soin des
restes si precieux, ct tacbons de les mcttre rn oeiivre^ en
suivant Texemple de celui des inoderfu s, qui a repandu
les plus grandes lumieres sur la que tion de I'antici'jit^
des lettres. M, Warburton a detruit lerreur oil ion
etoit que les pretres Egyp iens avcient invente les hiero-
glyplies pour catcher leur science : il a distingue trois
epoques principales dans l art dc se conrnuniquer les
idees parecrit : sous la premiere, ! ecritu re n etoit qu'une
simple representation des objets, une veritable pe'Oi'ire;
sous la seconde, elle ne coubistoit qu'en hierogiyphes,
cest-i\-dire, en une peinture abr6gee, qui, par exe(nnle,
au lieu de representer un objet entier, n'tn ropresentoit
qu'une partie, un rapport, &c. Kn^in sous la tn'isK ine
epoque, les hierogiyphes alteres dans leurs rraits devm^
rent les elemens d une ecriture courante: M. '/ari-urtori
auroit pu mettre cette excvilente theorie k portee de tout
le monde, en placant dans une pre niere colomne une
suite d'hieroglyphes, et dans un - seconde les lettres ([ut
en sont derivees ; mais sans doute que les lx)rnes qu'il
s'etoit prescrites ne lui ont pas permis d'ciitrer dans ce
detail. Quoi qu"il soit, tons reux qui rc' lie* ' rient I'ori-
gine des arts et des conii':iissdnces h am ' ues, peu vent
verifier le systeme du s^avant Anglois, et se convaincre

cc z u'ue

388 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book. lY.

que les lettres E^^pticnnes ne sent que des hieroglvphes
deguises. Nous avons assez de sccours pour entreprendre
cet examiii. Les recueils des antiquaires offrent pla-
sieurs monumcns Egvptiennes charsjes d'hieroglyphes :
ct la seule bande de toile que Ton publie ici [PL N°2i,
•2^, 23, 24, 2.3.] suffiroit pour donner une idee de
1 eciiture courante — de s'assurer que I'alphabet de la
langue Egyptienne emanoit des hieroglvphes, il suffira
d'avoir un assez grande quantite des lettres isolees, et de
comparer avec les figures representees sur les monumens
Egyptiens. Or je puis assurer que I on appercevra
entr'elles la liaison la plus iniime, et les rapports les plus
sensibles ; et pour sen convaincre, on n'a (ju a jettcr les
yeux sur le N* I. de la XXVI. planche. J"y ai fait
graver sur une premiere colomne une suite d'hieroglyphes
tires la plupart des obelisqucs, ct dans une colomne
correspondante, les lettres Egvptiennes qui viennent de
CCS hierodyphes. On trouvera, par excmple, que le
premier hieroglvphc rcprcsentant une barque, a produit
un element d ecriture, dont la valeur a pi'i varier, sui-
vantles points ou les traits dont il etoit aftecte : que le
troisieme hieroglyphe, qu"on croit etre l image d'lme porte,
en perdant son arronuissement a forme la lettre qui lui
est parallele ; que la figure d'homme ou d'animal accrou-
pie au N° 4. est devenue une lettre qui ne conserve que
les lineamens du symbole original j enfin que le serpent
figure si souvent sur les monumens Egyptiens, N° 19.
g'cst change en un caractere qui reti ac3 encore aux
yeux les sinuosites de ce reptile. On ti ouvera aussi que
Tautres hieroglyphes, tels que le 2. le 5. le 6. le 1 1. le
13, &c. ont passe dans I'ecriture courante, sans eprou-
ver le moindre chan^cment. Au reste, ce nest ici
que le leger essai dune operation qui pourroit etre
poussee plus loin, et dans laquelle on appercevroit
peutt'tre des rapports differens de ceux que j'ai eta-
blis entre certaines lettres E^iyptiennes prouve visible-
nient leur origine ; et plus il est approfondi, plus il
sert a confirmer le senliujent de M. Warburton,
p. 69. Thus far this learned person. I have borrowed
the scheme he refers to, and the reader Mill find it
marked, Plate. VII.

P. 132.

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 389

P. 132. [X] M. Voltaire, in a discourse intitled,
Nouveau plan de Fiiiston-e de I'Esprit humain, speak-
ing of the Chinese printing, ^^ hich is an impression from
a solid block, and not l)y movable types, says they have
not adopted the latter method, out of attachment to their
old usages — On sait que cette Imprimerie est une gra-
viirc sur des planches de bois. L'Art de graver les
caracteres mobiles et de fonte, beaucoup superieure a
la leur, )ui point encore etc adopte par eiw, tant ils

SONT ATTACHES A LEURS ANCIENS USAGES. Now I

desire to know of M. Voltaire, how it was possible for
them to adopt the method of a Font of types or movable
characters, unless they had an alphabet. That they had
no such, M. Voltaire very well knew, as he gives us to
understand, in the same place. L'art de faire connoitre
ses idecs par I'ecriture, qui devroit n'etre qu'une methode
tres simple, est chez eux ce qu ils ont de plus difficile;
chaque mot a des characteres difFerens : un savant i\ la
Chine est celui qui connoit le plus de ces caracteres,
et quelques uns sont airives a la vieillesse avant que de
savoir bien ecrire. Would not Caslon or Baskerville be
finely employed to make a font of letters for this people,
who have so many millions of real characters ? But this
historian of men and nr,mncrs goes on in the same ramb-
ling incoherent ujanncr, and so he can but discredit the
Jewish history he cares little for the rest. — Qui leur donne
une superioiite reconniie sur tons ceux qui raportent
I'origine des autres nations, c'est qu'on n'y voit aucun
prodige aucune prediction, ancune meme de ces four-
beries politiques que nous altribuons aux Fondateurs des
autres Etats, cxcepte peut-etre ce qu'on a impute k
Four, d'avoirfait accroire quil avoit vu ses Loix ecrites
sur le dos d un serpent aile. Cette imputation meme
fait voir qu'on connaissait Tecriture avant Fohi. Enlin,
ce n est pas a nous, au bout de notre Occident, a con-
tester les archives d'une nation que etait toute [)o\k^e
quand nous n'etions que des Sauvages — First, China has
tlie advanta"e of the western world, because the Founders
of its religious policy employed neither Miracles nor
Prophecies, nor the Founders of its civil policy state
tricks and cheats, like other Leaders. And yet he is
farced, before the words are well out of his mouth, to

c c 3 own

390 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

own that Fohi pretendi d to have seen his laws written
upon the back of a win^'ed Serpent : and one can hardly
think ihst Kohi no^^ ootten int > so good a train would
Slop there. Secondly, By this, however, the historian
gains' f and ho l)ids us obst rve it; a very early date for
urit'mg amonjTSt the Chii ese, "htreasin truth they have
no li' rituig in the sense the historian gives to the word,
even at this day : and as for I iieroglvphic Characters, all
nations had them from the most early limes, and as soon
as men began to associate. Thirdly,, ^\'e barbarians of
yesterday must not pretend, he says, to contradict the
records of this ancient nation. And why not, I pray,
when superior Science ha& enabled this upstart people of
the ^Vest to detect the falsehood of the Records of
Egypt, a nation ^hich pretended to as high antiquity as
the Cliinese? This thev have done, and, I suppose, to
the good liking oi our iiistorian, it ever he has heard of
the names of Scaliger and Petavius, of Usher and
Marsham.

P. 132. [Y] — ^AXXxytxp a fx6i/oi> Aiyuwlj'ojval Xoyijcwrojoj,
;>rp.o; SI, x^t ruv aAAuv (iuf^upiat, cVoi ^iXecro^i'a; tcpcy(hfi<i'oe.Vy
TO (rt;/-t6o?.iKoy clSog i^vXiccaV fao"! ynti x«i 'lSxi>h^^x]i twv
ZKrexiN ^xGiXU, ike. C'em. AIc.k. btrom. 1 v. p. 567,
Thus thi- lear'ied Fatlier; who being in the gpneral pre-
judice that hifTOglypnics were a late drt, invented by
philosophic men, t*- secrete thdr k^o^^ le ige, exj resses
himstif accorojngly, ocroi fiXoirotpicv; upiy^dnvav : and yet,
raethiuks. the story he teils ot tlie icvtnian king might
have directed hin to anothe r origiitdl — Eu?tathi"s says
the same thing : C» Si yi ■araAaiO*, onoiiv TI xa* e» Aiyvvjiov
ivoissu, ^uiSiot, ti/a, 'ipoyX.^n^f; xcu Aurjij ^£ ^apxxlrpot^ elf
crifAXcfsx^./ >syi:u f€aAov]oj tTij xul au'rcl xciSa xal tuv tive?
Sfspoy Xxv^Mv, f(rr\[xxivo]/ a rSsXoi' iliuXu rma xcei ■sroXvtiSil
ypK'fxiAc^ix ^sa-lJiOilx iyfc3c(pov]£{. ■ in Iliad, vi. ver. 168.

P. 133. [Z] In judging only from the nature of things,
and witliout we surer light of Keveiation, one should be
apt to embrace the opinion of Dioaorus Siculus [lib. u.J
and Vitruvius [lib. ii. cap. i.] that the first Men lived,
for some time, in woods and caves, after the manner of
beasts, uttering only confused and iiidistiuct noises ; till
, . , . associating

Kotes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 391

associating for mutual assistance, they caine, by de-
grees, to use articulate sounds, mutually agreed upon,
for the arbitrary signs or marks of those ideas in the
mind of the speaker, M hich he wanted to communicate
to the hearer. Hence the diversity of languages ; for it
is confessed on all hands, that speech is not innate.
This is so natural an account of the original of language,
and so unquestioned by Antiquity, that Gregory Nyssen
\_a(lter. Eummiu7ii, lib. xii ] a father of the church, and
Richard Simon [Hist. Crit. du J^kiix Test. lib. i. cap.
14 & 15. lib. iii. cap. 21.] a priest of the Oratory, have
both endeavoured to support this hypothesis : and yet,
mcthinks, they should have known better; Scripture
plainly informing us, that language, had a different ori-
ginal. This was just the case of Saciufices. It is
very easy to conceive, that one sort arose naturally
from the sense of gratitude to our Divine Benefactor,
and the other from a sense of our demerit towards him
(as will be shewn hereafter) ; yet it is certain they were
of divine appointment. In this indeed the two cases
differ; language, I believe, had, for its sole original,
divine instruction ; whereas sacrifices amongst many
j)eople were certainly of human invention, and unde-
rived frou) tradition. Rut to return to the subject of
language. It is strange, as I say, that these learned
men should not have l)een better informed. We see,
by Scripture, that God instructed the tirst man, in re-
ligion. And can we believe, he would not at the same
time teach him language, so necessary to support the in-
tercourse between man and his Maker? For Quietism
is a thing of modern growth ; this, with Mysticism of all
kinds, is the issue of that wantonness A\hich makes tia-
voured man grow tired of his two great blessings, iiea-
sov and languagi;. — If it be said, Man might gain
language by the use of reason, I reply, so might he
gain Ireligion likewise : and that much easier and sooner.
Again, when God created man, he made woman for his
companion and associate ; but the only means of en-
joying this benefit is the use of speech. Can we think
that God would leave them to themselves, to get out of
the forlorn condition of brutality as they could ? But
there is more than a probable support for this opinion.

c c 4 If

392 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Rook IV.

If I am not much mistak'^n. we have the express testi-
mony of iMosES, that God did indeed teach men lan-
guage: It is v here be tells us, that Uod brought cxcry
beast of the field, and evei-ij fozcl of the aivy unto Adam,
to see xihat he u:ould call than: and •whatsoever Adam
called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
And Adam gave names to all cattle, a?id to the Jowl of
the air, and to every beast of the f eld. Gen. ii. 19, 20.
Here, by a common figure of speech, instead of directly
relating the fact, that God taught men language, the
historian represents it, by shewing God in the act of
doing it, in a particular mode of information ; and that,
the most aj)posile we can conceive, namely, elementary
in!^truction, in the giving names to substances ; such as
those with whicii Adam was to be most conversant, and
which therefore had need of being distinguished each by
its proper namie : flow familiar an image do these words
convey of a learner of his rudiments — A)id God
brought every beast, &c. to Adam, to see what he would
call them In a word, the prophet's manner of relating
this important fact, ha- , in my opinion, an uncommon
elegance. Put mm of warm iujaginations overlooked
this obvious and natural meaning to ramble atter forced
and mystMious senses, such as this, that Adam gave to
every creature a name expressive of its nature. I rom
which fantastic interpretation, all the wild visions of
Hutcliinson, and his cabalistic f illov.ers, seem to have
arisen. Nor are the Freethinkers much behind them in
absurdities. " Some," says Tindal, " would be almost
^' a{)t to imagine that the author of the book of Gexe-
SIS thought that words had ideas naturally fixed to
them, and not t)y consent; otherwise, say they, how
can we account for his supposing that God brought
all animals before Adam, as soon as he was created,
^' to give them names; and that whatsoever Adam
called every living creature, that zvas the name there-
" of?" {Christianity as old as the Creation, 8vo. ed.
p. '2-28.] But though ]\Ioses thought no such thing, I
can tell hiyi of one who did : A very ancient writer,
and frequently quoted by tlie men of this tribe to con-
front with Moses, I mean Herodotus; who not only
iJjought this, but thought still more absurdly, that Ideas

Notes ] OF MOSES DEAIONSTRATED. 393

had xcords naturally affixed to them. See the famous
tale of PsainiDCticlius and his two boys, lib. ii. JIoiv
would these men liave rejoiced to catch Mosts at the
same advantage! — To conclude Frotn what hath been
said, it ajj[)e-us, that God taught man, language: yet
we cannot reasonably suppose it to be any other than
what served his present use : after this, he was able of
himself to improve and enlarge it, as his future occasions
should require : consequently the first language nmst
needs be very poor and narrow.

P. 1 35. [AA] " How many commands did God give
" his Prophets, which, if taken according to the letter,
" seem unworthy of God, as making them act like mad-
*' men or idiots: As for instance, the prophet Isaiah
" walked for three years together naked J or a sigji-,
" Jeremiah is couunanded to carry his girdle as Jar as
" Euphrates, — to make bands and yokes, S;c. — Ezekiel
" is commanded to draw Jerusalem on a tile, &c. &c."
[Tindals Christianity as old as the Creation, p. 229.]
The prophet Jeremiah (says a learned writer) is ordered
to buy a girdle^ Sec- — IJe is also sent about with yokes —
Ezekiel besieges a pan-tile. — He shaves his head and
beard. — No reasonable man can believe these actions
were really pcrjornwd. Sec Dissertation on the History
and Character of lialaam.

P. 135. [BB] — Quemadmodum autem vidit in visi-
onibus [Propheta] quod jussus fucrit [Eiiech. cap. viii.]
fodere in pariete, ut intrare et videre posset, quid intus
faciant, quod foderit, per foramen ingressus fuerit, et
viderit id quod vidit ; ita quoque id quod dictum est ad
eum. Et tu same tibi laterem, &c. [Ezech, cap. iv.]
quod item alibi ei dictum legitur, Aovaculam hanc ton-
soj^iam cape tibi, [Ezech. cap. v. J ita, inquam, ista omnia
in visione prophetia3 facta sunt, ac vidit, vel visum fuit
ipsi, se ista opera facere, qua? ipsi prajcipiebantur.
Absit enim ut Deus prophetas suos stultis vel ebriis
similes reddat, cosque stultorum aut furiosorum actiones
facere jubeat. More Nev. p. ii. cap. 46. But here the au-
thor's reasoning is defective, — because what Ezekiel saw
in the chambers oj imagery in his eighth chapter was in

vision,

394 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

vision, therefore his delineation of the plan of the siege,
and the shaving his beard, in the fourth and fifth chap-
ters, were likewise in vision. But to make this illation
logical, it is necessary that the circumstance in the
eighth, and the circumstances in the fourth and fifth, be
shewn to be specifically the some; but examine them,
and we shall find them very different : that in the eighth
was to shew the Pro[)het the excessive idolatry of Jeru-
salem, by a sight of the very idolatry itself; those in the
fourth and fifth, were to convey the will of God, by the
Prophet to the people, in a symbolic action. Now in
the first case, as we have shewn above, the infomiation
was properly by vision, and fully answered the purpose,
namelv, the Prophet s information ; but, in the latter,
a vision had been improper ; for a vision to the prophet
was of itself no information to the people.

P. 137. [CC] The general moral, which is of great
importance, and is inculcated with all imaginable force,
is, that weak and worthless men are ever most forward
to thrust themselves into power ; w hile the wise and good
decline rule, and prize their native ease and freedom
above all the equipage and trappings of grandeur. The
vanity of base men in power is taught in the fifteenth
verse, and the ridicule of that vanity is inimitably marked
out in those circumstances ; w here the bramble is made
to bid his new subjects, who v\anted no shadow, to come
and put their trmt in his, who had none ; and that, in
case of disobedience, he would send out from himself a
jire that should devour the cedars of Lebanon, whenas
the fire of brambles, and such like trash, was short and
momentary even to a proverb, amongst the Easterns. —
Tin PAL, speaking of ttie necessity of the application of
reason to scripture, in order to a right understanding of
those passages in the Old Testament, where God
speaks, or is spoken of, after the manner of men, as
herngjealous, angry, repentant, reposing, S;c. (Modes
of expression very apposite, w here the subject is God's
moral government of the world ; very necessary, where
it is his civil government of a particular people.) Tin-
dal, I say, brings this in, amongst his instances—
Wine, that cheereth God and nian ; as if Jotham had

meant

Notes! OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 395

meaiit God. the governor of the universe; when all,
who can re id aniii^uity, m.i^t see his meaning to be,
thai "d ine chcertJi hero-L'^s avd common man. For
Jotham is here speaking to an iuolatrous city, which
ran a u'.linrini^ after Baalim, and made Laalbtr'ith thtir
god ; a goo sprung from amongst men, as may be partly
collected from his name, as well as iVoni divers other
circuui-tances of the story. But our critic, vvhu couid
not see the sense, it is certain, savv nothing of the bea^ity
of the expression ; which contains one of the finest
strokes of ridicule in the whole apologue, so much
abounding with them ; and insinuates to the Sheche-
mites the vanity and pititul original of their idolatrous
gods, who were thought to be, or really had been, re-
freshed xvitli zcine. Hesiod tells us, in a similar ex-
pression, that the vengeance of the fates pursued the
crimes of gods and men :

AI't ANAPHN t£ 0EflN T£ wa|>«i£«(r*»s t^BTnso-xi,

0EOr. vcr. 220.

P. 137. [DD] Judges ix. 7. Collins, the author of
the Scheme of literal Prophecy considered, speaking of
Dean Sherlock's interpretation of Geai. iii. 15. says—

What the Dean just now said is nothing but an argu-
" ment from the pretended absurdity of the literal sense,
" that supposes the most plain matter of fact to be
" fable, or parable, or allegory ; though it be suited to
" the notions of the Ancients, ivho thought that beasts
" hady in the frst ages of the world, the use of speech y
*' agreeable to what is related in the Bible of Balaam's

ass, and told after a simple historical manner, like all
" the relations in the Old Testament, wherein there is
" nothing savours of allegory, and every thing is plainly
" and simply e.rposed." p. 234. By this it appears that
Mr. Collins thought that Jable, parable, and allegory,
were the same mode of speech, whereas they are very
different modes. A fable was a story fan)iliarly told,
without any pretended toundation of fact, with detign to
persuade the hearers of some truth in question; a pa-
rable was liie same iuiid of story, more obscurely de-
livered ;

396 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Cook IV.

livered ; an allegory was the relation of a real fact,
delivered in symbolic terms : Of this kind was the story
of the fall: a real fact, told allegorical ly. According
to Mr. Collins, it is a J'oble to be understood literally,
because it zcas suited to the notions of the ancioits, u ho
thought that beasts had, in the frst ages of the xcorld,
the use of speech. By the Ancients he must mean, if he
means any thing to the purpose, those of the Mosaic
age: and this will be news. His authority is, in truth,
an authentic one I It is Balaam s ass. — Agreeable, saj^s
he, to xvhat is related in the Bible <f Balaam'' s ass, and
told after a simple historical manner. Now the Bible,
to which he so confidentlv appeals, expressly tells us,
that Balaam had the gilt of prophecy; that an angel in-
tervened ; and that God Almighty opened the ass's
mouth. But however he i> pleased to conceal the mat-
ter, he had a much better proof that the Ancients
thought beasts had the use oj speech in the first ages of
the world than Balaayns ass; and that was Esop's
Fables. And this might have led him rather to the
story of Jotham, so plainly and simply exposed, that,
had not only the sei^pent, but the tree of knoxvledge
likewise spoken, he could have given a good account of
the matter, by Jotham's fable; told after a sim-plc his-
torical manner, like all the relations in the Old Testa-
ment. A great improvement, believe me, this, to his
discovery, — that the ancients thought not only that
beasts, but that trees spoke in the frst ages of the
world. The Ancients! an' please you. It is true, they
delighted in fabulous traditions. But what then? they
had always the sense to give a sufficient cause to every
effect. They never represented things out of nature,
but when placed there by some God, who had nature
in his power. Even Homer, the father of fal)les, when
he makes the horses of Achiiles speak, or feel human
passions, thinks it not enough to represent them as sti-
mulated by a God, without informing us, that they
themselves were of a coelestial and immortal race.

P. 140. [EE] This account shews how ridiculously
the critics were employed in seeking out the inventor of
the Apologue ; they might as well have sought for the

inventor

Notes.] OF jMOSES DEMONSTRATED. 397

inventor of the Metaphor, and carried their researches
still further, and with Sancho Pancha inquired after the
inventor of eating and drinking.

P. 142. [FF] K«i \v Ai'yUTrJw jME^ 70?? ls()CVfft (TVlirfV, }^

TT\v (Totplotv i^fjwaSf, >tj Tcov Ai-yuTrli'wv ^uivf. Tpa,fj^f/.(x,Tuv
SI Tpta-j-a? J<a(pof«f, EniSTOAOrPA4)IKIlN tc, xx\ IEPO-
TAT^IKIIN, xal STMBOA1KX2N- ruu xoi,voX6ynfji.hooi

Du Vila Pythagorie, cap. xi. & xii. pag. 15. £d.
Kusteri. — Holstenius translates twk ju.£y MivoXoynfj-'auiv

Xixlx f/,i[j^n&iv, Twv J'f ccKXnyo(i'tiiJ.svuv xaija Tjfa? atufjOtis?, in
this manner : — " Quorum illud propriam commuimn
" loquendi consuetudinan imitatur ; re/Zyi/a per allegorias
" sub quibusdani aenigniatum involucris sensum expri-
" rftunt." By which, it seems, he understood ruv ixh
xoivoXoyxij-ivuiy xcclot fji.if/.Yi(Tiv to be an explanation of the
nature of epistolary writing ; and tuv S\ cl\\nyopii[ji.ii/u»
xola Tn/«? a,\uJ[ji.xg, of the nature both of hieroglyphic
and symbolic ; whereas the first words are an explanation
of hieroglyphic writing, and the second only of symbolic.
For Porphyry having named three kinds of writing, the
first common to all people ; the two other peculiar, at
that time, to the Egyptians ; uhcn he comes to speak of
their natures, he judiciously omits explaining the episto-
lary, which all the world knew, and confines his dis-
course to the hieroglyphic and symbolic. But A\as it,
as Holstenius thought, that ho ex[)lained the nature of
the epistolary in the words tuv y.iv >iot]/oKo[iiiJ.Evuv, Ikc. then
lias he entirely omitted the proper hieroglyphic (for the
ruv S\ (z\\y\yopisiJ.ivuv, &c. relates only to the symbolic) ;
which had been an unpardonable fault. But that this is
Hjlstenius's mistake is further seen by the next passage
from Clemens Alexandrinus : for w hat Porphyry calls
hieroglyphical and symbolical, Clemens calls hierogly-
phical; using hieroglyphical as a generic term, which
Porphyry used as a specilic. Clemens, I say, giving
an account of the nature of hieroglyphic writing, tells
us it was of two sorts ; the one, KTPTOAOrEITAI KATA
MIMH2IN, directly and simply imitates the thing intended
to Ije represented ; by this he meant the proper hici'oglv-

398 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

phic (which Porphyry, in his enumeration of the kinds,
distinguishes n\)in ihe d}/)nbalic) ; and what is more,
Porphyry seems U> have borrov^ed his expression of ruv
[Aiv xoi^oXoygy.ii'Uiv xala fjul^nviv, from Clemens's xu^ioAo-
yurxi, nc^la. uifji.nirtv, by which this latter evidently means
to express the nature of the proper hieroglyphic. Besides,
Clemens, who gives the nature of epistolary Avriting, with
the same judgment that Porphyry omitted giving it, de-
scribes it in a very different manner, and with great pro-
priety, t.iUS, rii V [^tv £r» ^KX, ruv zrpuruv ZTOIXEIHN
KXPIOAOriKH. Yet a learned writer, supported by
the authority of Holstenius, which served his purpose in
an argument for the low antiquity of Eg}'pt, v^ould per-
suade us that Porplajrif did not mean by the expression
xoivoXoyifAsvx xi*Ia |i>t//wn(r»v, that the chavacters^ he spoke
of imitated the Jon/,s oi Jigures of the things intended
by them ; for that was not tlte {/.Ifji-ricnq xchich the ancient
'writers ascribed to letters. [ISacr. and Prof. Hist, of
the World connect, vol. ii. p. 296.] This argument is
a Petitio Principii; which supposes Porphyry to be
here describing epi tolaiy writing. On this supposition
the writer says, that the imitation of the forms or Jigures
of things is not the y.i[*n(rii the ancient writers ascribed to
letters. Certainly it is not. But Porphyry is not
speaking of the letters, but of hieroglyphic figures :
therefore fj^ifjiwn does here, and may any where, mean
(because it is the literal sense of the word) imitation of
the figure of things. However, let us consider his cri-
ticism on this word, though it makes so little to his pur-
pose : — Socrates in Plato says, it seems, 0 SkU rZv
vvXXxtZvTi ^ ypx[j^iAix.ruv iriv xclotv ruv T;^^x^f*.diruv AIIO-
MIMOTfMENOS" and the ancients, the learned writer tells
us, we7^e exceeding philosophical in their accounts of both
•words and letters : when a word or sound was thought
fully to express, according to their notiofis, the thing,
which it xvas designed to be the name of, then they called
it the imuv, or picture of that thing. The ancients
were, without doubt, wondertuUy profound ; if w e will
believe Kircher and bis school : but if a plain man may
be heard, all the mystery of jttt)i*»i(r»f and t\y.uv was siniply
this : Alphabetic letters, as we have observed, sprung

from

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 399

from h'<eroi'-lv]ihic characters ; and even received their
form lio'.n thence. NovV the ancients, as was very na-
tural, wiien they spoke of the power of letters, and of
w ' tnposed of letters, frequently transferred the
^:!ir) c-(>c«i, w these, whicli properly belonged
l acters: a plain proof of this is the
. . .. .^^louai, quoted by the learned writer from
i ; whkil literally signifies, to imitate from mi e.i-
c; . but figuratively, to e.rpress, at large : So ro-AaV/^a
ot j^ aciiiy signified any thing formed and fashioned by
art; traductively, a similitude in speech, nay, the mu-
sjfiai niodulation of the voice. There is a remarkable
passage in Plutarch's discourse of the Pythian prophetess
no longer rendering her prophecies in terse ; where the
Word zTha,<rfji.ix. is generally thought to be used in the first
of these traductive senses, but I think it must be under-
stood in the second ; speaking of the ancient manner of
delivering the oracles, he says, — ax oivriSi^vlov, xHrtv,

y.x\ fiiT xvxi. AI. Le Clerc, [De Prophetia, pag. 18.
torn. iv. Comm. in V. T.] translates the latter part
thus, pedibus vincta, tumida, qucesitis tralatitiis
verbis constantia, & cum tibia pronunciata. But
u\d(r[A.(ili signifies here, not qucesitis verbis, but that
modulation of the voice which we may call placida
conj'ornuitio, and is opposed to thta, a contrary modu-
lation of the voice, which may be called gravis conj'or-
matio. These two were used in tlie theatre (to which the
matter is compared) in a kind of recitative on the flute :
so that what Plutarch would say, is this, that the ancient
oracles were not only delivered in verse, and in a pom-
pous figurative style, but, "Cie sung likewise to the
flute. To ofxu and TO-Aa(r/i>ia.1» he opposed olvvSvi,loi/, in the
seiKe oi' u/it unable ; and to iJitlx<p op xTg oiofxaTuv ha opposed
KitYiv, plain, simple. Plutarch uses TsXa.iiii.x again in the
sense of co7iformatio, where speaking of the elocution of
Pericles, he calls it DAASMA d^opvQov, a composed

modulation of voice. But Quintilian employs it in the
very sense in question, to express a soft and delicate
modulation of voice. Sit autem imprimis lectio virilis
& cum suavitate quadam gravis, & non quidem _prosae
similis, quia carmen est, & se poetaj canere testantur.

Non

400 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Non tamen in canticum dissoluta, nec plasmatf (ut
nunc a plerisque tit) effoeniinata. 1. i. c. 14. Hence
again, in another traduction, plasma was used to signify
a certain medicine, that speakers in public took to
render their voice soft and harmonious :

Sede leges celsa, llquido cum plasmate guttur
Mobile conlueris — Pers. Sat. i. ver. 1 7.

Turnebus, not attending to this progressive change in
the sense of words, and takin j; his signification of plasma
from the passage of Quintilian, supposed that plasma,
in this place of the poet, signifies not a medicament, but
a sott and delicate modulation of the voice — Est cum
molli & tenera fictaque vocula poema eliquaverit udo
gutture Est enim plasma, ut alio iuco docui, cum vox
est tenera & mollis. On the other hand, Lubin, who
had taken his signification of plasma from this place,
will needs have the same word in the passage quoted
above from Quintilian to signity not a soft and delicate
modulation of the voice, but a medicament. Turnebi
hujus loci cxplicatio, 1. xxviii. c. 2b. Adversar. mihi
non placet, & hoc Quintiliani loco refutatur. Comment,
in Pers.

P. 142. [GG] x«t' olxsiOTY^x fj-slxfoi/li? xxl fXllxlt^lill?.

That is, as I understand it, represented one thing by
another, which other hath qualities bearing relation or
analogy to the tiling represented.

P. 142, [HH] ix.)ixypx(p}S(ri ^mt ruv xi/xyXCtpui/. The
Latin translator k('cps close to his origmal, anaglyphicis
dcscribunt ; and Stanley, [Lives of Phil. p. 3.50. ed. 3d.]
they write by anaglyphies : as if this was a new sjiecies
of writing, now first mentioned by Clemens, and to be
added to the otlier three : whereas, I suppose, it was
Clemens's intention only to tell us that tropical symbols
were chiefly to be met with on their stone monuments,
engi'aven in relief; which was true.

P. I4*2. [II] A-Jxixa ol ZTxf AlyvTrJloij z:xiiivo[ACvoi zTforrotf
[*.\]/ zrdvluv TUV AlyvTrli'ui/ ypx^fj-xruv ^I'joSov Ex^avfiavatrt, ttiw
EnllTOAOrPA^IKHN xaAB/xitrv' ^£ul£>av Jt. riv lEPA-

TIKHN,

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 401

TIKFfN, 17 ^pui/TXi ol U^oy^xi^ixaliit;' vg-ecTyiv St xx\ TcXivJccfotu'
Triv IEPOrAT4>IKHN, 10 j jj fjitu eV* <^»« tuv zrpuTUi/ roij^f/wK
itvpioXoymr' v SI <ru[x€oXix-/i' t-a^ S\ inijoif oXtxn; vi (Av x.vpio~
^oyeTrxi Kotrol y.ifj^yi(nv' v J' uxnrsp t/jottikw? y^x<psl(x.i' 11' SI
ai/lixp'j^ olxXviUpSiTXi y.oUx TJi/a? ajKfjwa?. "HXtov yav ypa,-^tx.i
|3«AojM,£i/cn, HmXov ■zsroiao'j' XsXYivnv SI, (r^rifji.x fji.nuosiS\^ ko^IoL
TO y.upio\oyi^.ivov iiS^' rpoTTixivg SI, kxt oixncTvUx ix(\ccyoC\i?
xxi iJ^tlcili^hlsg, TX <J' s^xXXxrlovIe;' rx SI, zroXXx^u; fj.i\x-
cp^n[y..xlti^ov]sg, ^Kpxr\^(J^v' ra? yav tuv j3a»rt>.£wv Ittxivh^
S'soXoyaiMiuoig jU,u9o(f zrxpxSiSovli^, xT/xypxipHdi Six tuiv uvx"
yXu^oov' ^£ >c«1a raj x.lviyy^sg, rpim s'lSsg, Suyfjux sVw roSi.
roc pkiv yxp ruv oixKm xf-puiv, Six rrlv -c^o^iixv iriv Xo^riv, o(pim
(TUiAXffiv aTrt/xa^of" tov SI "HXiov, tm ts xxi/^xpa. ettsi^u
xuxAolf^Ej £>tTiif (ioiirii ov9x c^fAX zr\x(rxiA£V^, xi/liTrpoa-UTr©*

nvXi'uSti. Strom, lib. v. p. 555, .556. Ed Morell. —
Ti (/.iv fVi (Jja Twi/ zTpooTUv s-oi^£iuii KvpioXoyixv. vSi, <rv[A,^oXmri,
the Latin translator turns thus, Cujus una quidtm est per
prima dancnta KupjoAoyiKii, id est, proprie loquens ; altera
vero symholica, id est, per signa significans. This is so
faithfully translated, that it preserves tlie very ambiguity
of the original, and leaves us still to guess at the auttior s
division. Marsham takes it just wrong; and so does his
nephew Stanley; the first of these learned men quotes^
and translates the passage thus : Triplex erat apud
JEgxjptios clntracterum ratio, 'Ertj-oAof^afixii, ad scri-
hendas epistolas apta, sive vulgaris 'hpxlix.ri, qua utun-
tur 'le^oy^xiJi.y,x1i7i, qui de i^ebus sacris scribunt, 'h^o-
yX\)<piKv, :sacra sculptura; iiu.ius du(e su/it specicsy Kufto-
Xoyiy-n, proprie loquens per prima cleaienta, ^.v/x^oXmri,
per sig7ia [CvM. Chron. p 38. Francq. Ed.] The second
thus,— ///e/a5'/'rt'«^/woif ycr/cr^, hieroglyphical ; "whereof
one is curiologic, the other symbolic. [Lives of Phil,
p. 329. 3d ed.] By this interpretation, the learned
Father is, 1 . made to enumerate three kinds of writing,
but to explain only the last, namely, hieroglyphics ;
2. which is worse, he is made to say one kind of hierogly-
phics was by letters of an alphabet ; for that is the;
meaning of S^x ruv zit^utuv ro»j^£»wv: 3. wliich is still worse,
* he is made to divide liieioglyphics into two sorts, curiO'
logic and symbolic, and symbolic into three sorts, curio-
logic, ti'opical and allegorical; which makes the prior divi-
sion into curiologic and symbolic, inaccurate and absurd;
Vol. IV. D D and

402

THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV

and spreads a general confusion over the whole passage.
Their mistake seems to have arisen from supposing iwfOe'J'g
hpoyXvipmri? (the immediate antecedent) was understood
at jiA£» ifi ; whereas it was the more remote ante-
cedent, iti^oSis AlyuTrl/wv y^xi^^druiv ; and what made
them suppose this, was, I presume, the author's ex-
pressing the common plain way of writing by letters of
an alphabet, and the common plain way of imitating by
figures (two very different thi^igs) by the same words,
xupto?ioyi)t») and wfioXoyiira-i ; not considering that Tutv
TsrpuTuv ro^x^iuv, joined to the adjective, signified writing
by letters ; and, xara jt*/j(x»i(rn/, joined to the verb, sig-
nified writing by Jigures. In a word then, the plain
and easy meaning of Clemens is this, — " The Egyptian
** method of writing was epistolic, sacerdotal, and hiero-
*' glyphical ; of this method, the epistolic and sacerdotal
*' were by letters of an alphabet ; the hieroglyphical, by
** symbols : symbols were of three kinds, curiologic,
" tropical, and allegorical."

P. 143. [KK] This was indeed a very logical conclu-
sion from the opinion that hieroglyphics were inxented to
hide mysteries; but the high improbability of the fact
should have led them, one would think, to the falsehood
of the premisses. That the Egyptians had letters before
they had hiei'oglyphics, seems to me as extravagant as
that they danced before they could walk ; and, I believe,
will seem so to all who consider the first part of this dis-
sertation. However, a modern writer has taken up that
opinion : and tells us in plain terms, that the hieroglyphi-
cal zcay of writing was not the most ancient way of writ-
ing in Egypt ; [Connect, of the Sacr. and Prof. Hist,
vol. i. p. 230. and again to the same purpose, vol. ii.
293, 294.] partly, I presume, as it favoured the hypo-
thesis of the low antiquity of Egypt ; and partly, per-
haps, in compliment to that consequential notion, that
not only all arts and sciences came from the Hebrews,
but all the vehicles of knowledge likewise ; whence, par-
ticularly, the author of the Court of the Gentiles derives
hieroglyphics. The greatest pieces of the Jewish wisdom,
says Mr. Gale, were couched under the cover of symbols
and types ; whence the Egyptians and other nations bor-
rowed their hieroglyphic and symbolic wisdom, [Part i.

p. 77.]

Notes.] OF I\IOSES DEMONSTRATED. 403

p. 77.] But on what ground does the author of the
Conn€Ctio)i build, in support of his opinion? On this, that-
letters are very ancient ; in which, without doubt, he is
right : but surely not so ancient as he would have them.
However, the Argument he uses is certainly a very per-
verse one : There is one comideration more, says he, xvluch
makes it x:ery probable that the use of letters came
from Noah, and out of the first rcorld, and that is the
account zchich the Chinese give of their letters. Theij
assert their first emperor, xvhom they name Fohy, to be
the inventor of them', before Fohy they have no records,
and their Fohy and Xoah were the same person. [voL i.
p. 236.] Now it unhickiiy happens that the Chinese are
without LETTERS, even to this day. Nor are we, for all
this, to think our author ignorant of the nature of the
Chinese characters ; for he tells us soon after, that the.
• Chinese have no notion of alphabetical letters, but make
use of characters to express clceir meaiung. Their cha-
racters are not designed to express words, for they are
used by several neighbouring nations xcho differ in km-
guage. [p. 244.] Thus the learned writer, before he ^\ as
aware, in endeavourifig to prove letters of higher anti-
quity than hieroglyphics, hath proved just the contrary;
even that hieroglyphic characters, not letters, were the
w riting so early as his Noah : For the Chinese characters
are pro[)erly hieroglyphics, that is, marks for things, not
vords ; and hieroglyphics they are called by all the mis-
sionaries from whom we have the most authentic accounts
of China. 13ut had their characters been indeed letters^
as our author, in this place, by mistake supposed them,
yet still his argument would hav^ had no weight ; and I
will beg leave to tell him why : The Chinese characters
in use at present are very modern in comparison of the
monarchy. The missionaries tell us (as may be seen by
the quotations given above) that the Chinese character
hath undergone several ch.anges ; that their first way of
"writing was, like the Mexican, by picture ; that they then
abbreviated it in the manner of the most ancient Egyptian
hieroglyphics; and at length brought it, by many gradual
improvements, to its present contracted form : yet a real
character or hieroglyphic the Chinese writing still is ;
and so is likely to continue.

D D 2 P. 145.

404 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

P. 145. [LL] A late curious Voyager, who had exa-
mined the lariTer pyramids with great exactness, and
found no hieroglyphics inscribed upon them, either with-
out or within, concludes, rather too hastily, that they were
built before the use of hieroglyphic writing in Egypt ; and
from thence insinuates another conclusion, in favour of
the absurd hypothesis here confuted, that hieroglyphics
were not the first species of writing known in Egypt;
and, consequently, did not come from picture-writing,
but from alphabetic marks ; a foolish error, which be-
trays great ignorance in the natural progress of human
knowledge. *' Si je suppose (says Captain Xorden) que
" les Pyramides, meme les dernieres, ont ete elevees avant
" que I'on eut I'usage des hieroglyphes, je ne I'avance
" sans fondement. Qui pourroit se persuader, que les
" Egyptiens eussent laisse ces superbes monumens, sans
" la moindre inscription hieroglyphique, eux, qui, comme
*' on I'observe de toutes parts, prodigueoient les hiero-
" glyphes sur tous les edifices de quelque consideration ?
" Or on n'en appercoit aucun, ni au dedans, ni au de-
" hors, des pyramides, pas meme sur les mines des
" temples de la seconde et de la troisieme pyramide :
" n'est ce pas une preuve que Torigine des pyramides
" precede celle des hieroglyphes, que Ton regarde nean-
" moins comme les premiers caracteres dont on ait use

en Egypte." — Voyage d'Egypte, 3 me partie, p- 75.

The curious voyager not only satisfies himself in ac-
counting for the want of hieroglyphic characters on the
Pyramids, by their being built before the invention of
such characters, but seems to value himself upon a dis-
covery resulting from it, that Hieroglj/phics zvere not the
first sort of winting in Egypt. But there is a greater
difficulty in this matter than he was aware of.

It hath been proved at large, that iuarks for things,
by a kind of picture-writing, were the first rude effort of
every people upon earth, to convey and perpetuate their
intelligence and conceptions to one another, as soon as
they began to associate into tribes and nations. The
Montim' nts in question are a proof that the erectors of
them had advanced in the arts of civil life. No one then,
who understands what Society is, can doubt but that the
Egyptians had then a metliod of conveying their thoughts

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 405

at a distance, by visible marks : and no one, acquainted
with the slow progress of human inventions, can imagine
that alphabetic writing was the first effort towards this
conveyance. Hence arises the difficulty.

But this observation of the curious voyager, which fur-
nishes the difficulty, supplies the solution. Suppose only
the Pyramids to be erected in the interval between the
inventions of curiologic Sind tropical hieroglyphics, that is,
between their natural and more artificial state, and the
difficulty vanishes : For in their natural state, they would
be only used out of necessity ; and not for ornament,
luxury, or decoration. So that it is no wonder we do not
find them on the pyramids in pompous and flattering
inscriptions like those on the obelisks.

His observation, Norden indeed gives, as a proof of
the high antiquity of the pyramids ; and very justly. But
his drawings furnish us with another argument in support
of this truth, which he himself seems not to have consi-
dered : It is this, that the general idea of Egyptian archi-
tecture was entirely taken from the pyramids: which
nothing sure but the high veneration for them, increased
by their remote antiquity, could possibly have occasioned ;
since the figure of these sepulchral monuments, so well
adapted to triumph over time, is the most inconvenient
that can possibly be imagined for habitable structures,
whether public or private ; and exceedingly grotesque, in
all others. And yet we see, from the ancient ruins of
Egypt, of which this diligent and exact Traveller has given
us so fine drawings, that all their buildings, without ex-
ception, were raised on the idea and genius of the Pyra-
mids. We are surprised to find not only their ports,
their door-3t??ads [See plates CIX. — CXVIH.] but even
the very walls of their temples, [PI. CXLVIJ.— VHI.
— CLI. — CLIV.] nay, of their towns, narrowing up-
wards and inclining inwards, in the manner of a modern
fortification. [PI. XCIX.— CXV.— CXXXVHLj—
But to return to the solution given above : It may be said,
perhaps, " Allow the pyramids to have been erected in
the interval between the invention of curiologic and tro-
pical hieroglyphics. What hindered the Egyptians from
scribbling over these bulky monuments with their first
rude essays, as other barbarous nations have done upon

D D 3 their

4o6 THE DI\^INE LEGATION [Book IV.

their rocks ? of which we find specimens enough in Scan-
dinavia, North- East Tartary, and elsewhere./' Indeed I
know of nothing biit custom that hindered them; that
sovereign Mistress of the world, who finly is of force to
control and conquer Nature : And that Custom did ef-
fectually hinder them, is very plain, from our finding no
specimens of any of their first rude hieroglyphic paintings;
though, from them, their improved hieroglyphics received
their birth. I\or did they want, any njore than other
Barbarians, their isolated rocks for this purpose : they
had them very commodiously bordering on the Nile, and
in view of all passengers. And on these, it is remark- -
able, they have inscribed their improved hieroglyphics,
though \\ e see no remains of any the earlier and ruder
efforts of picture-writing.

But the modesty and reserve of this curious Traveller,
and his deference to learned xA.ntiquity, deserves comuien-
dation. He is not of the number of those who expect
more faith from their Reader than they commonly find,
or venture to entertain him with discoveries which he did
not expect. For the learned reader acquiesces in Anti-
quity ; the sensible reader prefers the evidence of a con-
temporary writer to the conjectures of a modern traveller:
yet such is the general iiumour of our Voyagers, that they
think they do nothing, if they do not rectify the errors of
Antiquity. I have an ingenious measurer of the Pyramids
in my eye, and one of the latest too [Dr. Shaw], who, in
the passion for saying something new, assures us, that the
opinion of tiieir being sepulchres is an old inveterate
niistake : that they are indeed no other than temples,
for reiigiuus worslnp. To soiten so rugged a paradox, he
says, there was no un 'rcersal cunscnl: amojigst the Aticiaiis
ccrncerning the use or purpose for which these Pynanids
"were designed. And was there any universal consent
amongst them that snow was white ? But would this save
the modesty or understanding of him who should atfirm,
after a certain ancient Philosopher, that it was black?
And .yet such a one would have the advantage oi our
Traveller ; who would be hard put to it to produce any
Ancient, .vhether Philosopher or otherwise, who said the
Pyramids were lemples. But if the positive and agreeing .
testimony of all the old vvritei"3 extant may be called uni-
versal

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 407

versal consent, it certainly is not wanting. Herodotus,
Diodorus Siculus, Strabo, Pliny, Tacitus, &c. all assure
us that the Pyramids were Sepulcltrcs. Nay, Diodorus,
to put the matter out of doubt, informs us, that the sacred
commentaries of their Priests said so. But our Traveller
supposed this universal consent to be shaken at least by
Pliny, who tells us, they were built for ostentation, and
to keep an idle people in employment. As if this intimated
that, in Pliny's opinion, they were not Sepulchres ! Sup-
pose I should say the great Arch at Blenheim was built
for ostentation ; and if not to set an idle people to work,
yet at least to make them stare : Does this contradict the
universal consent of its being a Bridge, though as much
too large for the water that runs under it, as the Pyramids
were for the bodies contained in them ? In a word, Pliny
is not speaking of the use to which the buildings were
applied, but of the mot 'wes for their erection.

P. 149. [MM] Against this, a late furious writer ob-
jects— " But is it credible that the polite and learned
" priests of Egypt would use a method to hide and secrete
" their knowledge, which the more rude and barbarous
" nations employed to publish and divulge theirs ? Or
" can you conceive that a curious and studied refine-
" ment of so knowing and enlightened a people as the
" Egyptians should be one and the very same thing
" with a rude and simple invention ot those nations
" which were most barbarous and uncivilized ?"' Jack-
son's Chronol. vol. iii. p. 357.

I answer by another question — Is it credible that the
polite and learned orators and historians of Greece and
Rome should, out of choice, use a method [figurative
expression] to perfect their eloquence, which the first
rude and barbarous nation employed out of necessity, and
which rude and barbarous nations still employ, for want of
intellectual ideas, and more abstract ternis ? Or can you,
conceive^ that a curious and studied refinement of dress,
in so knowing and enlightened a people as the present
French, should be one and the same thing with the rude
and simple invention of leathern garments to cover naked-
ness amongst the Laplanders, a people most barbarous
and uncivilized? But if it displeases our Chronologist,

p D 4 that

4o8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

that so enlightened and refined a people as the Egyptians
should pi ide themselves in the rude and simple invention
of barbarians : what will he say to find, that the most
savage people upon earth go a step beyond the most
polished in the delicacy and luxury of speech? Yet this
is the case of the Greenlanders, or the missionary Egede
deceives us. The women (says he) have a dialect different
from the men, making use of the softest letters at the
ends of words, instead of the hard ones. Hist, of Green-
land, p. 160.

P. 150. [NN] This hieroglyphic likewise signified the
earth', for the first Tude mortals imagined, that that
which sustained them M'as the Deity which gave them
Being. So Hesiod, who took iiis notions of the earth
from the Egyptians, describes her after their paintings ;
FAI' ETPTETEPNOS, which the figure of the Diana
inultimammia well explains. Put Shakspeare, who, as
Mr. Pope finely observes, had immediatelij from nature
xohat the txvo Greek poets, Homer and Hesiod, received
through Egyptian strainers, paints this famous hiero-
glyphic with much more life and spirit ;

Common Mother thou !

" Whose womb unmeasurable and infinite Breast

" Teems and feeds all."

That Hesiod had there the Egyptian Goddess in his
mind, is plain from the character he gives of her in the
words subjoined,

- - - Tirclyluv dtr^xXli an)

'AGai/arw!',

for the earth was the first habitation of those Gods
which Greece borrowed of the Egyptians: from whence,
as the poet insinuates, they were transferred into heaven:
To(,7x §i rot zr^UTOv y.\v lyitvoolo Wov la.vr'n
Ov^ocvov (xripcisv^\ 'lux [xiv znp] zrxi^x Kxhinrlotj
"Ofp' tin f/,xy.api(T<ri ^fo7g ii<^ aVipaAjf ulti.

P. 152. [OO] A very curious specimen of this hasty
delineation of the outlines of the figures (which gave
birth to rhe running hand character we are here speaking
of) the reader will find in Kircher p. 350. of his (Edip.

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 409

JEi^ypt. torn. iii. where he has given the characters on
the^ Florentine obelisk, which, though dignified by that
name, is only a late niiunc in miniature of the superb
monuments so intitled. See Plate VIII.

P. 1,52. [PP] The account which a missionary Jesuit
gives us of the several sorts of writing amongst the
Chinese will illustrate this matter: — Parmi cts ca~
racteres il y en a de pliisieuys sortcs. Les premiers ne
sunt presque plus if usaga, 8^ on ne les conserxie que pour
fairc honneur a. Vantiqulte. Les seconds beaucoitp moins
ancitns liont place que dans les inscriptions publiques:
quand on en a besoin, on consulte les livres, d la fa-
veur des dictionnaires il est facile de les dechiffrer.
Les troisiemes, beaucoup plus ?rguliers plus beaux,
servent dans Vimpression et mSme dans Vecriture oi^di-
ruiire. Neanmoins commc les traits en sont bien farmez,
il faut un temps considerable pour les ecrire ; c"est pour
cela qu'on a trouve une quatrieme espece d'ecriture,
dont les traits plus liez & moins distinguez les uns des
autres, donnent la facilite d'ecrire plus viste — ces ti^ois
derniers caracteres ont entre eux beaucoup de ressem-
blance, et respondent assez d nos lettres capitales, aux
let t res d' impression, et d Vecriture ordinaire. — Nou-
veaux Memoires sur Vetat present de la Chine, par le
P. L. Le Comte, torn, i, Amst, i6y8, pp. 258, 259.
And here let me just take notice of a ridiculous mistake
into which the equivocation of the word Notes (a term
signifying as well short-hand characters, as Jiieroglyphi-
cai) drew a certain learned grammarian : who in a letter
to his friend {Gloss. Ant. Rom. p. 414. ed. 1731] under-
taking to give the original of short-hand characters, re-
jects the account of the ancients (which makes them a
Roman invention) to fetch them from the Barbarians;
and will have them to be indeed the same as the Igno-
rabiles Literee of the Egyptians (mentioned by Apulcius)
and the present Chinese characters ; that is, real hiero-
glyphics. But had he considered, that the notes of
short-hand w ere marks for words, and the notes of hie-
roglyphics marks for things, he would have seen that
they had no manner of relation to one another, but were
of different original, and employed to different ends :

410 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

He thinks, however, he has found a support for his
notion in St. Jerom ; who, he says, tells us somewhere
or other, that they came from the Barbarians : Restant
adhuc NOTiE, qu(B cum ex Barbarormn puto ortu natcc
slnt, i-at'w)iem amisere. But without searching for the
place, and reciuring to the context, we may safely pro-
nounce, that St. Jerom meant here by not/e, not the
notes of )ihort-hand, but hieroglyphic ttotes ; by his say-
ing of them ratioiicm amisere; which was not true of
short-hand notcsy but very true of hieroglyphical.

P. 134. [QQ] To this, perhaps, it may be objected
that literary writing had the name of epistolary, rather
for its being afterwards employed in such kind of com-
positions ; because Clemens Alexandrinus says, That
Atossa the Persian empress rvas the jirst that wrote
epistles', and Tatian, where he gives a list of some In-
ventors, expresses himself, from Hellanicus the historian,
in this manner, 'E7r<roAa? SYNTASSEIN i^i

ovoixx avT}? riv. But to this it may be replied, that the
supposition of literary writing's having the name of epis-
tolary from any later application of alphabetic letters to
this sort of composition, is very precarious : for it may
be asked, why rather a name from epistles than from
any nobler sort of composition, in which we must needs
conclude letters had been employed, before the use of
epistles, if epistles were so lately invented? But the
truth is, if by a-wlxa-a-etv, which word Clemens likewise
uses, we are to understand the composing, and not tire
artijicial closing and sealing up of the tablets in which
the Ancients wrote their epistles (the more natural sense
of the word, and an invention more to the genius of a
court lady) we must needs say the whole story of Atos-
sas invention is a very idle one, and worth only the
attention of such triflers as the writers Of the invention
of things; from whence Tatian and Clemens had it:
tliey might as well have enquired after the inventors of
speech : writing epistles being as early as the occasions
of communicating the thoughts at a distance ; that is, as
early as human commerce. We find in the //.
ver. 1 69, Bellerophon carrying an epistle from Prastus

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 41 1

to lo bates. " No, says a great Critic, [see p. 539.

of the Dissertation iqmi Phalaris\ this was no epistle,
" as Pliny rightly remarks, but codicilU ; and Homer

himself calls it -mvec^ vrlvxli;.'' I do not comprehend
the force of the learned person's argument; the point
bet\veen him and his noble adversary was concerning the
thing, not the name\ but Pliny's observation, and his
own, is concerning the name, not the ihing. Let what
Bellerophon carried be z^lvoi.^ ■uf\-jy]oi;, small leaves of
icood covered with waa\ and icritten upon by a pen of
metal, yet was it essentially an epistle, if Cicero's defi-
nition of an epistle be a true one : Hoc est, says he,
Epistokc propriiiin, ut is ad quern scribitur, dc lis rebus
quas ignorant, certior jiat. Why Pliny said, this vrlvx^
w7u)c]of was not an epistle, but a codicil, was because
small leaves of wood covered with wax, when written
on, were called by his countrymen codicilU; and a mis-
sive-paper, epistola: that this was his meaning appears
from the account he gives of the pretended paper epistle
of Sarpedon mentioned as a great rarity by Licinius
Mucianus. [See the Dissert, mentioned above.]

P. 155. [RR], By sonos mcis Cicero means words:
It was impossible he could ever conceive that brute and
inarticulate sounds were almost infinite. — See what is
said on this matter below.

Long before this addition was made to the discourse
on Hieroglyphic writing, one of the ablest Philosophers
of this age, M. I'Abbe de Condillac, in his Essai sur
I'origine des connoissanccs humuines, had the candour
to say, that I had perfectly well discovered the progress
by Mhich men arrived to the invention of letters. Cette
section [De L'eciiture], says he, etoit presque achev^e,
quand I'Essai sur les Hieroglyphes traduit de I'Anglois
de M. Warburton me tomba entre les mains : Ouvrae;c
ou 1 esprit philosophique et 1 erudition regnent egalement,
&c. mes propres reflexions m avoient aussi conduit a
remarquer que I'ecriture n'avoit d'abord ete qu'une sim-
ple peinture: mais je n'avois point encore tente de de-
couvrir par quels progres on 6toit arrive h I'invention des
iettres, et il me paroissoit difficile d y reussir. La chose
a 6t6 paifaitement executee par M. Warburton, p. 178.

sec.

412 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

sec. partic. — My own countrymen have been less can-
did : and to them the above addition is owing.

P. 1,59. [SS]

Tsif\ Tuv iv Mipo») UpZv yfxiA^sir!/})/. In Vit. Democr.
Segni. xlix. lil). 9. But Reinesius and Menage, not ap-
prehending there was any sacred mysterious writing out
of Egypt and its confines, will have the Babylon here
mentioned to be Babylon in Egypt; but they should
have reflected hovv unlikely it was, if Democritus had
chosen to write of the sacred letters of' t/ie Egyptians,
that he sliould denominate his discourse from a place not
at all celebrated for their use, when there were so many
other that these ciiaracters had rendered famous.

P. 162. [TTJ I have the pleasure to find, that s&
sensible a writer as the celebrated INIr. Astruc, in his
Conjectures sur la Genese, has espoused this opinion,
that alphabetic writing was in use amongst the Egyptians
before the time of Moses : He has likewise ado;>ted the
arguments here employed in support of it, as well as this
w hole theory of hieroglyphic zvriting.

P. 163. [UU] Exod. xxviii. 21. And the stones
shall be with the names of the children 0/' Israel, tzeelve,
according to their names; like the engkavixgs of
A SIGNET, every one with his name shall they be, ac-
cording to the twelve tribes. And again, ver. 36. And
thou shalt make a Plate of pure gold, and grave upon
it, like the engravings of a signet, Holiness to the
Loud. Had letters been invented by JMoses, and un-
known till tlien to the Israelites, would he not naturally
have said, when he directed the workmen to engrave
names and sentences on stones and gold, — and in these
engravings yuu shall employ the alphabetic characters
which 1 have now invented and taught you the use of?
On the contrary, he gives them a very different direc-
tion ; he refers them to a model in familiar use, — like
the engravings of a signet. For tlie ancient people of
the East engraved names and sentences on tlieir seals,
just as the ^Mahometan princes do at present. —
My. Fleuri with great ingenuity confesses the high per-
fection

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 413

faction of the arts at this time amonj/st the Israelites.
" lis scavoient tailler & graver les pierres precieuses.
" lis etoient Menuis.iers, Tapissieurs, Brodeurs & Par-
" fumeiirs. Entre ces arts, il y en a deux que j'admire
" principalement : la taille des pierreries, & la fonte
** des figures, telles qu"6toient les Cherubins de I'Archc
' " & le Veau d'or. Ceux qui ont tant soit peu connois-
" sance des arts, s^avent combien il faut d artifices
" & de machines pour ces ouvrages. Si des-lors on les
" avoit trouvees, on avoit deja bien raffine, merne dans
" les arts qui ne servent qu"^ I'ornement; & si Ton
" avoit quelque secret pour faire les ni^mes choses plus
" facilement, c'etoit encore une plus grande perfection,
" ce qui soit dit en passant, pour montrer que cette an-
" tiquite si eloignee n'etoit pas grossiere & ignorante,
*' comme plusieurs s'imaginent." Moeurs des Israel-
ites, sect. 9.

P. 163. [XX] A certain anonymous writer, quoted
by Crinitus from an ancient MS. in his de honesta disci-
plina, is of this opinion. But I quote him chiefly for
his pacific disposition to accommodate and compromise
matters, by giving every nation its share in the glory of
the invention; not, I mean, of the alphabetic powers,
but of the various alphabetic characters:

" Moses primus Hebraicas exaravit literas ;
" Mente Phoenices sagaci condiderunt Atticas;
" Quas Latini scriptitamus, edidit Nicostrata;
" Abraham Syras, & idem repperit Chaldaicas;
" Isis arte non minore, protulit -^Egyptiacas :
" Gulfila promsit Getarum, quas videmus, literas."

P. 171. [YY] Les Iroquois, comme lels Lacedemo-
niens, veulent un discours vif & concis; leur Style est
cepcndant figure, & tout mctaphorique. Mceurs des
Sauvages Ameriquains comparees aux Mccurs des pre-
miers Temps, par Lajitau, tom. i. p. 480. 4to. And of
the various languages of all the people on that gieat
continent in general, he expresseth himself thus. La
plilpart de ces Peuples Occidentaux, quoiqu'avec des
Langues tres diflferentes, ont ce pendant a peu pres la
mfeme genie, la meme fa^on de penser, et les meme
tours pour s exprimer; tom. ii. p. 481. Condamine gives

pretty

414 THE DIVINE LEGATION" [BooklV.

pretty much the same account of the Savages of South
America. Speaking of their languajjes he says, plu-
sieurs sont energiques & susceptible d'eloquence, &c.
p. 54. nhich can mean no other than that their terms
are highly figurative. But this is the universal genius
of the language of Barbarians. Egede, in his Historj/
of Greenland, says, the Language is xery rich of'xcords
and sense-, and of such energy, that one As often at a
loss, and puzzled, to render it in Danish, p. 16.5. This
energy is apparently what the French Missionary calls
tout mctaphorique. Qumtilian, speaking of metaphors^
says. Qua quidem cum ita est ab ipsa nobis concessa
natura, ut indocti quoque ac non sentientes ea frequenter
utantur, lib. viii. c. 6. which shews, by the way, that
Quintilian did not apprehend their true cause or original.
— By ali this may be seen how uiuch M. Bullet mistakes
the matter, where, in his Memoires sur la langue Cel-
tique, he says, " Dans Its pays chauds une imagination
" ardente decouvre aisement la. plus petite ressemblance
" qu'une chose peat avoir avec une autre. Elle voit
" dabord, par exemple, la report qui se trouve entre
" un homme cruel & une bete feroce; et pour taire
" connoitre qu elle apper9oit cette ressemblance elle
donne a cet homme le nom de fitrre. Voila Coris:ine
" du langage figure 8^ mctaphorique. Dans ks pays
" froides, ou I'imagination n'a pas une vivacite pareilie,
" on se sert de terms propres pour exprimer chaque
" chose, ou appelle tout par son nom." Vol. i. p. 6.
But we find the fact to be just otherwise.

P. 171. [ZZ] YiccU §\

yoi/Jsf h uTrfpgoX*??. — -p. 213. This being the nature and
genius coiinnon to all the badjarous nations upon earth, I
am almost tempted to believe Geofry of Monmouth, when
he says, that he translated his worthy history of Britain
from the Welsh ; of which, his original, he gives this
character, — Phallerata verba ampulloscB dictiones. Jf
this was not so, one can hardly tell why he should men-
tion a circumstance that neither recommended his copy
nor his original. But the character of the ballads of the
old Welsh Bards fully supports Diodorus's account of the
style of the ancient Gauls.

P. 172.

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 415

P. 172. [AAA] But the important use to which the
very learned the Abhe de Coiulillac has employed all
that has been here said on this matter, may be seen in
his excellent Essay on the origin of human Knowledge,
Part II. which treats of Language.

P. 172. [BBB] Quintihan makes an objector to the
figurative style argue thus, — Antiquissimum quemque
maxime secundum naturam dixisse contendunt; mox
Poetis similiores extitisse, etiamsi parcius, simili tamen
ratione, falsa & irapropria virtutes ducentes. On which
he observes — qua in disputatione non nihil veri est. —
It is true, there is something of truth in it, and indeed,
not much ; for though the polishers of human speech did,
as the objector says, turn the improprieties of speech into
ornament, it is utterly false that the most ancient speakers
used only simple and proper terms.

P. 17G. [CCC] So I thought: and so it has been ge-
nerally thought. But M. de Beausobre, in his Histoire
de Manichee, lib. iv. c. 4. has made it probable, that
the heretics had no hand in these Abra^vas, but that they
are altogether Pagan.

P. 176. [DDD] This charm, which the Arabs called
Talisman or Tsalimam, the later .Greeks, when they had
borrowed the superstition, called .ZTOIXEIA ; which
shews of what house they supposed it to have come ;
r9»x;"* being, as we have observed, the technical Greek
name for hieroglyphic characters.

P. 17O. [EEE] The same error has made the half-
paganized Marsilius Ficinus fall into the idle conceit,
that the Golden Calf was only a Talisman: — Hebrrei
quoque (says he) in iLgypto nutriti, struere vitulum au-
reum didicerant, ut eorundem astrologi putant, ad au-
cupandum veneris iunapque favoreii, conaa Scorpionis
atque Martis influxum Judaiis infestum. De Vita Co&lit.
Com. 1. iii. e. 13.

P. 177. [FFF] This Discourse on the Egyptian
HIEROGLYPHICS hath had the same fortune abroad,

that

4i6 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

that the Discourse on the book of Job hath had at
home : Like this, it hath been the occasion of much
waste paper, and violation of common sense. For the
Discourse on the Hieroglyphics having been well trans-
lated and well received in France, both the subject and
the author became known enough to invite all gentltmen
scholars, better able to entertain the Public, to oblige
us with their ingenious conjectures; and many a French
pen, even to that of a captain of grenadiers, hath been
drawn, to shew that the nature of Hieroglyphics is yet
as unknown as ever. A nameless dissertator, sur VEcri-
ture Hkroglyphique, (who chuses to write, as he him-
self very truly says, in his title-page,' — sub luce maligna )
assures us, that Hieroglyphics werQ not a species of
writing to convey intelligence to the reader, but a mere
ornament upon stone, to entertain the eye of the specta-
tor: So there is an end of the subject. The learned
captain, who wheels in a larger circle, and takes in all
the wisdom of Egypt, laments with much humanity, the
superficiality and ignorance of all who have gone before
him, and their utter incapacity of getting to the source
of things : So there is an end of the author. Indeed,
the Journalist who recomracHds this important work to
the public seems to have his doubts as to this point —
N'est ce pas s'avancer un pen trop, (says he), et peut-
*on dire que Marsham pour la Chronologic & I'Histoire,
M. Warburton pour les Hieroglyphes, & d'autres
Sf avans ayent neglige de consulter les sources ?

To say the truth, these wonderful investigators of the
learning of ancient Egypt, by the mere dint of modern
ingenuity, had provocation enough to fall upon this un-
lucky Discourse, which no sooner appeared aniongst
them in the fine translation of a very learned French
lawyer, than the celebrated writers of the Journal des
Scavans, of March 1744, and of Trevoux, of July in
the same year, announced it to the public in these terms.
" II regno (says the first) une si belle analogic dans le
" systeme de j\lr. Warburton, et toutes ses parties
" tiennent les unes aux autres par un lien si naturel,
" qu'on est porte a croire que Torigine, & les progr^s
" de I'ecriture & du language ont ete tels qr'il les a de-

crits. Le public doit avoir bien de robligatiofl au

" Traduc-

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 417

" Traducteur de lui avoir fait connoitre un Ouvrage si
" CLirieux," — " JVI. Warburton (says the other) n'a pu
" sans une erudition profonde, una lecture murement
" differee et des reflexions inlinies traiter avec tant de
" precision, de justesse et de nettete, un sujet de lui
*' meme si difficile a mettre en ceuvre. Les plus savans
'* homines se sont laisse seduire sur Torigine des Hiero-
" glyphes; et la plgpart ont regarde un effet du peu
" d 'experience des Egyptiens comme un refinement de
" la plus mysterieuse sagesse. C'est cette erreur que
" M. Warburton s'applique particulierement a detruire
" dans la premiere partie.. II le fait de la maniei'e la
" plus naturelle. Ce n'est point un systeme fonde sur
DES IMAGINATIONS v'AGUES, Ses raisonnomcns,
" ses preuves, sont appuiees sur des faits, sur la na-
" TURE des choses, & sur les principes les plus

" LUMINEUX DU SENS COMMUN."

P. 178. [GGG] Amongst the rest, the author of Sa-
cred and Profane History connected ; who says : " We
" have no reason to think that these hieroglyphics

[namely, what ue call the airiologic] were so ancient
" as the first letters :" This is his first answer to the
opinion that hieroglyphics were more ancient. His se-
cond is in these words : " They, would have been a
" very imperfect character; many, nay most occur-
" rences, would be represented by them but by halves,"
vol. ii. p. 295. Now this to me appears a very good ar-
gument why hieroglyphics were indeed the Jirst rude
effort towards recording the human conceptions; and
still, a better, why they could not be the second^ when
men had already found out the more complete method
of alphabetic letters.

•h

P. 179; [HHH] What hath been said above of the
reason why Egypt alone continued their hieroglyphic
characters after the invention of letters, and why all
other nations thenceforUard- left them off, will give an
easy solution to what a curious traveller seems to think
matter of some wonder, namely, that " the symbolic
" learning was the only part of Egyptian wisdom not
translated into Greece." [Dr. Shaw's Travels, p. 391.]
Vol. IV. E e —But

4i8 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

— But if this learned man meant not hieroglijphic cha-
racterSi but only the mode of Egyptian wisdoni employed
therein, he raises a wonder out of his own mi:<taive : that
mode was translated into Greece <vith the rest ; for the
precepts of Pythauoras v. ere a fantastic kind of trans-
lation of hieroglyphic picture^ into vei'bal iiropositions ;
and on that account, dou!)tles^, called symbols: —
MaAtrat (says Pi^itarch) S\ »t(^ \o IIuGayopaf] cJf tejxf,
^xvfAxcr^elg Ktx,) S'avjw.i'.o-a? raj 'tuapx?, ol7riy.i[Ari(rci]o to <r\j[A-
Ca^ixof a.uru}v x*» n*ur»)ptw(5"£f, dvxui'^ocg xlviyiMXcri rx $o^fi.ot\x'
Twv yxp y.xK^fJi.'iVjH/ ypxy-iAXTUu ltp9yXv(pi>iuv dvoXiiTrn
rdi "nroAAa ruv TLi'JxfopiyMV ■srsipafyfA/xaTWi/, oTo'v £r» to Mn
i<r^Uiv £7rl Ji^p» {AJii^ It) p^oi'^ac"^ xaOrtrGai, /xr^t <po/i/ix«
<pu}tvtiv, /i4»^£ wup jwap^a/pj) rxaAtujiv iv olxix. De Is. &
Os. p. 632. Edit. Steph. 8vo. AvtUx t»i? (ixp^apa (says
Clemens Alex.) ^tAoo-o^iaf, ztxv^j (r(po^pa £7r(X£xpu/tAjM,£m?
rprr^jxi TX Ylv^xyo^ix 2TMBOAA. Tffxpxlvn yZv 0 Sa/xtoj
yiXiSoyx IV o'lKiix, [xii iX,^iv, TaJfV*, hxKov xa» ;|/t'9u^e> x«t
z3-^9y\ua-(roti a>9fco7roi», &c. Stroin. lib. V. p. 558. Edit.
Colon. 1688, fol.

p. 181. [Ill] The leader may now see how inconsi-
derately the learned W. Baxter pronounced upon the
matter when he said, '* The icpx ypx^i^o^lx of the
" Egyptians were not<E sacne borrowed from the Oni-
" rocritics, and therefore divine." [App. to his Gloss,
Antiq. Rom. p. 414.] Nor does the more judicious
]Mr. Daubux conclude less erroneously, when he sup-
poses that botli onirocriiic and hiaroglifphics stood upon
one common foundation. But he was misled by Kircher,
and certain late Greek writers, who jjretended that the
ancient Egyptians had I can't tell what notion of a
close union between visible bodies in heaven, the invi-
sible deities, and this inferior world, by such a conca-
tenation from the liighest to the lowest; that the affections
of the higher link reached the lower throughout the
whole chain ; for that the mtellectual world is so exact a
copy and idea of the visible, that nothing is done in the
visible, but what is decreed before and exemplified in
the intellectual. [Prelim. Discourse to his Comm. on
the Revelations.] This was the senseless jargon' of
Jamblichus, Porphyry, Proclus, and the rest of that

fanatic

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 419

fanatic tribe of Pytiiagorean-Platonists ; and this they
obtrudca on the world tor old lL2;yptian wisdom ; the
vanity of which pretence has been confuted in the First
Part. It is hard to say whether these Enthusiasts
believed themselves, there is such an equal mixture of
folly and knavery in all their writings : however, it is
certain, Kircher believed them.

P. 182. [KKK] But hieroglyphic writing, as we have
observed, not only furnished rules of interpretation for
their Onirocritics, but figures of speech for their Ora-
tors. So Isaiah expresseth the king of Assyrias invasion
of Judea by the stretching out of his wings, to Jill
the breadth of the land* : And afterwards, prophesying
against Egypt and Ethiopia, he says, JVo to the land
shadowing with wings-}-. Most of the interpreters,
indeed, explain wings to signify the sails of their vessels
on the Nile: but the expression evidently means, in
general, the over-shadoving with a mighty power:
of which wings in hieroglyphic language were the
emblem.

P. 182. [LLL] ThusSuidas on the word STOIXEIA*

"Xjfiyis Tti\ ix^xa-iv t^na-xt. Artemidorus tells us tliis uas
the technical word tor the phantasms in dreams : 'Oi-Ejf 0?

«iroC))(r£7a» jOtfla^u X>?^^^ JuXGcKr^, ri woAXS, ^ oX'iyx, t«ut«
ztuvlx ii' (ixivui/ \Slwv (p\i<riXMv ruv xxt 2TOIXKIX1N xxXn-

S\ivx<r^xi AorKTjWu ^i^a(rxoji*£i/Hf ra l<roy.tv» ia.x^c7v. OnHr.
lib. i. cap. 2. And in liis fourth book he begins a chap-
ter which he entitles mpl STOIXEinN in this manner ;

ritpi it ruu STOIXEIflN rs-pof ra? fTri^Goi/iyf tl^riT^xi ioxHVTxr,
«T(^ 0 Xoy^ x^y.o(TH, ottw? £;^»f «Voxj»/v«(r6a» xx\ xuTOi,
Kxl /All c^«7r«T>iS»jj oVo Tuv Z3-Xiioiix Kiyovlm uvm. cap. 3.

P. 182. [MMM] But the learned Daubuz, in conse-
quence of his trusting to the fanatic notion of the late
Greek philosophers, supposes that hieroglyphic marks
• Cb. viii. ver. 8. f Ch. xviii. ver. i.

E E a were

420 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

were called 'Zroi'xiXx, because the first composers of them
used the heavenly bodies to represent the notions of their
minds, there being, according to them, a mystic sympa-
thetic union and analogy betxoeeji heavenly and earthly
things ; consequently that 'Lrov'x/ioi,, in this use, signifies
the host of heaven : That it may do so, according to the
genius of the Greek tongue, he endeavours to prove by
its coming from rfi'x'^, which is a military term, and sig-
nifies to march in order, [p. lo. of the Prel. Disc]
But this learned man should on this occasion have re-
membered his own quotation from the excellent Quintilian,
p. 54. that analogy is not founded upon reason, but ex-
ample. Non rativnt nititur analogia, sed e.iemplo ; nec
lex est loquendi, sed observatio : ut ipsam analogiam nulla
res alia fecerit, quam consuetudo. Inst. lib. i. cap. 10.

P. 183. [NNN] Here perhaps I shall be told, with
the candour I have commonly experienced, that I have
applied the history of Pharaoh s dream in illustrating the
old Pagan method of onirocritic for no other purpose than
to discredit Joseph s prophetic interpretation of it :
Therefore, though this matter be explained aiterwards at
large, I must here inform the reader, of what every one
will be content to know, except such as these, who never
think but to suspect and never suspect but to accuse,
that when God pleases to deal with men by his ministers,
he generally condescends to treat them according to their
infirmities ; a method w hich hath all the marks of highest
w isdom as well as goodness. Phantasms in dreams were
superstitiously thought to he symbolical : God, therefore,
when it was his good pleasure to send dreams to Pharaoh,
made the foundation of them two well-known symbols ;
and this, doubtless, in order to engage the dreamers
more serious attention : But then to confound the
Egyptian Onirocritics, these dreams vvere so circum-
stanced with matters foreign to the principles of their ai t,
that there M'as need of a truly divine Interpreter to de-
cipher them.

P. 1 84. [000] But if you will believe a late writer,
Animal-worship was so far from coming from Hierogly-
phics, that Hieroglyphics came out of Animal-worship.

This

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 421

This is an unexpected change of the scene ; but, for our
comfort, it is only the forced consequence of a false hy-
pothesis, which will be well considered in its place :
" The hieroglyphical inscriptions of the Egyptians (says
" he) are pretty full of the figures of birds, fishes, beasts,
" and men, with a few letters sometimes between them ;
" and this alone is sufficient to hint to us, that they
" could not come into use before the animals, represented
" in inscriptions of this sort, were become by allegory
" and mythology capable of expressing various things by
" their having been variously used in the ceremonies of
" their religion." Connect, of the Sacred and Profane
History, vol. ii. p. 294. But if this were the case, How
came these animals to be so C(ipahle of expressing by
allegory ^.\^& mythology? or in other words, How came
they to be the objects of worship ? We are yet to seek ;
and it must be more than a hint that can supply us with
a reason.

P. 188. [PPP] As unanswerable a proof as this ap-
pears to be, that the living Animal was not yet wor-
shipped in Egypt, (for if it were, what occasion for this
trouble and expence?) yet a learned German, so oddly
are men's lieads sometimes framed, brings tliis circum-
stance to prove that the living Animal was at this time
worshipped in Egypt. — Eadem historia Mosaica cultus
vivorum animalium in vEgypto, vestigia alia non inficienda,
tum saepe alias, turn vero omnium clarissime in vitulo
AUREO nobis offert. Jablonski, Pantlieon iEgyptorum
Prolegom. p. 85.

P. 190. [QQQ] Sis, in the eastern languages, signi-
fied a swallow ; under whose form, as this fable says,
Isis concealed herself: and Bubaste, which signifies a
cat^ was the Egyptian name of Diana, who lay hid under
that shape. Hence the learned Bochart supposes, in his
usual way, that the original of this fable was only an
equivoque of some Greek story-teller, whose countrymen
delighted in the marvellous. But i. The fai)le was not
of Greek invention, if we may believe Diodorus and
Lucian ; the latter of whom, speaking of the Egyptian
account of it, says, t«ut« yutf a/x'AtJ Iv ro^i uiu'rets a7roHf»7c«

E E 3 y^xfivlK.

422 THE DTVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

y^oc^iulx. ri ■o'po £twi/ [/.v^tut), de sacrlf.ciis. 2. This
only places the di.iiculty a step L)ac';v\ ino. without re-
moving it: For oik might ask, Hovv camf the Egyptian
name of Diana to signiiy a cat ; or the word Sis or Isis
to signify a Sct-'allow ? Can any other good reason be
given, but that tJaese Goddesses aere expressed by such
symbols in hieroglyphic writing? Agreeably to this,
HorapoUo tells us [lib. i. cap. 7.] that tlie hierogh/phic
for the soui was a hazck, which in the Egyptian toqgue
was called Baieth, a word compounded of Boi and
Ethy the first of which signified, in that language,
the SGiil- the other the heart: for according to the
Egyptians the heart was the mclosure of the soul. Eut
if this were the case, what we have given above seems
the more natural original of the story.

P. 194. [IIRR] Ipsi, qui irridentur, ^gypt'u, nullam
beluam, nisi ob aliquum utilitatem, quam ex ea caperenty
constc nxtrurt. — La cordudam tavien be aas a Barbaris
propter hiujicium co/utcrat is. Nat. Deor. I. i, c. 36.
This, lu the per uu of Cotta the acudenuc How ill it
agrees with \ l.atthe same Cotuisa,s afterwards, 1 have
shewn above : Omne Jer^ gtnus Besdarum iEgyptii con-
secraverui t, lib. in. cap. 15. Now this being a tact, and
the other but a speculation, we see the reason has no
wig'at. Ihe wonder is th:xt Tully should not see it.
But the notion was pian-ible, and aritiquity stciued
enamoured of it. When Ph.tarch [is. & Os.] had said,
the Jews f,Arshipped swine ; not content nith this simpie
caiufuny, he invents a reason for it ; and takes up this
•whict. lay so coujuaodious for these occasions ; namely,
gratitudv- to tlmt aunnai for having taught men to plough
the gi ound.

P. 194. [SSS] A passage in Eusebius strongly con-
finns our opinion of the origin of brute-worship; and,
consequently, accounts for the adoration paid to no.iious
animals ; 'O SI aJios uaiXiv TStfi twv ^omxuv foi^tlaiv Ik ruv
JSarp^anaOwtl^ jj^tl 'Qoihuv, ^set oTroTa. tpr<ri -Trtp) ruv Ipirvfixuv

loQoXuv •S'noi'wi*, a iri ^ri<riv y.U dyoc^nu olvQpuTroig iStfAloiv <rvv-
ItXu, (p9o|jaK Si xCi^nv ot{ ecu rov SuirxX^ri yj^Xittlv if)(^^if*-
<|/£i£» diripyd.^ilxi' ypxipti cl Kxi txZtx zrpo; Ae£;1/ uSi zrui Keyuiv.

9 Tdxvl^f

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 423

o T««u1©J, x«» (AST auTov «u6»f Oo/vix£? Ti xai AjyoTrltoj. [Pr.
Evang. lib. i. cap. to.] Comiuer ,.gir'mr'-hat hc[l'kUo],suj/s
in his translation of Sanch&niathd ■-. disccurse of c/ic PhcC"
nibian elements, concaviing certain reptiles and other
venomous animals, zvhich not only bring no henejit to
many but convey certain mischief' and destruction on
whomsoever they shed their deadly venom. These are his
vetnj words. Taautus therefore consecrated the species
of dragons andserpents, and the Pha'nicians and Egyptians
followed him in this superstition. The quotation from
Philo then goes on to shew, troin the nature of the
serpent-kind, why it was made a symbol of the Divinity.
The discourse of Sanchoniathcn here mentioned, as
translated by Philo, was part of a larger work, which he
wrote concerning the Phoenician and Egyptian wisdom
and learning, and treated of hieroglyphic characters, as
appears from the title of ^omxiav 2TOIXEIX2N, which lat-
ter word I have shewn to be the technical term for hiero-
glyphics : but how a digression concerning the conse-
cration of noxious animals should come into this dis-
course, unless the author understood hieroglyphics to be
the origin of hmte-xcorship^ is difficult to conceive.

P. 198. [TTT] And it is remarkable that this, which
was done to luUe tiie ignominy oi vulgar Paganism, the
advocates of the Church (^f Rome have lately revived, to
hide the ignominy of vulgar Popery, in their saint-
worship : nothing having been of late more fashionable
amongst the French Philologists than the contending
against that most established doctrine of early Antiquity,
that the greater Gods of Paganism v.ere all dead men
deified. II soit ais6 de prouver (says one of them) que,
de tons les Dieux du Paganisme, Hercule, Castor &
Pollux sont les seuls qui aient ete veritablement des
hommes. Hist, de I'Academie Royale des Inscript. &c.
torn, xxiii. p. 17.

P. 200. [UUU] Winckelman, in his Histoire de I'Art
chez les Anciens, vol. i. p. 97, says I am mistaken, in
supposing it to be made at Rome. And that this is an
opinion I have adopted without any foundation — il ne
paroit avoir adopte cette opinion, destitute de fondement,

E E 4 qua

424. THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

que parce qu'elle cadre avcc son systeme. That I told
my opinion, because it quadrated .ith my system, is
certain. But that it is not 'vitlioui; j -ju.ulaiion he might
have understood by the very hint I gave of the devotees of
Isis in Rome. Tliese were very numerous, and had the
liberty of celebrating their own country rices. And when
they had this, it would be hard upon thern not to permit
a Roman Artificer to make them one of the proper im-
plements of their \\ orship, and decent furniture tor their
Temple. The Jews at the same time had the like indul-
gence in Rome, and without doubt made the like use of
it in directing Roman workmen to make them utensils
like these, once employed in their Ten)ple worship.
Now should one of these chance to fall into the hands
of an antiquarian of the size of Winckehnan, he uould
say they could never have been made at Rome, but at
Jerusalem, for that they were intirely different from the
style of the Roman school. And this wise remark
Winckelman makes with regard to the Bemhine Table —
les Hieroglyphes qui s "y trouvent, et qu'on ne voit sur
aucun ouvrage imite par les Romains, en prouvant I'an-
tiquit6 et refutent (favance, tons les sentimens qui pour-
roient y etre contraires. But after all, how does he know
but tliat the Romans might be at one time as fond of
Egyptian Hieroglyphics, as we in England (w hom he says
have neither art nor taste) have lately been of Chinese
Jiligrane? Would he tiierefore, because there is cer-
tainly as wide a ditference between the Chinese and the
English style as there "was between the Egyptian and the
Roman, deprive us of a fashion which we have been at
so much pains to make our own ? They seem to have
been fond enough of Hieroglyphics v. hen they s\ ere at so
much cost and labour of transporting to Rome the gigan-
tic Obelisques covered ail over with them. And though
the grandees procured these for their bulk, and not for
their literature, the common people might mistake, and
grow fond of these overbearing strangers, for the sake of
their imputed learning, which they migiit take upon trust,
and be ready to transcribe into smaller volumes, such as
the Bembine Table. In a word, the good man, with all
the advantage of eye- sight — je n'ai parle, says he, que
de ce quej'ai vu— has not been able to distinguish be-
tween

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 425

tween works which a Roman artificer was employed to
make for a Barbarian customer, and those he made ac-
cording to his own fancy, or on Grecian rules, to please
the more elegant taste of his own countrymen.

P. 207. [XXX] To this I shall be bold to add one or
two more : For though Antiquity be full and clear in this
matter, yet lest it should be said, that as the Greeks talk
of things done long before their time, it might very well b©
that, for the credit of the God, tradition would pretend a
very early deification, how short soever, in reality, of
the age of the hero ; lest this, I say, should be objected,
I shall give an instance or two of the fact from contem-
porary evidence, God speaking by the prophet to the
king of Tyre says : Thine heart is lifted up, and thou
hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God in the
midst of the seas ; yet thou art a man and not God. —
JVilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I 'am a
God ? but tliou shalt be a man and no God, in the Jiand
of him that, slayeth thee. Ezek. xxviii. 2 — 9. This I
understand to denote a real worship paid to the living
king of Tyre, by his idolatrous subjects : it is not unlikely
but he afterwards became one of the Greek Neptunes.
The Rabbins seem to have undeistood the text in this
sense, when, as Jeroin observes, they made him to have
lived a thousand years. For the Egyptians taught (whose
ceremonial of the apotheosis was followed by the rest of
the nations) that their first God-Kings reigned a thousand
or twelve hundred years apiece. MuOoAoyxo-j (says Diodo-

xa? (Tjaxofl-iwc ETUI/. — p. 15. We have already taken noticc
of Odin and his early consecration. But Tacitus assures
us, it was a general custom amongst the Northern Bar-
barians to deify \\ ithout loss of time : and this not in jest,
like their contemporary Romans. For speaking of the
German nations he says : Ea virgo [Velleda] nationis
Bructerce late imperitabat : Vetere apud Germanos
MORE, quo plerasque feminarum fatidicas ^ augescente
superstitione, arhitrentur deas, lib. iv. hist. And again
of the same heroine : Vidimus di vo Vespasiaiio Velledam,
diu apud plerasque numinis loco habitam. Sed olim
Auriniam, compliires alias venerati sunt, non adu-

LATIONE

426 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

LATIOXE NEC TANQUAM TACERENT DEAS. Here the

hrstorian hints at the mock deifications in Rome, and in-
sinuates, that these in Germany were of another nature,
and beheved in good earnest.

P. 913. [YY\n This paradox, as we say, is advanced
in defiance of Antiquity. The Mysttries, iii their secret
communications, taught that all the national gods
VERE dead men deified. Of this we are assured by
the express testimony of the most learned ancients, both
Gentile and Christian; Cicero, Julius Finnicus, Plutarch,
Eusebius, Clemens Alexandrinus, Cyprian, and St.
Austin. See the First Part of the Divine Legation.
And will this author pretend to say, thht the insiitutors of
the Mysteries did not know the true oi igmai of their na-
tional Gods r But we have much more than their bare
testimony ; almost every rite in the ancient worship of
these Gods deciared them to be dead :.iortals : such
as the solemn mournings and lamentutions with winch they
began their celebrations ; the custom of never coming to
worship empty-handed, but with a present, as was the
Eastern use when they approached their princes ; the
building sumptuous houses for their Gods, and setting
meat before them for their refreshment; with a number
of other domestic usages, too tedious to dwell upon.
Thus the clearest facts and most creditable testimony
concur to support this notorious tmth ; a truth, which
they who most ea^^erly deff nded Paganism, and they who
most maliciously undermined it ; as well the ministers
of the Mysteries, as Euhemerus and his followers, equally
allowed. On what then is this author's paradox sup-
ported ? On the common foundation of most modern
philologic sys^^ems, etymologies; which, like fungous
excrescencies, spring up from old Hebrew roots, mytho-
logically cultivated. To be let into this new method of
improving barren sense, we are to understand, that in the
ancient oriental tongues the few primitive words must
needs bear many ditierent significations ; and the nume-
rous derivatives he infinitely equivocal. Hence any
thing may be made of Greek proper names, by turning
them to Oriental sounds, so as to suit every system past,
present, and to come. To render this familial' to the

reader

Notes] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 427

reader by example : M. Pluches system is, that the Gen-
tile (lods came from Agriculture : All he wants then, is
to pick out (consonant to the Greek proper n^nies) He-
brew words which signify ?i pit ugh. tillage, or ears of com ;
and so his business is done. Another comes, let it be
Fou' mont, and he brinj>s news, that the Greek Gods
weia Moses or Abraham; and the same ductile sounds
produce, from the same primiti.e words, a chief, a. leader,
or KtruebeV;. .ir; and then, to use his words, A /er
qu'il s'agi-sse >ri du seul Abraham, cest Stre aveugle 4' es-
prit <§■ uji aveuglernent irremediable. A third and
fourth appear u{;on the scene, suppose them, Le Clerc
and Bannier j who, prompted by the learned Bochart, say,
that ine Greek Gods were only Phcnician voyagers; and
then, from the same ready sources, flow navigation^
ships, and negociators. And when any one is at a loss in
this game of crambo, \\hich can never happen but by
being duller than ordinary, the kindred dialects of the
Chaldee and Arabic lie always ready to make up their
deficit ncies. To give an instance of all this in the case
of poor distressed Osiris, whom hostile Critics have
driven from his family and friends, and reduced to a mere
vagabond upon earth. M. Pluche derives his name from
Ochosi-ertts, domame de la terre; Mr. Fourmont from
Hnscheiri, hahitant de Stir, the dweliing of Esau, who is
,his Osiris; and ^'ossius from «SV//c7?er or A/cr, one of the
sciiplure names for the Nile. I have heard of an old
humoiist, and a gi-eat dealer in etymologies, who boast-
ed. That ht not only knew whence /Fords came, but
whither they were going. And indeed, on any system-
maker's telling me his Scheme, I will undertake to shew
whither all his old words are going : for in strict propriety
of speech they cannot be said to be coming from but ^0-
ing ^0 some old Hebrew root, — There are certain follies
(of which this seems to be in the number) whose ridicule
strikes so strongly, that it is felt even by those who are
most subject to commit them. Who that has read M.
Huet's Demonstratio Evangelica, would have expected
to see him satirise, with so much spirit, the very nonsense
with which his own learned book abounds ? Le veritable
usage de la connoissance des langues 6tant perdu, Tabus
y a succ^d6. On sen est servi pour etymologiser —

428 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

on veut trouver dans I'Hebreu et ses dialectes la source
de tous les mots et de toutes les langues, toutes les bar-
bares et etransjes qu'elles puissent etre — Se preseute-t-il
un nom de quelque Roi d'Ecosse ou de Norv6ge, on se
met aux champs avec ses conjectures ; on en va chercher
I'origine dans la Palestine. A-t-on de la peine a I'y ren-
contrer ? On passe en Babylone. Ne s'y trouve-il point,
I'Arabie n'est pas loin : & en un besoin menie on pousse-
roit jusqu'en Ethiopie, pkifot que de se trouver court
d'ETYMOLOGiEs : et Ton battant de pais qu'il est impos-
sible enfin qu'on ne trouve un mot qui ait quelque con-
venance de lettres et de son avec celui, dont on chei che
I'origine. — Par cet art on trouve dans THebreu ou ses
dialectes, I'origine des noms du Roi Artur, & tous les '
Chevaliers de la Table ronde ; de Charlemagne, & des
douze pairs de France ; et meme en un besoin de tous
les Yncas du Perou. Par cet art, un Allemand que j'ai
connu, prouvoit que Priam avoitet6 le meme qu'Abraham;
et iEneas le meme que Jonas. — Lettre au Bochart. On
such subjects as these, however, this trifling can do no
great harm. But w hen, by a strange fatality of the times,
it is transferred from matters of profane Antiquity, to such
important questions as the redemption of mankind, and
faith in the Messiah, we are ready to execrate a Cabalhs-
tic madness which exposes our holy religion to the scorn
and derision of every unbeliever, whose bad principles
have not yet deprived him of all remains of common
sense.

P. 233. [ZZZ] As Sir Isaac's own words seem so much
to shake his system, I shall quote them at length : " The
" lower part of Egypt being yearly overflowed by the
*' Nile, was scarce inhabited before the invention of corn,
" which made it useful : and the king, who by this in-
" vention first peopled it and reigned over it, perhaps

the king of the city IVIesir, where Memphis was after-

wards built, seems to have been worshipped by his
*' subjects after death, in the ox or calf, for this bene-

faction." p. 197, 198.

P. 233. [AAAA] I apprehend such mistakes were
pretty general in the traditional accounts of nations, con-
cerning

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 429

cerning their early times. Garcillasso's history of the
Yncas affords us just such another instance. " lis
" pretendent (says the French Lransiator"* qu'un de leur
" Rois fut un <:>raiid Legislaieur, ils disent de plus,
" qu'il fut un excellent capitaine, qui conquit un gTand
" iioinb)-e de Proxnnces S^- de Royaumes. Mais pour le
" tirer de ce Labyrinte, ils attribuent au premier Vnca
" tons ces chosesy taut pour ce qui est de leurs Loix, que
" du fondenient de leur Empire." Vol. i. p. 150.

P. 238. [BBBB] Julius Caesar had so little doubt of
this matter, that speaking of the Gauls, he says, Deum
maiiml Mercurium colunt — Post hunc, Apolhnem ^
Martem Jovem Minervam. De his eandeni jerhy
quam reliqmi gentes, habent opiniotiem. De Bell. Gall.
1. vi. sect. 15. The reason he gives is, that the several
Gods of Gaul had attributes correspondent to those of
Greece and Rome. Hence he, and most other writers,
concluded them to he the same. So Tacitus observes
of the Germans, that they worshipped Mercury, Hercules,
and Mars, deorum maxime Mercurium colunt — Herculem
ac Martem concessis animalibus placant. [Z)e mor Ger.
c. ix.] and speaking of the ^stii, a nation of the Suevians,
he says, they worshijjped the mother of the Gods — Ergo
jam dextro Suevici 'maris lit {ore JE.stiorum gentes ad-
luuntur : quibus ritus habit usque Succorum^ lingua Bri-
tatijiiccB propior. Matrcm Deum venerantur. [c. 45.]
But this Mother of the Gods was, as we learn from the
ancient Northern Chronicles, an idol peculiar to tliose
people, called Solotta Babba, or the golden xvoman. Yet
as she most resembled the Mother oj the Gods, she is
called so by Tacitus without any hesitation : who yet, in
another place, speaking of the worship paid to Castor
and Pollux amongsi this peopl^, gives us to understand
by his expression that no more \\ as meant th-m that the
Germans had a couple of Guds, whose attributes and
relation to one another bore a resemblance to the Gieek
and Roman Dioscuri. " Praesidet sacerdos muliebri
" ornatu, sed X)Qos, interpxtniione Romaiia, Castorcm
" PoUucemquo memorant." [c. 43.] But what greatly
confirms our opinion is. that^ when these people were
converted from Paganism to the Christian faith, their
.j.j,. Convertists,

430 THE DiraE LEGATION [Book IV.

Convertists, \vho had the best opportunities and fittest
occasion to enquire thoroughly into the st ite of their
superstition, found neither Greek nor Ronmn Gods
amongst them; but Idols of their o vn gro wth only.
And though, indeed, the vulgar herd of Antiquarians,
misled by the Classic writers, are wont to speak atter
them, in this matter, yet the most learned investigators
of the history of this people expressly affirm tlie con-
trary. Of whom I need only mention the celebrated
Saxo Grammaticus, who says, " Eos qui a nostris cole-
" bantur non esse quos Romanorum vetustissimi Jovem
" Mercuriumque dixere, vel quibus Grasci Latiumque
*' plenum superstitionis obsequium exsolverunt, ex ipsa
" liquido feriarum appellatione coUigitur." Hist. Dan.
1. vi. But Tacitus has recorded a circumstance which
fully evinces the mistake of this supposed identity. For
when he had told us that the Germans worshipped Mer-
cury, Hercules, Mars, &c. he immediately adds, that they
did not worship their Gods in Temples, nor under a
Human figure. Ceterum nec cohibere parietibus deos»
neque in uUam humani oris speciein assimilare ex magni-
tudine ccelestium arbitrantur. [c. ix.] I quote the words
for the fact. The reason seems to be a conjecture of
his own. Now if the Germans had borrowed their Mer-
cury, Hercules, and Mars, from Greece and Rome, they
probably would have worshipped them in Temples ; most
certainly, under a Human form. And, M hat is strangest
of all, Tacitus himself afterwards, in the case of the
Naharvali, seems to be sensible of this ; for having told
us that they worshipped two young Brother Gods, w-hicli
the Romans conjectured to be Castor and Pollux, he
makes the following observation, as seeming to dissent
from them. Nulla simulacra, nullum peregrinae super-
stitionis vestigium, c. xliii.

A celebrated French author, M. Freret, has borrowed
and adopted this system. He holds with me, that the
Gods of these Barbarians were not the same with the
Greek and Roman Gods ; and that the mistake arose
from the resemblance between their attributes, which he
shews, in the manner I have done (and I suppose from
the observations I had maae) must needs be alike.
*' Chaque Dieu dans toute religion Polytheiste avoit son

^* district

Notes.] OF MOSES DET^IONSTRATED. 431

" district, ses occupations, son caractere, &c. par-
tage avoit ete r6gle sur les passions & sur les besoins
" des homnies: etcommeleurs passions & ieurs besoins
" sont les memes par tout, les departemens des Dieux
" barbares avoient necessairement du rapport avec ceux
" des divinit^s de la Grece. II falloit par tout une intei-
" ligence qui goavernat le ciel, & qui lancat le tonnerre.
" II en falloit d'autres pour gouverner les Clemens, pour
^* pr^sider a la guerre, au commerce, a ia paix, &c. La
" conibrmite des emplois entrainoit une ressemblance
" d'attributs: & c'etoit sur ce fondement, que les Grecs
" & les Romains donnoient les noms de leurs Dieux aux
" divinites des Barbares.'' — Voiez M. de la Bleterie, ses
remarques sur la Germanic de Tacit, p. 135.

In conclusion; the learned reader ^vill remark, that
this is a species of that general coiiform'iti) which I had
observed is commonly ascribed to imitation, when in
truth its source is in our common nature, and the similar
circumstances in which the partakers of it are generally
found. Here again I have the pleasure of finding this
M. Freret agree with me in this general principle, as
before in the particular system of polytheism here ad-
vanced. " II seroit utile, dit M. Freret, de rassembler
les conformites qui se trouvent entre des nations qu'on
" sait n'avoir jamais eu de commeree ensemble. Ces
" exemples pourroient rendre les critiques un peu moins
" hardis a supposer qu'une nation a-emprunte certains
" opinions & certains coutumcs d'une autre nation, dont
" elle 6toit s^paree par une tr^s-grande distance, & avec
" qui Ton ne voit point quelle ait jamais eu la moindre
" communication." See M. de la Bleterie, p. 168. and
compare it with what I had said many years before at
the end of the last section of this Fourth Book. When
I reflect upon the honours of this kind, which several
writers of this humane nation have done me in silence, it
puts me in mind of what Muret says of Macrobius on
the like occasion, — ut apparcat eum factitasse eandeih
lU'tem, quam plerique hoc sajculo faciunt, qui ita humani
a se nihil alienum putant^ ut alienis asque utantur ac suis.

P. 239, [CCCC] It is remarkable, that though Hero-
dotus tells us, these Pelasgians, before their knowledge or

admission

432 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

admission of the Egyptian names, sacrificed to their Gods,
j^ESuof Si Tffxvlx TffpoTtpov o'lh lli\a.(f\o\~\, yet when they had
admitted these names, he gives the matter of sacrificing
as one change which this admission had introduced; from
that time, says, he, they sacrijiced [xno fjXv Sri tkts rs
Xpovs eSuok]. a passage in Julius Caesar will explain
this difficulty : After he had given an account of the Gods
of the Gauls, who, living under a civil Policy, worshipped
Hero-gods; he goes on to those of the uncivilized Ger-
mans, which, he tells us, were only the celestial Lumina-
ries and Elements. Deorwn numero eos solos ducunt,
quos cernunt, quorum opibus aperth Juvantur ; Solem
6r Vulcanum S^' Lunam. Reliquos ne fama quidem ac-
ceperunf. DeBell. Gall. vi. sect. 19. The very Gods,
as we observed, of all the uncivilized idolaters upon earth.
Now of these Barbarians he adds, Neaiie Druides ha-
bent, qui rebus divinis prcEsint; neque Sacrifici/s
STUDENT. They were not nice and exact in the matter
of sacrijicing: and no wonder, for he tells us, they had
no Priests. Now Herodotus, speaking of his Barbarians,
informs us of the same thing, though in other words, and
on a different occasion. They sacrijiced, says he, every
thing ziithout distinction; this was the neque sacrijiciis
student of Caesar. But when they came to use the names
of the Egyptian Gods, then V^vov, they sacrificed, i. e.
made a study of it, had a large Ritual concerning it, and
no longer sacrificed without distinction. For these names
being expressive of each God's peculiar nature, qualities,
and dispositions, soon introduced a distinction of sacri-
fices, according to the imaginary agreement or disagree-
ment between the subject and the object.

P. 240. [DDDD] Thk co)?munication of names (from
whence the men we are arguing against inferred, that the
Grecian Gods were originally Egyptian) made another
party, such as Bochart, Huet, and Fourmont, conclude
they were originally Jewish. Thus the last of these
writers in one place says. Par tout ce discours il est dairy
que les Romains, les Grecs, les Pkrygiens, les Thraces,
les Getes, les autres Scythes, 8^ en general tous les peu-
pies Guerriers ont adore Mars sans le connoitre, 8^ que
c'etoit un Dieu originGirement Phenicien, comme les

autres

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 433

autres granck Dieux. [Refl. Crit. vol. i. p. 103.] And
in another place, Mais en vdilcl assez sur ce Dieu on
Hcros, qui, coynme L'on voit, avoit e^e fort illustre sa.vs
ETRE coNNU. [p. 1 56.] For, according to these Critics,
a pagan Hero was never known till his pedigree had
been traced up into the Holy family.

P. 24,5. [EEEE] But, besides the Greek and Egyptian,
there was certainly an Indian Bacchus: whose existence
and history the learned Mr. Shiickford has well disem-
barrassed. I shall quote his words, and this with more
pleasure than I have yet done on most occasions. "There

" have been several persons called by the name of

" Bacchus ; at least one in India, one in Egypt, and

" one in Greece; but we must not confound them one

" with the othei', especially when we have remarkable

*' hints by M-hich we may sufficiently distinguish them.

" For, 1 . The Indian Bacchus was the first and most

" ancient of all th;it bore that name. 2. He was the

" first that pressed the gra[)e and made wine. 3. He

" lived in these parts befoi^e there were any cities in

*' India. 4. They say he was twice born, and that he

" was nourished in the thigh of Jupiter. These are the

" particulars which the Heathen writers give us of the

" Indian Bacchus; and from all these hints it must un-

" questionably appear that he was Noah, and no other.

" Noah being the first man in the post-diluvian world,

" lived early enough to be the most ancient Bacchus ;

" and Noah, according to Moses, was the first that made

" wine. Noah lived in thos^ parts as soon as he came

" out of the ark, earlier than there were any cities built

" in India; and as to the last circumstance of Bacchus

" being twice born, and brought lorth out of the thigh

" of Jupiter, Diodonis gives us an unexpected light into

" the true meaning of this tradition; he says, that

" Bacchus was said to be twice born, became in Deuca-

" lion s flood he was thought to have perished with the

" rest of the zvorld, but God brought him again as by a

" second nativity into the sight qj men, and they say,

" mythologically, that he came out of the thigh of

" Jupiter.'* Connection, vol. ii, p. 49, 50.

Vol. IV.

P. 25©«

434 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

P. 250. [FFFF] iri /^£lf^£T£/)«» <Pxt) 'EAX'/l'vCCl/'Po^tOTTt®^

Irxipr]; ywxi-AOi iTvxi. llerocl. 1. ii. c. 134- Their handle
for this was a story the Esyptiau priests told of their king
Cheops, the great buil(,ler of Pyramids. That, having
exhausted his revefiues, he raised a new fund for his
expences by the prostitution of his D^\ught£1i: 'By
Mhich the priests, in their figurative ^^'ay of recording
matters, only meant, as I suppose, that he prostituted
Justice. This interpretation is much confirmed by the
character they give of his son Mycerirtus, Jota? h (r<pi
zTxiluv ^xa-iXriuiv oi>ixio](x,TU(; K^Utiv. [Sec Merod. 1. ii. c. 126.
1-29.] However, the Greeks took it literally,

P. 252. [GGGGj Plutarch, in Theseus, tells us, that
when tlie daughter of Pitlieus bore Theseus of ^'Ejveus.
her father gave out that tlie infant was begot by Nep-
tune.

P. 259 [HHIIH] That Homer collected his materials
from the old Songs and Poems of his predecessors, I
conclude from this circumstance; In those tilings wherein
he might be instructed by the records of poesy, we find
him caUing upon the ^Iuses to inform him : But when
he relates what happened amon^ist the Gods,, which he
could only learn by poetical inspiration, he goes boldly
into liis story, without invoking the A/uses, at alh Thus
vvlien he speaks of the squabbles between Jupiter, and
his wife Juno, he tells them with as little preparation as
if thev hud been his next door neighbours. But when he
comes to give a catalotrue of the Grecian forces which
went to tlie siege of Troy, the likeliest of all subjects to
be found in the old poems of his Ancestors, he invocates
the j\Iuses in the most solemn and pompous manner :
which therefore I understand as only a more figurative
intimation (to give the greater authority to w hat followed),
that he took his account from authentic records, and not
from uncertain tradition. And these old poems being, in
his time, held sacred, as supposed to be v, ritten by a kind -
of divine impulse, an invocation to thein, under the name
of the Goddesses, who were said to have inspired them,
was an extreme natural and easy figure :

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 435

O'lrim ■^yif/.ovs? — lA. j3. ver. 484.

" Say, Virgins, seated round the throne divine,
" AU-knowincr Goddesses ! immortal nine !
** Since Earth's wide regions, Heaven's unmeasured
height,

" And Hell "s abyss hide nothing from your sight,
" We wretched mortals lost in doubt below,

But guess by rumour, and but boast we know,
*' Oh, say what Heroes." — Air. Pope.

Which, put into a plain dress, is no more than this, That
as the old records of the poets had p)r served a very cir-
cumstantial account of the forces zcarring before Troy,
he chose rather to jetch his accounts Jrom thence than
from uncertain and confused tradition.

This observation will help to explain another particular
in Homer, and as remarkable ; namely, his so frequently
telling us, as he is describing persons or tilings, that they
bore one name amongst the Gods, and another amongst
Mortals. Which, we may now collect, means no more
than that, in those old poems, they were called differently
from A\ hat they were in the time of Homer. Thus speak-
ing of Titan he says,

Sl-A 'Ex.x1o'yf^£i^ov vixXitTxty U fji.xy.poi/ ''OAujU-Trof,
*Ok Bpix^iuu xxAiHiTi 0£oi, xu^pez te ztuvIs?
Alyxiuv — lA, a. \ev. 402.

" Then call'd by thee, the monster Titan came,
" Whom Gods, Briareus, men iEgeon nan)e."

Mr. Pope.

So again,

''Er' Tif zrpoTTxpot^s ■ctoAew; xIttcTx xoAwi/>t,
'Ev ZTEi^lcti aTTKCEuQf, zreplipofj.^ iv^x £i'9a*

^A^xuxloi T£ any-x woAi;o";t«p6jaoto MvpUvvi?.

I A. |3. ver. 811.
" Amidst the plain in sight of Ilion stands
" A rising mount, the work of human hands,"
** This for Myrinnfe s Tomb tlf immortals know,
" Tho' call'd iiateia in the world below'.'" — Mr. Pope.

r F 2 And

436 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Cook IV.

And again,

I\. V. ver. 73.

" Witli fiery Vulcan last in battle stands
" The sacred flood that rolls on golden sands ;
" Xanthus.his name with those of heav'nly birth,
" But call'd Scamander by the sons of earth." —
• I\Ir. Pope.

Now supposing these names were not taken by Homer
from the old poems, no reasonable account can be given
for his so particular an information of this circumstance.
But allow them to be taken thence, and the reason is
evident. It was to remind the reader, from time to time,
that he still kept their ow n venerable records in his eye ;
which would give weight and authority to what he de-
livered. The old names are called by Homer, the Names
used by the immortals, on these three accounts : 1 . As
they were the names employed in the old sacred poems.
2. As they V,- ere in use in the first heroic ages. And 3.
As they were of barbarous and Egyptian original ; from
whence came the mythologic history of the Gods. Two
lines of the pretended Chaldaic oracles, collected by
Patricius, explain this whole matter w^ell, as they shew
the great reverence of the Ancients for the Religion of
Names :

£»Vj yap ovo[ji.cxlx zrxp* Ixuroi; ^locSolx.

Never change barbarous Najnes ; for every nation hath
Names zvhich if received fro7?i God.

P. 264. [IIII] The late bishop Sherlock supposed,
that " the divine original of tlie Law might be infeiTcd
from this prohibition of the use of Cavalry : for that no-
thing but a divine command could have prevailed with
Moses to forbid the princes of his country the uses of
Horses and Chariots for their defencef [4th Dissert,
p. 329. Ed. 4.] But I chuse not to insist on this,'as the
use of Cavalry could not be necessary for their defence
after they were in possession of the country.

P. 270.

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 437

P. 270. [KKKK] It is true Diodorus supposes, the
principal reason was to cover and secure the flat country
from hostile incursions : to f^iyirou, -srpoi t«\ tuv zs'oXii/.iuy
t^otTaf o^v^Civ nx) $u<ri[ji.^oXciv iTrolria-s Tnv yj^^ocv, p. 36. But
sure he hath chosen a very unlikely time for such a pro-
vision. The return of Sesostris from the conquest of the
habitable world would hardly have been attended with
apprehensions of any evil of this kind.

P. 274. [LLLL] The reader may not be displeased to
see Homer's ideas of this matter: who supposes the
science of architecture to be arrived at great perfection in
the time of the Trojan war. For speaking of the habita-
tion of Paris (whom, as his great translator rightly ob-
serves, Homer makes to be a bd-eaprit and a Jim genius)
he describes it in this manner:

KAAA, Ta p" auro? inv^i trvv di/Sp(x.<nv, o\ tot API2TOI
"^Ha-ocv £1/1 TpoiV ipiQuXxKi TEKTONKZ oIvS^bi;,
O't'ol iTrolniTKV 0AAAMON, x«l AX2MA, xal ATAHN. —

l\. C 310-

Here, we see a magnificent palace, built by profest
architects, with all suits of apartments ; as different from
the description of Hector's dwelling, as the character of
the masters from one another ; of which last he only
says, it was a commodious habitation.

Arj/a r ETTfjO' Txava ET NAIETAONTAS

"Ektop^. — Ibid. 497.

P. 285. [MMMM] In the history of the acts of
Hezekiah, king of Judah, it is said, that, " He removed
*' the high places, and brake the images, and cut down
" the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent
" that Moses had made : for unto those days the
" children of Israel did burn incense to it : and he
" called it Nehushtan." [2 Kings xviii. 4.] The his-
torian's care to record the ?ia7]w which the king gave to
the brasen serpent, when he passed sentence upon it,
will appear odd to those who do not reflect upon what
hath been said, about the superstition of names. But
that will shew us the propriety of the observation. This

F F 3 idol,

438 THE DT VINE LEGATION [Book TV.

idol, like the rest, had doubtless its name of honour, allud-
ing'o its sanative attn'ou es. Good Hezt kiah, therefore,
in contempt of its title ot" deification, called it Xeiiush-
TA\, which signifies a thixg of BR7^ ss. And it was
not out of season either to nickname it then, or to con-
vey the mockery to posleritv : For the xame of a demo-
lished God, like the shade of a deceased Hero, still
■walked ahout, and was ready to prompt men to mis-
chief.

P. 280. [XNNN] A learned writer [Mr. Fourmont,
Reflections Critiques sur les Histoires de anciens Peu-
ples] hath followed a system which very well accounts
for this unconquerable propensity ' to Egyptian supersti-
tions. He supposeth that the Egyptian, and consf quently
the Jewish idolatry, consiit -d in the worship of the dead
Patriar:Jis, Abraliam, Isaac, and Jacoo, &c. The mis-
chii f is, that this should have the coiiMnon luck of so
manv i.ther learned Syste t.s, to liave ail Antiquity oh-
stinately bent against it. Not ujore so, however, than
its Author is against Antiquity, as the read' r may see by
the instance I am about to give him. Mr. tourmont, in
consequence of his system, having taken it into his head,
that Cronus, in Sanchoniatho; was Abraham ; notwith-
standing that fragment ttlis us, tljat Cronoo rebelled
against his fattier, and cut off his privities; buried his
brother alive, and murdered his ov\n son and daugliter;
that he wa^^ an idolater ; anil a {)ropagator ot idolatry,
by consecrating several of his own iamiiy ; that he gave
awav the kinijdom of Athens lO the Goddess Athena;
and the kingdom of Egypt to th.e God Taaut ; notwith-
standing all this, so foreign and inconsistent with the
history r.f Abraham, yet, because the same fragment says,
that Cronos, in the time of a plague, sacrificed his only
son to appease the shade of his murdered father; and
circu'ncised himself and his whole army; on the strength
of this, and two or three cold, fajiciful etymologies, this
great Critic cries out, A^tr qiiil sagme ici du seul
Abiaham, cest ttre avlugle d'esprit, et d'un"

AVEU CLEMENT IRREMP.DIABLE. Liv. ii. SCCt. 3, C. 3.

P. 298.

Notes.] OF MOSES DEiMONSTRATED. 439

P. 298. [OOOO] Fornication, adultery, whoredom,
are the constant figures under which the Holy Spirit re-
presents the idolatries of the Israelites : consequently,
by this character of tlie Egyptians being great o f flesh,
and in anotlier place, their ftesli icas as the Jiesh of asses,
and their issue like the issue of horses, Ezek. xxiii. 20.
v/e are given Jo understand that Egypt was the grand
origin and incentive of idolatry, and the propagator of
it amongst the rest of mankind : wiiich greatly confirms
our general position concerning stlie antiquity of this
Empire.

P. 303. [PPPP"! Yet this evasive reasoning a syste-
matic writer, who has therefore often fallen in our way,
would seem to insinuate in an argument designad to
make short work with Spencers learned volumes. His
Mords are these — " It is remarkable tliat some learned
" writers, and Dr. Spencer in particular, have im'agined,
" that the resemblance between the ancient Heathen
" Religions, and the ancient Religion which was insti-
" tuted by God, was in many respects so great, that
" they thought that God wasp/eased to institute the one
" in inutation of the other. This conclusion is indeed
" a very vvrong one, and it is the grand mistake which
" runs through all the vvorks of the very learned author
" last mentioned." " The ancient Heathen Religions
*' do indeed in many particulars agree with tiie institu-
" tions and appointments of that Religion, which was
" appointed to Abraham and to his fan/ilij, and which

was ajierivards revived by ]Moses; not that these were
" derived from those of the Heathen nations, but much
*V more evidently thJ; Heathen religions were copied from
*' them ; for there is, I think, one observation, which,

as far as I have had opportunity to apply it, will fully
'* answer every particular that I)r, Spencer has offered,
" and that is tliis ; He is -able to produce no one cere-
" mony or usage, practised both in the religion of Ahra.-
*' ham or Moses, and in that of the Heathen nations,
*' but that it may be proved, that it was used by Abra-
" ham or Moses, or by some other of the true wor-
" shippers of God earlier than by any of the Heathen

nations." Sacred and Prof. Hist. Connected, vol. i.

FF4 2d

440 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

2d ed. p. 316, 317. This writer, vac see, seems here to
suppose a palpable falsehood; which is, that there is an
iiijpalpable difference between the Mosaic and Patriarchal
Religions. But this was not the principal reason ot my
quoting so long a passage. It was to consider his one
OBSERVATION, which is to do such wonders. Now I
cannot find that it amounts to any more than this ; That
the Bible, in which is contained the account of tlie Jeuish
Religion, is a much older book than any other that
pretends to give account of the national Religions of
Paganism. But how this discredits Dr. Spencer s opinion
I cannot understand. I can easily see indeed the advan-
tage this learned \a riter would liave had over il, had there
been any ancient books which delivered the origi/i of
Gentile religions in the same circimistantial manner that
the Bible delivers this of the Jeirish ; and that, on a pro-
per application of this one observation, it appeared
that Dr. Spencer, with all his labour, zcas able to pro-
duce no one ceremony or usage practised both in true and
Jalse religion, but that it n,ighf bt proved it zcas used
jirst in the true. But as things stand af present, what
is it this learned writer would be at r The Bil)le is, by
far, the oldest book in the world. It records the history
of a Religion given by God to a people- wlio had been
long held in a state of slavery by a great and powerful
empire. The ancient historians, in their accounts of the
religious rites and manners of that monarchy, deliver
many which have a surprising relation to the Jewish
ritual ; and these rites, these manners, were, they tell us,
as old as the monarchy. Thus stands the evidence on
the present state of tilings. So that it appears, if, by
it may be proved, the learned writer means to confine
his pvoof "to conteu'porary evidence, he only tells us
what the reader kreu before, vis. 1 hat the Bible is the
oldest book in the world. But if, by it may be proved^
he means proved bv sueh argunients as the nature of the
thing will admit, then he tells us what the reader knows
now to be false. Sir Isaac New ton hath given us much
the same kind of paralogism in his account of the origi-
nal letters. There is no instance, says he, of letters for
writi/fg dozen sounds being in use before the days of
Dajjid in any other iiaiion besides the posterity of Abra-
ham,

Notes.] OF INIOSES DEMONSTRATED. 441

ham. [Chron. p. 209.] So that what hath been said
above in answer to the other will serve eqtmllv against
this. I v\0Lild only remark, that the learned writer setvis
to have borrowed his onk observation from a chapter
of Witsius s JEgyipiaca, thus intitled, NuUms Historici
siipicieutt 7e,stir/io/iiO probari posse, ta ijua in Religiciie
lauuiibUia sunt apucl jf'gyptios, qiiam apud Hebribus an-
tiquiora f uissc, 1. iii. c. 1. to which, wha*: I li ve here
said is, I think, a full ansuer. — The learned writer will
forgive me, if, before I leave this passage, I take notice
of an expression which seems to reflect on that good
man, and sincere believer. Dr. Spencer; but 1 suppose
not designedly, because it seems a mere inaccuracy. The
words are these ; they thought [i. e. Dr. Spencer and
otiiers] that God rvas pleased to institute the one in
imitation of the others. Now this neither Dr. Spencer
nor any believer ever thought. They might indeed sup-
pose that he instituted one in rejerence to the other, i. e.
that part of its Rites were in direct opposition to the
customs of the idolaters ; and part, out of regard to the
people's prejudices, in conformity to such of their cus-
toms as could not be abused to superstition. But this is
a very different thing from instituting one religion in imi-
tation of another. As no believer could suppose God
did this ; so neither. I will add, could any unbeliever.
For this opinion, That the Jewish religion was instituted
in imitation of the Heathen, is w hat induces the unbe-
liever to conclude, that God was not its author.

P- 303. [QQQQ] The parenthesis seems odd enough.
It may not therelore be unseasonable to explain the ad-
mirable reasoning of our divne Master on this occasion,
Jesus, being charged by tlie Jews as a transgressor of
the law of Moses, for having cured a man on the sabbath-
day, thus expostulates with his accusers. " Moses
" therefore gave unto you circumcision, not because it is
" of IVIoses, but of the Fathers, [^x on U ra Muo-eug, dx\*
** U Tuv TD-ale'fwi/] and ye on the sabbath-day circumcise
" a man. It a man on the sabbatli-day receive circunv
" cision, that the law of Moses should not be broken,

are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every
" whit whole on the sabbath-day.^ " That is, *' xMoses

enjoined

442 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

enjoined you to o'oserve the Rite of Circumcision, and
to perform it on tiic eighth day: but if this day happen
to be on the sabbath, you interrupt its holy rest by per-
forming the Rite upon this day, because you ^vill not
break the law of Moses, which marked out a day certain
for this vvork of charit}'. Are you thei efore angry at me
for performing a of equal charity on the sabbatli-
day ? But you Avill ask, why was it so ordered by thr Law,
that either the precept for IL'ii cumcision, or that for the
sabbatical-rest, must needs be frequently transgressed ?
I answer, that though Moses, as I said, gave you Cir-
cumcision, yet the Rite ^\as not originally of IMoses, but
of the Fathers. Now tlie Fathers enjoined it to be per-
formed on the eighth day ; IMoses enjoined the seventh
day should be a day of rest ; consequently the day of rest
and the day of Circumcision must needs fi"equently fall
together. Moses found Circumcision 'instituted by a
previous covenant which his Imo could not disamiul*'.
But had he originally jnstituied both, 'lis probable he
would have contrived that the two Laws should not have
interfered." — This I take to be the sense of that very im-
portant parenthesis, not because it is of Moses, but of the
Fathers.

P. 303. [RRRR] No one ever yet mistook Circum-
cision for a natural duty ; while it has been esteemed a
kind of impiety to deny the sabbath to be in that number.
There are two circumstances attending this latter institu-
tion, w hich have misled the Sabbatarians in judging of
its nature.

1. The first is, that which this positive institution and
a natural duty hold in common, namely, the setting apart
a certain portion of our time for the service of Religion. —
Natural reason tells us, that that Being, who gave us all,
requires a constant expression of our gratitude for the
blessings he has bestowed, which cannot be paid without
some ex pence of time : and this time must first be set
apart before it can be used. But things of very different
natures, may hold some things in common.

2. The second circumstance is this, that Moses, the
better to impress upon the minds of his People the ob-

• See Gal. iii. 17.

servance

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 443

servance of the sahhath, acqu' ints them with the eariy
institution of it ; that it was tnjoiiied oy God himi-:elf,
on nis finishing the work of creation. But these Sabba-
tarian,-; do not consider, that it is not the time « hen a
command was given, nor even the author who gave it,
that (iiscover the class to whicli it belongs, hut its nature
as discoveral)!e by human rci'son. And the sabbath is
as much a p.isitive institution when given by God to
AdMiri and b.is posterity, as when given by Moses, the
messenger ot God, to the Israelites and to their posterity.
To judge otherwise, is reducing all God's commands to
one and the same species.

Having thus far cleared the way, I proceed to shew
that the Jewish sabbath is a mere positive institution,

1 . From ttie account the Prophet hzckiel gives of it —
Moreovtr also I gave them my sabbath, to be a sign
httween me and thtni^. t\ sign of v\hat? A sign of a
covenant. And so was circumcision caWtd by God him-
self— And ye shall circumcise the jksh of your foreskin^
and it shall be a token [wr sign] of the covenant
betu een me and you-\-. Now ncithing but a Rite by in-
stitution of a p^osiTivE LAW could serve for disign or token
of a covenant betvveen God and a particuUu- selected
People ; for be ides its u$e for a remembrance of the
covenant, it was to serve them as a parlition-zcall to se-
parate them from other nations : And this a Rite by
positive institution might well (io, though used betore by
some other people, or even borrowed from them. Bui a
natural duty has no capacity of being thus employed :
because a practice observed by all nations would oblite-
rate every tract of a sign or token of a covenant made with
one. Iniieed, where the Covenant is with the whoie race
of mankind, and so, the sign oj the covenant is to serve
only for ^..remembrance, thei'c, the sijj,n may be either a
moral duty or a natural phcnomenoii. This latter was
the case in God's promise or covenant, not to destroy
the earth any more by water. Here the Almighty, with
equal marks of wisdom, made a natural and beautitul
phenomenon, seen over the whole , habitable earth, the
ioken of that covenant. And God said. This is the token
OF the covenant. I do set my bow in the cloud, and
* Chap. XX. ver. 12. t Gen. xvii. 1 1.

444 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

if shall be for a token of a Covenant betzveen me and the
earth, Gen. ix. 12, 13. Yet it is wonderful to consider
how this matter has been mistaken. Perhaps the word
set did not a little contribute to it : the expression being
understood absolutely ; when it should have been taken
in the relative sense, of set for a token. And in this
sense, and only in this sense, the bow was then first ^e^^
in a cloud. However, Dr. Burnet of tiie Charterhouse,
who had a visionary theory to support, which made it
necessary for him to maintain that the phenomenon of
the Rainbow did not exist before the flood, endeavours
to countenance that fancy from the passage above, by
such a kind of reasoning as this, " That, had there been
a Rainbow before the flood, it could not have been pro-
TpQY\y used as a token of God's Covenant^ that he would
no more drown the earth, because, being a common ap-
pearance, it ^^ould give no extraordinary assurance of
security." And to this reasoning Tindal, the author of
Christianity as old as the Creation, alludes. Perhaps
(says he) the not knorving the natural cause of the rain-
bow, occasioned that account xve have in Genesis of its
institution^ page 228, 2 2(). Its institution! The ex-
pression is excellent. God's appointing the rainbow to
be a token or memorial, for pej-petual generations, of
his covenant "with mankind, is called, the institution of
the rainboxv. But ill expression is the homage to non-
sense, for the, privilege of Freethinking. However, his
words shew, he took it for granted that Moses represents
God as then first setting his bow in the clouds. And
it is the reasoning which we are at present concerned with.
Now this, we say, is founded in gross ignorance of the
nature of simple compacts and promises : in which, the
vnly security tor performance is the known good faith of
tiie Promiser. But, in the case before us, the most novel
or most supernatural appearance could add nothing to
their assurance, which arose from the evidence of God's
veracity. As, on the contrary, had the children of Noah
n i'znorant of this attribute of the Deity, such an extra-
'ry pb(momenon could have given no assurance at
•• \ hat then served the rainbow ? For the wise
' 11 expressed by the sacred writer, for the
coYhNANT. That is, for a memorial or

remembrance

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 445

remembrance of it throughout all generations. A method
of universal practice in the contracts of all civilized na-
tions. Indeed, had this remnant of the human race been
made acquainted with God's Covenant or promise by a
third person, and in a common way, there had then
been occasion to accompany it with some extraordinary
or supernatural appearance. But for what ? Not to give
credit to God's veracity ; but to the veracity of the mes-
senger vvlio brought his Will. Now God revealed this
promise immtdiatdy to the children of Noah. But here
lies the mistake : Our Deists have put themselves in the
place of those Patriarchs, when a much lower belonged
to them ; and, the promise being revealed to them only
by a third hand, and in a common way, they refuse to
believe it, because not accompanied with a miracle. In
the mean time they forget the condition of the Patriarchs
when this covenant was made with them ; filled with
terror and astonishment at the past, and with the most
disquieting apprehensions of a future Deluge, they need-
ed some superior assurance to allay their fears. Had not
that been the case, a particular Covenant had not been
made with them ; and had their posterity all along con-
tinued in the same condition, we may certainly conclude,
from the uniformity of God's dealings with mankind,
that he would, from time to time, have renewed this
Covenant, in the way it was first given ; or have secured
the truth of the tradition by a supernatural appearance.
But those fears soon wore out : and Posterity, in a little
time, became no more concerned in this particular pro-
mise, than in all the other instances of divine goodness
to mankind. But Moses, as this great philosopher con-
cludes, had no knowledge of the natural cause of the
rainbow. It may be so : because 1 kno\v of no use that
knowledge would have been to his Mission, But lie was
acquainted w'lih t\\e moral cause, 2iX\(\ t) . effects ioo, of
COVENANTS, which was more to the purpose of his office
and character; and which this freethinking Doctor of
LAWS should not have been so ignorant of.

2. But secondly, if the Jewish Prophets cannot convince
our Sabbatarians, that the Mosiac day of rest was a po-
sitive institution; yet methinlcs tlie express words of
Jesus might, who told the Sabbatarians of that time, the

Pharisees,

44«

THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

Pharisees, That the Sabbath was made f or rnan^ and not
man joy the Sabbath. Mark ii. 27. Now v.ere the
observation of the Sabbath a natural dutNS it is certain,
man was made for tht Sabbath, the end of his creation
being for the observance of the moral I aw, — the
^ worship of the Deity, Temperance and Justice : nor
can we by natural light conceive any other end. On the
contrar}', all positive institurions vere made for man, for
the better direction of his conduct m certaiji situations of
life ; the observance of which is therefore to be regulated
on the end for which they were instituted : for (contrary
to the nature of moral d ities) tlie observance of them may,
in some circumstances, become hurtiul toman, tor whose
benefit they were instituted ; and whenever this is the
case, God and nature grant a dispensation.

3. Thirdly, the primitive Christians, on the authority
of this plain declaration of their blessed l\f aster, treated
the Sabbath as a positive Law, by clianging the day
dedicated to the service of Religion from the seventh to
the first day, and thus abolished positive Law, the
Sabbath institnted in memory of the Creation, and, by
the authority of the Church, erected anotlier, properly
called THE Lord's day, in memory of the Redemption,

P. 309. [SSSS] The author of the Grounds and Rea-
sons of' die Christian Religion says — " They [tlie Pagans]
" learnt the art [divination] in schools, or under disci-
" pline, as the Je\vs did prophesying in the Schools and
" Colleges of the Prophets. [For which JVheatlys
" Schools oj the Prophets is quoted] where the learned
" Dodweli says, the candidates for prophecy were
" taught the rules of divination practised by the Pagans,
" who were skilled therein, -and in possession of the art_
*' long before them." P. 28.

P. 310. [TTTT] Dr. Mead, in his Medica Sacra,
cap. iii- p. 25. observes that what is said oJ the spirit of
the Lord is not to be uiuier stood literally. He did not
reflect that the Vicegerent of the Theocracy is here spoken
of. Otherwise, surely, he could not but acknowledge
that if there was any such thing as the spiutT of the
Lord existing in tnat administration, it must needs
reside in the supreme Magistrate.

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 447

P. 31 1. [UUUU] There a difTiculty in the histon,'
of David, in which spinoza aiiich exults, as it supports
him in his impious uudeitaking on Sacred Scipture.
It is this, in the xvith chapter of the first book of Samuel,
we find David sent tor to Court, to sooth Saul's melan-
choly with his harp. On his arrival, lie gave so much
satisfaction, that the distempered Monarch sent to his
father to desire he might sta/id before hhn, ver, 22. that
is, remain in his service. David hath leave; and be-
comes Saul's Armour-bearer, [ver. 21.] Yet in the very
next chapter, viz. the ,xviith (which relates an incursion
of the Philistines, and the defiance of Goliah), when
David goes to Saul for leave to accept the challenge, neither
the king, nor the captain of his host, know any thing
of their champion or of his lineage. This is the difficulty,
and a great one it is. But it would soon become none,
in the usual way Critics have of removing difficulties,
which is by supposing, that, whatever occasions them is
an interpolation ; and some blind manuscript is always at
hand to support the blinder Criticism. But had more
time been employed in the str.dy of the nature of Scrip-
ture History and somewhat less in collations of manu-
scripts, those would have found a nearer wav to the
wood, who now cannot see wood for trees. In a word,
the true solution seems to be this: David's adventure
with Goliah was prior in time to his solacing Saul with
his music. Which latter story is given by way of anti-
cipation in chap. xvi. but very properly and naturally.
For there the historian having related at large how God
had rejected Saul, and anointed David, goes on, as it
was a matter of highest moment in a religious his-
tory, to inform us of the effects both of one and the
other; though we are not to suppose them the in-
stantaneous effects. The effect of Saul's rejection was,
he tells us, the departure 01 God's spirit from him, and -
his being troubled with an evil spirit [ver. 14.] : this
leads him, naturally, to spe!!ik of the effect of David's
election, namely, his being endowed with many divine
graces ; for Saul's malady was only to be alleviated by
David's skill on the harp. When the historian had, in
this very judicious manner, anticipated the story, he re-
turns from the 14th to the 23d verse of tlie xvith ch.apter,

448 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

to the order of time, in the beginning of the xviith chap-
ter. So that the true chronology of this part of David's
life stands thus : He is anointed by Samuel — he carries
provisions to his brethren, incamped against the Philis-
tines, in the valley of Elah — he fights and overcomes
Goliah — is received into the king's court — contracts a
friendship with Jonathan— incurs Saul's jealousy— re-
tires home to his father — is, after some time, sent for
back to court, to sooth Saul's melancholy with his harp
— proves successful, and is made his armour-bearer —
and, again, excites Saul's jealousy, who endeavours to
smite him with his javelin. This w hole history is to be
found between the first verse of the xvith, and the tenth
of the xviiitt] chapter. Within this, is the anticipation
above-mentioned, beginning at the fourteenth verse of
the xvith chapter, and ending at the twenty-third verse.
Which anticipated history, in order of time, comes in
between the 9th and 10th verses of the xviiith chapter,
where, indeed the breach is apparent. For in the 9th
verse it is said, And Saul eyed David from that day

forxvard. He had just begun, as the text tells us, to
entertain a jealousy of David from the women's saving
in their songs, Saul hath slain his thousands, and David
his ten thousa)uls. — " From that day foruard Saul eyed
David,^' i. e. watched over his conduct. Yet, in the
very next verse, it says And it came to pass on the
MORROW, that the evil spirit from God came upon Saul
— And David played with his hand — And Saul cast the

javelin. This could never be on the tnorrow of that day
on which he first began to entertain a jealousy ; tor the
text says, froju that day forward he began to watch over
his conduct, to find whether his jealousy was v\ell
grounded. Here then is the bieach, between which, in
- order of time, comes in the relation of the evil spirit's
falling upon Saul ; his sending for David from his father's
house, 8^c. For when Saul began first, on account of
the songs of the women, ft) grow jealous of David, and
to watch his behaviour, David, uneasy in his situation,
asked leave to retire ; which we may suppose was easily
granted. He is sent for again to court: Saul again
grows jealous : but the cause, we are now told, was
ditferent : And Saul was ajraid of David, because

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 449

the Lord was ^VITH him, ayid was departed erom
Saul, ver. 12. This plainly shews, that the departing
of God's spirit from Saul was after the conquest of
Goliah : consequently, that all between ver. 14 and 23
of the xvith chapter is an anticipation, and, in order of
time, comes in between ver. 9 and 10 of the xviiith
chapter, where there is a great breach discoverable by
the disjointed parts of distant time. Thus the main
difficulty is mastered. But there is another near as stub-
born, which this solution likewise removes. When
David is recommended by the courtiers for the cure of
Saul's disorder, he is represented as a mighty valiant many
a man of war and pimdent in matters, and that the Lord
was with him^ chap. xvi. 18. i.e. a soldier well versed
in aft'airs, and successful in his undertakings. Accord-
ingly he is sent for ; and preferred to a place which re-
quired valour, strength, and experience ; he is made
Saul's armour-bearer. Yet when afterwards, according
to the common chronology, he comes to fight Goliah,
he proves a raw unexperienced stripling, unused to arms,
and unable to bear them ; and, as such, despised by
the Giant. I will not mispend the readers time, in
reckoning up the strange and forced senses the critics
have put upon these two passages, to make them con-
sistent; but only observe, that this reformation of the
chronology renders all clear and easy. David had van-
quished the Philistine ; was feecome a favourite of the
people ; and, on that account, the object of Saul's jea-
lousy ; to avoid the ill effects of vvhich, he prudently re-
tired. During this recess, Saul was seized with his
disorder. His servants supposed it might be alleviated
by music ; Saul consents to the remedy, and orders an
artist to be sought tor. They were acquainted with
David's skill on the iiarp, and likewise with Saul's in-
disposition towards him. It was a delicate point, which
required address ; and therefore they recommend him ia
this artful manner — The son hf Jesse is cunning in play "
ing, and a mighty valiant man, and a man oj war, and
prudent in matters, and a comely person ; — That is,
" as you must have one constantly in attendance, both
at court, and in your military expeditions, to be always
at hand on occasion, the son of Jesse wili become both
Vol. IV. G G stations

450 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

stations well : he u iil strenathen your cam]), and adorn
your court ; ior he is a tried soldier, and of a graceful
presence. You have nothing to fear from his ambition,
for you saw with what prudence he went into voluntary
banishment, when his popularity had incurred your dis-
pleasure."— Accordingly Saul is prevailed on : David is
sent for, and succeeds with his music. This dissipates
all former umbrage ; and, as one that was to be ever in
attendance, he is made his armour-bearer. This sun-
shine continued, till David's great successes again
awakened Saul s jealousy ; and then the lifted javeliii
was, as usual, to strike off all court-payments. Thus
we see how these difiiculties are cleared up, and what
light is thrown upon the whole history by the supposition
of an anticipation in the latter part of the xvith chapter,
an anticipation the most natural, proper, and necessary
for the purpose of the historian. The only reason I can
conceive of its Iving so long unobserved is, that, in the
xviith chapter, ver. 15. it is said, But David zcerit and
returned from Saul, to J eed his father s sheep at Beth-
lehem. Now this being when the Israelites were en-
camped in Elah against- the Philistines, and after the
relation of his going to court to sooth Saul's troubled
spirit with his music, seems to fix the date of his standing
before Saul in quality of musician in the order of time in
which it is related. But the words, David zcent and
returned from Saul, seem not to be rightly understood :
they do not mean, David left Saul's Court where he
had resided, but that he left Saul's Camp to which he
had been summoned. The case \^ as this : A sudden
invasion of the Philistines had penetrated to Shochoh,
ti'hich belonged to Judah. Now on such occasions, there
alv. ays went out a general summons for all able to bear
arms, to meet at an appointed rendezvous ; where a
choice being made of those most fit for service, the rest
'were sent back again to their several homes. To such
a rendezvous, all the tribes at this time assembled.
Amongst the men of Betli-leliem, came Jesse and his
eiglit sons ; the three eldest were enrolled into the troops,
and the rest sent home again. But of these, David is
only particularly named ; as the history related parti-
cularly to him. NoiAj David xvas the son of that EphrU'

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 451

thite of Bethlehem- Judah, rvhose name zcas Jesse, atid
he had eight sons : and the fnan went amongst men for
an old man in the days of Saul. And the three eldest
sons of Jesse went and foltoiced Saul to the battle — And
David was the youngest, and the three eldest jollowed
Saul. But David xcent, and returned from Saul, to
feed his father's sheep at BetJilehem, i. e. he was dis-
missed by the captains of the host, as too young for ser-
vice. And in these sentiments, we find, they continued,
when he returned with a message from his father to the
camp. — I have only to add. that this way of anticipation
is very frequent with this sacred historian. — In the xviiith
chapter, ver. ii.it is said, And Saul cast the javelin',
for he'Said, I will smite David even to the wall ivith it :
and David avoided out of his presence twice. But
one of these times relates to a second casting of the ja-
velin a considerable time after the first, here spoken of,
which is recorded in chap. xix. 10. So again the his-
torian telling us in the xth chapter, how Saul, when he
was first anointed by Samuel, prophesied amongst the
Prophets, says. And it came to pass, when all that hiexv
him beforetime scnv, that behold, he prophesied amofig
the prophets ; then the people said one to another. What
is this that is come imto the son of Kish ? Is Saul also
among the prophets? — Therefore it became a proverb.
Is Saul also among the prophets? ver. 11, 12. But it
is evident, that the original of the proverb, M as his se-
cond prophesying amongst the prophets at Naioth, re-
corded chap. xix. both for the reasons given above, and
for these : 1 . Saul was not at this time known to the
people ; and, 2. The original of the proverb is said to
arise from this second prophesying, ver. 24. Therefore
the account of the proverb in the xth chapter is given by
way of anticipation.

P. 312. [XXXX] A malignant and very dull buf-
foon, who appears to have had little idea of this mattf c,
and less inclination to be better instructed, lately pub-
lished a large and virulent invective against the personal
character of David ; his pretended provocation was as
extraordinary ; it was a pulpit parallel ; of which he iro-
nically complains, as injurious to a modern character of

G G 2 great

452 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

great name, Mho is complimented with a likeness to the
King of Israel. He was answered as he deserved. —
But, if Divines think they can manage infidel cavils by
the aid of sums and systems, instead of studying to ac-
quaint themselves with tlie nature and genius of the
Jewish dispensation, as it lies in the Bible, unbelievers
will have little to apprehend, how bad soever be the
cause whicli a low vanity has put them upon supporting.

P. 323. [YYYY] There were no sort of men more
averse to the system here defended of Jewish customs
borrowed from Egypt, than those Puritans. Yet when
they could serve a turn by adopting it, they made no
scruple of so doing. Thus, in order to disgrace the
surplice, they venture to say, in the Declaration of the
Ministers oj London, published 1566, That the su7--
plice, or white linen garment, came from the Egyp-
tians into the Jewish church.

P. 327. [ZZZZl For, with regard to every thing's
being exactly prescribed', from which direction it was
not lawful to make the least deviation, Spencer acknow-
ledges this as fully as Witsius himself. " Nihil enim
" cultum divinum spectans verbis obscuris aut incerti
*' sensus a Mose traditum, nil cajco vel praecipiti zelo,
" nihil prurienti Judagorum ingenio, vel naturag humanae

rerum novarum in sacris avidae, relictum fuit. Nempe
*' lex de minimis plerisque curavit. Ipsi arcae annuli,
" &c." De Leg. Kit. Heb. 1. i. c. 10. sect. 5. And it
is remarkable, tliat he employs this very circumstance,
with great weight as welL as ingenuity, to inforce the
opposite conclusion; namely, that God admitted some
rites in use amongst the Gentile nations in compliance
to the people's prejudices — Ipse ritus Mosaicos institu-
jendi modus huic sententiae non parum praesidii prasbet.
Deus enhn npn tantum eorum materiam, sed et locum,
tempus, ipsuni etiam corporis situm quandoque quo
praestari debebant, aliasque minoris notas circumstantias,
accurate praescripsit. Et postquam Deus minimas quas-
que circumstantias rituum singulorum tradidisset, prae-
cepto cautum pst. Deut. iv. 2. ne quid e ceremoniis
npmpe vctitis ijs adderetur ; aut quicqnam e ceremoniis

nen)pe

Notes.] OF MOSES DE:\rONSTRATED. 453

nempe prasceptis adimeretur. Nemo vero qui jvidicio
valet, opinari potest Denm horum vituum minutias ac-
curate adeo prffiscripsisse, ex uUo quo ipse eorum amore
vel desiderio tangehatur. A ratione multo minus abest,
gentium et Hebrasorum litus baud paucos (si materiam
eorum vel substantiam spectemus) proximam inter se
similituuinem et afilnitatem habuisse, ideoque lege cu-
ratum fuisse, nc eoelem modo ]5eragerentur, sed ut cir-
cumstantiis quibusdani pecuiiaribus et a Deo prcescriptis
ab invicem discernerentur, Nam Israelitee ritus suos
omnes e Dei prsescripto peragciites, se in Jehovae [non
dei alicujus ethnici] honorcm sacra sua praestare testa-
rentur; et ratio tern porum exegit, ut cultus Deo praesti-
tus quandam <7ioT»)Ta retineret, nec ad ritus gentium
nimis accedere, vel ab iis plusquam par erat abire vide-
retur. Mosis Eetate res in loco tarn lubrico et ancipiti
sitffi sunt, quod summa tantum sapientia limites eos de-
finire norat, quos ultra citrave non potuit consistere Dei
veri cultus. Lib. iii. cap. 2. sect. 1.

P. 329. [AAAAA] I cannot therefore agree with
Air, "NV'histon in the high value he sets upon a passage
of JVIanetho— Tliis (says he) is a very xaluahk tcst 'nnmy
of Manet hds, that the laws of Osarsiph or Moses zi ere
not in compliance with, but in opposition to, the customs
of the Egyptians. Translat. of Josephus, p. 993. How-
ever, though this fairy treasure vanish, it is some com-
fort that we do not want it.

P. 3,52. [BBBBB] That very able interpreter of
Scripture, father Houbigant, understands these words
of the Prophet as spoken of tl)e Jeunsh Law. " Itaque
'* in praeceptis non bonis intelligendte veniunt ejusmodi
" leges quae ad poenam propositae erant, non ad mer-
*' cedem; quales erant leges de suppliciis, de aquis ab
" uxore suspectae pudicitiae bibendis, de leprobis ab
*' hominum coetu arcendis, et alias quaedam, qu£E ab
" irato Legislatore proficisci videbantur." In loc. This
learned person was too well versed in the style of Scrip-
ture, in the subject of the Propliecy, and in the histoiy
of the Jews, to imagine, w hen God speaks in the cha-
racter of Legislator, of giving Statutes and Judgments

c c 3 that

454 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

that he meant the general permission of divine Provi-
dence to suffer a people to fall into a number of senseless
and idolatrous practices. Indeed, a little to soften the
character given of Statutes not good, he supposes they
^vere thus quaUfied on account of their being j'xvw/ Laws :
and so makes what I understand to be a representation
of the moral genius of the ritual Law in general, only
the physical quality of some particular Pates. But the
very words of the Prophecy evince that a Body of laws
was meant ; and the character of the Speaker shews, that
the subject is of moral, not of physical good and evil.

I*' 353- [CCCCC] Speaking of Marsham and
Spencer, he says : In omnium nunc fere ernditorum
manibus versatur Nobilissimi Viri Johannis Marshami
Canon Chronicus. Opus quantivis pretii; quod uti
Authori suo multa lectione, accurata meditatione, pluri-
misque lucubrationibus stetit, ita Lectori per salebrosos
obscurissimae Antiquitatis recessus viam non pauUo facili-
orem expeditioremque efFecit. Sed ut in humanis rebus
nihil omni ex parte beatum esse solet, ita nec pulcherrimo
huic corpori suos deesse naevos videas — Eandem senten-
tiam magno nuper animo atque apparatu tuitus est Johannes
Spencerus in Dissertiitione de UrimS^ Thummim, Ubi ita
vir doctissimus instituit, 8^c. — Multa a viris doctissimis
congesta sunt, quibus huic suae assertion! fidem faciant;
Ea autem quum plurimum reconditce contineant erudi-
tionis, non videntur Clarissimi Authores sua laude, uti
nec studiosi lectores jucunditate atque utilitate, quae
exinde percipi potest, fraudandi esse. — Super omnibus
denique \-n\y.f\<T\v meam subjungam, eo argumentorum
robore quod suscepti negotii ratio patitur firmandam.
Nequaquam ea mente ut doctissimorum virorum labori-
bus detraham ; sed ut me & Lectores meos in investiganda
veritate exerccam, sit forte detur curva corrigere &
engregio inspersos abstergere corpore naevos, p. i — 4^
This candour was the more extraordinary, as Sir J.
Marsham had given but too many marks of disaffection
to revealed Religion. And though that great and good
man Dr. Spencer was entirely free from all reasonable
-suspicion of this kind ; yet, it must be owned, that too
intent on a favourite argument, he was apt to express

himself

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 455

himself somewhat crudely. He had a bright and vigo-
rous imagination, which, now and then, got the better of
his judgment; and the integrity of his heart made him
careless in giving it the reins; sometimes in a dan-
gerous road. Thus, for instance, in his fine discour.-e
couccm'ing Prodigies, speaking uf a certain quality in
the soul, which, as he says, makes it grtatli) impressite
to the persuasion of parallels, equalities, similitudes, in
the frame and government oj the 'a:orld, he goes on in
this strange manner : " This general temper of the soul
" easily inclines it to believe great and^ mighty changes in
*' states, usher'd with the solemnity of some niighty and
" analogous changes in nature, and that all terrible evils
" are prciac'd or attended with some prodigious and
" amazing alterations in the creation— Hence, perhaps,
" it is that we generall) find great troubles and judg^
" ments on earth described, especially by persons ecsta-
" tical. Prophets and Poets (whose speeches usually
" rather follow the easy sense of the soul than the rigid
*' truth of things) by all the examples of horror and
" confusion in the frame of the creation. The prophet
" David describes God's »oinii out lo iudo-ment thus,"
Oj'c. p. 71, 72. 2d ed. Dr. Spencer seems to have l)een
misled in this philosophic solution by a greater Master,
■who, however, talks still more grossly of m hat he seems to
have understood as little. " In matters of faith and
" religion (says lord Vcrulam) we raise our imagination
" above our reason: which is the cause why Religion
*' sou'iht ever access to the mind by sintilitudes, types,
** parables, visions, dreams." Adv. of l.-n-ning, b. ad.
The serious christian reader cannot but be oti" nded at
this injurious representation of the holy P' ophets. Such
remarks as these are altogether unworthy these two
excellent men. It is false in fact that Proj^hetic
figures were enthusiastic or fantastic visions raised by,
and then represented to, the imaij;! nation. I have
shewn that the images, which the jHr(jphets employed,
composed the common phraseology of their times ;
and were employed by them because this figurative
language was well understood, and srill better relish-
ed by the People. [See p. 1.34, of this vol] - But is
it therefore fitting that such writers should be treated,

o G 4 by

456 THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

by every dirty scribbler, as Libertines, Deists, and secret
propagators of Infidelity, for inadvertencies, which a man
like the candid Witsius would only call 7icEvi in pulcher-
rimo corpore ?

P- 355- [DDDDD] Let me here observe how this
very circumstance in Moses's conduct, acquits him of all
suspicion of that kind of fraud so much in use amongst
the best human Lawgivers of Antiquity. The Mosaic
Dispensation had been treated by our Freethinkers with
great liberties. It was therefore offered by the late
learned and ingenious Dr. IVIiddleton, as a means to
rescue it from their contempt, and to solve the difficulties
w^hich attend it, without hurting the authority whereon it
stands, to suppose some degree of fiction in certain
cases, in the Mosaic writings. And this he endeavoured
to make credible, from the practice of the ancient Law-
givers. Now I tliink this supposition neither true nor
probable, i. If we consider what it was that induced
the ancient Lawgivers to emplov fiction, we shall find it
arose, in part, from their false pretences to a divine
Mission ; and, in part, from the imaginary necessity of
propagating Polytheism. As to the first, Moses's pre-
tensions to a divine mission are here allowed. And it is
notorious that he preached up the one true God, the
Creator, in opposition to all kinds of Polytheism. No
occasion therefore remained for the use of fiction. And
we can hardly think he would employ it \\ ithout occasion.
What we have then to shew is, that the only cause why
the aneient sages employed ^^'c^/o?i (besides the support of
a false mission) was to hide the absurdities of Polytheism.
This indeed hath been already done for other purposes,
in several places of this Work : So that I shall her6 con-
fine myself to one single proof. Macrobius assures us,
that the ancient sages did not admit the fabulous in all
their disputations; but in those only which related to the
SOUL, to the HEAVENLY BODIES, and to the Hero-Gods.
Sciendum est tamen non in omnem disputationem philo-
sophos admittere fahidosa vel hcita, sed his uti solent cum
vel de anima vel de aeriis .itheriisve potestatibus,
vel de ceteris dis loquuntur. [in Somn. Scip. 1. i. c. 2.]
On the contrary, when they discoursed of the first

CAUSE,

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 457

CAUSE, then every thing was delivered exactly agreeable
to the truth. Ceterum cum ad summum et principem
OMNIUM Deum — tractatus se audet attollere — nihil
FABULOSUM pcnitus attingunt. [id. ib.] The reason of
their usmg Jictioji or fable, in treating of their false Gods,
was to hide the absurdities attendant on their Worship ;
a Worship thought to be necessary. Hence, as hath
been shewn elsewhere, [vol, iii. of the Div. Leg. b. iii.
sect. 6.] tliey were led from the absurditif and the neces-
sity together, to conclude that ulility, and not truths was
the end of Religion; and from another mistake there
mentioned, that utility and truth do tiot coincide. From
these two principles necessarily arose a third, that it was
expedient and kncjid to deceive for the Public good.
And, on this last, was founde d the practice oi fiction
above mentioned. Now tlie whole Religion of Moses
being established on that very doctrine, in the handling
of which the ancient Sajfes ncitlier needed nor used
fiction ; and at the same time directly opposing that very
superstition, for the sake of which, the fiction was em-
ployed ; we conclude, with certainty, that Moses employed
NO DEGREE OF FICTION in the Composition or in the
propagation of the Jewish Religion. But 2. That
which he had no occasion to use, we think it im-
possible he should use, if his pretensions were (as is
here allowed) real. We have, indeed, in order to display
the wisdom of God's Dispensation, endeavoured to shew
that he employed, in the contrivance of it, all those arts
(though in an infinitely more perfect degree) which human
Lawgivers are M'ont to use, in the legitimate exercise of
civil Government : for that, without forcing the Will, no
other method was sufficient to accomplish the end de-
signed. But this, we presume, is as different ixom fction
as truth is from falsehood. Thus far, we think, God, in
his dispensations to men, would chuse to do, rather than
to force the Will. But could we suppose a People,
favoured with a divine Revelation, so absurdly circum-
stanced as to be incapable of being worked upon by com-
mon means, without the use of some degree of fctiori we
should ihen conclude God would rat'ipr cl.use miracu-
lously to overrule the Will: because wc conceive divine
Revelation with human Jiction to be a mixture ci t'lmgs

utterly

45S THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

utterly incompatible ; that there can be no alliance be-
tween God ana Belial ; nor any union between the Spirit
of 1 ruth, and the father of Lies.

P. q.^T-TEEEEE] Suppose (says Dr. Stebbing) a
" Deist should allege that the Israelites learned this
" doctrine in Egypt where INIoses himself also mifi^ht have
" learnt it, Hoiezcould you prove the contrary?''' Exa-
mination,^ P- 33, 34- '

Shouid a Deist allege this, as making m\y\hmgagaijist^
mv arcrument, or for his own cause, I should say he knew
as little either of one or the other as Dr. Stebbing hiujself
dees : For my argument being addressed to the Deist,
supposes that Moses iind the Israelites migh.t have learnt
the doctrine in Egypt ; and on that supposition, deties
them to find a reason, exclusive of the extraorainary
Providence, why Moses did not make so useful and ne-
cessary a doctrine (in favour of which his People were
much prejudiced) the Sanction of his Laws. Their ac-
quaintance with the doctrine in Egypt, I supposed : This
acquaintance my argument required me to suppose : and
yet this Answerer of mv Book knew so little of its con-
tents, as to ask, How I would prove the contrary ?
If the learned Doctor had any pertinent drift in this
question, you can discover it only by supposing him to
go upon this ridiculous assumption, that what the Jews
once learned they could never either unlearn or forget,
and therefore if they had learned the doctrine of a future
state in E^ypt, they could not be so ignorant of it as, I
say, thev were. But to clear up his conceptions in this
matter he may have recourse, if he pleases, to the latter
division of the fifth section of the fifth Book, of the Divine
Legation.

P. 357, [FFFFF] This was the character it bore even
so late as the time of Jeremiah, who tells us, that the
rebellious Israelites, frightened at the power of the king
of Babylon, refused to stay any longer in Judea, saying,
No. hut ive zfill go into the land of Egypt, "a-herewe shall
set no tear, nor hear the sound of the trumpet, nor have
hunger of breads and there will rve dwell, chap. xlii. 14.

P.362.

Notes.] OF MOSES DEIVIONSTRATED. 459

P. 362. [GGGGG] This famous book (as is the for-
tune of all which bring new proofs for Revelation in a
new way) hath undergone many heavy censures both from
Jews and Christians. Those blame him for attempting
to assign reasons for the Ceremonial ordinances ; These
for explaining Scripture on the principles of Aristotle.
But both, as usual, expose their own ignorance and pre-
vention. In thi> v.ork, the excellent author studied the
real honour of God, together with the good of those to
,whom his discourse w-as addressed. And because its end
and design appears to be little understood, and depends
on a curious piece of history, neglected by his editors and
translators, I shall give the Reader a short account of it.
In the first flourishing times of the Saracene Empire, (as
we learn from William of Paris in his book De Lcgibus)
a great number of Jews, devoting themselves to the study
of the Aristotelian philosophy, (then cultivated by the
Arabs with a kind of scientific fanaticism) and thereby
contracting not only an inquisitive but a disputatious
habit, set themselves to examine into the reasoxs of
THE Jewish laws; which being unable to discover,
they too hastily co'^icluded them to be useless, absurd, and
of human invention; and so apostatized, in great num-
bers, from the Religion of their Fathers. — " Postquam

autem Chaldaeis sive Babyloniis & genti Arabum com-
" mixti sunt, & miscuerunt se studiis eorum & pliiloso-
" phia3 ; & secuti sunt opiniones philosophorum ; nesci-
" entes legis suae credulitates & A bra hie fidem contra
*' disputationes eorum is: rationes defeadere : hinc e.st
" quod ficti sunt in legeerronei, & in fide ipsius Abrahai
" hffiretici ; maxime postquam rcgnum Saracenorum
" ditfusum est super habitationem eorum. Exinde enim
" ffiternitatcm mundi &: ahos Aristotelis crrores secuti
" sunt multi eorum. Hincque pauci veri Juda;i (hoc
" est, qui non in parte aliqua credulitatis suae Saraceni
" sunt, aut Aristotelicis consontientes erroribus) in terra
" Saracenorum inveniuntur, do his qui inter phiiosophos
** commorantur. Dcdit enim occasionem non levera
*' apostasiae hujusmodi ea qua3 videtur multorum manda-
" torum absurditas vel iuuiihias : dum enim apparet in
" eis absurditas & inutihtus, nulla autem prasceptionis

aut inhibitionis earum ratio, nulla observantiarum uti-

*' litaa,

46o THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

" litas, non est mirum si ab eis receditur : sed tanquam
" onera supervacanea projiciuntur." fol. 18. In these
times, and under this Empire, our Author wrote. So that
nothing could bft more useful than to shew his apostatizing
brethren that the Scriptures mi^ht be defended, nav,
even explained on the principles of Aristotle, and that
the precepts of the cekemoxial Law were founded in
the highest reasonableness and convenience — ]\Iaimoni-
des, where, in his preface, he gives his reasons for writing
this disccurse, plainh' hints at that apostasy — Vertig'mo-
sos vero quod o.tthiet, quorum cerebrmn est pollutuin
vanis futilibusque ac fals'is op'm'wnihm repletuj,-, qidque
sibi imaginantur se tnagnos esse philosophos, ac theo-
logQS, illos scio Jugituros a multis, contra multa etiam ob-
ject wnes jnoturos. — Dtus vero benrdktm novit, quanto-
pere timu&rim conscribere eo, qucE e.rplicare comignare
volui iv hoc Ubro. Nam quia talia sunt dt qui! 'is 7,uUus
ex gtnte nostra in hac en: tivit^te quicquom cripsit hacte-
nu-s, qiui ratione piimusego prodii^t in iwc pii ^^stra audeo,-^
verum suf^'/'tu^ sunt duobus principiis ; primo, quod de
istius nwdi negotio dictum sir, tempus est faciendi Dorwio :

IRRITAM EECERUXT LEGEM TUAM, (^T SCCUruh, €0 quod

sapientes nostyi dicunt, Omnia opera tua Jiant ad gloriam
Dei.

P. 364. [HHHHH] The learned author of the ele-
gant and useful Letter from Rome has here taken to
himself what was meant in general of the numerous
writers on the same subject ; and so has done it the
honour of a confutation, in a postscript to the last edition
of tliat Letter. But the same friendly considerations
which induced him to end the postscript with declaring
his unwillingness to enter further into controversy with
me, disposed me not to enter into it at all. This, and
neither any neglect of him, nor any force I apprehended
in Ids arguments, kept nie silent. However, I owe so
much both to myself and the public, as to take notice of
a misrepresentation of mv argun]ent ; and a change of the
t^uestion in dis])ute between us : without which notice the
controversy Cas I asjree to leave it Avhere it is) can scarce
be fairly estimated. — " A pai"agi-aph in Mr. Warburton s
'■ Divine Legation of Moses obhges me (says Dr. Mid-

cUeton) to detain the reader a little longer, in order to

" obviate

Notes.] OF MOSES DEIMONSTRATED. 461

" obviate the prejudices which the authority of so cele-
" brated a writer may probably inject, to the disadvan-
" tage of my argument. — I am at a loss to conceive
" what could move my learned friend to pass so severe
" a censure upon an argument which has hitherto been
" espoused by all protestants; admitted by many papists;
" and evaded rather than contradicted by any. But
" whatever was his motive, which, I persuade myself,
" was no unfriendly one, he will certainly pardon me,
" if, pursuing the full conviction of my mind, I attempt
" to defend an established principle, confirmed by strong
" and numerous facts, against an opinion wholly new and
" strange to me; and which, if it can be supposed to
" have any force, overthrows the whole credit and use
" of my present work. — He allows that the writers, who
" have undertaken to deduce the rites of popery from

paganism, have shexvn an exact and surprising likeness
** between them in a great variety of instances. This
" (says he) one would think, is allowing every thing
**' that the cause demands : it is every thing, 1 dare say,
" that those writers desire*." That it is every thing
those writers desire, I can easily believe, since I see,
my learned friend himself hath considered these two
assertions, 1 . The religion of the p7rsent Romans derived
from that of their Heathen ancestors; and, 2, An exact
conformity, or uniformity rather of worship between
popery and paganism : He hath considered them, I say,
as convertible propositions : for, undertaking, as his title-
page informs us, to prove the religion of the present Ro-
?»ans derived from that of their Heathen ancestors ; and
having gone through his arguments, he concludes thern
in these words, " But it is high time for me to conclude,
" being persuaded, if I do not flatter myself too much,

that I have sufiiciently made good what i first
" UNDERTOOK TO PROVE, an cxact conformity, or uni-
" formity rather, of worship between popery and pa-
" ganism f ." But what he undertook to prove, we see,
was, The religion of the present Romans derived from
their Heathen ancestors: That I have therefore, as my
learned friend observes, allowed every thing those writers
desire, is very likely. But then whether I have allowed
* Postscript, p. 228, t Letter, p. 124.

every

462 ^ THE DIVINE LEGATION [Book IV.

every thing that the cause demands, is another question :
v. hich I think can never be determined in the alhrniative,
till it be shewn that no other probable cause can be
assigned of this exact coujormltrj between Papists and
Pagans, but a borros\ing or derivation from one to the
other. And I guess, that now this is never likely to be
done, since I myself have actually assigned another pro-
bable cauie, namely, the same spirit of superstition ope-
rating in the like circun^stances.

But this justl celebrated «riter goes on — "This ques-
" tion accoi oinjT to his [the author of The Divine Lega-
" tion^ notion is not to be decided by facts, but by a

principle of a diiferent kind, a superior knoxvledge of
" human nature'^ T Here I am forced to complain of a
ivant of candour, a want not natural to my learned friend.
Por, whence is it,' I would ask, that he collects, that, ac-
cording to my notion, this question is not to be decided
by facts, but a superior knozeledge of human nature ?
From any tiling I have said ? Or from any thing I have
omitted to say ? Surely, not from any thing I have said
(though he seems to insinuate so much by putting the
words a superior knoxvledge of human nature in Italic
characters as they are called) because I leave him in pos-
session of h\s facts y and give them all the validity he de-
sires ; which he himself observes ; and, from thence, as
we see, endeavours to draw some advantage to his hypo-
tliesis : — Nor from any thing I have omitted to say ; for,
in this short paragraph where I deliver my opinion, and,
by reason of its evidence, offer but one single argument
in its support, that argument arises from a fact, viz.
that the superstitious customs in question were many ages
later than the conversion of the imperial city to the
Christian faith : whence I conclude, that the ruling
Churchmen could have no motive in borrowing from
Pagan customs, either as those customs were then fa-
j^hionable in themselves, or respectable for the number or
quality of their followers. And what makes this the
more extraordinary is, that my learned friend himself
inmiediately afterwards quotes these words ; and tlien
tells the reader, that my argument consists of an histo-
KiCAL FACT, a}td of a consequence deduced from it. It
* Postscript, p. 228.

appears

Notes.] OF MOSES DEMONSTRATED. 463

appears therefore, that, according to my notion, the
question is to be decided by facts, and not by a superior
knowledge of human tmture. Yet I must coiifess I then
thought, and do so still, that a superior k/toicka'ge of'
hwnuH nature would do no harm, as it might enable men
to judoe better oi facts than wc find they arc generally
accustomed to do. But will this excuse a candid repre-
sentor for saying, that the question, according to wy no-
tion, xcas not to be decided by facts, but a superior
knowledge of human nature? Jriowever, to do my
learned friend all justice, I must needs say, that, as if
these were only words of course, that is, words of con-
troversy, he goes on, through the body of his postscript,
to invalidate my argument from fact ; and we hear no
more of a superior knowledge of human nature than in
this place w here it w as brought in to be laughed at.

As to the argument, it must even shift for itself. It
has doiio more mischief already than 1 was aware of:
ana forced my learned friend to extend his ciiarge from
the modern Xo the ancient church of Rome. For my ar-
gument, from the low birth of the superstitions in question,
coming against his hypothesis, alter he had once and
again declared the purpose of his letter to be the ex-
posing of the Heathenish idolatry and superstition of the
VRESEMT church of Rome ; he was obliged, in support
of tiiat hypothesis, to shew that even the early ages of
the church were not free from the infection. Which
hath now quite shifted the subject with the scene, and
will make the argument of his piece from henceforth to
run th.us, The religion of the present Romans derived
from their early Chri.stian ancestors ; and theirs, from
the neighbouring Pagans. To speak freely, my reason-
ing (which was an argument ad hominem, and, as such,
I thought, would have been reverenced) reduced the
learned writer to this dilemma; either to allow the fact,
and give up his hypothesis ; or to deny the fact, and
change his question. And he has chosen the latter as
the lesser evil. As to the fact ; that the Churches of the
first ages might do that on their own heads, which Moses
did upon authority, i. e. indulge their Pajran converts
with such ot their customs as could not be easily abused

464 THE DIVINE LEGATION. [Book IV.

to superstition, may be safely acknowledged. IVIy learn-
ed friend has produced a few instances of such indulgence,
which the censure of some of the more scrupulous of
those times hath brought to our knowledge. But the
great farraginous body of Popish rites and ceremonies,,
the subject of my learned friend's Letter from Rome, had
surely a different original. They were brought into the
Church when Paganism was in part abhorred and in part
, forgotten ; and when the same spirit of sordid supersti-
tion vvhich had overspread the Gentile world, had now
deeply infected the Christian.

END OF THE FOURTH VOLUME.

Loudon : Printed by Luke Hansard & Soii»,
near Lincoln's- Inn Fields.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "The works of the Right Reverend William Warburton, D.D., lord bishop of Gloucester : to which is prefixed a discourse by way of general preface, containing some account of the life, writings, and character of the author"

See other formats