statements of any kind; but we confess that with respect to many of the representations of both Josephus and Eusebius, we wish to see them submitted to the process of an enlightened and honest criticism before we receive them to our confidence. As a case in point, we shall extract from the second chapter, On the Remains of Chaldean History which confirm the sacred accounts, the Author's notice of Berosus.

The great antiquity of the Assyrian empire, and the connexion, which from the earliest periods subsisted between the inhabitants of Nineveh and Babylon, and the Israelites, must naturally lead us to expect traces of correspondence between those few memorials which are to be found in the fragments of their history still preserved, and the reports of the sacred historians.

Berosus, the Babylonian historian, appears to have been a priest of Belus at Babylon, and a native of that city; he wrote a history of the Chaldeans, in three books. When the Macedonians, under Alexander the Great, took possession of Babylon", he acquired from them the Greek language, and quitting Asia, settled at Cost, and thence removed to Athens, where he became distinguished by his astrological productions, and where a statue was erected to him. His history was collected from ancient records carefully preserved in the temple of Belust, and was dedicated to Antiochus Soter, king of Assyria, who began his reign B. C. 279; or, as some suppose, to his son, Antiochus Theos It was esteemed of high authority by the Orientalists and Greeks. It contained an account of the first ages of the world from the creation, and of the dynasty of the kings who reigned in Chaldea before the flood. The chronology is obscure, and extended beyond all truth and reasonable limits Josephus and Eusebius have preserved many fragments of it, from the Greek of Alexander Polyhistor, which concur, in some respects, with the accounts of Scripture. There are five books of a spurious history under the name of Berosus, which contradict, in many points, the genuine fragments of Berosus, and which were composed, probably, by a later writer.

Berosus appears to have given a narrative of the creation of the earth and of the heavens from chaos, of the destruction of mankind by the flood, of the preservation of one family in the ark, of the building of Babel, and of the genealogy of the sons of Noah, which exhibits a resemblance to the relations of Moses, but which is disguised often by fiction. He represents it as a report, that some remains of the ark were to be seen on the Cordyæan mountains in Armenia, in his day; and states that the people were accustomed to the pitch from the planks, and carry it about for an amulet§. Tatian contr. Græc. Biblioth. Patrum, Vol. i. p. 184. Ed. Paris,

scrape

1624.

+ Vitruvius, lib. ix. c. 7. Edit. Amstel. 1549.

Joseph. contra Apion, lib. i. Varreni censur. in quendam auctorem qui sub falsâ inscriptione Berosi circumfertur. Rom. 1765.

§ Joseph. Antiq. lib. i. c. 3. s. 6. Edit. Hudson, 1720. Euseb. Præp. Evang. lib. ix. c. 11, Huet. Demon. Prop. 4. c. 2. § 18. Edit. Paris, 1679.

He seems to describe Abraham without naming him, as a just* and great man, who lived among the Chaldeans, in the tenth generation after the deluge, and who was skilled in celestial matters; and he appears to relate the account of the destruction of Sennacherib's army under Rabshakeh, stating, in conformity with Scripturet, that one hundred and eighty-five thousand men, with their leaders, were exterminated in one night by a pestilential disease, from the Divinity; and that Sennacherib, panic-struck and agonized by this calamity, fled with the remainder of his force to Nineveh, his capital, where, after a short time, he was slain in his own temple of Arasca (Nisroch,) by the treachery of his elder sons, Adrammelech and Sarasar (Sharazer,) who being driven into banishment for the murder of their father, went into Armenia; upon which Assaræhaddas (Esarhaddon,) succeeded to the kingdom. He mentions the conquest of Judea by Nebuchadnezzar, the demolition of the temple, the leading away of the Jews to captivity, and the order issued by Cyrus that the temple should be rebuilt, in perfect consistency with the accounts of the sacred histo> rians.'

To make out the claim of authority for Berosus, so far as regards his accounts of the first ages of the world from the Creation, and of the dynasty of the kings who reigned in Chaldea before the Flood, would be no easy task. The alleged preservation in the temple of Belus, of ancient records referring so minutely to those times, is not well adapted to facilitate our credence in the statements of the history of Berosus. Nor is it very probable, that Chaldean accounts would preserve the memory, much less contain so particular a narration, of the destruction of the Assyrian army before Jerusalem. It is much more probable, that Berosus had access to the Septuagint translation, which agrees with the Hebrew text in the number of men exterminated, and that be mixed up with current or invented fables, the accounts which he borrowed from that version. If his history was not published before the time of Antiochus Theos, the Greek Bible was already in circulation.

The succeeding chapters of Dr. Gray's work, treat-Of Zoroaster and the Religion of the ancient Persians.-On the Phœnicians and Sanchoniatho.-Of the connexion which subsisted between the Jews and the Egyptians.-On Hermes Trismegistus. -On Hecatæus, Manetho, Artapanus, and others.-On the Intercourse which the Grecians enjoyed with the Jews, and the knowledge they derived from it.-On the Intercourse which subsisted between the Romans and the Jews, and on the Means of Information which the former possessed. On these several topics, *Joseph. Ant. lib. i. c. 7. + 2 Kings, xix.

1022.

Antiq. lib. x. c. 1. et 2. Biblioth. Patrum, lib xv. p. 117. Colom.

Antiq. lib. x. c. 2. Joseph. cont. Apion, lib. i. § 19. Euseb. Pre. Evang. lib. ix, c. 40. Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. i. p. 392. Vol, ii, Edit. Potter.

the Author does not strike out any new lights. He is satisfied with collecting together the most general accounts, and he repeats them with less of that caution with which they should be regarded, than we could sometimes wish. For instance, in his enumeration of the circumstances from which he deduces the probability that the Greeks were indebted for a part of their knowledge and institutions to the Mosaic records, Dr. Gray states, that many of the ancient laws of Attica, might be supposed to have been borrowed from the statutes of Moses; as that which Sopater mentions, and to which Terence refers, which directed that the nearest of kindred should marry the widow of a deceased person. This example is exceedingly ill chosen, since it does not admit of doubt, that the particular statute referred to, was not, in the code of the Hebrew legislator, an original enactment. The custom which it sanctioned, had been in existence long before the times of Moses, as most clearly appears from the history of Judah, Gen. xxxviii. 8.

The tenth chapter and several subsequent divisions of the work, relate to―The religious Doctrine and Worship prevailing among different nations, in the early ages of the world.-The Existence of a Supreme Being.-The Doctrine of the Trinity. -The Creation of the World, and the Origin of Man.-The Immortality of the Soul.-The Origin of Evil, the Existence of Spiritual Beings, and the Corruption of the Human Race. Several chapters are employed in considering the events described in Scripture, and the knowledge of them which was preserved among the Heathen. The Morality of the Heathen; Sacrifice; Prayer; and the Expectation of a Divine Reformer of Mankind; are the subjects of other portions of the first volume of the work. The last two chapters are on Philo and Josephus. We extract

Chap. XIII. On the General Belief of the Divine Origin and Immortality of the Soul, among the Heathen.

A belief in the divine origin and immortal nature of the soul is to be found among the earliest and most general persuasions of all nations. There is no antiquity so remote, and no people so barbarous, as not to manifest some indications of these persuasions: they are to be regarded, however, rather as speculative opinions, mixed with error, than as pure and efficacious principles. Homer opens in his poem (Qu. what poem ?) some intimations of a future state, in which his heroes were to exist. Herodotus relates that the Egyptians first believed in the immortality, together with the transmigra tion of the soul*, and the same persuasions were received by the Brahminst, Indians, and Thracians. Cæsar represents the Druids to have anxiously instilled the doctrine of the unperishable nature of the

soul, which they also supposed to pass from one body to another after death

« The belief in a transmigration, here ascribed to the Egyptians and Druids, is illustrated by Virgil, who represents Æneas to have contemplated in the Elysian fields, souls preparing to enter into other bodies, by drinking of the oblivious streams of Lethe, and in a noble episode which Milton (and perhaps Shakspeare) has imitated, the succession of the distinguished descendants of the Trojan prince is made to pass in review before him. The conviction, however, was not so general, as not to require a frequent renewal of argument upon the subject, nor so strong as to exclude doubt, even from minds of enlarged capacity, and considerable attainments. Individuals often expressed their scepticism or their fearst, and some sects publicly denied the doctrine. The best and ablest men, however, maintained it with the strongest assurance. The reasonings of Socrates, Platos, and Xenophong, were urged with the greatest impression among the Grecians, and Ciceroll deemed himself justified in considering it as a doctrine admitted by the consent of all nations.

• Juvenal speaks of man as capable of divine things, and as having derived an understanding from heaven such as brutes do not possess.

• Pliny commends Hipparchus for having proved the relation of man with the stars, and maintained that the soul was a part of heaven**. Lucian also supposes the soul to have emanated from divine wisdom.

• The learned among the primitive Christians insisted with great effect on these and other passages, which contained intimations of the divine nature and immortality of the soul, received as axioms, or 20110 vosas, observing that the 'main particulars and foundations of Christianity were thus granted by the philosophers as universal truths. It must, however, always be remembered, that these persuasions were received only as reasonable and probable conjectures, and did not ge. nerally operate to practical and moral effects. They were supported by poets and philosophers, but they wanted the confirmation of divine authority. It is to Revelation alone, that we are indebted for that assurance which has left no excuse for doubt. The persuasions were affirmed with increased confidence among the Heathens, after the promulgation of the Gospel.' pp. 153–156.

That the principles of actions approved by the philosophers of the heathen world, and consecrated by the priests of its multiplied superstitions, were false and mischievous [vol. i. p. 166.] ; that selfish passions were recommended as glorious, and vices regarded as virtues (ib.); we do not dispute. A redundancy of proof establishes the gross depravity of mankind, as one of the most evident facts that constitute our knowledge

A

* Lib vi. cap. 13. Strabo, lib. iv. Amm. Marcell. lib. xv. cap. 9. + Sallust Bel. Cat. Orat. C. Cæsaris. # Phædo, passim, et Mela, lib. ii. Grot. de Verit. lib. i. cap. 22. § Memorabilia et Cyropædia. || Tuscul. Quæst. lib i. cap. 16. I Sat. xv. I. 143–156.

** Nat. Hist. lib. ii. c. 24.

of the human race. But is it not worthy of the most serious attention, that, in this very age of the world, in countries where the priests of Heathenism are not existing, and where the authority of Revelation is considered as having superseded the instructions of philosophy, selfish passions are still recommended as glorious? The history of mankind has not yet ceased to be a detail of crimes. What periods of time can be selected as more fruitful in the atrocities of war, than the times that have been passing over us? And to what species of wickedness can the religion of Christ be more opposed, than to that of war? A state of warfare, and the cherishing of those passions which stimulate and support the bloody contests of nations, are as remote as possible from the condition in which the Christianity of the Bible would place mankind. What other conclusion, then, is it possible to draw from the extensive prevalence of war in our own times, than that the influence of Christianity is narrow and limited? The profession of it, indeed, is general, but what other proof can be required to demonstrate the very partial subjection of mankind to its spirit and its principles, than · the sanguinary hostilities which have for so many years been receiving the patronage and support of declared Christians? Dr. Gray seems himself to be impressed with the feeling, that this opposition exists between the design and tendencies of the Gospel, and the practice of modern states; for though he refers distinctly to both the Grecian and the Roman governments as being directed by the principles of an exceptionable policy, (pp. 217, 218,) and represents correctly the salutary effect which Christianity would produce in the councils of nations, he does not supply us with examples of its forming the rule of practice in modern cabinets. What might be, and ought to be, rather than what is, appears to have been in the mind of the Author when he wrote the following sentence.

It is the spirit of Christianity alone, which moderating the views of sovereigns and states, and directing the measures of government to the legitimate objects of its institution-the promotion of the welfare of society, and the preservation of its moral interests, leads to an equitable consideration of the rights and independance of other nations, and to an unremitted regard to the well being of the community over which it presides.' p. 219.

Suicide is mentioned at p. 230, as being, in ancient times, the consequence of a want of just information on moral questions among the Heathens ; which may be true. But when Dr. Gray remarks, that if the Heathens had understood the considerations upon which afflictions are dealt out in a probationary state, 'suicide would not have been deemed noble, and Cato would not have inflicted death upon himself; an action which Se