Sacred Writers.

1. The Bible contains, not merely the only authentic, but the only clear and consistent, account of the remotest ages of the world; and that, too, communicated in a manner adapted to subserve the highest moral and religious purposes, inasmuch as it shows us how, in preparing mankind for another world, the universal Parent has dealt with individuals, with families, and with nations in this.

2. It may safely be averred, putting the question of inspiration altogether out of view, that the natural character of the sacred historians ranks them with the first of human beings. In point of grandeur and sublimity of conception, of the power of discrimination, of unaffected simplicity, of ingenuous disinterestedness, of unbending integrity, of successful execution, they are unrivalled; and it is only necessary to compare their productions with the most admired compositions of antiquity, to assign to them, unhesitatingly, the preference. From the enactments of Moses,

principle and as to form; and where any departure from this grand outline is attempted, the change has been perceptibly for the worse; while the most elegant critic of the heathen world has produced the opening of his narrative, as the most striking specimen of the true sublime which could be presented. "God said-what? Be light; and light was. Be earth; and it was so." Few will dispute the authority of Longinus on such a subject, and none can doubt his taste and judgment. If sacred history be tried by the character of its narrators, it wears the marks of undoubted authenticity.

3. Let it be tried by the events narrated; another important criterion of history. The earliest and most interesting events form the subject of its records. It begins, where revelation must be supposed to commence its testimony, with the origin of the visible creation. The first inquiries of man are directed towards the material universe, himself constituting so noble a part of it, and its destinies being so inseparably associated with his own. Urged by a nobler impulse than curiosity, he endeavours to retrace the stream of time to its fountain, and to penetrate even to the infinite Cause,

by whom all events are generated. What was to the philosopher a subject of speculation, giving birth to numberless and contradictory hypotheses, is to Moses simply a subject of history. The first sentence of his narrative unveils the hidden and eternal cause, settles the disputes of philosophy, assumes the fact of the creation, declares the Creator, and proceeds to a detail of the circumstances attending the stupendous transaction: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth;" a grandeur of expression, not inferior, perhaps, to the celebrated passage so distinguished by Longinus. Around this revealed truth, as a central point, the scattered schemes of philosophy rally, correcting their errors, reconciling their differences, and contributing their researches ; science finds the base upon which to place a fulcrum that can raise the world; history discovers the spring of the ever-flowing tide of time; and chronology, the punctum stans—the fixed, determinate, immoveable point, whence all her dates are deduced, and to which all divisions of time are to be referred. This great fact being established, the historian proceeds briefly, yet distinctly, to enumerate the leading particulars of this operation; passes on to a consideration of man's primeval state; unfolds the facts attending his degradation, leading to the miseries to which he is exposed, and accounting for the thousand natural shocks that "flesh is heir to." The narrative thus instantly connects itself with the scheme chosen for his recovery, into which all other events necessarily resolve themselves; and the grand march of providence is distinctly visible through all the shadows of agesfrom the chorus of the sons of God at the birth of nature, to the final shout of the archangel, and the trumpet which shall awaken the dead.

4. To go over the various periods of this history forms no part of our business here; but to advert to them thus generally, is sufficient to establish the position, that the events recorded are such, in their nature, as might be expected from revelation, and as are suitable to the dignity and purposes of history. To apply to them the general rule of historical judgment, they have all the collateral evidences of which such facts could be capable. Moses has no contemporary historian; the most ancient writers fall centuries after him; and he records events which took place centuries before his birth. The deluge forms the common epoch from which all nations commence their records; and under different names, Noah is the first monarch announced in history. Traditions relative to the creation agree with the narrative of Moses in all essential points, and even in form, whatever speculations and fables may disfigure the simple account. Historians, and poets more an

cient than historians, drew from this common source. Traditions of the fall are to be traced over all the east, and among the western nations; they traverse the north, and occupy the south; they have penetrated the wilds of America, and are planted in the islands of the Pacific ocean: in truth, the forms of worship and observances added to these traditions, everywhere authenticate the Mosaic narrative; and from their universality, which would have been impossible had they not originated in fact, a sanction is given to sacred history which could scarcely have been expected, which is altogether unexceptionable, because it is indirect in its nature, and infinitely diversified in its form.

5. It is no small collateral proof of the truth of sacred history, that it furnishes a clue to many facts which, although known, could not have been understood without its assistance. It serves to correct other historians; and in every instance in which the sacred writings and general history come into contact, it is to them what the chronometer is to the common watch-it measures the same period, but does it with superior precision; it relates the same events, but with greater accuracy. Still further, as the floating traditions of the heathen world bear upon the facts recorded in the Scriptures; so, by a re-action, sacred history developes the hidden import of many an ancient institution, the intention of which was not comprehended by those who lived under it, nor could it be otherwise understood; and gives consistency and reality to the traditions of antiquity. It brings distant occurrences to bear upon each other; it discloses political interests, jarring among themselves, all tending to the harmony of the universe, and the ultimate amelioration of the human race. It supplics, in short, to time, what gravity is to space-the principle which holds and draws every thing together.

6. If we examine the manner of narration; one of the most striking features of sacred history, which, while it demonstrates its authenticity, renders it invaluable, is the fidelity with which it relates occurrences offensive to the existing powers, and not always honourable to the historian himself. Patriotism is evidently a moral principle highly appreciated by Moses; yet he disguises nothing that reflects disgrace upon his country. While he could even desire to sacrifice himself for the interests of the people whom he governed, yet he never conceals and never palliates their rebellions, their ingratitude, or their vices. Self-love cannot be supposed to have been extinguished in the bosom of the historian; yet he records his own follies and infirmities with the same simplicity and sincerity with which he wrote down the sins

IV. CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES: Hebrew Cycles; Remarkable

Eras; Empires, States, and Sovereigns connected with Scripture History; Sacred and Profane History, from the Creation to the destruction of Jerusalem.

I. It is of considerable importance to a right understanding of the chronicles or history of any people, that we obtain an acquaintance with the methods according to which they computed their time. And this is the more necessary with reference to the Jews, in consequence of their having adopted two several years, i. e., civil and ecclesiastical, a want of attention to which will interpose many difficulties and apparent contradictions in the course of our reading the Holy Scriptures. Nor is it of less importance that we ascertain their method of computing days, dividing them into hours, and reckoning time generally: these being in all respects so different from the modes adopted by ourselves, that a want of attention thereto will be attended with many and serious inconveniences. This being premised, we proceed to notice the subject in its several branches.

1. The Hebrews, in common with other nations, distinguished their DAYS into natural and artificial: the former consisted of 24 hours, as the time employed by the earth in making a complete revolution round its axis; and the latter reached from sun-rise to sun-set. It has been thought that the Jews had formerly two different beginnings of the natural day; one of the sacred, or festival day, which was in the evening; the other of the civil day, which was in the morning. That the sacred day began in the evening, is certain from the command of Moses (Lev. xxiii. 32), "From even unto even shall ye celebrate your sabbaths;"* but it is not so certain that the civil day was reckoned from the morning. Jennings conjectures that before the departure out of Egypt, the Jews began all their days, both civil and sacred, with the sun's rising, as the ancient Babylonians, Persians, Syrians, and most of the eastern nations did; and that, at the time of their

*Hence Daniel makes use of the compound term, eveningmorning (viii. 14); and hence, also, the use of the Greek term Nuchthemeron, 2 Cor. xi. 25. But although this mode of com

putation began with the Jews, it was not confined to them; for the Phoenicians, Athenians, Numidians, Germans, Gauls, Druids, Bohemians, and Poles did the same.-See Grotius de Ver. Rel., l. i. s. 16. In our own language we may trace the remains of this usage, where we compute by se'nnight, and fortnight.

ning, not only of the year and of the week, but likewise of the day, that they might be distinguished from the idolatrous nations, who, in honour of their chief god, the sun, began the day at his rising. + With regard to the natural day, it is evident that it would vary in length with the season of the year. In Palestine, the longest day is about 14 hours, 12 minutes; and the shortest, 9 hours, 48 minutes. The civil day was at first divided into three parts, agreeably to the sensible difference of the sun, viz., morning, noon, and night; then into four parts (Neh. ix. 3), which could be easily determined by the position of the sun in the horizon. Afterwards it was divided into twelve equal parts, to which our Saviour refers in John xi. 9. We have no means of ascertaining when this division of the day was first introduced among the Hebrews; the Greeks derived it from the Egyptians, and it is probable that the Jews borrowed it from the same source; but this is uncertain. The earliest mention we have of hours, in the Old Testament, is in the book of Daniel (iv. 19); but it is doubtful whether the word there used is not of too general a signification to prove that the hours of which we are speaking were then in use. Leaving this part of the subject, then, we only observe, that the hours of the civil day were computed from six o'clock in the morning till six in the evening; and that the term hour is sometimes used with great latitude, and denotes the space of time occupied by a whole watch. See Matt. xxv. 13; xxvi. 40; Mark xiv. 37; Luke xxii. 59, &c. It appears, from a passage in the Old Testament (Judg. vii. 19), that the night was originally divided in the same manner as the day, viz., into three parts, or watches; but this, perhaps from its inconvenience, was altered; for in the time of our Saviour there were four watches included in this period of time, Mark xiii. 35. In the passage here referred to, the four watches are distinctly enumerated : EVEN, MIDNIGHT, COCK-CROWING, and MORNING. The first watch was from six till nine; the second, from nine to midnight; the third, from twelve to three; and the fourth, from three to six. We read in the law, that the paschal lamb was to be sacrificed "between the evenings" (Exod. xii. 6); hence

Jewish Antiquities, b. iii., c. 1. Lamy, Appar. Bib., b. i., c. 5.

we see that the Jews had two evenings; the former began at the ninth hour, and the latter at the eleventh hour. It has been remarked, that "Christ our passover," the antitype of the paschal lamb, expired at the ninth hour, and was taken down from the cross at the eleventh hour, or sun-set.*

2. The WEEK needs scarcely a remark. Six days out of the seven were devoted to the ordinary affairs of life; and the seventh was appointed a a holy sabbath, or a day of sacred rest. Besides the week of days, the Hebrews had weeks of years, the seventh of which was the sabbatical year; and also weeks of seven years, the forty-ninth of which was the year of Jubilee.t

3. MONTHS. For these the ancient Hebrews had no particular names. They called them in their numerical order, first, second, third, &c. Under Solomon we read of the month Zif (1 Kings vi. 1), which is the second month of the ecclesiastical year, and answers to that afterwards called Jiar. We also hear of the month Bul (ibid.), which answers to Marchesvan; and

of the month Ethanim (viii. 2), which corresponds with Tizri; but the origin of these names is uncertain. In the time of Moses, the months consisted of thirty days each; for he reckons 150 days from the 7th day of the second month to the 7th day of the seventh month, which makes an interval of five months, of 30 days each. In the time of the Maccabees the Jews followed the custom of the Grecians; that is, the months were lunar. These lunar months were each of them 29 days, 12 hours, and 44 minutes, but for convenience they had one of 29 days, and the following one 30, and so on alternately that which had 30 days was called a full and complete month; that which had but 29 days was called incomplete. The new moon was always the beginning of the month, and this day the Hebrews held as a sacred festival.

The following synchronical arrangement of the Hebrew and English months, to which we have added the Syro-Macedonian names, will be found useful:

solar ones.

When we say the months of the Jews thus answered to ours-Nisan to March, Jiar to April, &c., we must be understood with some latitude; for lunar months cannot be reduced to The vernal equinox falls between the 20th and 21st of March, according to the course of the solar year but in the lunar year, the new moon will fall in the month of March, and the full moon in the month of April. So that the Hebrew months will commonly answer to two of our months, the end of one and the beginning of the other. But as twelve lunar months make but 354 days, 8 hours, and 48 minutes, it is evident that the Jewish calendar, by which the sacred festivals were regulated, would soon have been in sad confusion, had they not taken some means to

*Hales' Analysis of Chronology, i, p. 115, † See unte, p. 301.

July, August.

prevent it. This they did by intercalating a month every three years, after the twelfth month, Adar, and which they called Ve-Adar— the second Adar. By this means their lunar year was made to equal the solar, because in 36 solar months there would be 37 lunar months; and the passover was always celebrated the first full moon after the equinox. But this arrangement of the Hebrew calendar, it should be observed, is made on the authority of the Jewish writers, who are not always the best guides, even in the affairs of their own nation. Their notation of the months has been implicitly followed by Christian critics and commentators, almost universally; but we believe it to be incorrect. According to their distribution of the months, the religious festivals could never have

See ante, p. 299.

Ꮓ