descendants of barbarians, who formerly dwelt in Crete, and afterwards passed over to the continent. That this view is the correct one, and has received the support of Greek and Roman authors, Movers (1841), Bertheau (1842), and Lengerke (1844,) abundantly prove.

From the book of Genesis we learn that the first attempt at centralization took place in the fertile plains watered by the Euphrates and Tigris. "In the earliest records," says Heeren, "of the human race, the name of Babylon appears as the primeval seat of political society, and the cradle of civilization." This we should expect from the wonderful fertility of these plains, and from their contiguity to the higher regions first inhabited by Noah and his sons after the deluge. Such being the case, we feel induced, both by Scripture and the probability of the case considered in itself, to conclude that the germs of civilization first quickened into growth in these plains, and were afterwards transferred to other regions. The researches of modern scholars remarkably confirm this idea.

Lepsius and Saalschütz, in their admirable researches into the origin of alphabetic writing, have shown that it probably belongs to a period before the dispersion; that the alphabet of the Indians had a common source with that of the Semitic tribes; that the square character, adopted by the Hebrews during the captivity, was marked by more originality than any other; that the harmony between the Semitic alphabet and the Egyptian hieroglyphics is more intimate than is generally imagined; and that the Phoenicians and Hebrews, in migrating eastward from the country of their common origin, retained their knowledge of the art of writing as well as that of speaking. These views are in a measure sustained by the celebrated scholar De Wette. He regards it as "more probable" that the first sources of writing are to be sought among the Babylonians.

The researches of Boeckh into ancient

weights, coins, and measures, result in the same conclusion. He has shown that the systems of weights and measures prevalent in Babylon, Syria, Phoenicia, Judea, Egypt, Sicily, Italy, and Rome— in all the countries of the ancient world in fact, form one great whole. He has, moreover, proved most satisfactorily that the meteorology of all ancient nations is to be traced up to Babylon as its source. This profound work of Boekch's, says Grote, “exhibits the diffusion of institutions originating in the very ancient civilization of Babylon, to the neighbouring countries whose period of settled ordinances and commerce was more recent." It has generally been considered that western nations obtained their knowledge of astronomy from the Babylonians. Recent investigations have served to establish the fact, that the Chinese owe their knowledge of this science to the same people.

Thus, then, in the history of science, as well as in the Bible, Babylon appears as the centre of civilization.

Archæology has, of late, done much in support of revealed truth. Many works have been recently published, not merely in Germany, but in England and America, in which it is plainly asserted that the late origin of the Pentateuch is evident, since alphabetic writing was unknown in the time of Moses. A few interesting extracts on this subject will show the impudent ignorance of such an assertion. "The antiquity of the invention of writing," says Lepsius,* "is placed beyond the reach of controversy; not only by the age and demonstrable genuineness of the Egyptian documents, but also by the pictorial representations of writing materials on the earliest of their monumental remains." A papyrus document is now in existence bearing a date long prior to the time of Abraham. Chevalier Bunsen, in his Ancient Egypt, informs us, that "the Egyptians had writings and books in the earliest period in which we have monuments. The pen and inkstand appear on the monuments Preface to the "Book of the Dead," p. 17.

No wonder, then, that Ewald, in his late work on Israelitish History, declares, speaking of the nations of Western Africa, that "writing, among these nations, always appears more ancient than any history can disclose.' So

much is evident, that it was enjoyed by the Shemitish nations long before Moses appeared," p. 69.

The recent discoveries of Nineveh have brought to light one interesting fact among many. Notwithstanding the mention made of battering-rams by Ezekiel, our works on Ancient History and Antiquities regard the ancients as having been indebted to the Macedonians and Carthaginians for these military engines. Mr. Ledyard has within a few months past discovered several representations in which this machine is portrayed.

Mention is more than once in the Bible made of a bow of brass, rendered by our translators "a bow of steel." They and more recent critics have been misled from ignorance of Egyptian Antiquities. Recent experiments have proved that the Egyptians, by an alloy of copper, were in the habit of making their most hard and elastic weapons. An ancient Egyptian sword has been found to contain 85 parts of copper, 14 of tin, and 1 of iron. The stone-cutters' chisels in the British Museum, taken from the granite quarries of Syene are of the same materials. Nor was this confined to the Egyptian. An antique sword, found in France, a short time since, produced 88 parts of copper, and 12 of tin. "Such alloys, copper with a small mixture of tin, were anciently employed as weapons and tools in the place of steel."-Enc. of Chemistry, 1844.

Much interesting and valuable information has recently been obtained from ancient coins and inscriptions. The splendid works, "Trésor de Numismatique," and Boeckh's "Corp. Inscript.," leave us but little to be desired on these subjects. From these sources, Akerman has lately (1846) illustrated the narra

Bailie (1844) the places of the Apocalypse. Thus Akerman shows, from coins, that the town-clerk (Acts xix. 35) was a personage of great importance. The dignity and duties of the Asiarchs (chief men of Asia, Acts xix. 31), and the meaning of the title Neocoros, assumed by Ephesus, (Acts xix. 35, translated a "worshipper,") have recently been admirably explained by means of coins and inscriptions. Kranse's Neocoros (1845) exhausts the subject.

In Biblical Criticism much has also been accomplished of late. Tischendorf has recently printed the New Testament and fragments of the Septuagint, from Ephraim's Rescript-the celebrated Codex C of biblical critics; regarded as the oldest manuscript extant of the sacred writings. Chemical science has rendered this most important and venerable work legible. The editor has an Appendix on the disputed passage, 1 Tim. iii. 16, in which he asserts that Ocós, God, is, indubitably, the correct reading; the medial line which distinguishes the theta from the omicron having been by him distinctly traced.

Much difficulty has been felt by critics, arising from the differences which exist between the Septuagint and the Hebrew text. Two works of standard authority have recently made their appearance on this subject. Thiersch, anxious to ascertain whether the derivation in question was such as to warrant the belief that it could have originated from competent MS. authority, applied himself, for two years, to the study of the Hebrew and Greek Pentateuch. The conclusion to which he comes is, that "the Alexandrian translators proceeded evidently in making their version on principles which allowed them an almost arbitrary latitude, and that in the exercise of this they can reasonably be supposed to have made the changes which appear in their version, without seeking the origin of them in a different Hebrew text." The other

*See an article by Prof. Hackett, which appeared in the last number of the Bibliotheca Sacra.

work to which we referred, is that by Dr. Frankel (1841.) He, in point of fact, agrees with Thiersch.

The late investigations of Peyron, Tattam, Parthey, and Meiar, in the modern Egyptian languages, have thrown much light upon Scripture. For instance, Meiar (1846) well explains the name given to Joseph, Gen. xli. 45, as meaning "the support of life," and the Egyptian word in Gen. xli. 43, translated in our version "bow the knee," as though from the Hebrew, as signifying "bow thyself down," being the Egyptian imperative with the pronoun of the second person. This same author, with Gesenius and Bunsen, consider the word Pharaoh as compounded of the masculine article p, and ouro, king; thus supporting the opinion of Josephus.

Lassen, Bohlen, and others, have employed much learning in illustrating the Bible from Persian and Indian sources, and from oriental inscriptions. Thus, the word translated "lieutenant," Est. iii. 12, &c., has lately been found in an inscription in ancient India. Its proper orthography is "ks'atrapa," i.e., warrior of the host; hence our word "satrap." The name Cyrus appears now to be an appellation meaning "the sun." Compare the Indian title of dignity surja, which denotes the same. The images mentioned Lev. xxvi. 30, &c., were unknown until the discovery of several Punic and Palmyrene inscriptions, when it appeared that they were pillars or images of the sun.

Hebrew proper names have recently had much light thrown upon them by Kosagarten, in his "Prænomina of the Arabs," and by Ewald, in a recent admirably-written essay.

Much attention has of late been paid to Chronology. Seyffarth's "Chronologia Sacra" (1846) is pre-eminently valuable, and surpasses every other work on the subject. This author advocates the era of the world, which accords with the Septuagint. An admirable treatise on the date of Christ's birth has lately appeared from the pen of Wieseler. From four data given in the gospels, he determines, with great critical sagacity, the period of that event. The conclusion to which he comes is as follows: "In respect, therefore, to the month and day of Christ's birth, we are brought to the conclusion that the day must be left undecided, and that of the months, the close of December, together with January and February, should be taken into consideration, of which, however, December has the least, January a greater, and February decidedly the greatest probability in its favour." He had before determined the year to be 750, U. C.

Well has it been said by Professor Ritter: "God's truth is not the exclusive property of a single science; it must penetrate and pervade all sciences, if they would claim to have any participation in it." F. B. Extracted from the Canada Protestant Herald for April.

Ir was at an early hour, on a brilliant morning, the third Wednesday in May, 1839, that a gay and dashing young man,

altogether devoted to the pleasures of the world, called unexpectedly, and under the influence of great and joyous ex

gent and respectable acquaintance in London, of nearly the same age, but, happily, of very dissimilar tastes and habits, and dashed into his apartment, before he had taken breakfast, while he exclaimed, at once, without allowing himself time to inquire after the health of his friend, "Well, my dear fellow, I have broken in upon you by times this morning, and in an unusual manner; but I am going out soon to-day, with a party of friends, and I want you to accompany us, and you must not say nay. We have engaged a splendid carriage and four, and shall leave London in style. We go out of Pall-mall precisely at ten o'clock." "Well, but George, you have not yet told me where you are going at this early part of the day, and in the brilliant manner that you have been representing. Are you intending an excursion into the country for the day, to have a few hours rural enjoyment, and freedom from the heat, bustle, and turmoil of the city?"

You

"Oh! no, my dear fellow-we are going into the country, certainly; but our object is not a mere rural excursion, or mere rural pleasure. We have a higher aim. We have other game to bring down. We are off for Epsom. are aware that the races commenced yesterday, and that this is the principal day; it is the great Derby day;-all the world will be at Epsom to-day. Who would be at home in empty London on the day when the Derby stakes are run for? I would rather lose a hundred pounds than be absent from the downs. I expect it will be brilliant sport. We shall all enjoy ourselves, I am sure. You will accompany us, I hope?"

"No, George, you must not expect me to join your party to-day. Indeed, it is impossible. I have a great aversion to races and the race-course, and, with my views and convictions, I cannot accompany you as you wish."

"What, my dear fellow, do you mean? Are you in jest or in earnest? Not the latter, I am persuaded. Not join a select party to go to Epsom on the Derby day?

Really, William, you are so scrupulous, and so very nice,—so particular and fastidious in everything,-that I know not how to meet you; but, come, do away with your scruples for once, and let me see that you are willing to unite with us in enjoying a little innocent pleasure." George, you mistake me, or do me injustice. If you term my views scruples, they are, at least, conscientious scruples; if, as you state, my sentiments are nice, and pertinaciously maintained, they have, at least, this good qualitythat they have been carefully formed, and are the result of thought, discrimination, and of close and somewhat extended observation."

"Well, my friend, I have not time, nor have I the disposition, this morning, to enter into any argument with you on the subject; for I am all excitement. But, really, I do feel surprised that you can so calmly, and without regret, lose a day's pleasure, and high pleasure, too, when offered to you with so much frankness and cordiality."

"Pleasure, George, pleasure? Pleasure at Epsom on the Derby day? Pleasure on Epsom race-course? I tell you ingenuously, it would be no pleasure to me. It would, instead of pleasing me, grieve and sadden my spirit."

"William, my dear fellow, you must be joking! What! no pleasure at Epsom -no pleasure on the race-downs-no pleasure in witnessing the contest on the Derby day? I cannot understand you -I cannot believe you. To me it is quite a luxury-a delicious pleasure—an extraordinary enjoyment! When I anticipate it, it makes the blood thrill in my veins;-I am all enthusiasm. You can

never have been, William, at Epsom, especially on the Derby day. If you had, you would say it is a glorious scene. How often have I observed it, and been delighted with it. When proceeding towards Epsom, how have I been struck with the sight on every hand. The crowds moving out of London, the roads lined with passengers, hundreds and thousands of carriages, and vehicles of all descriptions, rolling rapidly along, in one continuous course, from the humble, lightspringed cart to the splendid six-in-hand. How have the inns and turnpike-gates been besieged; what a development of life and enthusiasm,—what a display of property, what an exhibition of beauty! Why, William, on the Derby day, the road itself to Epsom is, to me, full of charms. I never saw anything like itso varied, so animated, so exciting! and then, when we arrive at the course, what a scene opens upon us! What multitudes collected!-what multitudes continually pouring in!-what perfection of arrangement!-what a display of elegance and beauty! Why, to see the grand stand, with its galaxy of nobility and splendour, always gave remarkable impulse to me. Then, to view the sleek, graceful, and noble animals which were to contend for the magnificent stakes, moving impatiently about, with their jockies on their backs, why, it is worth going a hundred miles just to see them, William! And then, when the bell rung, the course was cleared, and arrangements were made for starting, was it not to me beautiful-most beautiful? What an exciting moment! How intense the anxiety, and yet how thrilling the pleasure! Now all is arranged. What order-what excitement-what hopes and fears! The horses are placed. Everything is ready. The signal is given. Off they go! twenty or thirty beautiful creatures-the perfection of form, elegance, and agility. With what fleetness they hurried by-every limb and muscle in full play-with nostrils distended, and veins ready to burst. How have I followed them with my eye, and with what solicitude, almost breath

less have I watched the foremost on their return to the grand stand, and observed the tremendous struggles of two or three of the fleetest and most powerful to reach the winning-post first, as though they were determined to conquer, or fall down lifeless on the course! How have they been spurred and stimulated, when within a comparatively few yards' distance of the goal, until, by a last and desperate effort as though sensible that everything depended on it-one of the noble creatures suddenly and fearfully plunged forward, winning some thousands of pounds by half a quarter of a length! I have seen many spectacles, William, but never have I beheld one by any means so pleasurable and so exciting as that which is witnessed on Epsom racecourse on the great Derby day! I really cannot understand you, I must say again, when you tell me it would be no pleasure for you to be present to behold such a scene. I am convinced you would be delighted. Lay aside, then, for once, your preconceived notions, and join us this morning."

"No, George-I am quite firm, and resolved not to go. I see that you are very fond of the race-course, and, I must acknowledge, I am sorry to observe it. I think the taste is bad-radically bad. I consider that the dangers associated with the race-course-I mean, especially, the moral dangers-are pre-eminently great, and almost innumerable. You have spoken to me of the pleasures of the races, and of your pleasures in attending them; but, I assure you, I regard those pleasures to be essentially pernicious and ruinous-like the apples of Sodom, of which we read,-fair and attractive without, but full of dust. The pleasures of the race-ground! where is their genuineness?-where their intelligence?where their solidity?—where their purity? Will they bear examination? Do they commend themselves to a virtuous, benevolent, and rightly-constituted mind? Are they associated with the happiness of man? Are they in unison with simple and pure tastes?—with kindness and