.■'■MM >f'i;M '.'':'■■ ,^jjiys^ ^^^ WW JUrolo.qiV.,/ ^ Sh,!i "if. PRINCETON, N. J. k/AcI H ^ It It Division Bbc/rlS Sec/ ion * VU'D 30 //ci-. f^^/y '■ v.5:z AN EXPOSITION OF THE PARABLES AND OF OTHER PARTS OF THE GOSPELS, BY EDWARD GRESWELL, B. D. FELLOW OF C. C. C. OXFORD. IN FIVE VOLUMES. VOL. V. PART n. OXFORD: PRINTED BY S. COLLINGWOOD, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY, FOR J. G. & F. RIVINGTON, ST. Paul's churchyard, and waterlog place, london. SOLD BY J. H. PARKER, OXFORD. MDCCCXXXV. CONTENTS OF THiE FIFTH VOLUME, PART II. APPENDIX. CHAPTER I. On the Omissions in the List or Syllabus of Parables .... P. 1 CHAPTER II. Historical Examples of the Use of Fables 8 CHAPTER III. On the Relation of Master and Slave, as characteristic of the Social State of Antiquity 27 CHAPTER IV. Consideration of some further Testimonies to the Doctrine of the Millennium 67 CHAPTER V. On the Apocryphal Second Book of Esdras, and its proba- ble Date 80 CHAPTER VI. On the probable Date of the Apocryphal Book of the Ascensio Isaise Vatis 96 CHAPTER VII. On the probable Date of the Book of Enoch 1 03 iv CONTEXTS. CHAPTER \'III. Oil the Sibylline Oracles C;iIAPTEU IX. On the personal Character of the Sower in the parable of the Seed 238 CHAPTER X. On the Existence and Locality of Hades 201 An Hymn 40; Inijkx qk Al'tiioks 433 Index ok Tkxts from the Old Testament 441 Index of Texts from the New Testament 4."il Index ok Matters 4fil APPENDIX, APPENDIX, CHAPTER I. ON THE OMISSIONS IN THE LIST OR SYLLABUS OF PARABLES. SEE INTRODUCTION, CHAPTER I. p. 4. X HE list or syllabus of parables, which I pro- posed for future discussion, in the first chapter of the General Introduction, was complete as far as re- garded the allegorical parables ; that is, the most comprehensive division of the parables in general. But with respect to the moral ; though every moral parable might be a specimen of the argument a pari ^ or from analogy, it would manifestly have been im- proper to consider every such argument which was to be found in our Saviour's discourses, recorded in the Gospels, entitled to the name of a moral parable. Instances of such arguments abound in his dis- courses ; and a complete consideration of all the ap- plications of this principle of reasoning, to didactic and practical purposes, wheresoever they occur in the Gospels, would be the consideration of almost every thing which our Saviour is recorded to have said, in the way of general or special instruction. There are only two such passages, to which, under certain qualifications of its meaning, the name of moral parables, or examples, might properly have been ap- VOL. v. PART II. l-y B 2 y4pj)ruf{i.r, C/itipfrr First. ])Vwd: Luke vii. 11 — t.'j": and Matt. xxi. 28— 32''. 'i'licre is a certain dt'^ive of narrative in eaeh of these passages ; their suhjeet-niatter may very l)os- sibly be a real history ; and they have a pirictical use and ai)j)lit'ati()n. as appears from the inference drawn from them, at the time: and in these respects, they agree witli the moral parables in general. But they are not drawn out to any length, like the ])ro])er moral parables; they are short, and undi versified by circumstances; and what is peculiar to them, in tlivir use as examj)les or cases in i)()int, they have a sj)e- cial and particular, not a general and indiscriminate. reference and application. Tlie word parable, is so peculiar to the Gospels, that it occurs only twice in any other part of the l!^e\v Testament ; and each time in the Epistle to tlie Hebrews^", The fundamental sense of resemblance, juxta-position, comparison, is at the bottom of its use in both those instances. In the Old Testament, parable, (7ra^a/3cX>j,) or i>ro- verl), {iToipcifjiia,) is the usual version of the Septua- gint, for the Hebrew 7U.*'2 • the former in twinty- three instances, the latter in three; the former consequently, in much the greater nund)er of in- stances, "i'he senses of tlie Hebrew word are many and various ; which thcif is no necessity for me to enumerate further than as they may serve to illus- trate corresponding uses or meanings of the term pa- rable, in the (ft)spels. The sense of a simple ])roverb, is «>ne of the iiu aii- ings of the word in the Hebrew ; and the \vitvi\ ]ia- " Hariiionv, iii. I<». '' Iliid. iv. (i;. f Ih. ix. 1». xi. I'J. Omissions in the List of Pur aides, 3 rable is so used by St. Luke, iv. 23''. An example, or simple illustration of one thing by a comparison with something else that resembles it, is another of its meanings ; and in the same sense is the word pa- rable used by each of the Evangelists ; Matt. xxiv. 32: Mark xiii. 8 : Luke xxi. 29^. A moral axiom of any kind, a practical rule of life and conduct, a gnome, especially one not open to immediate com- prehension, or all at once to be understood ; that is, a dark sentence ; is another of its meanings : and so is the word parable applied, Matt. xv. 15 : Mark vii. 17^. Any discourse, of a didactic or practical kind, whether more or less diversified in its particulars, may be another of its significations ; and in that sense St. Luke has applied the word parable, xiv. 7°, to the discourse which our Saviour delivered in the house of the Pharisee, prescribing the rule of good manners as well as of good morals, in the choice of seats at table. With regard to any other instances of the use of the word parable, or irapafSoXyj, in the Gospels ; I think I shall best illustrate it, by premising an explanation of the use and meaning of the word -napajSoAyi, as em- ployed by the writers on rhetoric, anciently, and especially by Aristotle — to describe a peculiar kind of reasoning. Those who have attended critically to the minutiae of style, and peculiarities of idiom in the four Gospels — and especially in St. Luke's — must have remarked the occurrence of certain words in his use of terms, which are not to be met with in the prose Greek authors — but only in the poets ; 'I Harm. ii. 17. e ibid. iv. 78, ^ Ibid. iv. 1. g Ibid. iv. 39. B 2 4 Appejidir, Chapter First. and from tliis circiuiistaiice it has been inferred, ap- parently not witliout reason, that St. Luke was pro- bably acquainted witli the classical CJreek poets. The same kind of peculiarity, in his aj)j)licati()n of the word parable to a certain class and description of aro^unients from analogy, will authorize, I think, an e(jually just inference that be must have known soniethinir itf the technical use of terms b\- the Greek rhetoricians. A\'itli reference to this technical use of the word irapa/3&A^, we find Quinctilian observinc:'' : Tertium genus ex iis, qu;e extrinsecus adducuntur in causam, (xra'ci vocant ■7tap6?j(iyu.a'. quo nomine et generaliter usi sunt in onini similium appositione, et specialiter in iis, quai rerum gestarum auctoritate nituntur. nostri fere fiimilitud'DiC))! vocare maluerunt, quod ab illis 7rapa(3o>.r] dicitur ; hoc alterum exemi)lum : quan- quam et hoc simile est, et illud exemjdum. By Aristotle, the i)arable or comparison in (juestion, is classed with the fictitious TT'xpa^.etyu.a, or examj)le ; tliat is, the A/y.f, or fable'; both of which he sup- poses to differ fntni the ])roper example, only as a feigned or li\ potlictii-al mattir of fact, ditl't-rs from a real. And while both agree in being opj)osed in this resj)ect to the real example, they diHer from each other merely in the circumstance that the fable is always a kind of narrati\e. tale, or story, which re(piires to be told, betori' it can be ajiplied; but the parable or comj)arison is not. 'J'o illustrate his meaning, Aristotle retVrs his readers to ra ^LxnnariKd; tliat is, to such well known instances of reasoning as the iikmK- so «»ttiii i-mployed '• Iiistiliit. Ort. \. \i. 1. ' Hlu't. ii. xx. .'i. Omissio7is in the List of Parables. 5 by Socrates, to shew the folly or absurdity of a cer- tain thing, by pointing out the same folly or absurdity in something else that resembled it. Thus to jn'ove the folly of choosing magistrates, that is, persons appointed to command, and preside over others in the state, by lot — it would be just as reasonable, So- crates argued, to choose the combatants in the games by lot ; to appoint the pilot of a ship by lot. The Memorabilia of Xenophon abound in such ex- amples of his mode of arguing upon practical sub- jects'*. One similar instance occurs also at the be- ginning of the Rhetorica of Aristotle, where he is arguing against the impropriety of prejudicing the understanding of a judge by an appeal to his pas- sions ^ It would be just as wise, says he, to make crooked a rule. The common principle of all such reasonings as these, is this. Something is supposed, which is not a real matter of fact ; that is, which never actually holds good in practice ; but which something, if it were real, and did hold good in practice, would be exactly the counterpart of a certain matter of fact and notoriety ; of something which actually does ob- tain in practice. The TrapapoXrj therefore necessarily cites and supposes a parallel ca.se of some kind or other — and consequently is always an example. But it supposes a parallel case, which is never real ; and consequently it is an example, which is always a fictitious one : yet such a fictitious case, that if it were real, it would be just the same kind of thing as something which is real. Of this parallel case, thus hypothetically assumed as real, some manifest ab- k Cf. IMemombiliii, i. ii. 9. 12 ; ii. vi. 3«. ' i. i. 5. 13 3 6 Ajjjjeudi.v, Chapter first. surdity holds good : whence it is inferred, and Justly so, on the j)rinciple of analogy, that the same ah- surdity does, or ought to hold good, t)f the real case, j)arallel to it. The ])aral)le of rhetoric, then, was always a species of the argument a pari, or from analogy, in general ; and that species of this argu- ment in j)articular, \\liich had for its ohject the cleiichus, or rcductiu ad ahsurdtim ; whicli was di- rected to the exposure of some ju'actical folly and absurdity in one thing, by pointing out tlie same kind of folly and absurdity in other tilings, wliich resembled it. It is well known that Socrates was a great master of this peculiar weapon of dialectic ; but it has not, perhaps, been sufhciently attended to by commentators on the Gospels, that our Saviour also has dignified and ennobled its use, by resorting to it on various occasions. To these instances of its use by him, we find St. Luke twice premising the words, f/Ve Ve vapa^oXrjv auTCiit or (Xcy^ te Kai TTapa(3o\yjv npo{ avTov^ "' : and it we analyse the reasonings whicli follow, we shall find them to be of the kind described by Aristotle, under the name of the parable of rhetoric — the re- ditctio ad (dt.surduni, by \irtue of a j)arallel case; the refutation or exj)osure of an error, which actu- ally holds good in ])ractice, by the comparison of something, wliich resembles it, and would be just as absurd, if real ; the clcncliiis or convietion of an adversary, on principles which he cannot deny him- self ; and the liki'. Take the first, I^uke v. .'J(). 'J'o force the ()l)>erv- ancc of fastings, or of simih'U' austerities, on those who wi're not }et j)rej)are(l lor thi-in. or the circum- "1 Liiko V. ;{(i. Harm. ii. 2H. \i. ;Jl». Harm. iii. ;"». Omissiotis {)i the List of Parables. 7 stances of whose situation, were not yet befitting for tliem, would be just as absurd as to put a piece of new cloth on an old garment ; which either will not sustain the new, or will not match with it. And so, of the instances which follow to the end of the chapter. Take again the examples specified, Luke vi. 39, &c. For one, who himself is still in need of reform- ation or instruction, to attempt to reform, or to in- struct another, M^ould be just as absurd as for a blind man to pretend to guide a blind man ; a scho- lar to endeavour to teach his master. Even in the instance specified, Luke iv. 23, where the word irapa^oXyi is used in the sense of the word 7rapoi[/.ia, or proverb, still the nature of the reasoning is the same. For Jesus not to perform such mira- cles, in behalf of his own countrymen, at Nazareth, as he had performed for strangers, in Capernaum, would be as absurd, as if a physician were to cure others, but to neglect himself. They are strictly such parables as those of Ari- stotle, which St. Mark recounts iii. 23. in the answer of Jesus to the charge of casting out devils, by the ruler or prince of the devils ; premising to them the words, ev TrapafSoXali eAeyev avroig ". Every case supposed in this account of his answer, is one which, if real, would be parallel to the alleged fact of our Lord's casting out devils by Beelzebub: and if it were real, would involve an obvious absurdity. And hence, perhaps, we may infer that St. Mark also was not ignorant of the technical sense of the word 7rapal3oXy], no more than St. Luke. " Harm, iii. 13. B 4 APPENDIX, CHAPTER U. HISTORICAL EXAMPLES OF THE USE OF FABLES. VIDE GENERAL INTRODUCTION, CHAP. V. j. 79,^:0. A HE original name of the fable or apologue, in Greek, was alvog, which, however, is the same in meaning as the more common one of Aoy&f, or /xD^oc. Its name in Latin is of cowy^g Jhhula ; wlicncc our English wortl for it is derived; though Quinctilian tells us some of iiis countryiiieu had attempted to render it, non sane recepto in usum nomine, by Apologatio •'. Under the name of alvo^-, we meet with a genuine specimen of the fable in the following passage of Hesiod, the most ancient classical author, whose writings have come down to us ; as he is believed to have Nourished in the latter part of the tenth century before Christ, and was, therefore, contempo- rary with Asa king of Judali, or Jehoshaphat his son. Ni/f 6' alvov jiacriKiva fptui, (fipovowfTL kuI aiToiy. uiJ' lf)t]( TifiocTtdTTd' ayjhoi'a TroiKiAo'Ofipoj'. " lii.stitut. Drat. V. xi. 10. Historical Use of Fables. 9 v\\n. fxa\' iv vec^iecrcri (j)€puv, ovvxeacn fxefxapTtuis' Tj h eXebv, yvaixiTTOLcrt imrapixivrj a}x^ 6vv\^aai, fJLvpeTO, TTjv 8' oy iTTiKpariias Ttpbs [mvOov hnre' Aaip-ovLT], TL \e\rjKas ; lx,^i vv ere ttoKXop apeL(t>v. Trj b €Ls, T] a-''- av iyca Trep ayo), kol aoibbv iovcrav heiTivov 8' oIk kOiktii, ttoltJcto fxat, 7/e fx^di]v o8e, ws ap' aXcaTTT]^ (cderoy Fragm. xxxviii. Poetae Min. Gr. 30/. 10 appendix. Chapter Second. Epe'd) Tiv vyXv aXvov, w }\r]pvKih], a\i'x~r\^ KipC)aKr\ avvriVTiTO, irvKVuv (\uvaa vuov. Fra<;m. xxxix. I hid. .'iOS. The most celebrated fabulist of anti(|uity was iiiidoiibtedly .Esop : whose ai^e, liowever, if lie was coiiteiiiporan' with ("nrsiis. kiiii( of Lydia, about the middle of the sixth century before Christ, was later than that of Archilochus. 'I'he collection of fables which have descended to posterity under his name, it has long since been shewn by IJentley, and by others of the learned, are most of them much later than his time ; and the work either of the monk Plaiuules, as it is thought, or of fabulists before hi.s time, but much more recent than .Esoj) ; especially of Babrias. It is very possible, however, that in this collection many have been incorporated, traditionally ascribed to Jvsoj) ; though others there are, also as- cribed to -FiSoj), which d(j not appear in it. Maximus TntIus, at the be«rinniiiir of the second centurv after Christ, thus describes the collection of fables attributed to ,Ksoj), in his time; a description which aj)plies in general to those also, that still go by his name. Ai^xnx tx *i*pvyi TrcjroirjVTai ZidXcr/oi tc Orjptxv Kai ^vvavTiat' tiaklyijai Z\ avT-2 Kai to. tlv^pa^ Kat cl lyOvf^y aXAo aAXaJ, kou avBpuvoi^ avufxt^' KajafXifxiKTOu ^e fv tok koy(it>; TfjVTOii vet/,' ^pa-^jgy aiv t/ Ti'H aA'jjfiiv ". Wc fmd Ari.^totle also referring to the ^vfi&< Al(ram(ioi, in his Rlutorica '', as to comi)ositions or • Dissert, iii. 1, ' Lil». ii. xx. 'J. Historical Use of Fables. 11 collections well known in his time ^. Along with these he mentions the ixvBoi, AifSvKrA, as collections or productions of the same kind. They are joined with the fables of iEsop by Quinctilian also ^. Dio Chry- sostom has an oration, entitled fxlQcg Ai(3vKog ^ ; from which it appears that such a title might stand for any sort of fairy tale, or legend. But Suidas has preserved an extract from the Myrmidones of M- schylus, in which the fjivBoi Ki^variKol are quoted by name ; and shewn to have properly consisted of fables. 6 8' (leg. ojs 8') ecrrt [xvdiov tu>v Xi^vcrTLKSiV Ao'yos, ■nXriyivT arpaKTco rofiKw tov alerbv eiire'LV, ibovra ^x,rwavi]v TrrepcaixaTos, raS' oiix VTT aWcov, aWa rots avTwv TtripoL'i aXtcTKOixeaOa. Once on a time, as tales of Libya tell, Struck by the arrow, when the eagle saw The feathery artifice that Avings the shaft. Sped from the bowstring with unerring flight, ' In fact, a variety of ancient authorities either quote them, or recognize tlieir existence, Aristophanes, Plato, &c. Socrates, we are told in the Phaedo, put some of them, if not all, into verse, during his confinement in prison, between his condenuiation and his death. Besides the Alaoyneioi and the AijSvariKol fivSoi, men- tion is sometimes made in the writers of antiquity, of the 2v^a- piTiKol, ^pvyioi, KiXtKtot, KapiKo], Alyvnrioi, and Kinrpioi pii6oi ; and besides Hesiod, Homer, or Archilochus, the earliest authors of such compositions, the names of Connis, Cilix, Thurus of Syba- ris, Cibyssus of Libya, occur also, as more ancient than jEsop. A kind of distinction is drawn too between these several species of the same genus of compositions ; the pvdoi 2v^aptTtKo\, are so called as made up of the agency of rational animals only ; the AuStot, ^pvyioi, and Ai/3vkoI, of that of irrational only ; the pvdoi Ato-coTretoi, of that of both promiscuously. d V. xi. 20. e i. 188. Orat. v. 12 Appendix, C/tapter Seco7ul. "TIk'M miiif own arms," liu cried, "my tall have wroiiglit — "Whose wings pursucil mi-, and whoso wings have cauglil.""' Seneca, in his Consolatio ad Polybiiim, speaks of fables and apoloijiies as a kind of writiiiij:, nj)oii which his conntrynien, the Romans, iiad hitherto not exerted their genius. Non audeo te us(|ue eo producere, ut fabellas quoque et .Esopeos logos, in- tentatuni Ronianis ingeniis opus, solita tihi venustate coniR'ftas ^ Yet tiie very thing, which he tjius thought it scarcely worth while to reconnnend to Polybius, had l)een successfully executed by one Roman writer before the time of Seneca, or contem- porary with him ; viz. Pha'drus ; if at least, Pha- drus was a freed man of Til)erius Ca-sar. Some of the learned, however, assign to iiim a mueii later date; whose opinions, no doul)t, Mill be considered to derive supi)ort from this passage of Seneca. Yet that Seneca did not exactly remember the real state of the case, at tiie time, so far as regarded the culti- vation of the fable for moral and didaetie ])urposes, before his time ; or that he tiionght j)roper to dis- guise his knowledge of it, for the sake of conq)li- menting Polybius the more agreeably, ai)pears from the fact that two or three fables occur in Horace, as fine and as instructive as any tliat antiquity has transmitti'd to us. Excellentissimum est doeendi genus exemplorum traditio, ol)servcs M. 'i\'rentius Varro. in one (»f his fragments; and examples, as Aristotle tells us »^, nniy be fictitious, as well as real, and serve all the purposes of the example just the same. Ilia- quo- ' Ciiji. 'J7. ' '■ Hliet. ii. XX. •-'. Historical Use of Fables. 13 que fabellae, says Quinctilian ^\ quae, etiamsi origi- nem non ab iEsopo acceperunt (nam videtur earum primus auctor Hesiodus) nomine tamen .^sopi ma- xime celebrantur, ducere animos solent, praecipue rusticorum, et imperitorum : qui et simplicius, quae facta sunt, audiunt, et capti voluptate facile iis, qui- bus delectantur, consentiunt. An ingenious, philosophical imagination, observes Aristotle, which can readily discern resemblances between things otherwise the most distinct, may multiply fables to any extent, all possessing some moral use and application '. B-ut there are many instances to be met with in liistory, in which we find the fable or apologue, simple as it may appear, and calculated for times of very little intellectual refinement, applied with great effect upon serious practical questions ; resorted to by the orators and statesmen of antiquity, at very cultivated ])eriods of Greek or Roman history ; and recognized so far not as a mere exercise of the imagination, nor as an amusement of the school, the a^^oAy;, ^iha^KaXehv, or auditorium, but as one of the most convincing and popular modes of influencing the deliberations of a public body. Some specimens of the use of fables, for real practical purposes, among those which may be gleaned from the historians or other writers of antiquity, I will take the liberty of subjoining. The oldest example of a fable, properly so called, known to the critics of former times, was that of Hesiod, before alluded to; and to him, consequently, it was very natural they should attribute the germ h V. xi. 11). ' Rhet. ii. xx. 7- 14 Appendix, Chapter Second. of the invention, afterwards brought to j)erfection by TRsop. Every reader of his Bible, however, is aware of the existence of two apologues, much more ancient than the time of Hesiod ; viz. the fable of Jotham, the son of Gideon, addressed by him, B. C. 1250, to the men of Shechem '^ ; and Nathan's parable, or fable, addressed to David', B.C. 1().'32, or 1033. These two apologues are, strictly speak- ing, the most ancient we are acquainted with ; and as every reader of taste, who has a proi)er relish for simple and natural eloquence, will at once allow — they are not only the most ancient, but among the most beautiful that we know of. There is another exquisite specimen of the same kind, in the answer of Joash king of Israel, to Ama- ziah king of Judah "', about B. C. 822 : and con- sequently, though later than the time of Hesiod, yet much older than that of Archilochus. There is a parable or fable, also, in the 2nd of Esdras ", which is prettily conceived and expressed : thougli this work, as I shall have occasion to shew hereafter, is later even than the Christian era. And these, I think, are all the apologues or parables, to be met with in scripture, in any part of it, canonical or apocryphal, excei)t the New Testament. Herodotus records a fable", which he attributes to Cyrus, king of Persia, about B. C. 51-8, in his answer to the Ionian Greeks ; who had come to tender him. of tluir own accord, afti'r the reduction k Jmlj^r^.s, ix. 7 — 'Ji 1 o Sam. \ii. 1 — 7- '" - Kiiij^rs, xiv. 0. " Cliap. iv. \'.\ — I 7- of tlii' \'ulf Dr. Laurt'iu'c's ViTsion oi tlir Ktliiojiic. " Lil). i. 111. Historical Use of Fables. 15 of the Lydian empire, that submission which he was willing to have accepted, but which they had refused to make, before. Aristotle records a fable of ^Esop, which he sup- poses him to have delivered to the people of Samus, in behalf of one of their demagogues ; who had grown fat upon the spoils of the people, and was at last brought to account before them i\ We are told that this fable was a favourite one of Tiberius; who was in the habit of quoting it, or one very like it, to justify his well-known policy in keeping his governors of provinces so long in office •!. In the same chapter, Aristotle quotes also a fable of the poet Stesichorus •", which he delivered at Hi- mera in Sicily, when the people, having appointed Phalaris aTparriylv avroKparopa already, were deliber- ating next whether they should allow him a body- guard. Conon in his A/ij7^<7e/^ quotes the same fable ^ ; substituting only the name of Gelo, for that of Phalaris. Every one must remember the fable of Menenius Agrippa*, by which he restored harmony and a good understanding, between the Commons of Rome and the Patricians, U. C. 260, B. C. 494, when every other expedient had failed. A fable, something like this, is attributed by Dio Chrysostom to ^Esop, and quoted": in which the eyes are described as envying the mouth the many P Rhet. ii. XX. 6. q Jos. Ant. Jud. xviii. vi. 5. Cf. SS. Deperditi, ii. 553. Excerpta e Dione, 80. r m\Qt. ii. xx. 5. s Phot. Bibl. Cod. 186. p. 139. 9—22. ad sin. Cf. Hoi. Epp. i. x. 34, &c. t Livy, ii. 32 : Pint. Coriolan. vi : Qiiin- ctilian. v. xi. 19 : SS. Deperd. ii. 145. Excerpta e Dione, xiii. ^ Opera, ii. 7- Orat. xxxiii. 16 Appendix, Chapter Second. good things of which it partook, especially honey. Another, and one very like it in its moral and im- port, (which also was taken from iEsop,) is cited by Xenophon ^ ; where Socrates is recommending his friend Aristarchus to answer his family (who con- sisted of females) in the words of the dog to the sheep ; they having complained of him (though in jest) that he was the only idle mouth among them, as having provided them with work, and so with the means of subsistence, but doing nothing him- self. Diodorus Siculus^ relates how Eumenes, B. C. 316 or 315, applied to certain proposals of Anti- gonus, which would have reduced himself and his army to a powerless state, the fable of the lion, who obtained permission to court the daughter of a cer- tain person, on condition of parting with his fangs and claws. Plutarch records a fable of Phocion's ', by which he excused himself to the people of Athens, for not contributing on a certain occasion to a sum of money, intended to be raised merely that they might enjoy a feast, while his own creditor remained unpaid. The fable of the sheep's being invited by the wolves to make peace with them, on condition of giving up their dogs, was invented, as it would seem, or at least, was applied by Demosthenes, in answer to the demand of Alexander, that the people should make their peace with him by surrendering their ^vjixaycoyot or pyjrrjpi^ ^. Plutarch relates a fable, (borrowed, as he says " Menioiab. ii. vii. 12 — 14. V Lib. xix. 25. ^ Phocion. 9. '•^ Pint. Deniosth. 2:^ C f . Julian. Inipcrat. Orat. vii. 227. B. Historical Use of Fables. 17 elsewhere, from ^sop.) by which a philosopher of antiquity consoled Arsinoe, one of the queens of Egypt, for the loss of her son, more effectually than any thing else had done ^. Justin has an account of a fable, which he ascribes to one of the natives of the country, in which Mas- silia or Marseilles was founded, and which he sup- poses to have been addressed by him to the king of the country, by way of dissuading him from grant- ing a site to the city, or permission to build upon one. If he allowed it to be built, as the moral of the fable implied, it would be the destruction of the neighbouring country; opprimendamque in ipsoortu, ne mox validior ipsum obrueret''. If this fable is authentic, it must be of very high antiquity ; as Marseilles was founded about the end of the sixth century before Christ ; and its foundation is placed by Justin in the reign of Tarquinius Priscus. The fable of the middle-aged man, with his two wives, an old and a young one, the former of whom plucked all the black hairs out of his head, and the latter all the grey, was applied by the celebrated Lusitanian partisan, Viriathus, to the temporizing policy of the people of Tucca, who would not join either himself, or the Romans, outright ; and as a warning of the consequences this policy would be of to themselves '^ Appian relates a fable of Sylla, the dictator's*', which he addressed to the people of Rome, U. C. 673. about the ploughman, who burnt his jacket at last, after trying twice or thrice in vain to clear it t> Operum vi. 425, 426 Consolatio ad Apollonium. <^ Hi- stor, xHii. 4. d ss, Deperditi, ii. 97- Excerpta Diodori 111. lib. xxxiii. « De Bellis Civilibus, 101. VOL. V. PART II. C 18 Aj)])emlix, Chapter Second. of fleas : the moral of which fable was of very tre- iiieiidous import to his audience. These instances may suffice, for examples of apo- logues or fables, actually employed as grav^e and serious arguments on corresponding practical emer- gencies. '\Ve might produce many more, of their employment in the way of moral or didactic im- provement : but I shall mention only, as well-known specimens of that kind of application, these of Ho- race — the city mouse and the country mouse ^ ; the frog and her young ones ; the field mouse and the weasel ^ ; to which we may doubtless add, as taken from some fable or other, his, Incipc, qui recte vivendi prorogat horani Rusticus exspectat dum defluat aninis: at illc Labitur, et labetur in omne volubilis anum. And also, Parturiunt monies, nascetur ridiculiis mus h. Maximus Tyrius premises a fable of ^Esop's to the dissertation, in which he shews that if pleasure is a good, it is yet not a permanent one; and as the groundwork of the ensuing discussion '. He has another fable, where he is discussing the charge of piuderasty, as brought against Socrates ; to shew that Socrates, even as tpa^rrj^- txv Traidxv, was so only as the shepherd is of the sheep ; others, in the same capacity as butchers are of the sheep **. yEsop's fable of the fox and the crow, occurs in the Florida of Ai)uleius ; and Dio Chrysostom quotes another of his, al)out the advice of the owl to the f Sermon, ii. vi. 7!)— 1 1 ;. k Il.id. ii. iii. 314—320. Epp. i. vii. 29—33. Cf. Ihid. i. i. T-^—7r>. '" Kpp. i. ii. 4J. De Arte- Poctica, 131). ' Diss. iii. 1. k Diss. xxv. 2. Historical Use of Fables. 19 birds to pluck up the oak, when first planted ^ ; as well as a fable of some countryman of Jilsop's ™. We have two fables in Achilles Tatius, De Clito- phontis et Leucippes Amoribus ", which are so con- trived as to be the counterparts of each other ; and are both of them very ingenious, and very beauti- fully told. Philo Judaeus quotes a TraXaioi \oyo$, which, how- ever, is not so much an apologue, as a mythus, tra- ditionally handed down from wise men of former days, but whether Jews or Gentiles, he does not say ; the moral of which is to account for the orig-in of music and song ». He has another, in explanation of the diversities of tongues or voices (at present in existence) among animals — which originally had but one speech P. There is a [jlvOo^ very elegantly related in the Opera Inedita of Fronto, one of the preceptors of Marcus Aurelius ; the substance of which is an ac- count of the origin, endowments, and prerogatives of Somnus or sleep ^ : and there is a fragment of another fable, entitled, De disceptatione vitis et ar- boris ilicis, in the same work ; which Fronto pro- fesses to have borrowed from his own tutor and pre- ceptor, Dionj'sius Tenuior^. There is also a very long mythus, or allegorical tale, in. Julian's seventh oration ^ ; the import of which is to flatter his personal vanity, by setting 1 Apuleii Opera ii. 151, 152. Dio. Clirys. Opera, i. 373. Orat. xii. m Ibid, i, 684—686. xxxii. n Lib. ii. 21, 22. o Operum i. 348. 12—34. De Plantatione Noe. P Ibid. 405. 34—406. 19. De Confusione Linguanim. q Pars Prior. 188. sqq, De Feriis Alsiensibus 3. r Pars Altera, 241. De Oratio- nibus i. Fragm. 6. s Opera, 227. C— 234. C. c 2 20 Apjjendix, Chapter Second. him forth in the mystical character of the hero of the narrative, as the chosen favourite of Jupiter and the sun ; as born of gods, and himself sometime to be a god. On this subject, however, enough has been said. We may conclude our remarks by some observations on the nature and use of the parable, or fable, when employed as an example. Servius, ad iEneidem, i. 235. draws a distinction between a fable, an history, and an argument, (or plot,) as follows : Et sciendum, inter fabulam, et ar- gumentum, et historiam, hoc interesse : quod fabula est dicta res contra naturam, sive facta, sive non facta, ut de Pasiphae : historia est quicquid secun- dum naturam dicitur, sive factum, sive non factum, ut de Phaedra : argumentum, ut sic detiniam, est res ficta, quae tamen fieri potest, ut sunt argumenta co- moediarum. The first of these definitions seems to describe a mere monstrous or unnatural occurrence, which though improbable, is yet not impossible; the second, one which is natural and jirobable, and therefore possible, though not necessarily a fact ; the third, something, which must be natural and probable, and therefore possible, but yet not a matter of fact : something which might have happened, and would be natural enough, if it had happened ; but yet never has happened. It differs therefore, from the second, in the circumstance that while both are what is natural and probable, alike, that may have been matter of fact also; but this never can. On the same principle which induced Servius to make this distinction between an argument and an history, we may presume he would have drawn a Historical Use of Fables. 21 distinction between an example and a fable, suppos- ing them both to have consisted of possible and proba- ble circumstances alike ; viz. that the example must still be matter of fact, the fable must not. In the judgment of Aristotle, however, as far as regards the use of either of them for practical purposes, this dis- tinction wovdd be quite immaterial ; for he classes them together as species of exactly the same kind of reasoning ; and had he been called upon to define them reciprocally in terms of each other, he would have pronounced the example a real Xoyog, on the same principle, that he called the koyog a fictitious example. It was considered by him essential to the Xoyog, that it should be fictitious, in the sense of invented ; but not that it should consist of possible or proba- ble, and therefore of such as might be real, circvim- stances. Otherwise, he would not have referred, as instances of what he meant by Xoyoi, to such collec- tions as the Xoyoi Ala-aTretoi, and Ai^vko), abovemen- tioned ; for these consisted of stories invariably made up of circumstances frequently impossible; still more frequently not probable; and always unreal, that is, not matter of fact, but purely invented and imagi- nary. He refers too to such collections, not as to storehouses, which would supply at any time a va- riety of this kind of arguments, whenever they should be wanted ; but simply as exhibiting models or patterns of what the orator, when he had occasion for such examples, was to frame for himself. For he supposes one practical use of the Xoyog to be, that it tries the inventive powers of the speaker ; and its chief recommendation with the hearers, to be its no- velty: neither of which things could be the case with c 3 9Si Appendix, Chapter Second. Xoyoi, borrowed at second hand, and merely applied, because they were apposite to the occasion. The most essential characteristic of the Aoyof, which we will call, in its classical sense, by the name oi fahle^ is to substitute a feigned, for a real mat- ter of fact ; Avhich, nevertheless, irro tanto, and for the purpose of the argument at the time, must be received, and allowed to stand as real. It is .the only other species of the example, Trapa^eiyfxa, which Aristotle makes, as the proper counterpart of the actual historical example; simply too, on the prin- ciple that all fiction is, or professes to be, the imita- tion and likeness of truth. Now, even a real matter of fact, not previously known, in order to be rendered available for the purpose of argument from it, would require to be re- lated in detail ; much more then a fictitious story, which is to be both invented and applied at the time. Hence in every fable, there must be some degree of preliminary narrative, more or less ; as its very name implies, whether aivog, fxi/Bog, ?^oyoi, ox fahula; all meaning a tale^ or story. As it accommodates the circumstances of a sup- posed event, to those of some reality ; there must be a variety of particulars in the one, answering to corresponding particulars in the other ; between which, however, the analogy will not fully appear, until all the circumstances of the fictitious history have been drawn out and laid before the hearer, preparatory to their juxtaposition with those of the real. This is the true reason, why narratives so in- tended for comparison with something else, should be called parables, or comparisons, as well as Xoyoi^ Historical Use of Fables. 23 or fables. A direct induction or application, may- then be founded upon the circumstances of the ficti- tious case, to something which concerns the real case — justified indeed, and borne out by the circum- stances of the case related, and by their resemblance to those of the case actually existing, but directed to an end and purpose quite independent of them. A fable, then, or fictitious example, without a moral, in its application to something beyond itself, was as much an absurdity, as a fable or example, previously not known, without some preliminary narrative and statement, was an impossibility. And every such moral of the fable, or fictitious example, as used in rhetoric, must be of a practical nature and tendency. Rhetoric could never require them except for a special purpose ; and there could be no such purpose either in public or in private deliberations, but what was practical, and concerned in some way or other, the regulation and direction of the future, by the expe- rience of the past. All examples, whether real matters of fact or ficti- tious, are arguments a pari; and are founded in an apparently self-evident axiom, that what has hap- pened, under such and such circumstances, before, may, and probably will, under the same circum- stances, happen again. Aristotle has entered at large into the metaphysical process of this kind of argument, which he calls the areA^? cTra^wy^, as well as into that of induction, or eTrayajy^ properly so called, in his Analytica Priora ; and though it may appear presumptuous in me to venture to call in question the accuracy or justness of the views of one c 4 24 Appendix, Chapter Second. so acute and profound as Aristotle ; I think he has mistaken the nature of both. Tlie account which he gives of the process of rea- soning in the example, or imperfect induction, if I understand him right, is this ; not that it supposes the direct transition of the mind, on the mere princi- ple of the analogy perceptible between two cognate things, from the fact of something past, to the ex- pectation of something like it, still future ; but that, by means of one or two, or as many more facts of a like kind, as liistory or experience can furnish — a general law is first collected (as in induction) relating to all such facts collectively ; and then by the help of that general so established, (as in the process of syllogism,) the particular fact is inferred, relating to the contingency still future, on which the delibera- tion turns. With respect to this explanation of the principle of reasoning in the use of the example, as well as to that which is also proposed in the same part of his works, of the i)rinciple of induction ; I cannot help thinking that he was misled by too great a desire to make out every kind and process of reasoning to be founded on the syllogistic at the bottom : whereas both the inductive process of reasoning, and that of the examj)le, as it seems to me, are carried forward by the help of principles, perfectly independent of the syllogistic, yet quite as natural, and quite as sim- ple, as they. Certain it is, that no one ever employs either the inductive process, or the example, in prac- tice, in any such way, as would be the case, if Aristotle's explanation of its principle were correct ; nor in fact, could do so, without committing such Historical Use of Fables. 25 technical faults, as upon the principles of just syllo- gistic reasoning, would infallibly vitiate the conclu- sion. I do not deny that the example is a species of in- duction; but I contend that it is, as Aristotle him- self defines it, an induction, which proceeds, ag [xepog Tcpog (j-epog, oog ofxoiov Trpog ofxoiov^, from one particular fact or truth to another particular fact or truth, which resembles it ; without any roundabout inter- mediate process; but by virtue of this simple, uni- versal axiom, which the mind spontaneously recog- nises to be true ; that what has once before hap- pened, may happen, and probably will happen, under the same or similar circumstances, again. To the full force and application of this axiom, nothing is necessary except to shew that a certain case or con- tingency, still future, is exactly the counterpart of something which is, or may be considered, a matter of fact, and past experience : after which the mind will draw the conclusion for itself. For this reason, Aristotle himself admits in the Rhetorica ^, that there is no way of contravening the argument from examples, but by the production of contrary exam- ples ; that is, of instances to shew that the same thing did not always happen under the same or similar circumstances ; or by denying that the case alleged is actually in point to the case under dis- cussion ; that is, by contending that the example is no example — and the fact alleged has nothing to do with the matter under discussion. With regard to the parables of the New Testa- ment; (that is, the moral parables;) there is no doubt that Aristotle would have pronounced such composi- t Rhet. i. ii. 19. " Lib. ii. xxv. 13. 26 Appeyidix', Chapter Second. tions, tiapa^elyixaTa, or examples, in general ; which, if he had considered them to be the invention of the speaker, he would have called Xoy^^i or fables, in par- ticular ; if he had tliought them to be real matters of fact, known to the speaker, though not to his hearers, before they were circumstantially related, he would have called properly examples : and whe- ther examples or fables, in these different senses respectively, as opposed to each other, he would still have pronounced them, (-ur^yyoi Trii-xeig alike — as hav- ing a moral and an application over and above themselves ; as directed to a practical use and pur- pose ; as contrived or applied by the speaker him- self, to enforce and illustrate something which might be expected of the future, by the light and comi)ari- son of that, which was thus seen to have resembled it, in the past. APPENDIX. CHAPTER HI. ON THE RELATION OF MASTER AND SLAVE, AS CHARACTERISTIC OF THE SOCIAL STATE OF ANTIQUITY. SEE GENERAL INTRODUCTION, CHAP. VII. P. 96—98. It is much to be regretted, that the same attention to accuracy, which appears so remarkably in other respects, did not induce the translators of the Bible into English, to render the word 12)? in the Hebrew, and dovXog in Greek, wherever they occurred, by the most correct and literal, if not the only version of it, which our language supplied, viz. the word slave. The almost invariable substitution of some other word for this, has had the effect of keeping the majority of Christians among us, totally in the dark as to the true nature and constitution of the domestic relations of antiquity; and has probably tended more than any thing else, to create and to foster a prejudice, pregnant with danger to the peace and good order of society ; that the existence of slavery is repugnant to the law of nature, and to the law of the Gospel ; that man cannot have a right of property in man ; that every one has a na- tural indefeasible right to his personal freedom, of which no accident of his birth, no mere contingency 28 Appendix i Chapter Third. of external fortune, can deprive him ; and that the relation of master and slave, under all circumstances, and at all times, and in all countries, is equally offensive to decency, justice, reason, and religion. Had any unlearned, but simple-minded Chris- tian, been accustomed to meet in his Bible with the word slave, as regularly as he now meets with the word servant ; or rather, if he had never met with any word there, as scarcely any else is to be met with in the original, but that which answers to it ; it is impossible that he could have come to such conclusions as these ; or, if he had reasoned about the subject at all, that he should not have inferred that a relation, which was seen to be as old almost as the existence of mankind ; a relation which was recognised, sanctioned, and approved of, in a thou- sand ways, directly or indirectly, by the word of God, both in the Old Testament and in the New, could be founded in nothing repugnant to the essen- tial, immutable rules of right and wrong ; could not be merely tolerable or expedient, but must be innocent, harmless, and indifferent ; in particular could not be offensive to the will of God, and ini- mical to the genius of revealed religion, not even of the Christian religion ; l)ut must be quite in accord- ance with the general principle of the temporal dis- pensations of the Divine providence, and with the purposes, intentions, and adaptations of his revela- tions themselves, to the actual relations of social existence among his moral and responsible crea- tures. It would l)e easy to shew both from the testimony Ancient Relation of blaster and Slave. 29 of the Bible, and from that of profane history, that for two thousand years before the birth of Christ, (which goes much further back than the beginning of historical time in the records of any nation,) and for six hundred years after it — and more especially at the precise period of the Gospel era ; there was no such domestic relation in the civilized world, as the modern one of master and servant. From the highest to the lowest, among all the orders and gra- dations of society, the only established relation was that of despot and slave. Such was the relation which Christianity found in existence at the time when it began to be propagated ; such was the rela- tion which our Saviour recognised, illustrated, and sanctioned, both in a variety of other instances, and by making it a fundamental condition, and a charac- teristic circumstance of the supposition and train of events, in the majority of his parables ; such was the relation which his religion adopted into its own communion, as perfectly capable of subsisting coor- dinately with itself; and such was the relation, for which the apostles of Jesus Christ, M'hen they went forth into a world, presenting no other comprehen- sive distinction of its inmates than that of free- men and slaves, were content to legislate ; while prescribing duties and obligations reciprocally in- cumbent on both the parties in it, never once ex- pressing a wish or desire to disturb the relation it- self, much less to set it aside, and to supersede it by any new one, diametrically repugnant to it. It is not my intention, however, to discuss at pre- sent the lawfulness of slavery in general, or its com- patibility with a sound and legitimate view of the 30 Appendix^ Chapter Third. true genius of the Christian religion in particular. The prejudice which has gone forth into the world upon this suhject, pregnant as it may be with danger to the well-being of society, and like many other of the fashionable, but erroneous, dogmas of the day, unfounded as it is in reason or Scripture, is too deeply rooted to be eradicated ; and as it has wrought much mischief, and led to many lament- able consequences already, so it must continue to work its effects in the same way, as long as the Su- preme Disposer of sublunary events, (who can turn passion and prejudice, error and evil, to the further- ance of his puri)oses, as well as reason and sober- ness, truth and good,) shall think proper to permit. The object of my present remarks is merely to illustrate a question of fact, with which we are pro- perly concerned in the explanation of the Gospel parables ; viz, the true nature and constitution of that relation of private life in ancient times, which we should understand to be meant by the domestic one of the head of a family and its inferior members. This relation we are accustomed to speak of at pre- sent as that of master and servant ; but it was really in former times, that of des])ot and slave. And I think I shall best effect the object which I have in view, not by any general abstract reason- ings on tiie sul)ject of slavery, but by the simple collection of a nunil)er of well-authenticated facts, which will shew the real state of the relation in question, in the times immediately before, and after the birtii of Ciirist ; by giving the reader an idea of the nundxTS of the slave i)o])ulation, among the Greeks or Romans ; the multitudes of such domestic servants possessed by particular owners ; the uses Jtncient Relation of Master and Slave. 3 1 made of their services ; and the general principles of their estimation and treatment, whether good or bad ; for to the illustration of these points, more especially, do I propose to confine myself. First, then, as to the numbers of the slave popu- lation ; and the amount of slaves, possessed by par- ticular owners. In many parts of Greece, the slaves gave name to the principal portion of the inhabitants of the country ; as the Helots in Laconia ; the Penestae in Thessaly; the Claroti in Crete '^; or, as Aristotle calls them, the Perioeci ^. Eustathius adds, the Therapontes in Chius ; the Corynophori in Sicyon ; the Gymnesii at Argos; the Dmoeetse in Crete; and the Pelasgi among the Italiot Greeks *^. The Arcadians, according to Theopompus, pos- sessed a population of serfs, analogous to the Helots, called Prospelatae, amounting to three hundred thou- sand ^. According to Timaeus, the city of Corinth once possessed four hundred and sixty thousand slaves : according to Aristotle, the Ji!,ginetse, four hundred and seventy thousand : according to Ctesi- cles, the Athenians, in the time of Demetrius Pha- lereus, Ol. 115, about B. C. 318, four hundred thou- sand ; when the free population consisted of twenty one thousand, and the Metoecs, of ten thousand only ^. Smindyrides the Sybarite was attended to the court of Clisthenes, tyrant of Sicyon, about B. C. 520, by a train of one thousand slaves ^. Nicias, a single a Athenseus vi. 84. ^ Politica ii. vii. 3. ^ Ad Dionysium Perieg. 535. d Atlien. vi. 101. e Ibid. vi. 103. f Herod, vi. 127. Athen. vi. 105. 32 Appendix, Chapter Third. citizen of Athens, possessed, before the expedition into Sicily, B.C. 415. one thousand slaves, trained to work on the silver mines: Hipponicus, a contem- porary of his, Coo : and Philemonides, another, 300 ^. The occupation of Deceleia, by the Lacedaemo- nians, in the Peloponnesian war, B. C. 415, was soon followed by the desertion and loss to the Athe- nians, of twenty thousand slaves, and upwards '•. The people of Chius are said to have had more slaves, B.C. 412, in proportion to the numbers of the free population, than any of their contempora- ries except the Lacedivmonians '. Lysias, the orator, had one hundred and twenty slaves, when his property was confiscated by the thirty, B. C. 402 ^. Demosthenes' father left him at his death, fifty valuable slaves at least'. Meno the Thessalian could furnish a body of three hundred cavalry, from his own Penestiu "*. Mnaso of Phocis, a contemporary and friend of Aristotle's, had one thousand slaves of liis own " : and Agatharchides mentioned, in his Euroj)iaca, that the citizens of Dardanum had most of them as many as that num- ber each ; and some more". Philostratus represents the king of India as telling Apollonius of Tyana, who visited India in the reign of Claudius or Nero, in answer to a question of his, whether he had many slaves ; that he had twenty thousand, and all born in his liouse i'. & Xcnopli. Dc W'cti^alibus, iv. 14. 'i Tliucvtl. vii. 2/. ' Ibid. viii. A(). ^ Oratio, xii. 20. Contra EratosthcncMii. ^ Oratio, xxvii. 11. .sqej. Contra Aphobuni, 1. ™ Deui. Or. xxiii. 238. Contra Aristocratcni. " Athen.Tiis, vi. 8(5. lOli. o Ibid. vi. \m. V Vita Apoll. ill. I). 13H. Ji. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 33 We read of some cities and nations as founded originally by slaves ; for instance, Ephesus^ ; the nation of the Bruttii, in Italy, Ol. 106 '' : and as it is said, the Locri also. Stephanus Byzantinus mentions a city of Africa, called Aot^Awv TioXig, of which none but slaves could be freemen : and Strabo, speaks of a variety of Upo^jovXoi, or slaves dedicated to the service of particular gods or goddesses, both males and females ; many thousands in number, and in various parts both of Greece and Asia ^ In the time of Polybius, (about B. C. 146.) the Roman government had forty thousand slaves, who wrought in the silver mines, near New Carthage in Spain *. Diodorus Siculus records, that very soon after the breaking out of the Bellum Servile in Sicily, B. C. 1'55. the numbers of the revolted slaves amounted to two hundred thousand. Four hundred of these, at least, belonged to one master, Damo- philus of Enna ^. At the time of the next outbreak, B. C. 103—100, Titus Minucius, a Roman knight, had four hundred slaves fit to bear arms ; and Pu- blius Clonius, another, had eighty : and the army of the slaves soon amounted to forty thousand, and upwards ^. About the same time with this second insurrection of the slaves in Sicily, various risings took place among the slave population elsewhere ; in which, on the whole, a million of souls and up- wards, are said to have perished >". q Athen. vi. 92. i" Diodor. Sic. xvi. 15. s For ex- ample, lib. xii. 11. 3. 6, p. 17 — 25. * Polyb. lib. xxxiv. 9. Strabo, iii. 2. 394. ^ Diod. Sic. Frag, lib, xxxiv. vol. X. 100—123. Cf. Liv. Epitome, lib. Ivi. x Diodor. Sic. Fragm. lib. xxxvi. p. 143 — 166. y Athenaeus, vi. 104. VOL. V. PART n. D 34 Appendix, Chapter Third. Sylla, B. C. 81. draughted ten thousand persons, from the slaves belonging to the different masters, who had perished in the civil wars, or in the Proscrip- tions, and made them Roman citizens ^^ Augustus recaptured thirty thousand slaves, U. C. 718. who had deserted from their masters, and were serving in the fleet of Sextus Pompeius ^. On one occasion he manned his own fleet with manumitted slaves, to the number of twenty tliousand *'. Demetrius, a favourite freedman of Pompey the Great ^^^ is said to have had the numbers, or muster- roll, of his slaves called over daily, as a general that of his army*'. Clodius had a thousand slaves, at least, all ablebodied men, living upon the estate, near which he was killed by Milo, U. C. 702 *'. It appears also from the preface of Asconius to the Oratio pro Milone, that Milo himself had three hun- dred servants in his train at the time of this ren- contre ; though principally unc'iUa', who waited on his wife. Marcus Crassus had more than five hun- dred slaves, who practised the trade of bricklayers, masons, and carpenters, merely ^ liefore the suppression of the Avjc-ra/, or pirates, in the Mediterranean, by Pompey the Great, as many as ten or twenty thousand slaves, used to be disposed of by them in one day, at Delus ; which was their mart for the sale of slaves ^. The Roman government levied a tax on the sale or transfer of slaves; which under Augustus amounted to the z Appiiui. Do IJfllis Civililms, i. 100. « Djo, xlix. 12. Marmor Ancyr. apud Tac. toni. ii. pars 2d». 846. ^ Suet. Aug. I<5. 1. «■ (i. Pint. C'ato, Min. \\\: Pomp. 40. ^ Si'iieca Di- Traiuiuillitati' Aiiiiiii, }{, 4. i" Cicero, Pro Milone, 20. f Pint. Crass. 2. ^ Straho. xiv. 4, 2. (J7(). Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 35 quinquagesima, or two per cent. ; under Nero, to the vicesimaquinta or four per cent. '» Lipsius ob- serves of this tax, that it was probably the most productive of any in the empire. Julius Caesar is said to have more than once made every soldier in his army a present of a slave '\ Augustus allowed even the exiles, who had been interdicted from fire and water, the pos- session of twenty slaves or freedmen apiece, if not raorek. Cato Minor himself was attended in the civil wars by a train of twelve slaves; whereas his great ancestor, Cato the Censor, had never gone abroad with more than three, or at the utmost five ^ We read of five thousand ■na'ihg or linkboys, with their heads shaved in derision of the emperor Tibe- rius who was bald, being employed by one of the pr^tors, Lucius Sejanus, to light the people home from the Floralia, U. C. 785 "^ When Pedanius Secundus, Urbis Prsefectus, U. C. 814. was assassi- nated by one of his slaves, he had not less than four hundred in his family at the time ». Pudentilla, a rich African widow, married to Apuleius, some time in the reign of Antoninus Pius, gave her two sons, among other things, four hundred slaves and more ». Caecilius Claudius Isidorus, a Roman knight of mid- dling circumstances, left behind him, at his death, A. D. VI. Kal. Februar. U. C. 746. four thousand one hundred and sixteen slaves; though his pro- l^Dio, xlvii. 16; xlviii. 31; Iv. 31. Tac. Ann. xiii. 31. i Suet. Jul. 26, 10. k Dio, Ivi. 27- l Valerius Maximus, iv. iii. ii. 12. Apuleius, De Magia Oratio, 21, 22. m Dio, Iviii. 19. n Tac. Ann. xiv. 42, 43. " Opera, ii. 97. De Magia Oratio. D 2 3() Appendix, Chapter Third. perty had suffered much in the civil warsi'. Horace observes of the Sardus (Sardinian) Tigellius^i, Habebat s.-i'pe diiceiitos, S;rpe decern servos : And of himself •", Vesteni, servosque sequentes Ut mag-no in j)oj)iilo, si (juis vidisset, avita Ex re pra^beri siinitus niilii crederet istos : So that a long train of slaves was a characteristic of the rich, in those days, when they apjieared abroad. Juvenal, in like manner. Maxima qua?quc doniiis servis est plena superbis"^. And again, IVotinus ad ccnsum : de moribus ultima fict Qua-stio: (juot pascit servos, tjuot possidet agri Jugerat, &c. There is a striking and perhaps not an exaggerated description of the pompous magnificence and luxury of the wealthy citizens of Rome, with resj)ect to the number and variety of the slaves, M'ho formed their retinue in public, in the time of Ammianus Marcel- linus, the middle or latter end of the fourth cen- tury". The projKjrtion of the slave population to the free, in the country, at least, must have been in the ratio of three to one ; or, we may presume, Julius Csesar would not have thought it necessary to pass a law, that none (pii j)ecuariam facerent (kept grazing farms) should have fewer than one third puberum ingenuorum, among their pastores^. A motion was P Plin. II. N. xxxiii. 4/. q Sermon, i. iii. 11. r n,;,]. i. vi. 7H- s Sat. V. ()C. » Sat. iii. 142. Cf. vii. 141 . 14± " Lib. xiv. G. J). 2r>, i2G. " Suet. Jul. 42. 1. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 37 once proposed in the Roman senate, to distinguish the slave population from the free, by their dress. It was abandoned, says Seneca, upon reflecting what risk would be run, if the slaves should begin to count their masters y. Alexander Severus afterwards en- tertained a similar design ; from which, however, he was dissuaded by his great legal advisers, Ulpian and Paulus^. Larensius, the host of the party who are supposed to constitute the guests at the Convivium of Athe- naeus, (the time of which was about the reign of M. Aurelius,) observes there, that very many of the Romans had ten thousand, twenty thousand, and even more domestic servants ; that is, slaves, whose sole business it was to attend their masters abroad*^. The allusions to the numbers of slaves, in the pos- session of private owners, which occur in general terms in Tacitus, Seneca, Pliny the Elder; — all writers contemjiorary with the first publication of the Gospel— are such as to give us the most extra- ordinary conception of their multitude and variety. Postquam vero nationes in farailiis habemus, quibus diversi ritus, externa sacra, aut nulla sunt, conlu- viem istam non nisi metu coercueris ^ — Quid enim primum prohibere .... adgrediar ? villarumne infi- nita spatia? familiarum numerum et nationes <^? — O miserum, si quem delectat sui patrimonii liber magnus, et vasta spatia terrarum colenda per vinctos, et immensi greges pecorum per provincias ac regna pascendi, et familia bellicosis nationibus major '^. — y De Clementia, 24, 1. z Lampiidius, Alex. Severus, 27- a Atheiieeus, vi. 104. b Tac. Ann. xiv. 44. c Ibid. iii. 53. d SenecEj De Beneficiis, vii. x. 4. Cf. ad Helviam Matrem, 11,4: De Tranquillitate Aninii, 2, 5 : De Vita Beata, 17, 3 : Epp. ex. lb'. D 3 38 Appeiidix, Chapter Third. Hoc profecere mancipiorum legiones, et in domo turba externa, ac servorum quoque causa nomencla- tor adhibendus *'. It may not be amiss to conclude this account of the prodigious numbers of slaves in the families of antiquity about this time, by specifying some in- stances of the prices given for them, whether ordi- narily or extraordinarily. Xenophon tells us that Nicias gave a talent (about one hundred and ninety-three pounds) for the liri- (jTaTYji, or head slave, (the foreman,) who had the management of his jDitmen in the silver mines : and he observes further, that the price of an o/Wtv;^, or domestic slave, might vary commonly from half a mina, to two, or five, or ten minae, (somewhat more than thirty pounds ^) Demosthenes reckoned the slaves left him by his father, (who were sword- cutlers by trade,) to be worth from three to five or six minae apiece ; and the rest of them (who were kKi- voTToio), bed -makers or cabinet-makers) about two mina? apiece^. Plutarch mentions tliat Cato the Censor would never ifive more than one thousand five hundred drachma? (about forty-eight pounds) for such a slave as he wanted ; which was for his farming business •' : yet even in his time slaves were sometimes sold for as much as four talents (nearly eight hundred pounds) apiece '. Aulus Gellius reports a saying of Varro's, from his Satyra, irep] e'^ea-fxaTm : Si, quantum opera^ sumpsisti, ut tuus pistor boiuun facerct panem, e Plin. H. N. xxxiii. (I. *" I\Ioiii(iral)ili;i, ii. v. 2. f^ Orat. xxvii. 11, 1-. in Ajiliobuiii i. ^ Vita Catoii. Maj. 4. ' Atlu'ii. vi. 1(»!>. Dioilor. Sic. Frag. lil». xxxvi. Oporr. x. 175. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 89 ejus duodecimam philosophiae dedisses; ipse bonus jam pridera esses factus. nunc, ilium qui norunt, volunt einere millibus centum, (about eight hundred pounds,) te, qui novit, nemo centussis'^. Julius Caesar sometimes gave so much for slaves, that he was ashamed to allow it to appear in his accounts ^ Seneca tells us a story of a contemporary of his, one Calvisius Sabinus, a rich man, but very ignorant ; who thought it quite sufficient to pass himself off as learned, if he could produce learned slaves. So he got one, who knew Homer by heart ; another, who knew Hesiod ; nine more, for the nine Lyric poets. These cost him centena millia (eight hundred and seven pounds) apiece ™. The value set upon slaves, no doubt, rose in proportion to the number, variety, and intrinsic excellence, of their accomplishments. Pliny says the largest sum ever given in his me- mory for a slave, was that of seven hundred great sesterces, (about five thousand six hundred pounds,) which Marcus Scaurus paid for Daphnus, a slave well instructed in grammar". The numbers of Pliny in this passage are much disputed ; and pro- bably the above reading underrates tlie actual amount. There are many more instances in the same chapter, of large sums paid for slaves. Josephus mentions an instance of a talent apiece being given for one hundred boys, and the same for one hundred girls, intended to be presented to the king and queen of Egypt, Ptolemy and Cleopatra ". In the war with Mithridates, a slave might be bought in the Roman camp, for four drachmae, (about two k Lib. XV. 19. 1 Suet. Jul. 47, 2. m Epp. xxvii. 4 — 7. n Plin. H. N. vii. 40. Cf. Suet. De illustribus Gramm. iii. 3. o Ant. Jud. xii. iv. 9. D 4 40 Apjiendix, C/idjiter Third. shillings and sixpence ^) : and when Nicanor invaded Judiua, in the time of Judas IMaccahaus, he is said to have offered ninety captive Jews for sale, at the ])rice of a talent (about two })ounds a man '';. But these of course, are instances of an extraordinary cheapness of the article, exposed to sale, owing to an extraordi- nary abundance of the supply of it. Horace observes in one of his Satyrs, where Da- vus, his slave, is speaking, Quid, si nie stultior ipso Quingcntis emto drachniis deprcnderisf ? And again, in one of his Epistles, Hie et Candidas, et taios a vcrtice pulcher ad imos, Fict eritque tuus numnioruni inillil)us octo^. Juvenal likewise, Flos Asifx? ante ipsutn, prctio niajore paratiis, Quam fuit et Tulli census pugnacis, et Anci^ Clemens Alexandrinus supposes a man's horse, or servant, or estate, and the like, might perhaps be worth Jiftccn talents ; the owner, peradventure, not worth three chalci^K Julian (the emperor) reckons the j)rice of a slave to vary ordinarily from such and such a number of drachmae, to two niinif — or to ten staters of gold, that is, two mina- and a half; ten aurei, or two hiuidred and fifty drachma'^. And on this subject of the price of slaves, these instances may sufiice. With regard to the uses, whicii were made of the services of the slaves, and the manifold advantages I Pint. Lufull. 14. 1 Mucc. viii. 10, II. ' Sermon, ii. vii. 42. * Ej). ii. ii. W * Sat. \ . ."»(). " Oiktuiii. i. 274. n— (5. P.rdajr- iii. <>• ' Opera IDJ. 1). Oratio. iv. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 41 they were the cause of to their owners ; Aristotle ob- serves in his Political, '^ovXav ^' ud-/] TtXeia ?^eyo[xev al yap epyaaiai TrXeiovg' tovtcov he ev [xepog Kareyovaiv ol X^F~ vTjTeg. Slaves were necessarily instructed in various arts and employments ; as no one, we may presume, would possess any property of that description, which he was obliged to maintain at his own expense, without making them useful to him in some man- ner or other in return. In most of the republics of Greece, the laws themselves prohibited the freemen from learning or practising any of the (Savavjoi -xeyyat., that is, the mercenary or handicraft arts^. The ojjeratives, therefore, of former times, in such com- munities, the manufacturers, mechanics, artisans, et id genus omne, were exclusively the slaves. The Cyropaedia of Xenophon specifies the carpenters, wheelwrights, cabinetmakers, masons, bricklayers, shoemakers, taylors, &c, as all belonging to that class ^: and Socrates, in the Memorabilia, discours- ing with one of his friends, mentions various per- sons, known to them both, who not merely supported themselves and their families, but got rich, and were enabled to contribute to the necessities of the state, by the labour of their slaves ; one, as a miller ; an- other, as a baker ; a third, as a manufacturer of x^a.- fxvheg, a fourth, of 5(,Aav/^ef : and the like^. War and husbandry were the only employments which it was not thought unworthy of the freemen to pursue and cultivate ; yet with respect even to the latter, it ap- pears from every page of the (Economica of Xeno- phon, that, whatever share the owner of the soil might y Lib. iii. ii. 8. z Xenophon, CEconoui. iv. 3, 4. Cf. Aristot. Politica, iii. iii. '^ Lib. viii. ii. 5. b Memorabilia, ii. vii. 3 — 6. 42 AppendiXy Chapter Third. take in the culture and management of his estates, his farming men, his j)l()ughmen, his herdsmen, his sheplierds, liis mowers, liis reapers, and the like, were all his slaves. The slaves, who deserted from the Athenians, in consequence of the occu})ation of Deceleia, numerous as they were, Thuc}'dides says were mostly ytipoTi- yva/, instructed in some mainial and lucrative art; whose loss could not fail to be a serious injury to their owners, and to tlie state*". Nicias' slaves, one thousand in munber, who were miners or pitmen, were hired out by him at the rate of an obohis a day, to such as farmed tiie j)roduce of the silver mines of the Athenians. This was at the rate of nearly two thousand j)ounds per annum. Hipponi- cus' slaves, six hundred in number, brought him in, on the same principle, six hundred oboli, or one mina, a day ; and those of Pliilemonides, three hun- dred, brought hiu) in lialf as much''. The slaves which Demosthenes' father left him at his death, brought him in, both together, some of them as ixa'/jxipfj-norA, and the rest as Kktvonotct, forty- two mina3 (about one hundred and thirty-four pounds) per annum''. In liis oration Contra Olympiodorum, he speaks of the division of a certain j)roj)erty, con- sisting in part of slaves, one class of which were craK- yy(pavTai, and the other, (pap[jiaKca- stores, hippocomi, bubulci, fossores, &c. among the Romans, were ahnost exchisively the slaves and per- sonal property of the owners of the soil, appears plainly from the Scrij)tores Kei Rustic*', Cato, Varro, Columella, &e. 1'hus it was tiiat the rich citizens, having in the first place got possession of the con- quered lands, on condition of farming them for the benefit of the state, employed their own menials, upon their cultivation ; and by degrees secured the property of such lands to themselves : which unjust usurpation of the public rights was the first cause of the agrarian disputes, between tiie commonalty of Rome and the rich. The slaves of such landowners could not be called on to serve in war, as tiie i)oor citizens might be; the increase of their numbers by proj)agation added to the value of the interest of their masters in them ; and the exclusive benefit and advantage of their labour, how many soever they were, belonged to their owners ". The celebrated Marcus Crassus had more than five hundred of one descrij)tion of slaves, viz. Oi^-j^^i- Tfh'Tove^ and oiKo^cfxoi — whose services, as let out for hire, in various building speculations, brought liiiii in great profits, Plutarch gives this further account of the extent and variety of his possessions, and of the use jnade of liis slaves, in amassing wealtli for him : cvtxv avrio 7raju,7roAAa>v dpyvpetwv, itoXvTiix.rjTdv &e ywpai;, Kai tuv (pya^ci[x(vuv ev avT-lif Ofxa;^ a'j rig fffr^rjairu fXYjOfv ftvat Tavra iravra "npog ttjv to/v oiKiToov tiixyj-^ to(jov~ TCfiT (KiKTr/To Kai ToiovTcuc, avayvx^Tag , imoypacpiTs, apyv- '" Cato ."Maj. 1. ("f. Pliri. Kpp. iii. l'.>. <), 7- " Aj>j»i:iii, I)i' U. Civilibus. i. "• Cf. Diodor. Sic. Fragin. lib. xxxiv. ami xxxvi. Opi-rr. x. 1(M). s(|<|. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 45 poyvuifxovag, dioiKrjTa^, Tpaire^oKOfxcvg' avTog (Tria-TaTav fxav- Qdvovai Kol TTOoaiyxv Kai ^i^aa/^cov, Kai oXcog vo[j.i^cpv tm ^e- a-TTOTy] 7rpo(7YjK€iv [xaXiciTa rrjv Trepi rovg oiKerag eTrifxeXeiav, cog opyava etxipv^oi. TVjg oiKovo(J.iKrig ^. With regard, indeed, to the domestic establish- ment of an opulent Roman citizen, Xenophon's de- scription of the household of the kings of Persia, or of the rich Persian grandees, in his time, would ap- ply to it verbatim p. They had their Bvpapol, crno- TToio], orloTTQio), olvoyotji^ XovTpoyooi, all within themselves; their TrapandevTeg, and their dvaipovvreg, their KaraKoi- fiiKovreg, and their dvicrTavreg, their Kca-[jiyjTai, and a great many more who waited on and about them, in various ways, not by him enumerated. Clemens Alexandrinus reckons up, among the slaves of the rich in his day, their oxpoTrciicjl, and Tpaire'CoTnotol, their carvers, their confectioners, some of sweet meats, others of sweet drinks ; their wardrobe keepers ; their gold, their silver, their furniture-keepers ; their grooms ; their butlers; the tiring-men and tiring-women of their ladies ; some with the charge of their looking-glasses ; others of their head-gear ; others of their combs ; and the like i. Philo Judaeus, de- scribing in equally lively and forcible terms, the luxury of the times, and the costliness and extrava- gance of their entertainments, insists strongly on the numbers, gorgeous dress, and personal beauty of the pueri, or boys, who waited at table ^'. Basil of Caesarea also, in his Homilia in Ditescentes, draws o Plut. Crass. 2. Cf. Cato Maj. 21. P Cyropsedia viii. ii. 6 ; A'iii. 20. Q Operum, i. 268. Peedagog. iii. 4. '' Ope- rum, ii. 478. 35 — 480. 2. De Vita Contemplativa. Cf. Diodor. Sic. V. 40. Cicero, Pro S. Roscio, 45. Seneca, De A^ita Beata, 17, 2. Epp. ex. 14. 4-6 Appendix^ Chapter Third. an equally animated picture, of the establishments of the ricii in his ])ositis urbana? familiae suspensae digerentibus sollicite, quos insi- gnes faciunt virgaj dextris aptata;, velut tessera data castrensi, juxta vehiculi frontem omne textriinuii incedit : huic atratum coquina^ adjungitur ministe- rium, deinde totum promiscue servitium, &c. * OptTiiiii. i. \VM^. A. H. t Lil>. \iv. (i. p. '2:». '2(i. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 47 The most ridiculous instance of the use made of slaves, is one which is mentioned by Philostratus among; the other eccentricities of Herodes Atticus. Wishing to teach his son, who was not very bright, his a, b, c, he placed twenty-four slaves in attend- ance upon him, called after the letters of the alpha- bet respectively ^^ The slaves of the polite and elegant Romans, however, were brought up in all the literary ac- complishments of the day, as well as instructed in the merely useful and manual arts. Take this de- scription of the family of Pomponius Atticus, by his biographer and son-in-law, Cornelius Nepos, as a specimen of that of a scholar and a gentleman, generally '^i Usus est familia si utilitate judicandum sit, optima, si forma, vix mediocri. namque in ea erant pueri litteratissimi, anagnostae optimi, et plu- rimi librarii, ut ne pedissequus quidem quisquam esset qui non utrumque horum pulchre facere pos- set, pari modo artifices ceteri, quos cultus domesti- cus desiderat, adprime boni. neque tamen horum quemquam nisi domi natum, domique factum ha- buit, &c. We may conclude this part of our subject, by subjoining a list of the different sorts or classes of slaves, illustrating the descriptio ministeriormn al- luded to by Tacitus ; the names of each of which intimate the nature of the services discharged by those who bore it ; and which, though far from being complete, or including every description of slave which might be mentioned, are such as may 1 Vitse Sophistarum, ii. 557- A. 'f Atticus, 13. 48 Appendixj Chapter Third. occur to any one, inter legendum. They are as follows : Nonienclatores> (C^viaaTovAyjrcst,) — .Taiiitores, Osti- arii (61017:0/') — Dispensatores, A rationibus" — Pit- dat'OiT'i '' — Amanuenses, A manu '" — A studiis ^ — Ab epistolis *" — Pnvgiistatores ^ — A pedibus, Pedisse- qui f — Lecticarii *' — Ministri. Pueri ( AiOAoci •) — Promus. A penu : Cellarius, A Cella '^ — Ao;aso. Hip- pocomus, Intertor' — Villicus'" — Cursores.Pincerna'" — Artopt Hor. Serni. i. vi. 116: ii. viii. JO. '^ Hur. Serm. ii. 11 — 16. ' Hor. Semi. ii. viii. 72: Scholiastes, in loc. — Persius, v. 76. "" ^'ide the Parable of the Unjust Steward, n Juvenal, v. 52. " Ibid. 73. P Ibid. 120. sqq. q Ibid. vi. 475. Cf. ix. 109. ^ Ibid. 476. ^ ii,id. 489 Suet. Claud. 40. 4 — Ovid. Amor. i. xi. 2. * Juvenal. ix. 109. " Ibid. 110. » Ibid. 145. y Ibid. x. 41. z rbid. xiv. 305. sqq. — Tac. Ann. xiv. 44. » Seneca, De Const. Sap. 14. ^ Ibid. 14, 1— Plut. Lucull. 16. c Seneca. Epp. xc. 26. '> Plin. Epp. iii. 19. 3. ^ Ibid, f Ibid. Epp. V. 19. 2, 3. Ancient Relation of Masier cmd Slate. 49 Anagnostae ^ — Mediastini, Calones ^ — A pectine ^ — A speculis'^ — A coenis^ — Vocatores ™ — Obsonato- res " — &c. With regard to the general treatment and esti- mation of slaves — in the nature of things it must have been different, in different communities, and according to the difference of disposition in parti- cular masters. The laws of Athens, it is well-known, were more equitable and indulgent to this class of the people, than those of any other community in the ancient republics of Greece : and the condition of slaves was proportionably more easy, secure, and comfortable there than any where else. The remains of the Attic comedy supply abundant proofs how free from all restraint, how happy and independent, the slaves must have felt themselves, generally speak- ing, in the families of their Athenian masters ^. A common citizen of Athens was no better dressed than a slave. A pleasing custom is mentioned, as observed in an Athenian family, upon the reception of a new slave into it for the first time. The master or mistress poured over his head a quantity of figs and almonds, or nuts p. "When Ischomachus, in the CEconomica of Xenophon, was instructing his young wife in her future duties, and tellino: her that one part, and perhaps the least agreeable of them, would ? Plin. Epp. viii. 1. ^ Hor. Epp. i. xja". 14. i Orid, Ars Amandi, i. 367- ^ Prop. iv. vii. 74, 75. ^ Plut. Lucull. 41. ™ Vide the Parable of the Great Supper. ^ Seneca. Epp. xlvii. 6. ^ Cf. Athen. ri. 92 — Xenoph. De Rep. Athen. i. 10, 11 — Dem. Orat. is. 6. in Philipp. iii. xxi. 63. Contra Midiam. P Suidas, KaTaxCcrfiara. Harpocration, in eodem. Demosth. xlv. 91. Contra Steph. i. VOL. V. PART II. E 50 j4ppendix, Chapter Third. be to take care of the oiKhai, domestic servants, when they were sick or disabled, she replied, N^ A/a .... (.TriyapiTWTaTov fxev oi/v, v]v ^eAAwcr/ ye oi KaXHog 6epa7r€v6ev- TCf "X^oipiv eiaecrQat, kui (LVVovoTepoi rj Trpoa6ev eo-eadai. Among the Romans, the old, familiar names to express the domestic servants of such and such masters, viz. Philippores, Marcipores, Lucipores, (that is, Pliilippi pueri, Marci pueri, Lucii pueri,) are proofs of the freedom and endearment, once subsist- ing between the head of the family and its inferior members*!. We learn from Suetonius' life of Galba"*, that anciently every slave and freedman of the family came twice a day to visit the master ; in the morning to bid him solvere; in the evening to bid him vcilere : an amiable custom doubtless, yet al- most obsolete in the time of Galba. Also, from Macrobius % that certain sacrifices used to be an- nually celebrated, from remote times, to the Mater Larium, the Dea Mania, expressly pro familiarium sospitate. It was thouglit, in these times, punishment enough for a slave, who had done any thing amiss, and forfeited the confidence of his master, to expose hini merely to the disgrace of walking about the neighbourhood, carrying the bar, or fork, with which they propped the poles of their j)loughs or waggons. And hence Plutarch explains the word Jurc'ifcr^ as ai)i)lied to a slave *. Tlie mothers of families would often themselves suckle the children of their slaves; in order to conciliate the good-will q Plin. II. N. xxxiii. (I : Quinct. i. iv. 26. «• Vita Galbje, 4, 9. s Saturn, i. 7- * Coriolanus, 24. Cf. Operr. vii. 132. Quaestiones Roman.x*. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 51 of such children, to their own offspring, Ik ry\q crw- Tpocpia^f as SO many foster brethren ". Of families so attached to each other, consisting of homeborn slaves, brought up in the society of their master's children, and scarcely distinguishable from their brothers or their sisters, we have many agreeable pictures drawn, in such allusions, occurring in the Latin poets, as the following : Consuescet numerare pecus, consuescet amantis Garrulus in dominae ludere verna sinu '-'. Turbaque vernarum, saturi bona signa coloni, Ludet, et ex virgis exstruet arte casas y. Positosque vernas, ditis exanien domus, Circa renidentes lares ^. Cras genium mero Curabis, et porco bimestri, Cum famulis operum solutis ^. O noctes ccenasque deum ! quibus ipse meique Ante larem proprium vescor, vernasque procaces Pasco libatis dapibus ^. Idem habitus cunctis, tonsi, rectique capilli, Atque hodie tantum propter convivia pexi. Pastoris duri est hie fiJius : ille bubulci Suspirat longo non visam tempore matrem, Et casulam, et notos tristis desiderat hsedos ; Ingenui vultus puer, ingenuique pudoris, &c.^ Saturabat glebula talis Patrem ipsum, turbamque casae ; qua fceta jacebat ^i Plutarch, Cato Maj. 20. x TibuU. i. v. 25. y Ibid, ii. i. 23. z Hor. Epod. ii. 65. a Hor. Carm. iii. xvii. 14. ^ Sermon, ii. vi. 65. c Juvenal, xi. 149. E 2 52 Appendixy Chapter Third. Uxor, ct infantes luclebant quatuor, unus Vcrnula, tres dumini ^. The rich Romans had a species of j^^t slaves — dwarfs or children, of whom they made much, and were very fond. Ilerodian thus describes one of them, in reference to the death of Commodus, which he was accidentally a means of accelerating. 'Hv l\ Kai T;ak>ji'j)) irdw v^ttiov, tcvtxv ori txv yv^vvv [xev eaSrjTc;, •^vacti Se Kai XiBoi<; TroXvTifXdii KiKoa-ixynxivav, olg adi yjxipovai 'Puixaixv ol Tpv(f)xvT€i^. Seneca alludes to them, appa- rently, in the following passage ; Pueros quidem in hoc mercantur procaces, et eorum impudentiam acuunt, et sub magistro habent, qui probra meditate effundant : nee has contumelias vocanius, sed argu- tias ^ Epp. 1. 2, he relates an anecdote of Harpaste, his wife's Jcifua (buffoon or fool,) who seems to have been one of these pet slaves. Several of the poems in the Silvae of Statins were written expressly to commemorate such dclicati of his different friends^^: and speaking of the death of his own child, lie says '^ : Non ego mcrcaliis Pliana dc pujipc locjuaccs Delicias, doctumque sui convicia Nili Infanteni, lingiur nimium, salibusque protcrvum Dilexi : mens ille, mens, &c. ' The ordinary dress of a slave at Rome differed not, excej)t in some trifling particulars, from that of the connnon freemen or citizens ^. They were j)cr- ^ Juvenal, xiv. 1(50. c LJU,. j, 53, f De Constantiu Sa- picntis, xi. 3. Ci. De Provideiitia, i. C. P Vide Silv. ii. i. vi. 1' Silv. V. V. ()()—()«>. i C'f. Philost. De Vitis Soph. ii. Alexander, 572. C: i. Phavorinus, 41);"). A. ^ App. De Bell. j4ncient Relation of Master and Slave. 53 raitted out of the allowance made them by their master, or out of the proceeds of their labour in his service, to save a peculium of their own, and in due time to purchase their freedom. Duni me Galatea tenebat. Nee spes libertatis erat, nee cura peculi i. Sic tibi semper honos, sic curta peculia crescent, Hoc face, et exiguo tempore liber eris ™. Praestare tributa clientes Cogimur, et cultis augere peculia servis ". Pliny the younger gives us this account of his own method of proceeding with his slaves, in allow- ing them the disposal of their property": Permitto servis quoque quasi testamenta facere, eaque, ut le- gitima, custodio. mandant rogantque, quod visum : pareo ut jussus. dividunt, donant, relinquunt, dum- taxat intra domum. nam servis respublica quaedam et quasi civitas domus est. A slave too, might have his vicar'ms, to relieve him from all, or from part of his duties, if he could aftbrd to pay for one, or if he otherwise deserved such an indulgence. Nam Sive vicarius est qui servo paret (uti mos Vester ait) seu conservus P. Cui jamdudum divitiae esse debuerant duo vicarii et cella laxior ^. Civ. ii. 120. Servius ad iEneid. i. 282. Seneca De Clementia, xxiv. 1. Lamprid. Alex. Sev. 23. 27- Hor. Serni. i. i. 96. 97- 1 Virgil. Eclog. i. 32. m Ovid. Amor. ii. ii. 39. "^ Juvenal, iii. 188. o Epp. viii. 16. 1, 2. P Hor. Serm. ii. vii. 78. fi Seneca, De Tranquillitate, viii. 4. E 3 54 Appendix, Chapter Tliird. The forty-seventh Epistle of Seneca was written to conij)liment his friend Lucilius, on the kindness, condescension, affability, and gentleness of his beha- viour towards his slaves ; and with these it contrasts stronc^ly the coldness, the haughtiness, the harshness, and inhumanity of most other masters. Libenter ex his, qui a te veniunt cognovi, fami- liariter te cum servis tuis vivere: hoc prudentiam tuam, hoc eruditionem decet. servi sunt ? immo homines, servi sunt ? immo contubernales. servi sunt ? immo humiles amici. servi sunt ? immo con- servi, si cogitaveris tantumdem in utrosque licere fortunae .... vis tu cogitare istum queni servum tuum vocas ex iisdem seminibus ortum, eodem frui Ciulo, cL'que spirare, itque vivere, iuque mori ? tam tu ilium ingenuum videre potes, quam ille te servum . . . haec . . . prajcepti mei summa est : sic cum infe- riore vivas, quemadmodum tecum supcriorem velles vivere . . . . ne illud quidem videtis quam onmem invidiam majores nostri dominis, omnem contume- liam servis detraxerint? dominum patrem familiae appellavcrunt : servos (quod etiam in mimis adhuc durat) familiares^ instituerunt diem festum,(|U0 non solum cum servis domini vescerentur, sed quo uti- que in domo illis honores gerere, jus dicere permi- serunt, et donunn pusillam rempublicam esse judi- caverunt. The whole epistle is written in the same strain. So likewise Juvenal '* : Mitcm aniimmi, ct mores modlcis crrorihiis ii'(|U()s Pra-tij)it, atcjiie aiiiinas sc-ivonnn el corpora nostra Materia coiistare |)iilat, paribus(|ue elenieiilis? An snevirc doeet UutiJus, qui gaiulet acerbo ' Cf. Mucrob. Saturn, i. 1 I . ^ Sat. xiv. la. Ancient Relation of blaster and Slave. 55 Plagarum strepitu, et nuUam sirena flagellis Comparat, Antiphates trepidi Laris, ac Polyphemus ? Est autem infima conditio et fortuna servorum : ob- serves Cicero* : quibus, non male praecipiunt, qui ita jubent uti, ut mercenariis : operam exigeudain, justa praebenda. Cum servos fueris proprios mercatus in usus, Et famulos dicas, homines tamen esse memento". Pliny the elder exhibits a numerous list of names of freedmen of different Roman grandees, who hav- ing become favourites of their masters, acquired un- bounded wealth and influence : Chrysogonus, the freedman of Sylla ; Amphion, of Catulus ; Herones, of Lucullus; Demetrius, of Pompey; Hipparchus, of Antony; Menas and Menecrates, of Sextus Pom- peius^. We might add the names of the celebrated freedmen and favourites of the emperors, as Claudius or Nero ; Polybius, Narcissus, Callistus, Pallas, &c. of whose overgrown power and wealth, the contem- porary writers supply so many proofs. Seneca has a long discussion on the question, An beneficium dare servus domino possit? which he decides in the affirmative y. It is full of fine observa- tions, and the most just and humane reflections : and a large part of it^ is taken up with the particular recital of various remarkable acts of devotion, zeal, disinterestedness, and beyond all question, good ser- vices, of slaves in behalf of their masters, during the proscriptions, and the other national and domestic t De Officiis, i. xiii, ^i Catonis Disticha, lib. iv. 44. X H. N. XXXV. 58. Cf. Ciceron. Pro S. Roscio, 41, &c. Plut. Cato j\Iin. 13. Pomp. 40. Y De Beneficiis, iii. xviii. xxviii. 2 Capp. xxiii — xxvii. E 4 56 Jppendix, Chapter Third. calamities of that season. Similar accounts may be found in many other writers*'. Hermij)pus wrote a book, Ttfp) txv ^ia7Tp(\lavTxv Iv Tiai^jtia ldKxv^\ The celebrated fabulist /Esop was a slave : to whose memory nevertheless the Athenians erected a statue, tlie M'ork of Lysippus, as a just tribute of admiration to his talents. The j)oet Terence was originally a slave ^"i C^ucilius, Publius, 3Itmoff?'aj)/i?(.s, and Manilius, were also of the same class of persons '^ Juvenal was reputed to be liberti- Dus*'. Horace's father was certainly such. The great- est part of the Illustres Grammatici, and some of the llhetores, whose memoirs Suetonius has left behind him ^ were either slaves, or libertini, originally. And Aulus Gellius enumerates the names of many celebrated philosophers of antiquity, who were once slaves ; Ph;edo, Mcnippus, Pompylus, Perseus, Mys, Diogenes, Epictetus s. The epigram upon the latter is well known. AovXoi 'Ettikttjto? y€v6fXT]v, koL (T23, sqq. ^' ii. 18. Cf. IMacrob. Saturn, i. I 1 . Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 57 It is an observation as old as the days of Homer, that a man was deprived of half his virtue the mo- ment he became a slave ; and while Plato quotes this sentiment with approbation, he adds to the same effect of his own, ov yap vyilg oiiVev ^v')(Yjg '^ovXi^i^. Aristotle in his Poetica describes the yjQog of the fe- male character as generally bad ; and that of the servile as always so'. So Theognis, OvTTOTe bovXect] Ke^aAr) evde'ia 7T€(f)VK€V, a\y ahl (TKoAtrj, Kovyiva Xo^bv e^ct^. And Ovid, Dum fallax servus, durus pater, improba lena Vivent, dum meretrix blanda, Menandros erit'. Among the Romans, Jtir and servus were syno- nymous. Quid doniini facient audent cum X.aWaJ'ures'^? On which Servius : Pro servo, furem posuit : Furta enim specialiter servorum sunt, sic Plautus, de servo, Aulul. ii. 46 ; Homo es trium literarum : id est, fur. It was a common saying among the Greeks, that freemen were no where more free, nor slaves, more slaves, than at Sparta". Nothing indeed could be more miserable, more oppressed, more degraded, than the condition of the Helots in particular ; whom the laws of Lycurgus condemned to every kind of in- dignity ; to wear a cap of skin (kwvj) and a coat of leather (^iffydepa) ; to receive every year, a stated number of lashes, without any offence committed ; to be made drunk at regular times, on purpose to h Athen. vi. 87. » Cap. 28. k Poetae Minores Gr. 535. 1 Amor. i. xv. 17- ^ Virgil. Eclog. iii. 16. ^ Plut. Ly- curg. 28. 58 Appendix, Chapter Third. exhibit to the free youths of Sparta, the beastly, and disgusting effects of intoxication ; to be put to death, and their masters punished by a fine, if they ap- peared too fat and robust for slaves ; to till the ground perpetually, and to render every year a stated amount of its productions to their masters ; and the like ". Aristotle tells us, it was usual for the Ephors publicly to declare war against the Helots, every year, on coming into office; that so it might be Lawful at any time to put them to death. But, independ- ent of this, the law of the KpvTTTta authorized their indiscriminate massacre, as often as the state thought proj)er; andTliucydides records an instance, in which two thousand of them were secretly made away with at once, by the grossest breach of public faith p. At Athens too, the slaves were subject to various restrictions'!. They must wear their hair after a particular fashion''; they could not frequent the gymnasia, nor use certain kinds of unction, like the freemen, there ^ ; they could not bear certain names either male or female*: they could not be buried with the same honours as freemen : and what was the worst of all, they might be put to death by their owners with impunity". No slave at Rome anciently, was allowed on any account to taste of wine ^. No freedraan could wear o Athcii. xiv. 74. Pint. LycuriT. 28. P iv. 80. •1 Ov yap fifTflvai T BovXon f(f)v. AoiiXos TTfcfiVKas, ov fifTecrri croi \6yov. Pliilo JiuL 11. 453. 1 — 3. Quod liber quisquis virtuti studet. Cf. M. Antoninus, De relms suis, x. 30. "" Suidas, avSpano- Bo}8t) Tplxa. * yEscliines, i. 138. Contra Timarcluun. t Aulus GcU. ix. 2 : Harpocration Nf/xtn. " Antiphon. v. 33, 34. De Ca;de Herodis. ^ Athcn. x. 33. ^lian. Var. Hist. ii. 38. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 59 a ring of gold, without special permission ; and no slave under any circumstances: their proper ring being of iron y. By the laws of the Twelve Tables, a slave convicted of theft, might be scourged, and thrown from the Tarpeian rock ^ Cato the censor recommended to all good managers to reduce the allowance of their slaves when ill ; to dispose, as soon as possible, of superannuated slaves, or of such as were disabled by bodily infirmity, from being any longer of use to their owners ^ The in- humanity, and even the injustice of such a practice, shocked his biographer Plutarch; who has some noble and generous reflections in the next chapter, to shew that even brute animals, for long and faith- ful services, deserved better treatment in their old age, and much more fellow-men. The sixth book of Hecato, De Officiis, according to Cicero, was taken up with such questions as these ; Sitne boni viri in maxima caritate annonse, familiam non alere? which he decided in the negative. Si in mari ja- ctura facienda sit, which would he part with first, a valuable horse, or a good-for-nothing slave ? and the like ^ Vedius Pollio, a Roman nobleman in the reign of Augustus, was accustomed to condemn his slaves, for very trifling offences, to be thrown alive into his ponds, to feed his lampreys <^. It was usual in the reign of Claudius, for the owners of sick or infirm y Dio, xlviii. 45. Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 6, 7- ^ A. Gellius, xi. 18. a Cato, De Re Rust. 2. Plutarch, Cato Maj. 4. b De Officiis, iii. 23. « Dio, liv. 23. Seneca, De Ira, iii. 40, 2. De dementia, 18, 2. Plin. H. N. ix. 39. TertuUian, v. 21 7- De Pallio, 5. 60 AppoulLv, Chapter Third. slaves, tired of the expense and trouble of maintain- ing them, to turn them out of doors in that con- dition, and expose them in the Insula ^sculapii, to take their chance of dying or recovering. The emperor issued an edict, not to forbid this practice, but ordering that, if any who had been so treated happened to recover, they should be free. If masters too, should prefer to kill their slaves, when in this condition, rather than expose them, with the chance of their obtaining their liberty, the same edict held them to the penalties oi homicide or manslaughter; but not in any other case^. If a master of a family had been murdered by one of his slaves, the Roman law condemned all his family to be put to death, whether partners in the crime or not. Tacitus records an instance under Nero, when this law was rigorously executed on four hundred innocent persons at once '^. Not long before the same time, a decree had been passed, as he ex- presses it^, ultioni juxta et securitati, that even such slaves as by the will of the deceased party would have obtained their freedom, upon his death, subject however to the condition of continuing to live under the same roof, (as the liberti very often did ^,) should be liable to the same treatment as the rest. Hadrian was the first of the emperors who miti- gated the severity of this law ; but only so far, as that none of the family should be considered, a jwiori, implicated in the guilt of their master's death, except those, qui per vicinitatem poterant sentire. Pie took away also from masters the power, which they must before have possessed, of d Suet. Claud. 25, 5. Dio, Ix. 29. " <= Ann. xiv. 42—45. f Ann. xiii. 32. g See Plin. Epp. ii. xvii. 9. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 61 condemning their slaves to death ; and ordered that they should be tried and condemned by the regular tribunals ^\ Formerly, and as Plutarch tells us in his life of Cato S a master could do what he would in bringing his slaves to justice; and Cato's practice was to cause such of his family, as had done any thing- worthy of death, to be tried by their fellow-servants, and acquitted or condemned according to their deci- sion. Pone crucem servo : meruit quo crimine servus Supplicium ? quis testis adest ? quis detulit ? audi, Nulla unquam de morte honiinis cunctatio longa est. O demens, ita servus homo est ? nil fecerit, esto. Hoc volo, sic jubeo, sit pro ratione voluntas J. There was, in fact, no degree of authority which a Roman master at one time did not possess over his family ; nor any abuse of such unlimited and irre- sponsible powers, to which slaves, under bad mas- ters, were not exposed. Juvenal thus describes the ill-humour of a Roman mistress, as venting itself on her unfortunate attendants'^ ; Si nocte maritus Aversus jacuit : periit libraria ; ponunt Cosmetse tunicas, tarde venisse Liburnus Dicitur, et poenas alieni pendere somni Cogitur. hie frangit ferulas ; rubet ille flagello, Hie scutica. sunt quae tortoribus annua praestent. Verberat, atque obiter faciem linit ; audit amicas, Et caedit ; longi relegit transversa diurni, Et caedit, donee lassis csedentibus, exi, Intonet horrendum, jam cognitione peracta, Praefectura domus Sicula non mitior aula. ^ Spartian, Adrian. 18. ' Cato Maj. 21. J Juvenal, vi. 218. k Sat. vi. 474. Cf. 485—495. 652 Appendix, Chapter Third. In another instance, he draws the picture of a do- mestic tyrant, wlio was never happy except wlien abusing his slaves. Tuni felix, quoties aliquis tortore vocato Uritur ardenti duo propter lintea fcrro. And again, Quid suadct juvcni la^tus stridorc catena^ Queni mire afficiunt inscripta ergastula, career llusticus' ? Not to mention these Inscriptiones, or brandings of slaves, either with the names of their owners (which was very common) or with a name of re- proach, as a punishment for some supposed oflVnce, nothing was more usual than to condenni them to labour in chains ; especially those who did the agri- cultural business of the community : Spes etiam valida solatur conipede vinctuni ; Crura sonant ferro, sed canit inter opus"^. Hoc est cur cantet vinctus quotpic comjiede fossor, Indocili numcro cum grave mollit opus". HaDC facit, ut vivat vinctus quoque compedo fossor Liberaque a ferro crura futura putcl". Speaking of those, by whose hands Italy was culti- vated in his time, Pliny says''; At nunc eadcm ilia vincti pedes, danmatic manus, inscrii)tiqui' vullus exercent. And, if Seneca is to be believed, there 1 Sat. xiv. 21. Cf. Ilor. Serin, ii. ii. ()(>— ()ft, and the.Sdu.l. /// loc. ^ Tibull. ii. vi. 2a. ■> Ovid. Trist. iv. f). " Ovid. De Ponto, i. vi. .'U. C f . Ilor. Serin, ii. vii. 1 1 7. 111!. .Tini'ual, viii. J7S>, IHO. Plin. Kpit. iii. xix. 0, J. I' II. X. xviii. 1. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 63 were masters, who carried the refinement of cruelty so far as nicely to assort and match these vincti, ac- cording to age, complexion, stature, and the like q. There was one description of slave, the janitor or ostiarius, who was almost invariably chained to his post ^. Janitor (indignum) dura religate catena, Difficilem moto cardine pande seram ». Excute : sic unquam longa relevere catena. Nee tibi perpetuo serva bibatur aqua t. Dummodo sic, in me dura? transite catenas : Tempora noctis eunt : excute poste seram u. Quindecim liberi homines, populus est: says Apuleius, (ii. 52 :) totidem servi, familia : totidem vincti ergasfuhim. Condemnation to these erga- stula, or carceres rustici, breaking the legs — shack- ling with heavy fetters— starving — solitary confine- ment — death itself — were modes of punishment, to which, if we may believe Seneca, a master was at all times ready to resort for very trifling offences^. And indeed, Lactantius himself gives nearly the same account of the treatment of slaves, by their masters, even in his days>^. To send to the mill, or pistrinum, was a very common punishment, and per- haps not the most severe : and Suetonius supplies an instance, where the legs of a slave of Augustus were actually broken; though for a very serious offence ^ Clemens Alexandrinus tells us, that Aristotle for- q De Brevltate Vitse, xii. 1. ^ Cf. Suet. De Claris Rhet. iii. 1. s Ovid. Amor. i. vi. 1. t Ibid. 25. ^ Ibid. 47- X De Ira, iii. 32, 1. Y See Divin. Instit. v. 18. 475. and De Ira Dei, 5, 722. z Aug. 67, 6. 64 Appendix, Chapter Third. bade the least approach to familiarity or condescen- sion in the behaviour of a master to his slaves^ ; not so much as even to smile in their presence : and Se- neca says there were masters, in his time, who would not allow a slave to open his lips before them ; who would not condescend to speak to them ; who conversed with them by a sign, a gesture, a whistle, or the like^. Even good masters in other respects, would sometimes make it a rule that their servants should never speak in their houses, excejit in answer to a question^. The owners of slaves possessed the power of selling their children, if they pleased. Pliny the younger complains'^ that the stock of slaves, on a certain estate, which he was thinking of purchasing, had been much diminished by its former owner, in thus disposing of their offspring. And as it is known that the unnatural and inhuman custom of exposing new-born children, was, at this period of ancient history, almost universal over the Roman empire ; so are we told that many iDersons made a practice of picking up these unfortunate infants, with a view to rear them as slaves — not, however, from a motive of compassion, but to make money of them, as mendici, or objects of charity : for which purpose it was usual to mutilate or injure them in some way or other**. a Operum, i. 302. 34. P.-ed. iii. 12. b De Ira, iii. 35, 1 : Epp. xlvii. 2 — 4 : Cf. Taciti Ann. xiii. 23. Clem. Alex, i, 204. 8 : Paedag. ii. 7. c piut. viii. 34, 35. De Garrulitate. Cf. Cato Maj. 21. d Epp. iii. xixr 6. e Vide Seneca, Controversiarinu lib. v. 33. On the subject, however, of a Roman master's authority over his servants, and in illustration of the possible abuse of it; it is unnecessary to multiply proofs. Ancient Relation of Master and Slave. 65 Servus, ut placet Chiysippo, perpetuus raercena- rius est^ — Servis imperare moderate, laus est : et in mancipio cogitandum est, iion quantum illud impune pati possit, sed quantum tibi permittat cequi bonique natura : quae parcere etiam captivis et pretio paratis jubet quum in servum omnia liceant, est ali- quid, quod in hominem licere commune jus animan- tium vetet : quia ejusdem naturae est, cujus tu^. The wise author of the Book of Ecdesiasticus, was an advocate for strictness in the management of a slave or servant, without cruelty or inhumanity^'. " Fodder, a wand, and burdens, are for the ass ; " and bread, correction, and work, for a servant. " A yoke and a collar do bow the neck : so are " tortures and torments for an evil servant. " Set him to work, as is fit for him : if he be not " obedient, put on more heavy fetters. " But be not excessive toward any ; and without " discretion do nothing. " If thou have a servant, let him be unto thee as " thyself, because thou hast bought him with a price. " If thou have a servant, entreat him as a bro- " ther : for thou hast need of him, as of thine own " soul ; if thou entreat him evil, and he run from " thee, which way wilt thou go to seek him ?" To conclude. According to Aristotle, an oIkU Cf. Diodor. Sic. Frag. lib. xxxiv. Operr. x. 101. 114, 115. — Hor. Serm. i. iii. 80 — 83 : Epp. i. xvi. 46 — 48. — Ovid. Amor, i, vi. 19, 20.— Juvenal, xii. 115— 118. — Statius, Silv. iv. vii. 13 — 16. — Dio Chrys. Orat. xiv. xv : De Servitute, 436 — 457- — Clau- dian, in Eutropium, ii. 542 — 545, &c. ^ Seneca, De Bene- liciis, iii. xxi. 1. g De dementia, 18. 1, 2. h Ch. xxxiii. 24. 26. 28—31 . VOL. v. PART II. F GG Appendix, Chapter Third. reAeia, or family as such — must be made up of free- men and slaves'. He contends that there are among men (pvcrei '^ovXoi, and (pv<7ei (XevOepci, who differ as much from each other, as body from soul, or the like ; that the latter have a right to be masters, the former, to be slaves ; and that it is for the mutual good of both that they should stand in this relation to each other^. He defines a slave at one time, KTY/fxa Ti ^fxyl^vyov, and olov opyavov irpo opyavocv ; and com- pares him to the fabled automatons of Daedalus or Vulcan^: at another, efj.xlvy^oy opyavov, and the opyavov, aif v)^of ^ovXoi '". He denies, therefore, that there can be any friendship or sympathy between the master and the slave, as such, any more than between the artist and his tools ; or the soul and the body. He denies that the master as such, can injure the slave as such ; or the master as such, wish the good of the slave as such, and the like ; but that whatsoever he does to him, or for him, in his proper capacity, is to be considered as done to, or for the sake of himself. He admits, however, that there may be something like friendship between them, as beings partaking of a common nature; that is, as between man and man : and while he will scarcely allow the slave, as such, the capacity of any proper virtue, like temper- ance, courage, justice, Tiapa ra^- opyaviKOLi Ka\ liaKovi- Kui (xpe/af ") ; he yet admits that he wants, and con- sequently may be considered capable of some slight degree of it, for the sake of his jn-oper utility as an organ or instrument itself : o-nwg [x-^re di aKoXaaiav, fJiY/T^ ^jia OeiXiav, tAXe/ij-v; twj/ epyuv.^ i Politica, i. ii. ]. k ibifi. 1:j_1-,. i IhiJ. :>_r,. '" Et'nicii, viii. xi. (5 — {{. n Puliticii, i. v. .'{ — 10. APPENDIX, CHAPTER IV. CONSIDERATION OF SOME FURTHER TES- TIMONIES TO THE DOCTRINE OF THE MILLENNIUM. SEE THE GENERAL INTRODUCTION, CHAP. XII. PART II. Notwithstanding the prejudice which na- turally rises in the mind of a pious and orthodox believer, upon the mention of apocryphal or heretical productions — against the admission of their testi- mony, on questions of controversy ; a little consi- deration must satisfy an impartial person, that as wit- nesses merely to the truth of a fact, that such and such doctrines were actually current in the times of their authors, the evidence even of apocryphal works, however objectionable in other respects, may be ap- pealed to with as little scruple as that of the soundest ecclesiastical writings. It is generally the case with all error, in some way or other to be based upon truth ; that nothing absurd or false is proposed, or obtains a reception, but as possessing the appearance, at least, of reason or pro- bability. Some things there are too, so extraor- dinary in their own nature, that in whatsoever shape they may be afterwards proposed, the first idea of them could scarcely have suggested itself F 2 68 Appendhv, Chapter Fourth. spontaneously to the authors of such representa- tions. Of this number we have seen, that the doc- trine and expectation of a millennium in particular, are one. We should not have met with the vestiges of a doctrine like this, even in heretical or apocry- phal productions, had not the conception of it been previously in existence, as derived, in all probability, from inspiration, or from some infallible authority which first communicated it, and gave it a right to general reception and implicit belief. The forma- tion of such an expectation as that of the millen- nium, without any light or intimation from with- out — and as a mere creature of the human imagina- tion — we may venture to say was impossible ; and even could it have been so conceived, yet if proposed as a serious truth — as an anticipation some time to be fulfilled by the event — were there no foundation for the assurance of tiie fact, beyond the mere concep- tion of the thing itself — to assent to it would exceed the bounds of credulity in the weakest, and to expect it, the utmost measure of infatuation, in the most fool- ish of mankind. Besides which, whatever be the particular character which the millenary doctrines assume in the hands of such and such persons ; how- ever monstrous, perverted, and consequently unscrip- tural, they may become in their mode of represent- ing them ; yet in the mere J'act of the expectation, in the circumstance of believing and teaching the fu- turity of such an event as the millennium in general, there is nothing heretical or apocryphal even in the opinions of heretics and apocryphal writers : or if there be, the charge of heresy must l)e brought against many orthodox writers of the same period, who ex- pected and taught the same thing. Testimonies to the Millennium. 69 For example ; the first nominally Christian writer, who perverted the doctrine of the millennium, and while he recognised the fact of it in general, clothed it with so objectionable a dress in particular, as to make it necessarily offensive and disgusting to sober and religious minds — was Cerinthus, the founder of a sect of Gnostics, called after his name. Yet Ce- rinthus was contemporary with Papias, Polycarp, Justin Martyr — if he was not even older than they; at a time when the doctrine of the millennium, as set forth in the simple, evangelical plainness of its origin, was not only believed by these persons, but the general persuasion of the church. We need not hesitate, then, to claim even Cerinthus as a credible witness to the fact of the prevalence, at least, of such a doctrine, in his own time ; while, as to the nature and explanation of the doctrine, we repudiate and reject his testimony as unscriptural and unsound ; as sim- ply his own, and to be dealt with as such ; not as that of the church in his time, nor as entitled to any portion of the authority which it might have derived from the concurrence of ecclesiastical antiquity in its favour. The doctrine of Cerinthus, relating to the millen- nium, is represented by Eusebius as follows, in an extract from the works of the Roman presbyter Caius, who flourished in the reign of Severus, about A. D. 200, and had occasion to notice the opinions in question, in a work of his against the Montanists"*. 'AAAa Kai Koy^ii/ficf, o ti a7roKaXv\p60ov wg vtto airocTToXov [xe- ya\ov yeypocixfievav, repaToXoyiai yj^mv wq tt ayyeXav avria oeoeiyixevag ipcv'^o/xdvo^, eTreicrayei Xlyoov, [xeTa t>;v avaaraaiv a E. H. iii. xxviii. 100. A. Cf. Hieron. iv. pars ii. ] 17- De SS. Eccles. 59. F 3 70 Ap2)endix, Chapter Fourth. (TTiyetov etvai to (BaTiAeiov tov ^piarov' km Ttakiv €Tii6vfJiiat( KOi Tj^ovaig ev 'lepovaak^fx t^v aapKa TroXiTivofxevyjv ^ovXeveiv. Kai (.yPpOi VTidpyjav raig ypacpaig tov ©fov, apiBfxov y^iXiov- TaeTiag ev yafxx eopTyjg OiXccv irXavrJ.v Xeyei yiveaSai. Though there is nothing extant of Cerinthus's own, and though contrary opinions are seldom fairly or impartially represented by an adversary ; yet that we may admit to the letter the truth and justness of the above description — every one must allow that Cerinthus' pretended revelations — his assumption of the character of a great apostle — his introduction of angels as the medium of his revela- tions — his resurrection — his kingdom on earth to follow it — his conversation of the flesh in Jerusa- lem — his millennium of the celebration of the nup- tial feast ; are the plainest and most palpable imi- tations of the canonical book of the Apocalypse ; so that, whatever additions he might make to the par- ticulars therein recounted, and whatever embellish- ments of the doctrine his own imagination might suggest, he took the first idea of his millenary dis- pensation, gross and carnal as it might be, from the Book of Revelation itself. And simply on the ground of this very j^erceptible coincidence between his own pretended revelations, and those of St. John, we might have ventured to say, that the great apostle, whose name and character he affected to personate, was most probably St. John. And so it aj)pears it was ; as we learn from the testimony of Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, whom Eusebius quotes in reference to this subject, both hei-e and elsewhere '\ That Cerinthus was a contemporary of St. John, may be collected with certainty, if the anecdote '» Lib. vii. -25. 273. A. B. Testimonies to the 3IiUennium. 71 relating to their meeting in the public baths at Ephesus be true ; an anecdote, which Eusebius twice records from Ireneeus, who professed to have heard it of Polycarp ^. Doubts, it is true, have been cast on the authenticity of this story ; principally because the same thing is related of Ebion and St. John. But Irenseus, its original author, confines it strictly to Cerinthus and St. John ; and whatever we may think of the story itself, yet that Cerinthus was actually a contemporary of the apostle, and might have been acquainted with his Revelation, there is no reason to question. The Liber Enoch is an apocryphal production, which, though often referred to by the Fathers, was long supposed to have been lost ; until our country- man Bruce brought it from Abyssinia, where he had found it in the Ethiopic ; from which language Dr.Laurence translated it into English, and published it in 1821. The learned translator concluded that the work must have been written in the reign of Herod the Great ; but I think it may be proved from the internal evidence of the work itself, with a degree of j)robability almost amounting to certainty, that it is later than the Christian era ; and was composed in the interval between the Jewish war under Vespasian, and that under Hadrian. The proof of this position is too long to be entered upon in this place ; though it will be produced hereafter. I will take the liberty, therefore, of assuming it at present, and reasoning upon it accordingly. Now the doctrine of a personal reign of Christ on <= E. H. iii. xxviii. 100. C. D. iv. xiv. 128. A. Cf. Theodoret, iv 329. Hsereticar. Fabb. Compendium,, ii,3. F 4 72 Appendix y Chapter Fourth. earth, and of a state of things analogous to wliat may be expected under the millennium, occurs in various parts of this book. Yery early, it is said 'S "Who will hereafter tread upon mount Sinai, appear " with his hosts, and be manifested in the strength of " his power from heaven ;" which is a plain allusion to the coming with the angels, and the irapovjia h lvvdu.il of Christ. There is a distinct reference, in chapter xxiv. to the imagery of the Book of Revela- tion, descriptive of the tree of life ; to the personal residence of God on earth, the seat whereof is the north, or mount Sion, during a reign or subsistence of the saints in })eace and long life. So likewise in chapter x. 20 — 29 ; wiiere the twenty-third verse speaks of the saints living until they have begotten a thousand chWdven ; " while the whole period of their "youth, and their sabbaths shall be completed in " peace." The rest of this verse, and the twenty-fourth contain, as it seems to me, a very significant allusion to that parable, ascribed to our Lord by Irena^us and Papias, on the authority of St. John and of the Elders ; the authenticity of which we considered at large, vol. i. 292 — 305 of the present work. " In " those days all the earth shall be cultivated in right- " eousness ; it shall be wholly planted with trees, and " filled with benediction ; every tree of delight shall " be planted in it. In it shall vines he planted; " and the vine ivhich shall he planted in it shall yield *^ fruit to satiety ; every seed which shall he sown " in it, shall produce Jbr one measure a thousand ; " and one measure of olives .shall j)roduce ten " presses of oilr Many other chapters too there '' ('li:il). i. 4. Testimonies to the Millennium. 73 are ^ which contain descriptions easily to be ex- plained and accounted for by a reference to the mil- lenary state of things ; but not on any other suppo- sition. In Origen's Commentaries on St. John's Gospel, he has occasion to produce the following passage from Heracleon, (a disciple of Valentinus,) in refer- ence to the Passover, John ii. 12, 13^. Aut>;, ^irja/v, Yj fXf.yakYi eopTVj, rov yap TraUov^ rev awTYjpog rvitog i^v, ore ov [xovov avYjpe7T0 to 7rpof3aTov, aXka Kai avaTravaiv Trapayev haSiofj.evov, kol 6vo[xevov [mv to irdBog tov awTrjpog to ev Koaixco €a-^[Maiviv, ea-6io[Jievov Se tyjv avaTravcriv Tyjv ev yafxw. If we compare this passage with the Excerpta ex Scriptis Theodoti, in Clemens Alexandrinus ^, which seems to be a digest or abstract of the opinions of the Valentinians in general ; we shall see that this avaTravaig rj ev ya^aco of Heracleon, is the ^eiTivov lav yafxcov, there alluded to, Komv ttolvtccv rm (7x^o[xlvu)v, which was to ensue on the awTeXeia tov alavog indeed, but to precede the resolution of to, irvevfj^aTiKa, (spi- ritual essences, clothed with xpv^och or animal souls,) into the everlasting condition of intellectual iEons. We are told by Clement '», that Valentinus was an hearer of Theodadis, who had been a disciple of St. Paul; and as to Heracleon, his antiquity, I think, is such that we must not place him later than the middle of the second century. That the traces of the doctrine of a millennium, as a period of happi- ness represented under the sensible image of a nup- tial feast, whether in reference to certain of the e xxxviii, xxxix. 1. xlv. Ixi. 11 — 18. f Operuni, iv. 171)- E. in Joh. Tom. x. 14. g Operum ii. 984. capp. (33 — 65. h Ibid. ii. 898. 12. Strom, vii. 17. 7i .■}j)jj('/i(lix, L'luijitcr Fourth. parables, or, as is more probable, to the symbolical marriaire of the Lamb with tlie new Jerusalem in the Apocalypse, may be recognised under the above descriptions, it is impossible to deny. And the same doctrine supposes this festivity to be transacted in the interim between the transition from the things of sense into those of eternity ; for the passage goes on to speak of a s})i ritual and everlasting marriage feast, to be celebrated by the same spiritual essences in the state of iEons, even after that which they had celebrated as clothed with souls. Another statement is also to be met with in Cle- ment', which is probably a Valentinian notion ; and seems likewise to be founded at bottom on the doc- trine of a millennium : cl yap e^ avOpoinxv eU ayyeAov^ fxtTaUTcivTe?, 5(,'Aia ervj fJiaOrjTevcvTai vno rav ayyeXav, ng t€- XeiOTYja aTTOKaOidTaixiyoi' eiroc, oi [xev ^t^a^avTig /xerar/Sev- Tai (Ig ap'^ayyekiKYj'j e^ovaiaV oi [xaOovreg 6e, Tovg ef a-jSpx- TT'xv alOtg ixeOiaraixevovi elg ayyfXovs fxa6-^T€iovoriv. k , t. X. In the first or genuine ei)istle of Clemens Roma- nus, I find no direct testimony to the doctrine of a millennium ; nor any indirect, unless it be, at cap. 2'i : where, as he quotes James i. 8, and 2 Pet. iii. 4 : it is to be j)resumed that he had the same pro- mised coming of Ciirist, before his mind, which is meant in those two j)assages, cs})eciall}' in the latter. In the second epistle, (which, liowever, is most probably not genuine, though undoubtedly of very high anti(|uity,) the same quotations, and the same observations occur, rcrhat'mi^s with a still more ])i'r- ceptible reference to tiie time of the end, and to ' ()iti'ruiii ii. lOOl. \']\ S^. l'n)|)liL'larum EdufXir, cap. TjJ- ^ Cap. xi. Testimonies to the Millennium. 75 the fulfilment of the promises of God in his king- dom. The next chapter of this Epistle proceeds as fol- lows : " Let us wait then hourly for the kingdom of " God in love, (charity,) and righteousness : for as " much as we know not the day of the manifestation " of God. For the Lord himself, being inquired of " by some one, when his kingdom should come, an- " SWered, oVav (leg. oVe) tarai TO. '^vo ev, Kai to e^a wg ro eao), Kai. to aprrev ixtTa t>;$" oYjAeiag ovTe apaev ovt€ ui^Av. The original of this passage was to be found in the Gospel according to the Egyptians, as we learn from Clemens Alexandrinus'" : and the party who was supposed to be speaking to our Lord was Sa- lome ; the same who in the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark took part in the petition of James and John. A rather fuller account of the conversation is given by Clemens, in another passage", as follows : 0/ ^e avTiTa(T(XO[Ji€VOi Tyj KTicrei tov Seov ^/a tyj^ evcpYJixriV ey- KpuT^iag, KaKeha Xeyovaif xa Trpog SaAoj/xojv eipyjixeva, wv TrpoTepov l^xvyjaQyi^e/ (peperai ^e, oifxai, ev tco kut AiyviTTi- ovg evayyeXiw. (paai yo.p, oti avTog eiTrev 6 Swtt;/?, 'HA^ov KUTaXvaai to. epya Trjg dyjXeiag . . . o6ev eiKOTag Trepi avvTe- Xeiag [xvrjO-avTos tov Aoyov, y] SaAw^M,'*? (pyja' Me')(^pt Tivog oi avOpcoTTOi anoSavQvvTai ; . . . ^w Kai 7TapaT(iTV]pYi[j.evcog anoKpi- veTai 6 Kvpiog' Mej^p/f av tiktooo'iv ai yvvaiKeg. 1 Something like this occurs in the Epistle of Barnabas, no doubt from some apocryphal production, which is nevertheless called the work of a prophet. 'O/ioiws ttoXlv nepl roD a-ravpov opi^fi ev nXXco 7rpo(j)TjTr], XeyovTi, Koi Trdre ravra (rvvreXea-drja-erai ; Kai Xfyd Kvpios' oTav ^vKov KkiQfj Koi dvaar^, Ka\ orav tK ^vXov aijxa a-Ta^rj. Caj). xii. p. 9. ^^ Operum i. 553. Strom, iii. 13. Cf. 532. 8—11. Strom, iii. 6: ii. 985. Excerpta Theodoti, 57- n Operum i. 539. 42, sqq. Strom, iii. 9. 70 Appendix, Chapter Fourth. The doctrine of a reign of the saints as such, seems to be plainly implied in the following passage of the Pastor of Hermas°. EcceDeiis virtutum, qui invisi- bili virtute, et magno sensu suo, condidit mundum, et honorifico consilio circumdedit decorem cr^aturae suae, et fortissimo suo verbo confixit coelum, et fun- davit terram super aquas, et virtute sua potenti con- didit sanctam ecclesiam suam, quam benedixit ; ecce transferet citlos ac montes, colles ac maria ; et omnia i)lena fient {margo plana) electis ejus ; ut reddat illis reiwomissionem quam reproinisit cum multo honore et gaudio (si margo) servaverint legi- tima Dei, quie acceperunt in magna fide. In the next vision?', the book is supposed to be written in the time of Clemens, no doubt the same who w\is bisliop of Rome ; though this is no proof that it was so. The antique fragment quoted in the Reliquiae Sacrae^i, speaks of a Pastor composed by Hennas or Herma, at Rome, not long before the time of the writer, when Pius, brother of this Her- ma, was bishop of Rome ; consequently about A. D. 140 — 150. Yet it must be observed that the work whicli has descended to posterity under the name of the Pastor or Sliei)herd, has been ascribed by many ancient and by many modern authorities, to a much older person, the Hernias mentioned by St. Paul, Rom. xvi. 14. There is a singular passage in \'opiscus' life of the emperor Florianus, whose reign comes in the short interval, between tlie dcatli of Tacitus, his brother, and the accession of Probus, A.D, 276. " PP. A])().st. 3G. lib. i. \'isiu i». caj). W. V Pago 1^7. caj). I. 'I Vol. iv. '.. 1. 21—24. Testwiotiies to the Millennium. 77 which seems to ine to be founded ultimately on the doctrine of the Christian millenary kingdom. The reader will find it below'". Again, as it is acknowledged that the Koran of Mahomet is made up in a great measure of matter derived from the Old and New Testaments re- spectively ; the resemblance between the paradise of Mahomet and the millennium of Cerinthus, or other Christian heretics who entertained the same gross and carnal opinions of it, is presumptively an argument that the first idea of his j^eculiar paradise was borrowed by its author from this source ; and that the paradise of the Arabian impostor is, in fact, nothing more than the millenary dispensation of Ce- rinthus, Valentinus, and other heretical Christians. Lastly, as the doctrine of a future restoration of the Jews to their own country, was shewn by me. General Introduction, chap. xii. part ii. p. 359 — 365, to be intimately connected with that of the millennium ; I would observe upon this subject !■ Two statues had been erected to Tacitus and Florianus, at Interamna : Sed dejectas fulmine, ita contritiE sunt ut niembra- tim jaceant dissipatie ; quo tempore responsum est ab aruspici- bus, quandoque ex eorum familia imperatorem Romanum futu- rum, seu per foeminam, seu per virum, qui det judices Parthis ac Persis : qui Francos et Alemanos sub Romanis legibus ha- beat : qui per omnem Africam Barbarum non reb'nquat : qui Taprobanis praesidem imponat : qui ad Romanam (Casaubou would read Britanniam) insulam proconsulem mittat : qui Sar- matis omnibus judicet : (perhaps, judicem det :) qui terrain omnem quam oceanus ambit, captis omnibus gentibus, suam fa- ciat : postea tamen senatui reddat imperium, et antiquis legibus vivat ipse, victurus annis cxx. et sine herede moriturus. futu- rum autem eum dixerunt a die fuhnine proscipitatis, {forsan fulminis prU(.' ujjoii that, conimeiisurate to the oirasion in grandeur and extent, of uhitii he speaks, xiv. 4 — 7, and therefore must be supposed to have sjjoken, in the still more express and parti- cular (lescrij)tion tlieretif, xiii. .>— IS. It is observable that 'J'oi)it professes to expect all Testimonies to the Alillemiium. 79 these things, not of his own knowledge or inspira- tion, but because they had been predicted by the prophets. If he was born about B. C. 766, and lived to about B. C. 609, he might be acquainted with the predictions of the prophets; most of whom flourished in the intervening period, especially Micah and Isaiah ; and have left descriptions on record relating to a restoration of the long-lost people of God, and the glories of a new Jerusalem, which the advocates of the millennium consider never, as yet, to have been fulfilled. It is surely to such as these that Tobit also must be supposed to allude, as the groundwork of his faith in a future event, the hope and expectation of which constituted more than any thing else the proper support and consolation of himself and his children, in the land of their capti- vity. And Tobit's testimony to the meaning of such prophecies, it should be remembered, is the testi- mony of a contemporary ; whose faith too, in this article of his belief, so interesting to his nation in general, and so dear to every patriotic breast among his countrymen in particular, it would not be easy to deny, was as sober and rational, as it was firm and unwavering. APPENDIX, CHAPTER V ON THE APOCRYPHAL SECOND BOOK OF E SDR AS, AND ITS PROBABLE DATE. Si:i-: (JKNKRAL INTRODUCTION, CHAPTER XII. PART II. P- 359—365- X HE apocryphal production, called tlic Second Book of Esdras, or Ezra, formerly existed only in the Latin Vulgate, and in an Arabic ver.sion ; until it was translated by Dr. Laurence, from the Ethiopic, and published in 1820. There is a singular state- ment in that book, concerning the subsequent his- tory of the ten tribes, after their absportation by Shalmanezer, into Upper Asia. The number of these tribes is represented in the Ethiopic version as nine **, in the Vulgate as ten ^ : but both agree furtlier in saying that, being carried beyond tlie Euj)hrates, into another country, they resolved to retire into some quarter of the world before unin- liabited, and there keep tiieir law, which they had not observed in tbrir own land : that, accordingly, they crossed the Eui)hratcs, which was miraculously divided to give them a passage, and went a year and an iialf's journey into a region, wliich the Ethiopic calls Aza])Ii, and the A'ulgate Arsaieth, or as it is « CIi. xiii. i2. •' CI), xiii. UK Date of the Second Book of Esdras. 81 in the margin, Ararath : where they ever after con- tinued, until the time of the end was approaching. At this time, the same book speaks of their being restored to their own country, and of their being brought back thither miraculously over the flood again, as they had been taken across it*'. Before this restitution, and as the direct prelimi- nary to it, it describes also in a very significant manner, the termination of a contest, in which the Son of God himself was previously engaged, on the one hand, and the infidel or antichristian powers, represented as all the nations of the world besides, on the other ; the latter being overwhelmed and de- stroyed by one act of omnipotent energy, on the part of the former ; and the scene of his triumph over them being mount Sion 'I The author of this book, then, entertained the same expectation as the rest of the early Christians, that an infidel or antichristian contest would pre- cede the coming of Christ to the end of the world ; the locality of which would be Judaea in general, and mount Sion in particular. It appears too, from other parts of the work, which precede this closing description, if they are but consistent with it — that he expected a reign also of the Son of God upon earth, the visible limits of which would be the boundaries of the Holy Land ; and the subjects admitted to partake of it, be either the Jews exclusively, or certainly none but believing Christians among the Gentiles, distinct from them. The former I consider to be his real opinion ; for c Ch. xiii. 49—52. 17—10: Eth. Vers. ^ Ch. xiii. 1 — 1.5. 33—41. VOL. V. PART II. . G 82 ^ppetulix. Chapter Fifth. lie iiivnriably assumes, and reasons upon the as- sumption, that the world was created for the Jews, and for them alone ; that all besides were created in vain ; were rep;arded in comj)arison of the Jews, as so many nonentities in the scale of being ; and as ut- terly worthless and insignificant, should be left by their Creator to i)erish, as though they had never been ^. The fact of this reign is supjmsed to come in be- tween the destruction of the Roman empire, and the general judgment *^: and yet to be j)receded by a judgment of some kind or oUier itself'-'. And we may collect from iv. 28, that this judgment, or these judgments, in the opinion of the Pseudo-Esdras, would take up three years. " The earth shall be terrified with those who dwell " ui)()n it, and the sj)rings of water shall stand still " without flowing for three years-y JJut the Vulgate, vi. 24, has the latter part of this verse; *' And in three hours they shall not rise." That he was well aware of the futurity of a ge- neral judgment, as " the end of the present world, " and the beginning of that which is to come, where ** mortality should cease and immortality commence," appears plainly from vii. 12: and from a still more peculiar notion, which is, that after the termination of the reign of Messiah with the chosen ^{}\\\ upon earth, both he, and all before alive, should die, and the world return for seven days to a state of primi- tive silence; until its awakein'ng, followed by the general resurrection — the general judgment — and the innnutable state of happiness or misery through f Ket' ill. iv. (»;{. <)(! ; V. 10; ami a variety of other passjiges. f Cli. xii. Mil— 4l>. t' Cli. xiii. II ; iv. 22. 2y. Date of the Second Book of Esdras. 83 eternity : which general judgment the author was further of opinion should be transacted in one day, but a day equal in length to seven years''. Before all this, however, we have clear intima- tions of a revelation of Messiah in person ; of the rais- ing up of others, to partake of his glory, or of that of God, with him (which is the resurrection of the just, as such); of a change of the hearts and disposi- tions of the inhabitants of the earth; of the extinction of evil, and the triumph of faith and truth ; and of other like effects, which a millenarian can suppose to hold good, only of such a dispensation as his mil- lennium ^ That Judaea is the appointed scene of all this oeco- nomy of happiness, and Judsea strictly limited, may be plainly inferred from ix. 8, 9- 14 : and that there is a city, the New Jerusalem, as its capital, appears likewise from the vision of the woman to Esdras, and her sudden transformation into a city, explained by the angel, who converses with him, accordingly**. Besides which, it is also observable* that the author believed in the notion, peculiar to the Jews, con- cerning the creation of the two monsters. Behemoth and Leviathan ; and their destruction, or rather des- tination, to be " preserved as food for those who may want them ;" that is, as the notion, above men- tioned, supposed '" ; for the supper of the faithful in Messiah's kingdom. There is this difference, how- ever, between our author's opinion on this subject, and the rabbinical tradition, that he supposes both h Ch. V. 30— vi. Hi. i Cli. V. 26—29 ; iv. 29, 31, 32. Cf. viii. 60. 62. 64. 70, 71 ; iii. 10. k cf. ix. 38; x. 40, 41. r)5_70. Cf. iii. 4. 1 Chap. iv. 56 — 60. '« Dr. Laurence's General Remarks, p. 308. G 2 8t Appendix, Chapter fifth. monsters to be reserved for the purpose in ques- tion" ; the conceit of the rabbis only Leviathan. The testimony of this book, then, like that of the otlier apocryphal productions considered abqve, is favourable, in general, to the opinions of the mil- lenarians. I say in general ; and no one, I hope, will be so unfair as to infer from this mere general coin- cidence between us. that its particular notions are the same with ours. The reader may j)erhaps de- sire to know somewhat of the probable date of its composition ; upon which depends, in a great mea- sure, the value of its testimony, general as it is. The learned translator thinks it was written be- tween B. C. 28 and B. C. 25"^ : in which case it was earlier than the Christian era. But there are many passages in it, which seem to me strongly to imply that the author must have been acquainted with the books of the Xow Testament : and therefore wrote q/^er the Christian era, at least. For example, I would desire the reader to compare the following parts of the Ethiopic version, with the corresponding ones, produced from the Xew Testament as parallel to them ; and then say, if the resemblance between them is not sufficiently striking to justify the infer- ence that the author of the former knew something of the latter. Ch. ii. ;J6 — 40 : Parable of the Tares in St. Matt, xiii, 21 — SO — ii. 44, 45: Rev, vi, 10, 11 — iii. 1 — 20: Prophecy on the Mount, especially iii. 3. 15. and Matt. xxiv. 12 — iii, 2 : Luke xviii. S — •» In this rispect, the opinions of the Pseudo- Esdros ajn'eed with thi>se of the P>eiido- Enoch. Si»e Dr. Laurence's Liber Enoch (second edition) chapter Iviii. 7 — !•♦• " General Remarks, 317- Date of the Second Book of Esdras. 85 iii. 6. 10 : Matt. xxiv. 29, &c.— iv. 13 : Rev. vii. 3— iv. 14 : Matt. xxiv. 3 — iv. 21 : Rev. i. 15 ; xiv. 2 ; xix. 6 — i v. 22 : Rev. xx. 12 — iv. 26 : 1 Cor. xv. 52 or 1 Thess. iv. 16— iv. 30 : Matt. xvi. 28, or John viii. 52 — vi. 1 : Rev. xx. 1. 3, or ix. \,kc. or Matt. xiii. 42. 50— vi. 20 ; viii. 1, 2. 6 : Matt. xx. 16— vi. 50 ; viii. 38 : Rev. xiv. 13, or Luke xii. 33 — vi. 71 ; vii. 30 : Matt. xiii. 43 — vi. 71 : Luke xx. 36 — vi. 76 : Acts i. 25 — viii. 26 : Hebrews i. 7 — ix. 2, 3 : Matt, xxiv. 7: Luke xxi. 25^ix. 8: Matt. xxiv. 13 — xiii. 2: Matt. xxiv. 30 — xiii. 3: Rev. xx.ll — xiii. 36: Matt. xxiv. 7 — xiii. 54 — Matt. xi. 27 — xiii. 55: Luke xvii. 22. 24 — xiv. 7 : Philipp. i. 23. Ch. iv. 1. we have the Son of man, aTrAws, a phrase decidedly Christian; iv. 13. and elsewhere repeat- GiWy, faith, absolutely mentioned also; xiii. 54. xiv. 7. the Son, absolutely ; xiii. 50. his day, absolutely ; all evangelical or Christian modes of speech. Independent however of these internal evidences of what the author was — I think a clear proof that he was a Christian of some denomination or other, would be supplied by iv. 30. alone : " In that day, " shall they behold those men who have ascended •' (into heaven) without tasting death from their " birth." If the only persons who ever ascended into heaven without having died, were Enoch and Elijah, these men must be Enoch and Elijah : and tlie verse in question predicts their appearance again just on the eve of the establishment of the Messiah's kingdom upon earth ; such being the general subject of that part of the book, to which this verse belongs. Now the expectation of a personal reappearance of both G 3 86 Appendix, C/iapter Fifth. these parties in conjunction, and not of one of them merely (Elijah) distinct from the other, is an ex- pectation which we liave seen to be purely Christian; which no one entertained, who had not heard of the two witnesses in Revelation, and of the Christian gloss upon them, that they were Enoch and Elijah. Again, the end of the world is repeatedly spoken of as at hand, and the latter times as current, when the author was writing; and the likei*. In particular, at xiv. 8, 9; which I shall quote: " For the world has past its youth, and the times " grow old. " The world is distributed into ten periods. To " the tenth is it arrived, and a half of that tenth " remaineth." The part which answers to this in the Vulgate '', certainly differs materially from it ; but Dr. Lau- rence has shewn that the true reading is the Ethi- opic ^. There is another text in the \"ulgate (vii. 28.) which predicts the a])pearance of Jesus by name, within four hundred years ; and though the Ethi- opic, in the parallel j)lace, v. 29- reads simply, " my " Messiah," for, " my Son Jesus," and omits the date, yet there seems no reason, why we should not sup- pose the date at least to be gemiine, whether the name of Jesus is so, or not. At the end of the work in tiie Etlii(i])ic, xiv. 52. we meet with a sub- scription, which makes it bear date A. M. 5092. in the fourth of the Sabbatic years, on the tenth niglit of the third month. If these dates are consistent with each other, the P Chap. u.'A'}. 11 — IM. .")'2— CI. iii. ."> ; viii. ()— ±"). X (h. xii. 1(5— ]H. Date of the Second Book of Esdras. 91 the Roman emperors, Augustus ; of which this cha- racteristic circumstance is there mentioned, that none of his successors should reign even half so long. Tiberius had the longest reign of the first twelve Csesars, next to Augustus; yet Tiberius reigned only twenty-two years complete, whereas Augustus was currently reckoned to have reigned fifty-six years complete. Thirdly, xi. 23, 24 of the vision, after mention- ing the perishing of all the wings in their turn, when their allotted period of existence was over, it is said of them generally : " Some of them indeed "set themselves up, but did not reign:" which, I think, is a plain intimation that some of the twelve should aspire indeed at the purple, but should not gain or not retain it. Such were three of the first twelve Ca?sars, Galba, Otho, and Vitellius ; all of whom reigned successively, and perished between June 9, U.C. 821, and December 21, U. C. 822. Besides these reasons, it seems to me absurd to suppose that the eagle in the vision, can be the same with the fourth beast in Daniel, and yet not denote the Roman empire, as such, just like that ; or to suppose that the twelve kings can answer to twelve wings, who reigned hj turns and in succession, as they are said to have done, and yet not be twelve successive emperors as such. Add to which, that the crimes of this eagle or empire, as laid to its charge, xi. 44—48, are what the empire as such alone could have been guilty of: and among these we find a specific reference in verse 47, to " its de- " struction of the strong hold of the righteous, and " removing the walls of them who had not injured " it ;" which, if we consider that this writer means 92 Appendix, Chapter Fifth. by the righteous, the believing part of the Jewish community alone, must be understood of the treat- ment of Judita by the Romans; most probably in the war of Nero and Vespasian. So much for the explanation of the Twelve wings; which we may justly contend to be simply and purely historical. But as to the Eleven heads ; we may observe first, that they are made up of Three and Eight ; the Three, originally a part of the eagle, as nuich as the wings >' ; the Eight, subse- quently sprouting out from the Twelve wings ^, and being in fact both heads and small wings. Secondly, that the Three heads, when they first appear, are represented as silent*'; and they continue in that state of silence, until the Twelve wings liave each reigned and perished ^' ; which clearly implies, that the Three heads of the eagle, whatever they were, should not come into the discharge of their proper part, until the Twelve wings had done with theirs ; nor, in fact, until later. For, thirdly, the Eight heads, or smaller wings, are also supposed to have nothing to do, until the Twelve wings have perished. After that, both they, and the Three silent heads, come into a state of activity, as follows. First, Two out of the Eiglit perish, immediately after the Twelve : then Two of the Six remaining, pass over from the rest to tiie Three heads : then, out of the Four left, first one conspires to reign and quickly perishes ; then a second, who meets with the same fate ; then the Two last of the Four ; at wliidi moment of their y C'li. xi. 1. ^ t'h. xi. M, 1. VI. " Cli. xi. .5, (1. '' C'li. xi. 25. Date of the Second Bonk of Esdras. 915 conspiring to reign, the middle iiead of the Three silent heads awakes ; and with the aid of his Two associated smaller heads or wings, said to have passed over to the Three heads sometime before, destroys the Two last of the Four ; after which, he reigns himself. Then the Two other silent heads reign ; one of which, that on the right, devours the other, that on the left ^\ Afterwards, he perishes also himself; and then, last of all, the Two wings (or smaller heads,) which had been the associates of the Middle head before, reign in like manner, and perish 'I We have the interpretation of all this, xii. 23 — 35 ; whence it appears that the course of the repre- sentation is strictly consecutive ; the history of the Eight small wings, and the Three silent heads, beginning directly after the destruction of the last of the Twelve great wings, and going on to the very time of the end ; the Eight being generally described as so many kings, ivhose years should he impious, and their datjs short ; all, near upon the end, but the Jour nearer to it than the first tivo ; and the last two nearer to it than the Jaur — and reserved in fact for the very end ; while the Three heads between them and the Four, should bring on by their inter- vention after their several orders, and by the peculiar nature of their reign, " the conclusion of the king- " dom (that is, of the Roman empire) itself." It would be in vain to endeavour to extract from this representation, though perfectly clear and de- terminate in itself, a consistent historical sense, ap- plicable to the next eleven Roman emperors after c Chap. xi. 25—39. ^ Chap. xii. 2—4. 94 Appoidi.v, Chapter Fifth. the reign of the twelfth ; though there are some things in the account of the middle head, and of the other two, which are strikingly adapted to the history of Severus, and his two sons, Antoninus and Geta, who both succeeded him ; especially, his dying in his bed, but in torment ; and the right head's de- vouring the left, yet perishing himself by the sword*'. Severus actually so died ; and Geta was actually murdered by Antoninus ; and Antoninus by JMacri- nus. But no part of this vision of the heads is his- torical, as referred to the time of the author. It merely gives liis conception of events, in the short period, as he thought it, to come between his own time and that of the end. His history of the Three silent heads in particular, seems to be nothing more than his idea of the kingdom of Antichrist ^ The age of the Pseudo-Esdras is therefore, we may presume, just between the demise of the twelfth Roman emperor, Domitian, and the accession of the thirteenth, Nerva ; that is, A. D. 96. cxnnite. We assumed above that he was writing about that time ; and as the Revelation had been seen and published to the Christian world, before the end of the reign of Domitian, it was possible for him to have seen, and become acquainted with it, before he wrote Iiis own work ; as we also supposed he had done. The two first chapters of the Second of Esdras, which arc found in the Vulgate, are wanting in tiie Etliiopic ; and are considered by Dr. Laurence to be no part of the genuine work. Certainly their author differed from the Pseudo-Esdras. in not expecting a ^ Chap. xii. 34. chap. xi. WW, ;{}». «" Chap. xii. 'JD— 31 . Date of the Second Book of Esdras. 95 restoration of the Jews, but instead of them, of a cliurch, not Jewish according to the flesh ^. Yet he also speaks of the end of the world, as at hand '' ; he also borrows apparently from Revelation, the imagery of his description of a future happiness ' ; he recog- nises the two witnesses, as Isaiah and Jeremiah, and as sent for the help of the people of God ^ ; he ex- pected a resurrection of the just, as such*; a king- dom to be established in Judeea, on mount Sion, hav- ing Christ for its head'"; and " a consummation," which he calls " the Feast of the Lord "." Neither are the two last chapters of the Vulgate to be found in the Ethiopic. But.it is not necessary for us to consider them, as they supply no intimation of the author's opinions on such topics as we are at present discussing. g Chap. i. 33—40. ii. 10, 1 1 . 'i Chap. ii. 13. 34—36. 41 . i Chap. ii. 12. 18, 19. 40—47. ^ Chap. ii. 18. 1 Chap. i. 38_40. ii. 16. 23. 31. m Chap. ii. 10, 11. 40—47. n Chap. ii. 38. APPENDIX, CHAPTER VT UN 'J'lIK PKOHAHLK DAI E OF TIIK Al'OCKV- PIIAL HOOK OF THE ASCENSIO ISAI.E VATIS. ski: (iENKRAL INTRODUCTION, ( llAPTKU XII. TAK-T II. p. 388, 38U. It is the opinion of the learned translator and editor of this work, that it was composed before the end of A.D. 69 : and that it was the work of a eon- verted Jew. See General Remark.s, j)p. 158, 159- sqq. Tliat it was tlie work of a Cliristian (;f some de- nomination or other, may be collected from almost every page of it ; and tiiat this Christian mirophets and teachers of confirmed truths ; and the like : one may imagine a disapj)ointed candidate for ecclesiastical preferment to be giving vent to his spleen and vexation; and that we are even listening to Valentiniis himself — of whom Tertullian tells us, he did not become an heretic, until lu' had nii>sed a bisho])ric. ** Set" chajttiT iv. siij)ra, j)aj;p 7-^ APPENDIX. CHAPTER VII. ON THE PROBABLE DATE OF THE BOOK OF ENOCH. J. HAVE had occasion, not only in the course of the present work, but in my former, upon the prin- ciples and arrangement of a Gospel Harmony, to refer to tlie supposed Liber Enoch, or Book of Enoch, ujion points involving more or less the question of its true date ; and I have uniformly felt myself obliged to express an opinion on this sub- ject, different from that of the learned translator and editor of the work itself. I hope therefore I shall be excused, if I lay before my readers, some- what at length, a statement of the reasons, upon the strength of which I venture to dissent from an au- thority, entitled to so much respect as that of the archbishop of Cashel, the author of the English version in which the Ethiopic translation of the original has been made accessible to us. The testimony of the Book of Enoch is of service in the decision of another question, besides that of the truth of the doctrine of the millennium, so far as this depends upon the fact of its early reception and general diffusion in the church ; viz. the com- parative merits of the Hebrew and the Septuagint H 4 104 Appendix, Chapter Seventh. chronology. It may be made to appear from its own evidence, that it follows what is called the short, and not the long, chronology. On this ac- count, also, it would deserve a particular inquiry into the question of its antiquity, with a view to determine its true date. If it was the composition of an Hebrew Christian, as I believe it to liave been; and if it was written soon after the l)eginiiing of the second century, as I also a])j)reliend to have been the case ; the date of its comj)osition and publication coincided very nearly with that of the famous version of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek, made by Aquila ; the chronology of which, as it is well known, differed from that of the Sei)tuagint, and agreed with that of the Hebrew Bibles of the present day. Here then is a case in point, to prove that the Hebrew chronology generally, in the time of Aquila, and in that of the author of the Book of Enoch, was one and the same ; alike in accordance with the Hebrew chronology of the present day, and alike at variance with that of the Septuagint. This coincidence ought to be allowed its due weight in deciding upon the comparative authenticity of these rival systems of time ; nor is any thing necessary to the full effc'ct of the argument deducible from it. in favour of the Hebrew, except to shew that the author of the Book of Enoch was a Jew, a native in all probability of Palestine, and a contemj)()rary of Aquihfs, so far as regarded the date of his work. I'here was scarcely any production of ancient times, strictly to be considered apocryphal, whicli acquired greater celebrity, and was more confidently received as genuine, or was mori' frequently (juoted Date of the Book of E7ioch. 105 by the Fathers, than the work which bore the name of the patriarch Enoch. I shall notice some of these references to it, by and by. At present I o])serve, that all the fragments of it, extant in their writings, in the shape of quotations which profess to be taken directly from it, are extant in Greek ; which so far implies that the work was written in Greek, or if composed in any other language, was so speedily translated into Greek, and copies of the version were so generally circulated, as to supersede the original. There would be nothing surprising in this last fact; for there is a parallel instance of a translation's su- perseding an original in two much more remarkable cases, the present Greek of St. Matthew's Gospel, and that of St. Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews ; at least, if the uniform tradition of ecclesiastical history with respect to both, and especially with reference to the former, that they were written in the verna- cular Hebrew of Palestine, is to be received as true. The Liber Enoch, from which Dr. Laurence made his translation, exists only in the Ethiopic ; and for the history of the copy which he has followed in the version — how it was discovered in Ethiopia, and brought to England thence, by our countryman Bruce — I refer the reader to the Preliminary Dis- sertation of the learned translator. The first point which I shall endeavour to establish, preparatory to the investigation of the date of the work, is what we may probably suppose was the country of its author, and what the language in which his work was written ; with respect to the latter of which points, I shall have the pleasure of agreeing with Dr. Laurence, but upon the former it will be neces- sary to dissent from him. 106 Appendix, Chapter Seventh. In the first place, then, it is the opinion of the learned translator, in which I entirely concur with him, that the work was written in HebreAV ; that is, as 1 aj)prehend, in the vernacular language of Pales- tine ; though this, indeed, is no necessary conse- quence of its being written in Hebrew. For first, Dr. Laurence himself has shewn ", that references are extant in the most ancient of the Ca- balistical writings, to such a work as tliis I^ook of Enoch ; whence it may be inferred, that the work itself was known to be written in Hebrew. Again, in the book itself, chap. vii. sect. ii. verses 7, 8, there is an account given of the origin of the name of mount Hermon or Armon ; which derives it from the fact that the apostate angels descended from heaven first on that mountain, and there en- tered into their mutual covenant of apostasy. " That " mountain therefore was called Armon, because " they had sworn upon it, and bound themselves by " mutual execrations." This explanation of the name will hold good only in one of the cognate lan- guages, the Hebrew, Syriac, or Chaldaic ''. Again, chap. civ. 8, 9- we meet with a presenti- ment very i)lainly expressed, that whatever language the work itself was written in, it should be trans- lated into others : " But when they shall write all » Preliiniuarv Diss. p:i;j;e xxi. xxii. xxiii. The edition wliieli I refer to is the second edition, Oxford, IR'J.3. ^ This is one of the particulars contained in the Liber Enoch, as we have it at present, which goes furthest to identify the Book, in the main, with that which was known, under the same name, to the Fathers. The definition of the name of inonnt Ilermon in (piestion, is referred to by them, as, often as any thini; contained in tlie Book besides. Date of the Book of Enoch. 107 " my words correctly in their own languages, they " shall neither change nor diminish them ; but shall " write them all correctly." Now this presentiment would be much more probable of a work written orio-inally in Hebrew, than of one composed in Greek. The idea of the translation of a work written in any of the Oriental languages into Greek, was natural enough ; but that of the version of a work composed in Greek, into any of the Oriental languages, was just the reverse. Accordingly it was observed by Scaliger, from the internal evidence of the passages recited from the Greek book of Enoch, in Syncellus, that they were evidently translations from the Hebrew, or some other of the cognate Oriental tongues ^. Now this point being presumptively established, it is a natural inference from it, that the author of a work, which was written in Hebrew, (especially if that was vernacular Hebrew,) was probably a ^qw of Palestine, who both lived and wrote his work, in that country. Dr. Laurence, indeed, is of opinion that he was one of the remnant of the ten tribes, whom Shalmaneser planted in Halah, and Habor, and in the cities of the Medes ; understanding, with Grotius and other commentators, by Halah, Colchis, and by Habor, Iberia 'i. Whether Halah is truly the same with Colchis, and Habor with Iberia, is a ques- tion upon which I do not consider it necessary to enter at present, as having no connection with the further inquiry of the date, or birthplace of the Book of Enoch, except the following very precarious one : viz. that chapter Ixxi. where the author is explain- c Preliminary Diss. xx. ^ Ibid, xxxvii — xxxix. 108 Appendix, CUapter Seventfi. ing his theory of the revolution of days and nights, supposing all along that the sum total of the com- ponent parts of a day and a night, at every point of the year, is eighicoi, he observes, verses 18, 19, that the longest day lias twelve of these parts, and the shortest niglit has sue. According to the prin- ciples of such a theory, every one of these parts of a day and a night, must be supposed to contain one hour and twenty mi imtes of our time, or what is the same thing, of ancient ef/tiifioc/fa/ t'uuL\ The longest day, then, upon the author's i)rinciples, contained six- teen hours of our time, and the shortest night eight: whence Dr. Laurence infers that the author must have lived in some country where this might be the case, not lower down than forty-five, nor higher up than forty-nine degrees of north latitude ; the for- mer of wliich is beyond the limits of Judaea, but the latter not beyond those of Colchis and Iberia. But it is manifest that tiiis reasoning never can be considered conclusive, unless it may be assumed as certain that the writer is speaking with strict mathematical exactness, when he is defining the longest day to contain twelve parts out of tiie eiglileen, and the shortest night six. The hours of the ancients were perpetually varying in length ; and at all times of the year except the two equinoc- tial points, the upai KUipiKai and the xpai ia-r/ix(piva.t dillcred more or less widely asunder. To reduce them to an equality, or to specify the former, at a given j)eriod of the year, in terms of the latter, was no very easy task ; and it may well be doubted whether the author of the Book of Enoch w as com- petent to do this, or posscssi'd the means of measiu*- Date of the Book of Enoch . 109 ing solstitial time by equinoctial, with the necessary precision. That he adopts a rude and imperfect system of astronomy in general, plainly appears from the chapter in question and those which fol- low it, wherein he endeavours to account for a variety of the heavenly phenomena. His estimate of the lengths of days or nights at individual points of the year, measured in such and such proportions of a whole w^HfJ-^pov — whether containing eighteen, or four and twenty, equal parts in all — might be just as rude and imperfect. Nor is it clear, whether he reckons the whole duration of the longest day from sunrise to sunset, or from twilight in the morning, to dusk in the evening. This latter mode of reckon- ing, for the meridian of Jerusalem, woidd make the longest day very nearly sixteen hours of our time in all. Nor are there wanting statements in ancient authors, with respect to the different lengths of the day in different countries, to keep in countenance the assertion of our author, if understood, »; TrXarei Xoyw, of the duration of the longest day even between the parallels of Judaea ^. There are indications, however, in the course of the work, which appear to me, though Dr. Laurence has not referred to them, to point sufficiently clearly e Vide the Uranologicon of Petavius, Geminus, i. 2. E ; iv. 17- A ; iv. 22. D : the author of the Appendix to the Phccnomena of Ptolemy, 93. D — 94. A : Achilles Tatius, Isagoge ad Aratum, cap. 25. i48. C: 35. 159. D: Hipparchus, in Arati Pheeno- mena, lib. i. 5. 179. D — Strabo ii. caput ultimum, circa fn. 35.5. 56. 350—362 — Agathemerus, Geographica, i. viii. apud Geo- graphos Minores, ii : Ptolemsci Arabia, apud Geographos Mi- nores, iii. p. 28 — IMatheniatica Compositio, lib. ii. 6 : Cleomedes, De Sublimibus, lib. i. cap. 6. no Appendix, Chapter Seventh. to the birthplace of the composition. Thus, chapter xvii, 4, it is said, " I came to a river of fire, whieii " flowed like water, and emptied itself into the " Great sea westwards." The usual denomination in the Old Testament % for the Mediterranean sea, is the Great sea; and if that sea is meant in this pas- sage, then the position of that sea westwards, j)roves that wherever the writer was, it was somewhere to the east of the Mediterranean ; whicli Avould be the case with one in Palestine, but not with one in Colchis or Iberia. In like manner, we have mention made, chaj)ter xxxi. ii, of the Erythra'an or Red sea, as lying eastwards ; which also is true of its locality in reference to Judaa. Again, chaj)ter Ixxxi. 18, we have a descrij)tion of the spring, or vernal quarter of the year, extend- ing, according to the author's hyi)othesis, from the vernal equinox to the ninety-first day afterwards ; " In the days of his influence there is perspiration, " heat, and trouble. All the trees become fruitful ; " the leaf of every tree comes forth ; the corn is " reaped ; tlie rose and every species of flower " blossoms in the field." Now these natural j)lie- nomena are really characteristic of the eflects which come to pass within the vernal quarter in Jud;ea ; especially the ripening and reaping of barley and wheat, tile blossoming of the rose, and every species of flower, long bi'fore the summer solstice. But they are not characteristic of the northerly and much colder latitude of Colchis and Iberia. The fourth chapter consists of the following vei*se; " They consider and behold every tree, how it aj)- " pears to wither, and every leaf to fall ofl', except of »» Sei» Xdiiil). xxxiv. (). Date of the Book of Knock. Ill " fourteen trees, which are not deciduous; which wait " from the old to the appearance of the new leaf, for *' two or three winters." What fourteen trees may be here meant, it might not be easy to say ; yet we may perhaps justly contend that more evergreen trees might be enumerated for the climate of Judaea, than for tliat of Colchis or Iberia. Chapter Ixxiii. 13 — 16, there is a comparison of the number of days in a solar year of three hundred and sixty-four days, and a lunar one of three hun- dred and fifty-four, at the end of three, and of five, and of eight years respectively. Now in the cir- cumstance of the selection of these three years espe- cially, as the periods of comparison between the solar and the lunar motions, with a view moreover to ascertain the quantum of the moon's defect in eight years' time upon the sun; it is clear there is a tacit reference to the octaeteric cycle, which we know to have been in use among the Jews at as late a period as the third or fourth century'^ ; as well as to have been the most ancient in use among the Greeks. The third, the fifth, and the eighth years of this cycle, were the intercalary or embolimaic years of the cycle ; which is another critical coin- cidence to shew the reference to be to this cycle ; li yjv aiTiav, says Geminus c, tov$ l^j^jBoXliJ^ovg fx^vag eTo^av ayeiQai Iv tco Tpnoi eTeif koI TreaTrrco, Kai oy^ox' ovo [xev [XYjvag , fxera^v hvo erxv Trnnovrcov, eva ^e, jxera^v evog eviavrov dyof^evov. In chapters Ixxv. and Ixxvi. 1 — 4, also, we have an account given of the winds, which agrees with the cycles or divisions of them made by Aristotle, t" Epiphanius, i. 823. 826: Audiani, xiii. Africanus, Rel. Sacrse, ii. 88. <= yi. 35. C. 112 Appendix, Chapter Seventh. and other ^\'riters upon meteorology, later tlian liis time ; enumerating twelve in all, three from each of the four quarters of the heavens. Both this and the preceding fact are calculated to throw light not only on the country, init on the age of the author of the work ; his country, as nmcli more probably the vicinity of Lower, than of Upper Asia ; his age, as certainly not earlier than the time when such schemes or diagrams of the winds, came to be made and promulgated ; which we are told was not before the time of Aristotle ''. And though Dr. Laurence grounds an argument in support of his oj)inion of the country of the writer, upon his allu- sion to the " North, which is called the Sea," chap. Ixxv. 9 ; the meaning of that allusion may be other- wise collected from Ixxvi. 4, where the north wind is divided into three parts ; one of them for the habitation of nian ; another for seas of water ; and the third part containing paradise ; whence it ap- pears that " the Sea" is meant for the name of one of the winds to the north ; as it would seem, that which blew from the quarter of the heavens lying between the due north point, and the first of the eastern winds as such. But the probable age of the writer is a question which, on many accounts, requires a particular con- sideration by itself. The translator, indeed, has come to the conclusion '', that the work was com- posed early in the reign of Herod the Great ; and consequently some years l)efore the birtli of Christ. ^ See my Dissertations, vol. i. Diss. ii. 144 — 1 1(5, ;iii(l Su|)_ pleiii. Diss. II.ISK .''(!(). <• Prrliininai y Diss, paijc xxiv. xxxiii. XXXV. Date of the Book of Enoch. 113 Into the grounds on which this conchision is founded, we may inquire by and by. Meanwhile, I observe, that with respect to the only two modes of deter- mining the date of an ancient composition, like this of the Book of Enoch — either external testimony, or the internal evidence of such works themselves ; Dr. Laurence has spared me the necessity of endea- vouring to shew that the Book of Enoch was not known to be in existence, at any earlier period than that which he has assumed as the date of its com- position. The supposition that any references to such a work were to be met with in the remains of Eupolemus, or Alexander Polyhistor^, is founded in a mistaken construction of them ^. After the Christian era, indeed, we meet with a multitude of testimonies to its existence ; but they all occur in Christian authors ; and with one exception, they are all of an age that would not prove the work to be known to those who cite it, as already in exist- ence, before the middle of the second century. We shall point out some of these testimonies hereafter. But as to the internal evidence furnished by the book itself, which might enable us to form a probable conjecture of the time of its composition — this species of evidence is manifestly the most satis- factory upon such questions as these, where it is to be had; particularly as it presupposes nothing but the existence of the work itself — the age of which is the point under discussion. And though it was this internal evidence which determined the learned editor to assign the book a date, that makes it earlier by many years than the Christian era ; yet ' Apud Eusebium, irpaTov tov 'Ef&jp^ evprjKivai Ti]v darpoXoyiav, ovK AlyvTTTiovs. S Ibid, xxxiii — xxxv. VOL. V. PART II. I 114 Aj)})(n(Ux, Clidjitcr Seventh. I think the very same kind of evidence will author- ize a totally diflVrent conclusion, without affecting the imnapJe of this mode of reasoning about the age of a certain work, from its own internal evi- dence in general ; but only the question of the legi- timate conclusion which ought to be drawn from tiiat evidence in the given instance, in particu- lar. If, then, the Book of Enoch, such as we have it, was written many years before the birth of Christ ; the author could have known nothing of Christian writings, Christian doctrines. Christian phrases and modes of speaking : so as actually to recognise — actually to adopt them — not to say purposely to quote them, in his own work. If any thing there- fore occurs in his work, which would imply the con- trary to all this, its occurrence there must be ac- counted for, on the princii)le of a purely accidental and undesigned coincidence. If, however, the occur- rence of such coincidences should further appear to be too numerous and frequent ; the coincidences tliem- selves too minute and particular ; the subjects upon which they turn, to be points of knowledge, which could not have been possessed before the revelation of the Gospel, or matters of fact, which could not have been known, before the same era; it will no longer be })()ssil)le to explain them on the j)rinciple of acci- dent; and it will follow that the author of the work in which such coincidences appear, was acquainted witli the facts, the doctrines, the idioms of Chris- tianity — in une word, with Ciiristians and Christian writers; and therefore that he lived some time rz/^rr the Christian era, at least. Date of the Book of Enoch. 115 Now though the work as accessible to the English reader in its present form, is but the translation of a translation, yet it is impossible to read it even in the version from the Ethiopic, and not to be struck with the remarkable agreement between the phraseo- logy and sentiments of this English Book of Enoch, and those sometimes of the Gospels ; sometimes of the Epistles ; sometimes of the Book of Revelation. Almost every page of the version supplies matter of observation of this kind, so plain and palpable in my own opinion, that I have often wondered how it should have escaped the notice of the learned translator; and not have been alluded to either in his Preliminary Dissertation, or in his notes. As the value of the argument, founded on coincidences such as these, depends upon the number, variety, and mi- nuteness of the instances in which they hold good ; it will be necessary to make out a chain of circum- stantial evidence, of this description ; the cumulative amount of which, I think, will fully establish the point in question, that the author of the Book of Enoch must have been some one familiar with Christianity. In the first place — throughout the book he shews an acquaintance with the doctrine of the immortality of the soul ; of the soul's existence out of the body, in an intermediate state ; of the separation of the souls of the good from those of the bad, in that state ; of a resurrection of the body ; of a judgment to come ; of eternal rewards and everlasting punish- ments, according to the works or deservings of the particular subjects of either ; which, if any Jew, or any Gentile, could be supposed or could be shewn to have possessed, before the revelation of Christianity; I 2 110 ./j/jinidij', i'hdjiter S'rrenf/i. it would not be easy to say wliat furtlier light that revelation itself could have thrown upon such points ; or what there was in any of the disclosures which it made in reference to these points, that could he said to he distinctive of Christianity as such. See chapters xvi. 1; xvii. 5; xxii ; xxiv; xxvi ; xxxviii ; xxxix. .'i — 12 ; xli. 1 . (i, 7 ; Ix. 6, 7 ; xcix. 5 ; ciii. .5 ; besides many more passages, whicli might be produced. Again ; among the }>hrases of peri)etual recur- rence in the work, these are some; f/zc elect — the chosen — the saints — aTrAis, or absolutely ; an use of words wliich as meant of an (uXoyrj, a chosen few, or rather the fKX(,yr], the chosen few, whether from among the Jews or from among the (ientiles, was much more })robably to be derived from the language of the New Testament, than from that of the prophe- tical parts of the Old ; though tlie words themselves may occur in these last also. In like manner, as the reverse of these elect ones, we meet with the mention of" the reprobates,'' c\vd\i. X. l.'J: T',v; aiotiifjiov., ; a denomination just as evan- gelical in that sense, as the elect or the approved, in the opposite one. Another phrase of very common occurrence, is that of the " Lord of Glory ;" sometimes in reference to the first i)erson in the Holy 'i'rinity, sometimes to the second, ^^'e know that the jdirase, '' King of *• Glory," occurs three or foiu- times in the Old Tes- tament, Ps. xxiv. 7, S, 9. 10: yet this phrase, the " Lord of (ilory," does not occur therein. Jiut in the New Testament, it is twice applied to our Lord; 1 Cor. ii. 8 : James ii. 1. Another very common phrase is that of the " Lord Date of the Book of Etioch. 117 " of spirits," as applied to the Supreme Being, in his capacity of the Creator of the souls of men. No- thing like this occurs in the Old Testament, except at Numbers xxvii. 16: " The God of the spirits of " all flesh ;" and whether it was taken thence or not, it bears a striking analogy to the similar phraseology of Hebrews xii. 9 : " the Father of " spirits." Again, " the Elect One," is a denomination of standing occurrence to describe the second person in the Holy Trinity, as the same with our Saviour Jesus Christ: in which sense it is analogous to the phrase of " The Just One," Acts iii. 14; vii. 52; xxii. 14: (Cf. James v. 6:) also used of the same person. Again, the phrase, " Son of Man," as applicable to our Lord especially, occurs once only in the Old Testament; Daniel vii. 13. In the Book of Enoch, the words, " This Son of Man," occur repeatedly in that form. (See xlvi. 1. 3; xlviii. 2; Ixi. 13. 17. &c.) In other instances " The Son of Man" is the phrase used in their stead : as Ixviii. 38 — 41 ; Ixix. 1, &c. It is true, this Son of man is mentioned in conjunction with the Ancient of Days ; which is Daniel's designation for the Supreme Being, chap, vii. 9. 13 : but if the phrase in question was borrowed by the author of the Book of Enoch, from the Book of Daniel, which speaks only of " one like the Son of " man," as brought before the Ancient of Days, how came it to be so modified, as to point distinctly to some one individual, under the name of This Son of Man ; which individual in the estimation of the author of this book, it is very clear was our Lord Jesus Christ ? 1 3 118 Appendix, Chapter Seventh. \l\\i whatever may be inferred from tlie use of this phrase, there is a similar one, ciiapter Ixi. 9, so very peculiar and so truly singular, that it must at once be pronounced to be the lanj^uage of a Chris- tian. " And trouble shall seize them, when tliey " shall behold this Son of woman sitting upon the " throne of his glory." This too is intended as a descrij)tion of tlie same person, the second person of the Holy Trinity, the man Jesus Christ. Whence then, we may ask, could he have been designated as '• This Son of woman," if it was not known to the author of such an apj)ellation, that he was in- deed the " Son of woman," but not " the Son of " man ?" The origin of such a phrase, and as so aj)plied to our Lord, by any Jewish writer before his birth, could be traced up neither to the j)romise made to Eve, nor to tlie j)rophecy of Isaiah, vii. 14-: without assuming that the Jewish church had a clearer conception of the great mystery of the incar- nation before its revelation by the event, than it can be reasonably supposed, or can be proved, to have had. The phrase of '* sitting upon the throne of his " glory," too, is of standing occurrence in tlie work : see xlv. 3; Ix. 10; Ixi. 2; Ixviii. .'J9, 40. The de- scriptive designation, " Throne of thy glory," occurs Jeremiah xiv. 21 : and something like it, xvii. 12: but the very phrase in question is not met witli in the Old Testament. In the New, our Lord l\\ ice applies it to himself, Matt. xix. 28; xxv, .'H. In another ])assnge, cv. 2(5: Crod is introduced saying of the " spirits of the good :" *' And I will *' i)lace each of tliem on a llirone of glory, of glory Date of the Booh of Enoch. 119 " peculiarly his own." Compare Matt. xix. 28 ; our Lord's promise to the twelve : " Verily I say unto " you, That ye which have followed me, in the re- " generation — when the Son of man shall sit on the " throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve " thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." Chapter civ. 2, (the second chapter with that number,) God speaks of his Son by name : " For I " and my Son will for ever hold communion with " them in the paths of righteousness, while they are " still, alive." Where is the parallel of this language, supplied by the Old Testament? though it might obviously be borrowed from the New ; as for in- stance, John xiv. 21. 23. Chapter Ix. 10, 11 : " Then the Lord of spirits " seated upon the throne of his glory tlie Elect one ; " who shall judge all the works of the holy, in " heaven above, and in a balance shall he weigh " their actions," &c.— Ixviii. 39 ; " He sat upon the " throne of his glory ; and the principal part of the " judgment was assigned to him, the Son of man." Now the fact of this connnission of judgment to the Elect one, or to the Son of man, could have been distinctly learnt from nothing but the New Testa- ment, to which the revelation thereof is peculiar. If the fact of a future judgment is intimated, how- ever obscurely, Daniel vii. 10 ; it is there attributed to the Ancient of Days, and not to the Son of man. It was reserved for the Gospel to declare that " the " Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all " judgment to the Son :" John v. 22 : and that " God " hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge " the world in righteousness by that man whom he '* hath ordained:" Acts xvii. 31. I 4 l!^0 Appeiidu', Chapter Seventh. Besides the phrase of " The great day of judg- *'nient," x. 9, wi-' niett with that of tlii' " (Jreat day" ahsolutc'ly, xix. '■2 : an usage of speech, in reference to the (hiy of (hjoin, unexampled in any j)art of scripture but tlie Gospels and the Epistles of the New Testament. Cliaj). Iviii. 6. it is said, "That " day has been i)repared for the elect a.s a daij of *' covenant, and for sinners as a day of retribution." " The day of the great consunnnation of the great " world," or similar phrases, all denoting the uvvtI- Xaa ToD aixvc.;, as such, a i)urely evangelical idiom, occur xvi. 1: xviii. 15, 16: xix. .'i : &c. Among a variety of words or phrases of a jmrely evangelical imi)ort or idiom, I would cite " The " faithful," xliii. 1: xlvi. 6: &c.: "Truth," "faith," " righteousness :" " Faith," " patience," " benevo- " lence," that is, ayaTrr], charity, xxxix. 5: (Cf. 1 Cor. xiii. 13:) Ix. 14: (Cf. 2 Pet. i. 5—7:) '• The de- " struction of every evil work," x. 20 : " Peace and " remission of sin," xii. section iii. 7: '* Inheriting " eternal life," xl. 9 : " Denying the Lord of glory," xli. 1 : " 15elieving in the name of the Lord of " spirits," xliii. 2 : " Rejecting, denying the name " of, the Lord of spirits," xxxviii. 2: xlv. 2: xlvi. .5: " Being saved by the name of the Lord of spirits," xlix. 3 : " Trusting in the name of the Lord of " spirits," Ix. 3 : " ^rrusting in the day of the Elect " One," Ix. 7 : " Confessing their sins before the " Lord of spirits," Ixii. 1. 9^ "Glorifying the name " of the Lord of kings," Ixii. 9 : and a variety of others of like kind, easy to be borrowed from, or formed upon, the language of the New Testament in almost every page; hut not so with reference to the Old. Date of the Book of Enoch . 121 I should wish to direct the attention of the reader to the following coincidences also, between particu- lar texts in this Book of Enoch, and such and such passages of the New Testament : Thus, chapter x. 20, 21: " Let. ..the plant of " righteousness and of rectitude appear, and its pro- " duce become a blessing." Compare James, iii. 18 : " And the fruit of " righteousness is sown in peace, of them that make " peace." Or Hebrews, xii. 11 : " Nevertheless " afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of right- " eousness unto them which are exercised thereby." Chapter xiii. 6 : " And that I might make the " memorial of their prayer ascend up before the " God of heaven" — xcvi. 4 : " In those days shall " the prayers of the righteous come up before the " Lord" — xcvii. 4 : " Your prayers rise up in re- " membrance." So Acts, x. 4, in the words of the angel to Cor- nelius : " Thy prayers and thine alms are come up " for a memorial before God." Chapter vi. 9 : " The elect shall possess light, joy, " and peace ; and they shall inherit the earth." So Matthew, v. 5 : " Blessed are the meek ; for " they shall inherit the earth." Chapter ix. 3. 10, 11, 12 : " And now to you, O " ye holy ones of heaven, the souls of men com- " plain, saying. Obtain justice for us with the Most " High." " And now behold the souls of those who are " dead cry out, and complain even to the gate of 122 Appendix, Chapter Seventh. " heaven. Tlieir groaiiiiiu: ascends ; nor can they " escape from the uniigliteousness wliich is coni- " niitted on earth." Chapter xxii. 5 : " And I saw the spirits of the " souls of men who were dead ; and their voices " reached to heaven, while they were accusin<;."' (Ot this nuinher, Ahel is mentioned as chief.) Chapter xlvii. 1, 2: *• In that day, the i)rayer of " the holy and the righteous, and the l)lood of the " righteous, shall ascend from tiie earth into the " presence of tiie Lord of spirits." " In that day shall the holy ones assemhle, who " dwell above the heavens, and. ..petition, suj)i)li- " catc.the Lord of spirits on account of the hlood " of the righteous wliich has been shed ; that the " prayer of the righteous may not he intermitted " before the Lord of spirits ; that for them he would " execute judgment; and that his ])atience may not " endure for ever." Compare James, v. 4: "Behold, the hire of the " labourers who have reaped down your fields, which " is of you kej)t back by fraud, crieth : and the cries '• of them which have reaped are entered into the " ears of the Lord of sabaoth," Luke, xviii. 7. S : •* And shall not (rod avenge his " own elect, A\iiiili cry day and night unto him, " tliough he bear long with them ? I tell you that *' he will avenge them si)ee(lil\'." ("f. ^L'ltt. xxiii. 35 : Luke, xi. .50, .5L Ht.'\'c'latioii, \i. <), 10 : " I saw iukKt tiu' allar the " souls of them that were slain for the word df " (lod, and for the testimony wliich they lield : and " they cried with a loud voice, saying. How long, " () Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and Date of th e Book of Enoch. 1 23 " avenge our blood on them that dwell on the " earth ?" Chapter ix. 3 : " IVioii art Lord of lords, God of " gods, King of kings." Cf. Ixxxiii. 2. Revelation, xvii. 14 : " Lord of lords, and King " of kings" — xix. 16 : " King of kings, and Lord of " lords." Chapter ix. 4 : " Thou hast made all things." Revelation iv. 11 : " Thou hast created all things." Chapter ix. 4 : " And all things are open and " manifest before thee." Cf. Ixxxiii. 4. Hebrews iv. 13 : " All things are naked and " opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have " to do." Chapter ix. 12 : " Thou knowest all things, be- " fore they exist." — Ixxxii. 12 : " And every thing " which God has known from the beginning." Acts XV. 18: " Known unto God are all his works " from the beginning of the world." Chapter x. 6 : " Bind Azazyel hand and foot ; " cast him into darkness." Cf. Ixxxvii. 3. Matt. xxii. 13 : " Bind him hand and foot " and cast him into outer darkness." Chapter xiv. 24 : " Yet did not the sanctified, " who were near him, depart far from him either by " night, or by day." Revelation iv. 8 : " They rest not day and night." Cf. vii. 13 : xiv. 4. J 24 Appendix, Chapter Scvenf/i. Chapter xv. 3 : " As those w/io are flesli and " blood do," Matt. xvi. 17: "Flesh and hlood hath not re- '* vealed /7 unto thee." — 1 Cor. xv. 50: '* Flesh and " blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." Chapter xviii. l.>, KJ ; xxi. .'i ; Ixxxv. '2. 4: tiie apostate angels are represented under the image of Stan;, and by the host of heaven. Sueii is the sym- bolical language of Revelation also, vi. I'j ; viii. 10 ; xii. 4. Cliaj)ter xix. 21 : *' So that they sacrificed to devils " as to gods." Though these words occur, Deuteron. xxxii. 17- they are also to be found, 1 Cor. x. 20. Chapter xxii. 9, 10: " 7''hree separittioii.s have " been made between the spirits of tlie dead, and " thus have the sj)irits of the righteous been sepa- " rated, namely by a chasm, hi/ water, and hij light " above it." Luke xvi. 26: "And besides all this, betwi'iii us " and you tiiere is a great gulf (j^d^fxa or chasm) «• fixed." It api)ears too, from verses 11 and 12 of the same chapter, tiiat though judgment is said not to ovir- take sinners in their lifetime, yet " abundant is tliiir *' suilering, castigation, and torment," in the inttr- mediate state between death and the judgment ; a representation of tlieir condition immediately after f (lod's revealed word, except the parable of Dives and Lazarus. Date of the Hook of E)toclt. 125 Chapter xxxvii. 1 : " The word of wisdom." 1 Corinth, xii. 8 : " The word of wisdom." Chapter xxxvii. 3 : " JVhat I received from Mm " was in a hundred and three parables." Chapter xxxviii. 21 : "It would have been better " for them, had they been never born." Matthew xxvi. 24 : " It had been good for that " man, if he had not been born." Compare chapter xxxviii. 2, 3, with 1 Pet.iv. 17, 18. Chapter xxxix. 1 : " Enoch received books of in- " dignation and wrath." Romans ii. 8 : " Indignation and wrath." Chapter xl. 5 : " The second voice I heard bless- " ing the Elect One, and the elect who suffer on ac- " count of the Lord of spirits." By the Elect One here is meant our Lord Jesus Christ ; and from the translator's gloss upon the passage, at the foot of the page, it appears that the word rendered by sufter, means literally in the Ethiopic, crucified or tormented. Could any but a Christian have spoken of being crucified for the Lord of spirits? not to mention that his alluding even to their suffering in any manner on his ac- count, implies that he was aware of the fact of per- secutions for Christ's sake, as sustained, or liable to be sustained, by the elect : which will further appear by and by. Chapter xl. 7 : " The fourth voice I heard ex- 126 AppendiXy Chapter Seventh. " pelling the impious angels, and prohibiting them " from entering into the presence of the Lord of " spirits, to prefer accusations against the inhabit- *' ants of the earth." Revelation xii. 10: "And I heard a loud voice *' saying in heaven, Novi'' is come salvation, and " strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the " power of his Christ : for the accuser of our bre- " thren is cast down, which accused them before our " God day and night." And as this is here spoken of the ejection of the devil or dragon, that is, Satan, from heaven, so is the word in the preceding passage, rendered by, " impious angels," literally, in the Ethiopic, " the Satans." Chapter xliii. 1 : " And their conversion was into " the number of the angels, and of the faithful." — L. 4 : " And all the righteous shall become angels in *' heaven." — xlix. 1 : " In those days the saints and " the chosen shall undergo a change." Luke XX. 36 : " Neither can they die any more : " for they are equal unto the angels :" 1 Cor. XV. 51 : " "We shall not all sleep, but we " shall all be changed." — Philipp. iii. 21 : " Who " shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned " like unto his glorious body." Chapter xlvii. 3: " While the book of the living *' was opened in his presence." Revelation xx. 12: "And another book was " opened, which is the Imoh of life." Cf. Luke x. 20: Pliilipp. iv. 3. Chapter xlviii. 5 : " Therefore the Elect and the Date of the Book of Enoch. 127 " Concealed One existed in His presence, before the " world was created, and for ever." John i. 1 : " In the beginning was the Word, and " the Word was with God." — xvii. 51 : " And now, " O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self " with the glory which I had with thee before the " world was." Cf. 24. and John i. 18. Chapter Iviii. 1 : " The powers of the Most High "... were agitated." Matt. xxiv. 29 : " The powers of the heavens " shall be shaken." Chapter Ixi. 4 : " The word of his mouth shall " destroy all the sinners and all the ungodly, who " shall perish at his presence." 2 Thess. ii. 8 : " Whom the Lord shall consume " with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy " with the brightness of his coming." Chapter Ixii. 11 : " In his judgments He pays no " respect to persons." Romans ii. 11 : " For there is no respect of per- " sons with God." Cf. Acts x. 34 : Gal. ii. 6 : Ephes. vi. 9: Coloss. iii. 25, &c. Chapter Ixxx. 8 : " That no flesh shall be justi- " tied before the Lord." Romans iii. 20 : " Therefore by the deeds of the " law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight." Cf. Gal. ii. 16. In like manner, we may compare chap. xlv. 3. with Hebrews vi. 18: 1. 1. with Revelation xx. 13: Ivi. 5. 128 ytppeudix, Chapter Seventh. with Revelation x. () : Ixi. IS. uitli Liii\exxi. 28. and Revelation vii. {). 1'3, 14- : Ix. 1 — G. we may compare tlic ropCnS, cords, or measures, of the ri*;^hteous with the seals, which serve the same purjwse, Reve- lation vii. 3 : and Ixviii. 20. .'i8. the secret name of the Son of man, with Revelation xix. 12: Ixix. 1. witii Piiilii)p. ii. 9: Ixxx. (). with Rexclation XX. 12: Ixxxviii. 36, 37. with John x. 4: xci. 2. with Acts i. 7 : xriii. 7- with James v. I — .5 : xcvi. 18. with Rew'lation vii. 3 : civ. 2. with Matt. xiii. 43. The descrij)tion of the prison of the fallen angels, which is given in chapter xxi. might serve as a com- mentary on 2 Pet. ii. 4. or Jude 6 : and is in fact the hottomless ])it, or aj3v7'7c<, of Revelation, xx. 1. The vision descrihed, chap. xiv. 8 — 25. might have been suggested by the account given of the vision in Revelation iv. In chapters xxv. xxvi. lii — liw wc have a descrij)ti()n of a valie}' wliich is I'NJdmtly meant to be the counterpart of tiiat \\ liicli is called in Joel, iii. 2. 12. 14. " the valley of Jehosliaj)hat," or " the valley of decision," and Revelation xvi. 1(>. is denoted by " Armageddon." Cf. xcviii. 3. and Revelation xiv. 20: xix. !{)• It seenjs to me too that the descriptions contained in chapter xxxix. 6. — xl. 1. bear a decided reference to similar represent- ations. Revelation v. 9 — 13: vii. 9 — 17: xiv. 1 — .5. I \\(»ul(l (•()nij)arc also liii. (j. xc\'i. 11. A\Iiicli (K'scribe the place of tornuiit as *' a furnace of blazing fire," with Revelation .\\. 1 t, \5. wiiere it is spoken of as *' the lake of fni'. " It aj)pears too, from cliaj)ter xc. () — 14. that lOnoch was aware of another defection of mankind, another consummation of all iniquity, by Date of the Book of Enoch. 1 29 a judgment of fire, another destruction of sinners by fire, and not by water. Now whence could the author of the book have derived his knowledge of this truth in particular, except from 2 Pet. iii. 7- 10 : 2 Thess. i. 8 : 1 Cor. iii. 13. 15 : or the Book of Revelation generally ? Perhaps, however, the strongest presumptive proof that the author of this book lived many years later than the commencement of the promulgation of Christianity, is supplied by the following passage, from chapter xlvi. 3 — 6: which shews, beyond a question, that he was aware of the fact of the perse- cution of Christianity by the kings of the Gentiles, before his time. " This Son of man, whom thou beholdest, shall " raise up kings and the mighty from their couches, " and the powerful from their thrones ; . . . He shall " hurl kings from their thrones and their dominions ; " because they will not exalt and praise Him, nor " humble themselves before Him, by whom their '* kingdoms were granted to them .... They shall " condemn the stars of heaven, shall lift up their " hands against the Most High .... Their strength " shall be in their riches, and their faith in the gods *' whom they have formed with their own hands. " They shall deny the name of the Lord of Spirits, " and shall expel Him from the temples in which " they assemble ; and with Him the faithful, who " suffer in the name of the Lord of spirits." Is not this a plain description of persecution as such ? of injuries, and indignities done to the Lord of spirits, to the Son of man, by the worshippers of idols ? and of sufferings endured by the faithful as VOL. V. TART n. K 180 Appendix f Chapter Seventh. such, at the hands of Gentile princes ? If so — could such a description have been penned by any writer who Iiad not himself seen, or was not historically acquainted with the fact of the persecution of Chris- tianity by one or two of the Roman emperors at least ? and therefore, could the author of the Book of Enoch have lived before the time of Nero, at the earliest ; or before that of Domitian ; or even before that of Trajan ; by each of whom Christianity was successively persecuted ? Having thus produced a considerable part of the internal evidence furnished by this book, sufficient in my opinion to render it almost demonstratively certain that the author of the work, in which it is found, could not have lived before the Gospel era, however long he might have lived after it; I shall proceed to consider what objections to this conclu- sion may also be derived from the testimony of the work itself. No doubt the greatest of these objections, is the fact that something occurs in this book, ascribed to Enoch, ai)i)arently to the same effect with the pro- l)hecy ascribed to Enoch, in the Epistle of Jude, 14, 15. It has been connuonly supposed that the apostle St. Jude, in referring to tlie prophecy in question, refers to some aj)ocryphal book of Enoch, in Mliich it was contained ; and bccan.se the same l)roi)hecy, or something like it, is actually found in the book which at j)resent bears the name of the Book of Enoch, therefore it seems at first sijiht a plausible inference tliat St. Jude referred to this book, and tli.it thi.s Book of Enoch is tlie identical one, from which he took the quotation. Date of the Book of Enoch. 131 But to this conclusion we may reply first, that for any thing which appears to the contrary, it is founded upon a gratuitous assumption; viz. that the apostle, when referring to a prophecy of Enoch, was referring to some book of Enoch. There might be such a thing as a prophecy of Enoch, and yet no such thing as a book of Enoch ; and this prophecy of Enoch might be known to, and quoted by, St. Jude, and yet no book of Enoch either be known to him, or, if known to, be quoted by him. It is no necessary inference therefore, that when referring to a certain prophecy of Enoch, he was referring to some book of Enoch. And when referring to this prophecy of Enoch itself, with what view may we ask, and with what construction of the nature of the prophecy, was he doing this ? with any serious in- tention in the reference, or otherwise ? whether as to a true prophecy, or as to a false ? as to something which actually proceeded from Enoch, or to some- thing which did not ? If it was with a serious in- tention, that he referred to it ; if it was as to a true prophecy ; if it was as to something which actually proceeded from Enoch ; then we may take it for granted he was referring to nothing contained in a merely apocryphal book of Enoch. If it was not with a serious intent ; if it was not as to a true prophecy ; if it was not as to something which actually proceeded from Enoch ; then the thing referred to might very well be contained in a purely apocryphal production ; but would it be quoted thence by a Christian apostle — and quoted, as it evidently is by St. Jude, with all the solem- nity befitting the grave and momentous subject, on which he quotes it ; a subject forming the topic of Kg i;32 Appendix, Chapter Seventh. his Epistle in general, the actual drift and design of which could not he more distinctly specified, nor more completely summed up into one point, than by the terms of this prophecy itself? It appears to me a very objectionable assumption in the prlndple, to take it for granted that apocry- phal productions might be quoted l)y the inspired writers of the '^^w Testament, in any jiianner, which, if it conveyed no direct approbation of such productions, yet very clearly implied no disai)proba- tion of them : as every one must allow to be the case with this sui)posed reference to the Book of Enoch by the apostle St. Jude. If these productions were really what we mean by apocryphal, they were all of them forgeries of one kind or another ; and frequently forgeries of a very grave and serious cha- racter — involving much more than the ordinary degree of criminality which attaches to fraud, im- posture, false professions and pretences, under all circumstances, when they would pass themselves off for their contraries — by being written in the name of patriarchs and prophets ; by pretending to be in- spired, and therefore claiming as their author the holy Spirit of God ; and whatsoever they contain- ed, uhether true or false in itself, whether objec- tionable or unobjectionable, whether orthodox or he- terodox, virtually alleging the same warrant of in- sj)iration for it all alike. If this was not to com- mit a blasj)hemy against the Holy Ghost, almost in the strict sense of the word; especially when we consider how much of error, of absurdity, and even of wickedness, was tlius palmed upon the Christian world in his name — it wouhl not be easy to say what was. There may be nothing of a very offen- Date of the Book of Enoch. 133 sive and exceptionable character in the Book of Enoch ; but there is much in it simply false and erroneous, upon a variety of points : and it is an ob- jection to the work in principle — an objection not to be reconciled to any correct standard of sincerity, and much less to the Christian standard of truth and honesty — that it is attributed to the patriarch Enoch ; it is all supposed to be revealed to him, directly or indirectly — and it is all consequently to be ascribed at last, to God himself. Could more be said of many parts of the Book of Daniel, and of almost all of the Book of Revelation, with respect at least to the pro- fessions of the book itself, and to the circumstances under which the particulars therein recorded are supposed to have come to the knowledge of the writer ? The fact is, that the greatest part of these apo- cryphal productions, which once abounded in the Christian world ; and those three of them in parti- cular, which have come down to us, the Liber Esdrae, the Ascensio Isaise Vatis, and the Liber Enoch; are very plainly compositions modelled upon the plan, and written in imitation of the canonical Book of Revelation. The idea of such works in general seems to have been first suggested by the Book of Revelation itself: nor have we proof that any of them was in existence, or was known to be so, before the best authenticated date of the Revelation, the close of the first century, and the beginning of the second. One of the earliest of these productions, was the pretended \\7ioKaXv\l'ii of Cerinthus, which as we have seen was published in the lifetime of St. John, and was so barefaced an imitation of the K 3 194 Appeyulix, Chapter Seventh. canonical Book of Revelation, as not only to bear the same title, but to be ascribed to the same author. In the Liber Esdra?, and the Ascensio Isaiju Vatis, tlie same first princij)le is at the bottom of the whole as in the Book of Revelation ; viz. that whatever be the subject-matter of the work, and whatever the particular revelations, visions, rei)resentations, nar- rated therein, it is an history of revelations', or the like, made to some saint or holy man ; made by the instrumentality of angels ; and related by the saint or the holy man himself: all which is true of the state of the case in the Book of Revelation. And as to this Book of Enoch, its conformity to the model of the Revelation, not only in the outline and plan, but very often in the particular details, is too striking to escape notice, and too close to be ac- counted for on any principle but that of design. It is an obvious remark, that a strong argument in proof of the antiquity, and also of the general re- ception, and acknowledged authority, of the canoni- cal Book of Revelation, might be derived from the early production even of these forged or apocry- plial compositions ; if they were actually modelled upon the plan of that inspired work. The spurious Revelation of Cerinthus, had it come down to us, would have been a valuable document in this point of view, as recognising so early the existence and authority of a genuine Revelation : and it is in the same point of view a fortunate circumstance, that each of the three apocryj)hal writings, of a date later tiian the Cliristian era, which out of so many that onci' existed are all that have descended to posterity en- tire — a])i)r()aches wry nearly in point of time, to the publication of the Revelation itself; especially Date of the Book of Enoch. 135 the Liber Esdrse ; which as we have seen, must have been composed in the interim between the reign of Domitian and that of Trajan ; when St. John was probably still living. In point of comparative anti- quity, I should place the Liber Enoch next to the Liber Esdrae ; though this is not so absolutely cer- tain, but that the Ascensio Isaiae Vatis may still dis- pute the palm of priority with it. We know the opinion which St. John himself ex- pressed in reference to Cerinthus, w^ho had been guilty of the crime of forging a Revelation under his name. We know too the censure which the ancient church passed on one of her presbyters, who had been guilty of a similar fraud, though of a much less aggravated character, in composing and publish- ing the spurious Acts of Paul and Thecla ^. Are we to suppose that the apostle St. Jude would not have reprobated fraud and imposture of any kind, as much as the apostle St. John ? or that the primitive church would not have condemned the author of a spurious Book of Enoch, as readily as the author of forged Acts of St. Paul ^ ? Is it credible, then, that if St. Jude had known of a Book of Enoch, and known it to be falsely so styled and reputed — he would have quoted its authority in support of a serious argument, like his own ? li Tertullian, iv. 204. De Baptismo, I7. i It is mentioned by Jeromej De SS. Ecclesiasticis, that one reason why a part of the Church did not receive the Epistle of Jude, as genuine, was because the author of it had referred, as they supposed, to an apocryphal work. If so, it is necessary even to vindicate the honour of the Epistle itself, to shew that in referring to a prophecy of Enoch, it was by no means re- ferring to the Book of Enoch. K 4 136 Appendix, Chapter Seventh. But to this objection it will probably be retorted, that Jude has actually quoted an apocryphal pro- duction, in verse 9, of the same Epistle, just before : where he speaks of Michael the archangel's contend- ing with Satan for the body of Moses. True, should be my reply ; could it be proved that Jude refers for that fact to some apocryphal production, in which it was contained. But until that can be shewn, we may answer with Horace, Nil agit exemplum, quod litem lite rcsolvit. I observe St. Jude in this instance, quoting such and such a fact, as I observe him in the other, quoting such and such a prophecy ; but I do not see that he refers the fact to any independent au- thority in the former instance, no more than the prophecy in the latter. The fact too might be con- tained in an apocryphal production of some kind or other, (as indeed we are told it was, in one entitled MaJC7ea)f avaXr^xpic, or Mi-aeaJf avalSacrig, or avaPaTiKoiJ . Mosis Assumptio or Ascensio,) just as the prophecy has something like it in the Liber Enoch ; and yet it would not follow from this circumstance, that the apocryphal production in question existed in the time of Jude, no more than it does from the other, that the Liber Enoch did so too ^ •^ Origen. i. 138. a. b. De Principiis, iii. cap. ii. 1, and the note of the editor. Cf. Clem. Alex. i. 412, 24; Strom, i. 23: ii. 8()G, 32—807, i); Strom, vi. 15 : 1008 in Jud. 9; 1009. 24. in 1 Juhann. ii. 1. Constitutiones Apostolica*, vi. 1(J. 280. D. E. Epiphanius. i. 280. C. D. Sethiani, v. Theophyl. iii. 450. D. in Judae Ep. 8. Nicephorus, apud Syncelli Chronographiam, p. 787' li'ic 10. 1 St. Paul refers, 2 Tim. iii. 8, to the fact of Jannes and Jambres's withstanding Closes in Kgyptr Does he then refer Date of the Book of Enoch. 137 It ought to be observed, upon this question, that the presumed quotation from the Book of Enoch, contains a prophecy ; and a prophecy which, though supposed to have been delivered, I will not say so long ago as the time of Enoch, but even so long since as Dr. Laurence's assumed date of the book of Enoch, is a prophecy still — that is, even if true, remains yet to be fulfilled. Now with respect to prophecy of this description, prophecy which was not to be fulfilled, if ever, until after the lapse of hundreds and thousands of years, it is impossible there could be any medium between its absolute truth, or its absolute falsehood. The prophecy in question, then, must be either absolutely true, or absolutely false. If absolutely true — such a pro- phecy was the dictate of inspiration ; if absolutely false, whatever else might have produced it, it could never have been the dictate of inspiration. Now we know that the prophecy, though delivered profes- sedly so long ago, and though still to be fulfilled, is most true, and sometime infallibly to be fulfilled ; for it is a prediction of the coming of God, in due course of time, to judgment, attended by thousands of his holy angels, to reward every man according to his deservings, whether good or evil ; an event to an apocryphal production, in which that fact was contained ? I do not know that commentators usually suppose so : yet there was an apocryphal book, which gave an account of this opposi- tion, and was called the Book of Jamnes and Mambres, (that is, Jambres) : Origen. iii. 916. B. Comment in Matt. Series, 117- The names of Jamnes and Jotapes, as those of two celebrated magi of antiquity, have been thought to occur in Pliny's Na- tural History : but Harduin reads the passage differently : H. N. XXX, 32. Yet Numenius, the Pythagorean philosopher, certainly mentioned both of them. 1;38 Appe7idi.i\ i'hapter Sncntli. wliich is foretold almost in the very same terms, and certainly to the very same elFect, in a variety of passages both of the Gospels, and of the Epistles of the New Testament. The (piestion then is — is the prophecy referred to by St. ,Tude, a proi)liecy of Enoch, or a ])rophecy merely ascribed to him, by the author of the Hook of Enoch ? If it was a prophecy of Enoch, it is no M'onder such a prophecy should be al)solutely true; for it was no doubt the dictate of inspiration. If it was the j)roi)hecy of the author of the Book of Enoch, merely attributed to Enoch, it could not have been the dictate of inspiration ; for no one surely will think of maintaining that the author of the Book of Enoch was inspired. But if he was not inspired, how comes it to pass, we may very well inquire, that he could have been able of himself, at that distance of time beforehand, to put into the mouth of an antediluvian patriarch, a proj)hecy as absolutely true, as if it were the dictate of insj)ira- tion? I dt) not ask how he came to i)ut it into the mouth of Enoch in ])articular ; though it might be no easy thing to answer that question, suj)j)(>sing his work to have })een written before the Gospel era ; but simply from what quarter did he obtain before the Gospel era, that jjcrfect kiu)wledge of the future which is yet to come to j)ass, relating to the fmal judgnuMit, and the circumstances under which it will take j)lace — of which even we at this day should liavi' known nothing with certainty, but for the light which the Gospel j)ro])hecies liave thrown upon it ? It cannot be siiewn that it might have been obtained from any [)art of tlie Old Ti.stamcnt, not even from Daniel vii. 1), 10 ; much Kbs that it Date of the Book of Enoch. 1 39 was derived from tradition : and if it could not have been obtained from either of these sources, it could not have been possessed by any one, before the publication of the Scriptures of the New Testa- ment. With respect indeed to the question, how far it is probable that the prophecy attributed in Jude to Enoch, is an actual prophecy of that patriarch, or not ; if this were the proper place for entering upon such a discussion as the connection between the translation of Enoch, before the Deluge, and that of Elijah after it, with the events which are yet to come to pass before the end of the world ; particularly with the ministration of the two wit- nesses in the Book of Revelation, one of whom by an almost unanimous concurrence of the ancient church, has been understood of Enoch, and the other of Elijah — much might perhaps be said, to render it extremely probable that such a prophecy might actually have been delivered by him, before his translation into heaven, in reference to such an event as the coming of God to judgment, at the end of the world. But this discussion, though not foreign to the present subject, would lead too much into details to be now attempted. I will observe only, that as the prophecy is referred to by Jude, in prosecution of the general argument of his Epistle, which is the ultimate treatment and dis- posal of the men whom he begins to describe in verse 4, and continues to describe down to verse 19; which men, be it remembered, were contemporaries of himself, and of those whom he was addressing, and whether deserving of the name of fellow-Chris- 140 Appendix, L'hapter Seventh. tians or not, were yet nominally i)rofessors of a common C'iiristianity ; so in his mode of referring to it, there is a peculiarity which mixes \\\> this j)ro])hecy of Enoch with his own remarks, as just as much (tddptcd to hear, and just as mucli intended to hear, upon tlie particular suhjcct of discussion, as any thing which he himself had said. The in- troduction to the prophecy, in the words of the ori- ginal, stands as follows, 1-4 ; 7rp&f0r^T6vae l\ Kai tovtok; €(3oo[xog drro \\^aix^ 'Evxy^, Xiyvv ; which tlie English Bible renders, " And Enoch also, the seventh from " Adam, prophesied of these, saying :'' In this ver- sion, I am compelled to say there is a double mis- take ; first in reference to the place of the koi, and secondly in reference to the version of the dative TovToii. The true version of the Greek, I apprehend to be, " And Enoch, the seventh from Adam, pro- " phesied for these also, saying." The general mean- ing of the observation is, that Enoch had delivered a proj)hecy, of such and sudi a kind, with reference to, that is, for, or unto, such aiul such a descri])tion of persons ; among which persons, and as coming under Mhich description, besides others, those also were included, and were to he understood to be comprehended, of whom Jude himself had begun to sj)cak at verse 4, and was still speaking up to verse 14. Now tiiis l)eiiig the meaning of the apostle's introduction to tlie j)rophecy, I think it may be justly inferred from it, that lie considered the pro- phecy not merely to be capable of apj)lication or accommodation to the persons in question, though perhaps not expressly nu'ant for them ; but actually to have been intended for them, as well as for all others who resembled them ; and to have been ful- Date of the Book of Enoch. 141 filled in its application to them, as much as in its application to any others. As to the fact that a passage resembling this pro- phecy of Enoch's, in Jude, is found in the Book of Enoch — even were the latter of these verhatim the same with the former, nothing would be more pre- carious than to ground upon such a coincidence the inference, that St. Jude quoted the one from the book which exhibits the other. What would be easier than to retort this inference, and to say, that / the author of the Book of Enoch took the prophecy om Jude, not Jude from the Book of Enoch ? We ve but to suppose that the former was acquainted with the Epistle of Jude, as much as with any part \ of the New Testament besides, the whole of which * 5eems to have been so well known to him, and that -le knew there was a prophecy therein ascribed to Enoch : and if after this, he sat down to write a book, of such and such a kind, which should bear the name of Enoch, what was more natural than that he should embrace the first opportunity of in- corporating that prophecy with it, and take good care to make that prophecy appear there, as well as any thing else which he thought of attributing to Enoch ? We may be sure that the author of an im- posture like this, would not let slip an opportunity of giving something like an air of authenticity to his forgery, by introducing into it words, which were to be attributed to Enoch upon the authority of an inspired apostle. Now this seems to be actually the case. The author of the Book of Enoch appears to have been so eager to avail himself of this prophecy of Enoch's, 142 Jj)j)endiif Chapter Seventh. ill Jude, that he has introduced it at the very outset of his u'oik, and with so little regard to connection as to make it stand quite independently of every thing else, both before and after it. It constitutes, where it stands, an entire chapter by itself, the second in order, and it is evidently detached from the context '". It is introduced too apparently from nieinory, certainly with no regard to exactness in copying the words of the original, though it may agree with it in sense, and substantially; as the fol- lowing comparison will shew : Jude, 14, 15 : " Behold, the Lord cometh with " ten thousand of his saints, to execute judgment " upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly " among them of all their ungodly deeds which " they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard " speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken *' against him." Book of Enoch, chap, ii : " Behold, he comes with " ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment " upon them^ and destroy the iviched, and reprove " all the carnaU for every thing which the sinful " and ungodly have done, and committed against " himr The parts, here marked in Italics, arc either want- ing in Jude, or diflerent : and as to the concluding part of Jude 15, "And of all their hard speeches which " ungodly sinners have si)oken against him," it is not found in this chapter of the JJook of J^^iioch, nor ™ The division into cliapters, indci'd. nmy have boon arbitrary, as well as that into versos. The passajje in question stands in the other I\IS. of the Ethiopic orijiinal, called tlie Paris one, as the last verse of the first cliapter : Prelim. Diss. xiv. In either position, it is alike independent of the context. Date of the Book of Enoch . 1 43 any thing like it elsewhere, except at chapter xxvi. 2 : " Here shall be collected all who utter with " their mouths unbecoming language against God, " and speak harsh things of his glory :" which yet is very far from being verbatim the same. The inference of the age of the Book of Enoch, from the supposed reference to it in the Epistle of Jude, being thus set aside, we may proceed to con- sider the remainder of its internal evidence, on which Dr. Laurence rests his hypothesis of its date. One of these is a passage, found in chapter liv. 9, 10 : " Then shall princes combine together, and conspire. " The chiefs of the East, among the Parthians and " Medes, shall remove kings, in whom a spirit of " perturbation shall enter. . . . They shall go up, and " tread upon the land of their elect. The land of " their elect shall be before them. The threshing- " floor, the path, and the city of my righteous ^^ people, shall impede the progress of their horses." The translator understands this to be a description of an historical fact, which happened U. C. 714, B. C. 40 " ; the invasion of Jud?ea by the Parthians, for the purpose of deposing Hyrcanus, and setting up his brother's son, Antigonus, in the high-priesthood, in his stead. But the description supjjoses the pro- gress of these invaders to be stopped, and stoj)ped in Judaea ; neither of which things is true of this invasion of the Parthians, U. C. 714. Their pro- gress was impeded nowhere in that year. They succeeded in that invasion, to the utmost of their wish, both in Syria and in Juda?a. The next year, their progress was indeed impeded by Ventidius, but " Prelim. Diss, xxxii. 144 Appendix, Chapter Seventh. it was in Cilicia : and the year after, it was still more efTectually checked, but it was in Syria ". The truth appears to nie to be, that there is no reference in this description to any ])ast h\ct what- ever : but that it is meant to be prophetical of the great antichristian contest, before the consummation of all thint^s, which Ezek. xxxviii. xxxix : Daniel xi. 44, 45 : Joel iii : Zechariah xii. xiv : and Reve- lation xvi. xix. also allude to. Tiie Parthians and Medes are specified by name in it, because it might be collected from proj)hocy that the antichristian powers were to come from the north, which is the position of Parthia and Media relatively to Juda'a: and it is said that their progress should be impeded in Judciea, because it was also to be known from prophecy that the scene of the final decision of the contest in question, would be Juda:a, and the locality of Jerusalem itself. Even after the supposed de- struction of these same powers, so plainly implied, chap. liv. 10, 11, 12: another army is spoken of, chaj). Ivi. 1, 2. as seen to be coming from the east, from tlie west, and from the south ; but no longer from tlie north : an omission which I consider sig- nificant — and to be explained only by referring this fact in general to that other contest, whicli even after the destruction of Antichrist and his powers. Revelation xx. 8, 9- authorizes us to expect will be waged, before the end of all things, with the powers of Gog and Magog. The next of the internal evidences, on which Dr. Laurence founds his supposed date of the age of the o Vide my forim-r work, vol. i. Diss. iv. Apj). i. 211, 212 ; and Supplcin. Diss. ."iyi. 'i7'»- Date of the Book of Enoch. 145 writer, is the allegorical description relating to the seventy shepherds, chapters Ixxxviii. Ixxxix. These shepherds are mentioned first, chapter Ixxxviii. 94 : and from chapter Ixxxix. 1. 7. S15. it would seem that they are to be distributed into three classes, consisting of thirty-seven, twenty-three, and twelve respectively. For reasons, which he specifies, the learned translator would correct the first of these numbers into thirty-five. These thirty-five he un- derstands of the kings of Israel and Judah, not in- cluding Saul, David, and Solomon : the twenty- three, of the Babylonian, Persian, and Syro-Macedo- nian princes, who successively ruled over Judaea, in common with the rest of the East, from the captivity downwards to the time of the Maccabees : and the twelve, of the series of Maccabaean princes down to Herod the Great. And because this series stops short with the twelfth, that is with Herod — and does not pass on to Archelaus, Antipas, or any other, who afterwards reigned over Juda?a, either wholly or in part — he concludes that the writer of the work lived to see the reign of Herod, but no reign, later than his ; and therefore wrote his work in the reign of Herod i\ But, without stopping to point out the objections to which the list or series of monarchs, proposed in each of these instances, is liable, (objections which in my opinion would materially affect the question of its accuracy,) I will simply observe that these same shepherds are not once mentioned or alluded to, in the book itself, until the course of the Jewish P Preliminary Diss, xxiv — xxviii. VOL. V. PART 11. I- IK) Appe)it the time of Samuel, Saul, David, and Solomon, chap. Ixxxviii. 67, 68. 71, 72. 77: past the building of the first tem|)lo, ibid. 81, 82 : j)ast the falling away of tile Jews subsequently, into various kinds of idolatr}', ibid. 84 : past the mission of prophets to bring them back again, ibid. 85 : past the destruc- tion of these propliets, all but Elijah, and past Elijah's translation into heaven, ibid. 86. 87: p«'ist in one word, the utter abandonment of his people by God, and the dereliction of his name and temple among them, ibid. 90 — 92. After all these things, the sheep are resigned at last into the hands of the seventy shepherds in question, ibid. 99- If so, and if there is any thing like a princi])le of regularity, unity, order, and succession, in the several j)articu- lars of this allegorical narrative, which after all is an historical sketch of events beforehand — it is im- possible that these seventy shepherds, in the apj)re- hension of the author of the narrative, could have any connection with tlu' kings of Israel or Judah, as such, either before the time of Saul, David, and Solomon, or after it. Not one of the seventy could be supposed b)'^ him to denote a king of Israel, or a king of Judah ; iiuu-h less one half of the whole number. I observe too, that the images under which the figurative language of this book represents tiie de- stroyers, troublers, and perseciiturs of the shi'ej). are those of various beasts and birds of \n-v\. 'JMie shej)hcr(ls and their associates are sui)pose(l, in(k'ed, to aid and abet these, in their treatment of the sheep; but are plainly considered to be personally distinct from them. See Ixxxviii. 101. 104; Ixxxix. Date of the Book of Enoch. 147 19, 20. Now by these beasts and birds of prey, the destroyers of the sheep, properly so called, what can be understood but the Gentile lords, oppressors, and masters, to whom the Jews at different times were subject ? If so, how can any of these Gentile lords and oppressors be included in the number of the seventy shepherds ; who are personally distin- guished from their counterparts, the birds and beasts of prey ? I observe also, that the sheep, as committed to these shepherds, are committed as hlind and unable to see, Ixxxviii. 115 ; Ixxxix. 9. 13, &c : and though this is certainly the language in which the author speaks of the apostate and rebellious Jews of former times; it is that likewise in which he speaks, even more significantly and more regularly, of the infatuation of the unbelieving portion of his countrymen in aftertiraes, which prevented them from seeing and recognising their Messiah, in Jesus Christ. It is observable too, that the purpose for which the sheep were committed to these shepherds, was that they might destroy such of them as the Lord of the sheep himself had appointed for destruction : that is, these shepherds, one and all, were so many instruments and ministers of the vengeance of the Lord of the sheep. If so, how extraordinary must it be, to suppose any good king of Judah included in this number, like Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah ; any good Gentile king, like Cyrus, or Darius Hystas- pis ; any of the Maccabiiean warriors and deliverers, as Judas, Simon, Hyrcanus ! The commission of the sheep too to the shepherds, by their proper Lord, for this purpose in particular, must imply that it could not take effect, until God had, for a time at least, L 2 148 A])peud}x, Chapter Seventh. utterly abandoned, east oil', and rejeeted his people ; wliieh no one will suppose could have been the case, l)efore the birth of Jesus Christ. Moreover, we find it stated, tiiat though ai)pointed by the Lord of the sheep to l)e the instruments of his vengeance to a certain j)art of his sheep, viz. the devoted portion thereof; these shepherds should go far beyond tlieir commission, and destroy many more of tlieir own heads. And for the sake of keei)iiig an account l)oth of their use and their abuse of their commission, how many they should destroy in its due discharge, and how many of their own minds ; we have it men- tioned that one j)erson, or three persons, were ap- j)ointed, for each division of the shepherds, but un- known to them ; to watch, and to report upon their conduct. See Ixxxviii. 94—100. 107—109. 118: Ixxxix. 21. 25. Lastly, it a])pears from the event or catastrophe of all, Ixxxix. 32 — 137, that the judgment of tlie stars, which first fell from heaven, that is, of the apostate angels who left their first estate ; that of these se- venty shepherds, who had thus exceeded and abused tlieir trust ; and that of the blind, infatuated sheep, was to take ])lace t(jgether, but in this order ; that of the stars first; that of the shepherds, next ; that of the sheep, last: and that all were to be condemned alike to the same abyss of fire, or bottomless ])it. A strange and unexj)ected result indeed, in the case «)f the good kings and patriots, mentioned above. For my i)art, 1 should collect from all this, that the seventy shepherds in question, were supi)osed by the author of these representations, to partake of the nature of the stars in general ; that is, to be a Date of the Book of Enoch. 1 49 species of evil spirits and apostate angels, as well as they, if not of the number of the egregori or watchers in particular. And as ministers or instru- ments of the Divine vengeance upon the Jews, in quality of shepherds to whom they as sheep had been committed, the aiders and abettors of ravenous birds and beasts, in the work of destroying their charge — the true character of these shepherds, it appears to me, is that of the apy^ovreg tov Koa-fxcv rovrov : not the rulers and princes of the Gentile nations themselves, but the several tutelary angels, or objects of idol worship, supposed to preside over, and to be- long to each. It is not necessary to prove from scripture, or from the testimony of antiquity, espe- cially of ecclesiastical antiquity, that every nation and country in the Gentile world was supposed to have its peculiar tutelary, guardian, or presiding di- vinity. We read of the prince of Tyre, in Ezekiel, as one of this number ; and of the prince of Persia, as another, as well as of Michael, the prince of the people of the Jews, in opposition to him, in the Book of Daniel. These various presiding genii, or divinities of the different Gentile communities, I should consider to be meant by the shepherds in question ; and by the three persons, or the one person appointed to watch over them, and to keep an ac- count of their use or abuse of their trust, the guar- dian or tutelary angels or angel, supposed to preside over the Jews, in particular : which angel, if a sin- gular one of the kind, no doubt must be understood of Michael. The number of these shepherds, therefore, would naturally be represented in conformity to that of the supposed amount of the diflerent Gentile communi- 1- 3 150 Appendix, (Jiuipter Seventh. ties ; if there was any means of fixing or determin- ing this last. Now it was a very general opinion anciently, of which I liad occasion to produce proofs in my former work^ that the number of families into which mankind were broken at the dispersion, by the confusion of tongues ; and consequently the number of the different communities of mankind, as respectively derived from that number of distinct families, was just seventy-two. We find the shep- herds in question represented in general terms at seventy : but I had also occasion to shew in my former work'', that according to the Hebrew idiom, the pre- cise number of seventy-two, is almost regularly ex- pressed by the round number of seventy. And that seventy-two is the precise number of the she])lierds actually intended, even when they are reckoned in general terms at seventy, appears from the division of the whole number into the three component parts of thirty-seven, twenty-three, and twelve, which make together just seventy-two. Dr. Laurence, it is true, would correct thirty-seven, into thirty-five, and so would reduce the amount to seventy. What I have said, however, uj)on the peculiarity of the Jewish idiom in this respect, and the first cause of the statement of the number of the shepherds, at seventy, (these shei)herds being truly to be under- stood of the rejn-esentatives of the gods many and lords many, throughout the communities of the Gentile world,) must, I think, satisfy us that the sum total of their number being seventy-two, it consists of tliri-e ])arts u jiicli togetiier amount to that : and " \'i(k> tlu' notfs to V(»l. ii. I)i.>.s. ii. Supplemental Diss. 4(ii). 1' \'ol i. Diss. xiii. ti2\), .V^O. Supplfui. Diss. A'l'). Date of the Book of Enoch. 151 therefore, if there is no error in the number of two of these parts, twenty-three and twelve, respectively, there can be none in that of the third, thirty-seven. The thing implied by all this representation is con- sequently neither more nor less than the indiscrimi- nate dispersion of the Jews, the former people of God, among ail the nations under heaven ; and their being i)laced every where at the mercy of the different rulers of these communities, to kill and destroy them at their will : an effect which could not take place until they had been abandoned for a time by their proper Lord and Master, and made over as it were to be possessed and disposed of by his adversaries and their own. The further explanation of this allegory depends upon the right interpretation of another, chapter xcii : on which point also I cannot agree with Dr. Laurence. This is a much simpler chapter than either of the two which we have been hitherto considering — there being no allegorical matter in it, nothing but a plain historical statement of events; though supposed to be prophetically delivered, and extending from the beginning to the end of all things. In other respects, it is mere history by anticipation. Its explanation will materially confirm the account we have given of the shepherds ; as well as illustrate the truth of our original assertion, that the author of the Book of Enoch followed the Hebrew, and not the Septuagint chronology, in his computation of time both before and after the deluge. In this chapter, the duration of the world is dis- tributed into te7i periods of one week each ; which l4 152 A])j)endix, Chapter Seventli. is sufficient to imply that each of these weeks was meant of a term of seven hundred years, and the ten in all, of one of seven thousand. The opinion that the world would last seven thousand years, was a very common one, especially after the Christian era: an idea, that its existence would be prolont^ed to ten thousand years, would be altogether singular and unexami)led. The first of these weeks then begins A. M. 1, and ends A.M. 700: and with regard to it, we find it said, xcii. 4 ; " Enocli then began to speak from a " book and said : I have been born the seventh in the *' first week." Jude, too, it will be remembered, de- scribed Enoch by this circumstance of being the " seventh" from Adam : and according to the He- brew chronology, he was actually born A. M. 62^ : according to the Septuagint, he could not have been born imtil A. ]\1. 1122; that is, in the second week, according to the author of the Book of Enoch. The second week begins A. M. 700, and ends A. M. 1400. Chapter xcii. 5 — 7, after predicting the rise of great wickedness and iniquity during this week, we find the author foretelling also the " execution of the decree uj)()ii >iiniers," when it was completed. I understand this of the deluge; which actually came to j)ass after this second week, \. M. 1().>(J or 57. The third week begins A. M. 1400, and ends A.M. 2100. Chai)ter xcii. S, predicts very j)hiinly the call of Abraham, and the birth of the chosen l)eople, as events which were to happen diirinij^ its completion, that is, while it was still current, or not Date of the Book of Enoch. 153 before its close. The call of Abraham happened A. M. 2015. The fourth week begins A.M. 2100 and ends A.M. 2800 : and the events predicted dur'mg its com- pletion, as before, are plainly the revelation of the holy and the righteous to his people, the institution of the law, civil and religious, as ever after destined to continue, and the settlement of the Jews in Ca- naan : all which actually came to pass between A. M. 2445, the Exodus, and A. M. 2485, the Eis- odus ; or A. M. 2491, the division of the country. The fifth week begins A. M. 2800, and ends A. M. 3500. Ch. xcii. 9, the only event thereof which is specified, is the building of Solomon's temple, which actually took place, A. M. 3001'-. The sixth week begins A. M. 3500, and ends A. M. 4200. In this week, it is said, xcii. 10. 12, " All those who are in it, shall be darkened, the " hearts of all of them be forgetful of wisdom — and " in it shall a man ascend. During its completion " also, the house of dominion shall be burnt with " fire, and all the race of the elect root be dispersed." I refer the first of these particulars to the blindness of the Jews, in not recognising their Messiah, when he appeared among them, A. M. 4031 : the second r It is a singular coincidence on this subject, that according to tlie Ethiopic version of the Book of Esdras, made by Dr. Laurence, the reading, chapter x. 58, 59, as established by this version and the Arabic, being adopted, the temple is said to have been built by Solomon 3000 years after the creation of the world. lot Appendix^ Chapter Seventh. to the Ascension of our Lord, A. M. 4034 : the third, to the destruction of the tenij)le, and tiie dispersion of tlie Jews, under Wspasian, A.M. 4074. If this be the case, we have here a proof that the writer of tlie Book of Henoch lived down to, if not beyond, the war of Wspasian and 'J'itus. The com- mission of the sheep to the seventy shepherds bears date, as 1 apprehend, from tliis same time of the dispersion of the elect race ; and consequently the sequel of the vision, narrated in chapter Ixxxviii. from verse 94 and afterwards, coincides with tiiis completion of the sixth week in chapter xcii. The seventh week begins A. M.4!20(),and ends A.M. 4900. During- this it is said, (xcii. 12,) "A perverse " generation shall arise ; abundant shall be its deeds, " and all its deeds perverse. During its comple- " tion, the righteous, selected from tlie plant of ever- " lasting righteousness, shall be rewarded ; and to " them shall be given sevenfold instruction respect- " ing every part of his creation." This perverse generation, with its abundant deeds of iniquity, I should understand of those instruments of o])pres- sion and mischief, who l)egan to be mentioned from the time when the sheep were delivered up to the seventy sliepherds, Ixxxviii. 9-i; down to the time just before the slieep begin to be redressed, Ixxxix. 2.5. The eighth week must begin A. M. 4900, and end A..M. .")(;()(). xcii. l:i, 14. it is said of it, "'Inhere " shall be another week .... to which sliall be given " a sword to execute judgment and justice nj)on all '* opi)ressors. Sinners shall be delivered uj) into tlie " hands of the righteous, \\ ho during its comjiletion Date of the Book of Enoch. 155 " shall acquire habitations by their righteousness ; " and the house of the great King shall be built up " for ever." That part of the former vision, which answers to this, I conceive to lie between chap. Ixxxviii. Ill, where three of the sheep are described as departing, arriving, and beginning to rebuild all that was fallen down of the house (of the Lord) ; and Ixxxix. 27, where a sword is said to be given to the sheep to go forth against all the beasts of the field, (their destroyers and oppressors,) and to slay them. Now this expectation of the ultimate destrviction of their destroyers and persecutors previously, by the sheep, might be derived from Joel, Daniel, Ezekiel, Zecha- riah, or Revelation, which also speak of the de- struction of the antichristian poM'ers, in due time, by the saints: but the specific idea of a sword's being put into their hand for this purpose, seems to be borrowed from Psalm cxlix. 6 — 9 : " Let the high " praises of God he in their mouth, and a two- " edged sword in their hand ; to execute vengeance " upon the heathen, and punishments upon the " people ; to bind their kings with chains, and their " nobles with fetters of iron ; to execute upon them " the judgment written : this honour have all his " saints." The building of the house which was to take place, during the completion of this eighth week, I apprehend to be begun, when the three, before spe- cified, are said to have returned and set about it. To understand these three, with Dr. Laurence, of Zerubbabel, Joshua, and Nehemiah, is contradictory to history and to chronology. Nehemiah was much later than Zerubbabel, and had nothing to do with 156 Appendix, Chapter Seventh. the rebuilding of the second temple, effected by him. Ezekiel xl. and tlie remaining chapters, might have taught tilt' author of the Book of Enoch to expect a tenij)]e to be again built, notwithstanding the de- struction of that under W'spasian, as well as a restoration of the JeM's to their country, notwith- standing their disj)ersion : and he might attribute the instrumental agency therein, to the three sheep in question, because of the tradition, so generally received, as we have seen, among the ancient Chris- tians, that our Lord's second advent was to be pre- ceded by Elias, by Enoch, by St. John, by two of them, or by all the three, to perform such and snch a work, which our Lord himself specifies as that of a restoration, a bringing back again, a restitution of all things; which might be understood to include the rebuilding of the temple, the resettlement of the tribes, and even the revival of the Mosaic a'conomy, either wholly or in })art. The author of these allegorical descriptions of the course of the future, had no doubt his own con- ceptions and ex])ectations of wliat that course would prove to \)v\ though to jiretend to make out from his allegories themselves, a dear and consistent state- ment of his j)articular opinions respecting the un- fulfilled future, would l)e an hopeless undertaking, lie had unquestionably a scheme of his own in his mind, and he has conformed his descrij)tions to it accordingly. I liavr no (loul)t, iiMlfiMJ. that the lambs spoken of, Ixxxix. 8, as born of the white slieep, '' who began to open their eyes, and to see, •* crying out to the sheej)," though without eflect upon the sheep themselves, are meant of eoiivi-rts to ( 'hristiaiiit)' from ;iiii()iig the unbelieving Jews, Date of the Book of Enoch. 157 the first-fruits of their countrymen, preparatory to tlie general conversion of them all, which was ulti- mately to follow. And in like manner, the animal, mentioned Ixxxix. 15, 16. 20 — 24, and rendered by Dr. Laurence, the Dabelat, or Dabela, who is de- scribed as mainly instrumental in opening the eyes of the sheep, at last — I think is to be understood of the great precursor of the Messiah's second advent, especially to the Jews, the prophet Elijah. The learned translator supposes it to mean Alexander the Great. The ninth week begins A. M. 5600, and ends A. M. 6J300 : the tenth begins A. M. 6300, and ends A. M. 7000. It is said, that in the ninth week (xcii. 14, 15.) "shall the judgment of righteousness " be revealed to the whole world ; every work of " the ungodly shall disappear from the whole earth; " the world shall be marked for destruction, and all " men shall be on the look out for the path of in- " tegrity." In the tenth, it is said (ibid. 16) on the seventh or last day of it *, " there shall be an ever- " lasting judgment, which shall be executed upon " the watchers ; and a spacious eternal heaven shall " spring forth in the midst of the angels." The two next verses promise a new heaven ; the passing away of the former, and many weeks (that is, an eternity) of goodness and righteousness, in which sin should not be named for ever and ever. t This mention of the last day of the week proves implicitly that each day of the week contains a period of time, one seventh of that embraced by the whole week : and therefore that this is some number divisible by seven, (as seven hundred is, but not one thousand,) without a remainder. 158 Appendi.r, Chiijiter Seventh. This (lescrij)tioii of the course of tilings which was to follow uj)on the close of the teiitli week, might he borrowed from Revelation xxi. to the end. The judgment of righteousness, &c. to be revealed in the ninth week, |)reviously, must coincide with ciiapter Ixxxix. 29 — .'il, in the j)receding vision, M'hich after the delivery of a sword to the sheep, speaks of a judgment consequent upon it : and the everlasting judgment executed u])on the icatcJicrs, on the last day of the tenth week — nuist be the same which is supj)osed, verse 33 of chapter Ixxxix, to be executed on the stars that first fell from heaven, who are in fact these very watchers themselves. If such be the case, the judgment in question, chapter Ixxxix, is j)rolej)tically related there : as in- deed we might collect it to be, from 38 — 47. Be- tween the time of beginning to redress the sheep, and the consummation of the judgment on the watchers, the shepherds, the blind sheep, and all their oppressors, the birds and beasts of prey — it aj)- pears from chap. xcii. there must have been an in- terval, extending from some time in the ninth week, to the last 3 Ethiopic, is found at verse 10, and sqq. of chapter vii. sect. ii. It is there said, that the leaders of the apostate angels, and their followers, took them wives, in the 1170th year: that is, their apostasy bears date from that year, or A. M. 1170. Now this is directly contradictory to xcii. 9. of the Ethi- opic, which told us that Enoch was born the seventh in i\iQ first waok '^ that is, before A. M. 700 complete. It is a date of the defection of the angels accommo- dated to the Septuagint date for the birth of Enoch, A.M. 1122. But the author of the Book of Enoch, as we have shewn upon circumstantial evidence too minute and complicated to mislead us, did not follow tlie Septuagint Chronology. It is needless to add that no date of any kind appears, ch. vii. sect. ii. 10. of the Ethiopic. Here is a clear proof, then, of a gross interpolation in the Greek. Nor have I any doubt, that the fourth extract from Syncellus, p. 189- to which Dr. Laurence could find nothing corre- spondent in the Ethiopic, was altogether an inter- polation likewise. Under these circumstances, it appears to me a matter of no very great importance, that often as the Book of Enoch is referred to by the Fathers — not unfrequently when its very words are quoted — yet these references being uniformly made to the Greek edition of it, it is not always in our power to point out what answers thereto in the Ethiopic ; nor even when the passage in question admits of being detected, to shew more than a general and substantial agreement between the Greek and tiie Ethiopic. There is enough even in such coinci- dences, to make it appear that we have in the main M 2 164 j4ppen(iix. Chapter Seventh. the same Liber Enoch nt present, as the Fathers had anciently. Most of these passages have been i)roduced by Dr. Laurence in his Preliminary Dissertation ; which renders it unnecessary for me to cite them afrcsli. All tliat I shall do with reference to such testimonies, is to specify some of the places in the writings of the Fathers where they occur, and, whether \\ ith a distinct allusion to the Dook ot Enoch, or not, wliere they may reasonably be sup- ])osed to be meant of it. The following then are some of these passages : Iren.Teus, iv. xxx. .'319. line 2 — 9 : Tertullian, iii. 36—40; Ue Habitu Muliebri, 2, 3 : Ibid. 65; De Cultu F(pminarum, 10: iv. 149, l.'SO ; De Idolola- tria, 4: Ibid. 1.56.9; 170. 15: Clemens Alexan- drinus, i. 260. line 16, sqq : Padag. iii. 2. (Cf. i. 538. 19; Strom, iii. 7: S59. 7 ; Strom, vii.7:) i. 466. 3; Strom, ii. 15: ii. 813. 21; Strom, vi. 16: ii. 989; Ex. SS. Propheticis Edog.e ii : ii. 1002. 13 ; Ex. SS. Proph. Eclog. liii : Ibid. 1008; in Judam 14: Origeii. i. 61. d. De Principiis, lib. i. caj). 3. sect. 3: ii. 831. B. in Ps. cxxxii. 3; iv. 142. B. Comm. in Job. torn. vi. 25 : Anatolius, apud Euseb. E. H. vii. xxxii. 287. D: Constitutt. Aj)ostolica', vi. 16. 280. D. E: Ililarius Pictaviensis, 1059- A. in Ps. 132: Chronicoii Julii Pollucis, (A. D. 1779.) 22. 1. 1 : Ilieronym. iv. Pars I'. 421. ad f/ird. ; in Titum, i : Cf. iv. Pars 2''». 102; De SS. Eccks. 4: Auguslin, de Civitate Dei, xviii. 38 ; Operr. vii. 520. E. F. : Nicephorus, apud Syncellum, Chronographia p. 787. I. 6 : 'riu'()j)hyl. iii. 453. A. in Judam. 'i'iu' mo.^t iiiij)(>rt.int of liie exti-rnal testimonies however, whicli might be cited in order to sliew Ix'- Date of the Book of Enioch. 165 fore what time the Liber Enoch was already in ex- istence, and known to writers of the second century, is that of Celsus, apud Origenern. Origen has pre- served a considerable extract from the work of Cel- sus, lib. V. 52. Operum i. 617. D — F. of which this is a portion. '^Hv tk ^ovkofx-tBa e^erao-ai vvv, says Ori- gen, Tov KeXaov Aef^y, ovrag ^%^^' Ka/ Wt] TrapaXenrctifj-ev Q'ja Trepi tov ^i^aaKoiXov ^teXiyyovrai, Kai ^oKeiro) rig ag akfjOxg ayyeXog. yjKe ^e norepov ohrog Trparog koci [xovog, r\ Kai aXKoi TrpoTepov ; ei f^ev (pa7ev oti [xovog' eXey')(oivTO av evavria a(j)i(7i ipev'^oiJ.evoi. eXdeiv yap xai aXkovg Xeyov(7i TroXXaKig, Kai Ofxov ye h^TjKovTa yj k0^Of/.YjKovTa' ovg Vif} yev^uBai KaKovg, Kai Ko\ai^e(x6ai decrfxoig vTrolSkvjdevTag Iv yrj' oQev Kai rag 6ep- [xag TTYjyag eivai to, eKeiVMV ^aKpva. k , t. X. It appears from Origen's remarks upon this pas- sage, that though the Book of Enoch is not men- tioned in it by name, he understood tlie statements in question to be taken from it. Thus cap. 54. 619- B : TToAAco de TrXeov cv TrpfjorjaeTai amp eoiKe TiapaKoviag ano tm ev to? 'Evwp(^ yeypafj-fxevav TfQeiKevai o K.eXf. 4: Lib. iv. 3G. 530. A: Lib. viii. 7G. 799- B. Cf. also vii. IL 702. B. M 4 168 Jppe/u/iu; C/iapfer Seventh. conclusion may be confirmed by a variety of circum- stantial evidences, furnished by his work itself. First — it was not long after the commencement of the preaching of the Gospel, that Celsus declared himself to be writing ^ ; not long after the personal ministry of our Lord ; and when the recollection of his person, ai)pearance, features, or the like, was still traditionally preserved ^. Again, Celsus was aware of the fact of the deifi- cation of Antinous in Egypt *^ ; and this circum- stance proves that he did not write before the eleventh of Hadrian; in which year, as I endeavoured to shew in my Supplementary Dissertations ^, that deification took place. Again, Celsus predicts the extinction of the Jews as a nation in a short time *^ ; w^ience we may infer that he had witnessed the second war of the Jews and Romans, and what consequences that had been of to them. His age would thus be later than A. D. 136, the last year of that war, at least. Again, allusions occurred in his work, which Origen understood to be meant of the heretic i\Iar- cion, and of others before, or contemporary witii him K If this was the case, he wrote later than the lime of Marcion, the date of whose heresy, I have shewn in my Supplementary volume ^, to have been the reign of Antoninus Pius. Now it appears from Galen, De Libb. Propriis 17'', that among his contemporaries, Celsus the Epi- '^ Lib. i. 2(). 314. D. b Lib. vi. 7r>. ()80. A. ^ Lib. iii. 30. 470. B. Cf. v. 03. 620. C. d Diss. x. 1 77— 1us, ovbi Kvboipo'i' ovb€ ^apv(mvayov(Ta (ToXevcTeTaL ovkItl yaia. ov TToAe/jios T , ovb^ au ye ' Kara \Ooi'os av\p.6'i tr' ecxTai' ov \ip.us, Kapiriov re KaKOpiWjTeipa '" \d\aCa. Koi /3ao-iAei/? (^aanXrfi 7TOL9 (Te\i(T€l€V h' OVpCU'^ d(TT€p6eVTl aOdvaroi 6\ vaa vt~paKTaL SetAoio-i /iporoio-ir ".) c The passafjes about to be cited, are all taken from the text of GalIa,'U.s' edition of the Oracles ; excepting only the typogra- phical errors which there occur, and some differences in the pointing. As to conjectural emendations of .such and such parts, more corrupt than others in the original, they will be specified in the margin in each instance ; and though none of these emendations will be proposed without reasons of a critical nature, whereby to su])port them, if necessary, the reader will remem- ber that they are conjectural, after all. f Lege 'OmroTf Ktv Ka\ tovto X(i,% TfXos. if. lib. iii. .'^Id. 1. !• : 358. 1. .'{ : 44'J. I. 2 : also Lactantius, vii. •20. ? Lege ayadov. ^ Lege MfyaXoto kot upxr]v, and C'f. i. IH;"). 1. 10: iii. 470. 1. 2 : where MJ^ft cV av6pumovi, dya6ov ptyd- Xoio KaTap)(i], or, I't^fi in ufffpCiiTrovt dyadov fitydXoio KUTap\ijv. For the use of this word Kumpxt), Cf. iii. .'JfiO. 7- ' Leg. o-iVov t'. ^ Lege tK fi' dpvS>v npvas r' . ' I^ege ov noXt/xof S", oi/i' avrt, "" Lege KaKOi)f')€icT(ip(i. " The parts between the brackets are manifestly corrupt, and :i.s they stand almost unintelligible. As far as I can divine the meaning of the writer, I a])prehend ho was going to .say, that Oil the Sibylliyie Oracles. 177 KoX Tore 8' e^eyepeX jia(nXi]i.ov els aliavas Trdvras ctt' avdpcaiTovs, aytov vofjiov ottttot ebwKev ivaelSecnv, (roi? iracnv VTiicryeTO yalav avoi^eiv, KOL KoaiJLOV T€ TTvXas [xaKcipoiV ° ,) Kol )(apiJ.aTa iravTa, KoX vovv aOavaTo'v'? alcavtov, ev(})pocrvvr]v re. TTaaris 8' e/c yaii-js Kijiavov kol boypa rrpbs o'lkov^^ o'lrrovuLV /zeydAoto deov, kovk ecrcreTat aXkos oiKOS iiT avOpdoTTOKTi KOL ipdv6riTL Kopt], kolI aydkkeo' (rot yap €bo)K€v ev(})pocrvvrjv aiaivos, os ovpavov eKTiae Kal yriv €V (rot S' otK7/(ret, aol 6' eaaerat dOavarov ^<5s. ^v be \vKOL T€ Kal dpves (v ovpecnv dp-ixis ^ (bovrai \opToVf irapbdXus t Ipl^oi^ djxa /3o(rK7j(TovTat, dpKToi (Tvv p.6(T^0L^ vofj.dbe'i '^ avkLaOijaoi'Taif a-apKOjiopo'i re Aewi* d\vpov (f)dy€TaL '^ em (pdTvqs o)? ^ovs' Kal iralbes fidXa n/7rioi €V becrpLola-iv ^ d^ovcTLV {TTijpuv yap iirl \Ooi'l 6i\pa 77ro?Jcret^) — . (/cat l5p((f)i€av irvpos alOop.ii'oio. aTTToXcfxoL 8' ((raovTat iv acmcnv, 7)8' ivl ^tiipats' oi -x^elp yap iroKepioio KaKOV, p-dKa 8' ia-aerai. avToTs aiiTO'i inreppiaxos, dddvaros^ Kal \€lp ayioio. The '^iKdioKpiTYji [xovap'^a in one of these verses, and the 'x^e'tp ayioio in another, which together with " the " Creator, the Immortal, and Supreme God," is suj)posed to be the j)rotector and guardian of his children or people, may be understood of our Saviour; but whether as reigning before or during the mil- lenary dispensation, except that he is conceived to be reigning in Judaea, may be doubtful. The con- '' (iflipaivufxfvoi T . ' Legeniluiii forsan, bmx.' 6. «n Corrif^e, (TK(7Tu(T€i T( : tliough in rt'j)i'ati'd instances, the author of tlit'se Oracles seems to use this form of the oj)tative as equivalent to the future ; where too, it is not always clear that the text is corrupt. See for example, iii. 4JJ3. H. 0r;af**, for <^i)(rfi — unless we should correct that by 0ijv fXriKT], TTeptTek\oix4i>o)v kviaVTQ)V, TTekras kol dvpeovs, KopvOas, irap^TTOLKiXd ff o-nXa ■noXXa be, kol to^ov TtXrjOvv, jieXibiv, abiKcav re. ovbe yap ck bpvpov ^vXa Koxf/erat h TTvpbs avyijv ". n It makes no diiference to the coincidence in question, be- tv.-een Ezekiel xxxix. 8— 10 and this passage, wliether it stands in its proper place here, or made part of the description, re- lating to the destruction of the army of Antichrist, before given. Some of these lines occurred (but with a degree of variation in the expression) earlier in the book, 455. 8—459, line 1. I should conjecture that the passage stood originally, ov8e yap tK 8pvfiov ^vXa Koylrerai fs iTVpos cwyi)u enra xpova>v firjKr], rrf/JtreXAo/xeVwi/ iviavrihv' f\6pS>v orrXa nopi(ofievo)v Kara yauiv afraaav, N 3 TTeXrar 182 ylppeiidix, Chapter Eighth. Another description of a state of things, which I should consider to be intended by the autlior of it, to rej)resent the millenary, occurs in the second book, 289, line 6, to 293, line 1. The reference of this description to the millenary state is so much the clearer, that it is supposed to begin and proceed, after the resurrection of the dead, and the judgment, consequent upon it; both which begin to be described, page 27-i, line 6. In the aK"onomy of this judgment Christ is specified by name, as "sitting upon a throne " or judgment-seat, at the right hand of the Lord of " hosts," (Za/Saoj^ "Alovaiog Ixl^iKepavvof, 277- '3—8,) the angels acting as his ministers, both in bringing the dead to life, and in assembling them before his tri- bunal. Though both the good and the bad are sup- posed to be thus brought before him, and Christ himself to sit on his throne, KplvOiV iva-e'fiiwv ftCoTov koI 6v(Tc^e/3e'a)^' Tp6~ov ai'bpQv, the first part of the description, from 278. 5 — 289. 5, is taken up with the enumeration of the various kinds of the reprobate, and the different crimes, or moral offences, for which they are suj)j)()sed to be punished, as well as of the nature of the punishment to which they are condemned on account of them". TTtXras mi Bvpfovs, Kopvdas^ irapTroiKiXa ff onXa TTuWu Tf, Koi t6^o)V irXrjOiiv, ySfXtwi/ t, uKidoiv t(. " A rofcTL-nce to the millenary kiiigduin, and its future j)us- sessor, in the jierson of our Saviour, under the name of ayvbi <1va^ TrdoTjj y^t (TKfJTTTpa KpnTr)(Ttoi>, <«y aicofdf navTas tnfiyopfvoio \p6poiOf may be intended, lib. ii. 324, line 1 — 32;», line 3. Cf. lib. viii. 71 K, lines 1 and 2. The primary intention of this reference, however, as collected from the context, seems to be to the birth Oil the Sibylliiie Oracles. 183 In the fifth Book of the Oracles, after the de- scription of the rise and progress of a power, which is evidently meant for that of Antichrist, page 561, line 5, it proceeds, dAA' orav vyj/os ex?7 Kparepov, kol TdpjBos d)]8e? P, rj^ei 8' av ixaKapcov kdikwv iioKiv e^aXaird^aL' KUKeX rt? deodev aOevapos iSacnXevs ^KTrepupOeLS, iravra^ oAet" /3a(TtAets jxeyaXovs, koX avbpas'i dptcrTovs' ei^' ovT(t>s riXos ^crrai {ia-aeTac) dcjyOcTov dvdpoi'noLcnv — whence it is plainly to be inferred, that in the esti- mation of the writer, this king (Antichrist) was to invade Judaea, and to meet with his end there ; the instrument of his destruction being a still mightier King, sent out for that purpose from on high ; whom a millenarian would of course understand to be our Saviour. This idea of the future, the author must have derived from Daniel, viii. 25, xi. 45, or from the Book of Revelation. That it was probably obtained from the latter, may be inferred from a still more remarkable pas- sage in this book, the reference of which to the Book of Revelation, in a certain part of its descriptions, can scarcely be mistaken. There also, after a de- scription, from 592. 5 — 598, line 1, which, however intricate and obscure in parts, is evidently to be understood to relate in general to the same subject of the destruction of Antichrist, (represented as Nero — of which we shall have more to say by and by,) intermixed with an apostrophe to some city, of our Saviour, and to the period in the history of the Roman empire, when that event should happen. P Forsan, avaibh. Cf, v. 573, line 8. *1 Corrige, (f>a>Tas, and Cf. Lactantius, vii. 18; or read, 17S' ciuSpas dpiarovs. N 4 184 Appendix, Chapter Eighth. apparently that of Rome — these judgments being over, tlie description i)roc't'eds, TOT eacTiTai ijixaTi kcu'w lovbaio)i' ixaKupcav O^lov ydvos ovpavLutroii'' oi TrepwauTaovaL 6eov ttoKlv ev pLearoyawLi' S-Xpi- 8e Koc ''lorrrjs tcl\os pifya KV/cAwo-airey, vyj/ocr' adpovTat a\pi koI vfcfieoir fpe/Sefz-wr. vvKtTL crvpL^d adk~iy^ iroXeixuKTovov ijxov, oiS" ii:t[xau'OfjL€i'aLS TraAapiais i^dpovs '' biokovvrai, (oAAa (Tn(TTi](T€L T€ KaK(iji> ai(x)i'L Tpuvaia ^.) fts hi TLs (o-aeTUL avOL'i aii aiOipos ^io-)(^o'i ai'i]p, ov TToAdpia? i]TT\¥, or read the line, oiid fnipaivofifvaii ndkdpais, exdpovs 81', oXovvTai. ® Lege, aXX' fTTt S17 (TTTjaovai KOKotp eV alava rponaia, or simply awvi, as 182, line 3, alSaaiv, in the same sense; also v. 581. 2: viii. (J78. 11 ; (51)4. !». t The meaning of this passage is obscure ; and the metre is evidently defective, unless the \\Titer of the Oracles lengthened the first syllable here in ^v\ov. Vide the conclusion of the sixth Book, and the note, /// he. Cf. however, viii. 72!). 7- Perhajis the word might be originally arxAov, instead of ^i;Xov ; though what Viould be meant by oxvXou TroKvKupnov, any more than by ^v\ov TToKvKupTTov , I confess I am unable to say. It may be a periphrasis for mount Kbal, and refer to Joshua viii. ."K). I aj)pre- hend, that in any case, the word ov is here the adverb, iihi, not the relative, ciijm: The allusion to the sun, immediately after, seems to place it bi-yond a doubt, that some fu-t in tin- history of Joshua, was generally intended by it. " Perha[)S u^ upivros, or o y lipiaTOi. "■ Li.-^'. rriiTt dijafv. On the Sibylline Oracles. 185 " Man" too from the air or heaven, of whom Joshua was in some respect or other a type, must denote our Saviour. The rest of the description also, from 602, line 2 — 605, line 7, would be much to the point, and serve materially to confirm the supposed reference of the whole to the millenary dispensation, were it not too long to quote. The same observation may be made upon another passage in this book, 620, line 9—621. line 1 : where having previously described the judgments upon the host of Antichrist, (of which, the nature of the judg- ments themselves, obviously shews that the descrip- tion is to be understood,) these being over, it pro- ceeds, ei^ ovTCsis TToAejuoto TreiravcreTaL oIkt^os oXcOpos, KOVKiTL TLS ^i(f)€CrLV TToX^ixicTa^Tai, ovhl (nbr]p(ii, ovo avTOLS /3eAeeo-o-u', a //?) dqxi^ 'iaa^Tai avris. dp-qv-qv 8' efet Aaos (T6(pos, uxTirepY iXetcjiOr], 7r€i.pa6eh KaKOTn-jTa ^-, tV varepov €V(f)pavd€ir]. In a subsequent passage of the same book, after an allusion, which in my opinion requires to be un- derstood of the fate of the second Jewish temple, as once already destroyed by the Roman power; (623. line 2, et seqq. ;) a natural association of ideas be- tween the fact of this destruction by that power, and the similar one, still to come, which should be attempted by the same power, in the days of Anti- christ, leads the author to proceed as follows 624. 7 : vvv 8e TLs i^avajBas ^ a(f)avy]s ^ ^actXevs koI avayvos TavTrjv €ppL\{/€V, Kol avoLKohoprjTov a(()riK€, y Read oa-mp. ^ Read KaKorrjTos, or KaKOTTjrd y. a Porsan, elaava^ds. l> atre/Sjjs, or more probably still, daiv^s. 186 Jppendix, Chapter Eighth. {rrvv TT\r\dei. ixcydkio^, kol avbpdcri KvbakCfj.oicnv'^') avTos 6' a)\ero )(ip(Tov cltt' ddavdrr]v e7n/3ay yT]V^. KOVK(TL aijiia toiovtov (tt dvOpumoiai rervKTo, tuore boKeli' erepovs pLeydArjv TtoKiv e^aXaird^aL ^ . — T}\6c yap ovpai'Mv vatroiv 8 dinfp fxaKapCrris, cnaiTTTpov excor er x^P''"'^* o o' ^^"^ kyyvaki^^v, KOL TidvTCDV iKpaTrjcrc /caXw?, iracrtv t diifbwKe Tols dyadoli rbv ttXovtov bv oi TTponpov ^ Xd/Sov dvbpes. TTd(ras 8' €K ftddp(j>v elK^v ttoAis ' iv irvpl ttoAAcj, Kol bijixovs ((f)\€^€ fipoTu>v Twi' TTpocrOe KaKOvpy(ov' KOI TJoXlV, 1)V i~uOl](T€ ^ d(US, TaVTTjV €TT0L1]T€ ^aibpoTip-qv darpoyv re, kol tjXiov 7/8e creA^yr;?, feat K6(rp.ov KaTidri\ , [ayiov re vabv iTTuiija-ev ') ivaapKOV, KuXoi', (Trepi/caAAea, ijbe (Trkarraev "i) TToAAot? if aTabioKTL fxiyav koll aTreipova irvpyov, aVT. or els>e, avTos 8 u>\€To x,fi-pos vn u6audroi', tmlSas yfjp. See iii. 462. 9, 10. f A line is jjrobably lost here. The sense appears to be, that never before had such an extraordinary phenomenon come to pass as this, that they who seemed, or who tliouirht themselves to have utterly destroyed a mighty city, should themselves be consumed and perish. Perhaps, with this sense, we should read tTiptov instead of tTtpovs, or both : oxrre Sokup (rtpovs irtpcov ttoXiv t'^aXoTra^at — S Supple fir, and in the next line, read, o ff ol. h Lege irp6T(pot. It is to be understood of the invaders. ' Cf. page 122. line 7' ^ Lactantius, vii. 24. reads tVot'»;o-f, 1 Read, ayiov T (Vi vtjhv fnXaatrtp. m Itead, TrepiKoXXut t\ fjS" (Trolrjatv. These two verbs, at the end of these two verses, have been ac- cidentally transposed. " Cf. Revelation xxi. lb*. On the Sibylline Oracles. 187 {ho^av athov deov) °, TT^TToOrjixivov etSos, avToKiai bvarUs re P deov kAcos i^Vfji-vqaav ^. ovK€TL yap TTiXerai beiXotai iSpoTolai to. Setfa, {ovbe yaixoKXaTitai., Kal naihisiv KVTtpis a^ecr/xos •■,) ov (j)6vos, ovbe KvboLpos, ept? b' kv iracn biKaCa. V(TTaTos ecrd^ ay loiv {Kaipbs, on avra irepaiv^i,^) Oebs vxj/Llipeix^rrjs, KTiarip vaoio fxcyLcrTOv. The intelligent reader cannot fail to perceive that the allusions in this description, " to the return of " our Saviour, in his human capacity, from heaven, " his assertion of a power and sovereignty given " him by God, on earth — the discomfiture and de- " struction of all his enemies, consequent on that " event, his restoration of Jerusalem, under the name " of the city desired by God, and brighter than the " stars and the moon — his construction therein of " an holy temple, his own incarnate divinity, and " the like" — (all admitting of no interpretation ex- cept in conformity to the millenary doctrines), are too plain to be mistaken. In the seventh book also, 659- line 9 — 660, line 3 *, we meet with an allusion to one of the house o Transpose, and read, at8i6v re 6(ov 86^av. P Read, dvTokias 8v(Tids re. Q Read, i^vfj-vrja-ai. ^ This line is probably an interpolation where it stands. ^ Read, Kaiposy, ore ravra nepaivei. In the preceding part of the verse, ead' stands for ecrrai. * The passage begins, and should be read, perhaps, as fol- lows : ecrrai yap nore kolvos aira^ xpovos, evda re (pa>Tes e^iXdcrovai 6e6u y ' aXX' ov Tvavcrova'iv dvias aKpdvrovs. Aa/31S Se 8i' o'ikov TtdvTa reXetrat. ro) yap r uvrns e8u>Ke d(6s dpovov f'yyvaXl^as, ol 8e biayyeXrripes inral nocrl KOifirjaovTai, k , r. X. 188 Appendix^ Chapter Eighth. of David, to whom God himself had given a throne ; T(5 yap t' avTo^ ihcuKi debs Opovov kyyuaki^as, (for so the line dearly requires to be read, instead of as it stands, TO) yap T avTos eScoxe Oeus )(j)6vov iyyvaki^as,) and under whose feet the angels, {^layyeXTVjpe^,) as his ministers, in various capacities, both in the phy- sical and the moral world, it is supposed will rest (/fc/^vjT&vrai). And in like manner, towards the end of the book, page 673. 1 — GTJ-. 1. another passage occurs, the re- ference of which in general to the times and events just before the millenary, and under the millenary dispensation itself, is very perceptible, though the description in part abounds in corruptions. The five concluding lines will shew its drift sufficiently clearly : ovK iTL Ti? k6\I/€l (iadvv avXaKa yvp<2 iporpu), ov /3o'es idvi'TTipa koltu} ftdxf/ova-L (Tih]pov, KXr]p.aTa 8' ovk toT, ovbe crTaxves, dAA' afxa TTuvTa fj.avi]V Ti]V hpo(Tepi]v X^vkoIs vtt ohovai (jidyovTaL. crvv avTols earai t6t€ kuI doi], uxrre 8t5ufei". " III the third line of the above quotation, we should perhaps read, KkTjfiara 6 ovk ecrrai, (ttu^v€s 8 ovk, dXX afxa Trdi/rfy. In the last, as Opsopseus suggested, ai/v 8' avTo'is (crrai roTt Kiii fftos, os rt hihd^fi' after whicli probably a line or more is wanting. . With respect, indeed, to the first part of the passage alsi», we might read the two first lines, fV 8< TpiTo} Kkijpu) 7itpiT(Wo^iv(t)V iviaxnitiv uyboubot TTit(t)Tr]v Tjbe avvaipecrts eyyi)?, (ita leg.) oTav Tive^ ovtI TTpocfyqT&v ■yj/evbaTTaTaL TreXdrrocrtv, eirl yOovl (prip.[(ovT€i. Kal BeAtas ^'^et, koL cr'qp.aTa TroAAa iroi-qa^L avOpcoTTOts — which predicts not only the coming of Beriel, and ^ Another instance of a coincidence between the same work, and the Oracles, is this ; that that work, as we have seen, (vide supra, page 102.) spoke of " the paucity of prophets, and " teachers of confirmed truths," as one of the characteristics of its own times ; and in like manner, in the Oracles, after a pre- diction of the diffusion and reception of Christianity, under that name, among the Gentiles, lib. ii. 186. line 1, 2. we meet with the following also, aWa ye kcil /zfra ravra 2dXot Kadodrjyol eaoPTai, Kai TOTf di) navcns fcrrai fifTtTriira 7rpo(j)r]TS)v : which I should correct, as follows, dXXd ye koi pera ravB' 00" oXoi KadnBrjyrjcrovTai, Kai Tore 8f] Traixris earai fiereneira irpo(jjT]rcov. Cf. however, iii. 356. 4. 192 Appendix, Chapter Eight h. the miracles or signs wliich lie should perform, but also that of deceivers and iniiwstors, false pr()})hets instead of true, before his ; just as the book of Revelation foretells the appearance of a false pro- phet, as well as of Antichrist, whose ministry should be subordinate to his advent, and intended to pro- mote his success. Thus again, lib. iii. 327- line 1. (K 6e ai,ia(TTr]vuiV ij^ei, BcAias fxeToincrOev, Koi on/rrei>' opibiv vyjfos. (rrtjaei be ^ OdXacaav, 7/eXtoj' -iiVpoevTa ixiyav, XafxTipdv re aeXi^vqv, Koi I'fKva'i crn/o-ei, koX ai'jixaTa TroXAa Trouytret av6p(i)TT0i,i. dAA' oirxj. T€\€(r(f)6pa ^ {((raeT iv^) avrio, aWa irXdva^. kol bi] ttoWovs p.ipo~a'i^ TrXamjufL, TiKTTov'i T (KXeKTov^ T 'E/3paiovs, a.vujjLov'i T( Ka\ aXXovi dvipa" yalav 7/^ci ^, KOI BcAiTjp ftfTtjKnv(Tai>' either of them, readings, fouiulcd on the K'ftion of the Regius Codex. f rj^j). K Supple y. I'erhaps we should read, nlariv y fVt notrjcrntrrut . C'f. la-J. line 7, and lih. ii. 2}!;')..'.. 071 the Sibylliiie Oracles. 193 " final destruction by fire," are thus predicted, it must be Antichrist. The coincidence between the Antichrist of the Sibylline Oracles, and that of the Ascensio Isaice Vatis, is so much the more remarkable, that while they agree in considering him an evil angel of some kind, and in giving him a common name, that of Beriel, or Berial ; they agree also in supposing that he should appear in the form of Nero — according to that expectation, proofs of which were collected in the first volume of this work, page 387, 388. This opinion, too, it may be observed by the way, is implicitly an argument of the high antiquity of the Oracles, as much as of the Ascensio ; and that each was composed at a time when, humanly speaking, the reappearance of Nero alive, within a certain distance of the time of his death, would not be so extraordinary an event. For we learn from Dio Chrysostom, that the belief of his being still alive somewhere, was entertained even in his own time by persons who were not Christians, and who had never heard of the scriptural character of Antichrist ; and the time of Dio Chrysostom extended late into the reign of Trajan ^. The same opinion, then, might still be more or less currently retained, even in the reign of Hadrian. The first allusion to Antichrist, as the same with Nero, which occurs in the Oracles, is furnished by the second of the passages last quoted : eK h\ aefiacTTrivoiv ij^a BiXias fxeTOTTtadev. This phrase, €k (xe(3aaT'/jva)v, in Greek, is to the same ^ Vide my Suppleni. Diss. xii. 220—222. VOL. V. PART Tl. O 194 Aj)j)cn(li\v, Cfiaptcr K'lgltth. effect as de Aufi^'u.staui.s, in Latin; and either might be understood to exj)ress a person of the family of the Auij;ii,st'i, '^(paiTol, or Ca'sares; as Nero was, and as Beriel might be said to be, if he should come in tlie assumed character of Nero. The next clear allusion to Nero, (because it de- scribes him as polluted by matricide,) to liis escape as if by a furtive flight, and his disappearing from Italy, beyond the Euphrates; to his return thence in j)rocess of time, under the designation of " the " mighty fugitive of Home," and the like, occurs lib. iv. .520. line 3 — 52.5. line S. But whether it was meant to refer to him in his literal, or in his anti- christian character, may be doubtful ; for tlie former is just as possible as the latter — the allusion both to his escape from Italy, and to his return from the East, coming in regularly, in the midst of a consecu- tive series of contemporary events, all which are described in this part of the work ; and the latter, if understood of the attempt of the Pseudo-Nero abetted by the Parthians, in the reign of Domitian, (see vol. i. 388,) being just as historical a fact as the former. The place of this allusion is directly after a plain prediction of the celel)rated eruption of mount \'esuvius, U. C. 832. A,]). 79, in the reign of Titus : 524. line 2. sqq. But there is no ambiguity in the remaining allu- sions to Nero, which occur subsequently to this, 'i'hus lib. V. after describing Nero, in his proi)er order among the kings of liome, "by the muneral " value of the first letter of his name, in the Greek " diaracter," (X. or ,50) — " by the nuu-der of his " jnotlier, by his contiiiding in the games, and his On the Sibylline Oracles. 195 " attempt to divide the Isthmus ;" it proceeds, 548. line 1 : dAA*' eorat kol cuotoj 6 Aotytos" elr avaKctixxl/eL laaa((3)V dei2 avToV eAey^et o" ov [xiv eovra, or as we should perhaps read, eAey^et 8' oiiSey eovra (sc. a7;roV.) Tliis is a clear description of one who should act the part of Antichrist, by making himself equal to God. Thus again ; another description there is of Nero, in the same book, ,573, line 2 — 574, line 9, in which the attributes of the real and the antichristian cha- racter are so intermixed, that it is scarcely possible to discriminate them asunder : and in the allusion to Nero in such a capacit}^, there is this further cir- cumstance of peculiarity, that as scriptiu-e, under- stood in its literal sense, limits the reign of Anti- christ to a period of three years and six months ; so after depicting the ascendency of the antichristian Nero in question, and his doings in that character, the prophecy proceeds, 575, line 1. dAA orav ^k Terpdrov ereos Aaju\//-r] jjAya(rAfX€vaL, (fifvyovTa SoAo) ' t(j6p.oio Trap' oju,(^T/y i Supple, y. o 2 196 Appendix, Chapter Eighth. a^ovaiv fX€Ti(t)pov, eois (eo-iSoxn' ere ^) iravres, TOP irdkai. eKK6\}/avTa ireTp-qv TToXvi]\aTL )(aAK(o* Kol ai]v yaiav oAei, koX KoxjreL^ m irpoTiO^TaL. roT;rKe 6eos fiovo^ ™- e? to TTOLrjaai, old Tis ov TipoT^pos rHiv (Tvix-ndvTOiv ^acnkricov, where also, in the sequel, though manifestly very corrupt, and probably with omissions in some parts, and derangement in the order of others, the descrip- tion passes to what is meant to be his coming to his end, and imperial Rome with him ; followed by the passage 598, relating to the establishment of a kingdom in Juda?a, quoted above. Again, we have another description of the same character, further on in the book ; the attributes of which, over and above the features of the historical Nero, are manifestly taken from those of the wilful king in Daniel, viii. 23—25 : xi. 36, who should " understand dark sentences," and " should prosper " and jyractisey Among other things, the description ascribes to him the power of raising the fallen, that is, in battle. This description too is followed, as before, by an account of his miraculous destruction, and the deliverance of the people of God ; a passage which likewise has been quoted. Lib. V. 618, line 8. sqq. Icro-erat vorartw Katpco Trept ripp-a (T€\y]vr]s Koaixop.avi]s TToAe/xos, /cat eirUXoTTos iv boKoTrjTL. rj^ei b e/c irepdroiv yaCrji pjqTpoKTovos dvrjp, (})evyb)V rjbe voov, (leg. voQ>v,) o^v arop-a p.^pp.r]pi((av , OS Trdcrav yaiav KaOeke'i, koL iravTa Kpari'jaet, irdvTiiiv T dv$p(ti77a>v (j)povip.(oTepa Ttavra vorjo-d, (rjs xdpiv ddXero t' avrbs, f Aet r avTi]v ■napay^prip.a ") avhpas T e^oAecret ttoXXovs, p.eyd\ovs re Tvpdvvovs, k Read, ia-lBoicri re. 1 Supple, y. ™ Rescribe /xeVoy, vel adfvos. " This line is manifestly out of its place. 0)1 the Sibylline Oracles. 197 iraDTas t ejUTrpT/cret °, m brjiroTe aXXos kiroUi, Tovs 8' av TreTTTrjcaTas avopOuxrei (bca (rjkov.) In the eighth book, likewise, there are two allusions, one, page 688, line 8, 9, to " the return of the fugi- " tive and matricide (o cpvya^ ixvjTpo/iTovog) from the " ends of the earth," the other, 716, 7, " to the cut- " ting through of the Isthmus, by some one, and his " then setting forth against all the rest ;" both which can be understood of no one but Nero, in their pri- mary, and Antichrist in their secondary sense ; in whose person Nero should effect at last, what he had attempted in vain before to effect in his own. This eighth book of the Oracles, however, is in a state of the greatest confusion of all ; and were we to endeavour to reduce it to a tolerable degree of method and regularity, it could be done only by transposing its parts, and altering its existing order, on a large scale. It is very probable that each of the allusions to Nero, in the character of Antichrist, found in that book, though separated at present, ori- ginally formed part of the same description. In like manner, a description occurs between the two, which miffht once have belonged to one of them, or both, 677, 1 7 : for the first part of it manifestly alludes to the empire and ascendency of the antichristian power, with this significant circumstance, that it " should begin in the east, and spread to the west ;" the second to its final destruction, represented figu- ratively as " the grinding of the fine flour by the " mills of God, and by fire." o Supple, y, and read the rest of the passage, coy firj TTOTf S' aXkog irroKi Tovs av TVfTVTrjcoTas dvop6a>crei 8iadt]\u>s. o 3 198 Ajjpendix, Chapter Eighth. Before we take our leave of this subject, it is neces- sary that we should specify another instance of coinci- dence between these Oracles, and the expectations connected with the millenary doctrines. In the first of the passages, relating to the coming of Beriel, quoted above, the proi)liecy proceeded, page 268, line 1, to predict " an o^noKaTdoTac-tc" or as the metre requires it to be read, " an airoKaTaTaai^f of the elect " and faithful — a spoiling (AeTjAa^r/vj) of them and the " Hebrews," (which seems to mean the Ciiristians and converted Jews in conjunction,) " the coming of " the twelve tribes from the East, in search of the " l)eople of their kindred Hebrews, the i)ersecution " and subjection of both in connnon, by and to some " power, apparently that of Antichrist ;" until the period arrives for their deliverance, by the direct interposition of the supreme God : and lastly, as the event which should usher in this period, (for so it is most natural to understand it,) the " return of Elijah, " under the name of the Tishbite :" 270, line 2. Kol Toff 6 0e(T/3ir?j9 d-b^ ovpavov dpjxa tltcuvwv ovpdvLov, yau] 8' '' iiTLjSas, t6t€ a-ijixara TpLcraa Kocrixu) oAo) Sei'^et, tov d-noXXvp.ivov ftioToio : which three signs appear to me to be described in the sequel, first as " darkness — which should cover " the infinite world" — secondly, " as a river of fire *' from heaven, which should devour all things," and thirdly, " as the falling of the stars into the sea :" the end of all being the resurrection of the dead, and the general judgment, in which Christ, as we have seen, (vide suj)ra, l>age 182,) was to preside as judge, and whidi was to be followed by the millenary king- dom. 'I (1770 T . r lU'lul, yuil] T . On the Sibylline Oracles. 199 The above quotations from the Sibylline Oracles will be found to comprehend, on the whole, the sub- stance of the testimony which they are calculated to furnish to the fact of the existence and reception of such and such doctrines and expectations, in the time of the writer. Considering their number and variety, we may justly be surprised, that the amount of objectionable matter contained in them, is so small in comparison of what an orthodox millena- rian of primitive times might have been disposed to concur in : for though I would not undertake to maintain that any of the advocates of the millen- nium in early times, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenseus, or Tertullian, would have agreed with the author of these representations in every particular of his ap- prehension of the course and circumstances of fu- turity ; yet if I know any thing of their opinions on the same subjects, as expressed in their own writings, or by competent testimony transmitted to us — I may safely assert that there is much in these descriptions of the Sibylline Oracles, to which even they would have assented, as entirely in unison with their own belief, and agreeable to their own expecta- tions ; viz. all the essentials of the millenary doc- trine, in contradistinction to the accidentals — all the general facts connected with it, in opposition to iXmiv particular circumstances. Thus, in expecting a return of Elijah, before any second personal advent of Jesus Christ, to act some definite and appropriate part ; a general conversion of the Jews to Chris- tianity ; an appearance of a real, and not a figura- tive Antichrist, who should have a prophet or har- binger, and should work signs and wonders of a peculiar kind ; a persecution both of converted Jews o 4 200 Appendix, Chapter Eighth. and believing Gentiles, by this Antichrist ; a forcible occupation of Judaea, by the same power; his coming to his end in that locality ; the production of this event by a direct miraculous interference of tlie power of the true Christ ; a resurrection of all or of part of the dead ; an establishment of a kingdom in Judaea, under Christ as Supreme, but divided with the saints, in certain pro})ortions, as reigning with him — and subordinately to him ; a new Jerusalem, possessed of a living temple, the residence of the Incarnate Divinity; a perfect communion between heaven and earth, between angels and men ; a re- sulting state of things, retaining all the essentials of a social state, as calculated for beings strictly human — and therefore necessarily requiring to be transacted among men, still possessed of the integrity of their proper nature, unaltered and unimpaired — and upon this earth, the same as at j)resent constituted, and appointed to l)e the proper scene of their abode, with the exception only of the mixture of alloy and imperfection, both moral and j)hysical, which coexists at present with the good and the per- fection, of either kind, also existing in it and upon it — a state of society, realising the utmost conceiv- able picture of happiness, innocence, and goodness, among i)eings strictly human, and not yet the same with angels — and among the inhabitants of earth, not yet translated to heaven : upon these, and such j)oints as these, the most orthodox millenarian of primitive times, and the author of the Sibylline Oracles, in my opinion at least, would have i)een entirely at unison together. The stress of the argument, indeed, founded upon On the Sibylline Oracles. 201 the coincidence in all material or essential respects, between the particulars of the creed of a millenarian of primitive antiquity, and the testimony even of the Sibylline Oracles, considered as an apocryphal Chris- tian production, rests upon the assumption that the testimony of these Oracles is contemporaneous with that period of Christian antiquity, which we have uniformly supposed to have been the time when the millenary doctrines and expectations were the cur- rent belief of the church ; whatever they might be- come in the course of time afterwards. This period was comprehended between the end of the first, and the middle of the second century, more particularly. Within this period the Liber Esdrae, and the Liber Enoch, both were written ; each of them containing more or less of testimony to the doctrines and ex- pectations in question. Within this period flou- rished Papias and Polycarp, and the rest of the presbyters or elders ; whose own belief in these truths was founded on the teaching of St. John, and of others of the apostles, or the apostolical men, all for more or less of their lifetime, contemporaries of theirs ; and on whose testimony to the same truths, as thus delivered to them, both oral and written, Ire- naeus as we saw, (and no doubt others besides Ire- nseus, contemporaries of his,) founded their belief in the same doctrines also. Within this period flou- rished Justin Martyr, in whose time the millenarian was the current and orthodox belief of the church ; and within this period his Dialogue with Trypho, which contains so many testimonies to his own in- dividual concurrence in the common belief, was held and connnitted to writing. Within this time too, flourished Celsus, whose work against Chris- 202 Appendix, Chapter Eighth. tiaiiity, little as we know of it from tlie extracts preserved in Origen's reply to it, yet contains clear allusions to certain peculiar expectations, entertained by the Christians of his day, which are too inti- mately connected with the millenarian doctrines, not to he identified Avilh thejn. ^^'ithin this j)eriod flourished Cerinthus, Marcion, and many others, who, heresiarchs as they were, and perverters of the truth in various respects, agreed in the belief of the milleiiai'y doctrines, as much as the ortho- dox themselves. In sliort, there is nothing ex- tant of primitive Christian antitpiity, either a])ocry- phal or non-aj)ocryplial, and belonging strictly to this period, in which the same belief is not, in one way or another, recognised ; and the truth of the genuine millenary doctrines is not illustrated and confirmed even by the amount of error mixed up with it. This unity of character in all the writ- ings of this j)eriod, with respect to so remarkable a feature of distinction as the common testimony which thev render to a doctrine so jieculiar as that of the millennium — nuist of itself materially conduce to the decision of the question, to what date the Si- bylline Oracles, which abound in testimonies to the same doctrines, are in all j)robability to be referred; whether to some ])eriod, when such testimonies were characteristic of almost every thing that was written and published by Christians, or to some period w hen they were not ; whether to the period, when the millenai-ian doctrines were still fresh from the l)irth, and curri'iitly bi-lieved in the church, or to some one (»f much later times, when they had become com- paratively obsolete, and out of KadobrjyqOevTes. In one of these passages, the Sibyll classes herself among Christians, lib. viii. 789- 4 : {tuvl'€k cLfj T/zxety Kol 9 o(rir/s Xptoroio yeviOkt]^ ovpavCrjs TTecjivaiTes, iTTtK\(6iJ.e(rda (Tvvai\xoL, and so on, in the first person, to the end of the book. It is an obvious inference from this fact, that these parts of the Oracles, at least, could not have been written before the point of time, wlien Christian became the denomination for the believers in Jesus Christ ; that is, before U. C. 794 or 795. A.D. 41 or 42. (see Acts xii. 26. Cf. xxvi. 28, and 1 Pet. iv. 16.) Again, passages occur in the Oracles, which prove that the author of them was no stranger to the fact of persecutions, properly so called ; or to the exist- ence of persecutors, whom he calls, (vaeQeu)}' KepdicrTal, TTLaToXiTat, Koi TO)/' OLKaioiv (f)dL(TCi'opes " avbpwv. Lib. ii. 1>81. (). Here the use of so peculiar a term as TriaroXeTat, that is, " destroyers of the faithful," and the particu- '' Lotje avdrjcrovaiv. ' Tuvixkh kiu // qfius. and Cf. iii. 34'). (>: 34(). 4: 'ACiO. 2. Also iii. 331. !). " Perhaps, (f)6ier- ceive are alluded to. The text in this passage is less corrupt, than in most other instances ; and a very few corrections, each of them admissible on critical principles, will suffice to restore it to a tolerable degree of purity. Lib. ii. 192. 8. Koi t6t€ §j) fxeya arjfJLa 6ebs /^ereTietra 7rot?;o-ef ka^-^ei yap crTev K\eos aOavacrirj'i. /cat Tore bi] ttcls Aaos eif adavdroiatv deOkoL^ dOXrjcreL vlkyi^ TrepiKaKXeos' ov yap drat^ois apyvpCov tls eKel bvvaraL arecpos ^vqa-aadai. ayvos yap Xptoros tovtol9 to. bUaia (BpajSevaei, Kal a-Texj/ei boKLpiOvs, avrap depa p.apTvcn buxreL aOavarov y , ayjpi kox 6av6.TOV tov ayuiva ttoiovo-l. TrapOevLKo'is be bpapovcn KaXw?, d(pOapTov aedXov bMcrei TOV OepaTOS, Kal toIs to, biKaia vepovcriv dv6pu>TT0L^ TTaarCv re, Kal eOvecnv dk'Koba'nolcnv , Tols ocricos (Qicriv re, Oeov 8' eva yivuxTKOVcnv. Then, after a long digression, from 202. 4 — 265. 1, consisting of a summary of moral duties, compiled chiefly from the Old and the New Testament, and in some instances expressed in their very words. On the Sibylline Oracles. 209 (not the least admirable part of these Oracles in general,) the subject of the aym is resumed and con- cluded thus: ovTos ayciiv, ravr ecmv aidkca, ravra ^pa^eia, rjbe TTvkrj (oiijs re, koL etcroSos adavaairjs, Tjv Oeos ovpdvtos ye biKaiOTarots avOpci^irocs €v, koX ' apyvpov k\dpov ^ Tik^LOVa avX.k4$as, kol {yvpLVcocras dvakvcrei ',) Kol /xayt/ccoy dbvrcov pLvaTripia Travra ju,e0e^et, TToiba debv betKVva-ei., uTravra (T^^d(Tp.aTa kva^L, KU^ dpxrjS Ta Ttkavqi p.v(TTr\pLa Tidcriv dvoi^^i. The two facts in the history of Hadrian, his deifi- cation of the boy Antinous, and his being initiated in the mysteries, &c., which are here referred to, imply that the author of this description must have lived up to the period in the reign of Hadrian, when each of these things happened ; but not necessarily beyond it. Now this period was the eleventh or g -xXibavT]. The autlior is evidently apostropLising Rome. Compare lib. iii. 404. 6. ^^ noXvKpavos. Vide the note in loc. and compare the opposite page. * Supple, eV. ^ Forsan, exdpav. i Probably corrupt. P 3 214 Appendix, Chapter Eighth. twelfth year of his reign, as I endeavoured to prove in the Dissertations supplementary to my former work '". Before this ])eriod too, that visiting of the world by him on foot, likewise alluded to, had taken place. If the genuineness of these passages could be depended on, this coincidence would be of great im- portance ; for it would prove not only that this eiglith book of the Oracles was not written before the reign of Hadrian, but also not before the eleventh or twelfth of his reign ; and supposing the whole of the collection to be the work of the same person, this fact, combined with another, would lead very strongly to the inference that the Oracles were all written in or before the eleventh or twelfth of Ha- drian. This other fact is, that though the author of the Sibylline Oracles, as we have seen, shews himself to have been well acquainted with the first war of the Jews and the Romans, in the time of Vespasian, and with all the calamities which befell them in consequence of that event; there is no clear allusion to be found in these prophecies, which would sliew their author to have been aware of the second, in the time of Hadrian ; which never- theless was just as calamitous ". The omission of «> See Diss. x. IHIJ, 184. 1«0, 1«7. ■> I say no clear allusion — for it is, indeed, the case that an aUusion does occur, at the end of Liher jirinuis, 187- -, to " the " expulsion of the Jews or Hebrews frtjni their country ;" a consequence to themselves not so properly of the first Roman war, as of the second. But this is found in immediate conjunc- tion willi an alhisioii to the destruction of the temple at tlie same time ; wliich shews the expulsion in question to be some- thinj; synchronous with tliia last event, and therefore an effect of the first war, in sonu* sense or other, as well as tiiat. Uefore and after ( acli of these allusions, too, the context seems to de- Oil the Sibj/llme Oracles. 215 all mention of this second war, appears to me quite as significant a circumstance, in determining the age of the writer, as the plainest allusion to the first. If he actually wrote in the eleventh or twelfth of Hadrian, we account for this omission, as the war itself broke out only in the eleventh at the earliest ; (vide Supplem. Diss, x ;) but not, if he was writing at a later period in his reign, much less if he was writing in the reign of his successor. It should be observed too, that the first allusion to Hadrian, lib. V. 552. 1 — 553. 2, in the sequel of the part there quoted, is clearly of a laudatory character ^ ; and not such as was to be expected from a writer like the Pseudo-Sibyll, in respect to one who was known as a destroyer of the Jews. Let the reader, to be convinced of this, compare with that testimony to the character of Hadrian, the language in which Vespasian was spoken of just before, 548. 4, in the capacity of the destroyer of the Jews. And though scribe the civil wars^ which prevailed in the empire^ about tlie same period, rather than any thing else. o ecrrai Koi iravapicrTOS avrjp, Ka\ Trdvra vorjcrei, k , t. X. The character of Hadrian was of a mixed kind ; yet such, that upon the whole, his good qualities, as an emperor, preponderated over his bad. The character of Tvavapiaros, however laudatory, would have ajjpeared from his public conduct, for the first half of his reign, a just description of him ; and as to the other cir- cumstance, Ka\ TTovTa voTjcrei — it is expressly observed of him, by Spartian, Vita, 20 ; Fuit memorise ingentis, facultatis immensee (which means, "unbounded capacity") nam et ipse orationes dictavit, et ad omnia respondit. He was an accomplished poet, orator, lawyer, and architect ; besides his skill in the art of commanding, and the perfection to which he brought the military discipline of the Roman army. In short — with respect to all the duties which belonged to his station as emperor, it might truly be said of him that he was competent to understand every thing. p 4 216 AppendiXy Chapter Eighth. the language of the second allusion to him, is cer- tainly not laudatory, yet it describes him by no other of the worst attriljutes of his character, but his love of money, his addiction to magic, his super- stition, and the like. The difference of strain, in- deed, between these two testimonies to the character of the same person, might lead to the inference that they are not both due to the same author, (which, in fact, is far from improbable — the eighth book of the Oracles liaving much the appearance of a cento from different parts of the rest,) or else, that one of them was written early in the reign of Hadrian, before the worst parts of his character had been yet developed, and he was known only as a public bene- factor, the other later, when his character had been altered for the worse. See Dio Ixix. 1 — 6, and Spartian, in Vita. I have thus produced the principal part of the internal evidence supplied l)y the Oracles themselves, on which we might build a probable conjecture re- specting the time of their composition P. We can- P Lib. iii. 445. line 3, indeed, the Sibyll reckons it fifteen hundred years up to her own time, (^ ov 8t) ^aaiXfvcrav vTr(p(f)ia\oi /SticriXfJfr 'EWr'jvav, K , T. X. but this is much too indelinite an iiUusion to the first com- mencement of monarchical governments in Greece, to ground any argument upon it, in proof of the date of the alhision itself. A much mure significant passage occurs, lib. viii. "Jl't. 1 — 71(3. 2, where she ventures to predict tliat Konie should have exactly fulfilled her own name, (that is, have exactly attained to the age imlicated by the sum of the numeral value of the letters in the Greek word 'Fw/17, which is JM8,) at the time of her final destruction. This would ])rove that the author of the 0)1 the Sibylline Oracles. 217 not however dismiss the subject withovit bestowing some consideration on one or two passages which prophecy did not live after U. C. 948, referred to some date, though he might have lived before it. And as to this date, there is every reason to suppose it to be meant of one of the two commonly received dates Urbis Condi/cv, the Varronian, B, C. 754, or the Catonian, B.C. 752; according to the former of Avhich, U. C. 948, would answer to A. D. 195, in the third of Severus, according to the latter, to A. D. 197, in the fifth. Cf. in reference to this passage, Dio, Ivil 18, and Ixii. 18, the former belonging to the reign of Tiberius, the latter to that of Nero. Among other probable arguments, indeed, of the age of the Oracles, we might specify the peculiar mode of describing things or persons by the numeral value of their names, as one. It seems to me, that this practice, in apocryphal productions at least, profess- ing to be inspired compositions of some kind or another, is to be referred to the precedent of the Book of Revelation ; in which the name of Antichrist or of the Beast, is similarly described by his number. In this manner, 117. 3, 4, the name of the Su- preme God; and lib. i. 177. 2—178. 3, the name of Jesus, are numerically enunciated in these Oracles. Soon after the beginning of the seventh book, page 655. line 1, we meet with a prediction relating to Egypt, of the fol- lowing kind ; Tr]v XiTTaprjv A'lyvTTTov det araxvea-ai (Bpvovaav, TjV NflXoy vrjKTois vtto KVfiacriu eTrra nedvcrKei, aXKrj'Kiov e'ficfiv'Kos eXet (oXet) crTdais- ev6ev aeKnToas avepes e^eXdaova-i tov ov 6e6v dvdpdaiv ^Aniu. The matter of fact, here predicted, some commentators on the Oracles refer to that intestine dispute, which arose in Egypt early in the reign of Hadrian ; vide Spartian, Vita, 5. 12 ; or rather, was in existence at the death of Trajan, It would make no difference to our argument for the assumed date of the Oracles, as collected from their internal evidence, were this reference admitted to be correct. But it is surprising to me, how any commentator should have fallen into the mistake of confounding this prediction, with the dispute mentioned by 218 Appendix, Chapter Eightli. occur in them likewise, and unless explained would lead to the inference that they are of a later date, than what we have concluded to allow them. Among these passages, the most important will probably be deemed the sequel of the two allusions to Hadrian, which have just been considered ; the latter of them containing, apparently, a reference to his death, lib. viii. G87. line 2, &c., which would imply the author to have been aware of that event ; and to each of them a prediction being subjoined that even after Hadrian, there should be three kings; which the connnentators on these prophecies have supposed to mean Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, and Lucius Verus. And in favour of this conclusion, it seems at first sight a strong ar- gument, that on the second occasion, lib. viii. 688. 4, 5, these three kings, it is said, should reign, ovvo\j.a TT\T]pu>(TavTes k~ov^)avioio Ofolo. One of the names of the Supreme God, recognised in the Oracles, as we have seen, is Adonai, or 'A^o- va7o^- ; between which, and the name of the Antonini, a sufficient degree of resemblance may be imagined, to induce us to suppose that the Sibyll meant to ])redict the rise of three kings, next after Hadrian, all of them bearing the name of Antoninus. Spurtiaii, occasioned as it was ; lor this pri'diction fori'tclls a (rrdais or sedition of tiie E<;vptians among themselves, the effect of which should be, that they should drive out from among them, Apis, before-time the object of their worshij) — as a god unto them no htnger ; that dispute, in Spartian's Life of Hadrian, had f(»r its object wliieli of tin- cities of Egypt shouhl liave the honour of receiving Apis among them, instead of tlie rest ; Apis, after u long interval of time, having recently aj)peared. On the Sibylline Oracles. 219 But there are many objections to this conclusion. First, that if the Sibylline Oracles were not com- posed until the reign of Marcus Aurelius and Lu- cius Verus, it would not be easy to shew by what means any such collection, bearing that title, and containing a variety of testimonies to the facts or doctrines of Christianity, could have been known to Justin Martyr, who probably did not survive the death of Antoninus Piusi — or at the latest, suffered martyrdom early in the reign of Marcus Aurelius ; or to Athenagoras, the author of the Legatio pro Christianis, which was addressed to the two em- perors Aurelius and Verus, in conjunction ; or to Theophilus, the writer of the work Ad Autolycum, the internal evidence of which shews him to have been a contemporary of Marcus Aurelius'. Secondly, it was not perhaps the case that the next three emperors after Hadrian, all bore the nomen as such of Antoninus. Antoninus Pius did so ; and upon his adoption of Marcus Aurelius, it was assumed by him ; but it does not appear to have been assumed by Lucius Verus ^ The name itself was borrowed from the Antonines, even by much later emperors, down to the time of Maximin himself. q Vide my Supplem. Diss. vi. 53 — 63. r Vide lib. iii. 26—28. Cf. Eusebii Chronicon Arm. Lat. ad ann. Abrah. 2185 and 21 93, at the former of which it is stated that Theophilus was made bishop of Antioch, in the ninth of Marcus Aurelius, and at the latter that Maximus succeeded him in the seventeenth. If so, Theophilus was dead by this last date: which, however, is disproved by the testimony of his own work, loc. cit. whence it appears that he lived to witness the death of M. Aurelius at least. Cf. Eus. E. H. iv. 20. 24. s Vide Capitolinus, Marcus Anton. 5. 7- Anton. Pius, 4. Verus, 1. 4. 220 Appendix, Chapter Eighth. Thirdly, it seems to be forgotten in tliis supposed reference to Antoninus Pius, Aurelius, and Verus, that the real state of the case with respect to the successors of Hadrian, was as follows. About two years before his own death, Hadrian adoj)ted Lucius Cejonius Commodus Verus, giving him the name of -^lius, over and above ; so that his name in full, after his adoption, was Lucius Cejonius Corn- modus .-Filius Verus Ciusar ; and upon his death, in about another year, he adopted Antoninus Pius ; re- quiring him at the same time to adopt Marcus Au- relius, and Lucius ^''erus^ It follows then that for one year at least, the associate of Hadrian in tlie empire, and his declared successor, if he survived him, was Lucius iElius Caesar. Now we may con- tend that if the author of the eightli book of the Oracles had been aware of this fact, he would not have failed to comprehend Lucius Ciesar in liis list of emperors ; for he was so scrupulous to include every one, in tliat h'st, who had been bona jidc emperor, though for ever so short a time, that he reckons among the number even Piso, adopted by Galba, and associated with him by that act, though only for five days before the death of both. He enumerates fifteen kings of Rome, before Hadrian ; viii. ()S4. 5 and 7 : which makes Hadrian the sixteenth ; and Hadrian could not be the sixteenth, unless Piso was reckoned the eighth. Fourthly, the supposed resemblance between the name of tiie Antonini, and that of tiie Supreme Being, Adonai, in the line uvvofxa TiKripdKTavm (irovpavioio 6(olo, ^ \'i(U' my Stippioin. Diss. vi. .').'}, o-l. Cf. Spartiaii. yKliiis \\'rus, (!. On the Sibylline Oracles. S21 is merely imaginary and fanciful. There is no ac- tual resemblance between them, even in sound, much less in sense. The truth is, that the meaning of the phrase, ovvo^Ka TrXvjpcocravTe^, in this passage, is mistaken, when such a construction is put ujion it as that of fulfilling the name in question by hearing it. The sense of the phrase here, must be judged of by the analogy of another instance of a similar phrase, which occurs in the Oracles, lib. viii. 716. 2, in the apostrophe to Rome, reov cvvoixa TrXvjpooaaaa. The context of this passage shews that " fulfilling the " name," means fulfilling the numeral value of the name, of Rome, in the Greek character. See the note, supra ; on which principle, fulfilling the name of the God of heaven, means, fulfilling the numeral value of his name, according to the same notation ; whatsoever that name was^. Fifthly, the supposed allusion to the death of Ha- drian, lib. viii. 686, 2, in the second of the passages which speak of him, is in my opinion an interpola- tion where it stands ; and belongs to a different part of the book, and describes the fate of a very different person. Many parts of this book are in all proba- bility out of their proper place, as we find them at present. That there can be no allusion to the death of Hadrian, in this instance, whatever else may be ^i There is another instance of a similar phrase, lib. ii. 318, 1 and 2, where Adam, the Protoplast, is said to have " fulfilled " in his name, the east and west, and south and north ;" be- cause (for so it is implied) his name was composed of four letters, which are the initial letters of the name of the east, the west, the north, and the south, in Greek, respectively. These are the only instances in which the phrase occurs in the Oracles at all. 222 Appendix, (Chapter Eighth. alluded to, the language of the reference to it will shew, atAtz'o? CKTore /catpos, oti''^ Kivo's avrov oAetrat. Corrupt as the line may be, it is manifest that a play was intended in it upon the words alXivoi, to describe the effect, and Xhog, to describe the mode, of the death in question ; which can leave no doubt that whosoever was to die by that death, the instru- mental means of the dying should be, in some man- ner or other, what is denoted in Greek by Xhoi;, Testis; that is, a rope — which implies a death by hanging. But Hadrian died of the dropsy >'. Lastly, it ajjpears to me that by this prediction of the three kings who should succeed to Hadrian, the Sibyll intended to predict the number and order of his successors in the kingdom of Rome, between him and the time of the end ; which she considered to be near at hand in his reign. In proof of this assertion, the language of each of the passages will speak for itself. The first is as follows, v. 553. line 1. KoX^ 6771 croX, Trai'dpLare, 7rar«^o)(e Kvai'o\aLTa, koX'"^ €TtI (Toicri KkaboKTi, rdb^ Icro-erat ijfiaTa TrdvTiov ^Tpds dp^ovcTLV, 6 be TpCros oxj/k KpaD]ixaaiv ey»fXet{Tct Tr\pSiv, Xv orav y kiravikdr] (K -nepoLTdiv yair\s o (\)vyai'« TTi'iati', or rdini y' tmntri fltSm's. On the Sibylline Oracles. 2^5 Vide lib. iii. 329. 8. 10 : lib. viii. 720. 4: 721. 1. sqq. Whether the author meant to describe the church, in any two different states of being, or in any two different senses, by these figures, I do not pretend to say; though I think it not improbable, especially from the internal evidence of the last passage, viii. 721. 1— 3f. Another argument in the opinion of some com- f Supposing the construction which we put upon the phrase, ovvofia TrXrjpaxravres eirovpapioio Beoio, to be correct; I should understand the sense of the allusion in general to be as follows : viz. that the reigns of the kings of Rome, as such, including those of these three last of the number, up to the coming of Antichrist to put an end to them entirely, should amount all together to some number of years, equal to the numerical value of some one of the names of the God of heaven, in the Greek character. What name was meant, may be doubt- ful. But let us sxippose it was ©eor. The value of Geos in the Greek character, is two hundred and eighty-four. Let the be- ginning of the reigns of the kings of Rome bear date from U.C. 705, the commencement of the civil war between Caesar and Pompey. The end \^'ill synchronize Xvith U. C. 989, one hun- dred and nine years later than the eleventh or twelfth of Hadi'ian. This is not more than it might be supposed would be occupied by the remainder of the reign of Hadrian, and by three other reigns after his; the third and last of which, too, was to be a long one. On this principle, our author must have ex- pected the appearance of Antichrist, in about one hundred years after his own time : and so might persons have expected in the reign of Hadrian. It is true, that this supposes Rome to be destined to survive until U. C.989 ; whereas, as we have seen, the Sibyll predicted, in this very book, its destruction when it had attained to U. C. 948. We are not called upon to explain every inconsistency in the Oracles: but this is a difference of but forty-one years, which, perhaps, might be explained, if it were worth while, in various ways. VOL, V. PART II. U 226 AppeiicUx, Chapter Eighth. mentators, that the date of these Oracles is later than what we have assigned them, is an allusion which occurs in the midst of an apostrophe to Rome, to the destruction of some second temple, or to some second instance of the destruction of a certain temple, by fire; which these commentators understand of the destruction of the temple of Vesta, by fire, in the reign of Commodusf-'. To judge of this passage, we must produce it ; lib. v. 621. 10, sqq. (r[yr]6iTov alkv eovra, eK ^vxij? ikTTiCopcvov, /cat o-w/xaros avrov. The description proceeds to particularize this temple further as containing " no idol, in the form of God, " the work of the cunning of the artist ; neither of " earth, nor stone, nor gold ;" and sums up the whole with two verses, which are obviously to be corrected and read as follows : akXa piyav yevfrrjpa debv irdi'Tcov O^oTiveva-TdiV iv Ova-iais (yepaip€, /cat eiV ayiais kKaTopiiais. There is no mistaking a description like this — which must be that of some temple of the true God ; and conse(pu'ntly of the temi)le of Jerusalem. This pas- sage, then, clearly bears witness to the fact that the Sibyll had seen, or supposed herself to have seen, a second instance of the destruction of this temi)le; but P V'ldv Kuscl). Chroii. Arm. I.at. :ul ami. Al)r::li. 2)H)-2. l2'2(>7. Couiiii. 7- 1-- Dio, Ixxii. 2-1. Ilonulian. i. 44, 4.^. Oil the Sihylliiie Oracles. 2^7 not a second instance of the destruction of the tem- ple of Vesta, or of any other idol temple at Rome. In- deed, with respect to the supposed second instance of the former event — it might be shewn that the destruc- tion of the temple of Vesta, in the reign of Commo- dus, was in reality not the second, but the third in- stance of the kind. And this leads me to observe, that the reference of the passage, or any part of it, to an occurrence in Rome, appears to me to be founded upon a misconstruction of its meaning alto- gether. This reference cannot be implied by it, un- less the words ovKeri yap napa creto, k , r. A. are understood to signify, Non enim diutius ajmd te, &c. But where is the instance of that construc- tion in Greek, by which itapk aov admits of being used synonymously with irapa v TreSiW. p o6l 6'. . q Transpose, and read divaov Xipvrjs : or road Xiixvijs devdoi". q3 230 Appetidix, Chapter Eighth. society or happiness of the just. Instead of that they should be removed into a sort of elysium, to the enjoyment of a different kind of life, and a dif- ferent kind of happiness by themselves. Origen on the contrary, was of oj)inion, that when the punish- ment of the reprobate had been fully undergone, and had come to an end in the due course of time, there would no longer be any difference between one class of the subjects of immortal happiness and another ; but tiiat good angels and bad angels, good men and bad men, would all be taken into favour with God alike, and all admitted into heaven alike '". If the two points, for which we have contended, first, that the extant Sibylline Oracles were the com- l)osition of a Christian of some description or other; secondly, that the author of them, whosoever he was, did not live, or did not write, later than the reign of Hadrian, be admitted ; then, for the sake of the argument, deducible from their testimony, in favour of the anti(|uity of the millenary doctrines, and their general recei)tion in the primitive Ciiristian church, it makes no dilference whether they are considered the work of one person, or of more, provided they are still the composition of a Christian; whetlier they "■ Not to insist again on the argument that the writings of u Siljyll, later than the time of Origen, could not have been known to Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Tlieophilus, &c. — it would he a great objection t«) tlie supposition that these Oracles were not older than his time, that lil). v. ()2{{. J), tliey speak of no kingdom, as yet in being, in Upper Asia, but the Parthian. In Origen "s time, the second Persian kingdom had already overturned the Parthian. On the Sihylline Oracles. 231 were published at once, or at different times, pro- vided they are to be comprehended between such and such a period in the first century, and the end of the reign of Hadrian. On the contrary, it would add, in my opinion, to the value of their testimony, and to the strength of the argument deducible from it, could it be proved that they were the work of different Christians, writing independently of each other ; and that they were all published, though at different times, between the end of the first century, and the expiration of the reign of Hadrian. The first of these positions, I, consider to be incon- trovertibly true ; and the second, upon grounds of internal probability, to be in the highest degree credible. Under these circumstances, I shall not think of adding to the length of this dissertation, by entering minutely upon the question of the au- thenticity of the present collection ; or how far it is, or is not, to be considered the same with that which was known to the Fathers, under the title of the Sibylline Oracles, and which is repeatedly quoted by them. Were there no proof that the present col- lection was known even by name to the Fathers, much less recognised and quoted by them ; still if its own internal evidence shewed it to be the work of a Christian, and of a Christian of very high anti- quity, a contemporary of Hadrian, or of earlier Ro- man emperors, its authority, as calculated to throw light upon doctrines and expectations at that time current among Christians, would not be diminished and impaired, by the absence of external evidence to the fact of its own existence at or about the period to which it belonged. Q 4 232 Ap2)endix, Chapter Eighth. That a collection of Oracles, indeed, which passed by the name of the Sibylline, was known to the Fathers, and is often qnoted by them, as a produc- tion containing- a variety of testimonies to the facts or doctrines of Christianity ; it is impossible to deny. It is on every account more reasonable to suppose, that the collection thus referred to was some one and the same in each instance, than that it was something different : for it is never spoken of, or referred to, or quoted by the Fathers in question, except as the Sibylline Oracles, aTrAwc. The apy}i of this collection, as such, or a part of it, is quoted at considerable length, by Theoi)hilus, Ad Autolycum ' ; and Theo- philus' own age was the middle of the second cen- tury. There is a still earlier reference to such a collection, in Justin JNIartyrs Cohortatio ad Gne- cos ^ — the author of which this father supposed to be the Cunicean Sibyll, or the Sibyll who settled at Cuma in Italy, though originally of Chaldiea, and as he thought, the daughter of Berosus ; and from which he quotes one line, to the following- effect " : ^ {ov TTpGiToi' irXacra^ ij.€ poTTcav ,) "Abafx 8e KaXtcraas- And though this line may not be found in the ex- tant Oracles >', yet when we consider the mutilated r Lil). ii. Clip. ,')2. page 234 — 252. * Cap. xxxix — xlii. ^ Cap. xli. " Perhaijs t6v npcoTov fifponoou 6 nXacras. Cf. viii. 750. 1. y Something like it certainly occurs, lib. ii. 317- !)• avTOi ^ij d(6s f'crd' 6 n'Kdcrns TfTpaypapparov 'A8ap, rov TTpioTov TrKacrOtvTa, Koi ovvupa Tr\i]pui(Tiu>Ta (ivToX'iTjv re, ^vaiu Tf, pfarjp^pirjv re, Kai upKTov. Ct". the note supra, 221. On the Sihylline Oracles. 233 state in which they have come down to us, such an omission will excite no surprise. In other respects, Justin's description of the Oracles known to him- self, general as it is, would suit the character and constitution of those which are now extant: and if these, or any part of them, were actually in being, under their present name, before the end of the reign of Hadrian, they might be known to Justin; whose extant works do not appear to have been written before the reign of Antoninus Pius, if not of Marcus Aurelius ^. There would be little difficulty, however, to sliew that the Sibylline Oracles, extant in the time of Lactantius, and known to him, must on every ac- count be supposed the same in general as those which were known to earlier Christian writers; and with this admission, it becomes a strong presump- tive argument that the collection known to any of the Fathers of the first three centuries, was the same in the main with that which exists at present, that only one of the books of the collection, extant in the time of Lactantius, was actually referred to one of the Sibylls of antiquity by name—the rest though supposed to be the work of some Sibyll, as much as that, were anonymous ^. This circumstance is a characteristic of the collection which exists at present. The third book alone is ascribed by name to one of the Sibylls, as a known historical person of antiquity ; viz. the Erythraean — and in that pas- sage, referred to at the outset of this discussion, where the Pseudo-Sibyll, while declaring herself to 2 Vide my Supp. Diss. vi. 53 — 63. ^ Divin. Institt. i. cap. vi. pag. 27- Cf. lib. iv. 15. 359. 2134 Appendix^ Cluipter Eighth. be really an Assyrian, yet j)redicts that she should pass anioni^ men in the course of time, for a native of Erythra ''. To the autiienticity indeed, and to the assumed antiquity of this third book in particular, (which contains as clear a testimony to the millenary doc- trines as any,) a degree of confirmation is given, above the rest, not only by the many quotations from it, occurring in Lactantius, and agreeing upon the whole with what is still to be found in it, but by the testimony of Athenagoras, and of Theophilus, bishop of Antioch; the former of whom, in his Le- gatio pro Christianis, written before the death of Lucius Verus, that is, before A. D. 169- quotes six lines from it, which are still to be met with in it*^ ; the latter, in his work Ad Autolycum, (brought down to the end of the reign of Marcus Aurelius, A. U. 180,) quotes ten lines from it, which, with some va- ^ Lib. iii. page 482. 9—1^3. 8. No Cliristian writer, of e(iiKil antiquity, refers to the .Sibylline Oracles so repeatedly as Lactantius : so much so, that to produce all the instances of these references which occur in his Iiistitutiones or other ex- tant works, and to compare them with the Oracles, as at present in existence, would be almost an endless task. I shall be satis- fied to point out to the reader, the places where these quotations are to be found in Lactantius ; the passages tliemselves he may afterwards compare, if he pleases, with the Oracles, inter /c- gnidiiDi. They are, I believe, the following : Divin. Institt. liber i. caj). (5, 7, ^ ; H. p. ')! ; 1"). p. (57 : lib. ii. cap. 10, 11 ; \-2. ]>. 187; IC: lib. iv. caj). (i; 1."). 3 ')0— 3j9 : Hi. 17; 18. p.:{7(), :{71 ; l!>. -'O: lib. vii. Ki ; 18, 1<», 20 ; 28, 21: l)e Ira Dei, capp. 22, 28. «• Legatio. page 188. lll.("f. Sil)ylliiia Orac. lib. iii. 348. 8—84;".. I. On the Sibylline Oracles. 235 riations, easily to be accounted for by the present cor- rupt state of the text — still make part of it^, and immediately precede the former ^ : so that in these two independent citations of the same collection, by writers contemporary with each other, and writing not many years later than our assumed date of the publication of the Oracles themselves, we have six- teen lines in sequence, which identify the collection extant in their time, with that which exists at present. In like manner, the eleven concluding lines of the fourth book, with the exception only of the last line of all, nearly word for word as they stand at present, are quoted by the Apostolical Con- stitutions^; and the age of the Apostolical Con- stitutions is either much earlier, or, at least is not later, than the last half of the third century after Christ s. On these topics, however, we shall perhaps be considered to have dwelt long enough. I shall take my leave of them with one more remark ; viz. that d Theophilus ad Autolycum, ii. 45. p. 210. 212. and Sibyll. Oracula, lib. iii. 332. 1—343. 2. Compare lib. viii. 676. 5, 6. Cf. Lactantius Divin. Institt. iv. 5. e Another quotation from the Sibyll occurs also^ Ad Autoly- cum, ii. 2. consisting of three lines, at present not found in the collection. ^ Constitutiones Apostolicae, v. 7 : PP- Apostolici, 245, 246. Cf. Lactantius Divin. Instt. vii. 23. QQQ. and Sibyllina Oracula, lib. iv. 538. 5—539. 8. ? Four lines of this fourth book, too, with some variations, page 489. 1 — 4. are quoted by Clemens Alexandrinus, as from the Sibyll. Also, iv. 489. 7. and 490. 1. The passage quoted from the fifth book, 598. 1, 2, &c. is re- cognised by Lactantius, iv. cap. 20. Also, that from the same book, 561. 5. Cf. Lactantius, vii. 18. 236 Appendix y Chapter Eighth. often as the Sibylline oracles are referred to, by profane writers, both before and after the birth of Ciirist, there is no reason to suj)pose tiie present collection was intended by that designation of them. The extant Sibylline Oracles agree with those of profane writers, in nothing except in being written in Greek, and in Greek hexameters, as those were ; in other respects, even the name of Sibyll, as we have seen, is disclaimed by the author of these pro- phecies, though assumed in every instance, by the real or supposed authors of the Sibylline oracles of profane antiquity. In repeated instances, citations from these oracles are to be met with in profane writers, or in writers whose works are connected with subjects of profane antiquity, and sometimes citations of considerable length ; not a word or a vestige of which is any where to be found in the ex- tant collection. To such an extent is this the case, that perhaps the only oracle of antiquity, which the present collection actually contains, and that too not an oracle ascribed to a Sibyll, occurs lib. iv. 515. 1,2: in the following cou})let : €(T(TeTai ia(TO[X(roLs ore Ylvpaixos apyvpobCvr]^ Tjiova TTpo)(i(i>v, upi]v eU vijaov uz/rai — which Strabo shews to have been a common saying in his time, with respect to Pyramus, one of tlie rivers of Cilicia, flowing into the sea ov'er against Cyprus. Vide lib. i. caj). .'3. p. 141. and lib. xii. caj). 2. sect. 4 : except'' that Strabo has evpvo^ivr].;, while tlic Oracles have apyvpo'^ivv]<;. h Consick'ring that the practice of \mting works under false names, did not be<;in after the birth of Christ, but was just as common before it, as after ; and tliat there were some apocry- ]»hal productions ]troj)erly so called, once extant, oKK-r than tht- On the Sibylline Oracles. 237 Christian era, as well as others, of more recent date ; we may think it far from improbable that apocryphal Sibylline oracles, composed by Jews, might once have existed, as well as others composed by Christians, which in many respects, where both re- lated to the same facts in the Old Testament history, might agree together. For instance, there would be no reason why a Pseudo-Jewish-Sibyll might not give the same account of the tower of Babel, and the confusion of tongues, as a Pseudo- Christian one ; or that a Pseudo-Christian-Sibyll of later date might not so far borrow from a Pseudo- Jewish of earlier origin. This conjecture serves to explain the statement of Josephus, Ant. Jud. i. iv. 3. respecting the Sibyll's account of the tower in question, and the confusion of tongues, as known to him ; which certainly contains the substance, if not the words, of the testimony to the same effect, quoted by Theophilus, and still extant in the third book of the Oracles. Yet, as Josephus did not compose his Antiquities until the end of the reign of Domi- tian, if this part of the Oracles was extant before that time, it might have come to his knowledge, before the same time. In Plutarch, also, De Pythise Oraculis, Operum vii. 567- a passage occurs, which leads to the inference that some of the Sibylline oracles, extant in his time, were known to contain a prediction which might be understood of the eruption of mount Vesuvius, which happened in the first of Titus, U. C. 832. A. D. 79- Such a prediction we have seen is extant in the fourth book of the Oracles. This book might possibly be known to Plutarch, or to his contemporaries ; for he is made by Euse- bius in Chron. to have flourished ad ann. 2133, in the third of Hadrian, as well as much earlier, ad ann. 2081, in the eleventh of Nero. APPENDIX, CHAPTER IX. ON THE PERSONAL CHARACTER OF THE SOWER IN THE PARABLE OF THE SEED. VIDE VOL. II. 26. X HE ministerial character of the sower of the seed was plainly declared in the interpretation of tlie pa- rable, to be that of a preacher of the word : the question which we have to discuss at present is what is to be understood by his individual charac- ter ; whether our Saviour in particular, or any minister of the Gospel in general. In favour of the former supposition it might be said, first, that our Saviour's ministry is repeatedly set forth, in the complex, as his word ; and his office is described as tliat of a preacher of the word. On one occasion, when the people were resorting to hear his teaching, St. Luke says expressly it was to hear the W(jrd of God ^. Secondly, that the designation of the agent, who scatters the seed, as simply o a-n-eipuv, the sower, might aj)j)car to denote in an eminent manner the great Preaclier and Evangelist, our Lord himself. Thirdly, that the going forth of the sower, on his errand of sowing, might seem to be just as appli- cable to the fact of the mission of our Lord, cou- » Cll. V. 1. Personal Clinructer of t lie Sower. 239 sidered as sent forth from the Father, and as coming into the world, to preach his word, and to reveal his will, unto men. Fourthly, that the time when the parable was delivered, viz. when half the duration of our Lord's personal ministry was over, would appear to imply that its success must have been adequately tried by the event, so as to furnish a counterpart to the re- presentation of things in the parable. On the other hand, it may be replied in answer to each of the above arguments ; first, that the me- taphorical description of the seed, considered as the word of God, and the corresponding description of the character of the sower, considered as a preacher of the word, apply just as properly to the ministry of any of the emissaries of the Gospel, as to that of our Saviour. Secondly, that, although the instrumental agents in the dissemination of the Gospel might be the apostles and evangelists; still that which gave effect to these agents, and wrought with these instru- ments, as the true efficient cause of their success, was the cooperation of their Master. The apostles were the Shilohs of Christ, as Christ had been the Shiloh of the Father ; and as the word of the latter is called on that account the word of the Father, so the word of the apostles, on the same principle, must be considered the word of Christ : and, if each of them in his proper vocation, was a sower of this word, the great sower after all, the great agent in the same work, was Jesus Christ. Thirdly, that the supposition of the going forth of the sower would apply with more propriety to 240 Appendix, C/iapfer Nint/i. the going forth of the apostles upon their evange- lical commission, especially when they quitted Juda'a, and went into all parts of the earth, than to the coming of our Lord into the world. Fourthly, that if the counterpart of the repre- sentation in iIk' ])aral)le is to he sought in the agree- ment of its material circumstances with the success of our Lord's ministry hitherto; it imj)lies that the j)arahle is historical, without any mixture of pro- phetical matter. A^ow there is no instance of an allegorical parahle besides, in which the reference is entirel}- to the past ; and the allegory, wiien de- cyi)hL'red, is found to contain simply a narrative of the past. 'iMiere are many such parables in a\ liicli there is no mixture of historical matter ; there is none in which there is no mixture of i)roj)hetical : there are several in which there is a mixture of both ; but in these instances the reference to the past is subordinate to that to the future, and the final end of the whole resides exclusively in the latter. The design of the allegorical parables in general was concealment; and the reason why this was the end more particuKirly coiitemj)Iated by them, as we made it appear in the j)roper place, was pr<)l)ahiy because they were intended to be the vehicles of prophecy; and of proi)hecy, wliich. for wise reasons, it was not expedient more plainly to reveal at the tinu'. In every allegorical jiarable. therefore, we should exj)ect to find a reference to the future ; or if there is any reference in it to tlie pa^t, lliat it siiould be in subordination to tlie future; not nu'rely because the end of a dis<;uised repre^entation. under Personal Character of the Soiver. 241 all circumstances, and whether with a view to a re- moval of the disguise in course of time or not, is necessarily better secured by a reference to the fu- ture, than by one to the past — but also because, where the subject of reference is the past, conceal- ment of its meaning, if not impossible, is preposte- rous and out of place. No good reason can be imagined why past history should be disguised under the semblance of allegory, for its own ^ake, and without any reference to the future ; though a variety of reasons might be assigned why such and such matters of fact, still future, under certain cir- cumstances should not be too plainly revealed. The end of allegory, when temporarily conceal- ment, would always be endangered by an exclusive reference to the past, or to the present. An hearer of ordinary sagacity might penetrate into the meaning of a disguise, which was intended to keep from his view merely facts, with which he was previously more or less acquainted. Men's minds are sufficiently quick in apprehending resemblances between the subject- matters of their own knowledge or experience, and other things to which they are or may be compared; particularly where their attention is excited, and the edge of their sagacity is sharpened, by the con- sciousness that something is purposely kept back from them, or is purposely put before them as an object to exercise their curiosity, and as a test to try their acuteness and penetration. Under such cir- cumstances, too, an hint of the truth is sufficient for the discovery of the secret ; a single coincidence, a single lucky or felicitous conjecture, will serve as a clue to the enigma. Even the percejilion of the future, though disguised by allegory, is far from dif- VOL. V. PART II. R 242 Appendix, Chapter Ninth. ficult, much more from impossible, to hearers of ordinary penetration, when the subject-matter of the description is something very sijnj)le in itself; and the images, under which the future is repre- sented, are so close and congenial to the thing pour- trayed, as almost to suggest their own meaning. And this was eminently the case with the parable of the sower ; on which account, too, we may pre- sume it was, that our Lord expressed his surprise that the disciples had not penetrated at once into the meaning of this in particular; and demanded of them, so significantly. If they had not been able to understand this one, how would they comprehend the rest? The objections which might be urged against the a])plication of the parable to the first half of our Sa- viour's ministry, would apply with equal force against the reference of it to the last half ; for the course and success of the last half were just the same as the course and experience of the first : not to men- tion, that, as supposed to refer to this ministry in general, yet as delivered at the middle point in its duration, the parable would seem to belong to either as much as to the other ; and we should not know whether it was entirely historical, or entirely pro- phetical, or both. Not to dwell, however, upon these objections, but to come to more general considerations ; if it is reasonable to sui)])f)se that a series of parables, de- livered in succession as these were, must possess something in common ; the analogy of the rest, in repeated instances, is a clear j)roof that the general subject of them all ^^'^s (he kingdom of heaven, Personal Character of the Sower. 243 understood in that comprehensive sense, in which I explained it elsewhere ''. More particularly to com- pare this first parable with that which most nearly resembled it, and most closely followed it, the parable of the good seed and the tares ; if the field in the latter was the world, the field in the former must be supposed to be so too ; if the agent, who sowed the seed in the latter, though declared to be the Son of man, did not personally or ministerially execute that oflSce in the latter, he need not be supposed to have done so in the former; and if the moral of the latter related to the final settlement, and the perma- nent constitution of the visible Christian church, in such and such respects, that of the former might re- late to its first commencement, and its original con- formation in the same. Our Lord's silence as to the special application of the parable to himself, and to the experience of his own ministry, is a strong presumptive argument that it had no such reference. Is it conceivable that none could be denoted by the sower, but him- self — nothing by the seed, but his own word — no- thing by the ground, but the hearers to whom he had already preached, or should continue to preach — nothing by the different fortunes of the seed, but the success of his word with the different classes of his hearers — and yet not the least intimation to that effect, be furnished by his own interpretation of these circumstances ? nothing, to fix their application to himself, and to the facts of his ministry, whether past, or present, or to come? Supposing, indeed, such to have been the end and design of the parable, '' General Introd. chapter x. R 2 244 Appendix^ Chapter Ninth. will any one say it was not too essential to the right understanding of the allegory, not to be distinctly explained ? or that any interpretation of it, which kept back the fact of this reference, was an inter- pretation at all ? Is it probable, too, that our Saviour would have kept back this fact in an interpretation of the parable, which, though withheld from tlie people, was expressly vouchsafed to his own disci- ples ? especially as their personal identity was just as much concerned in reference to the ground-, as his own was in reference to the sower, and as the doctrine which he taught was in reference to the seed. If it cannot be said that the variety of personal cha- racter in the hearers of the word, and the variety of personal conduct, as the natural result of that variety of character, in the reception or rejection of the word of God, might not be found in a single community, however limited, like that of the Jews, to which our Saviour's personal ministry was con- fined ; still it must be allowed, that there would be much greater scope for all the diversities of human character to shew themselves, and for all the jn-oba- ble differences of human conduct to be exemplified in their proper natural effects, when the dispensa- tion of the Gospel should begin to be carried on, upon so large a scale as i)y the ministry of the apostles — among all communities of mankind, and in all parts of the inhabited world. At least, if we restrict the moral of the j)aral)le to the success of our Saviour's i)ersonal teaching, we must suppose tliat the four divisions of character, which answered to the four diversities of situation, were to be found at this very time, among the body Personal Character of the Sower. 245 of his hearers ; one, of such as rejected his word alto- gether, and three, of such as more or less partially- received it. It may be reasonably doubted, how- ever, whether the number of those who believed in our Lord at this period of his ministry, was actually great enough to furnish the materials of a threefold distribution of personal character among his follow- ers, at least with any propriety ; and in particu- lar, whether a sufficient number could be found among them, to answer to the description of the un- worthy receptacles of the seed, in the parable. Of the body of his followers, all those whose mo- tives, professions, or characters would correspond to the honourable distinction of the good soil in the parable, must be restricted to the joint amount of the apostles and other disciples of our Lord. They were not told in the interpretation of this part of the history, that the honest and good heart be- longed to them ; and made them the counterpart of the only good situation of the seed in the parable. The paucity of their number, in all probability, at this period of our Saviour's ministry, may be judged of by the fact, that after the day of the Ascension, and just before the effusion of the Holy Ghost, the number of names together, says St. Luke ^, which made up the congregation of the first Christian church, was but one hundred and twenty. It would be very inconsistent with the analogy of the para- ble, and with the reason of things, to suppose that the good soil in particular, which received, as we observed, the largest portion of the seed, and there- fore denoted the largest class of the hearers ; could c Acts i. 1 5. II 3 iHii ^ppefuiix, Chapter \inth. be adequately re])reserited by so small a society. As one portion of the whole surface of the ground, which ultimately received the seed ; or as one field out of the many which we suj)i)osed to be all sown at one time — this small society might answer in j)art to the good soil in the parable ; and in point of quality, as being itself, in one instance, what every other j)ortion of the same good ground was in another — it might represent the rest. I5ut in point of quantity, no single connnunity of believers, much less one so limited as the original Christian church, let its intrinsic excellence be what it might, could represent the whole congregation of the faithful, any more than a single field, however excellent, the whole of an estate. In the good ground itself, too, there was proof, from the com])arative differences in the rate of the produc- tion of different parts, of certain corresponding dis- tinctions in the virtue of tlie soil. But where, in the limited congregation which composed the society of believers in our Lord, either at the middle of his ministry, or inniiediately after his Ascension, are we to look for that diversity of j)ersonal character, and of the personal fruits of holiness, whidi would answer to any such distinctions in the respective jjroduce of the good ground, as some thirtyfold, some sixtyfold, and some one hundredfold ? The most decisive argument, however, that the general drift of the parable concerns a period much later than our Lord's personal ministry, is furnished by the mention of tribulation and distress for the word's sake ; answering to the heat and the drought, which acted upon the .seed in the second situation. Personal Character of the Sower. 247 Persecution, and consequently a test so peculiar as that, to prove the strength of faith in professing- Christians — could have no being, until Christianity- had been established, and until there were professors of the Christian religion, the firmness of whose prin- ciples might be subjected to such a test. Besides, the scriptural as well as the obvious sense of the metaphor of bearing fruit, applied to the good soil in particular — which is the correspondency of the life and conduct to the principles of the Chris- tian profession ; and the interval, which we must needs suppose between the sowing and the ripening of the same seed — are sufficient to prove that the fulfilment of this part of the description, like that of the former, must be sought for in a state of things posterior to the commencement of formal Chris- tianity ; that is, of Christianity proposed, received, and applied, on its proper grounds and sanctions, as the rule of every believer's life and conversation. Nor can any exception be taken against the vali- dity of these two arguments, unless it should be said that the seed was sown by the ministry of our Lord, but appeared during, or was raised to maturity by, the ministry of the apostles. But if this objection implies any thing more, than that the ministry of our Saviour was, in some manner or other, prepara- tory to that of the apostles; it must imply that the converts to Christianity at last, were already con- cealed believers, in the lifetime of Christ. This would be possible in the abstract of the converts belonging to no Christian community, except that of the Jews; and it must be certain, even with re- spect to these, that the first converts to Christianity R 4 248 Appendix^ Chapter Ninth. among them, as well as every were else, were made by the preaching of the apostles. Besides, it is clear from the j)arable, that neither the success nor the failure of the seed, was due in any instance to the agency of the sower; but simply to the circum- stances of situation under which it was received into the ground. In no situation, too, where it did not perish, or run the risk of perishing at once, did it lie for any length of time in the ground ; but where- ever it took hold on the ground, it sprang up, as it was natural it should, immediately; and gave signs of vegetation, and even the promise of fruit, from the first. In a word, the very nature of a description which might apj)ly to the preaching of the apostles, as M'ell as to that of Clirist — and as a])plied to the former, would render the parable the more significant ; a description, which, so understood, would make the parable a concealed prophecy; which could not fail to be verified and illustrated by the matter of fact,where- ever the preaching of the (xospel took place, and would be just as apposite among the (ientiles, as among the Jews ; a description, which would conse- quently be universally apj)licable, wheresoever Chris- tianity itself might be j)lanted ; from the very na- ture, I say, of sucii a description, it might be con- cluded, a priori, that it was designed of the ministry of the ajHJstles, as the proper emissaries of Chris- tianity, and not of that of our Saviour. If, indeed, llie j)ersonal ministry of our Lord was the s;niK' in kind with that ol" the apostles, or di- rected to the same purpose as tlieirs ; then the Personal Character of the Soiver. 249 teaching or preaching of both might be called with equal propriety, the teaching and preaching of the word of God ; but if not — in whatever sense the ministry of our Saviour might be styled a ministry of the word of God, it must still be in some sense different from that of the apostles. Now the icord, as applied to the ministry of our Lord, stands for the complex of his part and office ; for his actions as well as his doctrines ; for his miracles as well as his discourses ; and it is conse- quently equivalent to his ivorJe — the work or com- mission which the Father had given him to perform: one principal part of which was the great, but indi- vidual article of his dying and suffering for mankind. The word as applied to the apostles stands for the preaching of the Gospel. The sowing of the seed in the parable, therefore, as intended to denote this preaching of the word by them, is a much more precise and definite mode of characterising their office, than it would be as meant of the ministry of Jesus Christ. The agent in the parable had no- thing else to do but to sow or disperse the seed ; neither had the apostles, in their proper vocation, except to preach and disseminate the word of God. I shewed at large in one of the Dissertations of my former work, that the ministry of our Saviour, considered distinctly from the one great purpose of his death and passion, was the same in kind with that of John the Baptist ; the ministry of an herald, ambassador, harbinger of the future kingdom, that is, the approaching Christian dispensation ; whose business it was to go about inculcating the doctrine of repentance, as founded upon the expectation of 250 Ap2)^ndix\ Chapter Xbit/t. this kingdom, and to call upon all men to prepare themselves for its appearance, and to qualify them- selves for admission into it, by reformation and amendment of life ''. Our Saviour's personal desig- nation, in his ministerial capacity, is consequently that of a K^pv^t an herald or proclaimer of tidings ; not of the aireipxy, the sower or disperser of seed : and though the former title is frequently applied to him, in terms describing accordingly his office and mode of employment at all periods of his ministry, the latter never is. It appeared to be intimated by the parable, that the part of the sower was not supposed to begin, until the office of those, who must previously have prepared the ground for the reception of the seed, was over. Though we might not be authorized to build with confidence on this intimation, yet, if the personal ministry of our Lord was designed to be, in any respect, introductory to that of the apostles, it would be an obvious coincidence with it, that his part was ov^er before theirs began. A'^or is it to be sup- posed that the agency of our Lord, whether instru- mental to that of the apostles, or not, could alto- gether have failed of its effiect, in preparing the men of the time for such a dispensation as the formal publication of Christianity. Christianity was preach- ed exclusively, even by the apostles, for many years to those who had repeatedly heard from the mouth of our Lord himself, the assurance that the kingdom of heaven was at hand. This kingdom, which had been announced by Christ, was ushered in to the same persons by his apostles ; and the instrumen- '^ Diss. V. vol. ii. J). 147. Personal Character of the Sower. 251 tality of the latter was only the appointed means of confirming to the men of the time the promise made, and the expectation raised, by the former. The formal publication of Christianity could not begin until Christ had died, and risen from the dead — and been raised to the right hand of God. But his death and suffering, as the last instance of his humiliation, and as the final purpose of his com- ing into the world ; and his resurrection, and exalta- tion to the right hand of the Majesty on high, as the proper reward of his humiliation, and of what he had done and suffered, in obedience to the will of the Father, for the salvation of mankind — were in the nature of things, the last events in his per- sonal history, the close of his personal ministry ; which must, in the mean time, be of a determinate length, agreeably to what prophecy had declared it should be**; and must conduct to those consequences as the result of time, and as the effect of natural or secondary causes. Now besides that multitude of other particular facts, which make up the history of this intervening period, and constitute the body of the Gospel evi- dence to the truth of our Saviour's divine legation ; what could be a more appropriate occupation of it than its being devoted, so far as our Lord's personal agency was concerned, to the annunciation before- hand of the approaching Christian dispensation, and to calling on all who heard of its approach, to pre- pare themselves for its arrival, and for their ad- mission into it, by repentance and reformation ? The collection of a body of disciples, who received the name of apostles during his personal presence e Diss. xiii. vol. i. p. 525, sqq. J252 Appendix, Chapter Ninth. on earth, but were not intended to enter upon tlie office denoted by that name, until after his Ascension into heaven — is a plain proof that the business of preaching Christianity could be discharged neither by our Lord himself, nor by any other minister, during his continuance on earth ; though it might be very proper, and even indispensable, that it should be discharged by persons, after his death and resurrection, whom he himself had previously ordained to that office, and had constantly kept about him, with a view to their better qualification for it. Our Saviour was a worker of miracles, in the discharge of his proper ministry; and so were the apostles, in the execution of theirs. But this does not prove that their ministries respectively were the same. Each wrought miracles in confirmation of his proper mission, and miracles frequently of the same kind. But miracles are proofs merely that the worker of them acts and speaks by a connnission derived from God ; and as God may send different persons on different commissions, each of whom shall have a different part to discharge, yet shall act and speak in it by the same Divine right ; the mira- culous testimony which may be vouchsafed in con- firmation of the ministry of either, may very possibly be, the same in kind, and yet not demonstrate the ministry, in behalf of which it is adduced, to be the same ; only that whatever it is, and whatsoever it is designed for, it is discharged by virtue of a com- mission derived from God. Our Saviour was a teacher of morality also, and so were the apostles. But not to repeat what was Personal Character of the Smver. 253 said upon this subject, on a former occasion f, I will simply observe, that the system of ethics, which might be compiled from the writings of the apostles, would be much more complete than any which could be extracted solely from the Gospels. In a plurality of instances too it is capable of proof, though we do not find that commentators in general have suffi- ciently attended to this circumstance, that the per- sons designed to profit by our Lord's admonitions were not the people at lai'ge, but his own disciples ; nor his own disciples in their capacity at the time, but in some future character ; nor in anj^ future character as Christians merely, or as placed in the ordinary situation of Christians at all times, but as a certain class of Christians, and as placed in cir- cumstances of an extraordinary and peculiar kind. But the teaching of the apostles included doc- trines, as well as duties : and that the doctrinal part of our Saviour's teaching is something jwiwa facie different from that of the apostles — that the rule of faith prescribed in the Epistles, is not apparently to be found in the Gospels — may be collected even from the senseless cry which has been raised in our day, of. Not Paul, but Jesus : the meaning of which is to set the authority of the Master, on points of faith, against the authority of the servant, in the same respects. No such attempt could have been made with any plausibility, if it might not be assumed that the characteristic tenets of the Christian re- ligion, as we have them stated and defined in the Creeds and Articles of the church, were to be met with only or chiefly in the writings of the apostles. f General Introduction, chapter v. il54> Appendix, Chapter Nbith. To assert, indeed, that the cardinal doctrines of Christianity do not so much as appear in the Gos- pels, would l)e to overstate the truth of this fact. If all that is meant by it, on the other hand, is that they do not formally appear there — they are not sys- tematically inculcated — they do not meet us on every page of the Gospels, as they do of the Epistles ; so far from denying the assumj)tion, or apprehending any danger to the uniformity of Christian teaching, from its admission, I should have been much sur- prised had the state of the case been otherwise, and had the same things which are so i)lainly and forci- bly taught by the apostles, and by the apostles only, been as clearly revealed by our Saviour. The rudiments and outlines of every essential article of a genuine Christian faith, may be traced even in the disclosures of the Gospels ; and that is as much as we ought to expect. The question con- cerning the comparative clearness, and particularity of mention, with which they occur there, as first partially made known, and afterwards, as formally propounded in the Epistles, is nearly the same as about tile doctrine of a future life, such as it was revealed in the Law of Moses, and such as it is brought to light in the Gos])el. It would be equally erroneous to say that it was distinctly revealed in the Pentateuch — and that it could not by implica- tion be collected from it. The nearest approach which was made in our Saviour's discourses, to a distinct communication of the whole trutji on the leading doctrines of formal Christianity, occurred in the conversation with Nico- demus>f; the disputes with tlie Jews in tiie synagogue P Harm, piirt ii. \'2. .lolm iii. 1 — '2\. Personal Cliaracier of the Sower. "^55 at Capernaum '^ ; and afterwards at the feast of Ta- bernacles \ and Encaenia ^ ; and in the long and mysterious colloquy with the disciples in the upper chamber, on the night before the crucifixion \ But the fact that all these discourses occur in one only, and the last of the Gospels, is sufficient to prove that without the Gospel of St. John, we should never have known that they took place. Those who deny the catholic doctrine of the per- sonal individuality, and the personal agency of the Holy Ghost, do not consider the necessity and sub- ordination of his mission and ministry to those of Christ : and they, on the other hand, who desire a plain, a popular, and yet a satisfactory argument for the distinct individual being, and the distinct in- dividual agency of each of the three persons in the blessed Trinity, conspiring and cooperating to one result, the redem])tion, sanctification, and salvation of mankind ; cannot have a better than is supplied by the very light of the event, and course of things, when the personal agency of Christ, subordinate to his mission by the Father, in being born, and dying, and rising again for mankind, being concluded, was succeeded, only ten days after his personal departure into heaven, by the agency of the Holy Ghost ; coming in subordination to the will and mission of Christ and of the Father both. For though the Holy Ghost is never in the New Testament said to have come of himself, but always to have proceeded, or to have been sent ; yet he is represented indif- h Harm, part iii. 31. John vi. 25 — 71- ^ IWfl- part iv. 16—20; John vii. 2— x. 21. k ibid, part iv. 21 ; John x. 22—39. ^ Ibid, part iv. 90, 91 ; John xiv. 1— xvii. 26. 256 Appendix, Chapter Ninth. ferently as proceeding or coming, sometimes from the Father, in the name of the Son, sometimes from the Son, in his own name, and sometimes conjointly from both. In that last conversation with his disciples, our Saviour told them he had yet many things to say unto them, but they could not bear them then "' ; which directly implied that a further and more par- ticular disclosure of Christian truth, in their state of mind at the time, would have been premature, or else that it would have been made. And, indeed, how was it possible that those, who, on so many 'occasions, could not comprehend even a plain, undis- guised, and historical declaration of a mere matter of fact, though a future one — the death and passion and rising again of Christ — should have entered at once into the deep and mysterious doctrines con- nected with those events"? These discoveries, there- fore, were purposely reserved for the teaching of the Holy Ghost; accompanied by his illuminating influences on the understandings of the apostles. Therefore it is, that, immediately after the pre- ceding declaration, our Saviour proceeds ; " Howbeit " when he, (fVerv&s,) the Spirit of truth, shall be " come, he shall guide you into all the truth : for " he shall not speak of himself; l)ut whatsoever he " shall hear, (doubtless from the Father and Christ,) " Unit shall he speak : and he shall tell you the *' things that are coming. He (eArtrvo?) shall glorify m John xvi. 12. " Vide Ilarnioiiy, part iv. 12. IMatt. xvii. 22, 23; .Alark ix. :U)— 32 ; Luke ix. 43—15; Ibid. 55. Matt. XX. 17—11); Mark x. 32—34; Luke xviii. 31—34. Cf. Ibid. ix. Matt. xvi. 21 — 28 ; Mark \ iii. 31 — ix. 1 ; Luke x. 22 27. Personal Character of the iSoiver. 257 *' me: for he shall receive of that which is mine, and " tell it unto you "." It is manifest, then, that Christ declined to in- struct his disciples himself, in the entire knowledge of the mysteries or secrets of the Christian religion, that he might not anticipate the ministry of the Holy Ghost, whose proper office it would be, in due time, to open their minds to the perception of all the truth, as it is in Jesus ; and not only to bring back to their remembrance, whatsoever he himself might have said at any time, in relation to this or to any other subject, but to enable them, to enter fully into its meaning. Those revelations, indeed, of which Jesus Christ himself was to be the subject, it can scarcely be ex- pected that he himself should have made ; for in the human apprehension of what is just and becom- ing, it is contrary to the rule of propriety that any one should bear witness to himself; and our Saviour admits the justness and reasonableness of this appre- hension, on more occasions than one. The eternal generation and preexistence of the Son of God ; his mysterious union with the Father ; the ineffable dignity of his person ; the conjunction of the Divine and the human nature at his incarnation ; his ever- lasting priesthood ; the saving efficacy of his blood ; his providential care and government in the con- cerns of the world and of his church ; were first clearly conceived and understood by the human in- tellect, at least in the case of the apostles, when their minds had been inspired and illuminated by the Holy Ghost. o John xvi. 13, 14. VOL. v. PART II. S 258 Appendix^ Chapter Ninth. Arid as to the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith, deducible from these premises — Christian doc- trines could have no being, before the Christian reli- gion, nor the Christian religion, before the founda- tion of the Ciiristian church ; nor the Christian cliurdi, which was purchased by the blood of God, before the price of that blood was paid for it. The church, of which Christ in heaven is the Head, and faithful men on earth are the members, could have no such bodily existence, until Christ had ascended into heaven, and faith in Christ was proposed to believers upon earth; the church, which was gathered by the apostles, couhl not begin to be collected, until they began to preach ; the church, whose continuity, well-being, and preservation are the effects of the tutelary providence of its Lord and Head, did not become the object of his saving care, nor the main part of his mediatorial kingdom, until he was sat down on the right hand of God, and all power was committed to him in heaven and on earth. Tlie word (KKkfjcria, which occurs so often in the Acts and the Epistles, is found only thrice in the Gospels ^ ; and but once in the strict and proper sense of what we understand by the church. On the first of these occasions, when our Lord pronounced his blessing on the celebrated confession of Peter, *' And I say also unto thee, Thou art Peter, (a rock;) •' and upon this rock {or this Peter) I will build my " ciiurch 'I ;" if the church was yet fo he built, it was not yet built : the first stone of the (Christian edifice, though founded on the apostles and the pro- phets, (Jesus Christ himself, as the chief corner P .Alatt. xvi. IH. xviii. 17- •• Harm. iv. 5!: Matt. xvi. 18. Personal Character of the Soiver. 259 stone, as the master or key-stone of the whole, uniting both its parts together,) was not yet laid. It is only from the day of Pentecost, and thence- forward, that we meet with such expressions as these, which recognise the church as already in being ; " And the Lord added to the church daily " such as should be saved ''," (tois- o-w^&^evci^c.) To instance in one of the doctrines of Christianity, the most peculiar and most essential of all. We read of faith in Christ, during his lifetime ; and of faith in Christ, after his death and resurrection. Now this last kind of faith, from the necessity of the case, was a faith in a crucified Redeemer ; but a faith in Christ during his lifetime, was a simple belief either in the reality of his character of a pro- phet or teacher come from God ; or, at the utmost, in the truth of his character as the expected Messias of Israel. No such faith, in any who entertained it at the time, included the least idea of a crucified Sa- viour ; or was founded in the consciousness of sin, the conviction of the necessity of some atonement, the hope of justification or of acquiring the cha- racter of righteous, by an absolute trust and reliance on the merits of that one atonement ; and all this, as personally applicable to the believer, or subject of the faith, himself. It is very evident, then, that a faith in Christ during his lifetime, and a faith in Christ after his death, were different things ; that there could be no room for the latter before his death, though no hope of salvation without it afterwards. It is not too much, consequently, to say, that the utmost sin- r Acts ii. 47. s 2 260 Appendix y Chapter Ninth. cerity of faith of the former kind, unless it became merged in an equally sincere faith of the latter, was unprofitable to the believer and void. Those, there- fore, who professed to believe in our Lord, as the expected Messias of Israel, before his death, would yet be bound to believe in him as the Saviour of mankind, after his death — or their former faith was vain. Nor is it improbable that there might be many, disposed to believe in him before his death, whom the very nature of his death Mould not allow to believe in him afterwards. The great ol)stacle to a faith in Christ during his lifetime, was the re- proach of the Nazarene ; but the chief stumbling- block to a saving faith in him since, has been the scandal of the cross. APPENDIX, CHAPTER X. ON THE EXISTENCE AND LOCALITY OF HADES. VIDE VOL. IV. Page 104— 116. J. HE parable of Dives and Lazarus, though one of the moral parables, differed from the rest, in con- sisting of an history, part of which was transacted in the present world, and part in another scene of things; the former, such as might be judged of from our own experience and observation, the latter, not ; the former, as tried by that criterion, apparently perfectly possible and probable ; the latter, as inca- pable of any such test, evidently nothing upon which we might undertake to pronounce for ourselves, whether it was either possible or impossible, proba- ble or improbable, yj^r se — and therefore if we were to pass any opinion upon its character in those re- spects, it must be an opinion, founded upon other grounds than those of our own observation and ex- perience. If the moral parables in general, however dif- ferent from each other in all circumstantial respects, agree in this one property, of being narratives or histories of real events ; unless we should consider the parable of Dives and Lazarus, for particu- lar reasons, an exception to its proper class, this s 3 5i62 Ajtpendix, Chapter Tenth. must be supposed a true history, as much as the rest: in which case, that part of the narrative which is transacted in another state of being, must be as real as that wliich j)asses, and is rehited to pass, in the present life. The first part of the history, in- deed, as I before observed, requires no otiier evi- dence but its own probability, at once to convince us tiiat tiie transaction which it relates, is not only possible, but may be real ; in wliich case, the re- mainder of the narrative, whicii is in fact merely the sequel of the former, the second j)art of one and the same account — it may well be ])resume(l, is real also. It would be manifestly incongruous, for one part of the same continuous detail of things to be matter of fact — the rest (and the most important part of the whole) to be purely imaginary and fictitious. Not to repeat, however, the arguments whicii were urged in their proper place, in favour of this conclusion ; as the scene of that j)art of the parabo- lic transaction which passes in another state of being, is laid in what is called Hades ; and as the transac- tion itself is something supposed to pass between tile souls of such and such persons, wliich were once united to the ijody, and once living in the upper world, but in this instance are sui)posed to be exist- ing in a disembodied state, and to be locally com- prehended in Hades — it seems to me a likely means to confinii the general truth of the wliole narrative, if we can shew not only the j)ossil)ility, but the ac- tual trutli and certainty of liiiis niucii of its j)articu- lars at least; by making it appear tliat there is such a place as Hades, that it is the retiptade of tlu- souls <»f men in a disembodied state, that its loealitN" On the Existence a7id LncuUty of Hades. 263 admits of being determined with presumptive assur- ance — and the like. To these questions then, do I propose to address myself; feeling persuaded that for entering upon the inquiry, no apology is necessary beyond this statement of its connection with the right under- standing of one of the Gospel parables — the ex- position of which has been, and still is, the proper subject of the present work ; the parable of Dives and Lazarus. Nor can it be said that the assump- tion of the material truth of that parable, supersedes any further investigation into this one point, relating to the locality of Hades. The truth of the parabolic narrative, in each of its parts, being admitted — it would certainly follow that there was such a place as Hades, that it was the receptacle of the soul after death, and the like ; but it would not follow that its locality was of such and such a kind ; and how- ever well satisfied of its existence, we should still be under the necessity of inquiring where it might be situated. To readers, indeed, whose thoughts have ever been turned to so mysterious and so interesting a subject of reflection, as the history of the human soul beyond the limits of the present life — the im- portance and solemnity of the ensuing discussion will be its best recommendation ; if it be conducted with all the care and circumspection, which the ob- scurity and difficulty of the subject so obviously re- quire. Of the two divisions of infinite duration, both of them alike boundless and immeasurable in comparison of any finite portion of either, properly called time — eternity a parte jjosf, and eternity a s 4 264 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. parte cmte — the endless future and the endless past — the term of human life, as measured by the ex- istence of the soul in an embodied state, lies betM'een the two ; or rather, though but an infinitesimal portion of the whole, belongs to the latter, not to the former. We have no direct personal interest in the eternity a parte ante, which preceded the precise moment when we began to be ; but we have, in the eternity a parte post, whicb remained to.be transacted after it : for we have no reason to believe that before the moment, when we were conceived in the womb, or born into the world, we had any ex- istence ; but we have every reason to know that having once begun to be, we can never cease to be — Ave must continue to be for everlasting. Nor am I now speaking of the relation of human life to an endless futurity, in a moral point of view ; or of the infinite importance of this limited period of being, considered as the state of trial, on the use or the abuse of which, as adapted to probationary pur- jjoses, depends the everlasting happiness or everlast- ing misery of each individual moral agent: I am speaking of it only as the first stage in a course of existence, which having once begun can never after- wards come to an end. and compared with the dura- tion of which, the term of human life at the longest, is no more than a mathematical point in comparison of infinity. Considered in this relation to some- thing beyond itself, the finite space between the womb and the grave — however long it may be — to whatever uses it may be devoted — and whatev'er consequences may hang upon those uses — is as good as obliterated : each human subject may be said to On the Existence and Locality of Hades. ^Q5 come into the world only to leave it again — and life, in philosophical strictness of speech, in reality to be- gin, where it appears to end. The question, however, of the existence, and of the locality of Hades, resolves itself ultimately into the question of the reality, and of the locality of what is called the intermediate state. In one sense of these terms, there may be no difference of opinion among Christians of all denominations, with respect to the reality of such a state ; for all Christians who agree in the belief of a resurrection to come, must agree also in the admission of some interval between every man's dying and every man's rising again — which so far as he was concerned, might be called in one sense the intermediate state. In the estimation of those Christians, however, who deny that a certain indivi- dual soul is any thing distinct from a certain indivi- dual body; or without maintaining such an hypo- thesis as that, are still of opinion that a given indi- vidual soul, though essentially distinct from a given individual body, loses all sense of its being by the act of dying, and recovers it only by the act of rising again, the intermediate state is little better than an empty name. But in the sound and orthodox meaning \ of the terms, the intermediate state is the state of the soul, in her condition of disunion from the body, and until her reunion to it ; a condition, not simply a i mere lapse or transition of time of such and such an / extent, but a life, or positive existence of one kind 01/ another, for the same length of time. We know that the soul was not yet united to the \ body, before it was born ; and we have reason to be- '\ lieve that it is no longer united to it, after it is dead : / 2G6 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. and we have reason to believe that it will some time be united to it again. We know, moreover, that it lived, for the period of its union with the body, in the strictest sense of the term ; and scrip- ture has taught us to believe that it lives, for the period of its disunion from the body, in the strictest sense of the term also. This state of temporary dis- union from the body, without any interruption in the essential vitality of the soul, I call the interme- diate state. The point where it begins is conse- quently the moment of the individual's death ; the point where it ends is that of his rising again : the former of which experience shews us to be perpetu- ally varying, the latter we have the assurance of scripture, will be one and the same to all, or to great part of the dead at once : to all, if there be but one common or general resurrection, to a part at once, on two several occasions, if there be a double resur- rection of the dead. Assuming, then, the fact of an intermediate state, understood in this sense — all mankind must have more or less the same personal interest in it, who are destined to die, and to continue for a greater or a longer time in a state of death ; and their interest in tills state will be consequently greater or less, in proi)ortion to the greater or less duration of the state itself, as beginning from the time of their death: but this interest can be absolutely nothing to any part of mankind, except those who may be destined never to die, (as some perhaps may be,) or not to continue for any time however short, in the state of death (which is i)erhaps not so probable). In the ^mean time, this intermediate state must be transacted in a proper locality, and after a proi)er manner, as On the Existence and Locality of Hades, 267 well as by a proper subject, who is capable of existingA- both ill that locality, and after that manner. The precise mode of this subsistence may be beyond the reach of our discovery at present — both from the nature of the case, and because scripture or revela- tion may have thrown no light upon it ; but the precise locality of the subsistence may perhaps ad- mit of being ascertained, if not from the nature of the case, yet by the help of the testimony of scrip- ture, which may have given us the means of inves- tigating and determining it. The sense in which I propose to use the word ^ Hades, through the whole of the ensuing discussion, unless where the contrary is specified, is that of the supposed receptacle of the souls of men after death ; in which general sense, we have the authority of our Saviour for the use of the term ; as I shall have occasion to shew elsewhere. The two points which I have chiefly in view to determine, if possi- ble, concerning it, are^rst, the existence of such a receptacle, somewhere or other ;^nd secondly, its-^ locality. And with respect to the proper method of the discussion — it appears to me the only safe and satis- factory course of proceeding on questions like these, to treat each of the above points, and any others that may be connected with them, purely as ques- tions oi fact; to be decided like every question of that description, by competent testimony ; which testimony, in a case like the present, can be nothing but the testimony of inspiration, or the revealed word of God. Without entering, therefore, into spe- culative or metaphysical discussions, the tendency 268 Appendix^ Chapter Tenth. of which might be to shew the individual distinct- ness of the soul from the body, the immateriality of the one, as contradistinguished to the materiality of the other, the probability that the soul survives the dissolution of the corporeal frame, that it retains its consciousness, and the other powers and capacities of its proper nature, after death as much as before ; I shall confine myself solely to this one considera- tion. What scriptural assurance we have to believe in the existence of an appropriate habitation for the soul after death ? by what name it is to be called ? and where, or in what region of space, in all proba- bility, it is situated ? Upon the decision of such questions as these, I shall appeal indifferently either to the Old or the New Testament — as the occasion may require ; as- suming only that the testimony of either is to be re- ceived on the ground of the deference due to the ipse dixit of a competent authority, understood ac- cording to the plain, grammatical, and unsophisti- cated construction of the language in which it is conveyed. The doctrine of a supposed accommoda- tion in the words of scripture, on such and such points, to certain preconceptions or prejudices of men themselves — to certain popular or current opin- ions of the time — or the like ; I utterly disclaim and repudiate, as subversive of the authority of scrip- ture, and inconsistent with the truth and simpli- city of revelation, under all circumstances. Besides which objections, the nature of the present questions is such, that, supposing the hypothesis of an accom- modation to preexisting opinions, even in the lan- guage of revelation, to be admissible in other in- stances, it would not be so in this; because there On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 269 could be no jDreconcei ved opinions on points like these, not derived from revelation itself. Without information communicated mediately or immedi- ately, from some other quarter, what could mankind have known respecting the existence and mode of disposal of the human soul after death — respecting the intermediate state, as the state which immedi- ately succeeds to life, but continues only until the resurrection — respecting the provision of a pro- per habitation for the disembodied soul — the locality of that habitation — or the like ? That opinions have been current upon such subjects among all nations, from the most remote antiquity — and opinions re- markably uniform, and consistent with each other — opinions too, not very different from the truths which revelation itself has made known on the same points — it would be absurd to deny, against the evidence of the fact : but it would be just as difficult to prove that they were notions and ideas, struck out by mankind originally for themselves. I shall begin the discussion, with stating a number of propositions, each of them to be supported by the necessary scriptural proof in its order ; the effect of which will be to bring the proposed inquiry within a narrower and narrower compass, until it termi- nates in the desired result at last. For example, > with a view to the proof of the first of our general assumptions, that there is some such place as Hades, understood in the sense explained above ; though I should not think it necessary to premise the scriptural proofs of a point so plain, upon scrip- tural testimony, as this, that men have souls as well 270 Appendix, Chajder Tenth. as bodies, and that their souls are something speci- fically different from their bodies ; I should think it desirable to shew first of all — That the soul of man does not continue united to the body of man after death, but that an actual separation of the soul from the body is j)roduced by death. ^ Secondly, that the soul in its disembodied state, passes directly into the hands of God. Thirdly, that the soul in its disembodied state, by passing into the hands of God, becomes added or joined to a certain society, company, or congrega- tion of disembodied souls like itself. Fourthly, that this society, company, or congre- gation of disembodied souls, is not any where ex- istent, or after any manner, but in a determinate locality, the proj)er name of which, considered as the receptacle of all the souls of the dead indiscriminately, is Hades in general. The proof of each of these points in its turn, will establish the first of our general conclusions, the proper existence of an Hades ; and to this proof, upon the simple testimony of Scripture, we will now proceed. With respect to the truth of the first proposition, ' the actual separation of the soul from tlie body by death — perhaps we might aj)peal, in the first j)lace, 'I to the testimony of the parable; from which the fact of that separation is by implication deducible, if not openly asserted by it. The l)ody of Dives it ap- peared was buried ; yet Dives himself immediately after was in Hades. Now he could not be there himself, while his body was in the grave, except in On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 271 a disembodied state ; that is, except in his soul, but not in his body. His soul, tliorrfore, had been se])arated from his body by his death. It is deducible, on the same })rincii)le, also from the words of our Saviour to the thief on the cross — Luke xxiii. 43 : Harm. iv. 101: A/x>jv Xiyui aoi^ cryj- fxepov fX€T (fnov ecTTj ev tco Trapa^tiacp ; '^ A^U'ily I say tO /> ' ./ * "thee, To-day shalt thou be Avith me in Paradise," -^ /. understood in their })lain and obvious sense, and . su})}X)sed to have been fulfilled according to the as- ' ''^-^ <|^'# would be the aggregation of a given body and a \ j; given soul, at once ; which aggregation would be WT the aggregation not of the dead individual, but of \ the living one; for as long as the same soul and | the same body, composing one individual, are still 282 Ap])end}x^ Chapter Tenth. united, the individual is not yet dead. Of the parts of the individual, on the other hand, the body is one and the soul is the other, while alive ; and the ag- gregation of the individual by his death to his fathers, being to be made in one or other of these parts, not in both, it must be to be made in the body distinct from the soul, or in the soul distinct from the body. It cannot be to be made in the body distinct from the soul ; first, because the body distinct from the soul, neither is, nor can be, the individual after death, as well as before; and se- condly, because no individual could be said to be added or gathered to his fathers in any sense after his death, by being gathered to them in his body, distinct from his soul, unless his body were sup- posed to be gathered to the bodies of his fathers ; that is, except he were buried in the grave of his fathers, or one locality received and contained the bodies of them all in death. This might be possible in some instances ; but it could not be possible in an infinite number of instances more ; and it is certain that whether possible or not, in other instances, it was not the case in the greater part of the instances, quoted above, to which we find the phrases in question applied. The bodies of the ancestors of Abraham, for example, doubtless rested in Ur of ChaldiEa, and his father's body in Haran, beyond the river, when his own was sleeping in Machpelah. The bodies of the fathers of Aaron, with the excep- tion of Jacob and the twelve patriarchs at the ut- most, (see Acts vii. 16.) were resting in Egypt, and the remainder of them in the land of Canaan, when he himself was buried in mount Hor ; and the same may be said of Moses, and of all the generation con- On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 283 temporary with Joshua — who were gathered to their fathers, by being committed to the grave in Canaan, while their fathers were most of them sleeping in Egypt. In none of these instances, then, can the phrase be understood of the individual's being gather- ed to his fathers after death, in his body, distinct from his soul ; a conclusion, confirmed by this additional consideration, that in some of them, if not in all, the individual is said to have been gathered to his fathers, by the mere act of his dying, and before any thing had been, or could have been done, for the disposal of his body after death. He is said to have died, and been gathered to his fathers by that event; and his burial is afterwards related. It must be understood, therefore, of his being gathered to his fathers by the event of his dying, in his soul, dis- tinct from his body ; both because the soul, though apart from the body, may still be the same indi- vidual as before, (the same individual out of the body, who before was in the body,) if the soul re- tains its consciousness and personality, out of the body, as well as in it ; and because, if the souls of the dead are formed into a common society, com- plex, or congregation by themselves, any particular soul may be, and must be, added to that complex in its turn, as soon as it is dead. The use of these modes of speaking — which are of such frequent oc- . currence in the Old Testament, and which are sane- \ tioned also, as we have seen, by their adoption in the New — does almost necessarily lead to the infer- ence, that every soul, by dying and being disunited from the body, and passing into the hands of God, becomes added or joined, in its disembodied state, to a society, complex, or aggregate of disembodied / 284 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. souls like itself ; which in every individual soul's case, might be called the company of its fathers, in the general sense of its ancestors, its predecessors — of those, in short, who had lived before it in j)oint of time, if not in the special relation of its fathers in point of descent. In one sense, indeed, the whole race of mankind who have lived at any time on the face of the earth, being all derived from the same first pair, the living on the face of the earth, at a given time, are all to be considered and styled the descendants and offspring of those who have ceased to live before that time, but did live once in their turn, on the same locality. In this general sense of the relation between the living and the dead, it may be literally true, that every one by dying, if added or gathered to the complex of the dead before him, is added or gathered to his fathers. After the explanation thus given of these phrases, we shall have no difficulty in understanding the meaning of the answer returned by David to his servants, when they required a reason why he had acted so differently before and after the death of the child, borne him by Bathsheba; fasting and weeping- while it was alive, but rising from the ground, anointing himself, and eating bread, when he knew it was dead : " Now he is dead, wherefore should I " fast? Can I bring him back again ? I shall go tt) " him, but he shall not return to me," 2 Sam. xii. 23. The meaning of this declaration is now j)or- ceived to be something more than his merely follow- ing his child to the grave, his merely dying like him, or resting with his own body in the same locality which might contain his : a circumstance, in parti- On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 285 cular, which we do not know even to have been the case, or that David was actually buried in the grave of his child at last. It means that he himself should follow his child, in due time, into the appointed locality which must receive the souls of all, when dead : it means a literal going of the father to the child, into that region of departed spirits, in opposi- tion to a literal coming back of the child to the father, into the upper world. David could not bring him again to himself, now he was dead ; but he should go himself to him, in due time, when he also should die. The same truth is still more plainly implied by ' \ the words of Samuel to Saul, 1 Sam. xxviii. 19 : " And to morrow shalt thou and thy sons he with '• me." Be with Samuel, where, and in what man- ner? we might ask. Be with Samuel simply by being dead, as he was? But that could not be called being with Samuel, though it might have been called being as Samuel was. Besides, as it appeared from this manifestation of Samuel to Saul personally after his death, that he was still living in one sense, though dead in another sense ; to be dead as Samuel was, would require to be understood of being alive in the sense in which Samuel still was, even after his apparent death ; and consequently, among the other circumstances of peculiarity which dis- tinguish the mode of the existence of the soul after death — in the same locality as Samuel, and after the same manner in that locality as Samuel. But was Saul to be with Samuel, by being with his body in the same grave with the body of Samuel ? To this supposition there would be the same objection as 286 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. before — viz. that the body of Saul, without the soul of Saul, would not be the individual Saul, of whom it was here predicted that he should be, on the mor- row, with Samuel. That prediction was addressed to the living Saul ; to Saul as yet consisting of a soul and a body in conjunction with each other; the dis- posal of the dead Saul by burial, in any manner soever, would be the disposal of the body of Saul, without the soul of Saul ; and the body of Saul, without the soul of Saul, could not be the same individual Saul, after death, as before, while alive. Besides which, the bodies of Saul and his sons never rested in the same grave with Samuel's, neither the next day, nor on any other day. In fact, they rested in no grave at all, until the men of Jabesh Gilead had stolen them by night from the wall of Beth-shan, where the Phi- listines had hanged them, and after burning the bodies, deposited the bones under the tree in Jabesh: 1 Sam. xxxi : whence they were afterwards brought, late in the reign of David, and buried in the se- pulchre of Kish, the father of Saul, in Zelah of the tribe of Benjamin: 2 Sam. xxi. In no sense, then, is it possible to understand these words of Samuel to Saul, except of Saul and his sons being with Samuel at the time specified, and in the manner specified, by being in the same place of departed souls with him — the place which was destined to receive all the souls of all the living, as they successively died — and which place was the local habitation of Samuel's soul, until it was brought up thence for a time to appear to Saul — and which place should be the locality of the soul of Saul, as soon as he had fallen in battle. ''"Hrhat the souls of the dead are con- gregated in some proper locality, one after another, On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 287 according to the order in which they die, follows from this fact, as matter of course The above testimonies may suffice for the con- firmation of the third of our positions. Let us now proceed to the fourth, which is, that this society, company, or congregation of disembodied souls, is not any where existent, or after any manner, but in a determinate locality, the proper name of which, considered as the receptacle of all the souls of the dead indiscriminately, is Hades in general. Though the name of Hades is borrowed directly from the Greek language, and consequently without some explanation of its meaning, would not be in- telligible to an English reader ; yet in the peculiar sense of the proper locality of departed spirits, it were desirable that it should be generally adopted into our language, and so far naturalized among us. The Saxon word, Hell, might originally have been remarkably adapted to express the Greek" A^'^yjg : but it could not now be used with propriety in the sense of the local habitation of the dead in common, custom having restricted it to the sense of the loca- lity of a part of the dead, or rather having excluded it from denoting the locality of any jDart of the dead at all, at least in the intermediate state between death and the resurrection, by appropriating it to the sense of the proper locality which is destined to receive such and such a portion of the dead, after the resurrection and the general judgment. The meaning of the word in Greek, as every one acquainted with the use of the term in that lan- guage, must be aware, is the region of departed V. 288 Appendix^ Chapter Tenth. spirits, the proper locality which was supposed to comprehend the souls of all iiiaiikiud who had ceased to live — a region divided into distinct quarters, ap- propriated to distinct inhabitants, and subject, both in general and in particular, to its proper presiding divinities, the Dii Manes or Inferi, bearing to the lower world the same relation as the Dii Superi or Ca^licoliL' to the upper. How far the Greek notion of Hades is consistent or inconsistent with that idea of the same locality which may be obtained from scripture, is another question. At present we are concerned only with the use of terms ; and with the reasons of that translation which has caused the Greek name of Hades, even in the language of scrip- ture, to be adopted for the proper denomination of the habitation of departed spirits. It will naturally occur to the reader, however, that the name of the locality in question, must be one thing in the Old Testament which is written in Hebrew, and another in the New which is extant in Greek. It appears from the comparison of passages, that the word in Hebrew, for which the version of the Septuagint almost invariably substitutes the Greek term Hades, is b'iW, or Sheol ; and if we con- sider the closeness of that version to the original, in the selection of its terms, this may justly be re- garded as the strongest argument, not only that the translators knew of no word in Greek, so well adai)ted to express the other in Hebrew, as that, but also that in reality a fitter term could not have been chosen for tlie purpose in view, than tliat. But we have still higher authority for tlie adoption and use of this peculiar term, in this j)eculiar sense ; our Saviour having four times sanctioned it, by using it 0)1 the Existence and Locality of Hades. 289 himself — once in the parable, Luke xvi. 23 ; and on three other occasions, each of distinct occurrence in point of time. Matt. xi. 23 ; xvi. 1 8 : and Luke x. 15. And though it may be said that our Lord himself must have spoken, on each of these occasions, in the vernacular language of the time, and therefore in all probability have expressed himself by the Hebrew Sheol ; yet it may be answered that the Evangelist, who has rendered his M^ords into Greek on each oc- casion, has rendered the word which he used to ex- press this Sheol, by Hades in each instance, as ex- actly an equivalent term : which is sufficient to prove that this was as adequate to express the mean- ing of our Saviour, with respect to the thing in- tended by it, as Sheol itself. But if we still desire the authority of inspired writers, expressing them- selves directly in Greek, for the use of the same term in the same sense, we have only to refer to 1 Cor. XV. 55 — where St. Paul employs it ; and to Revela- tion i. 18 ; vi. 8 ; xx. 13, 14, where it is used by the author of that book. Now, to suppose that the language of inspiration in the writers of the New Testament more particu- larly, by adopting the Greek word Hades for the locality of departed spirits, adopted also the Greek or Gentile notion of Hades ; would be a very pre- carious supposition. It must be manifest that it adopted the same term to express the same thing, only so far as it could be used whether by in- spired or by uninspired writers, in the same sense ; and that was obviously no further than as it was competent to express in general, the locality of the souls of the dead, for and during the state of death VOL. V. PAET II. U 290 Appendix y Chapter Tenth. — with which restriction of its meaning even the Gentile name for the Gentile or mythological Hades, was capahle of expressing the real Hades of Scrip- ture and revelation. The composition of the word in the original Greek, is resolvable into elements which re({uire it to signify the unseen or invisible place : and that this proper sense of the term was clearly understood by the Greeks themselves, to lie at the bottom of their familiar application of it to the world of departed spirits, appears from that allusion to this proper meaning, which occurs in the Phacdo of Plato, (Operum v. page 51, line 16, Bek- keri, 1817,) where Socrates is speaking of the de- parture of the soul, itself to a^iHg . . e/s- toiovtov tottov erepov . . . e/V " Ai'^ov wg aXy}Sx<;. In this characteristic circumstance likewise, the Gentile and the scriptural notion of Hades do necessarily coincide and agree together. The adoption then of a word from the Greek lan- guage to express what is meant by the scriptural Hades, whether in the Old or in the New Testa- ment — first and properly implies no more with re- spect to the agreement between the things them- selves, than that both the Hades of the Greeks and the Hades of scripture are each denominations for the locality of the soul after death — and each when resolved into its elements, denotes the unseen and invisible region alike. Whether the material agree- ment between the terms may not go further than this, and the very notion of the locality of Hades, attached to the use of that term in Greek, may not to a certain extent agree with the similar notion which requires to be attached to the scriptural use of the term — is a question, on which we cannot en- On the Existence and Locality of Hades. S91 ter at present, without anticipating what will come with more propriety hereafter. It has been already observed, that the name of this locality in the original Hebrew, is Slieol ; and the version of that name in the Septuagint in almost every instance, is Hades. It would seem to be only a natural consequence that one and the same word in the original, should be rendered by one and the same word in the translation ; and therefore what- ever term the translators of the English Bible might have considered the fittest to express the Hebrew Sheol, in the first instance, they should have adhered to the use of that ever after. Instead of this, how- ever, the Sheol of the original is sometimes rendered the^7Y/i;^; sometimes the ^j//; and sometimes //^//; upon which variation we may have something to remark elsewhere. For example, the grave — Gen. xxxvii. 35 ; xlii. 38 ; xliv. 29. 31 : 1 Sam. ii. 6 : 1 Kings ii. 6. 9: Job vii. 9; xiv. 13; xvii. 13; xxi. 13 : Ps. vi. 5 ; xxx. 3 ; xxxi. 17 ; xlix. 14, 15 ; Ixxxviii. 3; Ixxxix. 48: Proverbs i. 12; xxx. 16: Ecclesiastes ix. 10 : Canticles viii. 6 : Isaiah xiv. 11 ; xxxviii. 10. 18 : Ezech. xxxi. 15 : Hosea xiii. 14, &c. The pit — Numbers xvi. 30. 33 ; xvii. 16. Hell — Deut. xxxii. 22 : Job xi. 8 ; xxv. 6 : 2 Sam. xxii. 6 : Ps. ix. 17 ; xvi. 10 ; xviii. 5 ; Iv. 15 ; Ixxxvi. 13; cxvi. 3; cxxxix. 8: Proverbs v. 5; vii. 27 ; ix. 18 ; xv. 11 ; xxiii. 14 ; xxvii. 20 : Isaiah v. 14; xiv. 9. 15; xxviii. 15. 18; Ivii. 9: Ezecli. xxxi. 16, 17 ; xxxii. 27 : Amos ix. 2 : Jonah ii. 2 : Habakkuk ii. 5. After these general remarks on the use of the IT 2 292 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. word Sheol in the Old Testament, and Hades in the New — the truth of our fourth proposition, taken in conjunction with those which have been previously established, can scarcely require to be further made out ; for if it be once admitted that the souls of the dead, as soon as they are separated from the body by death, are formed into a certain proper society, within a certain proper locality, then so far as the use of a definite term for this locality, both in the Old and the New Testament, can imply that the locality itself is of a corresponding definite kind ; that the souls of men, as collected into a certain society by death, do not exist any where, nor after any manner, but in a proper region, the receptacle of all the souls of the dead in common, called Hades — follows of course. Under these circumstances, ex- pressly to specify every instance of the scriptural use of the word Sheol in the Hebrew, or of the word Hades in Greek — and expressly to point out its sense and meaning, as denoting the receptacle of departed spirits, in each of those instances — would be a super- fluous task, if not an endless one. I will observe only that the first instance of the occurrence of the word Sheol in the Old Testament is Genesis xxxvii. 35, in the account of Jacob's mourning for the supposed loss of his son Joseph — where our translators have rendered it by the grave. As to subsequent in- stances, the same word Sheol occurs sixty-two times in the original, and is sixty-one times rendered by " Ai^yjg in tlie Septuagint ; and once by QavaTog, in the version of 2 Sam. xxii. 6. The region of dej)arted spirits is alluded to. Job xxx. 23. as " The house appointed for all living :" Oil the Existence and Locality of Hades. J293 " For I know that thou wilt bring me to death, and " to the house appointed for all living :" in the lan- guage of which text, so far as to use the name of an house for the region in question, there is a percepti- ble resemblance to that of John xiv. 2 : of which I hope to shew hereafter, that it must be understood of the same thing. The same region is described, with reference to its characteristic property of being, " ki^ov a^ akvjOoig — the dark, invisible, unseen, region : Job x. 21, 22 : " Before I go whence I shall not return, even to " the land of darkness and the shadow of death ; "A land of darkness, as darkness itself; and of the " shadow of death, without any order, and where " the light is as darkness." Cf. Job xvi. 22. There is a still plainer description of the same locality, Job xxvi. 5, 6 ; at least if we adopt the ver- sion proposed in Mant's Bible, instead of that of the authorized translation : " The souls of the dead tremble ; " (The places) below the waters and their in- " habitants. " The seat of spirits is naked before Him. " And the region of destruction hath no cover- " ing." In the English version it stands, " Dead things are formed from under the water ; *' and (or in the margin with) the inhabitants " thereof. " Hell is naked before him, and destruction hath " no covering." Cf. Job xxxviii. 17 : Proverbs xv. 11. The following passages would perhaps be as a})- u S 294 Append'ix, Cfuipter Tenth. - tl propriate as any to shew that in the language of the prophets, Sheol, or Hades, is the supposed com- mon receptacle of all who die — the great or the little, the high or the low, the rich or the poor — not as simply synonymous with the grave, but as a locality sui goiet'is, and comprehending all in com- mon — which no grave does. Isaiah v. 14 : " Therefore hell hath enlarged her- "^" self, and opened her mouth without measure: and " " their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, " and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it." Isaiah xiv. 9 : " Hell from beneath is moved for " thee to meet thee at thy coming : it stirreth up " the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of- the " earth ; it hath raised up from their thrones all " the kings of the nations." Ezekiel xxxi. 14 : " To the end that none of all " the trees by the waters exalt themselves for their " height, neither shoot uj) their top among the " thick boughs, .... for they are all delivered unto " death, to the nether parts of the earth, in the " midst of the children of men, with them that go " down to the pit. 1.5. '' Thus saith the Lord God ... . 16. "I made the nations to shake at the sound of " his fall, when I cast him down to hell with them " that descend into the pit : and all the trees of " Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, all that " drink water, shall be comforted in the nether " parts of the earth. 17. " They also went down into hell with him " unto them that be slain with the sword ; . . . . 18. " To whom art thou thus like in glory and in " greatness among the trees of Eden ? yet shalt On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 205 " thou be brought down witli the trees of Eden " unto the nether parts of the earth : thou shalt lie " in the niidst of the uncircumcised with them that " he slain by the sword. This is Pharaoh and all " his multitude, saith the Lord GoD." Ezekiel xxxii. 18: "Son of man, wail for the " multitude of Egypt, and cast them down, even her, " and the daughters of the famous nations, unto the " nether parts of the earth, with them that go down " into the pit. 19. " Whom dost thou pass in beauty ? go down " and be thou laid with the uncircumcised. 21. " The strong among the mighty shall speak " to him out of the midst of hell with them that " help him ; they are gone down, they lie uncircum- " cised, slain by the sword. 22. " Ashur is there and all her company : his " graves are about him : all of them slain, fallen " by the sword : 24. " There is Elam and all her multitude 26. " There is Meshech, Tubal, and all her mul- " titude. . . . 29. " There is Edom, her kings, and all her " princes, which with their might are laid by them " that were slain by the sword : . . . witli them that *' go down to the pit. 30. " There be the princes of the north, all of " them, and all the Zidonians, which are gone down " with their slain ; 31. " Pharaoh shall see them, and shall be com- " forted over all his multitude, even Pharaoh and " all his army slain by the sword, saith the Lord " God." Cf. Job xvii. 13—16 ; xxxiii. 18. 22. 24. 28. 30 : u 4 296 J])]tendii\, Chapter Tenth. Proverbs i. 12; v. 5;ix. 18; xxvii. 20: Ecclesiastes iii. 20: Isaiah xxviii. 15. 18: Lamentations iii. 6: Ezek. xxvi. 20. The testimony of the parable may be appealed to in proof of tlie proposition, in this instance, as well as in the others ; for hotli liazarus and Dives are no sooner })erceived to be dead, tlian they are seen to be in Hades, and Abraham, the common father of both, is seen to be there before them : all which, by being literally understood, goes directly to prove that Hades is the common receptacle of the dead — of all who have died in times past — and of all who die from time to time, as they die and when they die, likewise. Having thus produced what appears to me to be competent scripture testimony to the truth of the first of our general propositions, which was the existence of Hades, understood in the sense above defined ; I shall now proceed to inquire what assistance the same testimony of scripture may give us, in deter- mining the next of the points proposed for discus- sion, viz. its locality. For this pur})ose, I shall endeavour to shew that there are good grounds, on the authority of scripture, to conclude first, that the locality of Hades is within the earth, and secondly, that the locality of Hades is the deepest point within the earth. First, that the locality of Hades is within the th. All those passages of scripture which speak of the disj)osal of men after death, in such terms as to imply that they pass into Hades, the proper recept- acle of the dead, into which they can i)ass only in "^ear On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 297 their souls, and after a manner invisible to the eye of sense, by passing apparently into the grave, into which they pass with their bodies, and after a man- ner visible to the eye of sense — are arguments that Hades, the proj)er receptacle of the soul after death, is as much within the earth, as the grave, the pro- per receptacle of the body after the same event. It seems inconceivable that such language would be employed to describe both the disposal of the soul by death, and the disposal of the body after the same event, as almost to imply that the receptacle of the one was identical with that of the other, un- less this to a certain extent were actually the case ; that is, unless the disposal of the soul by death, mutatis mutandis, were identical with, or analogous to, the disposal of the body in consequence of the same event; and unless something like a definite rela- tion, prevailed between the proper receptacle of each : viz. that each was received under the earth, in general, the body by being buried, the soul by pass- ing into Hades ; though not necessarily into the same part of the earth — so that the soul by being received into Hades, might not be received into a very dif- ferent quarter under the earth, from the body, by its being deposited in the grave. Again — the testimony of Job xxvi. 5, has been ^ produced already, in reference to the proposition last considered — that the dead are gathered into a proper locality, called Hades. With the amended version of that text, as there proposed, it is not less applicable to prove that the site of this locality is under the earth. " The souls of the dead tremble ; ^98 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. (" The places) below the waters and their inha- " bitaiits." If this is a description of Hades, then Hades is below the earth ; for Hades is described as below the waters ; and wliat is below the waters must be underneath the earth. ^^ Again — among phrases of frequent occurrence in ^xhe scriptures of the Old Testament — one is the " lower" or " nether ])arts of the earth." In this latter form it occurs Isaiah xliv. 23 : Ezekiel xxxi. 14. 16. 18 ; xxxii. 18. 24. The phrase, " the lower parts of " the earth," occurs in Ps. Ixiii. 9, and a similar phrase, Ezekiel xxvi. 20, " tlie low parts of the earth." In all these instances, the context demonstrates that each of these phrases is but a circumlocutory de- scription for Hades, the proper locality of souls after death. If so Hades, understood in that sense, is synonymous with the lower or nether j)arts of the earth ; and consequently Hades is below the earth. It is, therefore, entirely in unison with this cha- racteristic circumstance of its locality, that in re- peated instances, in the writings of the proi)hets, we meet with the i)hrase of ^oin^ (loan or (Icscendiug into hell, to the pit, or the like ; and that the prophet Isaiah, in the sublime passage quoted supra page 1 294, wlien proceeding to describe the reception which the kings and potentates of former times — the niiglity dead as such, i)reviously received into Hades — should there give, to the soul of the Babylonian monarch, wlnii he too should come thither among them — opens the dt'scriptiuii by the words. " Hell " I'UOM BENEATH is movcd for tiiee to meet t/wc at ^-il^thy coming :" xiv. 9- V On the Eocistence and Locality of Hades. 299 Upon this particular question, however, of the locality of Hades, understood in the proper sense of the receptacle of the dead ; were we called upon to produce any single testimony of scripture, which would do more than another, to prove its real situa- tion to be within the earth — there is none to which I should appeal so confidently as to the narrative / related in the sixteenth of Numbers, respecting the fate of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, on the one hand, or the still more remarkable transaction, recorded 1 Sam. xxviii. 8 — 19, in the appearance of Samuel to Saul after his death, on the other. To each of these passages I would invite the special attention of the reader, who is desirous of satisfying his doubts upon this question. Let us consider each in its order, beginning with the first ; the account of the punishment which befell Korah, Dathan, and Abi- ram. It is not necessary to cite the whole of this narra- tive. The most important part of it for our pur- pose, at present, is the words of Moses, in warning the people or spectators, of the fate about to befall these men, before it actually came to pass, 29, 30 : " If these men die the common death of all men," (margin, as every man dieth,) " or they be visited " after the visitation of all men ; then the Lord *' hath not sent me. " But if the Lord make a new thing," (mar- gin, create a creature,) " and the earth open her " mouth, and swallow them up, with all that apper- " tain unto them, and they go down quick into the " pit ; then ye shall understand that these men have " provoked the Lord." 300 Jjtpend'hT, Chapter Tenth. And then the account of tlie event itself — or the effect which followed upon, and verified his words, 31, 32, 33: " And it came to pass, as he had made an end of '* speaking all these words, that the ground clave " asunder that was under thein : " And the earth opened her mouth, and swal- " lowed them up, and their houses, and all the men " that appertained unto Korah, and all their goods. " They, and all that appertained to them, \vent " down alive into the pit, and the earth closed upon " them : and they perished from among the congre- " gation." ,j^ Upon this account, we might fairly reason as follows. If the ground was to cleave asunder, or the earth was to open her mouth underneath these men, that they might be swallowed up alive ; and if they were to be swallowed up alive, by the oj)en- ingof the ground underneath them — that they might go down alive into the pit — the pit must be under- neath the ground ; they could not be received into the pit, without being received into the ground ; nor go down alive into the j)it, without going down alive into the ground. And if all this was a special dis- pensation in their case — a departure from the ordi- nary course of nature — a mode of being received into the pit, by being received after which, they should die indeed, but not as every man dieth, and be visited indeed, but not after the visitation of all men ; it will follow, that all men, by dying, are received in some manner or other into the pit, and all men by dying a common kind of death, are received after a eomiiion manner into the pit — but that kind of death On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 301 is not such as these men were dying, nor that mode of being received into the pit, such an one as that in which these men were received into it. Two ques- tions, then, present themselves here ; what is to be understood by the pit, into which not only these men were about to be received, after a certain manner, but the rest of mankind are received also, after one manner or other — and what is the ordinary way in which the rest of men are received into it, what the extraordinary one, in which these men were about to be received into it. These questions are easily answered. With, re- spect to the word which is rendered the pit, in the original it is Sheol, in the Septuagint version it is " ki^r^i- ; both which, as we have already observed, and as we shall perhaps make it further apparent hereafter, can properly be understood of nothing but the region or locality of departed spirits in general. Nor could any different meaning from this, be possibly attached to the term in the present in- stance, except that of the proper locality of the body, not of the soul, after death ; that is, the grave : the absurdity of which construction of the term in the present instance, even could it bear to be so con- strued in any other, would be almost self-evident. For let it be supposed that the words of verse 30, " And they go down quick into the pit," or those of verse 33, " They went down alive into the pit" — could by possibility mean no more than that these men should go, or did go, down alive to the grave — what would be the consequence? That the earth must be supposed to open her mouth — to cleave asunder — to swallow them up, with their houses. 302 Appendix, L'Uaplvr Tenth. with all the men that a])pertaiiied to them, and all their goods — hy receiving tliem a few feet helow its surface — at the ordinary depth of a grave from the top of the ground. And were it to be supposed — for the sake of avoiding this absurdity — that they were swallowed up to a sufficient dej)th below the surface, to produce this elfect, in actually receiving and engulfing so large a company, and so many things besides themselves — my answer WDuld be, that this is to suppose them received into something very diflVrent from a common grave, and much nearer to the scriptural idea of such a grave as Hades itself, in the proper sense of the term. 'J'hat much more, indeed, was known to be meant by these men's being received alive into the pit, than merely their being hurled alive, may be collected from the subsequent reference to their fate, Deuteron. xi. 6 : " And what he did unto Dathan and Abiram, " the sons of Eliab, the son of Reuben : how the " earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them uj), '* and their households, and their tents, and all the " substance that uds in their possession, in the midst " of all Israel." Instead of the words, " all the sub- " stance that was in their j)osscssion," the margin in this instance has the version, "all the Jiving sub- '* stance which followed them, orwh'uh ^\ as at their " feet;" whence we may infer, that not only them- selves, their households, (their wives and families,) and their tents, but their cattle also, their Hocks and herds, were swallowed up along with them, and went down at the same time into tin- earth. V\\ Ps. cvi. 17. ('onij)are also l*s. Iv. 1.5: "Let death " seize upon \.\\vm.(in(l let them go down (juick into On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 303 " hell;" the nature of which imprecation obviously contains an allusion to the same kind of fate, in the instance of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. „,.. This brings us to the next question. Supposing i all men, by dying, to be received into Hades — but those who die the common death of all mankind, to be received after one manner — those who died such a death as these men, to be received after a peculiar manner — what is there common in the manner in which all the rest of mankind are received into Hades, and what was there peculiar in the manner in which these men were received into it ? Now, we may take it for granted, that there is no common mode of being received into Hades, but by dying: and it is just as certain that these men were received into Hades by dying, as that all else are. But there is an ordinary mode of dying, and there may be an extraordinary one ; the former, described in the present instance, by dying as every man dieth, by being visited after the visitation of all men — the latter, no further specified than as the negation of that. Now the common death of all men, the visitation in question after the manner of all men, is that which takes place in the ordinary effect of death, the separation of the soul from the body ; and the common mode of the reception of all men into Hades, after death, is by being received there in the soul, but not in the body — as no longer united to each other; in the body's being left to be committed to the grave, while the soul is transferred into a locality of her own elsewhere. Compared with this mode of dying, and this mode of being- received into Hades by death, it might well be said, that though Korah and his company died, they did 304 Appendix, C/utptcr Toilli. not (lie as every man dietli, or by the common death of all men — for they died without tlie previous sepa- ration of the body and the soul ; tliough they were received into Hades by their death, they were not received after the manner of ail men — for instead of being received in their souls apart from their bodies, they were received in their bodies along with their souls — they went down quick or alive, that is, still united body and soul, into the pit. Let us now proceed to consider the testimony of the passage relating to the appearance of Samuel to Saul ; the evidence of which is in some sense the reverse of the preceding, because it exhibits the spectacle of an inhabitant of Hades coming up from thence, after death — as the narrative last considered represented that of living human beings descending into it. It is not necessary to produce this narrative at full length. The important circumstances of it, upon the present question of the locality of Hades, are such particulars of the account as these; " I " saw gods ascending out of the earth" — " an old " man cometh uj)" — " why hast thou disquieted me, " to bring me up?" from all wiiitli, it is necessarily to be inferred, that the particular manner in which Samuel became visible to Saul on this occasion, was by being seen to rise, ascenjf in the Greek. To understand this word simply of the grave, or to suppose it could ever be meant to be so understood, as the proper correlative of heaven, in such sublime descriptions as these, and with so peculiar an antithesis of the things com- pared together — would be the height of absurdity, and anticlimax. Nor is this phraseology, peculiar as it is, confined to the Old Testament, even in the most sublime and poetical of its descriptions. It occurs twice in the New Testament, and each time in the midst of a grave and serious discourse of our Lord himself, with no admixture of the poetical character; nor therefore re- quiring any allowance to be made for the lofty and rapturous idiom of poetry in general, or the pecu- liarly soaring and rapturous idiom of Oriental poetry in particular: once Matt. xi. 23. Harmony iii. 9 : Kou av, KaTrepvaovfXf yj ecog tov ovpavov vxpa0e7'ja, €&>$• aOov KaralBifSaaO-^a-jj : and again, Luke x. 15 : Harmony iv. 26 : Kat (7v, K-airepvaovix, vj ew^ tov ovpavov v\pii6eiTaf ewf a^ov KaTa^ilSaad'^avj. 316 appendix. Chapter Tenth. On the first of these occasions, the account which is given us of the origin of this apostrophe is, that Jesus, among the other reflections which arose out of the celehrated message of John, began to reproach the cities in which his irXila-Tai Iwatxtig — the moat of his miracles, in point of number, not the greatest and cliiefest, in jwint of degree — had taken place, because they had not repented ; of the second, that it was sul)joined, along with a similar reproach of the cities in question, to the cliarge just before delivered to tlie Seventy, when about to be sent on their mission. On each occasion, after reproaching Chorazin and Betlisaida in very similar terms, he concluded with a direct apostrophe to Cai)ernaum, expressed in the very same words — and with the same antithesis in each instance, between being lifted up unto the hea- ven, at the time then present, and to be thrust down unto Hades, at some time, then future. I know not whether it has occurred to the reader to consider these words with that decree of atten- tion to which they are entitled ; but in my opinion they are truly significant and important, not only for the light which they throw upon the present ques- tion, of the ])roper opposition of Hades to Heaven, as the extreme of height, to the extreme of depth — but from tiio testimony which, when rightly ex- j)lained, they will be found to render to the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. For let it be observed, that while simply a woe is denounced against Chorazin and Bethsaida — some- thing more specific, and so far much worse, is de- nounced against rapernnum. It should be less to- lerable even for Ciiorazin and Bethsaida, in the day On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 317 of judgment, than for Tyre and Sidon ; but Caper- naum should be thrust down e^<;' Ailov^ . The grounds of this distinction are also stated — with respect to Chorazin and Bethsaida in general, that though the greatest number of our Saviour's miracles had been done in them, they had not repented ; with respect to Capernaum in particular, not only that, but because she had been lifted up to heaven in some manner or other peculiar to herself, and yet had not repented. Now should any one require a reason, why Beth- saida and Chorazin are mentioned as the places where most of our Saviour's miracles had been wrought — can any be assigned so natural as this, that they were in the immediate vicinity of Caper- naum, the place where our Saviour had taken up his abode, and the quarter where he was most regu- larly to be found ? It is reasonable to suppose, that in the benefit of his miracles, the place that would partake most constantly and most largely, would be the place of his stated residence, if he had any ; and next to that, the places in its direct vicinity. And if a reason is required in like manner, why Caper- naum should be reproached not only on this ac- count, but also on the further account of being raised b In tha Sibylline Oracles, lib. viii, page 694, language bor- rowed in all probability from this declaration of our Saviour's with respect to Caparnaum. — what it was at the time, and what it should hereafter become — is applied to the future judgments of God upon Italy or Rome ; fiovvT] Kara Koajiov cmavra (^ v\lrovs iXdovaa KaroiKrjaets vtto yaiau. The context shews that this dwelling under the earth means being thrust down to Hades. 318 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. or lifted up to lieavcii — which Chorazin and Beth- saida were not said to be — what can be assigned so natural as this, that Capernaum was the place of our Saviour's abode — but Jiethsaida and Chorazin were not ? That Capernaum was chosen by our Saviour, to be the place of liis stated abode during the trans- action of his jHiblic ministry, from the point of time when he is said to have quitted Nazareth, and gone and lived there, it is sui)erfluous to prove^'. The words of Matt. xi. 23, were delivered about the middle of the second year of his residence at that place — and those of Luke X. 15. towards the end of the third. It is affirmed by the words, on each occasion, that Caper- naum both had been lifted uj) to heaven before the time when they were spoken, and was still so lifted up at the time when they M'ere spoken ; and without assuming that it had been, and still was, so lifted uj), by having become, and still continuing to be, the place of our Saviour's residence — we may contend that it could not have become lifted up to heaven, for the time, without having become, for the time, the habitation of God. The j)r()pL'r notion of heaven, in contradistinction to earth, is the notion of that which is the proper locality of the personal residence of the Supreme Deity, in o|)position to that which is not. In one sense, tlie Supreme Deity, who is omnipresent, may be present on earth as well as in heaven ; hut in another, he is personally present only in heaven, be- cause lie is visibly and sensibly present only in hea- ven; invisibly and insensibly on earth. The j)er- *^ iNIatt. iv. \'.\ : Harm. ii. lil. \"h\q my Diss. vol. ii. Diss. viii. part ii. 244— 2;")!. On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 319 sonal presence of the Deity, therefore, wherever it is visibly and sensibly revealed, makes heaven of that locality. Would we define heaven, as heaven, it must be as the locality of the visible personal pre- sence of the Deity ; and conversely, the locality of the visible personal presence of the Deity, as heaven. The stated locality of that description is certainly heaven, in the ordinary sense of the term ; but so far as the visible personal presence of the Deity in any locality, is competent to make heaven of that locality, for the time being — any other locality, in which the Deity may be visibly revealed, may be heaven for the time, and not necessarily a locality in heaven. Earth, then, or any particular locality on earth, might become heaven for the time being, if it could become, for the time being, the residence of the God of heaven ; and under such circumstances, either heaven it miglit be said, for the time being, must have been brought down unto earth — or earth, for the time being, must have been raised up unto heaven. Now such is the language which our Saviour in both these instances employs of Capernaum ; that Capernaum had been raised unto heaven — that Ca- pernaum had been put on a par, for the time, with heaven. It had therefore become for the time, the residence of the God of heaven. It is as impossible that there can be heaven in any locality, where there is not the God of heaven to be revealed in that lo- cality, as that there can be a temple, or house of God, where there is no Deity to inhabit it. But whatever Capernaum had become before now, and whatever it was at this present time — is any one prepared to deny, that it had both become so, and 320 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. still continued to be so, by having become, and still continuing to be, the personal residence of our Sa- viour? If then Caj)ernauni had become, and still continued to be, the locality of the visible personal residence of the God of heaven, it had become so, and still continued to be so, by having become, and still continuing to be, the locality of the personal residence of our Saviour. If so, our Saviour was the God of heaven ; and his presence and residence on any locality ui)on earth, were competent to. make an heaven for the time being of that locality — even the heaven of heavens itself. There is no city of the time, not even Jerusalem, to which the same language is ai)i)lied by our Saviour, as this which he applies to Capernaum — its being lifted up to the heaven ; and there was no city, not even Jerusalem, of which it could be said it was his Ilia -n-oXig, as it is said of this, Matt. ix. 1. Harm. iii. 21. Jerusa- lem, by possessing the material temple, might be so far the residence of God ; but Capernaum, by pos- sessing the true spiritual temple, the antitype of the material, the human a/cv^o, or tabernacle inhabited by the Divinity in the jierson of Christ, was as much more truly the residence of God, for the time being, as that real and spiritual temple was superior to the material and tyi)ical one. But to j)roceed ; Ephesians iv. 8 — 10 : Aio Ae'yfr Ava/Sa/ e<,- vxpofy yjyjxaXwTfvatv ai'/jxaXxaia-j, Kai (IxKe rtOfxara tok avSpccTro^j-. to ^f, 'Avf/3>;, t/ eVr/v €/ /xr; oti Kai KaTk^f] ■npuixcj et$ ra Kararepa [Jupi] t^? y^s ^ o KaTal3a<;, avTog (TTi Kai o avapag imipavx TravTt'v txv ovpavxv, tva TTkyjpwcrrj to. Travra. " Wherefore /w saitli, Having " gone up on high, he liath made his captivity caj)- Oil the Existence and Localitt/ lyf Hades. 8:^1 " tive, and hath given gifts unto men. Now this, " He is gone up, what is it except that he went " down also first, into the lower parts of the earth ? " He that went down, himself is he that is gone up " on high beyond all the heavens, that he may fill " all things." The first part of this passage consists of a quota- tion from Psalm Ixviii. 18, which is cited merely in proof of a matter of fact, the personal Ascension of our Lord into heaven — whether in reference to the concomitant of that fact, his making his capti- vity captive thereby, (Cf. Coloss. ii. 14, 15,) or the effect and result of it, as evidenced by the event on the day of Pentecost, shortly after— the giving of gifts unto men. The remaining part of the passage is a proof that in the estimation of the writer, the fact of the asce7it demonstrated the fact of a deticent of the same person ; and the fact of his ultimate ascent, nrepava ttuvtcov tccv ovpavxv, the fact of his previous descent^ ei? to. Kararepa ixspv] rrjg y^g '. that without a previous descent of a certain kind, there could have been no subsequent ascent of the same individual, of a kind opposed to it ; nor without a previous de- scent, eig TO. Karwrepa fxep-^ rij^ y^g, any subsequent ascent, VTrepavco TraiTccv rwv ovpavcov. That such is the nature of the reasoning upon the fact of our Saviour's ascent beyond the highest heavens, as an evidence in itself of a previous de- scent into some quarter opposed to the highest hea- vens — which was passing in the mind of the au- thor of these observations, when he gave expression to them in the above words ; we may confidently assert: and without stopping to inquire what VOL. V. PART II. Y 3:^2 AppetidiT, Chapter Tenth. iniglit be the possible connection between the two things, wliicli in his apprehension rendered the one preliminary and necessary to the other, (though various reasons might be assigned for it, particu- larly in the alleged concomitant of the ascent, his making his captivity captive, on the one hand, and the alleged effect of it, his giving of gifts unto men, on the other,) I will only ask, what are we to un- derstand by the Kcnxrepa [Jiipv] ty;^ y^; — into which the same person is supposed to have descended of necessity, first, that he might ascend above all the heavens, afterwards ? In answer to this question I observe, first — that two things connected like these, as antecedent and consequent, as cause and effect — a descent elg to. KarwTtpa [J.(py] tyj^ y^s", first, an ascent nrepava TravTOJV ToJv ovpavxv, afterwards — imply that the locality of the descent must be somewhere as low, on the one hand, as the locality of the ascent is high, on the other : that the KaTxrepa [xeprj T^ dead, before he could thus be brought up from among them — ]ior that his being among the On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 327 dead must mean his being in Hades ; especially for the satisfaction of those who recollect that text in the sixteenth Psalm, " Thou wilt not leave my spul " in hell (Hades) ; neither wilt thou suffer thine " Holy One to see corruption :" or the declaration of 1 Pet. iii. 18, 19 J davaradei'; [xh aapKi, ^ooo7roiy]6e'tg ^e tcIj 'itvevfxaTi' ev u> kui rolq ev cpvXaKTJ irvevfjiacri Trop^uGeii (.kyjov- ^€v, K, T. A. which, as I shall have occasion to con- sider it again hereafter, I think it sufficient simply to refer to at present : taking it for granted, that by our Saviour's going in his spirit to the spirits in keeping, is meant his going in his own proper disembodied state, to other spirits in their proper disembodied state, and into the proper locality of spirits in that state, wheresoever it was. If so, the abyss in this passage of St. Paul, is only another name for Hades. And the abyss being here opposed to heaven, and going up into heaven for a certain purpose, to going down into the abyss for a contrary purpose — the same conclusion follows as before — that heaven be- ing the extreme of height above, the abyss, or Hades, is the extreme of depth below. If it has thus been rendered probable that Hades V- is situated not only within the earth, but at the ' lowest point within the earth ; it seems an obvious \ inference from this truth in general, that the loca- | lity of Hades is at or about the centre of the earth. | For since it must be equally true of the relative po- 1 sition of Hades to all parts of the surface of the \ earth, that it is alike within the earth, alike be- j neath, in reference to the surface, and alike at the / same point of extreme depth beneath, in reference to all parts of the surface ; it does not seem possible to Y 4 328 Appendix, C/iap/er Tenth. explain this community of relation, in the position of Hades, to all })arts of the earth's exterior sur- face, consistently with a well ascertained physical fact, the spherical form of the earth — except hy sup- posing its true position to he at or about the centre of the sphere itself. The centre of a spherical hody, like the earth, is the only locality within it, which can be alike at the greatest distance beneath from all parts of its surface, at once. On this point, how- ever, it is not necessary to indulge in conjectures ; luu" to push our speculations further than we have the warrant, direct or indirect, of Holy Writ, for the conclusions to which we come. Let us rather reca- pitulate the substance of our inquiries up to the present moment ; in order to see, how far the ob- ject originally proposed by the discussion, the i)roof of the existence of Hades, and the determination of its locality in general — has been attained by its re- sults. y It has been shewn, then, upon the testimony of scripture — that the souls of men are detached from their bodies at their death ; that the souls of men. so detached, j)ass directly into the hands of their ; Creator ; that the souls of men. by so passing, are added or joined to a certain society of souls like , themselves — previously dead ; that this society ex- ists not any where, but in a deternn'nate locality, called Hades, in the general sense of the common receptacle of the souls of the dead ; that Hades, un- derstood in this sense, is not situated in any part of space, indillerently, but within the com])ass of the same earth, on which the same souls existed in their living state : and as to the locality of Hades, even On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 329 within the earth, it is not any where beneath the earth, but within that part of it below, which is at the extreme point, or greatest depth beneath the surface of the earth. The proof of these positions is abundantly suffi- cient both to establish the fact that there is such a place as Hades, and to answer the question, in what part of space it is situated. It is manifest, however, that hitherto we have considered the existence of Hades, and the proper locality of Hades, as a ques- tion which simply affects the existence of a proper receptacle for the dead — and somewhere or other, in common. It may be demanded, in continuation of these inquiries, whether that is the utmost which the testimony of scripture enables us to determine upon this subject ; whether besides ascertaining the exist- ence of Hades, and the locality of Hades in general, it has communicated nothing of the circumstances of Hades in particular, it has given us no reason to conclude that Hades itself admits of distinctions — and that even in the locality appropriated to the re- ception of the dead indiscriminately, there may not be localities appropriated to the reception of some, but not of the rest — and the like? To such questions it may be answered, that there are indeed various remaining rays of light, scattered by revelation upon this mysterious topic, by collect- ing and concentrating which we may arrive at a clearer insight into the nature and constitution of Hades, than we have yet obtained ; and may learn something, perhaps, not only of the existence in ge- neral of a proper locality of departed spirits, but of the modes and circumstances in which, and under 330 Appendix i Chapter Tenth. which, they exist there in particular. These no- tices I shall endeavour to bring together and to ar- range accordingly. ""/ For example — though the name of the locality, appointed for the reception of the souls of the dead, without distinction, is Hades — Hades is not the name of one locality of that description, but of more ; that is, the proper locality for the reception of the souls of the dead in common, is divided into regions. Among the scriptural proofs of this truth — the testimony of the parable, literally understood, would deserve to be considered as direct and decisive as any; for from this it appears, that if there be such a place as Hades, the receptacle of the dead in com- mon, even Hades is divided into regions ; the souls of some of the dead, are received into one part of Hades, and the souls of others into another. Xor does it instruct us merely in the fact of this divi- sion — but also in the mode whereby it is effected; that one of these regions of Hades is separated from the other, not in any manner, but by an interme- diate barrier, which the parable calls a mighty gulf or void {-/oii^a u.(ya), and a barrier which cannot be passed — a gulf or void firmly fixed, {^ctV/xa }j.(ya f'TTrjpiyixevov,} — so that the separation thereby effected between the parts of Hades, is nothing arbitrary and precarious, but something necessary and im- mutable. -^ Tlie same truth is implied in those passages of the Old Testament, njore esj)ecially, which sj)eak of the lowest, or netltcrnio.st. Hades ; for from this mode of speaking it is a necessary inference, that if there be On the Existence mid Locality of Hades. 331 one Hades, which is the lowest or nethermost, there must be another, which is the highest or uppermost — and consequently that Hades itself is divided into regions — relatively situated to each other, as an higher point in respect of locality would be to a lower. Such passages are first, Deuteron. xxxii. 22 : " For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall " burn" (margin, hath burned) " unto the lowest hell, " and shall consume" (margin, hath consumed) " the " earth with her increase, and set on fire the founda- " tions of the mountains." Again, Ps. Ixxxvi. 13 : " For great is thy mercy " toward me : and thou hast delivered my soul " from the lowest hell." Affain, Ps. Ixxxviii. 6 : " Thou hast laid me in "the lowest pit, in darkness, and in the deeps;" where as the English version has the " lowest pit," the Hebrew has a phrase, which is equivalent to the " lowest Sheol," the expression in the other two in- stances, and rendered in the Septuagint by the " lowest Hades." And though the lowest hell may not be mentioned by name, at Proverbs ix. 18 : or at Jonah ii. 2, it is reasonable to suppose that this was what was meant by " the depths of hell," in the former, and by " the " belly of hell" in the latter. Secondly — though the souls of all men pass into Hades, by death, as the common receptacle of the dead, they do not all pass into the same locality in Hades. The testimony of the parable would be the most direct and decisive to which we could appeal, on this point also ; nothing being clearer than it is from its < 332 Appendh; Chapter Tenth. representations, that the souls of Dives, of Lazarus, of Abraham, l)eing all in Hades, as the common re- ceptacle of the dead, in general, the soul of Dives was in one locality of it, and the souls of Lazarus and Abraham in another, in particular. Nor is there any reason to suppose that each was not in a proper locality of its own. On the contrary — this is neces- sarily implied by the fact of the barrier interposed between the local habitation of the one, and the local habitation of the other, at the time; for the declared effect of that barrier being to confine both within certain bounds — the final end of its interposition must have been, that each might be confined within his own. The same conclusion is very clearly implied also by that passage of Acts i. 25 : e^ ^^ 7ra^€/3v? 'l&^^a^-, T(A) TTopevB'ijvai e/V tov tottov tov 'i^iov — if it be only ad- mitted that Judas' going in this passage, means his dying first of all, and his departing in the next place, according to the usual mode of the disposal of the soul after death — to the locality appointed to re- ceive him — the locality of Hades in general. In this case, " his going unto the place that was his " own, or his proper place," must mean his going to his appointed place in Hades. ■y His going simply to Hades, as the common recep- tacle of all the dead, could not be called with pro- priety his going to his own or his proper place ; for Hades, as the receptacle of all the dead in their dis- embodied state, in general, could not be called with propriety the proper or peculiar place of any one soul in particular. But if there are different localities, even in this general locality — appointed for the reception of different classes of souls, as the general locality is On the Existence and Lucalifi/ of Hades. 833 for the recei)tion of all — a soul belonging to a certain class might truly be said to go away to his own place in Hades, by departing to the locality ap- pointed therein for the class to which he belonged. There was, then, even in Hades, a proper locality ap- pointed for the reception of Judas, and of such as Judas — unto which Judas departed by dying and being received into Hades ; and if this was the case with Judas, we are justified from the analogy of his case to that of any other individual, in concluding that it must be the case with every individual besides. If one individual soul had his pi-oper place appointed in Hades, even before it was received there, it may well be presumed that any other, under the same circumstances, must have the same. Thirdly—the souls of the good are received into one locality in Hades, and the souls of the bad, into another. On this point also, the testimony of the parable would be as express to the purpose, as on any other. For the soul of Dives is seen to be received into one part of Hades, and the soul of Lazarus into an- other ; and Lazarus, we endeavoured to shew, was a good man, Dives was a bad man. The locality of the soul of Lazarus in Hades, was the locality of the soul of Abraham also ; which is so far an argu- ment that the locality of all the souls of the good in Hades, in general, is one and the same. This con- clusion is strongly implied by the words of Abra- ham ; " Besides all this, between us and you ;" in which, while it may justly be presumed, that even by us, he means not only himself and Lazarus, but many more, inhabitants of the same locality as they y. 334 Appendix y Chapter Tenth. two besides — it is certain that by you {t/xcov) lie must mean more persons than Dives — all occupants of the same locality, as well as himself. ^r- The same truth may be considered to be im- plied in the language of Isaiah, Ivii. 1, 2. The con- text shews that the prophet is speaking in tliis pas- sage, of the disj)osal of the souls of the righteous by death : '•' The righteous perisheth, and no man ' *' layeth it to heart : and merciful men a/'e taken " away, none considering that the righteous is " taken away from the evil to come. He shall enter " into peace : (margin, go in peace :) they shall " rest in their beds, ^«c/i ow^ walking in his upright- " ness." The general sense of the last verse is mani- festly to be understood of the intermediate state of the good after death ; and if the j)articular sense of it is faithfully represented in the above version, (as upon the whole it may be assumed to be,) then even in the intermediate state, each of the good must be suj)j)osed to have his own bed in which to rest, as well as his own uprightness in which to walk, for the duration of that period. This last is an imj)ort- ant circumstance ; for it proves that the supposed resting of the good in tiieir beds, for the same j)eriod of time, cannot mean simply the resting of the good in their graves, for that length of time ; because though their bodies might rest in their graves, their souls could not : or if their souls could be suj)posed to rest or sleep as well as their bodies, for a certain time, they could not be supj)osed to be resting and walking in their uprightness, also, for the same time. Tlie words then describe the rest of the good in the intermediate state — during which it is possible for On the Existence and Locality of Hades. S35 them both to rest in their beds, and to walk in their uprightness also. But if so — the souls of the good have a proper locality of their own, in which both to rest, and to walk in their uprightness, during this intermediate state — which proper locality is called by the prophet their beds. >C Again, the phrases considered above, " gathered " to his fathers," " gathered to his people," or the like, from which we collected the fact that the souls of men, as they die, become added to an existing society of souls previously dead — without losing their general significancy in this sense, acquire a peculiar force and emphasis, if the souls of the good are re- ceived into one locality, and into one society in Hades, and the souls of the bad into another. It is ob- servable that these phrases are most commonly found to be employed of the gathering to be made to his fathers, or to his people, of the soul of some righteous person, by his death ; under whicli circumstances they would very well bear to be understood in the sense of his being received into the company of the righteous dead ; all of whom, as dead before him, and consequently as having lived before him, and so far being his ancestors, might be called his people, and even his fathers in common. The testimony of Psalm xlix. 19, " He shall go to the generation of " his fathers; they shall never see light," contributes strongly to the proof of the same conclusion, by leading directly to the inference that the souls of the wicked, as they die, follow the generation of their fathers, that is, become part of a society or company of souls like themselves already dead. The margin in this instance has the version, " The soul shall go 336 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. " to the generation of his ftUhers ;" which, for cri- tical reasons, is j)robably the more exact of the two; and the a(lo])tion of which rentiers the meaning of the text, as speaking of the disposal of the soul by death, so nmch the clearer. In Revelation vi. 9 — 11. the souls of the martyrs are represented to be congregated on one spot ; and though this spot is sj)ecified as underneath the altai', (obviously from the supposition of their haying been sacrificed, as it were, by martyrdom upon that altar,) yet we may justly infer that they would not be represented as collected together in one body upon any locality, not even upon that, if they did not actually form one body, within their proper locality, whatever that was ; and consequently even in Hades had not a place or habitation of their own, within which they existed by themselves. Cf. Rev. xx. 4. In like manner, Hebrews xii. 23, " The spirits of " just men made perfect" {7rveu[j.aa-i liKalxv rereXeix- yu.ei/a>v) are described as forming one society, the navrj- yvpii Kai (KKAYjo-ia TrpxTOTOKCtiv ev ovpavx avay€yfiafxij.eva:'j " the assembly and congregation of first-born, whose " names are recorded in heaven," sj)oken of just be- fore. And that they are so described in reference to their existence in the intermediate state, may be l)resumed from their being described as the .spirits of righteous men made perfect, as the assembly and congregation of first-born, whose names were re- eordrd in heaven ; for the former is a description of disembodied saints, the latter of tiie future heirs of immortality, not yet in possession of their inherit- ance. 'JMie allusion to '* (Jod. tlie Judge of all," Ka.\ KpiTJj t)6a; TrdvTwv, between the two, confirms this On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 337 inference, by implying that between their present relation of the assembly and congregation of first- born, whose names were recorded in heaven, and their present condition of the righteous made per- fect in their spirits, the dispensation of judgment must intervene; before the time when the soul beina" reunited to the body, the body will be perfected as well as the spirit, and the relation of the heirs of immortality will merge, and be consummated, in that of the possessors. The same truth appears to me to be implied by 1 Pet. iii. 18, 19, 20, texts to which we have had occasion to refer once already : davaraSek fj^ev aapn}, icooTroiYjBeii ^e tco 7rvev[j.a.Ti' ev c6 koi toi$- Iv (pvXccKrj Tivev- l^aai TTopevStig eKTjpv^ev, aneiGrjo-aTi ttots, ore airal e^e'^ey^ero Yj Tov Qeov [j.aKpcSv[xia Iv Yjfxfpaig Nice, Karac-KevaKofxevr/g v'^aTog: "Being made dead indeed in flesh, but living " (made quick) iii the spirit : in which he went and " preached (proclaimed) also to the spirits in ward, " that sometime did not believe, when the lono"- " suffering of God was waiting once for all in tJie " days of Noah, an ark being preparing, into which " {when received) a few souls, that is, eight, were " saved to the end through water." If the author of this passage had stopped short with the nineteenth verse, ev a Kai toT^ ei/ (pvXa/cvj irvevixaai TTOoevde'ig €K-^pu^ev, it might not perhaps have been in our power to say that more was intended by it, than first, the simple fact of our Saviour's departing in the spirit, which continued to live, though the body had been made dead on the cross, to the common locality of de- parted spirits in general, that is, to Hades ; and VOL. V. PAllT ir. 338 Appendix, C/iapfer Tenth. secondly, the final end of that fact, that he might preach or proclaim to the spirits 6v (pvXau'^, in ward or in keeping there; the fact of which keeping heing true, as we have seen, of the spirits of all men, it would not have heen easy to disprove that this as- sertion of St. Peter's, of our Lord's preaching to those spirits in his spirit, was meant of his preach- ing in his own spirit to the spirits of the dead in general ; nor that the sense of the passage was any thing different in general from Romans xiv. 9, or 1 Pet. iv. 5, 6 : the former of which may be un- derstood to imply, while the latter affirms, a similar preaching of Christ to the dead, for such and such a purpose in general. But when these spirits in ward are further described as they who sometime did not believe, or if we prefer that version, who sometime were not obedient, when the long-suffer- ing of God was waiting once Jbr all in the days of Noah, an ark being in the course of preparation ; it is manifest that they are meant to be understood not of the spirits of the dead in general, but of the spirits of one class of the dead in particular ; and Christ's going in his own spirit, to preach unto these spirits, was so far a different thing from his going to preach to the sjjirits of tlie dead indiscriminately. It might be the sanje thing in general as his going and preach- ing to the dead in common ; but it must be something in specie different from it. In tliis case, this class of spirits being described as a distinct class of the spirits in Hades, the analogy of their case is a pre- sumptive argument that there may be other distinct classes of spirits in Hades ; and this class being de- scribed as iv (pvXaKyj there, the rest might be similarly described also ; and distinctions in the classes of On the Existence atnl Littality of Hades. 339 things in ward or in keeping, would naturally seem to require distinct localities, within which to keep them. If, now, we combine these two conclusions to- gether — first, the conclusion previously established, that Hades is divided into two regions at least, an upper and a lower, and secondly, the conclusion last established, that the souls of the good in general are received into one locality in Hades, and the souls of the bad into another; it seems a natural inference from them, that of the two divisions in question, the upper is appropriated to the reception of the souls of the good, and the lower to the reception of the souls of the bad. On this principle, the lower region of Hades is in some sense, and to a certain extent, the place of reprobation or punishment ; and the more so, in proportion to its supposed greater depth in comparison of the rest — which explains the allusions in Psalm Ixxxviii. 3 — 6. or even throughout ; for that Psalm is altogether such as the Messiah might be conceived to have uttered in the interim between his death and resurrection — that interval being con- sidered as past in his capacity of the victim for ' the sins of men, and while he was still obnoxious to, and still suffering vicariousl)^ from, the wrath of God. Cf. Psalm xl. 2: Ixix. 15: Ixxi. 20. The same supposition, too, is best calculated to explain that remarkable passage in St. Luke's account of the dispossession of the demoniac of Gadara, the true meaning of which, generally speaking, has not been sufficiently attended to by commentators ; viz. the request of the devils {to. ^aifj.ovia, that is, the demons) after they had received our Lord's command to quit possession of the body which they had occu- z 2 S40 Jppetidiji-, Chapter Teiitli. pied, that lie would not command them to quit the country also ; that he would permit them to enter into the swine, feeding near at Iiand, instead of going away to the abyss. Harm. iii. 20: Luke viii. 31 : Kai irapeKaXd airov iva [xti iTTua^'q a-ut^A; eii Tr,v oipvacrov direXQeh. Now it has been shewn, chiefly upon the testimony of Romans x. 7, that one of the names of Hades is actually this, of the abyss: a name taken from that characteristic circumstance of its nature — jn-ofundity, or depth, as it were, without end or bottom — and therefore so much the more ap- propriate, the greater the idea of profundity, at- tached to the notion of Hades itself. The request of these demons, then, not to be sent away to the abyss, may be considered an entreaty that they might not be sent away to Hades ; not merely ])ecause Hades, as the proper locality of spirits without bodies, may so far be as a])propriate for the con- versation of angels, as for that of the disembodied souls of men ; but also because there may be in Hades a proper locality for the habitation of repro- bate spirits without bodies, and so far for evil angels, as well as for the souls of evil men : and this locality being designated as the al)yss, in the present instance of an allusion to it, the allusion, if understood of any part of Hades in contradistinction to the rest, must be so of the lower in comparison of the upj)er, if not of the lowest of all in com- parison of the highest of all. To this subject, how- ever, we may have occasion to recur hereafter ; which renders it unnecessary to dwell any longer upon it at j)res<'nt. Fourthly — the name of the \mvt ot Hades aj)pro- On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 341 priated to the reception of the souls of the bad, may be doubtful ; but the name of the quarter, appointed for the reception of the souls of the good, in the Christian scriptures at least, is Paradise. The sub- stantiation of this last assertion requires the proof of two distinct things — first, that the souls of the good pass by death into Paradise, secondly, that Paradise is part of Hades. fc> First — that the souls of the good pass immediately by death into Paradise, may be collected from the words of our Saviour to the penitent thief — Luke xxiii. 43 ; " This day shalt thou be with me in " Paradise." For these words were delivered in the course of that day, when both our Lord and the thief were still living ; but before the end of the same day, both were already dead, our Saviour by the voluntary separation of his spirit from his body, of which enough was said on a former occasion, the thief, in consequence of the violence previously used to hasten the event of his decease, by the breaking of his legs. The body of our Saviour too, before the end of the same day, was taken down from the cross and conmiitted to the grave of Joseph ; the body of the thief, also, we may consider it a certain fact, whether expressly recorded or not, was likewise taken down from the cross, before the end of the same day, and either buried, or in some way or other disposed of, though certainly not by being committed to the grave of Joseph. It is impossible, then, that this assurance of our Lord, addressed to him in his lifetime, " This day shalt thou be with me in Para- " dise," could have been fulfilled by his being any where, or in any manner, with our Lord after his z 3 342 ^ppetidi.v, Chapter Tenth. death, but in his soul, and not in his body ; and if it was fulfilled by his soul's being with the soul of our Saviour, in some proper locality, before the end of that day, each in its disembodied state, it must have been by the soul of either passing in its turn into that locality, as soon as it was dead, as both were before the end of that day ; our Saviour's first, and the soul of tlie thief next. If so — it is reason- able to presume from the analogy of what happened in these two instances, that the souls of all the good, or at least of the faithful, in general, immediately on their death, pass into a proper locality, which in this instance is clearly called Paradise. Secondly, that Paradise is part of Hades, may be in- ferred first, from the juxtaposition of these two state- ments, both of them equally matter of fact, and equally true, that the soul of our Saviour by dying passed into Hades, and that the soul of our Saviour by dying passed into Paradise ; the former proved by Ps. xvi. 8, 9, 10 : Acts ii. 25—31 ; xiii. 35—37 : Rom. X. 7 : Ephes. iv. 9, 10 : 1 Pet. iii. 18, 19 : and other texts already considered : the latter, by this passage of St. Luke, xxiii. 43 : last under review. If so, Paradise was j)art of Hades — and by passing into Paradise, our Saviour still passed into Hades. There is no means of evading this conclusion, and suppos- ing that our Saviour might be both in Paradise and in Hades, and yet Paradise not be a part of Hades, except by assuming that the interval between liis death and his resurrection was spent partly in one locality called Paradise, and partly in another, called Hades ; an assumption, which if it means that the interval was spent any where except in the proper On the Existence and Localily of Hades. 343 locality of departed spirits, or in any manner, in his case, differently from the transaction of the same in- terval in the case of any other departed spirit — would be altogether gratuitous, as destitute of proof from scripture, and inconsistent with the reason of the thing, or the necessity of the case itself; be- cause it Avould make the disposal of the soul of our Saviour, for the interval between his death and his resurrection, totally different from that of the soul of any other person, and therefore an exception to the general rule, which regulates the disposal of the souls of men after their death, in every other in- stance. The truth of that most important doctrine, that our Saviour in his human capacity, was as much man as any of his brethren according to the flesh, and partook in all respects of human nature, sin only excepted, in common with the rest of mankind, would be seriously endangered by this exception. It is essential to the truth of this doctrine, to hold good in the death, as much as in the life, of our Sa- viour, and for the interval between his death and his resurrection, as much as for that between his in- carnation and his death. To expect an exception in the mode of the disposal of the disembodied soul of our Saviour, after his death, to the mode of disposing of the disembodied souls of the rest of mankind, after their death also, would be inconsistent with the fact of his dying at all in common with the rest of mankind, and after the same manner — by the separation of his soul from his body — in conmion with them likewise : for what reason can be assigned why our Saviour must die the common death of all mankind, because he was man in common with the rest, which will not make it equally necessary that our Saviour being dead, z 4 344 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. must be disj)osed of after the common manner of all mankind when they are dead, because he was man as much as any of the rest also? The common mode of the disposal of the bodies of men, after their death, is by burial ; and the body of our Saviour, after his death, was disposed of by burial, like that of any other person. And as to the dis- posal of the soul — let it be granted to be the com- mon lot of humanity generally, that the soul must be separated from the body by death ; that the soul in her disembodied state must pass into a proper locality after death ; that the soul must continue in that state, and in that locality, until the time arrives for her being united to the body again, which is the appointed period of the resurrection ; and all this must hold good as truly of the soul of our Saviour, as of the soul of any other man, if he was truly and properly man, like any other of his brethren. That he died by the separation of his soul from his body, like any other man, we have seen ; that he rose again by the union of his soul with his body afresh, as all others of the dead are destined sometime or other to do, is equally certain ; and that there was a certain interval between these two events, in his case, as there must be between the same two events, in the case of any other person — an interval neces- sarily transacted by him in some manner or other, and occupied by the existence of his soul in her disem- bodied state, in some locality or other — it does not seem possible to deny. Who then is j)repared to maintain that this manner Avas one thing, in the case of our Saviour, and is another, in lliat of any other i)erson, under circumstances exactly the same ; or that this locality was in one quarter for tlie pe- 071 the Existence and Locality of Hades. 345 riod of our Lord's existence in his soul in her dis- embodied state, and is in another for that of the ex- istence of any other human soul under circum- stances answering to his — who is not also prepared to maintain that our Saviour was not man as much as any other person, nor as subject to the common law of humanity, in either part of the nature in which only he could be subject to it, his body and his soul, after his death, as in his life ? Besides, our Saviour is called the airapyyi or first-fruit of them that slept — and not more in reference to his coming to life again from that sleep, than in reference to his sleeping previously to it. He became the first-fruit of them that slept, by becoming the first-fruit of them that rose again ; but in reference both to his sleeping previously, and to his coming to life again subsequently, according to one and the same order and appointment of nature — by being the first to rise again in the natural way, among those who were previously sleeping in the natural way also : and this he could not be, except by being the first to rise after the same way in which all are hereafter to rise, and from the same state of being in which all are previously existing, until the time when they are destined to rise. Now this supposes a proper locality, within which to exist, as well as a proper mode of existence, in which to exist there, the same in our Saviour, until the time of his rising again, as in that of the rest of the dead, until the time of their rising again too ; that is, of the good or the righteous dead. It could not be said, with truth, that our Saviour was the first-fruit of them that slept, in this sense, when he rose again — if our Saviour, until he rose again, was previously in Paradise, and the rest of the righteous dead, until 346 ^4ppe)idix^ Chapter Tenth. they rise again, are previously not in Paradise ; if our Saviour ultimately came to life again, out of one locality, and the rest of the righteous dead are ulti- mately to come to life again, out of another. 7S As a further argument that Paradise is compre- liended in Hades — Paradise, it has been seen, is the locality of the souls of the departed good — and Hades, it has also 6een shewn, is the locality of the departed souls of all both bad and good. If so, Para- dise is comprehended in Hades — and is that j)art of the whole locality, appropriated to the reception of the souls of all both bad and good in general, which is restricted to the reception of those of the good in particular. r Again, it may be argued that Paradise being the locality of the souls of the good and faithful after death — if David is to be numl)ered among the good and faithful, the soul of David after death must have passed into Paradise. Now we have the as- surance (►f St. Peter, Acts ii. 34 : that David was not ascended into heaven — that is, that the soul of David was not ascended, by his death, into heaven. If so Paradise is no locality in heaven, or synony- mous with all or part of heaven ; and consequently we may presume it is some locality in Hades, and synonymous with all, or part of Hades. / Again, the same conclusion is still more strongly implied by St. Paul's account of his double rapture — 2 Cor. xii. 2. 4. wliich he describes to have been once, i'Jig Tp'iTov dvpavji' — and the second time, ee their Eloah in the intermediate state, who was so in their lifetime, and who will be so after their re- surrection ? and that they must enjoy tlie natural benefits flowing to one of the correlative parties in such a relation, from the other, even in the interme- diate state, and before their resurrection itself? ^ \'i(le Bisln»j) HorsK'v's Works. Biblical Criticism, vol. i. Critical DiiMjuisitiuii on the iianu's Ki.o.vii and Ei.oiiim. On the Kocistence and Localiti/ of Hades. 355 In fact, it may justly be inferred from that sub- lime and rapturous passage of Romans viii. 38, 39, that as neither angels, nor rules, nor powers — as neither things present, nor things to come ; so nei- ther death nor life, neither height nor depth, (that is, as we have exjDlained the words already, neither heaven nor Hades,) nor any other creature, can separate the faithful believer from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord ; and conse- quently, that whether alive or dead, whether in heaven or in Hades, the soul of the faithful be- liever must still be united to the object of its love, and still experimentally sensible of the benefits of that love to itself. We learn, indeed, from 2 Cor. V. 6 — 9» that as the saints, v/hen actually still in the body, are actually still absent from the Lord ; so when actually no longer in the body, they are actually present with the Lord. For thus St. Paul expresses himself: 6appovvTe$ ovv TravTore, koi el^ore^ on ev^v][ji.ovvr£g ev tco aa^aTi, eK'^rjfjiovfxev airo tov Kvp.'ou* Oia Tiicrrewg yap ■irepiTraTovfi.ev, ov b'.a. eioovg aappovixev 6e, kui ev^oKovfXiv fxaXXov f.K'^rjixTjTai €k rov (J'^u^arog^ km evo>j- fxyjaai upog rov l^vpiov' '^lo Kai (piXoniJiovfMeda e/re eviiT]- fXQvvTeg eiTe eK^YjfxowTeg (.vapeaToi avrx eivat, k , r. A. It seems, then, that to pass personally out of the body, in the estimation of St. Paul, was to pass directly into the society of the Lord ; just as much as to continue personally still in the body, was still to be personally absent from the Lord. The Avords which he employs are eK'^Yjfj.uv on the one hand, and ev'^yjfj.eh on the other ; the first denoting the state of one who is living abroad — as a sojourner among, and in the midst of a ^^/aoc, or people, not his own ; the second that of one who is living at home, among, and in A a 2 356 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. the midst of his own l^^xog, that is, his own people. The life of the saints in the body is a sojourn of the former description, because it is the life of those who are personally absent from the Lord ; and their existence out of the body is an existence of the latter description, because it is the life of those who are personally present with the Lord ; which implies that the proper home of the saints is with the Lord, the proper ^^,u.cf of the saints is that fellowship or communion of saints, like themselves, all knit toge- ther, and comprehended in the body of the same Lord. To this fellowship they become at once i)er- sonally united by death ; and from this fellowsliii), when once personally united to it, they are never after personally separated. It seems impossible then not to conclude that the souls of faithful believers pass at once, by death, into the enjoyment of a proper kind of liappiness — derived in ])art from personal conmiunion with their Creator and Redeemer, and with each other. The same conclusion is not less clearly im])lied, by that other i)assage in St. Paul's Ej)istles, Piiilip- pians i. 21 — 2-i, the import of which is altogether in unison with that which we have just considered ; f/ACi/ yao TO ^■^v, \piaTOi' Kai to aiKjOavdh KepOog. e/ of to ^rjv ev aapKi, tovto fxoi KapTiOf epyov, Kat Ti aipyjaoixai ov yv'jipi^x' avviyfj^ai yap Ik rm ^Jo, ryjv iiriOvixiav ej^ojv €i,- to ava\v7at, Kai crv'j X.pi7Tx tivai' Tr'^AAa fxaXX'jV Kpfio'ac)/' to §6 (trtfxiveiv ev t>j crapKi, avayKaioTeoov ^<' vfna-; '. " For to " me to live (be living) is Christ, and to be dead is " a gain. But il" that being living is in flesh, to me '* this M' //fc fruit of f//c work, ^iii\' ministry,) and *' what I shall choose, I know not. For I am held " in a strait betwixt the two thini>;.s, w ilh my desire On the Existence and Locality of Hades, 357 " inclined unto my having departed, and being with " Christ ; (by much a far better thing ;) but that I " continue in the flesh is a more necessary thing for " your sakes." The passage, we perceive, turns upon the compa- rison of the opposite interests of two different per- sons, St. Paul's converts on the one hand, and St. Paul himself on the other, in two different events, St. Paul's dying on the one hand, and St. Paul's con- tinuing alive on the other ; each of which events would be followed by certain consequences to both the parties respectively, St. Paul's dying, by his ceas- ing to be personally present with his converts, but being himself with the Lord— St. Paul's continuing to live, by his continuing to be personally present with his converts, but being himself personally ab- sent from the Lord. With respect to the events themselves, and their consequences, which are thus opposed to each other, it does not appear that St. Paul entertained any doubt that lie himself should continue to live, even when personally absent from his converts, any more than while personally pre- sent with them ; only, not in the body, or, as he calls it, in flesh, when personally separated from his converts, as he had lived, and must still continue to live, while personally in their society. And as to these modes of continuing to exist, the one in the body, the other out of the body, and their conse- quences to himself and his converts respectively, he declares that he was in a strait betwixt the two, that each had a strong hold on his inclinations, and he was at a loss to choose between them ; for him- self it was better far better, that he should begin to exist no longer in the body, and if he consulted his A a 3 358 u4ppetidix, Chapter Tenth. own wishes and desires, they rather inclined tliat way; for his converts, it was more needful that he should continue to exist in the body, and if he con- sulted their necessities, and the work and duty of his ministry, he was hound to sacrifice his own in- clinations, and to prefer to continue in the body. Now it requires no explanation to shew what the effect would be of St. Paul's continuing to live in the body, viz. liis continuing to be present with his con- verts ; nor what the consequence of that continuance would be to them, viz. the benefit and advantage which tliey would derive from his continued minis- terial labours in their behalf. And what is that effect which it is said should be the consequence of St. Paul's beginning to live not in the body ? That St. Paul should begin to be with the Lord. And what the j)ersonal benefit which should be the result thereof to himself? Something, which, as he declares, in comparison of any thing that could redound to himself from continuing in the body, was better, far better. It seems then only a necessary inference, that St. Paul would derive a personal benefit of one kind himself, by his going to be with the Lord out of the body — as directly as his converts a personal benefit of a difiVrent kind, from his continuing to be present with them in the flesh. Cf. Rom. xiv, 7 — 9- With the light which these passages contribute to throw on the fact of that immediate enjoyment of some kind or other, accruing to the souls of faithful believers, as soon as tliey are released from the flesh — by passing at once into the society of their Re- deemer, and of their fellow-believers; we shall bet- ter be able to understand the following texts of St. On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 350 John ; xii. 26 : xiii. 33. SQ, 37 : xiv. 2, 3, 4 : xvii. 24 ; which I class together as relating probably to one and the same subject — the reception of the souls of faithful believers, immediately on their death, into Paradise, and into the enjoyment of their Redeemer after some manner or other. This truth seems to me to be intimated most clearly by John xiii. 33. 36, where our Lord tells the apostles, at the last sup- per, that whither he was going they could not fol- low him then, but should follow him hereafter ; and by xiv. 2, 3, which tells them that in his Father's house were many mansions ; and that he was going to prepare a place (which must "be understood of a place there) for them. No doubt, the allusion in this last instance may be first and properly to those various Mva), or chambers, which surrounded the lower part of the vaog, or sanctuary, the projjer habi- tation of the Deity in contradistinction to the rest of the temple ; of which Josephus in his description of it, observes as follows 8" ; Trep) 11 to. irkevpa tov koctco vaov, 01 aXXi^Xcov vjo-av otKoi Tpiareya ttoXXo), ko.) irap eKoire- pov eii' avTovg airo rrji TrvXvjg tiaoloi, k, t. A. And though it cannot be denied that it may also be understood se- condarily of heaven, yet I think it much more appro- priate, under the circumstances of the case, and much more significant, to understand it of Paradise, in the sense of the term explained above. For it should be remembered that our Saviour says these things to liis disciples just before his own death — that is, just before his own departure to the proper locality of the souls of the good after death ; and when he tells them at such a time, that whither he was going f//en, they could not follow him as i/et, but should follow s B. V. V. 5. A a 4 360 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. him hereafter, the very necessity of the case seems to require that we should understand him to mean, that they could not follow him into the proper locality of dej)arted spirits yet, because the time was not yet come when they were to die, as he was ; but that they should follow liim hereafter, because their time to die would arrive at last, as his had done already ; and in the mean while, that he was going- himself, among other purj)oses connected with his departure to the locality of the dead, to prepare a place for them, in the same locality which would receive himself — that where he was, there they might be also. I can imagine no reasonable objection to this explanation, except that it supposes our Saviour, even after his Ascension into heaven, to be prepared himself to receive his disciples into Paradise, on their death ; and himself to be personally with them in Paradise, after their death, though personally resi- dent in heaven, until that time or after it, also. But this objection is resolvable simply into our own ignorance of the possible connection between Para- dise and heaven itself, and of the manner in which the personal communion of disembodied souls in Paradise, either with each otlier or with any other descrij)tion of beings, is carried on : for tliat may be such as to render it a very practicable case, that souls in Paradise may yet have direct intercourse with the inmates of heaven, and may be conscious of a personal union and fellowshij) with their Re- deemer, though they themselves are in Paradise, in tlie intermediate state, and lie is in heaven. I iiave had occasion to (piote tiie account of St. Paul's raptures, 2 Cor. xii. 2 — 4, with a view to On the Existence a?id Locality of Hades. 361 shew the distinctness of the individual locality of Paradise from that of any part of heaven. The ac- count of the second of these raptures, viz. into Para- dise, is evidently an account of a rapture into the proper locality of the souls of the good — especially of faithful believers — after death ; and perhaps the terms in which that rapture is described, would furnish hints on which to build a variety of curious and interest- ing conjectures, respecting the constitution^ if I may so call it, of Paradise, and the nature of the intercourse wliich is there carried on, among its apj^ropriate in- habitants, in their disembodied state — were it pro- per to indulge in such conjectures. This description is as follows : Kai olta rov toiovtov avSpairov (are Iv (xw^ari, iiTd eKTO^ Tov TOifxarog, ovk oi^a' o Seog oi^ev) oti vjoTray/] €ii Tov TrapaSeiacv, Kai TjKovaev appi^Ta p-^fxara, a ovk e^ov dv- OpaTTx XaXTjaai: which the received translation has ren- dered, " And I knew such a man, (whether in the " body, or out of the body, I cannot tell : God " knoweth ;) how that he was caught up into Para- " dise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not " lawful for a man to utter." I do not contend, that the Greek of the original, a ovk efov dyGpaTrx XaXyja-ai, may not have been correctly rendered by this version — " which it is not lawful for a man to utter ;" but I maintain it would have been just as correct to ren- der it, " which it is not possible for man to utter." 'E^oi/ has certainly in Greek the sense of lawful ; but it has also the equally common sense of possible. And in this sense I am of opinion, it requires to be rendered in that other passage where only it occurs in the New Testament, besides this instance, and Matt. Xii. 4 : Acts ii. 29 : av^peg dhX4>o}, e^ov dneh [xerk irappria-iag irpog vfxag, irepi tov 7iaTpidp')(ov Aa/3)^, on koi ereXevTYjije Kai €Ta,(pvj, Kai to ixyr^xa avrov eaTiv cv vjfxiv a-^i 362 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. T^g yjfjifpag Tavrr^g : ** Men and brethren, it is possible " to speak with freedom unto you, concerning the pa- *' triarch David, because he both died and was " buried, and liis sepulchre is among us unto this " day." And with respect to the rest of the terms of the passage — it is superfluous to observe tliat av- 6f,u)7rx, rendered in the English by r/ man, is pr()j)erly ma?i as such — man in the abstract — that being who is a compound of body and spirit, and consists of neither apart from the other ; and that AaA^ya/ is proj)erly to speak articulately — to give utterance to articulate sounds — and consequently with the liu- man organs of sjieech, and in some one or other of the human languages. AaXav in this proper sense, does not necessarily imply to speak articu- lately in some human language, so as to be under- stood ; but it does mean to speak in some language proper for man, and in the manner common to men. It is possible AaAeTv in an unknown tongue ; impos- sible XaXi7v in any tongue, except M'ith the human mouth, the human voice, as well as in some one of the languages proper for, or peculiar to, man. Nor can this proper sense of Xa>.e7vhe better illustrated than hy 1 Cor. xiv. 5 — .'33 ; ^\'hich turns throughout upon it — and in the distinction which it draws, between the equally possible but oj)posite cases of speaking (Aa- Xijc-ai) with the understanding, and speaking with a tongue, is unintelligible without it. 'J'his proper sense of kaXeiv too, is of the utmost inij)ortance towards forming a correct notion of the nature of those iougni's, in some one of which 8t. Paul consi- dered it so very possible that one, possessed of the gift of tongues, might sj)eak himself, without being understood l)y (others. Such tongues would not ))e Oil the Existence and Locality of Hades. 3G3 merely unknown tongues, but unknown human tongues ; and human tongues merely unknown be- cause unknown to those who heard them spoken under the circumstances of the time and the occa- sion ; tongues which might not be unknown to any race or class of mankind, but only to those who heard them spoken at the time ; tongues which would consequently appear to those who heard them, the language of /3apl3apoi, or strangers, in comparison of their own ; and tongues which would require to be interpreted, if they were to be understood, and yet would admit of interpretation in order to be un- derstood. For there is no language spoken by the people of one country, that when heard for the first time, without being interpreted, must not appear strange and barbarous to those of another ; yet there is no language peculiar to one nation, which may not be translated into the speech of another, and thereby rendered intelligible to them. I understand St. Paul then to mean, that he had been rapt into Paradise, (whether in the body, or whether out of the body, he could not tell,) that is, into the locality of departed spirits — and had heard ivords there, but words unspeakable ; words which it was not possible for man to utter. In other words, he had heard the language of Paradise — the language of disembodied spirits — by which they carried on their intercourse with each other ; which it was as impossible to utter with human organs of speech, as to imitate or represent by any human language. It would seem from this, that the inhabitants of Paradise have a language — but not an articulate human lan- guage : have a mode of conversing with each other, but not by speech, not through the medium of the 364 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. organs of speech, properly so called. This datum might oi)en a wide field to a variety of conjectures with regard to their faculties in other resj)ects, were there any necessity to enter upon it at present. The last remark which I shall make in reference to this subject is, that with respect to the other member of the proposition, the fact that the souls of the bad by passing into their pro])er locality in Hades, pass into the endurance of a proper kind of punishment — it is not only presumptively proved by the instance of Dives in the parable, and by the general necessity of the case — that whatever is true of the good as such, under the circumstances of the intermediate state, the contrary must hold of the bad — but by this special consideration, viz. that Hades, or the part of it appointed for the abode of the bad, may be supposed to contain Gehenna, the place of the future punishment both of evil angels and evil men, under the proper name of the abyss. "A^va^jog, or the bottomless pit, occurs repeatedly in the Book of Revelation, ix. 1. 2. 11 ; xi. 7 ; xvii. 8 ; xx. 1. 3 : in which sense it is synonymous with the A/^v>j t&v •itvpog, also repeatedly mentioned in that book ; xix. 20 ; XX. 10. 14, 15; xxi. 8: and witli the Kufxivog rov TTvpog, Matt. xiii. 42. 50. It appears too from these allusions to the abyss in the Book of Revelation, that its locality is sup])osed to be within the earth, as mucli as that of Hades in general : and it is de- scribed, in four instances, ix. 1, 2, under the pecu- liar name of the cppeap tyj^ afSvcra-cv ; which may lead to the inference that it is a particular locality in Hades, as the place of punishment — an abyss, as it were, within the abyss itself. That a common fire On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 3b*5 is appointed for the reception of the Devil, his angels, and reprobate men, sometime or other, we learn from Matt. xxv. 41 : 2 Pet. ii. 4 ; iii. 7 : Jude 6, 7 : which fire is called the fire of Gehenna, in a variety of instances almost too numerous to cite. Matt. V. 22. 29, 30 ; x. 28 ; xviii. 9 ; xxiii. 33 : Mark ix. 45. 47 *• Luke xii. 5 : James iii. 6. The prayer of the demons, considered above — not to be sent away into the abyss, Luke viii. 31, might be a prayer not to be sent into this abyss, in its proper sense, that is, into the place of their proper punish- ment ; for it is evident that the prayer itself was produced by an apprehension of some punishment, from the presence of our Saviour — and was most probably intended in deprecation of it. See Matt. viii. 29 : Mark v. 7, 8 : Luke viii. 28, 29. To recapitulate then in brief, the substance of these further inquiries not merely into the generic, but also into the specific character and constitution of Hades, considered as the common receptacle of the souls of the dead — it has thus been shewn, upon scriptural testimony, that Hades itself is divided into regions, two at least in number, separated from each other after some manner which serves as an eifectual barrier against all passage from one to the other ; that the souls of the good are collected into one of these regions, and the souls of the bad into the other ; that the proper locality of the former is called Paradise, the proper locality of the other. Hades in a limited sense, Gehenna, the abyss, or the like ; that the souls of the good, within their proper locality, during the intermediate state, enjoy an happiness peculiar to themselves, and proper to SG6 u4ppcndi.x\ Chapter Tenth. that state ; the souls of the wicked, under the same circumstances, endure a misery or unliappiness pe- culiar also to themselves, and equally pr()i)er to the intertnediate state. Notwithstanding however the consistency of these conclusions with each other, and with those which were previously ascertained upon the same subject ; and notwithstanding also the number and variety of the scriptural testimonies both of the Old and the ^\i\\ Testament, by which they appear to be sub- stantiated ; there are certain objections which may be brought against them, resting apparently on scriptural authority, or by seemingly just inference deducible from it — which objections it would not be proper to pass over unnoticed. I shall consider therefore, such of them, as api)ear to me the most likely to be alleged on grounds like these ; before I take my leave of the subject. For example, if Ecclesiastes iii. 21 : " Who *' knoweth the spirit of man" {marg'ni, of the sons of men) " tliat goeth ui)ward," {margiuy is ascend- ing,) " and the spirit of the beast that goeth down- " ward to the earth ?" is to be understood in refer- ence to the disposal of the s])irit of the brute and the spirit of man respectively, by death — then it would seem to be implied by it, that the spirit of the brute is dis])osed of in one way, and the sj)irit of man in another; the sj)irit of the brute is disposed of by going downwards, and the spirit of man l)y going uj)wards : consequently, if by going down- wards, the spirit of the brute goes underground, the spirit of man by going ujjwards, does not go under- ground at least. Jt would not follow from this fact, On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 367 that the spirit of man might not pass, even by dying, into some proper locality appointed for the reception of the spirits of the dead ; nor that that lo- cality might not have a name of its own : but it would seem to follow from it, that it could not pass, by dying, into any such locality underground : and that the projjer name of this locality could not be Hades, if Hades were necessarily under the ground. My answer to this objection would be, first — that the text in question may have nothing to do with the mode of disposing either of the spirit of the ])rute, or of the spirit of man, after death, and whe- ther as different, or as the same ; and when it draws a distinction between the one as going down- ward, and the other as going upward, it may be in reference to nothing but that which is the general and characteristic distinction between man as man, and the brute as tlie brute, that the former is erect, and his natural aspect is upwards, the latter is prone, and its natural aspect is downwards. Pronaque cum spectent animalia cetera terrain, Os homini sublime dedit : coelumque tueri Jussit, et erectos ad sidera tollcre vultus. The same word is used for spirit, in the original, in either of these instances ; and to understand it of the soul in each case, would lead to the inference that the name of spirit was equally applicable to the soul of man and to the soul of the brute — in other words, that the soul of man and the soul of the brute were only species of a common genus, called spirit. But the name of spirit, in the sense of breath, would be alike applicable to each ; for the breath of life is the same thing in the brute as in the man ; only that this breath of life, in the 3(j8 Ajypendixy Chapter Tenth. man, from his erect posture, is going upwards at all times, that is, ascending ; the same breath in the brute, from its peculiar posture also, is descending at all times, that is, going downwards to the earth. Accordingly the same word which is ren- dered spirit in this verse, is rendered breath in verse 19, just before; and by Symmaclius, the same word in each instance in verse 21, was rendered not by TTveD/^a, as in the Septuagint, but by avaTrvo^ : the former of whicli might j)()ssii)ly be mistaken for spirit, properly so called, but the latter could not. Nor is it an unimportant circumstance, tliat this breath so descending is said to go to the earth, not under the earth ; for tliat is an im])licit argument that motion merely towards the earth, not reception under the earth, is what is intended l)y the distinc- tion and opposition in question ; which could not be the case, if the subject of that motion were not merely the breath of the brute, as by expiration tend- ing to the earth, but the soul of the brute, as by dying received beneath it. In the next place, to one who might not be satis- fied with this explanation — which I believe to be the true sense of the passage — I would further re- ply, that whosoever has read the IJook of Ecclesiastes with attention, must have ])erceived that tliere are a variety of sentiments in it which are evidently put into the mouth of an objector — and are stated only to be answered, or in some manner dealt with as objections merely might be. It is very necessary to mark these passages accordingly, that they may be distinguished from thosi- in w Inch the author of the book speaks in his own person, and authoritatively; for such passages may contain sentiments, to which On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 369 the sanction of an inspired authority could not pos- sibly be given ; and which consequently, though found in the midst of an inspired book, must not be confounded with the deliberate opinions of the writer of it. This text may be one of these passages, and contain a sentiment for which not Solomon, but some objector, is answerable; who could, therefore, know no more of the disposal of the souls either of men or of brutes, after death, than any other unin- spired person, under the same circumstances^. In the third place, admitting even for argument's sake,, that this text recorded a deliberate sentiment of the inspired author of the book itself — and ad- mitting also that it was a declaration of his opinion with reference to the different disposal of the soul of the brute and of the soul of man respectively, after death ; still we might justly contend that the senti- ment of the writer, so recorded in this text, was intended to be interpreted consistently with that other sentiment of the same writer, recorded in that other text of the same book, Ecclesiastes xii. 7, which we considered before, in reference to the question of the actual separation of the soul from the body by death. Each of these sentiments being regarded as alike the deliberate opinion of Solomon upon the same subject, the disposal of the soul of man after death — it Vv^ould not be fair to interpret either so as to be contradictory to the other, if it might be so interpreted as to be consistent with it. Now Ecclesiastes iii. 21. may be so interpreted as to be consistent with Eccles. xii. 7, if by going upwards in the former, is meant the same thing as returning to God in the latter ; but not otherwise. * Compare Wisdom, ii. 1 — 9. VOL. V. PART ir. B b 370 Appemlix, Clmpter Tenth. And if it lias been seen tiiat by the spirit's return- ing to God who gave it, notliing was intended in- consistent witli the possible disj)osal of it subse- quent!}' in any j)roj)er locality, appointed for the. reception of spirits ; it may justly be inferred that nothing can be meant by the spirit of man's going U])\vards, that is, returning to God who gave it, but what must be ])erfectly in unison with the same supi)osition of the disposal of it by God in any way afterwards. K Again, it has been seen that the English version of the Old Testament in many instances has ren- dered the Hebrew Sheol, and the Septuagint " :\ilr}<; or Hg" Ailov, by the " grave :" and the deference due to the authority of that translation, founded upon its fidelity and exactness in otlier respects, would naturally raise the presumption that the Hebrew Sheol, and the Septuagint " AiIyi^ or e/c " Xihv, under such circumstances, might be very competently ren- dered by tiie English " grave." ]5ut though we should admit this conclusion to its fullest extent, it would not loUow from it that Sheol or Hades in its proper sense was not, or miglit not be, a very dif- ferent thing from the grave. There are repeated instances of the use of this term in the original, in which it would make not tiie slightest difference to the general sense, and general tiutli of the pas- sages, whether the word Sheol were rendered agree- ably to its j)roi)er meaning of the j)lace of de])arted spirits, or simply by the gra\e. it would be easy to illustrate this assertion by the pailicular con- sideration one l)y one of the texts ct)llected sui)ra, where the Shvol of the Hebrew Bible was rendered On the Exist ejice and Locality of Hades. 371 by grave in the English version ; but the assertion is so obviously true of them all, that I may well spare both myself and the reader the trouble of this particular consideration of any of the number, but the first. For example, Genesis xxxvii. 35, which is the first instance of the occurrence of the word Sheol in the Old Testament, or xlii. 38, where Jacob speaks of *' going down in sorrow to the grave," of " bringing down his gray hairs with sorrow to the " grave ;" all that is meant in such allusions, being his dying, it could make no difference to this general sense, whether it were expressed as a going down to the place of departed spirits, or as a going down simply to the grave. It is to be remembered, too, that as the conjunction of a body and a soul, in the same individual person, when alive and still united together, is not apparent to sensible observation ; so neither is the disjunction of the body from the soul, in the case of the same individual after death, a sensible effect likewise. In all languages, the usus loquencU confounds the individual while alive, with the body ; because to the apprehensions of all man- kind the only sensible part of the individual, even while alive, is the body : and on the same principle, in all languages, wherever it is not necessary to speak with philosophical or metaphysical exactness on such a subject, the iisiis loquendi confounds the individual when dead, with the body; because to the apprehensions of all mankind the only sensible part of the individual when dead, is still the body. In the common apprehension of all mankind, there is no other sensible difference between the idea of a certain individual person as living, and the same in- dividual person as dead, than between the idea of a B b 2 :n^2 Appendix, C/iajjfcr Tenth. certain body, once animated M'itli life and activity, and that of the same identical body, as deprived of ani- mation and lifeless. Tpon all occasions, then, where nothing depends upon strict proi)riety and exactness of speech, the usit/i loqucndi will speak of the dis- posal of the individual after death, in terms of which the obvious and sensible import is applicable only to the disposal of tlie individual's body after death — in terms which would seem to imj)ly tliat whether alive or dead, the individual was the body, and nothing else — the living individual the living body, and the dead individual the dead body. To this very natural rule, even the language of insi)iration may possibly be acconnnodated, in giving expression to ordinary feelings and apprehensions after an ordinary and corresponding manner: of which accommodation we cannot have a better instance than the language at- tributed to our Saviour, when inquiring about the dis- posal of the body of Lazarus, John xi. 34 : -noZ t^:- BtUare ainov. No one knew better than our Saviour, that the body of Lazarus was not Lazarus, (not at least exclusively,) even when living, much less now that he was dead ; yet his manner of speaking of him at this very time is as much adapted to that sui)j)osition, as Martha's, Avho neither before his death nor after, could have any distinct idea of her brother as such, excei)t in and through his body: KCpif, y,'^i^ o^et : xi. 39. On this principle, it was a very possible case, and likely to be of frequent occurrence, that even scrip- ture itself, when speaking of the disposal of the individual by death, would speak of it, or admit of being sui)j)osed to speak of it, as if the disposal of the individual after death were the disposal of the On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 373 body of the individual by death. In these cases, it would be perfectly immaterial to the general mean- ing and general truth of its language, whether it were understood of a disposal of the individual in the grave, the proper locality of the body after death, or of the disposal of the individual in Hades, the proper locality of the soul after death : and from the influence of this natural feeling, and the conviction of this general indifference in M'hat manner the language of scripture on such a subject might be construed, it was likely to happen, and it actually has'' happened, that the translators of the Hebrew original, in frequent instances, have rendered by the grave, in English, what was expressed by Sheol, in the Hebrew. In most of these instances, however, if not in all, the laxity of the mode of expression, in comparison of the thing "intended to be] expressed — is to be charged on the version, and not upon the original ; for Sheol in Hebrew is as widely discriminated from the word which expresses the grave in the same language, as "A/^tj^- in Greek is from Ta(f)og, [xvYj[j.eioVf v€Kp(j$-^KVj, or any equivalent term in that language for the receptacle of the body, after death ; nor could any the least attention to propriety in the use of terms allow such very different words to be con- founded and interchanged promiscuously, in He- brew, any more than in Greek. The word which properly answers to grave in English, is lip in He- brew : a word which the Septuagint renders twice by doivaTOi, thirteen times by [xvYjfxa, eleven times by fj.vrflj.e7ov, four times by racprj, and thirty-four times by Ta 10 : all of which either di- rectly or indirectly assert that he was in Hades. In particular, I would ask them how they explain 1 Pet. iii. 18, 19? which asserts that while our Sa- viour died in the body, he still lived in the spirit — €V a Kai ToTg ev (pyXaKiq Trvevixaai TropevOeig eK'^pv^e — for it is there distinctly affirmed not only that the living soul of our Saviour was separated from his dead body, but that he went in that living soul, without that dead body, to some other locality, where were 380 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. other living souls, without their former bodies, like his own : and so we are furnished with an answer to the reply, if any such should be attempted — that our Lord jicrhaps went into Hades, by goinji^ with his body into the grave of Joseph. And should tiiey say that all this was special in the case of our Saviour — I would ask them not only to allege, as they would be bound to do, the reasons which required it to be special in his case, but also on what principle they could reconcile the supposition of a special disposal of his SDul after death, with the fact of a similar disposal of the soul of the i)enitent thief after his death also ? For is it not implied by Luke xxiii. 43, that where our Saviour was to be, that very day, the thief was to be also — viz. in Paradise? or will they contend that there might be just the same spe- cial reasons for the disposal of the soul of this thief, after a certain manner, different from usual, as for that of our Saviour himself? It is unnecessary however to dwell longer on the refutation of an hypothesis — so full of absurdities, as this : unless it should be said, that full of difficul- ties as it is, some countenance appears to be given it, by the testimony of our Saviour's words, John V. 21, 25. 28, 29, which affirm, or appear to affirm, that those who will come to life again, out of a state of deatli, in consequence of hearing the voice of tlie Son of inn\, will come to life out of the graves ; and therefore imj)ly, or aj)j)ear to imply, that they are previously resting in the graves ; and so far that the intermediate state between death and the resurrection, is i)asse(l in some manner or other in the grave. On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 381 To this argument, it might be replied in the first place, that the language here employed is merely in accommodation to the common notions of mankind; who knowing the soul when alive only in and through the body, can know it only in and through the body when dead ; and therefore cannot, without doing violence to their first and natural apprehen- sions, conceive of the soul except as resting with the body in the grave, even after its death. In the next place, and as the true explanation of the meaning of the passage — understanding this future coming of the dead out of their graves, as the consequence of hear- ing the voice of the Son of God, and therefore as supposed to be previously therein, of the return- ing of the dead to life at the resurrection — I should collect from it, not that the intermediate state be- tween the death and the resurrection, is spent by the souls of the dead in the graves which contain their bodies ; but that at the end of that state, when the souls of the dead come to life again, they will come to life in and reappear from their graves. For at the resurrection they must come to life again in their bodies, and consequently in order to that event must again be united to their bodies ; and therefore no conjecture can be more reasonable than this, that when the souls of the dead come to life again in their former bodies, as they must come to life again in some locality or other, they will come to life again in no locality so probably as in that where their bodies were committed to the ground, after they had apparently ceased to exist. This expla- nation may serve for an answer to the similar objec- tion, which might be derived from Matt, xxvii. 52, 53 ; that, if the bodies of the saints, which were 382 Jppemliv, Chapter Tenth. previously sleeping, came to life on tliat occasion out of their graves, the saints themselves were pre- viously sleeping in tiiose graves. The hodies of the saints were doubtless previously sleeping in those graves, hut not necessarily the saints themselves, or the souls of the saints ; only being reunited to their bodies, in order to apj)ear alive again on this occa- sion, they were united to them again there, where their !)odies were previously sleeping, viz. in their graves; and so came forth alive again, in their bodies and their souls together, on this occasion, out of their graves. There is a text in Revelation, xx. 13, which seems to imply that a ])ortion of the dead are compre- hended in the sea, and the remainder in Hades — in- stead of being all comprehended in one and the same locality, and that properly called Hades. ]3ut the conclusion that there is any such distinction as this, in the proper recei)tacle of the dead as such, does not necessarily follow from that text. The dead supposed to be contained in the sea, in this instance, are opposed to tlie dead supposed at tlie same time to be contained in Hades, for special reasons; which may be explained as follows. Under ordinary circumstances, no part of the dead can hr sui)j)(»si(l to \)v contained in Hades, who are not supposed to liave ])assed thither in the natural and ordijiary way ; and no way is the natural and ordinary, but that of dying in some of the natural modes of dying, (which scrijiture in a former instance called dying the common death of all men, and being visited after the visitation of all men,) the natural and common ('fleet of which, in On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 383 every instance of such death is, that the soul being first separated from the body, without any violence to the laws of nature, both the integral parts of humanity may be disposed of accordingly, the soul by being received into its proper locality after death, in Hades, the body by being deposited in the ground, or buried. But that mode of passing into Hades, which takes place when the soul is separated from the body by the life's being drowned in the sea, and the body is buried in the deep, though the soul may be received into Hades ; is not the natural or ordi- nary, but an unnatural and an extraordinary one. The original sentence on man was, that out of the earth he was taken (not out of the sea) ; and unto the earth he must return (not unto the sea) : -when his life was extinct, his spirit should return to God who gave it — his dust should mingle not with its kindred waters, but its kindred dust ; for which purpose his body must be buried in the ground, and mix with the earth around it. In this extraordinary way of dying by drowning, or otherwise perishing at sea, and of being buried by being committed to the deep — it cannot be de- nied that multitudes of human souls are passing from time to time into Hades, and multitudes of human bodies are from time to time disposed of; and on one occasion, at the time of the deluge, every soul of man, with the exception of eight persons, and every body of man did so pass, and was so dis- posed of, at once. The souls which pass or did pass into Hades by a mode like this, are passing and did pass by a mode sufficiently distinct from the com- mon, to require them to be described as a class of the inmates of Hades, whose proper locality after 384 AjjjH'/idix, iluijitcr Tint It. death, is not Hades, into wliitli they must truly have I)assed, hut the sea, in whose wonih, hy an act of departure from tlie common course of tiiiu'^s, they have seemingly been entombed ; but solely as those who have passed into Hades by an extraordinary mode, in oj)j)osition to those M'ho have passed thither in the ordinary manner ; as tliose in short, by re- ceiving and retaining whom, the sea might be said to have usuri)e(l, in the first instance, and still to retain in its possession, by an act of usurj)ation, what ])roperly belonged to Hades. Of this class of souls themselves, St. Peter, as we have seen, tells us that they who constitute probably the most consi- derable portion, the souls which were once disobe- dient in the days of Noah, that is, those who perished by the flood, were kept somewhere in the same locality into which the soul of our Saviour, as soon as it quitted the body, went to preach to them; that is, as we may well presume, somewhere in Hades, whither the soul of our Saviour, as soon as it fpiitted the body, must l)e supposed to have passed, as much as the soul of any other pei'son. In order to evade the inference deducihlo from Luke xxiii, 4.'j, the same school of commentators, to whiih I have before referred, would separate the arjixfjiav from the reniaindei* of the >entenee ; so as to make our Lord's declaration to the thief, to mean, " Wrily I say unto thee this day — Thou shalt be " with me in Paradise." The idea of this separa- tion is not a new one, nor j)i(uliar to the inge- nuity of modern connnentators : and in like man- ner, we meet with instances of a similar arbitrary separation between the j)arts of one and the same On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 385 proposition, in very ancient readings of John i. 3, 4: yeyovev ev avrca ^coyj ^v, k, t. A ; and in Mark xvi. 9, avaa-Tct^ ^e — irpai ecpavrj, k\ t. X^. I do not know that for the purpose of the argument which was founded upon this text, with reference to the disposal of the souls of the good and faithful after death, it is ne- cessary to expose the absurdity of this division of its parts ; or that it makes any difference whe- ther ayjfiiepciv goes with Xeycc aoi — or with eo-vy /xer e/xoy, K, T. A. We may observe, however, that on the former supposition, the introduction of the word itself becomes a very unmeaning and superfluous addition to the rest of the sentence ; but not upon the latter. On the former supposition it would not be easy to say what use or purpose the (rvj/xe- pov served, to account for its introduction ; but on the latter it becomes one of the most significant circumstances of the address, as containing a pro- phecy of a double event, each at that time still future — not only the thief's being with our Saviour sometime in Paradise, but his being with him there that day. Now no one can prove that these two things were necessarily united ; that the thief might not have been with our Lord in Paradise, and yet not exactly upon that day ; unless it had been fore- seen by the Speaker that the thief should die that day, which beforehand, at the time when those words were spoken, without the spirit of prophecy was by no means to be taken for granted. The thief had been but recently crucified, when these words were spoken to him ; and a person on the cross, whose death were not to be prematurely accelerated, ■^ Vide my Supplem, Diss. 528. VOL. V. PART II. t; c 386 Appendix^ Chajiter Tentli. as I proved by instances in point in my former work', would live two or even three days before he exi)ired. JJut who, without the sj)irit of projjhecy possessed by our Saviour, would have known that the death of the thief would be so prematurely acce- lerated, tiiat he should expire, and his soul be in any wise disposed of, before the end of that day ? It is manifest, then, that the o-^ue^cv is a very im- portant part of the general assurance, cttj /act' f/xoi), A.-\ T. A. — and ought not to be arbitrarily separated from it. Still, as I before observed, ujwn the par- ticular question of the immediate disj)osal of the souls of the good after death, it makes little differ- ence with which i)art of the address this word be taken ; if by being in Paradise with our Saviour, it is meant that the soul of the thief should be with the soul of our Saviour in the locality appropriated to the souls of the good after their death. If the soul of the thief was there with the soul of our Saviour, for any time during the interval for which our Saviour's soul was in the same locality, (the in- terval between liis death and his resurrection,) it would be indifferent whether it was with him there first on that day, or on the next day. But this sui)i)oses that Paradise is the name of the locality ai)pointed for the reception of the souls of the good after death ; which the same school of commentators in all probability are prepared to deny. In this case, I would call uj)on them to say what Paradise is, and where ? whether the j)r()j)er habitation of the good, before the resurrection, or after it ; ami wiu'thtr in heaven, or in some other ' Vid • V.'. \\\. Dj.s V IC!, IC.;".. ( f s,,j)plcni. Diss. ri3«. On the Existence and LocrilHy of Hades. 387 locality? They cannot admit it to be the proper habitation of the good before the resurrection, with- out admitting it to be the local habitation of one class of disembodied spirits at least ; and if they shall say it is the proper habitation of the good after their resurrection, they must be prepared to main- tain that until the resurrection it can have no being, no more than the inhabitants destined to occupy it. But St. Paul has shewn that Paradise had an exist- ence somewhere even in his time; and what is more, that it had inhabitants even in his time ; for he was rapt thither, and heard the language of those in- habitants, though in the shape of words to man unutterable. St. Paul has also shewn that wherever Paradise was, existing as it did in his own time, it was not any where in heaven ; and wherever Para- dise was, it was the proper habitation of spirits as such, and consequently either of angels or of the souls of men disembodied. But it was not the proper habitation of angels, because it was not in heaven ; therefore it was the proper habitation of the souls of men disembodied ; and so exclusively such, that St. Paul did not know whether he him- self was transported thither in the body or out of it ; which implies that if his spirit had been tran- sported thither out of the body, it would have been nothing extraordinary; but if in the body, it was preternatural, and out of course. There are many passages in scripture, especially in the Old Testament, which speak of the locality of souls after death, as the place of darkness, as the region of shadows and obscurity — the intensity of which was neither to be conceived nor expressed by c c 2 388 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. a comparison of it to any degree of the same things, ])ro(luced by the sensible absence of light in the upper world ; and in like manner, of the state of the dead themselves, as one of silence, of forget fulness, of in- sensibility, and of the absence of every thing, once possessed, characteristic of life and being, almost as much as annihilation itself. I'^pon the pr'iuHi facie evidence of such passages as these, it is a natural question how they are to be reconciled with the conclusions previously established — that the dead retain their consciousness; that disembodied souls continue to exist apart from the body, and not merely to exist, but in the enjoyment of a proper happiness, or in the endurance of a projjcr unhai)piness, each peculiar to the intermediate state? It must indeed be admitted that such passages, if literally construed, would be at variance with other passages of scripture, and the inferences justly de- ducible from them, to a very different effect ; which consideration alone, with every ingenuous mind, should be a sufficient argument that they are not to be literally construed. In favour of this conclusion it ma}' be fuitlier contended, that the context of many of these passages shews them to be temporary effusions, the effect of feelings produced by the oc- casion, the despondency, the mental distress and apprehensions of the sj)eaker, or author of them, at the time. Such is the case with various j)assages of that descri])tion, whicli occur in the IJook of Job; and such also is tlie case with many sentiments of a similar description, which occur in the Book of Psalms,an(l may be considered delivi-red !)y one speak- ing in the character of the Messiah, when labour- ing, 01' suj)posed to !)(.' labouring, vicariously under On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 389 the wrath of God, in the interval between his death and his resurrection; and which we may presume would answer to the truth of his situation, and to the nature of his feelings, from the point of time, so shortly before his expiration, when he uttered those words on the cross — " My God, my God, why hast " thou forsaken me?" Many of them again, especially those which are met with in the Book of Ecclesi- astes, may be the sentiments of objectors, and in- fidels or materialists, not the deliberate convictions of the author of the book — and consequently nothing for which he, in his own person, would be answer- able. All of them may be understood as literally true, in one sense ; viz. with reference to the feeling and apprehension of the living — not to the truth of the case with respect to the dead : considered in which point of view, they are rather confessions of the ignorance of the living, than just indications of the state of things, as affecting the dead. Nothing is more certain, than that to the eye of mere sense, death is literally a irlpag TravTwv, an end and con- summation of being ; that the living, by dying, dis- appears, and leaves no traces of continued vitality, even though retained, behind him — that his soul, at all times invisible even when united to the body, is not to be seen in its disunited state — that his body, once committed to the ground, shortly mingles with the elements around it, and ceases to be distinguish- able from the rest of the material universe. Judging: from external impressions, then, what would appear to be more true, than that the living, by dying, pass into darkness and obscurity, into which no eye can follow them — if not into annihilation itself — sink into silence and insensibility, if they do not altogether c c 3 390 appendix, L'luipter Tv)itli. lose their being — and give no symptoms of remain- ing life and consciousness, even though still re- tained ? Tiiose aflections too, of which the body, under the circumstances in question, is literally the subject after death, are naturally liable to be transferred to the soul — on the princii)le, l)efore alluded to, that we can neitlier concei\e nor speak of the individual in a given instance, distinct from, or indei)endent of, the body. Moreover, all those passages occur in the Old Testament ; and consequently belong' to a time, when the immortality of the soul, and the fact of its continued existence even after death, if not en- tirely unknown, had been but partially revealed : though, with respect to the particulars of such a doctrine, or to tlie circumstances of the state of things, after death — beyond the revelation of certain general truths, such as it has been our business to specify in the preceding part of this discussion — I do not know that more light is possessed even now under the Gospel, than was before under the Law. The doctrine of a resurrection to come, too, was as partially revealed, as that of the soul's im- mortality ; and until that doctrine had been fully communicated, the doctrine of tiie intermediate state, strictly so called, could not be said to have been yet made known, 'J'lie latter doctrine may now be fully ascertained, because the former is ; but the mode of the actual subsistence of souls in the intermediate state, and tiie actual nature of tiieir employments therein, is as great a mystery, and as much left to conjecture now, as ever. To speak too, as many of these passages do, of deatli as a state from wliich there was no return — as a change, Mhich when it On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 391 had happened, was thenceforward immutable — was still more natural, considering that the phenomenon of the return of one who had been dead, to life again, which has been so rare of occurrence even under the Gospel, was still rarer under the Law. The doctrine of the soul's continued existence after death, and its destination some time or other to come to life again, was sufficiently obscure, before the light cast on these subjects by the Gospel ; but the doctrine of its being intended to return to life in the very body in which it had lived, before it died, until the promulgation of Christianity was en- tirely unknown, and unheard of: and by communi- cating that doctrine, more than by any other revela- tion on the same subject, may Christianity be said to have brought life and immortality to light. ^This leads me to observe, in the last place, that we have in the Old Testament, and in the New, to- gether, eight recorded instances of the return of per- sons, who were dead, to life again — three in the former, and five in the latter ; the raising of the widow's son, by Elijah'", the raising of the Shu- namite's son, by Elisha", the reviving of the dead body, which came in contact with the bones of Elisha", in the Old Testament: the raising of the son of the widow of Nain i', of the daughter of Jairusi, of Lazarus^ of Dorcas^, and of Eutychus*, in the New. «" 1 Kings xvii. 17—24. »i 2 Kings iv. 18—37. ° 2 Kings xiii. 21. p Luke vii. 11 — 16. Harm. iii. 7- q Matt. ix. 18—26; Mark v. 22—43; Luke viii. 41— .56. Harm. iii. 22. «• John xi. 1—44. Harm. iv. 23. s Acts ix. 36—42. t Acts xx. 9—12. c c 4 392 AppeiuUx, Chapter Tenth. In some of these instances, the subjects were adults, or grown up persons ; and in all of them, they had been for a longer or a shorter time dead. The most remarkable instance was, no doubt, that of Lazarus ; who was both, as we may i)resunje, an adult or grown up person, at the time of his death, and had been four days dead, and tiie prin- cii)al j)art of that time in the grave, to whicii he had been connnitted when dead — before he was raised to life again. On this principle, then, if the souls of the dead pass into a proper locality of their own, the soul of Lazarus had not only })assed thi- ther, at his death, but had been there four days, be- fore he returned to life again ; and if the souls of the dead retain any consciousness after their death, the soul of Lazarus must have retained its con- sciousness in the intermediate state; and if it did so, must have brought back with it to life again a perfect knowledge of the circumstances of that state. Whether it actually brought back this knowledge — scripture has neither affirmed nor denied ; but al- lowing, for argument's sake, (what is, indeed, on every account, the most probable supposition,) that it did not, how are we to reconcile this fact with the sup- posed retention of the faculty of consciousness by the soul, after death? In answer to this question, we may observe first — that as to the kind or degree of knowledge of the intermediate state, and its circumstances, which one previ(msly there, and thence brought back to life, might be expecti-d to bj-jiig witii liim to life again ; every thing depends on the mode of being brought back — whether ordinary ov extraordinary, natural or unnatural. For adnntting everv thincr to be na- On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 893 tural, which is agreeable to the appointment of God, we may say, it is just as natural for men to come to life again sometime, as sometime to die ; but nei- ther, except at the proper time, and in the proper way : with respect to which, though men do not all die at once, nor in one way, yet all will come to life again, at once, and in the same way, at the appointed time of the general resurrection of the dead. Now those who will come to life again under such cir- cumstances, may well be expected to bring with them back into life, as perfect a knowledge of the intermediate state, as that which they carried with them thither, of the upper life ; and that knowledge so brought back, would be as complete in one of its possessors, as in another. But one, who after hav- ing died once in the natural way, should be called to life again, to serve a special purpose, as Lazarus was, not in the natural way ; and should be destined to die a second time, and to come to life again a second time, both in the natural way — no one can say it is reasonable to presume should bring with him on the first occasion, all that knowledge of the interme- diate state, which he might have acquired of it, while there, entire and unimpaired ; no one can say, of what use it could be to him to bring with him such a knowledge, even if he possessed it — no one can say, how it could possibly be communicated to others, or how others could in any manner be made sensible of it. St. Paul's rapture into Paradise proves this ; for if the words which he heard while there, had been capable of being uttered by the hu- man mouth, or made audible to human ears, they would not have been called " words unspeakable." Again, whosoever has reflected how many of the 394 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. incidents of early life, slip from the memory with advancinc^ years, as completely as if they had never happened ; how much is transacted in dreams, with the most lively im])ression of its reality at the time, of which not a trace is left upon awaking — how much of the stores of previously acquired knowledge may at once he lost to the mind, from a bodily in- jury, a fit of sickness — and the like — will readily admit that even to our own appreliensions of what is possible, it is very conceivable that all the ideas of whatever kind, which an human soul might have acquired in the intermediate state, by being con- versant therein for a longer or a shorter time, like that of Lazarus, might be as totally lost, on return- ing prematurely to life again, under such circum- stances as he did, as if they had never been acquired nor possessed. Lastly, admitting too, as we may, the necessity of the exercise of a miraculous power to produce this effect, still the analogy of other instances of the ex-, ercise of such a ])()wer, in cases parallel to this, would lead us a priori to expect it. In those in- stances of miraculous cures recorded in the Gospels, whereby our Saviour gave sight to one born blind, or si)eech to one born dumb — the effect of the mira- cle in every instance was this ; to j)lace the same in- dividual, by an instantaneous act of power at the time, in the very same situation — with respect to the use and exercise of the faculty connnunicated, and to the possession of every thing necessary to that end and eflect, as he would have l)een in at the time, had he never wanted the natural faculty in question, from his birth. How much more would be connnu- nicated, under such circumstances, than the mere On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 395 possession, or mere capacity of using the faculty, the reader may learn from my Diss. vol. ii. Diss. viii. part iv. 330 — 332, to which I refer him. Now- judging from the analogy of these instances, if one suddenly endued with sight at a given time, was placed in the same situation, by an act of the power of God, as he would have been in, at that identical time, if he had always seen : what should we ex- pect would be done in the case of Lazarus, who having died and passed in the natural way, into the locality of departed souls, was yet, for wise reasons, brought back thence, before the natural time, by an act of Divine omnipotence, to die again in the na- tural way, and to pass again into Hades in the na- tural way, and again to come thence, at the general resurrection, in the natural way ? Why, that the same act of Divine power, which brought him to life again before his time, and thereby undid the pre- vious act of his death, and placed him in the same situation as if he had never died — in point of the knowledge also which he had acquired or might have acquired in Hades, would place him in the same situation as if he had never died — and had never been in circumstances to acquire any know- ledge of that description, no more than any others who had never yet died likewise. It would not be proper, perhaps, to dismiss the subjects which we have been hitherto considering, without endeavouring to ascertain, in the last place, to what extent the above conclusions, as deduced from the evidence of scripture, are corroborated and con- firmed by external testimony also ; which testimony, under the circumstances of the case, must resolve itself into that of the Jewish church, before the birth of 39G Appendix, Chapter Tenth. Christ, and that of the early Christian church, after it. With respect to the opinions of the Jewish church before tlie birth of Christ, uj)on these, or any other questions, if its testimony is considered a different thini( from the facts or doctrines recorded in the Old Testament — j)erliaps the only authentic source to which we can go, for information concerning those opinions, are the two books of Maccabees, the book of Ecclesiasticus, and the writings of Josq)hus. In the First Book of Maccabees — I am aware of nothing which would illustrate the opinions of the Jewish church, with reference to Hades, its locality, or the like. In the Second Book of Maccabees — passages occur, which express a confident expecta- tion of the raising of the dead to life again — vii. 9- 14 : and others, vii. 22, 23, which imply not only that, but that breath and life, or spirit and life, (7rv6v/xa and ^a)>7,) were originally derived from God. Compare vii. 36 : and xiv. 46. There is a well- known passage also in the same book, xii. 40 — 45 — where Judas and his companions are represented as praying for those who had fallen in battle, and mak- ing an atonement for the sin of which they had been guilty, by a sj)ecific ofiering, under the hope and persuasion that they would rise again — which may perhaps be considered to imply that their souls were conceived to be somewhere existing, until the time should come for their reunion to their bodies. None of these passages however throws any ligiit upon tlie opinions of tlie writer, concerning Hades, its locality, the intermediate slate, or the other (piestions dis- cussi'd above, 'i'lie \\u\\\ Hades occurs but once iu On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 397 the Book, vi. 23, where it is rendered in the Eng- lish, " the grave." The same may be said of the Book of Ecclesiasti- cus ; in which though frequent allusions occur to Hades by name, tliey are mostly such as might have been taken from the Old Testament, with the books of which, and the sentiments and language of which the author of this book was no doubt familiarly ac- quainted. See ix. 12 ; xiv. 12. 16 ; xvii. 27 ; xxi. 10 ; xxviii. 21 ; xli. 4 ; xlviii. 5 ; li. 5, 6. In the apocryphal production, entitled the Wis- dom of Solomon, many sentiments occur which miffht illustrate the conclusions we have endea- voured to establisli, were it certain that this book was the composition of a Jew, who lived before the birth of our Saviour. In my own opinion, it is later than the Christian era ; and therefore cannot be properly appealed to in proof of the doctrines or belief of the Jewish church, upon any points, as contradistin- guished to the Christian ; or else we might refer, on this particular question, to such passages as iii. 1 — 3; iv. 7. 16; v. 15 : xvii. 21 ^ The testimony of Josephus, in a case like this, is nothing more than his testimony to the opinions of the differect sects among his countrymen, upon the " I purposely abstain from making any appeal to the testi- mony of the Jewish rabbis ; under a conviction that very many opinions, especially in reference to the state of things after death, to Paradise, to the resurrection, to the millenary pro- mises, and the like, however they may pass current for rabbini- cal, and appear in rabbinical writers, are ultimately borrowed from Christianity. The reader who thinks otherwise, will find a large collection of rabbinical lore on the subject of Paradise in particular, in Wetstein's Annotations on Luke xxiii. 43. 398 Apjicndix, Cluijiter Tenth. subjects in question. These sects were the Saddu- cees, the Essenes, and tlie Pharisees, more particu- larly. "With respect to the Sadducees, it is almost unnecessary to observe that they were materialists ; and consequently not believing in the existence of the soul after death, in a state of disunion from the body, they could not believe in the existence of Hades, nor of an intermediate state. As to the oj)in- ions of the Essenes upou these latter points, Joseplius himself tells us their notion of Hades differed in no respect from that of the Greeks, or the Gentiles, in general ; that is, they had their fortunate islands reserved for the good, and their Tartarus for the bad : kui rais u.ev ar^ahou;^ (sc. -^vyoAq^ o^o^o^cvvref iraicriv EAA^vojv, aTTocpaivcivrai tv)v vrrep uKeavov ^lairav a-jTOKeiTQatf Kai "xj^poi) cvre 0[xl3pcii, oiire vicfxiTolg, ovre Kavfuacri ^apvvo[j.e- voVf aXX 'ov f^ WKeavov irparig an i^€p/wv o^iaXeinTav I Bell. Jud. ii. viii. 11. Of the Pharisees on the same occasion he tells us, tliat they entertained an idea of Hades, which would be much more strictly in accordance with the Greek or Roman conception of it — as consisting of an Elysium, for the reception of the good, and a Tar- tarns, Erebus, or Orcus, for that of the bad, and each of them underground ; the souls of the good continuing to exist in the former, until the time arrived for their returninjr to life a Ktvov i^pafxcv, aXA (V TTl'JTft Koi ttKaiC7VVYi, Kai OTl (li TO)/ O'pflX''jlJ.€V0y UVTOk^ TOTTOV f■ tov o(p€iXofX(vov TOTTOV, iu tliis passagc, is analogous, in jjoint of expression, to that at Acts i. 25, in reference to Judas, which we considered above ; TropevOrj-jai it; tov TOTTOV TOV 1}iLov\ aud It agTccs with it so far in point of sentiment also, that Polycarp must have thought the apostles had a place due to them, and already bound to receive them after death — as much as the speakers in the Acts, that Judas had. This place, in the reference to it both in Clement and in Polycarp, is doubtless the same ; and that in the apj)rehension of the latter it was Paradise — we may infer from the following testimony of Irenieus ; concerning whom, I shewed elsewhere, (vide vol. i. page i29ii, 294,) that when he refers generally to the pres- byters, tlie disciples of tlu' apostles, he means Poly- carp and liis conteniporaries more j)articularly. {Vt also my Sui)j)lementary Diss. xv. note 304 — ,'30S.) A/5 Ka) 'Myoxj'yiv o'l Tipcj^vTfpoi, twv olttoitoXw ixaQr^Tai, T&Vi ixiTaTiBlvTa; iKuire /xerart^var ^iKaioi^ yap av$pwTroii Kat TTViV[JiaTO(f>opoii- yjTotfxaTOy] 6 TrapdOiiaoiy €v co Kat WavXog a.TTO'JToXoi ua-K0[Jiic6fi'; rjKovaev appr/TU ^vj/xara, av Trpoi Y,{xai (V T'Ji TTapovTi' KaKti fjitvtiv T&i/> /xf TaT« (U!:,- TvvTfXeiai, On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 401 Trpooiixial^ojxhovg t^v a(p6ap(Tiav: Adv. Haereses, V. V. 405. line 12. The antiquity of Polycarp, and the circumstance that he was familiarly conversant with St. John, ought to make his testimony highly valuable both upon this, and on any other point. The same may be said of the testimony of Clement, as that of a disciple of St. Paul. The testimony which the Book of Enoch was competent to have borne on this point, has been anticipated supra, page 115 — to which I refer the reader. In like manner, there is a full and minute account of the state of souls between death and the judgment, in the Apocryphal Second of Esdras, cap. vi. 44 — 76 ; the date of which we investigated, supra, chapter fifth. This passage is extant in the Ethiopic, though wanting at present in the Vulgate. Seven degrees of grief or discomfort are there recited, as the lot of the souls of apostates or reprobates, in the intermediate state ; and seven degrees of consolation, the contraries of the other seven, as the lot of the faithful ; and both are sup- posed to have their appropriate habitations, where the good in particular exist under the guardianship of the angels ; Cf. of the same work, iv. 33 — 35 : 41, 42: 49. 51. In the Sibylline Oracles, the antiquity of which, though later than the Christian era, is probably such that in point of time we should place them on a par with, or next to, these two apocryphal pro- ductions. Paradise is mentioned by name, as the local habitation of the worshippers of the true God, and the heirs of life, for some period of being which I should understand of the intermediate state. VOL. V. PART II. D d 402 Appendix, Chapter Tenth. Oi 6e 0€or Tiy.itiVTi'i aki]Oi.vov, aivaov re, (u)i]i' KkripovofiovaL, tov aiwros yjioi'ov, avToi oIkovvtc^ 7Tapab(((Tov ofjMs ipi6T}\(a Krpiov, bawvpid'OL yXvKVV dprov cni uvpavov aarfpoeiTOS' Pnxi'niium, page !33 and 34. Cf. Theophiliis ad Autolycuiii, ii. 52. page 250, wlicre the original of tliis j)assage first occurs. Cf. also Lactantius, Divin. Institt. ii. 12. Justin M. asserts in the following passage, that no souls die — that those of the pious remain in a better place, somewhere or other, (which is in fact in Paradise,) those of the wicked in a worse — both awaiting the season of judgment ; aXka fxvjv ov^e a-no- BvYjc-KCiv yifJ.i TTaaag rag ^vy^ag iyx .... aWa ti ; rag fxev Txv evaePSov h KpeiTjovt irot X(t:p'-f /u.(Vf}/.(pa.iag kch aTOfJuiTog \eovTog Kat eK yapo; Kvvog aiTfiv avTCv Trjv ipvyvjv au^vai, tva (J.'^ttig KvpitvJti Trig ^l^vyrjg avTov atTr,fjig y,v' iva rjviKa r,ixug irpog t^ f^o'^a) T6u /3/ou yivofMfSay Ta avTa a/ri/xfv TOV Beov, TOV ^uvaufvov ano^Tptxi^at Ttavra avat>jy}y irovr^pov ayyek^'V fxrj ka(3ea6ai yjtxxv Tijf ^pvyrjg, ibid. .'jO'3. 32. In the Qua^stiones and Kesponsiones ad Ortlio- doxos, also attril)uted to Justin Martyr, we meet witii the following passage, Responsio ad Quasti- onem Ixxv ; which illustrates the author's notion of the intermediate state of Paradise, of the occupation of the just there, and tiie like ; /xfTa . . t>;v (k toD cu}[xaT(,g f^ij^ov ti;6i'> ytveTai txv ^tKaix'v t( Kat aOtKoiv rj ^tatTToKYj' ayovTat yap wo tuv ayyiXxv ng a^iovg ai/Twv t6- On the Existence and Locality of Hades. 403 TTOvg' ai fxev rav '^iKaiav i\'vyou e;V tov Yiapa^^KJOt), evBa avv- Tvyia T€ Kou dea ayyiXm re kou apyayyeXav, kut OTTTaaiav ^e KOI TOV coiryjpog Xpiarov, Kara to dpYifxevov, eK'^rjfxovvTeg €K TOV aaixaTO(;i Koi h'^rifx.ovvTeg Trpog tov KvpioV al Ve twv a^iKWv ^vxai, elg Tovg ev tm a^jj TOiiovg . . . . Kai eia-iv ev To7i alioig avTCoy Toiroig, (f)vXaTTOiJ.evat exg Tvjg rjfxepag T^g dvaaToicTectig Kai avTairoloaeoog. Cf. also Quaestio Ixxvi. and the Responsio. Besides the passage from Irenajiis, quoted above, the same author affirms the existence of a proper locality for the reception of souls after death, and their continuance there in the intermediate state, until the resurrection ; al ^vyou a-nkpyjjVTai clg ... tov TOTTCV TOV wp/o-/A€Vov avTaig 0.710 TOV Oeou, KaKdH l^^xpi TYjg avaardaecog (fyoirSxri, Trepiixlvovcrai tyjv dvacfTaaiv. eirena aTToXafSovaai to. ocofxaTa, Kai oXoKK'^pcog avaaTaaat, TOVTeaTi c7U)[j.aT{KCt)g, KaQ^g Ka) o Kvpiog dvecxTri, ovTccg eXevJovrai eig Tvjv oxpiv TOV Qeov : Adv. Hser. v. xxxi. 452. 23. He describes this locality, it is true, in terms apparently which might suit to Hades in general ; but the con- text shews that they must be understood of the Hades of the good, that is, of Paradise in par- ticular. Tertullian describes the idea which the church entertained of Hades, in his time, as follows : Nobis inferi, non nuda cavositas, nee subdivalis aliqua mundi sentina creduntur : sed in fossa terras et in alto vastitas, et in ipsis visceribus ejus abstrusa pro- funditas : De Aniraa, 55, Operr. iv. 324. The local habitation of the good in particular, for the inter- mediate state, is thus described by him. Contra Mar- cionem, iv. 34. Operr. i. 329 : Unde apparet sapienti cuique qui aliquando Elysios audierit, esse aliquam localem determinationem, quae sinus dicta sit Abra- D d 2 4'04 Appendix, Cluipter Tenth. hae, ad recipiendas aniinas filioruin ejus, etiam ex natiouibus .... eain itaque ronioncin, sinuiii dico Abrahic, etsi iioii ca4estein, suhliiiiiorciii taineii in- feris : interim refrigeriiiin pnebiturain animabus justorum, donee consumniatio reruni resurrectionem omnium, plenitudine mercedis expungat. Cf. quae sequimtur. That he means Paradise l)y this locality, may fairly be inferred from the following passage of the Apologetieus, cap. 47. Operr. v. 114: Et si Paradisum nominemus, locum divina^ amoenitatis recipiendis sanctorum spiritibus destinatum, maccria quadam igne;u illius zona' a notitia orbis communis segregatum, Elysii campi fidem occupaverunt. And that he i)laccd Paradise somewhere apud inferos, appears from the same cliapter De Anima. quoted above, where he observes ; Habes etiam de Paradiso a nobis libellum, quo constituimus omnem animam apud inferos sequestrari in diem Domini. This treatise, De Paradiso, is lost. In like manner he wrote a work on the millenary promises, entitled De Spe Fidelium ; which also is lost. It is observ- able, however, that in the same chapter, De Anima, he seems to place in Paradise oidy the souls of the martyrs: Qnomodo Joanni in sj)iritu Paradisi regie revclata, (pia- subjicitur altari, nuUas alias animas apud sc pra'ter inartyrum ostendit ? quomodo Per- jH'tua fortissima martyr sub die passionis in rcvela- tione Paradisi, solos illic commartyres suos vidit ; nisi quia nullis rhompha\i Paradisi janitrix cedit, nisi qui in Christo decesserit, non in Adam ? Vet this conclusion is not necessarily deducible from these words. 'J'Ik' fnial observation, nisi qui in Christo decesserit, non in Adam, leads rather to the inference that Paradise, in the opinion of Tertullian, Oh the Existence and Locality of Hades. 405 was open to the reception of all who died in Christ, that is, of all faithful believers, though to that of none besides. Origen, in the following passage from his De Principiis, ii. xi. 6. Operr. i. 106. c — f, advances a conjecture, respecting the employment of souls in Paradise, during the intermediate state, according to which Paradise is an auditorium or school of souls, and the proper occupation of its inmates is the con- firmation or explanation of all the knowledge pre- viously acquired through the medium of their senses, with fresh accessions of light and information in certain proportions, concerning things to come. Puto enim quod sancti quique discedentes de hac vita per- manebunt in loco aliquo in terra posito, quem Para- disum dicit Scriptura divina, velut in quodam erudi- tionis loco, et, ut ita dixerim, auditorio vel schola animarum, in quo de omnibus his quae in terris vi- derant, doceantur, indicia quoque quaedam accipiant de consequentibus et futuris, sicut in hac quoque vita positi indicia qusedam futurorum, licet per spe- culum et senigmata, tamen ex aliqua parte concepe- runt, quae manifestius et lucidius Sanctis in suis et locis et temporibus revelentur. Prudentius has the following beautiful description of Paradise, or Abraham's bosom, as the locality of the intermediate state to the soul of the good Chris- tian, awaiting the appointed time of its rising again. Operum, i. 77. Cathemerinwn, x. 149- Hymnus circa Exsequias defuncti. Sed dum resolubile corpus Revocas, Deus, atque reformas, Quanam regione jubebis Animam requiescere purani ? D d 3 +()() Appendix, Chapter Tenth. Greniio senis adtlita sancti Ht'ciihabit, III ilia La/.ari, yufui Horibus uiidique septmn Dives procul adspicit ardens. Sc(juimur liia dicta, Rcdcniptor, C^uil)iis atra e morto triuniphans, Tua per vestigia niandas Sociuni crucis ire latronem. Patet ccce fidelibiis aiii])li \ ia liicida jam Paradisi, Licet et nenius illud adire, Iloniini (|iiod adenierat anguis. Illic, pivcor, optimc ductor, Famulain tibi praecipe inLiitciii Gi-nitali in scde sacrari, Qiiani licpierat cxsul et crrans. Nos tecta fovebimus ossa \'i()lis et fronde frequenti : Titul unique et frigida saxa Liquido spargenius odorc. Basil, from Isaiah v. 14. a text which we have had occasion to quote, collects the following notion of Hades, as the proper locality of reprobate souls after death , rd'/a. t\ yjixh o Xoyci tv^eiKwrai koivov riva tottov (V Tx icrxrarx ty]^ yr/^ htkjKio'v TcavrayoBtv, Kai aXafXTiriy to Tdv A<^oi/ yxpiov fivat' a-TOfxa t( ti Im to. Ko7ka Ka$yjK0Vy hi (jV Trjv K(i6ooov eivai TotlV "irpog to yilpo-j KUTiyvx^Tfxivaii y^vyjxii. k\ t. A. Operuni i. ^62. D. AN HYMN". vtLORY to Thee, whose lofty state. And everlasting rest. Before all time were uncreate, Before all time were blest : Some lower world Thy footstool, heaven Thy throne ; The universal King, eternal and alone. Glory to Thee, the Lord of hosts And hierarchies high ; Whose armies fill the lucid coasts, And people all the sky: Thick scattered as the stars, in bright array. Each in his order due, to serve Thee and obey. Glory to Thee, whose angel train, That crowd Thy presence shrine, In favour and in place to reign Were formed, as gods, divine: Advanced full high in pomp, to man unknown, With glory and with bliss ; but far beneath Thine own. ^ No apology, the author of the present work is persuaded, can be necessary for subjoining to the conclusion of it, the following ascriptions of praise and glory to God. With regard to the Hymn itself, he wishes to observe, that each stanza is intended as a kind of integral poem, after the model of those remains of antiquity which are called Scolia ; of all which it is characteristic to contain some one idea briefly expressed, though with a sweetness and sim- plicity, almost inimitable. D d 4 408 An Hymn. Gloky to Thee, whose spirits go, On highest errands bent. Familiar journeying to and fro, As bids Thy wise intent : Nor day nor night they rest, but far and near Roam all the earth abroad, unseen, unheeded here. Glory to Thee, who makest them seen, Revealed to human ken, In stature and in outward mien. As of the sons of men : Their visages as man's, and seeming gait ; But more than man's divine, majestic and elate. Gloky to Thee, who bidst them wear The snow-white plume confest ; And graceful braid tlie flowing hair. And graceful spread the vest : MHiere, in etherial grain and tinctured light. Their innnaterial form conceals its essence bright. Glory to Thee, whose throne is placed Above the clouds on higli ; Pavilioned midst the watery waste, And darkness of the sky : Where thunder, hail, and storm, and lightnings sealed. Within Thine armory lie, till Thou their fury wield. GloI'.v to Thee, whose native light No darkness can surj)rise ; Nor sleep, nor slumber, e'er invite To rest Thy wakeful eyes, "^i'hat good, wliere good is found, well pleased behold ; Nor pass the evil oer, unpuni&hcd, uncontrolled. An Hymn. 4!09 Glory to Thee, whose bounteous will By mercies past was shewn ; Whose goodness, unexhausted still, By blessing yet is known : Our fathers felt Thy love, and sang Thy praise ; And now their grateful sons shall emulate their lays. Glory to Thee, whose tender care. With wings paternal spread, Broods o'er Thy creatures every where, That call to thee for bread : Perpetual feast to all Thine hand supplies ; Unbidden opes its stores, and antedates their cries. Glory to Thee, whom angels see. And disembodied sprite, Disclosed in Thine own majesty, Ineffable and bright : While but its utmost skirts are shewn to men ; That blaze in mercy veiled, to spare their weaker ken. Glory to Thee, who givest to know Beatitvide on high ; And openest, through the vales of woe, A pathway to the sky: Where Faith, on eagle wings, sublime may soar ; And Hope, with ardent glance, her prospect dart before. Glory to Thee, who laidest on man Some portion of Thy might ; And placedst him in the subject plan, Vicegerent of Thy right : All else for man, but man Thou madest for Thee ; Himself to brutes as God, and Thou his God to be. 410 An IIj/m)i. Glory to Thee, who graced liis hrow \\\\.\\ reason's crown so true ; And formed liis lips to overflow ^^'ith eloquence and dew : Those lips' best use, to speak Thy praise designed ; That reason's noblest act, her Author, Thee, to find. Glory to Thee, whose aids most nigh In life's sad hour of close. The sunshine of the soul supply Witii j)eaceful, soft repose : That inward calm, when all to sense is dead, Thedroopingspiritmaycheer,and heavenlyconifortshed. Glory to Thee, whose arm hath wrought The conquest of the Grave ; And frailest flesh unmoved hath taught His mortal dint to brave : Now in his palsied gTij)e no strength is left, And harmless wounds the sting, whose poison Thou hast [reft. Glory to Thee, M'liose promise wings The parting of the breath ; And tempers sweet from living springs IMie bitterness of death : For, taught by Thee, to live was death before. And death we know is life, and life is death no njore. GLoiiV to 'J'hce, wiiose hand reveals The purpose of Thy will ; And bares the effect of power, but seals Tiie wondrous action still : For pathless are Thy ways : and all unknown, IMkju dwellest in thickest dark, light to 'J'ii)self alone. J7i Hynm. 411 Glory to Thee, who didst not spare Thy dear and only Son, When first for man his tender care The work of love begun : Stript of the God, and from Thy bosom sent. To tabernacle meek with flesh and blood content. Glory to Thee, whose Spirit still, A condescending guest, Disdains not with the lowly will, And the pure heart to rest : Their hallowed lives, and temper's altered frame. The living temples meet of heaven's own God proclaim. Glory to Thee, who gavest to man The rainbow's wondrous light, The compass of the sky to span, Majestical and bright : Thine hands that beauteous arch of glory wrought. And placed it in the clouds, with truth and mercy fraught. Glory to Thee, who makest the year. Through varying seasons borne. In order due to disappear. In order due return : Perpetual circle, whose quaternion round With providence, and joy, and goodness, still is crowned. Glory to Thee, when winter s cold. With snow-white mantle hoar. Envelopes in their secret hold All nature's embryon store : Deep in their cells immured, the saps of life His frozen touch evade, and save tneir juices rife. 412 Ah Hymn. Glouv to Thee, when tender spring Emerges from the tomb, O'er dell and dale abroad to fling The firstborn of her womb : And paint witii liveliest green the russet mead. And o'er tlie furrowed ridge the dancing corn-blade lead. Glory to Thee, when sunnner's sun, AV^ith kindliest toucli and warm. Matures the pledge of hope begun. And loads the teeming farm : And stocks the orchard's pale with fruits confest, And decks the gay parterre with flow^er-embroidered vest. Glory to Thee, when liarvest-horae Redeems the promised due ; And gathered stores for months to come The garner's wealth renew : And every germ, partiuient erst displayed, Tosevenfoldfulnessform'd brown autumn's right is made. Glory to Thee, whose absent day Unnumbered lights sui)ply. When thousand thousand stars array The forehead of the sky : Majestically slow, serene and bright. Each in his course to move, and rule his watch of night. Glory to Tlu-e, whose clouds so rare, Self-buoyant made to swim, O'ercanopy the middle air AVith curtain fringes dim : AVIiere jjrccious dn>j)s are stored, and, as tiiey go, From milklike veins distil their fatness all below. An Hymn. 413 Glory to Thee, who bidst them pour The first or latter rain ; Nor unproductive give the shower, Nor back receive in vain : Earth opes her thirsty mouth, and all around The barren wastes rejoice, with flowers and verdure [crowned. Glouy to Thee, whose dews amain, On summer's eve serene. With cooling balms refresh the plain, And brighten o'er the green : All night the honied spring its sweets distils, And slakes a thousand flowers, and feeds a thousand rills. Glory to Thee whose evening gray, With silent soft surprise. Steals on the parting smile of day, As slumber on the eyes : To bring sweet hour of rest, and grateful change ; For meditation meet, and thought's expansive range. Glory to Thee, who givest the morn To rise upon the night, With breath of purest breezes born, And rosy-purpled light : When fields rejoice, and birds sweet music make. And men to learned toil, or needful labour, wake. Glory to Thee, who bidst the sun. In brightness like thine own. Too dazzling to be gazed upon, Look from his noonday throne : Faint emblem of thy beams ; yet meetest he. If aught created meet, thine emblem faint to be. 414 J„ Hi/ run. Glory to Thee, when duly sped, ^Vith renovated might. He rises from his eastern bed. And opes the gates of light : As some gay youtliful spouse, for bridals drest ; Or giant, in his strength, with wine and sleep refresht. Glory to Thee, when, bright and warm. His fructifying shower ReneAvs the potent vital charm. In nature's genial hour : Earth fills her pregnant womb, and drinks the tide. That sweetens all her fruits, and decks her flowers with [pride. Glory to Thee, who formedst the moon To bear divided sway, And temper soft the blaze of noon To evening's sober ray : With beauty more adorned, and lovelier made; Queen of the peaceful hour, of silence, and of shade. Glory to Thee, when, full and clear, She j)ours her urn from liigh. The ])ensive spirit meet to cheer. And bless the feeble eye : While stars, of kindred pale, athwart are seen, (More lustrous and more fair,) her silver-trembling [sheen. Glory to 'J'hee, who didst illume The dark sepulchral damp. And hang within the silent tomb Religion's holy lamp : Uns])ent to burn, Mith sacred asbest fed ; \\'hile peace and hope prolong the slumbers of the dead. An Hymn. 415 Glory to Thee, whose eye maintains The watches of the dust, And noted in Thy book retains The members of the just : That, numbered, weighed, and sealed in measure due. Each several grain may lie familiar to Thy view. Glory to Thee, whom winds obey. And seas Thine bests perform, Careering in the cloudy way. And riding in the storm : Thy voice in thunder speaks ; Thy breath, as fire, Inflames the lightning's blaze, and points his shafts with [ire. Glory to Thee, who makest their power To know its limits due ; And even in desolation's hour Rememberest mercy too : Thine arm their rage controls, and, stretched to save, Peace to the wind enjoins, and stillness to the wave. Glory to Thee, whose hand alone Huge Ocean captive leads ; And to and fro, from depths unknown. His restless waters speeds : Now with majestic march, and swelling tide ; Now to his ancient bounds, diminished, made to glide. Glory to Thee, who didst ordain The barrier of the sand. Athwart his rude and barren main. And th' hospitable land : A bulwark strong, with everduring pale. Where each proud wave is stayed, nor further can prevail. 416 An Hi/m/i. Gi-ORY to Thee, uiiose wondrous care All nature's thirst supplies, With exhalations, moist and rare, That from his surface rise : Caught in Thy clouds above, and poured in rain ; Or by a thousand streams, superfluous, brought again, Glory to Thee, who gavest the brine. His essence pure to keep ; And badest the living salt combine Its spirit with the deep: That, as a soul through some vast carcass spread, P'rom putrefaction saves, and humours inly bred. Glory to Thee, who peoplest there His waste capacious reign. Abundant more than earth can bear. Or teeming heaven contain : Thy quickening impulse, in his members rife, Impregnates all his mass, and inundates with life. Glory to Thee, the King of kings. And Lord of lords below ; From Thine their power permissive springs, From Thine tiicir glories flow: Placed in Thy keeping sure, and strong control. The sceptres of their hand, and jmrpose of their soul. Glory to Thee, wiiose hand did Iniild This earthly fabric fair ; A temple by 'i'liy presence filled. Its Maker to declare : Where, in their i)regnant signs revealed and shewn. Thy power and Goflhcnd both, invisible, are known. An Hymn. 417 Glory to Thee, whose eye surveyed Its substance long before ; Who weighedst in scales its hills unmade, And toldest its atoms o'er : And scoopedst its watery bed, and metedst true Within Thy palm each drop, that flows old ocean through. Glory to Thee, whose word and will Before all ages wrought ; And worlds on worlds successive still, In endless train, forth brought : The effluence of Thy love on all imprest ; Thine image made to bear, and with Thy bliss be blest. Glory to Thee, whose every star, That shines so clear and bright, Or evanescent seems from far. To our diminished sight. Mysterious truths might tell, with glory crowned ; Lord of a subject world, and systems rolling round. Glory to Thee, whose marvels lie Effulgent more and more. Far as the optic tube can spy. Or boundless thought can soar : Through the vast ocean's void, with islands sown, Save to the Mind which form'd,unnumber'd and unknown. Glory to Thee, from whom his birth The burning seraph drew ; And the vile worm, that creeps on earth, Is yet Thy creature too : With Thee no height, no depth, no great, no small ; Who madestwith equal ease, who fiUest and boundest all. VOL. V. PART II. E e 418 Anlhpnn. Glouv to Thee, whose wondrous tliaiii Of being, ])ower, and thought, Through infinite creation's reign Without a void is wrought : Harmonious, ])erfect, just in each degree, Tlie diapason's scale is closed not. l)ut with '^J'hee. Gl()I{V to Thee, to whom is known Our secret frame within ; Where reason rules, and dwells alone, \N"here thouirhts tlieir course bejjin: Wliat stirs each sense, what force each member sways, How rolls the living tide, and speech the tongue obeys. Glory to Thee, who dost instil Thy gentle, soft control. To bend the springs which turn the will, And actuate the soul : As moulded wax they yield, yet unconstrained Self-governed seem to move, witli freedom still retained. Gi-ORY to Thee, whose hand prepares The souls of men on high. Ere, frailty's and corruption's heirs, A\'ithin the womb they lie : Horn in the flesh, probation due to yield, And earn their bright reward, or be to judgment sealed. Gl.OHV to Tliee, whom deatli repays The loan which life iiad lent. When i!ature's tinie-woni frame decays, And numl)ere(l hours are sj)ent : 13ust unto dust returns, and earth to earth ; Jiut tile i)ure essence light to Tiiee, who gavest it l>irth. An Hymn. 419 Glory to Thee, who didst ordain Thy Sacrifice to die ; In deep mysterious counsel slain, Before all worlds, on high : A ransom precious-worth, and meet to save All souls from utter loss, in judgment and the grave. Glory to Thee, when unto man, Thy last and youngest son, As firstborn in creation's plan. Prerogative was won : And the true Adam, Christ, by merit raised, Beside Thine own right hand, in loftiest seat was placed. Glory to Thee, when every throne And princedom of the light, Dominions, kingdoms, powers unknown In virtue and in might ; Before the anointed God, and King divine, Cast at hisfeet their crowns, and worshipped at his shrine. Glory to Thee, that none who die. And with the past are told, Though race on race has glided by, And years on years have rolled ; With flesh to dust are turned, nor being lose, Nor in lethargic sleep insensible repose. Glory to Thee, who hast revealed Some region dark and dread. In deep substantial shade concealed. The mansions of the dead : Where, in Thy keeping placed, the middle state Holds all that e'er have been, their second birth t' await. E e 2 420 ^-tii III/ mil. Gl.ORY to Tliec, whose angels speed The diseinhodied soul, And hear lier to her i)lace decreed, AVithin tliat distant goal : Where, in his turn received, each fleeting gliost, As wave on wave, is home, forgotten none, nor lost. Glory to Thee, whose righteous doom. With just distinction true. To good and ill, heyond the tomb, Awards their several due : No more, as once on earth, confused to dwell, While chaos, fixed between, disparts the realms of hell. Glory to Thee, who, in that seat Of fellowship and light, The just and faithful makest to meet In Abraham's bosom bright : From righteous Abel, first of men to die, To him who breathed this day in Christian hope his sigh. Glory to Thee, who even there Foretaste of good hast given ; And sealed in Eden, soft and fair. The accepted soul for heaven : With strong assurance of Thy favour blest, Antici])ated joy, and imperturbed rest. Gloi?y to 'J'hee, whose hand decreed Tlie social scheme for man ; And some to fulness, some to need. With wise design did plan : 'J'hat mutual want to mutual iielp might bind, And overflowing love might ('(pialize mankind. An Hymn. 421 Glory to Thee, who bidst us know The sympathetic thrill ; And with divided weal and woe The perfect law fulfill : Prerogative of rnan, to brutes unknown, His fellows' claims to feel ; nor live for self alone. Glory to Thee, when mammon's slave, Of pomp and pride bereft. To pining envy in the grave, And craving want is left : While the poor lazar, once despised and vile, To fulness now is fed, and revels in thy smile. Glory to Thee, whose warning lore, Mercy who would not shew, When transitory bliss is o'er, No mercy dooms to know : Just retribution due ! apart to groan In solitary pain, who shared not good, his own. Glory to Thee, who first didst make, And since sustainest, all ; And could Thine arm its works forsake, All nature soon would fall : Soul of the world ! throughout Thy creatures spread. In Thee they live and move; away from Thee, were dead. Glory to Thee, who didst decree That life, in time possest, The pilgrim's sojourning should be. And momentary rest : So might true wisdom to the distant scene Exalt our hopes refined, and from the world might wean. E e 3 422 An Hymn. Glory to Thee, who hast bestowed No settled lioine below, No perfect good, no sure abode, No j)leasiire safe from woe : Peace to our wandering feet Thou hast not given, Nor to our craving souls their fulness, out of heaven. GhuKV to 'i'lice, that nouglit of ill In all thy works had been, Save from the free perverted will Of angels, or of men : Fountain of life, and light, and good ! with Thee, No death, no dark can dwell, no taint of evil be. Gi.ORY to Thee, that all shalt turn To good unmixed at last. And with thy judgments, sore and stern, Avenge and clear the past: Lord of Thy purpose still, though man rebel, And fiendish spite oppose the iron gates of hell. Glory to T'hee, whose presence long The i)lissful gate displayed, Encircled by the angelic throng, And fiery-waving blade : That kept the tree of life, and pointed due Where hope from far might gaze, and sin for jjardon sue. Glory to Thee, whose pillared light Was tabernacled still, AVithin thy sanctuary bright. On Sion's holy hill : AMiilo, on tlie mercy-seat sublinie contest. Cherubic wings outs])read oVrshadowed all 'JMiv rest. An Hymn. 423 Glory to Thee, whose truth foreshewn, And dayspriiig long delayed, As distant twilight dimly shone Through darkness, and through shade : Till the dear morning dawn, and perfect day. Rose with the Sun divine, and chased all gloom away. Glory to Thee, whose name and praise Informed thy poets' tongue. Till ravished wonder fired their lays To more than mortal song : Thy knowledge filled their hearts, and, teeming wide, Swelled as Euphrates' flood, or Jordan's harvest tide. Glory to Thee, whom prophets saw. And taught thy perfect will ; That heavenly wisdom's sacred law Might rule Thy creatures still : In fear and love received, and practised due, A landmark to their feet, and beacon to their view. Glory to Thee, who long didst dwell Within one temple bright, By Shiloh's softly-flowing well, And mount Moriah's height : Thy palace and thy fane, appointed seat Where faith with peace should kiss, and truth with mercy [greet. Glory to Thee, whose blest abode Each Christian church supplies ; Unnumbered temples now to God, Unnumbered altars rise : Where purest worship meet each day prepai^es, With incense of the lips, and sacrifice of prayers. E e 4 424 An Hyniii. Glory to Thee, whose ensign proud Tliy first redeemed did !)ring To baptism, in tlie fiery eloiul, And saving Red-sea spring : A\nien at Thy glorious train, and inarching by, The wondering deep cried out, and raised his hands on [high. Glory to Thee, whose mystic wave. Baptismal cleansing true, Of j)()wer each carnal stain to lave, Ik'gets the soul anew : Peri)etual fount of purity to be, Forth gushing from His side, who hung upon the tree. Glory to Thee, whose table then ^X'lih angels' food was filled, When manna for the sons of men Its dewlike sweets distilled : ^^''llile from the flinty rock, or thirsty ground, The bubbling rill leapt forth, and streams emergence [found. Glory to Thee, whose cup around With living springs o'erflows ; Whose table, with salvation crowned, "J'he living bread bestows : His body and His blood, who came from high. The craving soul to feed, and health and strength supply. Glory to Thee, whose trump anon. Through the thick darkness blown, The coming of the Holy One, To meet His saints, made known : Assembled round 'J'hy feet, liigh proof to give, 'J'JiatGodwith man miglitspeak,aiid man might hearand [live. Jn Hymn. 425 Glory to Thee, whom Sinai saw. In thunder, cloud, and flame, Proclaiming, by Thy former law, The terrors of Thy name : Too holy, just, and pure, on sin to look ; Or, with divided sway, a rival's worship brook. Glory to Thee, whose gospel still Glad tidings makes its theme. Soft as the dew of Hermon's hill, Or Shiloh's gentle stream : True to the heavenly strain Thy quires began. Glory to God on high, good-will on earth to man. Glory to Thee, whose church redeemed. As spouse and queen to shine. All pure and spotless, well beseemed Her Lord and King divine : Crowned with the virgin's bloom, and matron's truth, Inviolable faith, and never-fading youth. Glory to Thee, whose only Son, The Shepherd good and true. Through every land has joined in one The good and faithful too : Unnumbered flocks, within His fold combined. Share the same Master's love, and equal pasture find. Glory to Thee, whose field so fair With purest seed was sown. Till devilish malice scattered there The tares, in secret thrown : Now both till harvest tide promiscuous grow. And, by their fruit diverse, their diverse virtue shew. 426 Jn Hjfmn. Glory to Thee, whose message high Thine angels forth shall send. To gatiier tVoiu heneatli the sky All scandals that offend : So garnished, swej)t, and clean Thy floor shall be ; Meet for the just alone, to shine as suns, with Thee. Glory to Thee, that wast not found On Horel) in the flame. Nor with the tremhling of the ground. Nor when the whirlwind came : But the small voice, that gentle, soft, and staid Broke on the prophet's ear. Thine oracle was made. Glory to Thee, whose trump shall blow Its last and loudest strain. That souls in ward may hear below. Through Hades' utmost reign : When every grave shall burst, and sea and earth, Each from her struggling womb, shall give the nations [birth. Glory to Thee, whom every eye. Even they that pierced, shall see, In glory and in power as high, As once of low degree : Before, rejected and disdained of men ; Now in the clouds return'd, with iieaviii's wliolc host [again. Glory to 7''hee, who madest known. In orient realms afar, The rising of the sceptred throne, And dawning of the star : Once, but in m}stic trance, l)efore revealed To him, who dimly saw, |)rosj)ective and concealed. An Hymn. 427 Glory to Thee, whose angel light Thy sages safely led, With guidance of shechinah bright. To Bethlehem's lowly shed : Divided right to claim in Israel's King, And the first fruits of faith from Gentile climes to bring. Glory to Thee, whose hand unseen, Through mingled weal and woe, Attempers all the chequered scene Of human life below : While fortune's varying smiles Thy pleasure wait. And youth, and feeble age, and manhood's grave estate. Glory to Thee, when cheerful day Gives place to sober night ; Glory to Thee, when night away Retires from cheerful light : Thy creatures both, in goodness both designed. With sweet vicissitude refresh and bless mankind. Glory to Thee, when all is still, And darkness rules alone. That thoughts the ravished soul may fill. To waking hours unknown : Though slumber seal the eyes, yet brightest then The intellectual beam, that shines with inward ken. Glory to Thee, that, good and kind, Remittest still Thy due ; And puttest the weak, but willing mind. For strict performance true : Remembering what we are, and ever mild To bear with frailty long, as parents with their child. 428 An Hi/mfi. Glory to Thee, whose wondrous grace Such power to faitli has given, From ashes and from dust to raise The trembling spirit to heaven : 'Tis hers, in trust received, the keys t' apply. Which ope the gates of peace, and usher to the sky. Glory to Thee, whose patience tried Averts Thy judgments still. When vengeance, every day defied, IMakes bare its arm to kill : Nor unaccepting sees, nor hoars in vain, The sacrifice of tears, and wounded spirit's plain. Glory to Thee, who to the soul Iler inward garb dost give, With beauty and with grace to stole Her inward shame, and live : Washed in her Saviour's blood, the spotless die Once more bespeaks her pure, and pleasing to Thine eye. Glory to Thee, whose arm in all The strength that stands maintains ; And them that sink, and them that fall, With timeliest help regains : Again, erect and firm, their steps endure, By past experience taught, more humble and more sure. Glory to 'J'iiee, that wilt be there, Wiiere two or three are found, On acts of common praise and prayer With kindred spirit bound : So pleasing in thy sight the godly show Of heavi'n-asj)iring souls, in sym])athy below. An Hymn. 429 Glory to Thee, who givest to man So much beyond his due, Proposing to a moment's span Eternity in view : And crowning frail desert, and partial love — What more could boundless grace ? — with utmost bliss [above. Glory to Thee, that all may meet Instruction as they go ; That heavenly lore, and comfort sweet, From all that falls may flow : Each varying turn with some wise use be fraught. And everlasting truth by time and chance be taught. Glory to Thee, that even now, In each new scene at hand. Before Thine altars still we bow. Within Thy temple stand : This universal frame Thy presence shrine, And every living thing an oracle divine. Glory to Thee, whose anger's cloud Is but a moment's space. When frowns averting seem to shroud The brightness of Thy face : Veiled, as in wrath, with altered beam, to prove The constancy of faith, and singleness of love. Glory to Thee, when every thought Pays tribute to Thy name ; And all within and all without Conspires to own Thy claim : That life's well-ordered frame one act may be Of endless sacrifice, from heart and soul, to Thee. 430 An Hipnn. Gl.onY to Thee, whose grace is then ^VitIl healing most replete, When Marah's bitter waves ao-ain o Their noisome draught repeat : Though sad the cu]) to suffering virtue due, Yet, sweetened by Thy love, she drinks and drains it too. Glory to Thee, who sendest relief In every hour of need, To raise the fainting child of grief, And staunch the wounds tliat bleed : For, tempered to their power, Thy tender care Their trials' load will ease, or yield new strength to bear. Glory to Thee, that each good will, And each right act, is Thine ; Thy grace concurrent to fulfil, Prevenient to design : By Thee the seeds are sown, by Thee they grow, And to Thy nurturing care their just perfection owe. Glory to Thee, whose secret aid Unlooked-for comfort brings. When sudden light from dismal shade To cheer and gladden springs : One hour of watchful night to sorrow given, Joy with the morn returns, a messenger from heaven. Glory to Thee, whom but to see Is hope and transj)ort bright ; And in whose presence but to be Is ever new delight : For Thine the well of life, that runs for aye ; And at Thine own right hand eternal i)leasures stay. An Hi/ mil. 431 Glory to Thee, whose image here Reflects Thee from above, Too great and holy, not to fear. Too beauteous, not to love : Drawn in Thy terrors, in Thy charms as well, Presumption to forbid, distrust and doubt to quell. Glory to Thee, whose riches' store, For them Thou lovest designed. No eye can see, no thought explore. Nor picture to the mind : And vain would human lips and human tongue Soar to that height of bliss, and emulate in song. Glory to Thee, whose utmost praise Thy seraphs might beseem, Could angels' or archangels' lays Exhaust the boundless theme : In wonder, as in light, advanced the more ; And, while they nearer gaze, more raptured than before. Glory to Thee, infinitude ! Which none but Thou can span ; No mind beside. Thine altitude. Thy depth. Thy breadth to scan ; Not half Thy glories seen, not half exprest, Admiringheaven growsmute,and silence speaks the rest. INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED OR REFERRED TO IN THE EXPOSITION. ACCIUS. (Vide Macrobius.) Achilles Tatius. (Vide Uranologi- con.) De Clitophontis et Leucippes Anioribus, 1792. Biponti. App. 19. Acta Martyrum, Ruinarti, 1713. i- 375- 481. ii. 322. 483. V. 313- Adamantius. (V^ide Origenes.) ^liani Variae Historiae. Kiiehnii, Lipsise, 17S0. iv. 410. v. to6. App. 58. ^schines. (Vide Oratores Attici.) -^schylus. i. 63. 372. ii. 250. 528. iii. 768. 363. V. 78. Agatharchides. (Vide Alhenseiis.) Agathemerus. (Vide Geographi Minores.) Alexander Polyhistor. (Vide Eu- sebius.) Ammianus Marcellinus, Valesii, 1681. ii. 20. 321. V. 365. App. 36. 46. Ammonias. (Vide Scriptores De- perditi.) Anacreon, Fischeri, Lipsise, 1793. ii. 225. Anatolius. (Vide Eusebiiis.) Andronicus. ( Vide Auliis Gelliiis.) Androsthenes. (Vide Athenaeus.) Antiphanes. (Vide Athenaeus.) Antiphon. (Vide Oratores Attici.) Antoninus, De Rebus, Suis, Gata- keri, Londini, 1697. iv. 165. 203. 411. App. 58. VOL. V. PAET II. Apollinarius. (Vide Epiphanius, and Scriptores Deperditi.) Apollonius, De Falsa Historia, V. 133- 255. Apollonius Rhodius. ii. 497. Appianus. iv. 6. 11. 454. v. 135. App. 17. 34. 44. 52. 56. Apuleius, Biponti, 1788. i. 452. iii. 273. App. 18. 35. Archelaus. (Vide Reliquiae Sa- crae.) Archilochus. (Vide Poette Mi- nores.) Aristides, Dindorfii, Lipsiae, 1829. iii. 270. iv. 332. 406. V. 284. V. 537- Aristo. (V^ide Eusebius.) Aristophanes, iv. 453. Aristoteles. (\Mde Athenaeus.) Analytica Priora. App. 23- Ethica, Cardwelli, Ox- onii, 1828. i. 435. ii. 53.432. 449. iv. 107. 164, 165. App. 66. Poetica, Tyrwhitti, Oxonii, 1794. i. 44. ii. 431. App. 57. Politica. Schneideri, Francofurti ad Viadrum, 1809. ii. 218. 5 28. iv. 334. App. 31. 41. 66, Rhetorica, Oxonii, 1820. i. 140. 283. 373. 432. iv. 27. 80. 214. 274. 458. App. 4. 5. 10. 12. 13. 15. 25. Ff 434 INDEX OF AUTHORS. Aniobius, Liigdiini Batavoruni, 165 I. ii. 180. iv. 221. Arriani Epictetus, Uptoni, Lon- didi, I 741. iii. 3 13. iv. 9. 10. V. 259. Ascensio Isaiae \'atis, Oxford, 1819. i. 389. V. 85. 86. App. 190. 191. Asconliis, inCii-eronisOralt.iv. 1 1. Athenagoras, Oxonii, 1682. iv. 219. 220. V, 285. App. 234. Atlienieiis, ArgetUorati, 1801. ii. 153. 221. 226. 323. iii. 315. 316. 420. 522. iv. 9. 334. 406. 458. V. 106. 134. 137. A|)p. 3'- 32. 33- 37- 3«- 4^- 49- 57- 58. Aiictor (Incertus) De C'onsumma- tione Mundi, (\'ide Hippoly- tus.) De Montibiis Sina et Sion. (Vide Cvprianus.) • De Pasclia. (\'ide Cy- prian 11 s) In Phtenomena Ptole- nisi. (\'ide Uranologicon.) AngusliiMis, ('ongregationis S. Mauri, Parisiis, 1679. i. 337. 340- 344- 3^^9- 374- 3^6. 388. 39 >• 394- ">• 63. V. 289. App. 164. Aldus Gellius, Liigd. Batav. 1666. i. 49. 50. ii. 196. 407, V. 135. 446. App. 39. 56. 58. 59. Ii. Barnabas. (Vide Patrcs Aposto- lici.) Basilius C'{csarca» Episcopiis, Pa- risiis, 161S. ii. 222. 226. 329. 352- 43°- '*■• 49- ^- 83. App. 46. 406. Bato. (\'idc Athenaiis.) C. CfCsar. i. 373. Cains. (N'ide Euscbins.) Calpnrnins. ii. 13. 218. 335. iii. 3^J'- CapiloliiHis. (Vide Historia3 Au- gnstce Scriptores.) Cassiodorus, Parisiis, 1588. v. 331. App. 211. Cato. (Vide Rei Rnsticae Scrip- tores.) Disticha, App. 55. Catullus. V. 449. App. 48. Cebes. iii. 579. 586. iv. 449. Celsns. (Vide Origenes.) Cerinthus. (\'ide Ensebins.) Chares. (\"ide AlhenaMis.) Cliarito, D'Orvillii, 1750. ii. 323. iii. 521. iv. 5. 27. Chronicon Pascliale, Dn Cangii, Parisiis, 1688. i. 294. 369. v. Chrysostomns, Parisiis, '1636. i, 221. 341. 369. 391. 394. ii. 86. 171. 218. 495. 519. iii. 360. iv. 303. 404. 408. 411. 412. 456. V. 131. 330. 363. 364. 365. 366. 449. 455. 505. Cicero, i. 373. ii. 6. 129. 322. 432- 433- iv. II. 334. App. 34. 45. 48. 55. 59. De Repnblica, Ileinricliii, Bonnaiad Rliennni, i828.iv. 4. Clandianns. ii. 222. 251. iii. 330. iv. 411. App. 65. Clemens Alexandrinus, Oxomi, T715. i. 50. 221.329. 373. ii. 222. 224. 226. 281. 335. 349. 352. 495. iii. 520. 521. 522. iv. 4c6. 41 1. App. 40. 45. 64. 73- 74- 75- i3<^- J'^H- '67. 235- Clemens Romanus. ii. 129. 306. 345. iv. 208. V. 442. App" 74. 75- Clenientin;e Iloniiliie. (Vide Pa- tres Apostolici.) Cleomcdes, Bakii, 1S20. App. 109. Colnmella. (\ide Rei Ruslicae Scriptores.) Conrilium Cartliaginiense. (\'ide Reli(|uiie Sacne.) Conon. (\'i(le Photius.) Constitutiones Aposlolicje. (\ ide Patres Apostolici.) INDEX OF AUTHORS. 435 Cornelius Nepos. iii. 420. iv. 12. App. 47. Ctesicles. (Vide Athenaeus.) Cyprianus, Oxonii, 1682. i. 340. 341.369. 381. ii. 351. iv. 123. 219. V. 313. 442. Cyrillus Contra Julianum, Lip- siae, 1696. i. 44.. 51. ii. 282. iii. 274. iv. 408. 411. V. 85. 365. App. 16. 19. 40. Hierosolymitanus, Ox- oniae, 1703. i. 341. 384. 394. V. 412. D. Demosthenes. (Vide Oratores At- tici.) Dio Cassius. (Vide Scriptores De- perditi.) i, 388. ii. 217. iii. 313. 408. 519. iv. 6. 455. 456. V. 107. 134. 257. 265. 266. 321. 331- 358. 359- App. 34. 35. 56. 58. 59. 207. 210. 21 1. 216, 2 17. 222. 226. Dio Chrysostomus, Reiskii, 1798. ii, 323. iii. 270. iv. 406.411. 448. App. II. 15. 19. 65. Diodorus Siculus, Biponti, 1793. i. 347. ii. 322. 492. iv. 333. 457. V. 6. 106. 134. 389. App. 16. 33.38.43.44.45.65. Diogenes F^aertius, Meibomii, 1692. iv. 278. 333. Dionysius, Alexandrise Episcopus. (Vide Eusebiiis.) — ^ Corinthi Episcopus. (Vide Eusebius.) Halicarnass. Reiskii, 1774. ii. 6. 322. iii. 270. 314. 499. Epitome, Maii^ Me- diolani, 1816. ii. 408. iii. 315. Periegetes. (Vide. Ge- ographi Minores.) Dioscorides. iii. 209. Dorotheus. (Vide Chronicon Pa- schale.) E. Ecclesia Viennensis et Lugdu- nensis. (Vide Eusebius.) Eckhel, Doctrina Nunini. \'tt. 1792. iv. 12. Ephorus. (Vide Athenteus.) Ephraemus, Antiochenus. (Vide Photius.) Caesares. (Vide Scri- ptores Deperditi.) Epicharmus. (Vide Phornutus.) Epicrates. (Vide Athenaeus.) Epictetus. ii. 121. iii. 207. 270. 330. iv. 88. Epiphanius, Petavii, 1622. i. 334. m- ''• 521- iv. 26. 271. 301. 303. V. 288. 312. 332. App. loo. 1 1 1. 136. Eupolemus. (Vide Eusebius.) Euripides, i. 372. 373. ii. 434. 528. iii. 149. 156. 168. 522. Eusebius. (Vide Scriptores De- perditi.) Clironicon, Aucheri, Venetiis, 1818. v. 258. 262. 265. 266. 312. 358. App. 207. 211. 219. 222. 226. 237. Demonstratio Evange- lica, Parisiis, 1628. iii. 273. V. 363- Ecclesiastica Historia, Valesii, 1659. i. 273 — 276. 288. 309. 310. 313.314- 340- 378. ii. 345. 559. iii. 277. 278. V. 285. 287. 288. 312. 332- 358. 363- 389- 454- App. 69, 70. 71. 164. 219. Praeparatio Evangelica, Parisiis, 1628. iii. 278. iv. 25.26. ■ Vita Constantini, v. 412. Eustathius. (Vide Dionysius Pe- riegetes.) F. Fenestella. (Vide Plinius, Natu- ralis Historia.) Florus, Varr. 1702. ii. 332.iv. i r. Fronto, Maii, 18 15. v. 537 App. 19. G. Galenus, Charterii, 1679. App. 168. Ff 2 436 INDEX OF AUTHORS. Gallicanns. (Vide Hisloriis Au- gust* Scriptures.) Geininus. (Vide Uranologicon.) Geographi ]Minores,Oxonia;, 1698. ii. 221. App. 31. 109. Geoponica, Xeedhanii, 1704. ii. 77. iii. 361. 362. iv. 328. V. 4. Gre.suell's Dissertations, Oxford, 1830. i. 64. 193. 353. 355 358. ii. 8. 172. 253. 526 547. iii. 277, 287. 337. 373 384. 391. 442. 472. 535. iv 176, 177. 239. 263. 271. 272 296. 298. 311. 313. 314. 316 3 '7- .^;5- 413- 483- 484- V' 65.66. 78. 90. 166. 189. 235 236. 237. 240, 242. 249. 250 251. 253. 256. 259. 261. 262 263. 267. 268. 274. 276. 279 282. 302. 307. 327. 330. 335 33^^- 337- 341- 357- 381- 386 387. 388. 389. 391. 392 App. 78. 112. 144. 150. 228 249. 251. 275. 318. 386 395- • Supplementary Disser- tations, Oxford, 1834. iv. 239 271. 272. 329. V. 8. 106 235- 236. 237. 241. 242. 249 250. 251. 253. 259. 261. 262 270. 274. 276. 277. 279. 282 283. 285.302. 313. 330. 335 337- 341- 342. 357- 359-389 391.392. 412. App. 112. 144 150. 159. 168. 169. 170. J93 203. 210. 214. 215. 219, 220 233- 275- 385- 386. 400. II. Harnier's Observations, London, 1797. i. 29. ii. 15. 85. 86 156. 217. 254. iii. 106. 138 209. 360. 362. 408. 425.430 431- 450- 5'7- 521- 522.526 iv. 210. 330. 331. V. 4. 7. 8 131- 136. 453- 467- Harpocralion. iv. 333. 459. App. 49. Hecato. (\'ide Cicero.) Hegesi))|)us. (\"ide Eusebiiis.) Heliodorus, .Ethiopica, IViponti, 1792. ii. 20. 224. iii. 270. Heracleon. (\'ide Origenes.) Hernias. (Vide Patres Aposto- lici.) Herujes Trismegistus. (Aide A- ptdeius and Lactantius ) Herodianiis. App. 52. 226. Herodotus, ii. 14. 19. 20. 155. 251. 281. 323-392. 395-528. iii. 519. iv. 25. V. 106. 255. App. 14. 31. Hesiodus. i. 441. ii. 433. iii. 69. 168. iv. 9. 278. 328. V. 261. A|)p. 8. 9. Hesychius, iv. 332. Hieronymus, Congregationis S. Mauri, Parisiis, 1693. i. 92. 335- 336- 339- 340- 369- 384- 388. 391. 394. 395. 418. 420. 423. 441. 444. ii. 14. 63. 79. 159, 169. 187. 217. 225. 254. 348. 352. 519- '"• 47- >\'- 7- 25. 26. 39. 48. 66. 301. 317. 412. 458. V. 7. 85. 257. 270. 3 '2. 3 '3- 330- 33'- 359- 360. 363- 364- 448. 504- App- 69. 135. 164. 167. Hilarius, (Fictaviensis,) Parisiis, 1605. i. 341. 369. App. 164. Hip])arcluis. ( \ ide Uranologicon.) Hippolytus. {Vide I'hotiiis.) Fa- bricii, Hainbin-gi, 1716.!. 322. 369; 374- 37<'^ 383- 394- Historiie Augustje Scriptores, Ca- sauboni el \'arr. 1661. ii. 227. 322. 323. iv. 457. Ap]). 37. 53. 61. 77. 211. 212. 215. 216. 217. 219. 220. 222. Honierus. iii. 517. iv. 2 1 o. Horalius. ii. 6. 222. 225. 227. 233- 329- '•'- 21 I. 313- 408. 521. iv. 4. ID. 75. 410. 453. 455- \- '33- J 34' '35- App. 15. 18. 36. 40. 48. 49. 51. 53. 62.6: 1. Ignatius. (\'i(le P.itres Aposto- lici.) INDEX OF AUTHORS. 437 Isaeiis. (Vide Oratores Attici.) Isidorus Characenus. (Vide Athe- naeiis ) Isocrates. (Vide Oratores Attici.) Irenaeus, Grabii, i 702. i. 46. 289. 291- 340- 380. 381. 394. iv. 66. V. 287. 288. 44T. App. 100. 1 01. 164. 400. 403. J. Josephus, Oberthuri, 1782. i. 198. ii. 155. 187. 217. 323. 364. 393- 394- 524- 543- 546- 547. iii. 59. 86. 103. 104. 117. 270. 278. 415. 475. 503. iv. 22. 25. 267. 296. 297. 298. 299. 300. 301. 345.411. 514. V- 71- 72. 135- 136- 237. 238. 239. 242. 243. 244. 246. 252. 257. 259. 261. 262. 263. 264. 266, 269. 281. 302. 303. 304. 321. 322. 323. 324. 327. 328. 333- 337- 343- 344- 345- 347- 354- 355 356. 357- 359- 361. 362. 384. 385-386. 387.388. 389. 392. 419. 446. App. 15. 39- 237- 359.398- 399- Josippus Gorionides. v. 356. Judas. (Vide Eiisebius and Hie- ronymiis.) Julianus. (Vide Cyrillus.) Julius Pollux, Chronicon Anony- mum, Bianconi, Bononiae, 1 779. App. 164. Justinus Historicus, Argentorati, 1802. App. 1 7. ■ Martyr, Thirlbii, 1722. i. 154. 284. 285. 286. 323. 369.377. ii. 195.414.518. iii. 27- 275. 475. 476. iv. 313. 402. V. 85. 284. 285. 287. 288. 311. 312 313. 363 441. 572. App. 402. Coliortatio ad Grsecos, Oxonii, 1703. App. 232. Juvenalis. i. 432. ii. 42. 226. 322. 428. 429. iii. 56. 314. 519. 521. iv. 10. II. 411. 455. App. 36. 40. 48. 51. 53. 54. 61. 62. 65. L. Lactantius, Sparkii, 1684. i. 287- 333- 334- 34'- 369- 374- 384. 388. 393. 394. 452. 460. ii. 322. 430. 433. 441. 448. 470. 482. iii. 275. iv. 165. V. 505. App. 63. 176. 178. 183. 186. 233. 234. 235. 402. Lampridius. (Vide Historios Au- gustae Scriptores.) Laurence, Dr. (Vide Ascensio IsaiiE Vatis, Liber Esdrse, and Liber Enoch ) Laurentius, De Mensibus, Lipsi.e, 1827. iii. 313. Liber Enoch, Oxford, 1833. i. 381. ii.495. App. 71- 73-401- Liber Esdr* Secundus, Oxford, 1 819. App. 14. 401. Livius. iii. 314. 315. iv. 454. App. 15.33- Lucanus. ii. 222. Lucianus. Hemsterhusii, 1743. i. 49. ii. 233. 495. iii. 274. 313. 408. iv. 4. 5. 332. 450. 458, V. 133. 284. App. 169. Lucretius, iii. 523. Lycurgus. (Vide Oratores Attici.) Lysias. (Vide Athenseus and Ora- tores Attici.) M. Macrobius. i. 373. ii. 227. iii. 3i3-3T4-3i5-App. 50. 54. 56. Maimonides, De Jurejurando, Dithmari, Lugd. Bat. 1706. ii. 157. De Ratione Inter- calandi De Veili, Londini, 1 683. iii. 59. Marmor Ancyranum. (Vide Ta- citus.) Maximus Tyrius, Londini, 1740. ii. 6. 246. 247. 423 — 428, 562. 573. iii. 521. iv. 459. App. 10. ) 8. Menander. (Vide Athengeus.) Methodius. (Vide Photius.) Mimnermus. (Vide Poetse Mi- nores.) Kf3 438 INDEX OF AUTHORS. IVIiniicius Felix, Heraldi, Farisiis, 1613. V. 285. N. Nearchiis. (Vide Slrabo.) Ne|)os. (\'ide Eusebius.) NicL'phorus. (\'ide Svncelliis.) O. ()lym|>iod()rus. (\'ide Photiiis.) Oppianus. ii. 250. 254. 255. iv. 411. Oratores Attici, Oxonii 1822. iii.270.499. iv. 51. 332. 333. 410. 458. 459. V. 135. App. 32. 38. 42. 49. 58. (>riu;ene>, Dclarui, 1733. (Vide also Pholius.) i. 51.315. 329 330. 33 >• 359- 369- 375- 37^ 379.460 11. 17T. 223. 330.420 519. 521. iii. 269. 273. 522 iv. 220. V. 85. 86. 285 312. 313, 448. App. 43. 73 136. 137. 164. 165. 166. 167 168. 169. 1 70. 405. Orosius. V. 263. Ovidius. ii. 6. 20. 78. 86. 222. 225. 434. iii. 314. 520. 521. iv. 310. 454. V. 134.454.537. App. 48. 49. 53. 57. 62. 63. 65. 367. P. Pantienus. (Vide Reliquite Sa- crae.) Papias. (Vide Eii.sel)ius and Ire- DiCllS.) Patres Apostolici, Cotelerii, i. 29. 216. 217. 221. 340. 344. 345. 377- 379- 380. 384. ii. 64. 171. 197. 330.345. 351. 367. 495. iv. 48. App. 75. 76. 136. 164. 235. 400. Pausanias. iii. 520. App. 211. Persius. ii, 232. iii. 521. iv. 410. 457. App. 48. Plialaris, Cironingite, 1777. iv. 21. 22. Philo Jiidiciis, Mangeii, 1 742. i. 363 — 365. ii. 210. 226. 251. 573. iii. 56. 278. 361.407. iv. 6. 150. 4ro. V. 53. 218. 234. 235- 236. 237. 240. 242. 304. 305. 446. App. 19. 45. 58. Philochorus. (\'ide Athena?us.) Piiilostratus, Morellii, 1508. ii. 218. 219. 221. 222. iv. 332. 411. V. 258. 265. 266. App. 32.47- 52. Phlegon. V. 258. 261, Phocvlides. (V'ide Poetae iNIi- nores.) Phormitiis. ii. 233. iii. 150. Pliotiiis, Codex, Jiekkeri, 1824. '• 33.2- 338-. 343- 348. 369- 439. ii. 227. iv. 12. A\)\). 15. Piiidarus. ii. 329. 434. iv. 406. Plinii Epistolae, i5chaeferi,'et Varr. Lipsiae, 1805. ii. 49. 407. iii. 313. iv. 411. 456. v. 13. 277. 283. App. 44. 48. 49. 53. 60. 62. 64. 209. Naturalis Historia, Fraiizii, 1778. ii. 6. 19. 20. 77. 155 161. 221. 224. 225. 226. 227 254. iii. 209. 360. 361. 362 409. 420. 519. 520. 521. iv 457- ^■- 255. 257. 265. 266 362. App. 36. 38. 39. 50. 55 59.62.137. Pliitarchiis, Reiskii, 1774. i. 50 373. ii. 78. 161. 196. 281. iii 313- 3M- 409- 420. iv. 6. I 1 88. 332. 333- 334- 407- 4ii 450- 451- 453- 456- 459- 469 V. 105. 107. 134. 135. App 15. 16. 17.34.38. 40.42 44 45. 48. 49. 50. 51. 57. 58 59. 61. 64. 21c. 237. Poet;e Minores Grseci, Oxonii, 1814. ii. 434. iii. 168. 169. 499. iv. 9. 210. App. 9. 10. 57-. Polybius. (Vide Athenaeiis.) ii. 495. 496. iv. 333. 334. App. 33- 43- Poivcarpns. (Vide Patres Aposlo- ii"ci.) Poiphyriu.s, DeN'vmphannnanlro, Cantabrigiie, 1710. iii. 313. Po.siduniiis. (Vide Slrabo.) INDEX OF AUTHORS. 439 Presbyter. (Vide Irenseus.) Procopius. (Vide Photius ) Propertius. ii. 222. 225. iii. 521. App. 49. Prudentiiis, Parmse, 1788. v. 364. App. 405. Ptolemaeus. (Vide Uranologicon.) ' Mathematica Compo- sitio, App. 109. Pythagoras. Aiirea Carmina, iii. '29. Q. Qiiinctiiianus, Spalding!,' 1798. ii. 408. iv. 409. 411. App. 4. 8. 11. 13. 15. 50. R. Recognitiones Cleraentis. (Vide Patres Apostolici.) Reliquige Sacrse, Roulhii, 1814. i- 48. 333- 343- 383- '«• 367- 518. iv, 41 1. App. 76. III. S. Scholiastes. (Vide Aristophanes, HoratiiiSj Juvenalis.) Scriptores Deperditi, Maii, 1825. J- 336. 369- 481- V. 330. 331. 358. 362. 363. App. 15. 17. _ Scriptores Rei Rusticee, Biponti, 1787. ii, 20, iii. 510. iv, 4. 5, 8. 10. 1 1, App. 59. Seneca Philosophus, Riihkopfii, 1797. ii. 225. 226. 322. 422. iii. 313. 409. 521. iv. 10. 12. 408. 411, 457. V. 134. 253. 257- 258. 259. 265. 266, App. 12. 34. 37, 39. 45. 48. 49, 52- 53- 54- 55- 59- 63- 64.65. Seneca Rhetor, Controversiie, Schultingii, Amstelodami, 1672. App. 64. Servius, ii, 20. iii, 313, 314. v. 446. App. 20. 53.57._ Sibyllina Oracula, Gallsei, 1689. V. 261. 411. App. 317. 402. Simonides. Vide Poetse Minores. Solinus, Biponti, 1794. ii. 20. 221. 222. 227. iii. 520. V. 362. Sophocles, i. 373. ii. 323, 364. 528. Spicilegiiim, Grabii, 1698. i. 381. Statins, ii. 222. iii. 521. App. 52. 65. Stephanus Gobarus. (Vide Pho- tius.) Byzantiniis, De Urbi- bus. App. 33. Strabo. (Vide Josephus.) Siebenkeesii,i796, ii,i9 20. 155. 221. V. 242. 256 257- App. 33. 34. 43. 109 236.^ Suetonius, Pitisci, 1690. i. 388 ii. 220. 226. 227. 322. 323 iii. 408. 409. iv. 4, II. 411 449. 450. V. 135. 262. 263 265. 266. 283. 384. App. 34 35- 36- 39- 48. 50-56. 60.63 207. 210, 211. Suidas, i. 346. 347. iii. 149 270. iv. 25. 450. 453. V. 53, App. 11.49. 56. 58. Sulpicius Severus. i. 166, 221 331- 335- 369- 384- 388. 410 481. Synceilus, Dindorfii, Bonnse, 1829. App. 136, 164. T. Tacitus, Oberlini, i8oi. i. 388 ii. 220. 225. iii. 56. iv. 333 334. 408. 448. 454. V, 240 253- 257. 258. 262. 263. 265 266. 267. 268. 277. 283.341 362. 384. App. 34. 35, 37 43-48. 56- 60. 64. Tatiani Oratio ad Graecos, Ox- onii, 1700. V. 285, Tertullianus, Semleri, 1770, i. 48. 305- 307- 369- 375- 381. 393. 460, ii, 221. 226. 227. 329. 352, 408. 558. iii. 567. iv. 219. 440. V. 285. 363. 440. App. 59. 102. 135. 164, 403.^ 404, _ Theocritus, iii. 169. 209. iv. 9. 253- V. 4- 448. Theodoretus, Hals Magdeburgi- cse, 1768. i. 309. 369. 386, 387- 392. 394- 4^8. ii. 153. F f 4 440 INDEX OF AUTHORS. 187. iv. 25. 26. 49. V. 33 1. 363. Ap|). 71. The«)(!oliis. (\'i(le Clemens Ale.v- anclrimis.) Theogiiis. (\'ide Poetie Min- oies.) Theojjliilus,adAiilolycum,Wolfii, 1724. ii. 171.434. V. 285. Ai)|). 219. 232. 235. 402. Theoplirustus, Ileinsii, 1593. ii. 14. 19. 78. 153. 154. 155. 161. 221. iii. 209. 361. iv. 9. Ethici Characteres, (jlasgdie, 1743. iv. 458. Tlieopliylactiis, Venetiis, 1794. i. 340. 369. 387. iv. 113. 161. 271. V. 98. 312. 363. 411. _ App. 136. 164. 'J'heopompus. (Vide Athenteiis.) Tliiuydides. ii. 58. 184. 434. '"«• 363- iv. 332- 333- V. 255. 261. Ap|). 32. 42. Tibulliis. ii, 221. 222. 225. iii. ^ .314- 520. App. 51. 62. Tiiiifceus. (\'ide Atlienaeus.) Tiinocles. (\'i(le Atlienaeus.) Tyrrheniis Ilisloricus. (\'ide Siiidas.) u. Uranologicon, Petavii, 1630. App. 109. III. Valerius Maximiis, Torrenii et \'arr. Leidie, 1726. ii. 227. 322. iii. 330. iv. 411. V. 134. ^ ^^PP- 35; 56. Varro. (\'ide Scriptores Rei Ru- slicae.) Fragmenta, Biponti, 1788. App. I 2. \'elleius Patercukis. iv. 10. Victorinus. (\'ide Reliquiae Sa- cne.) Virgilius. i. 441. ii. 6. 78. 225. iii. 361. 599. iv. 1C5. 310. V. 78. App. 53. 57. Vitruvius, De ArchitecUira, Ar- gentorati, 1S07. App. 210. Vopiscus. (\'ide Ilist.oriie Au- gustae Scriptores.) X. Xenocrates. (Vide Hieronyauis.) Xenophon. ii. 6. 14. 153. 153. 528. iii. 314. 408. 579. iv. 8. 9. 10. 51. 332. 333. 459. v. 131. 134. App. 5. 16. 32. 38. 41. 42.45. 49. Xiphilinus. (\'ide Dio Cassius.) Z. Zonaras, Du Cangii 16S6. i. 50. 388. ii.322. V. 107. 243. 258. 330. 366. 384. INDEX OF TEXTS CITED OR REFERRED TO FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT. Vide also iv. 86. 87. App. 291. 295. 296. 310. 311. GENESIS, vi. 3 vol. ii. p. 39 5 "-40 xiii. 18 V.359 xiv. 4 iv- 8 13 ^-359 XV. 2 iv. 8, 9 15 App. 280 xviii. I V. 359 6 ii. 186 7 "i- 522 xix. 17 iv. 208 xxii. I iii. 16 xxiv V. 55 2 iv. 8 10 ib. 53 '^•133 XXV. 8 App. 280 17 ib. xxvi. 12 ii. 79 xxvii. 9 iii. 526 xxviii. 12 i. 232 16. 17 iii. 526 22 iv. 272 xxix. 27 V. 107 xxxi. 19. 34- 35 ^- 54 30-32 .• ib- 29 ib. 40 Jv. 340 xxxii. 17 ii. 492 XXXV. 2.4... V. 54 8 V. 8 29 App. 280 xxxvii. 35 App. 292. 371 GENESIS. xxxviii.26 iv. 263 xxxix. 4 iv. 8 xli. 42 iii. 519 xlii. 38 App. 371 xliii. 16 iv. 8 xlv. 22 V. 133 xlix. 24 ii. 573 25 App. 312 29. 33 App. 280 EXODUS. iii. I ii. 494 5 V. 319 6 App. 353 vi. 7 V. 56 vii. I V. 78 viii. 26 v- 55 ix. 20 ii. 492 xi. 5 iv. 209 xii. 12 V. 55 XV. 7 ii. 86 xvi. 16. 22 iv. 26 36 iv. 26 xix. 1,10.11.15.16 ..iv. 378 5.6 V.56 8 ib. 18 V. 25(; xxii. 9 ii- 15 31 iv. 13^ xxiii. 10. 11 iv. i4( 20. 25, 26 V. 5-/ 2!;. 26 V. 6c 442 INDEX OF TEXTS. EXODUS. DEUTERONOMY. xxiv. 3. 7. 8 V. 56 iii. 19 ii. 492 xxix. 45.46 -v. 57 iv. 7.20.23.31.34 V. 57 XXX. 13 iv. 448 25 — 3 1 V. 80 xxxii. I. 4. 8 ^' ,S.S V. 2. 3 ^'- 56 32 iii 3''3 vi. 5 iii. 1 1 xxxiii. 16 ^'^ 57 8 iv. 303 xl. I. 17 iv- 378 vii. 6.9 V. 57 I 2 — 16 V. 60 LEVITR rs. viii. 4 iii. 247 ii. 11 ii. 196 x. 15 v- 57 xvii. 7 V- 55 xi- 6 '^PP- 3°^ xviii. 3 ib. 18 'v. 303 5 '}^- 402 xiv. 2 ■ V, 57 xix. 9. 10 iv. 149 2S. 29 iv. 149 13 iv. 340 XV. 7 — 1 I. 1 2 — 14. .'. iv. 130 18 iii. II II ib. xxiii. 22 iv. 149 xviii. 13. 17 — 21 v. 64 XXV. 3.6. IT. 12 ib. xxi. 13 v. 446 35—37 iv- 15-^ 17 iii- J I 7- 503 x.wi V. 80. 340. xxii. 12 iv. 303 4 — 13 v. 57. 60 xxiii. 24. 23 iv. 149 42.44.45 V- 349 xxiv. 10 — 18 iv. 150 15 iv. 340 NUMnER."^. 19—22 iv. 149 >• 1 1^-378 x.wi. 5 V. 50 vi. 23 — 26 iv. 319 17. 18 ^•57 ix. I — 5 iv. 378 I xxvii. 9. 10 ib. X. 11.13 ib' i 26 iv. 402 xii. 16 ib. 27 iv. 316 xiii ib. xxviii v. 80. 340 XV. 27—30 iv. 403 5—14 "^■•57- ^'O 38-39 iv. 303 xxix. 5 iii. 247 xvi. 22 App. 279 9— '3 V. 57 29 — 33 • • App. 299. 300 14. 15 v. 61 XX. 24. 26 M^P- 280 XXX. I — 19 V. 80 xxiv. 17 V. 508 I 2. 13 App. 326 xxvii. 13 Apj). 280 xxxi. 16 App. 280 i(> App. 279 xxxii. 8 iv. 390 xxviii. 16. 17 ii. 495 22 ^PP- 33' xxxi. 2 ■'^PP- 280 50 \pp. 280 xxxii. 16 ii. 4(^2 xxxiv. 10 . v. 65 24 — -^6 ib. 17 V. 55 .lO.siiiA. xxxiw. 4 ib. V. 15 ^.319 xxxiv. (> App. 1 10 vii. 21 V. 133 xiii. 30 \pp. 184 DEUTERONO.MV. xiv. 6—10 iv- 378 i. 6 — 4^ iv. 378 xxii. S v. 133 INDEX OF TEXTS. 443 VI. viii. ix. xiv. XV. xvii. V. 54 . ib. V. 55 V. 57 II. iii. ix. X. xi. xii. xiii. xiv. XV. xix. xxii. XXV. xxviii JOSHUA. 2 14-^5 14 22—25 JUDGES. 10 App. 280 4 •• • • V. 5. 66 V. 66 4 V. 256 16 ii. 492 8 V. 66 17 V. 8 7 — 20 . . iii. 367. App. 14 46. 47-49 V. 8 12 V. 107. 133 I iii. 526 10 iv. 332. V. 133 I SAMUEL. 27—36 I 20. 21 V. 66 V. 65 ib. 13 111.407 3-5-6— 13-8 15 20- 8 15 22 -25 V.76. ib. , . V. 82 . . V. 76 V. 256 iv. 294 V. vii. 27. 28 ii. 281 18 — 24 V. 76 5 V. 71 I App. 306 •3 • App. ib. 6 V. 71 8—19... App. 299. 304 15 V. 71 19 App. 285 24 , iii. 522 24 . , App. 286 2 SAMUEL. 2 ii- 574 2 V. 71 7 ; ii-574 12 ...... i.190. App. 281 T— 7 App. 14 23 App. 284 2 SAIMUEL. xviii. 18 V. 8 xxi App. 286 xxii. 6 App. 292 8 V. 256 xxiv. II — 14 V. 71 17 "-574 1 KINGS. V. 7 1 25 iii. 407. V. 116 5 7-71 22 iv. 22 25 "1-367 II iv. 22 12. 13 v. 418 29 V. 71 29 — 31 ii. 281 V. vi. xi. I 1 1 1 1 20 26 -i» -22 -32 xxi. xxii. V. 71 "f-n V. 71 ib. ib. 2 V. 77 II iv. 134 25 "^'^ 73 I — 7. 12 V. 72 4 iv. 134 7 V. 84 33 V. 72 I ib. 4. 13. 22 V. 76 17—24 App. 391 21. 22 App. 271 3 iv- 8 4. 13. 22 V. 84 4-13 V. 72 19 — 40 ib. 2. 10. 14 V. 84 10. 14 V. 76 II V. 256 16 V. 73. 77 19 iii- 415- V. n 19 — 22 V. 73 13 — 22 V. 72 28.35.41 ib. 35 "^-n 23. 24 IV. 134 8 V. 72 444 INDEX OF TEXTS. 1 KINGS. 2 KINGS. xxii. J I ii. 8i xxii. 14 ^'•77 '7 ••• -195 xxiii. 3 v. 58 xxiv. 4 V. 84 2 KINGS. i. 3. sqq V. 72 1 CIIUON. »'• 3- 5- 7 "^•73-77 •>:• 29 v. 71 5 ''-495 xi. 2 i'- 574 9— '5 ^'-73 x^ii- » ^-7' 13-14 V. 77 , 6 ii. 574 15. i 6 V. 73. 77 II A])|). 280 I 8. 23. 25 V. 77 xxi. 9 — 13 ^'-7^ iv. 1-38 V. 73. 77 17 ii. 574 18—37 App. 391 xxix. 29 V. 71 ^5 V. 77 V. 22 V. 77. 133 ■-' ( IIKON • vi, I ■^■•73-77 i'- 2. 18 iv. 22 2.4 V. 77 10 ib. vii. I. 16. 18 ii. 187 15 ib, I iv. 355 vi. 16 i. 190 8 V. 133 vii. 19 — 22 V. 418 viii. 25 i. 190 ix. 24 ^'^ '33 ix. 1—4 V. 73. 77 29 V. 71 7 V. 84 xi. 2 V. 72 10-3''^ iv. 134 xii. 5- 7- >5 '•'• 17 V. 8 15 v. 7 1 X. 22 V. 136 xiii. 22 ib. xi. 17 V- 57 XV. I — 8 v. 72 xii. 22 v. 72 12 V. 58 28 V. 55 xvi. 7 V. 72 xiii. 14-25 V. 73 I 10 y. S4 21 App. 391 14 ''-77 23 V. 340 xviii. 7 ./ • 7 2 xiv. 2 — 4 V. 7 1 ! 16 ii. 495 9 -^VP- '4 "i^- 2 V. 72 XV. 5 v. 256 XX. 14 \h. xvii. 6 — 41 iii. 475 1 20. 37 ib. 9 iv. 134 I , 34 '•>• 13 v. 79. 82 xxi. 1 2 — 15 V. 72. 84 14. 15 V. 83 xxiii. 10 — 18 ^-79 2 1 — 41 iv. 372 16 '^"•57 xviii. 8 iv. 134. V. 8 xxiv. 20 — 22 . . ii. 520. v. 73. 84 >o ^'- "'^ '9 *'• 73- 79 31 . iii. 368 XXV. 7.15 V. 73 xix. 2 V. 74 xwi. 5 ^'74 XX. I 2 — 19 V. 4 iS 910 V. 8 xxi. 10 V. 74 19. 20 V. 256 1 6 V. 84 I 22 V. 74 xxii. •;. 14 V. 74 wviii. 9 . . . . il). INDEX OF TEXTS. 445 2 CHRON. xxix. 25 V. 71 29 XXX. 18 ib. 19 IV. 294 xxxii. 20. 32 V. 74 28 ii. 493 xxxiv. 18 V. 63 22 V. 74. -]•]. 133 28 ; . App. 280 31 ^'-58 XXXV. 25 v- 74 xxxvi. 15 V- 79 16 V. 83. 84 21 V. 74 EZRA. iv. 2. 9. 10 iv. 372 6 ib. V; I ii. 520. V. 75. vi. 6 iv. 372 14 V. 75 vii. I. 7. 8 ib. 22 iv. 2 1 NEHEMIAH. I V. 75 8. 9 v. So I ib. 10. 19 iv. 372 I. 1 1 v. 8 25. 27 ib. I. 2. 7 iv. 372 3 ^- 5 14 V. 75 V. vi. vui. ix. I ... 7. 14. 10 . . . 14 .. . 2.9 . 1-38 20 . . 1—28 29 .. . 26. 36 38. 39 111, 3/^ • V. 75 . ib. ib. ib. • V-. 58 83.84 . V. 58 . ib. ■ V. 75 . V. 8 ESTHER. 9 "-393 II ib. JOB. V- 5 "-13 X. 21.22 App. 293 xi; 7- 8. 9 App. 313 xii. 10 App. 279 xvi. 22 App. 203 xix. 25 — 27 .... i. 188. 438 xxvi. 5 Aj)p. 297 5-6 App. 293 xxvii. 16 V- J 33 xxviii. 14 App. 311 XXX. 23 App. 292 xxxiv. 14 App. 280 xxxviii. 7 V. 408 17 App. 292 xxxix. 30 iv. 21 2 PSAL3IS. xvi App. 8.9. 10 App. 342. 9 Ai)p. xix iv. xxii. 16. 20 iv. 20. 21 Ai)p. ii. XXllI. xxiv. xxvi. xxxi. xxxiv, xxxvi. xl. 3—5 6 .. App. -22 xlvi. xlix. II. Iv. lix. Ixiii. Ixv. Ixviii. 5—10 1- 9 i- 2 App. 6 iv. iii. 9- H- 15 V. 8. 9 i. 19 App. 281. 7—^5 iv- 23 16. 17 15 App. 18 iv. 6. 14 iv. 9 App. 9—13 '• Ixix. 15 App. App. Z^- l"^ IV. 327 379 352 294 134 402 274 295 ib. 277 295 250 170 339 294 604 449 242 335 294 ib. ib. 302 317 134 298 251 256 321 339 294 446 INDEX OF TEXTS. PSALMS. 20 A|)|). 339 2—7 »• 251 1 2 — 14 ••252 16 ib. ' ''-573 18 V. 256 20 ii. 494 >;>:viii.52 >>• 495 7' ''-574 13 ii- 573 I ii. 8-15 iv. 13 Jxxi. Ixxii Ixxiv, Ixxvii Ixxix Ixxx. 495 560 J' V- 5 lxxxv.9 — 1 1 1. 241 Ixxxvi. 13 '^VP- 33 " lxxxviii.3— 6 App. 339 ^J App. 331 190 XCVII c. ci. civ. cvi. cvii. 573 469 573 330 291 190 ib. Ixxxix. 19 — 36 i. .\(:v. 7 ii. 7 i- 3 i'- iv. 295 29 App. 279 17 App. 302 34-35 >• 236 cxviii. 22. 23 V- 99 26 i. 173 cxix. 164 iv. 317 cxxiii. 2 ii. cxxxi. I. 2 ii. cxxxii. II. 12 i. 17. 18 cxxxix. 7 — 10 App. 314 cxli. 2 iv. 318 cxliv. 13 ii. 77 15 '11-589 cxlix. 5 — 9 i. 221 PROVERB.s. ix. I — 5 .... iii. 407. V. 117 >8 App. 331 XV. 8 iv. 294 'I App. 293 24 App. 31a xxi. 27 iv. 294 xxiv. 30. 31 \ . 4 XXV. 3 App. 314 XXV. xxxi. 111. ix. xi. xii. I. ii. iv. vii. viii. IV. V. VI. vii. XIII. xiv. PROVERBS. 21.22 '5 "• 439 . iv. 9 ECCLESIASTES. 21 App. 366. 3rj9 4 '\- 134 3 V. 442 7 App. 279.369 CANTICLES. 6 . 15 4 • 4 • 10 1 1 12 V. 9 V. 5 V. 8 ib. ...... ib. ... V. 9. 12 V. 12 is.\i.\n. 1 1 4 ■ • • 15.. . 5-6 . I. 2. 5 1—7 6 .. . 17 IV • 74 V- 7 295 . i. 241 . . V. 8 . i. 242 - 4- 40 iv. 361 ■ ii- J3 14 App. 294 406 24 ii. 86 I ib. II App. 3 1 1 19 'i- 13 23 V. 12 23—25 ii- 13 ^>-7 i- 195 iS ii. 13 '7 6—8 i 9- '3 i- 241 I O . I ^ V 8.. .". iv 9 App. 294. 29S 12. 13 V. 408 28.. ." V. 74 5 i- 195 8 — I I . . iv. 361 ib. 236 441 407 362 INDEX OF TEXTS. 447 ISAIAH. xix. 2 V. 230 XX. I V. 74 2 — 4 ii. 280 xxi. 5 V. 8 xxii. 21.22 '-195 22 ii. 365 xxiv. 23 i. 237. V. 407 XXV. 6. 8 i. 242 xxvi. 19 i. 188 xxvii. 2. 3 iv. 361 xxviii. 25 ii- 77 xxix. 6 V. 256 XXX. 19 i. 243 26 i. 237. V. 407 xxxii. 14. 15 i. 234 14 V. 8 15—19 i-..243 xxxiii. II ii. 86 12 ii. 13 20 — 22 i. 243 .4 V. 407. 408 1-2 i. 234 I V. 74 6. 7 i- 235 9 i- 236 ,16 iii. 368 , 1—8 V. 418 3—5- 9 i- 154 II ii- 335- 574 18-19 i- 235 19. 20 ib. 23-24 iv. 395 23 App. 298. 312 12 V. 408 2 iv. 210 9. 10 i. 244 3 V. 407 3 i- 235 4 i- 237 6 V. 407 II i. 244 13-14 i. 237 13-17 i. 244 3 i- 195 13 i. 236 10. 1 1 iv. 134 1-2 App.334 9 App. 314 XXXIV, XXXV. XXX VI, xxxix. xl. xli. xliii. xliv. xlv. xlvii. xlix. 1. 11. liv. Iv. Ivi. Ivii. ISAIAH. Ivii. 16 App. 279 Iviii. 2 — 14 iv. 295 lix. 20. 21 i. 237 Ix. 18 i. 241 19. 20. 21 . . . i. 237. 238 Ixii. 8. 9 i. 244 Ixiii. II ii- 574 Ixv. 5 iv. 268 17—25 i- 244 25 i- 236 Ixvi. 3 iv. 295 JEREflllAH. i. 1 V. 69 2. 3 - V. 74 ii. 21 iv. 361 iii. 6 V. 74 15 i'-574 15—19 i- 238 IV. 3 ii- 13 vi, 20 iv. 295 26 V. 83 vii. 21 — 23 iv. 294 25 V. 79 X-. 21 ii. 574 xi. I — 10 V. 58 16 iv. 362 xii. 10 ii. 574. iv. 362 13 ii- 13 xiii. I — 1 1 ii, 280 xiv. I — 6 V. 261 12 iv. 295 XV. 2 V. 351 8 iv. 134 xvii. II iii. 148 xviii. 2 — 6 ii. 281 xix ib. 4 V. 84 xxi. I V. 74 xxii. 1 1. 24. 28 ib. 22 ii.574 29. 30 i. 190 xxiii. I — 4 ii. 574 3—6 i. 245 5 .i- 195 xxiv ii. 281 XXV. I — 3 V. 74 4 V. 79. 83 448 INDEX OF TEXTS. .IKRKMIAIl. xxv. lo iv. 294 15— '7 ii. 281 34—3'^ "-574 xxvi. I ^'-74 ] 8 ib. 20 — 23 ib. xxvii. 2. 3 ii. 281 ... 20 V. 74 .Nxviii. 10 ii. 281 '^^^^ 9 '• 195 ^^>:'- JO '•■573 12.14 i. 246 3>— 34 1-238 3« V. 8 xxxii. 6 — 15 ii, 281 .39-40 i. 239 xxxiii. I 7. 20. 21 i. 190 25. 26 ib. 15 i- 195 x>;xv ii. 281 xxxviii.i6 App. 279 xli. 8 ii. 21 7 xliii V. 74 8 — 10 ii. 281 1- 6 ii- 573- 574 LA.MENT.ATIONS. V- 19 V. 5 EZEKIEL. '• '-2 .-.^■•74 iii 24 — 27 ii. 281 iv ib. 9 .."- 11 V. ii. 2S1 viii. ib. ix. T — 7 ib. xi. 19. 20 i. 239 xii. I — 20 ii. 281 xiii- 4 ^-5 >v. 2 ,. iv. 359 6 ib. wii. ^ . . . iv. 362 6—8 iv. 361 21 — 24 . . . ii. 177. iv. 362 xix. 10 — 14 iv. 361 XX. 7. 8. 18. 24 .V. 55 II iii. 36 EZEKIEL. xxi. 25—27 i. 191 ^xiii. 3 V. 55 xxiv. 15 — 24 ii. 281 xxvi. 20 App. 298 xxviii V. 408 24 — 26 i. 246 xxxi. 3 — 9 iv. 362 3—14 ii- 177 14 — 1 8 App. 294 14. 16. 18 App- 298 xxxii. 7.8 V. 407 '8-19 App. 295 18. 24 Ap]). 298 21.22 App. 295 24. 26 •. . . ib. 29 — 3 I ib. xxxiii. 21. 22 ii. 2S1 ^''^i^' ii- 573- 574- 4— ^J ii- 335 8—12 lb. I I — 16 i. 247 23—31 i- 24^ 23-24 i. 193 23 — 26 ii- 574 xxxvi. 25 — 27 i. 240 . 38 ii. 573- 574 xxxvii.i6 ii. 281 24. 25 i. 195 XXX viii App. 144 xxxix ib. 8—10 App. 181 9 i-358 "'• ^ ^-74 xlv. II iv. 26 1).\.mi;e. ':. '— -' ^'-74 iii. 15 iii. 363 25 App. 309 >*■- 10—15 1'- 177 20 — 22 ib. vi. 10. 13 iv. 317 22 App. 309 28 v: 74 vii. 9. 10 App. 138 viii. 10, II. 12 V. 408 13- 14 i-357 16 i. 468 INDEX OF TEXTS. 449 DANIEL. 23—25 App. 196 25 App. J 83 ix. I V. 74 21 i. 468 25. 26 V. 170 26. 27 V. 320 27 V. 322 X. I •• V. 74 13.21 i. 468 13. 20. 21 V. 408 xi. 12. 13 i. 229 31 V. 320 36 App. 196 44-45 App. 144 45 App. 183 xii. I V. 408 2 i. 187 T I V. 320 HOSEA. i- I V. 73. ii. 18 i. 236 21. 22 i. 249 vi. 6 iv. 294 X. I iv. 361 xii. 13 V. 63 JOEL. ii. 10. 31 V. 407 28 ib. iii App. 144 15 ^-407 18 i. 249 AMOS. i. I ; V. 73 ii. 9 iv. 362 iii. 2 iv. 381. V. 25. 26 V. 55.408. vii. 9. 10. 1 1 ^-73 viii. 8 V. 256 9 V. 407 ix 2 App. 313 5 V. 256 II '-195 13 — 15 '-249 VOL. V. PART II. JONAH. ii. 2 App. 331 MICAH. i. I V. 74 iii. 12 V. 363 iv. 3 ?• "41 4 i. 241. iii. 368 8 v. 8 12. 13 ii. 86 V. 2 i. 199 4 '-249 5 ".-.574 vii. 4 ii. 14 14 i- 250- i'-573 NAHUM. i. 10 ii. 13. 86 ii. 2 iv. 361 iii. 18 ii- 574 HABAKKUK. i; 15 'i- 250 ii. I v. 8 ZEPHANIAH. i- I --v- 74 7 iii. 407 iii. 9 i. 240 12. 13 ib. 15 i-25o HAGGAI. i- I V. 75 15 ib. ii. I ib. 10 ib. 19 ib. 20 ib. ZECHARIAH. i. I ii. 520 1-7 ./• 75 iii. 10 i. 250. iii. 368 vii. I V. 75 viii. 9 ib. ix. 10. 17 i. 250 X. 3 ''-574 xii App. 144 G S£ 4J0 INDFA or TEXTS. XIII. xiv. IV. V. xi. xiii. xiv. II. iii. iv. V. xiv. ZECn.\RI.\H. ' --^PP- 9. 10. II. 14 i. 7 »"• 495- M'l'- 4 '• 167. V. 10 II i. .AIALACIII 3- 4 • • 17. 18 TOBIT. '5- 21 «4 14 IV. 332 19 V. 107 5— '8 App. 78 I. 4. 1 1 ib. 4-5 '^^■ 4—7 ^^■ WISDOM. -9 App. 369 -3 App. 397 J ECCLESIASTICUS. 279 I V. I iii. 148 > 76 ' >-^- J 2 App. 397 574 •'''!• '9 >>"• "48 144 I xiv. 12. 16 .-\pp. 397 256 ' xvii. 27 ib. V. 8 j xxi. 10 ib. 250 I xxiv. 17. 18. 20 iv. 221 xxviii. I — 7 ii. 470 -' App. 397 154 xxxi. I — 10 iii. 148 240 I xxxiii. 24. 26 App. 65 ib. 28 — 31 ib. xli- 4 App. 397 xlviii. 5 ib. I J: 25. 26 iii. 59 App. 78 I* -341 I li. 5-6 App. 397. • 16 App. 397 5 ib. 2 •• — •;>• 578 23 — 26 .. iii. 578. ii. 210 21 App. 397 V. vi. vii. viii. xii. xiv. B.\RLTH. i. 236 1 MACCABEES. 12 iii. 368 2 MACCABEES. 2. 3 V. 268 23 App. 396 9. 14 ib. 22. 23. 36 ... . ib. 10. 1 1 App. 40 40—45 App. 396 46 ib. INDEX OF TEXTS OR PASSAGES TRANSLATED, CITED, OR REFERRED TO, FROM THE . NEW TESTAMENT. Vide also iv. 86. 87. App. 84. 85. 1 16. 129. MATTHEW. ii. 1 — 12 vol. ii. p. 532 2 i. 199. V. 383 iii. 2 iv. 176 7 iv. 311 7—10 iii- 556 9 iv. 313 II— 12 ii. 534- iii-.554 12 ii. 86 17 V. 88 Jv. 5 V. 319 7 iii. 18 8 — 10 i. 199 13 App. 318 17 iv. 176 V. 2 ii. 287 11 V. 283 II. 12 V. 307 19 .; •• ••/. 579 20 iii. 93. iv. 314 22, 29. 30 App. 365 25 ii. 4^7 27—30 ii. 318 vi. 2. 5. 16 iii. 93 5—15 iv. 215 5 iv. 270 10 i- 254 12 ii. 413 19 •• .• V. 133 19 — 21 iii. 160. 225 23 ii.41 25 — 34 iii. 160 33 •• 449- i'i- 219 34 iii. 194 MATTHEW, vii. 6 ii. 41. 242 15 V. 279 22. 23 V. 481. 577 24- 25 ii. 15 28. 29 iii. 82 viii. 5—13 iii. 442 II. 12 ib. 12 ii. 91 17 iii- 352 20 iii. 248 29 V. 572. App. 365 ix. I App. 320 2—9 iii. 353 10—17 jv. 313 10 — 13 iv. 316 14 iv. 270 18 — 26 App. 391 X. I — 15 iii. 249 5 iii. 56 16 — 18 V. 307 23—25 ib. 16 iv. 46 17 iii. 562 17-18 v. 275 17 iii. 562 19 iii. 192 22 V. 283 28 App. 365 29 iii. 105 40 — 42 ii. 303 xi. 3 ii.532.v. 313 II V. 166 12 iv. I 7 7 G g 2 452 INDEX Ol" TKXTS. .MATTHl'W. xi. 14 i. 160 19. . . . iv. 43. 271. 313. 316 22 — 24 i. 271 23 Ap|). 289. 3"5- 3'8 25 '«•■ 5^^2 27 iv- 494 xii. I — 8 iv. 313 9 — 14 . ib. i 4 App. 361 i 14 iv. 312 I 22—37 iii. 108. 558 I 28 iv. 184 i 34 'V- 3'i ' 37 '•'• 5^'2 39 iv. 308 41. 42 i. 271 xiii. 10 i. 58 ] 13—15 '• 59 ' 16. 17 i. 61 j 22 iii. 191 i 35 •• 57 ! 37- 38. 39 !|- 91 I 38 ii. 90 39 i'-92 ! 39- 40- 49 V. 217 ; 40—42. 43 ii- 93 ' 41 'i- 339 ' 42-50 App. 364 j 42-49 i- 271 43 i- 221 I 49-50 ii- 257 xiv. 5 V. 89 I XV. I — 20 . . iii. 92. iv. 3 13, 3 14 ' 15 App. 3 26. 27 iv. 134 XV i. 4 — I 2 ii. 198, iii. 78 4 iv. 308 I '4 i- 154- V. 89 15 iii. 290 ' 18. ii.i42.363..\pp.258. 289 >9 ii-3^'5 21 — 28 App. 25^ 28 i. 204 xvii. 5 V. 88 10. I I i, 152. 36S «i .!• '99 20 ii. iho 22. C3 App. 25^, M.VTTHEW. xvii. 25 iii. 103 xviii. 9 -^PP- S'^S 17 iii. 56. App. 258 20 iv. 261 26. 29 iv. 214 xix. 3 — I 2 iii. 1 16 5 iji- 583 14 ii. 287 16 — 22 iii. 8 20 iii. 242 21 iii. 243 23 — 26 iii. 273 27. 28 i. 222 27. . . . iii. 248. 290. iv. 388 29. ... i. 223. 265. iii. 263 30 iv. 3«7- V. 150 3' V. 150 x^- '^> V. 145. 150 17— '9 App- 25''> 20—28 i. 214 23 I. 217 xxi. I — II i. 200 14 — 17 ib. I I. 46 v. 89 •2. 13 iv. 447 21 ii. 162 22 ii- 374 28—32. iii.535.v. 99.App. 2 31. 32 iii- 554 31 iv. 267 42—44 ii. 142 xxii. 15 — 22. . . . iii. 1 16. iv. 3 i 2 23—33 i- 257 34 — 40 iii. 9 34 iv. 298 35 iii- >8 36 iii. 26 xxiii iv. 298 I iii. 87 I — 28 iii. 93 4 iv-314 5 V.303 ^■7 V. 3 J I 8 — 10 iii. 80 '- iv- 274 13 iv. 299 15 .... iv. 301. 311. v. 313 16 — 22 iv. 31 2 INDEX OF TEXTS. 453 8 ii. MATTHEW. xxm.23 '^-306 23. 24 IV. 314 23. v. 311 34-36 •v-84 35 V'5i9 37—39 '• ^72 .39 V. 216 xxiv.4. 5 ii. 539- 540 32 App. 3 45—51 "'• 291 45 iv. 13. V. 527 XXV. 14—30 IV- 474 15 ii-6i 31—46 V. 572 41 App. 365 xxvi.9 i- 173 14—16 iv. 312 29 i- 210 59—62 IV. 313 63—66 V. 92 69 iv. 494 xxvii. 3. 4 IV. 312 XI i. 201 27—30 l!'- 37 .••^^• 47-49 V '• ^54 50 App. 274 51 ... 52-53 53 ^-3^9 .54 ^'-9^ xxviii. 2 V- ^5" II — 15 iv. 313 18—20 iv. 494. v. 550 18 iv. 187 20 ii- 143 MARK. i. 7-8 ii.534iii-554 V. 256 i. 187.App.308.381 iii.81 V. 572 iii. 82 , iii. 353 iv. 316 iv. 313 ib. iii. 562 MARK. II 22 24 27 1 — 14 >5 15 — 22 23—28 17 18 I — 6 iv. 313 22 — 30 iii. 108. 558 23 App. 7 38—40 iv. 31 1 II. 12 i. 40 19 iii. 19^ 25 iii. 562. iv. 97 .33 i- i^ 33-34 i-5^ 7 V.57J 7-8 App. 365 22 — 43 App. 39I 7 — 1 1 iii. 249 15 :..'• ^53; V. 89 I — 23 iii. 92. iv. 3i3 17 App. 3 22 ii. 4^ 27. 28 iv. 134 . 13 — 21 iii. 78 18 — 21 ii. 198 28 i. 154. V. 89 29 iii. 29O 31— i^- ^ App. 256 35 iii. io3 I i. 2o4 7 V. 88 1 1. 12 1-152. 368 13 i. i6' 30—32 App. 256 35 "-284 37 "• 303- V. 89 38 iii. 289 38. 39 i'- ^64 41 "- 303- V. 283 42 '1-31? 42-49 "-31^ 45-47 App. 36.S 2 — 12 iii. 1 1" <: g 3 454 INDEX OF TEXTS. MARK. X. 7-8 iii. 583 14 ii. 287 17 — 22 iii. 8 21 iii. 243 23—27;.; "•• ^1 ?> 28. . . . iii. 248. 290. iv. 388 29. 30. . i. 223. 265. iii. 262 31 iv. 387. V. 150 32—34 App. 256 35—45 '-214 36 lb. xi. I — 1 1 i. 200 9 •• '73 15— '7 '.V- 447 22. 23 ii. 162 24 ''-374 32 V. 89 40 i. 217 xii. 10 ii. 142 13 — I 7. . . . iii. 116. V. 312 18—27 i. 257 28 iii. 18 28—34 iii. 9 38 iii. 10 38—40 iii. 93 40 ii. 341. V. 299 xiii. 5-^ ''-539 8 App. 3 II iii. 192 3^ V. 494 34 >• >i3- ">■■ 537 35 App. 190 37 "'• 293- 295 xiv. 10. I 1 iv. 31 2 25 i. 210 61 — 64 V. 92 62 iv. 494 XV, 2 i. 201 12 ib. 16—19 ib. 26 ib. 35 '• '54 37 App. 273 39 '^■•92 xvl. 9 App. 3H5 15 V. 300 15— '8 ^'-55° LUKE. i. 9. 10 iv. 318 '3 V. 383 15— >7 '-257 19. 26 i. 468 3'- 32 iv-3'9 32. 33 >• '88 51-52 »• 198 68—75 '-252 »»• 25.38 V.383 46 iii. 20 49 "•'■ 89 iii. 7— '4 »'• 556 8 >v. 3 « 3 12. 13 iii. 554 15 — 17 ii. 534. iii. 554 15 V. 383 17 ii. 86 22 V. 88 iv. 5—8 j; 199 12 iii. 18 23 ^J'l?:.3- 7 31 iii. 81 34 ''•572 V. 1 App. 238 > — «i "•253 7 iv. 3 " II iii. 248 17—28 iii. 353 28 iii. 248 29—39 iv. 3'3 29 iv. 316 32 iii. 562 33 '*■• 27^ 36 App. 6 vi. I ib. 1—5 iv. 3'3 6 — 1 1 ib. 20 ii. 287 22 V. 283 22. 23 V. 307 39 App. 7 48 ii. 15 vii. 1 — 10 iii. 442 II — 16 .^i'l'* 39' 16. 39 V. 89 19 . ii. 532. V. 307 2S V. ir.6 29 iii. 554 INDEX OF TEXTS. 455 LUKE. 29. 30 iv. 267 34 iv- 271.313. 316 35 , iv- 43 36 — 50 iv. 316 41—43 App- 2 2.3 iii. 248 14 iii, 191 15 :,: ji- 58 18 iii. 562. iv. 97 18. 31 V. 572 28. 29 App. 365 31.. V. 407. App. 340. 365 41—56 App. 391 55 App. 273 1—5 '"• 249 8 i- 153 8. 19 V. 89 19 ..i- 154 20 iii. 290 24 iii. 103 27 i. 204 35 V. 88 43—45 ;.• App. 256 48 ii. 284. V. 89 49 iii. 290 49-5° »• 164 51—56 iii. 59 I. 9. 17 — 20 ii. 164 I — 8 iii. 249 6 iv. 43 14 i. 271 15.... App. 289. 315.318 16 V. 88 18 V. 407. 408 2T iii. 562 22 \v. 494 22 — 27 App. 256 38 — 42 iii. 248 1—4 iv. 215 5—13 'b. 4 -11. 413 14 — 36 iii. 108 30—44 iii. 493 31-32 i. 271 37-38 iv. 3'3 39-44 iv. 119 39. 40. 42 iv. 305 LUKE. 41 iii. 270 42. 46 iv. 3H 43—46 iv. 299 43 iv. 311 44 iv- 307 44-45 iii- 10 47-48 V. 85 47—51 ii. 522 49—51 V. 84. 307 51 ii. 520 53-54 iv. 312 I ii. 198 5 App. 365 I J V. 275. 307 33 V. 133 37 App. 189 42 iv. 13 49—53 V. 277 58 ii. 407 10—17 iv. 313 23 V. 147 23—30 iii. 449. v. 481 26. 27 V. 481 30 iv- 387 31 i- 172 33 V. 89 34-35 ...i- 171 I — 6 iii. 402 1-3-7 Jv. 311 7 App. 3 II iv. 274 12 — 14 i. 178 26 iii. 562. V. 277 28 V. 8 30 V. 407 I ;. iii- 552 I — 10 .... ii. 330. iv. 316 3 iii- 532 4—6 iii. 559 8. 9 ib. 7 iii. 560 10 ib. I i'i- 534 II V. 407 14-15 V. 9c 14 15 iv. 67. iii. c6i 15.16 IV. I 1 9 « g 4 456 INDEX OF TEXTS. LUKE. 18 iv. 120 23 App. 289 1 ii- 349 '—4 ii- 35.S 3-4 ii. 378 5 ii- 161 20 iv. 258 21 i. 256 34 V. 336. 505 ,8 i. 481 9 ii'- 561 14 iii. 562 16 ii. 287 18 iii. 20 18—23 iii. 8 22 iii. 243 24—27-;. iii- 273 28. . . . iii. 248. 290. iv. 388 29. 30. . i. 223. 265. iii. 263 31—34 App. 256 2 — 10 iv. 316 7 iii- 555 9 iV554 20 — 24 i. 200 33 i- 173 41 — 44 v. 221 17. 18 ii. 142 20 — 26. . . . iii. 1 16. iv. 3 1 2 27—40 i- 257 45—47 iii- 93- iy- 311 46 iii. 10 47 ii- 341- iv- 299 8 ii- 539 24 i. 202 29 App. 3 3 — 6 iv. 3 1 2 15 — 18 i. 209 28 — 30 i. 21 I iii. 249 V. 99 66 — 71 V. 92 ('>9 i- 233- iv- 494 •2. 3 i- 200 4 — I 2 i. 201 I' iy- 253 38 i. 201 42-43 ib- 43. . App. 256.341. 342. 384 35' 61. LUKE. xxiii.46 Aj)p. 273. 277 xxiv. 19 V. 89 21. 25. 26 i. 197 47—49 V. 550 49 iv- 494 JOHN. i- 3-4 App. 385 14. 18 V. 88. 89 20.4^^-49 V. 383 21. 25 V. 64 46 — 52 iv. 261 50 i. 200. V. 93 50-51 i-232 ii. 13 — 22 iv. 447 20 iv- 345 iii. I — 21 App. 254 4 ii- 293 5 ii. 286 1 6. I 7 V. 89 16. 18 V. 88 35 iv- 94 iv. 9 iii- 59 19 V. 89 38 ii- 526 V. I— 19 iv. 313 14 iii- 353 17 iv- 494 19 — 23 ib. 25—27 . ib. 20 — 30 i. 265 21. 28. 29 App. 380 22 i. 227 23. 24- 30- 36—38. 38-48 . . . 25—28 V. 505 43 ii- 537 44 iv. 311 vi. 14 V. 64. 89 25—71 App. 25s 29. 38—40. 44. 46. 57 68. 70 iii. 290 vii. 2 — X . 21 App. 255 16 iii. 82 16. 18. 28. 29. 33 . . . V. 89 '7 ii. 149 23 iv. 3'3 } V. 89 (v. 89 INDEX OF TEXTS. 457 JOHN. 39 iv. 494 40 V. 64. 89 49 iv- 345 50—52 iv. 312 52 111.340 I, sqq iv. 308 3 — II iii. 115 16. 18. 26. 29 ..... . V. 89 28 iv. 494 33-39 i^- 316 44 '•392 48 iii. 56 56 i. 62 I. 2. 34 iii. 352 I — 41 iv. 313 17. V. 89 17. 18 !!• 570 19 — 21 ii. 488 22—39 App. 255 1—44 App- 39^ 24 — 26 i. 265 34-39 App. 372 47—50 V. 95 47—53 »^-3i2 49—52 IV. 185 10 iv. 312 12 — 36 i. 200 13 i- 173 26 App. 359 31 V. 407 36 iv. 43 42. 43 iv. 3 1 1 44-45-49 V. 89 , I. 3. 20 ib. 3 iv. 494 33-36.37 App. 359 . I — xvii. 26 .... App. 255 2 App. 293 2. 3. 4 App. 359 12-14. 16. 18. 1 .^ 20. 26 J ^ 16—18. 26 ii. 142 24. 31 V. 89 26 iii. 183 30 y. 407 I — 6 ii. 489 1.2 iii. 373 7. 16. 26 iv. 494 JOHN. XV. t6 iii. 290 17—25 '^^ 307 18. 20 iii. 398 21 V, 89 26 ii. 142 xvi. 1—4. 33 V. 307 2 V. 283 5. 28 V. 89 7 ii. 142 7-J3-'5.23.24.|i^^^^ II V. 407 12 App. 256 13-14 App. 257 xvii. 2. 10 iv. 494 3. 4. 8. 18. 23. 25 .. V. 89 12 iv. 43 24 App. 359 xviii. 7. 8 V. 92 29 iii. 56 36 i. 256 ■37 i. 200 xix. 1—5. 14. 15. 19 1 i. 201 — 22 J 30 App. 274 XX. 15 — 17 V. 550 21.22 lb. 23 ii. 366. 368 xxi. 1 — 14 ii. 253 21 i. 164 ACTS. i. 4-8 V. 550 5-8 iv. 494 6. 7 i. 195 8 iii. .168 10. II i. 165 15 App. 245 25 App. 332. 400 ii. 5— II V. 303 15 iv. 317 17 — 21 V. 407 25—31 App. 342. 379 29 App. 361 33—36 iv. 494 34 App. 346 39 iii- 475- 572 41 ii. 176 458 INDEX OF TEXTS. ACTS. 42—47 iii- 253 47 App. 259 I iv. 317 1. 2. 5—21 .. V. 275. 307 II V. 55 19 — 21 i. 169 22. 23 V. 64 24 V. 63 25 _}v- 43 4 ii. 1 76 II iv. 253 32—35 "'• 254 36.37 il>- I — II ib. 17—40 V. 275. 307 3 ' Jv. 494 36.37 ii- 543 I iii- 254. 275 8 — vii. 60. ... V. 275. 307 IT. 13. 14 V. 218 13-14 V. 374 14 V.377 16 App. 282 27 iii. 1 18 33 V. 319 37 V. 64 39—43 V. 55 43 V. 408 52 V. 85 55-56 iv. 494 59 App. 276. 277 1— ix. 31 V. 275. 307 9 — I I V. 386 29 V. 308 36—42 App. 391 14-28 V. 337 28 iii. 56 36. 42 iv. 494 41 i. 407 2-3 V. 337 3 iii- 56 26 V. 283 28 V. 257. 261 I — 19 V- 275- 308 26 App. 204 6 V. 387 6 — 8. 45 V. 283 8- 45—50 V- 308 ACTS. xiii. 8 iv. 234 20 V. 63 25 ii- 534- iii- 554 35— 37-- •-. App. 342. 379 36 iv. 51. App. 281 iv. 404 39.. .. 2. 4- 5 6 — 20 285 234 300 308 256 V. 309 V. 308 ib. 22 i. 261. iv. 234 1-5- 21 V. 337 10 iv. 413 20. 29 V 5 iv 6. 7 V 19 40 ; V 26 V I— 10. 13—15.. 6. 7 V. 283 17. 21 iv. 330 28 App. 279 31 i- 265. iv. 494 • I— 17 V. 309 6 V. 283 20 V. 337 I— 41 V. 309 9 ^'-283 3 V-309 9—12 App. 391 16 V. 337 19 V. 309 28 v. 551 30 v. 280 10 — 14 17 20. 21 23- 24-25 25 38 ii. 282 V 310 V. 337 ib. v. v. 285 388 XXII. 3 IV. 301 19- 20. 30 V. 275 21 iii. 572 21.22 iii. 56 21, 28 V, 283 27 — xxviii. 19 V. 275 _ 27. 30 V. 310 xxiii. 6 iv. 299 12 V. 3 I o 12—15 iv. 3'3 INDEX OF TEXTS. 459 ACTS. xxiii. 20. 21. 28 V. 218 xxiv. I. 2 V. 310 5 V. 377 5- 6. 9. 14 V. 283 XXV. 2. 3 iv. 313 3 V. 310 6 — 12 ib. xxvi. 28 V. 283. App. 204 45 iv. 301 xxviii,2 V. 282 16. 19 V. 310 4 21 28 24 28 2 . 8. 1 1 25 3 20 21 ^ / 13 3 • 18 18 38 38 39 4 ■ 6- 6. 7- 12 25 28 29 —32 29 12. 16. 17 XUl. xiv. 13 20 8 3- 7- ROMANS. iv. 494 .... ii. 209 'ii- 577- 583 V. 283 iii. 447 .... V. 59 iv. 68 .... iii. 447 ii- 571 V. 3 1 I iv. 406 ib. -12 ib. ib. iv. 404. V. 89 — 24 i. 171 •35-36 V. 311 V. 407 •39 App. 355 App. 312 V. 59 -8 ii- 447 7 App. 312. 326 App. 340. 342. 379 — 15 i. 182 — 27 i. 176 V. 350 V. 349 ■}■ 429 iii. 270 ib. ii-439 .ii-4i3 -10 iv. 253 -9 App. 358 ROMANS. 9 App. 338 10 — 12 i. 264 17 '-258 18 — 21 V. 300 23. 24. 28. 29 ib. 26 iii. 276 26. 27 iii. 270 30-31 "v- 311 17. 18 ii. 340. V, 280 Vll. viii. ix. X. 23 26 28 6- I. 3- 7- 1 1 12 6. 7- I 3-- 4-- 26 5-- 27 9- II 31 18. 1 CORINTHIANS. V. 280 27 ii- 310 iv. 253 -8 V. 407 2 iii. 97 iv. 190 -13 13- —4 26 xii. 8- IV. 77 V. 311 V. 283 ii. 298 ii- 197 i. 218 V. 576 iv- 253 V. 3 1 1 7. 407 iv. 213 iii. 18 V. 218 i- 429 19 ii- 346 28 -10. 30. 3 • 5- 20 22 23 24 27 35- 49 55 2 1, 212 ii. 169 ib. ii. 168 iii- 273 33 App. 362 ii. 302 •23 i- 185 . 24 i-^262 -28 iv. 495 iv. 187 -48 i. 263 5°- 51—53 i- 262 App. 289 iii. 270 460 INDEX OF TEXTS. 1 CORINTHIANS. xvi. 9 V. 3/ 1 ; V. ^i iv. 253 I I. iii. VI. vii. ix. 2 CORINTHIANS. 4 — 10 V. 7-9 iv. 13 — 16 i. 4 V. 16 I — 6— 10 4— 5-- 6.7 12 . 17 9 • 9 • V. App. 10 I 2- -16 IV. V. . V. ^3- 15 22 24- 25 V. 2—4 App. 346. 14 iv 5 iv. 405 177 407 3'i ib. 263 355 264 3u ib. 271 ib. 253 300 280 ib. ib. 311 360 .^82 234 GALATIANS. 7. II V. 280 23 iv. 234 10 iii. 27 I. 276 '1—21 V. 280. 337 12. 13, &c iii. 56 4 V. 3 1 1 7—9 j'i- 447 10 iv. 402 II — '3 iv. 404 •9 iv. 405 22. 23 iv. 413 24 iv. 406 29 ill- 447 4 V. S<> 9 i- 450 "4 iv. 253 26 i. 23S 26 — 28 iii. 447 29 V. 280 I — 4 ib. 11. GALATIANS. 2 — 4 iv. 402 8, 9 ii. 198 II V. 280 19 — 23 ii. 209 20 ii. 346 29 V. 31 1 6 iii. 27 I 9- '3 it). 10 iv. 234 12. 13 v. 279. 280 I'lIILIPPIANS. '3—15 ii. 63 15 — 18 '. . v. 280 2« — 24 App. 356 28 — 30 V. 31 1 6 — 8 iii. 372 9. 10 i. 469 9— II iv. 494 16 V. 556 2. 18 ii. 341. v. 280 3.4 v. 280 10 i. 181 18. 19 v. 280 20. 21 i. 263 8 ii. 62 10 — 20 iii. 271 EPHESIANS. 6 10 — 21 10. 20 — 23 V. 88 V. 307 iv. 494 2 V. 307 3 iv. 43 12. 13 iii- 572 'o— 15 V. 307 8 — 10 App. 320 9- 10 App. 34.2.379 II ii. 170 17 — 19 ii. 209 19 ij!- 583 26 ii. 447 28 iii. 271 5 iv. > 7 1 ^ iv. 43 14 ii- 354 2 2 — 3 2 V. 1 86 INDEX OF TEXTS. 461 EPHESIANS. V. 29 iii. 33 vi. 12 V. 307 COLOSSIANS. i. 13. 16 V. 407 16 i. 469 16 — 20 iv, 494 17 ;• •• App. 279 23 \v. 234. V. 300 ii. 3. 9. 10. 15 iv. 494 8 iv. 234 8. 16. 17 — 23 .... V. 280 8. 16. 18. 21 — 23 . . ii. 341 10. IS V. 407 M- 15 App. 321 iii. I iv. 494 1 THESSALONIANS. i. 10 i. 261 ii. 12. 19 ib. 1 4 — 16 V- 3 1 1 15 ^-85 19 ^■■556 iii- 3-4 y-3ii 13 i. 261 iv. 9. 10 iii. 271 15—17 1-263 15 i. 264 16 i. 186 V. I. 2 i. 365 2.3 V. 434 5 iv- 43 20 iv. 253 2 THESSALONIANS. i- 4—7 V. 3 1 1 5 — TO i. 261 ii- 2—4 i. 325 3 iv- 43 5—15 i- 365 6 1. 392 7 i-390- 393 8 L 380 9. TO. I T V. 382 iii. "^ V. 3 1 T 6 i. 365 10. 1 1. T 2 iii. 271 1 TIMOTHY. i. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 19. 20. . V. 280 1 TIMOTHY. 19-20 ii. 347 20 ii. 108 9 V. 234 16 i. 390 T. 6 V. 234 2 ii. 40 7 V. 280 TO V. 283 8 iii. 269. V. 234 16 iii. 27T 21 V. 407 3—5 ii- 342. V. 280 10. 12 V. 234 13 i. 201 14. 15. 19 i. 261 T7. 18 iii. 271 20. 21 V. 280 2I_ V. 234 2 TIMOTHY. 8.12 v. 3 I I 15. t6 ib. 15 ii. 1 10 8. 9. 10 V. 311 T I. 12 ib. 16 — 18 ii. 342 16. 18. 23. 25. 26 . . V. 280 T7 i. 278. ii. 110 17-18 ii. 347 4 iv- 234 5 ii- 342 6—8 V. 80 6—9 ii- 342 1 1. 12 V. 311 13 ii- 343 I. 6—8. 18 i. 261 3-4 ii- 343 7 iv. 234 16. 17 V. 311 TITUS. 10. II ii- 343 TO — t6 V. 280 13 iv. 234 15-16 ii. 343 2 iv. 234 3 1-264 9 1 T V. 280 10, II ii. 347 462 INDEX OF TEXTS. HEBREWS. i. I V. 89 3- 4- 13 iy-494 6 i. 469 14 ii. 230 ii. 5.8 i. 261 5—9 iv- 494 iii. I V. 89 7— »v. 11 i. 353 vi. 3 — 7 iii. 1 1 1 4 — 8. ... iv. 240 viii. I iv. 494 ix. 9 App- 2 26 V. 2 1 7 27 V. 441 28 i. 261 X. 1.2 iv. 404 25—31 iv. 240 25-37 iv- 239 32-34-36 V. 311 xi. 19 App. 2 36—38 V. 85 xii. 3-4 V. 3ii 9 App. 279 22 — 24 i. 261 22 i. 258 23 App. 336 26 V. 256 xiii. 8 iv. 493 9 V. 280 14 i. 261 '7 V. 556 JAMES, i. 2 — 4 V. 31 I 12 ib. ii. 7 V. 283 10 iii. 37 "'• 6 App. 365 V- 2 V. 133 7-8 iv. 214 7— II V. 311 1 PETER. '- 4- 5- 7- 13 '• 261 6. 7 V. 3 1 1 ii. 12 V. 282 12. 15 V. 283 19. 20 V. 31 1 iii. 14-17 ib. 1 PETER. 16 V. 282. 283 18. 19.. App. 327. 342. 379 18. 19. 20 App. 337 20 ii. 40 22 V. 407 3 '-264 4. 14. 16 V. 283 5.6 i. 265. App. 338 12. 13 V. 311 13 i. 261 14 V. 282 16. . V. 282. 283. App. 204 19 App. 278 I — 4 i. 261 2—4 ■■•}'■ 556 7 iii. 191 9 iv. 234 9. 10 V. 31 1 2 PETER. 4. 10. I I i. 261 5—7 ii- 62 16 i. 365 16 — 18 i. 205 19 — 21 i. 208 V. 280 I ii- 343 4 V. 572. App. 365 10, &c ii. 343 I I V. 407 20 — 22 . . iii. III. iv. 240 22 ii. 40 I— 13 1-263 3.4 i. 208 3, &c V. 280 7 App. 365 8 — 10 i. 208 1 JOHN. o. I I ii. 339 6 ii- 350 8 — 23 ii. 344 8 i- 371 8. 19. 22. 23. 26. . V. 280 2 i. 374 V. 279 -3-5 V. 280 —6 ii- 344 V. 88 INDEX OF TEXTS. 463 1 JOHN. iv, lo. 14 V. 89 18 iii. 28 20 iii. 31 2 JOHN, 7—1 ' Ji- 344 7. 10. 1 1 V. 280 3 JOHN. 9 ii. 110 9- 10 ii- 341 JUDE. 3 iv. 234 4—19 ii. 343. V. 280 6. 7 V. 572. App. 365 14 App. 140 7.... 18.. . 6. 15. 14- 15 20 . . 12 . . 20. . . REVELATION. i. 176. V. App. ii App. App. . . V. . . V. 9—11 12 12. 13 9 V 9 — 17 iii 14 V 410 289 1 10 ib. lb. 258 330 318 289 336 256 408 180 464 Vll. viii. REVELATION. 17 ii. 3-4 iv. 10. 1 1. 12 V. I I. 2. 1 1. 3- 4- 7 • 7 13 15 4 . App. i. 162. . App. . . . . V. . . . . i. . . . . V. 18 App. XVll. xix. -14 .... App. . . . . App. iii. 464. V. , V. .... App. 1 1— 20. 1-3 3. 4 '• 1—3- 7 '• 4 V. 574. App. 4—6 i. 178. 313: 6 i. 7—15 •• 8-9 10. 14. 15. 1 1 — xxi . . 13. 14 ... 13 .... V. App. .. App. .... i. .. App. .. App. 2. 10 i. 2. 8. 9 iii. 8 App. 16 App. 184. 495 318 408 ib. 364 368 364 256 199 408 ib. 144 256 564 144 180 180 364 ib. 228 230 336. , &c. 427 572 144 364 264 289 382 258 464 364 186 INDEX OF MATTERS. Abomination of desolation, what, V. 318, sqq. 330. 331. Abraham, whether an idolater be- fore his call, V. 53. Abridgment of the days of ven- geance, V. 340, scjq. AcroamatiCj vide Esoteric. Actions significant, nature of, ii. 276, sqq. recorded in the Old Testament, 280. in pro- fane writers, 281. in the New Testament, 282. Adamantiiis, a believer in the millennium, i. 33 i. Adoption, one of the modes of, in the East, what, v. 77. ^sop. Fables of, i. 85. App. 10. Africa, productiveness of, an- ciently, ii. 20. Agriculture, estimation of, an- ciently, ii. 5. App. 41. Atcovfs, or ages, su[)posed division of, among the Jews, v. 217. Alexandria, persecution of the Jews of, by Flaccus Aquilius, V. 234. Allegory, all, of the nature of the enigma, i. 44. Allowance, daily, to slaves, iv. 9. Anagogical method of scripture interpretation, i. 50. 329. 407. Analogy, argument from, of how many kinds, iii. 199. Ananias and ^apphira, case of, iii. 257. Angels, orders of, not a doctrine of scripture, i. 467. fall of, and its effects, 470. parti- cular or tutelary, ii. 329. App. 149. names of, how coni- poimded, App. 190. Anilseus and Asinsus, histon, of, V. 238, sqq. Annus Magnus, i. 347. . Antichrist, vide Fathers, loca- lity of the destruction of, what, i. 167. 394. App. 81. 179. 183. 187. meaning of the name, i. 372. ii. 542. expected to appear in the form of Nero, i. 388. App. 97. 190—197. 234. persecution of the church bv, i. 480. v. 4 1 2. App. 97. 99. 198. Antioch, ])reservation of the Jews of Antioch, v. 246. ^AiroKardaTaais, the, what, i. 451. Apoliinarius, bishop of Laodicea, a believer in the doctrine of the millennium, i. 335, sqq. Apologists, Christian, on what condition promised the assist- ance of the Holy Ghost, v. 291, sqq. Apostasy, the, what, i. 325. 481. ' Apostles, the twelve, had re- nounced their possessions, in our Saviour's lifetime, iii. 248. contradistinguished to the rest of the disciples, iii. 286. vica- rious relation to Christ, ii. 303. App. 239. Apostolical CiMistitutions, theirac- counl of Antichrist, i. 379. 'ATTOTaKTKTTiu, auioug the Chris- tians, who, iii. 274. INDEX OF MATTERS. 465 Aquila, version of the Old Testa- ment by, App. 104. Aquilius, Flaccus, vide Alexan- dria. Archangel, only one, recognised in scripture, i. 468. Archelaus, his opinion of Anti- christ, i. 383. king of Judaea, iv. Archilochus, Fables of, A])p. 9. 10. Argument, vide Rhetoric. Aristio, the presbyter, i. 274. 275. 276. 277. Aristotle, his opinion of the na- tural state of any subject, i. 426. description of the per- fect moral character, or tem- perate man, 431. of the im- perfect moral character, or continent man, 432. testi- mony to the corruption of human nature, 434. opinion of the moral insensibility of confirmed vice, ii. 40. clas- sification of mankind, 53. opinion of the virtue of meek- ness, 432. opinion of the duty of revenge, ibid, defini- tion of the final end of tra- gedy, how to be explained, 43 1 . definition of wealth, iv. 80. Arnobius, his age, i. 334. Artaba, content of, iv. 25. Artabanus, king of Parthia, date of his reign, v. 240. Ascensio Isaiee Vatis, description of Antichrist, i. 388. Asinaeus, vide Anilseus. Auctor, De Consummatione Mun- di, his opinion of Antichrist, i. 383. Augustin, originally a believer in the millennium, i. 337. his account of Antichrist, i. 386. Azazel, the angel, i. 380. App. 123. VOL. V. PART II. B. Babylonia, productiveness of, ii. Baptism, infant, prescriptive or traditionary, i. 367. Barnabas, the apostle, his sacri- fice of his property, iii. 256. 275. Barnabas, Epistle of, its antiquity, i. 344. description of Anti- christ, 377. Bankers, what, in ancient limes, iv. 447. Barchochab, v, 312. 359. 389. 39°- , ^ Barns, what, among the Jews, in. T38. Basanistse, office of, anciently, ii. 406. Bath, content of, iv. 25. Behemoth and Leviathan, rabbin- ical fable of, App. 83. Berial, a name of Antichrist, i. 389. App. 96. 190. 191. Bind, to, what, ii. 364. Birth of Christ, received date of, in the age of the world, i. 339. BXaicrcDO-if, rhetorical figure of, iv. 274. Blasphemy, name of, i, 394. of the Hoiy Ghost, as opposed to blasphemy of the Son of man, iii. 108. 558. apostasy of a certain kind, iii. iio. Bloodguiltiness, cumulative sin of, on whom to be visited, ii. 522, sqq. Byzacium, its productiveness, ii, 20. C. Calumnies once current against Christianity, what, and proba- bly how occasioned, v. 284. systematically propagated by the Jews, 311. Causes, secondary, iv. 77. divi- sion of, anciently, 78. Celsus, expected the speedy ex- tinction of the Jews, i. 360. H h 466 INDEX OF MATTERS. App. 168. his account of An- tichrist, as expected by the Ciiristians of his lime, i. 378. objection to the Gospel doc- trine of forgiveness, ii. 420. his age, Aj)p. 167. Cenotaphs, of the Pythagoreans, i. 50. iii. 522. Centesiniae, vide Interest. Cerinlhus, the first perverter of the millenarian doctrines, i. 403. App. 69. nature and character of liis pretended lle- vehilion, App. 70. 133. Ceronia, the tree so called, iii. 510- Cestius Galhis, his siege of Jeru- salem, V. 323. 326, sqq. 335, sqq. Character, the obdurate moral, a possible one, ii. 38. Child, image of the little, its meanings, ii. 285 — 313. pe- culiar to the (Jospel, 290. consistent with the character of the man in Christ, 294. implies exemption from what kind and degree of vice, 297. vicarious relation of the little child to the Father, 303. dan- ger of despising a little child, a believer in Christ, 325. ex- posed to what risk, and why, 352, sqq. Children, the, of light, iv. 43. of this world, 45. Chiliast, a nickname for the niil- lenarians, i. 33 S. 41 8. Christ, vide Denial. Discourses. Doctrinal. Moral. Christ, Jesus, vicarious relation ot, to the Father, ii. 303. omnipresence of, 372. a vo- luntary agent both in laying down and in resuming his life, 570. death of, vica- rious, 568. resurrj'ction of, necessary to human justifica- tion, 571. n)inisterial office of, what, iii. 371. 373. iv. 176. V. 89, sq(|. how distinguished from that of tlic apostles, App. 247, s(iq. Christ, the well-beloved of the Father, v. 88. the Shiloh, or apostle of the Father, 89. App. 239. omniscient in his human nature, as well as om- nipotent, from what time, V. 427. Christianity, odium of, among the (lenliles, v. 282. Christs, false, whether anv appear- ed before the birth of our Sa- viour, ii. 532, siiq. between the ascension and the destruc- tion (»f Jerusalem, v. 380. Chronology, Hebrew and Septua- gint, i. 352, sqq. 410. App. 103, sqq. ancient, adopted by the Liher Enoch, Aj)p. 151. Church, the catholic or universal, ii. 96. Hebrew, peculiar con- stitution of, iii. 252. occupa- tions and conversation, 259. final end of the constitution, 260. Clementine Homilies, their testi- mony to Antichrist, i. 380. Collybistse, vide Bankers. Coming in the name of Christ, peculiar sense of the phrase, ii. 540- Comings of Christ, i. 115. iii. 335. iv. 18S. V. 395.429.478, sqc). Commandment, the first and greatest, what, iii. 26. Compitalia, the, among the Ro- mans, what, iii. 3 14. ('or, or Corus, its content, iv. 25- Corn, grinding of, the work of whom in the East, iv. 209. Cornpension, among the Romans, iv. II. Corruption of human nature not acknowlcdired as incurable bv INDEX OF MATTERS. 467 the philosophers of old, ii. 443- Covenant of Horeb, iv. 380. sqq. V. 55.sqq. Covetousness, the, forbidden by our Saviour, what, iii. 120. Creditor, power of, over the debtor, by the Roman law, ii. 407. Gustos, vide Paedagogus. Cut, to, asunder, a species of pun- ishment, iii. 331. Cycle, the Octaeteric, among the Jews, App. III. Cyprian, his opinion of Antichrist, i- 383- Cyprus, Jews of, addicted to ma- gic, V. 387. Cyrill of Jerusalem, his opinion of the time of the appearance of Antichrist, i. 341. 385. D. Day, civil, division of, among the Jews, iv. 329. Length of, in Judaea, App, 109. Days, prophecy of the 2300, i. 357. Days of the creation, mystical sense of, i. 342, Days of the Son of man, iv. 186. sqq. 190, sqq. v. 396. 429, sqq. Death, day of, why uncertain, V. 441. Death-bed repentance, doctrine of, iv. 414. Debts, parabolic sense of, ii. 449. Demiurge, the, what, i. 308. 382. Denarius, value of, anciently, iv. 332, sqq. Parabolic sense of the image, 376. Denial of Christ, of what two possible kinds, iii. no. Desire, undue, prohibition of, what, iii. 120. Desolation, vide Abomination. Vide Jerusalem. Destruction of life in the days of vengeance, v. 353. Devil, the, i. 459. 469. names of, in Scripture, iii. 16. Dialectical method of disputation, among the Jews, iii. 19. Diamond, known to the ancients, ii. 224. Dimosritse, the sect of, i. 336. Dionysius, bisliop of Alexandria, his reply to Nepos, i. 310. opinion of the Revelation, 3H- Disciples, the, regarded in what light, in our Saviour's dis- courses to them, iii. 249. 272. App. 253. Discourses of our Saviour, what kind of compositions, ii. 273. Dispensator, the, of antiquity, iv. 3- Dispersion, the, extent and num- ber of, v. 302. Doctrinal teaching of Jesus Christ and of the apostles, respec- tively, App. 253, sqq. Doctrine, hypocrisy of, what, iii. 77. sqq. 83, sqq. 89, sqq. Dogs in Judaea, iv. 134. Domitian, his inquiry concerning the kingdom of Christ, i. 288. Draught, the miraculous, symbo- lical of what, ii. 253. Drowning, the punishment of what crimes, anciently, ii. 322. Avvafxeis or powers of the philoso- phers of old, what, i. 445. Duration of the world, i. 339, E. Eagle, vision of, in the second book of Esdras, App. 88. Earthquakes, in what light re- garded as signs, v. 254, sqq. instances of, 255, sqq. Ebionites, origin of the name of, iii. 277. Efficient, vide Cause. Egj'pt, productiveness of, ii. 20. Egyptian false prophet, v. 388. H h 2 468 INDEX OF MATTERS. Egyptians, Gospel according to, App. 75- Elder, the, testimony of, to Anti- christ, i. 380. Elders or presbyters, of Irenseiis, who, i. 294. 366. testimony to the doctrine of the millenniimi, 290. 292, sqq. Elenchi, a variety of the pearl, ii. 226. Elijah, vide Witnesses, coming of, i. 152, sqq. A pp. 198. pro- phecy ascribed to, 355. Ellipsis, principle of, in recon- ciling the oral and the written teaching of the apostles, i. 261. End of the world, expectation of, anciently, i- 164. 340. App. 86. 222. 223. 225. Energumeni, what, ii. 171. Enigma, how defined by Aristotle, i. 44. final end of, ibid. Enoch, vide Witnesses. Liber, vide Chronology. prophecy ascribed to, App. 137. Ensigns, Roman, worshipped by the soldiers, v. 321. Enthymem, vide Rhetoric. Epha, the, ii. 187. 'En IT ponoi, vide Procurator. Esoteric and exoteric doctrines of the ancients, i. 49. Espousals, ceremony of, among the Jews, v. 446. Essenes, the, iii. 277. Evangelists, the, what, ii. 170. 308. _ Evesperitse, region of, its pro- ductiveness, ii. 19. Evidences of Christianity, of va- rious kinds, ii. 147. Example, vide Rhetoric, utility of the, App. 12. principle of reasoning in, 20. Excommunication the highest of spiritual censures, ii. 369. au- thorised by our Saviour, in what case, 370. Exoteric, vide Esoteric. Eve, a cause of offence, ii. 3 1 8. F. Fables, use of, in public speaking, App. 14. in moral instruction, 18. Faith, vide Justification. Faith, vide Frayer. Faith, the, what, iv. 234. Faith, V. 178. 179. 578. the mi- racle working, its emblem, ii. 160, sqq. in Christ, before and after his death and resurrection, how distinguished, App. 259. 260. Families of mankind, their sup- posed number, App. 149. Famines, their character as omens, V. 254. 260. instances of, 261. Fastings, practice of, and times, among the Jews, i v. 270. Fathers, the, opinions of, with re- spect to the two witnesses, i. 368. to Antichrist, 369, &c. to the power and agency of the principle of evil, 459. Fear of God and fear of man, contrasted in what case, iii. 99. Fig-tree, the barren, miracle of, iii. 388, sqq. Fig-trees planted in vineyards, iii. 360. at what age produc- tive, 360. at what seasons of the year, dressed or pruned, 361. their value and estima- tion, iii. 367. Final, vide Cause. Fishes, supposed number of the kinds of, anciently, ii. 254. Flamen Dialis, forbidden the use of leaven, ii. 196. Foot, cause of offence, ii. 318. Foreknowledge, the di^^ne, com- patible with the freedom of human actions, iii. 396. v. 97. Formal, vide Cause. Friendship, not a gospel virtue, »'• 35- INDEX OF MATTERS. 469 Fringes, among the Jews, iv. 403- Fruits, their metaphorical sense, ii. no. iii. 368. v. 46. Fulness of time, iii. 582. G. Galileans, the, slain by Pilate, iii. 336. Galilee, estimation of the people of, by the rest of the Jews, iii. 340- Games, vide Iselastic. Garment, the wedding, a type of what, V. 177. Garments, proper, for proper oc- casions, V. 131. stores of, part of the wealth of the ancients, 132, sqq. Gifts, extraordinary, of the early church, of what kinds, ii. 169. God, the philosophical idea of, what, ii. 443. God, the love of, iii. 27. Good, temporal and eternal, not opposed per se, ii. 243. Gospel, diffusion of, over the Ro- man empire, or over the whole world, for what period, and why, V. 296, sqq. Gourd, growth of, in the East, ii. 159. Guests, at what time invited, an- ciently, iii. 407. nimibers of, on various occasions, 419. TwaiKovofioi, office of at Athens, v. 137- H. Hades, vide Intermediate state. Haman, his proposal to Ahasue- rus, ii. 392. Hand, a cause of offence, ii. 318. Harvest-time in Judaea, ii. lo. Hebdomas, the mystical, what, i. 343- Hebrew Christians, placed under a special providence, iii. 162, sqq. v. 333. preserved from the destruction of Jerusalem, V. 331. why called Nazarenes in Judaea, 377. Hebrews, Epistle to, when writ- ten, and why, iv. 239. Hedges, materials of, in Judaea, ii. 13. Heracleon, the marriage feast of, what, App. 75. Herbs, garden or potherbs, ii. 153. growth of, in the East, 154- Hercules, presided over treasures, ii. 232. Heresy, proper sense of, ii. 345, sqq. motives to, what, 349, sqq. Heretic, an, what, ii. 348, sqq. Hermaea, feast of, iii. 315. Hernias, the reputed author of the Pastor, App. 76. Hermon, Mount, etymon of, App. 106. Hesiod, fable of, App. 8. Hippolytus Portuensis, whether a believer in the millennium, i. 331. his description of Anti- christ, 375. 383. Hireling, to whom applied by our Saviour, ii. 548. Holy Ghost, office of, in remind- ing the hearers of our Lord, of his teaching, iii. 183, sqq. mission and office of, subordi- dinate to that of Christ, App. 255. sqq. Hours, division of, anciently, App. 108. Hypocrisy, nature of, iii. 89, sqq. I. Idolatry, anterior to the call of Abraham, v. 54. of the Jews in Egypt, 55. Ignatius, tradition concerning, ii. " 276. Incense, a type of prayer, iv. 318. Inheritance, application to our Saviour to divide the, iii. 114, II h 3 4/0 INDEX OF MATTER*^. sqq. rule of", among tlie Jews, I'/- Injuries, vide Hedress. Injuries, forgiveness of, subject to what coiidilion, ii. 380. whe- ther all injuries, un^. Inspiration, gift of previously, not incompatible with subsequent moral unworthiness, or abuse of the gift, in the person in- 8])ired, iii. 96. Instnnnental, vide Cause. Ir)terest, compound, known to the ancients, iv. 450. rate of, among tlie Romans, 453, sqq. among the (ireeks, 458, sq(j. naval or nautical, what, 459. Intermediate state, v. 442. 502, sqq. doctrine of, App. 265, sqq. soul separated from the body by death, 270. soul, being se- parated, passes into the hands of God, 277. soul, by pass- ing into the hands of God, added to a certain company, 280. local habitation of this company, Hades, 287. Hades, within the earth, 296. Hades, the lowest point within the earth. 310. Hades, probably at the centre of the earth, 327. Hades, divided into regions, 330. souls of men not all re- ceived into the same locality in Hades, 331. the souls of the good received into one part, the soids of the bad into an- other, 333. the good received into the higher, the bad into the lower region of Hades, 339. the locality which receives the souls of the good in Hades, call- ed Paradise, 341. the interme- diate state passed by the good in the enjoyment of a proper lia|)piness, and by the bad in the endurance of a proper misery, 348. objections to the above doctrines, answered, 3')6. opinions of the Jewish church on the same points, 396. testi- monies of the primitive C hris- tian church, 400. Interpretation, the legilinuite ride of scripture, what, iii. 171. INDEX OF MATTERS. 471 Irenaeus, his testimonj' to the mil- lenary doctrine, i. 289, sqq. opinion of Antichrist, 381. Isaiah, sawn asunder by Manas- seh, V. 85. App. 1 01. Iselastic games of antiquity, App. 209. Italy, productiveness of parts of, ii. 20. Izates, king of Adiabene, when, iv. 300. V. 240. J. Jamnes and Mambres, or Jambres, Book of, App. 137. Jamnia, people of, dispute with the Jews, V. 240, sqq. Jeremiah, vide Witnesses. Jerome, his description of Anti- christ, i. 385. objections to the millenary doctrines and ex- pectations, 418. 421. 423. 441. 444. Jerusalem, desolation of, v. 361, sqq. Jesus or Joshua, son of Ananus, history of, v. 268, sqq, Jews, vide Destruction. Jews, vide Dispersion. Jews, vide Restoration. Jews, disputes of, and Gentiles, V. 234, sqq. disputes of, and Samaritans, 251, sqq. rebel- lion in the reign of Trajan, 358. 389. in the reign of Ha- drian, iii. 359, sqq. 363. in the reign of Constantine, v. 364- John the Apostle, vide Wit- nesses. John the Apostle, tradition con- cerning, i. 165. discourse of our Saviour orally recorded by him, 290, sqq. John the Baptist, a type of Eli- jah, i. 158. John the Presbyter, i. 274. 275. 276. 277. Joshua, constitutions of, ii. 11. Jotham, parable of, App. 14. Judaea, the seat of the millenary kingdom, v. 85. App. 81. 83. 144. 180. 181. 184. 187. pro- ductiveness of, ii. 19. Judaizinff, charsje of, brought against the millenarian Chris- tians, i. 401. 418. Judaizing teachers, v. 278. Judas of Galilee, what kind of person, ii. 543, sqq. his de- scendants, 546. Judge, office of, improper for our Saviour, iii. 115. the iniqui- tous, why proposed as the counterpart of the supreme moral Governor, iv. 222. Judges, the, among the Jews, iv, 213. Judgment, the final, in St. Mat- thew, to be understood of what description of moral agents, v. Julian, attempt of, to rebuild the temple, v. 365. Justification by faith, a doctrine exclusive of distinctions in the kind or degrees of reward in the justified, i. 462. 471, sqq. v._ 179. Justin Martyr, testimony to the millenary doctrines, i. 284. his account of Antichrist, 377. Juvenal, arguments of, for the forgiveness of injuries, ii, 428. K. Karaites, the, among the Jews, iii. 15. Karexo" (to) of St. Paul, what, i. 392, sqq- Kfpdriov, vide Ceronia. Kermatistse, vide Bankers. Kingdom, the hereditary, of Jesus Christ, iv. 491, sqq. the medi- atorial, 186, sqq. 491, sqq. the millenary, i. 406. iv. 497, sqq. 504- H h 4 47 a INDEX OF MATTERS. L. Lactuiiliiis, hia tesliiminy lo llie niillciiary doclrines, i. 333. date of the aj)[jcarancc of An- ticlirist, 341. opinion of An- tichrist, 385. Lamp, llie, of the parable, Ivpi- cal of wiiat, V. 497, sqq. A(i\ncn, vide Herbs. Law, moral and ritual, how con- trasted in point of estimation, iii. 24. moral, substance of, how comprehended, 26. of work.s, final end of, 38. 598. iv. 401, s(]q. ritual, strictness of its observance by the Jews, iii. 597. Lawyer, the same wilh scribe, iii. 10. 86. Leaven, the metaphorical sense of, ii. 191. the parabolic sense of, 192. iii. 80. synonymous with hypocrisy, what, 77. 89, sqq. ab.stinence from, at the feast of the passovcr, ii. 192. Lectisternium, the ceremony of, iii. 314. AifivKol Mi'dtu, A pp. 1 I . Life everlasting;, known to ihc Jews of our Saviour's time, iii. 3. on what condition the gift of the law, 36. life, continu- ance of, the effect of what, 122. endantrered by the abuse of what oilier gift, 1 25. I.-ilies, j)ur|)lo, in the East, iii. 209. Loose, to, what, ii. 3^)4. Lord's Prayer, daily use of, tra- ditional, i. 256. 367. Lucifer, the name of whom, be- fore the fall of the angels, i. 4O9. y\. Malu)met, the I'.iradise of, bor- rowed fr(»m what, .\pp. 77. Mammoti, sense of the term, iv. ()f). of unrighteousness, 70, S(|(|. Man, love of, founded on the love of God, iii. 3 i. Marcus, the Colorbasean, i. 380. Marriaj,'e feasts, grandeur and magnificence of, v. 105, S()q. celebrated in the evening in the East, 454. trains, among the Jews, 448. Martin, St., his opinion of Anti- christ, i. 385. Martyr, the, choice or alternative |)roposed to, iii. 102. proj)er encouragement of, 105. Material, vide Cause. Matronalia, feast of, distinguished by what ceremony, iii. 313. INIaximus Tyrius, arguments of, for the forgiveness of injuries, ii. 423. Me.isure, vide Satum. Meiliatorial. vide Kingdom. Mercury, presided over treasures, ii. 322. IMicliael, the archangel, who, i. 468. App. 149. Middleton, Dr., his n)i.stake on the (piestion of the continu- ance of miraculous gifts in the church, ii. ; 72. ^Midnight, coming of Christ ex- pected at, V. 504. Millenary doctrines, not promis- cuously communicated, i. 287. Ministers, vide Orders. Ministers of religion, charged u ilh the little ones, who believe in Christ, ii. 323. 344. 352, sqq. pastors or shepherds, wliv, 575. liable to hyj)ocrisy of what kind, iii. 89. stewards, and of what, 97. 326, sqq. parabo- lically distributed into what orders, v. 539, s(]q. Miracle of the five loaves, i. 300. •Miracles, generally recorded, how many, i. 15. specially recorded, how many, 16. why neces- sary to be wrought by men, ii. 166. power of working, how INDEX OF MATTERS. 473 divided into kinds, 170. might be wrought by false Christs, V. 381. Miraculous gifts, kinds and num- ber of, in the primitive church, ii. 169. how long retained, and what, 172. effects in general, of how many kinds, i. 298. Miser, com|)arison of the, with the prodigal or voluptuary, iv. 169. Modius, the, ii. 187. Montanists, believers in the mil- lenary doctrines, i. 307. Moral character of a certain his- tory independent of its utility as an example, iv. 55. moral guilt, not expiable by the legal sacrifices, 404. moral influ- ences of Christianity, at the time of its first publication and since, ii. 201. moral obliga- tion, foundation of, what, i. 75. iii. 30. moral and ceremonial righteousness, iv. 292, sqq. 403, s(]C]. moral sense, the, iii. 187. moral teaching of the apostles and of our Saviour, re- S|)ectively, i. 74, sqq. App. 252. Morality, excellence of the (ios- pel, attested by those who were not Christians, ii. 414. Morals, discoveries in, like disco- veries in science, not possible, ii. 416. desiderata in morals, anciently, supplied by the Gos- pel, what, 41 8. Moses, vide Witnesses. Mosis Ascensio or Assumptio, the, App. 136. Mustard plant, size of in the East, ii. 154. seed, jjroverbially what, J 5 7. parabolic sense of, 166. Mystery, proper sense of the word, i. 34. of godliness, 390. of iniquity, 390. ii. 107. N. Nathan, j)arable of, App. 14. Natural religion, modern systems of, guilty of what fallacy, ii. 203. Neighbour, sense of the word among the .Tews, iii. 22. 55. Christian sense of the term, 65. Nepos, his testin)ony to the mil- lenary doctrines, i. 309. Nero, vide Antichrist. NoricB Caprotinifi, feast of, dis- tinguished by what peculiarity, iii. 314. Numbers, names represented by their, App. 216. Nuptial union, characteristic of the relation of Christ and his church, iii. 462, sqq. from what time, V. 1 86. O. Offence, proper sense of the word, ii. 3 14. 338. metaphorical sense of, 339. consequences of giv- ing, wliat, 315. causes or n)0- tives to giving, 317 — 322. 350. authors or givers of offences, who, 323. 337. 340, sqq. Ogdoas, the mystical, a type of what, i. 343. App. 189. Oil vessel of the parable, a type of what, V. 498. Olivet, mount, the supposed lo- cality of what future events, i. 167. 168. 395. prophecy de- livered on, iv. 192, sqq. Oral teaching of the a])ostles, per- petuated by tradition, i. 365. Orators, Christian, as opposed to those of the Gentiles of their own time, v. 291, sqq. Orders of persons set in the church, ii. 169. Origen, his opinion of the mil- lenarian doctrines, i. 329. his opinion of the Devil, 460. his opinion of the preexistence of the world before the creation of man, 348. his natural his- tory of the pearl, ii. 223. his doctrine of the non-eternity of future punishments, App. 228. 474 INDEX OF MATTERS. Padagogue, or Uai8ay(>>y6i of an- quity, iv. 406, sqq. Palingeiiesia or Regeneration, i. 226. 230. 351. Papias, his testimony to the mil- lennium, i. 273, s(|q. Parable of our Lord, ascribed to him, 291. Parable, sense of, in the Old Tes- tament, App. 2. of rhetorif, what, 3. Parables, out of the Gospels, alle- gories, i. 28. of the Old 'I'esta- nient, 93. of the Gemara, ibid. use of, among the people of the East, 92. minor, or allego- rical com|ee><, leaven of, what, iii. 77. 83, sqq. number of, 86. iv. 298. and Scribes, how distin- guished, ibid. Pharisees, how esteemed and treated by our Lord as the ob- jects of his ministry, iii. 356. their compensation of moral defects by ceremonial rigliteuus- ness, iv. i 15. 313. their allow- ance of the liberty of divorce, 120. historical account of the rise and progress of tlie sect, 296, sqq. just estimate of their true moral character, what, 304, sqq. Philo Judaeus, opinion of the fu- ture restoration of the Jews, i. 364. his testimony to the corruption of human nature, ii. 210. his sense of the word neighbour, iii. 156. Phineas, vide Elijah. Phylacteries, what, iv. 303. niarii, vide Faith. Plants, growth of, in the East, ii. 154. Pleasures, allegorically represent- ed by harlots, iii. 579. n\Tj6ovcra uyopa, what, iv. 335. Polycrates, ring of, iii. 519. I\)lytheism of anti(|uity, iii. 584. Poor, rights of, among the Jews, iv. 149. Porters or doorkeepers, among the ancients, v. 537. A|>p. 63. Poverty ofspirit, synonymons with becomingasa littlechild.ii. 287. Power of binding and loosing, what, ii. 364. how far commu- nicated to the successors of the apostles, 369. Prayer, success in, placed on what condition, ii. 372. an argument for a standing form of praver, 373. condition, whether abso- lute or relative, ibid. sqq. essen- tially what kind of religious olTice, iv 284. times of, among the Jews, 317, s(|(j. INDEX OF MATTERS. 475 Primogeniture, rights of, among the Jews, v. 503. Up6, senses of the Greek preposi- tion, ii. 527. Probation, scheme of, progres- sively completed, ii. 113. v. 512.' Probation of the Jewish church, in what sense special, v. 62, sqq. Procurator, of an ancient domestic establishment, what, iv. 5. Prodigal, comparison of, with the miser, iv, 169. Productiveness of parts of the an- cient world, ii. 19. Propagation of the Gospel, its ex- tent and rapidity, ii. 178, sqq. peculiarity of its instruments, 307- Property, the total sacrifice of, for eleemosynary purposes, not or- dinarily required of Christians, iii. 270, sqq. Prophecies of our Saviour, at what period in his ministry chiefly delivered, i. 36. Prophecy, idiom of, what, i. 124. "• 517- V. 395- . Prophet, the, promised by Moses, v. 64. Prophets, order of, when insti- tuted, v. 64, sqq. series and succession of, from Samuel to Malachi, 70, sqq. schools of the prophets, 75, sqq. sense of the name of prophet, 78. proper office, and in what man- ner preparatory for the Gospel, 79. treatment of the prophets, 83. false prophets properly what, 279. Proselytes, the, iii. 590. iy. 373. 397- Proverb of St. John's Gospel, i. 8. 138. ii. 487. 489._ Providence, the particular, among the Jews, iii. 351. iv. 83. Prudence as opposed to wisdom, properly what, iv. 46. Uraxol, the, who among the pri- mitive Christians, iii. 276. Publicans, moral estimation of among the Jews, iii. 552, sqq. Pytiiagoras, school of, their defi- nition of criminal justice, ii. Pythias, the Lydian, ii, 392. R. Reaping, modes of, in the East, ii. 85._ Recognitions of Clement, testi- mony to Antichrist, i. 384. Redress or resentment of injuries, doctrine of our Saviour with respect to it, ii. 356. nature of the injuries, ibid, methods to be observed in procuring their redress, 360. Regeneration, synonymous with becoming a little child, ii. 286. peculiarity of the doctrine, 292. properly to be understood of the adult, 299. Relations of unequal friendship — their rights and obligations, re- ciprocally, ii. 498, sqq. between Christ and his Church, how re- presented, 510. Repentance, necessity and efficacy of, not taught in the Penta- teuch, V. 80. Restoration of the Jews, i. 202. 359- V- 35°- App. 77. 80, 94. 198. Resurrection, the first, i. 1 79. 188. 265, sqq. 326, sqq. V. 573. Revelation, the, literal construc- tion of the parts relating to the millennium, i. 313, sqq. Rhetoric, modes of producing conviction laid down by it, i. 77. argument, how divided by it, 79. systems of, anciently, V. 293. Righteousness, vide Moral. Rings, use of anciently, iii. 519. Road, the bloody, what, iii. 47. Rock, the, in Judaea, ii. 14. 476 INDEX OF MATTERS. Roma aeterna, vide lilasphemy. Roman empire. \'ide Karfxov. Rome, citizens of, their wealth, iv. 12. S. Sabbath, the Christian, tradition- ary, ii 367. Sabbatic years among the Jews, V. 262. Sacea, feast of, distinguislied by what usage, iii. 315. Sjidducces, the, question of con- cerning the resurrection, i. 258. Sagene, the, what, ii. 250. Samaritans, the, iii. 58. 475. 479. 590. iv. 372. 393. Samuel, call of, to the propheticil othce, V. 65. 68. Satan, before his fall, probably what, i. 469. Satum or seah, content of, ii. 187. Scandal, vide Offence. Scribe, vide Pharisee. Scribes, ministerial relation of, iii. 87. Scripture, vide Interpretation, idiom of, in speaking of cause and effect, iv, 86. in express- ing sjjiritual ideas under sen- sible images, 115. 145. in speaking of angels, or angelic essences, v. 408. Sea, the (ircat, what, App. i 10. Seed-time in .Tudaia, ii. 10. Seleucia, destruction of the Jews of, V. 238. sqq. Seleucidae, era of, the date of the prophecv of the 2300 davs, •• 358. ' Self-love, founded ultimately on the love of God, iii. 33. Seneca, his arguments for the for- giveness of injuries, ii. 422. Scptuagint ('hronologv, incon- sistent with the millenary doc- trines, i. 3:53. 410. Sheep, how trained in the lOast, ii. 493- docir of the, what, 553- 559- 5^o- metaphorical sense of the term in Scripture, 573- Sheep-folds among the Jews, ii. 491. Shepherd, the good, why so call- ed, ii. 550. door of, what, 553. metaphorical use of the term in Scripture, 573. sqq. Shepherds, the seventy, vision of, in the book of Enoch, App. 145. sqcp Sicily, productiveness of parts of, anciently, ii. 20. Sign, vide Son of Mnn. Signs from heaven, v. 265, sqq. among the Jews, before the war, 266, sqq. Siloam, spring of, nature of, v. 270. Similitudes or parables of the |)ast()r of Hermas, i. 29. Simon Magus, rise of, v. 386. Slaves waited on by their masters or mistresses, anciently, iii. 3 13, sqq. numbers of, in ancient times, App. 31, sqq. prices of, 38, sqq. classes, denomi- nations, and services of, 40. sqq. 48. estimation and treat- ment, 49, sq(|. Socrates, argument of, for the forgiveness of injuries, ii. 420, sqq. Son of Man, the, sign of, v. 410, sqq. Soul, the, vide Intermediate State. Sower, parabolic character of, ii. 26. Spade, used in gardens and vine- vards in the East, anciently, iii. 362. Spain, productiveness of parts of, ii. 20. iv. 334. Stars, the emblems of what, v. 407. Stephen Gobarus, testimony to the milknnium, i. 338. ac- counl of the clothing of the INDEX OF MATTERS. 477 first human pair in Paradise, 439- Steward, or olKovofios of antiquity, iii. 318. iv. 3, sqq. Stewardship, every, necessarily a responsible office, iii. 98. iv. 94- Stoning, mode of, among the Jews, V. loi. Sulpicius Severus, a believer in the millennium, i. 335. Summum bonuni, numberof opin- ions concerning the, anciently, ii. 247. Swine, how trained in Cisalpine Gaul, ii. 496. T. Tabernaculum Abrahae, what and where, v. 359. Talents, metaphorical and para- bolic sense of, v. 543, sqq. 551. sqq- Tares, what, 11. 77. 79. Teachers, false, or "^evboirpocpriTai., V. 278. 280. Temporal^ vide Good. Temporal calamities, whether judgments, upon sin, iii. 342, sqq- 35 I' sqq- Tempt, to, its proper sense, m. 15. Tertullian, testimony to the mil- lenary doctrines, i. 305, sqq. account of Antichrist, 281. Thanksgiving, essentially what, iv. 286. Theodoret, his opinion of Anti- christ, i. 386. of the mystery of iniquity, 392. of the Kare- xov of St. Paul, 394. Theophylact, his opinion of Anti- christ, i. 387. Therapeutae, the, what, iii. 277. Theudas, what, ii. 546. 547. Thieves and robbers, names of, applied to whom by our Sa- viour, ii. 515, sqq. Thorns, in Judeea, ii. 13. Thought, taking of, what, iii. 168, sqq. 190, sqq. Threshing-time in Judeea, ii. 85. Tobit, expectation of, with regard to the restoration of the Jews, App. 78. Towers, in Judaea, v. 8. Tradition of the elders or Phari- sees, iii. 92. iv. 293. 301. Traditions of the early Christian church, i. 366. 398. App. I74- Treasures, concealment of, in the East, ii. 217. instances of the discovery of, 218. ascribed to Mercury or Hercules, 232. Trees, growth of, in the East, ii. 154. growing in the sea, 161. metaphorical image of, 177. iv. 361. Trypho, the Jew, testimony to the expectation of Elijah by the Jews of his time, i. 154. a stranger to the millenary doctrines, 286. opinion of the Gospel morality, ii. 414. Tuscan history, the, its cosmo- gony, i. 346. U. Uniones, or pearls, why so called, ii. 224. 'Yrramov, what, iv. 213. V. Valentinians, some peculiar opin- ions of, App. 73. TOO. lOI. Valentinus, age of, App. 73. Vegetables, growth of, in the East, ii. 154. Victorinus, bishop of Pettaw, his testimony to the millennium, i- 332- Vienne and Lyons, churches of, their conception of Antichrist, i. 378. Villicus, the, of antiquity, iv. 4. Vine, the, metaphorical image of, what, iii. 365. value and esti- mation of, 367. Vineyard, the, parabolic or meta- phorical sense of, iii. 365. iv. 356, sqq. V. 40, sqq. Vineyards, time of cultivating an- 478 INDEX OF MATTERS. cietitly, iii. 361. iv. 327. con- struction of, among the Jews, V. 4. animals infesting, ibid, rent^ of, among the Jews, i i. Vitality, the intrinsic, of the Christian religion, ii. 136. 141, Vocation, the Christian, indis- criminate, V. 5 14. Vocatores, the, of antiquity, what, iii. 409. W. Wars, Rumours of, y. 384, sqq. ^^'atcll^llness, the virtue of Chris- tian, what, i. 1 16, sqf]. v. 432, sqq. 479, sq(|. 492, sqq. Wealth, the gift of God, iii. 126. 135. iv. 75, sqq. abuse of, of how many kinds, iii. 124. iv. 131. 169, sqq. abuse of, in what way, liable to be how re- sented, iii. 127, sqq. ill-ac- quired, doctrine of the good use of, iv. 68, sqq. ^\'id()ws, support of, in the pri- mitive church, iii. 275. ^^'inds, cycles or divisions of, an- ciently, App. 111. ^^"ine-presses, anciently, what, y. 6. receivers or cisterns, what, ibid. ^\'itnesses, the Two, i. 162. 368. 369. App.85.95.139.156.157. Woman, the, taken in adultery, narrative of, iv. 308. ^Vonla^, the Son of, in the book of Enoch, App. 1 18. X. Xylophoria, the, what, App. 228. Z. Zacharias, son of Barachias, who, iii. 519. 520, sqq. Zealots, the sect of, ii. 544. Zizan, vide Tares. Zonin, vide Tares. Works by the same Author. Dissertations upon the Principles and Arrangement of an Har- mony of the Gospels. In three volumes. Oxford^ at the Uni- versity Press. 1830. Supplementary Dissertations upon the Principles and Arrange- ment of an Harmony of the Gospels. In one volume. Oxford, at the University Press. 1834. Harmonia Evangelica, sive quatuor Evangelia Grsece, pro Tem- poris et Rerum Serie, in Partes quinque distributa. Editio secunda. Oxonii, e Typographeo Academico. mdcccxxxiv. Joannis Miltoni Fabulae, Samson Agonistes et Comus, Graece. Oxoniij excudebat S. Collingwood, Academiae Typographus, MDCCCXXXii. Veneunt apud J. H. Parker, &c. Date Due Ae*-^ mj . — ' twfn m^ . 9 \^ iiiiinn