Hence, to page 136, follow some observations on the Penta teuch and the Mosaic Chronology; of which the dissonance, according to the Samaritan, Hebrew and Septuagint version are too well known to need any thing further being said. It was hardly possible, in such frequent copyings, to avoid numerical mistakes, which, however, do not alter, in any notable degree, the general complexion of the Bible chronology, which seems to accord sufficiently with the known history of what may be well called modern civilization.

The Druids admitted the creation of matter. (p. 137.) We see no proof of this. Who is there in the present day who does not agree, that the word translated create, in the beginning of Genesis, is also employed with the same meaning as to form, to shape, to fashion? The Druids were not Christians; nor does Mr. Higgins exhibit his authority for his assertion. The eternity of matter was an undisputed tenet of Pythagoras, and the oriental philosophers, as our author acknowledges. (See also the passage referred to by Mr. Higgins in Beausobre's Hist. de Manicheisme, lib. v. ch. 4, p. 207,) who agrees with Maimonides in his More Nevochim, that not one of the ancient versions or Chaldee paraphrases of the Pentateuch, attach to the word Bara, the meaning of creation in the modern sense of the word.

When letters arrived in Great-Britain. (p. 146.) The Phonicians traded to Great-Britain somewhat earlier than 1100 years before Christ? Mr. Higgins must forgive us for putting a quære to this assertion.

They brought, (or some other Eastern people brought) an alphabet of 16 or 17 letters. It is manifest, if at that time they had had 22, they would have introduced 22.

The Pentateuch was written with 22 letters. We beg leave to annex a quære? Moses compiled the Pentateuch 1500 years before Christ; hence the Cadmean alphabet of 16 or 17 letters must have been anterior to the date of the Pentateuch of 22 letters? Another quære, Mr. Higgins, if you please.

The Irish had only 16 or 17 letters, and their system of alphabet was the same with the Greek and Phoenician, as to the

young by oral tradition: mutual improvement must have compelled the formation of regular societies of these master builders, for we know that no trace exists of any other kind of communication between them. Freemasons were builders by profession; free of, and members of these societies, necessary for the mutual interchange of knowledge, and for the handing of it down from one generation to the next. The origin of Freemasonry, then, may be traced to about half a century after the Crusades. When writing and printing became common, the original intent of these societies became superceded by the improvements in all kinds of knowledge; and the original society of freemasons being no longer necessary for the communication of their art, was continued as a social and charitable association.

letters. With some compunctions of conscience we are, upon the whole, inclined to admit this position. Hence, the Irish alphabet, consisting of only 16 or 17 letters, must have been anterior to the increase of the parent alphabet to 22, and therefore anterior to the Pentateuch, and therefore anterior to fifteen hundred years, A. C. As all this plausible reasoning depends on the date ascribed to our modern editions of the Pentateuch, and the period when the compiler or compilers lived, wherein 17 letters may have been rejected as inconvenient, and 22 afterwards adopted, the superstructure will totter on this uncertain basis. Hence, Britain was peopled either by Phoenician traders or by a swarm from the Celtic hive, upwards of 1500 years before the Christian era. Nay, some addition must be made even to this date, to allow for the increase of the letters of the alphabet from 16 or 17 to 22. On our part, another note of doubt? Sir William Drummond, in his Treatise on the Zodiacs of Esne and Dendera, adopts the Septuagint chronology, which makes the age of the world 7210 years in the year 1820 of our common era. Mr. Higgins promises to shew that the learning of the East came to Britain probably before the date of the flood, even according to the Septuagint calculation? nous verrons. In the mean time we will annex another quære.

On Festivals removed by the precession of the Equinox. (p. 149.) A very ingenious attempt to shew, (with the aid of the Rev. Mr. Maurice) that May-day was the festival of the sun entering into Taurus, which, as it must have been at least four thousand years before the Christian era, was probably a sacred festival from the very creation of the earth and of man, and originally intended as a memorial of that auspicious period and momentous event. Connected with this, is the worship of the Bull Apis, and the Bull of Japan breaking with his horn the mundane egg. We acknowledge the ingenuity without being convinced of the truth of this hypothesis. How or when did May-day degenerate into a Phallic festival, emblematical with its May-pole of the generative power of the Eastern mythology?

Mr. Higgins has given many instances of, and authorities for the ancient prevalence of Tauric worship in various parts of the world, and particularly in England. He cites as additional authorities, Maurice's Ind. Antiq. Bryant's Heathen Mythology, Dupuis, and, in particular, Parkhurst's Heb. Lexicon, pp, 74 to 80, 351, and 401-403. April-day is the change of the festival of May-day, when by the precession of the Equinox, the sun would enter Aries instead of Taurus at the vernal Equinox; this could not have been later than 1800 years before Christ.

All this may have been so but as yet we see nothing in its favour but ingenious and plausible conjecture.

May-day, and April fool-day, however, were common to India and to Britain; and as these are astronomical festivals (?) they are not liable to the modern fashionable objection to the Indian astronomical tables of back-reckoning.

Opinions of Faber, Maurice and Collyer; (p. 154,) of Vallancey, Wilford and Davies; that the religion and superstitions of the Celts, the Druids, the Magi, and the Brahmins are identical.

The question of Brahmin back-reckoning. (ib.) "Professor Playfair, in vols. ii. and iv. of the Edinburgh Transactions, has shewn that the Brahmins could not have made the astronomical back-reckonings imputed to them, without being acquainted with the most refined of the theoretical improvements of modern astronomy. Instead of having forgotten the principles of their formulæ, they must have been much more learned than we know they were; and, in fact, much more so than their ancestors; indeed, much more learned than our modern astronomers were, until the theories of Newton were completed very lately by some French astronomers." The rest of the page contains observations, bearing on the same point, of considerable force: nor have we any hesitation in agreeing with Mr. Higgins as to the origin of this opposition, and the cause of it. "The Rev. Mr. Maurice asserts, that all the temples and caves of India were the works of Celta." Proof is wanting in support of an assertion so extensive.

"Temples, the inscriptions on which, in a language used previously to the Sanscrit, and now totally unknown to all mankind, are any day to be seen; among other places at Seringham, the temple at Malvalipuram, or the city of the great Bali, the Syrian or Irish Baal." (Crawford's Researches, vol. ii. pp. 85-92.)

In a note, (p. 159,) there is some curious disquisition on the accuracy of the usually received chronology, from the consideration of the well of Syene, Essene, or Essaoun; a place which might have been within the tropics 5,400 years ago, but not later; it being now in lat. 24° 8' 6". But the well would not have answered its astronomico-historical purpose, if it had not been within the tropics. These curious difficulties well deserve consideration.

Of the Cushites. (p. 160.) According to Maurice and Sir William Jones, these were a nation of blacks, who overran Asia. The Asiatic negro Memnon is supposed, by Mr. Higgins, to have been of this nation; the flat-faced, curley-headed VOL. IV. NO. 7.

4

Buddha of Upper Asia also belonged to them. He conjectures they settled and inhabited Africa, and built the pyramids. All this may have been, and may not have been. Let us once more be understood. In this curious and interesting question, as to a lost people, a lost language, lost arts, and lost knowledge, that once existed in Northern and Eastern Asia-as to the connexion of this last race with what may be called modern people, that is, the people within the reach of ancient history and modern history, whose probable origin is traceable to the lost race, we cannot reasonably ask for evidence beyond probability: but evidence that does not carry us thus far, is worth nothing. Bare possibility is too slender a ground to tempt us to build on it, or to excite sufficient interest in the inquiry. Let us have then, not conjecture merely, but proofs that lead on to what is probable, and we shall be content to give up the expectation of arriving at certainty: but such proof is the very lowest that can be accepted on such a subject. Of mere conjecture, there is no end, and we have no temptation to pursue it.

The Druid festival of Christmas. (p. 162.) Not distinctly made out; but it seems probable that the 25th of December was celebrated in ancient times as the birth-day of Sol, the Sun. The misletoe, which we well know is never omitted in England on Christmas day, is undoubtedly Druidical.

Gods of the British Isles. (p. 166.) Hence to 184, much learned disquisition, of all shades of truth and verisimilitude.— The etymological proofs of the connexion between the Chaldee Phoenician, Irish and Hindus, appear too strong to be slighted. Priscian, (who flourished about 525) notices the near connexion between Phoenician, Chaldee and Hebrew: and Bochart has, undoubtedly, added to the proofs; as has Gallæus (Treatise on the Sybils.)

Of the sacred fire of the Druids. (p. 185.) Much learning on this subject and on Druidesses. Mr. Higgins cites, (p. 187) the Rev. Dr. Henry's History of England; we take this opportunity of observing, that among the accounts of the Druids in Britain, those contained in the two first volumes of Henry's History of England, are not the least instructive and curious. They go far to support the opinions maintained by Mr. Higgins.

Chaldees. (p. 189.) The Persian Magi, the Gallic Druids, and the Chaldee Priests of the Assyrians, were, if not of one and the same sect, yet a similar order, agreeing in all circumstances known concerning them. The Chaldeans of Daniel were not a nation, but the priesthood of the country.

Dr. Aikin, says "the Chaldeans or Celts, in fact, flourished along the Euphrates, and supplied a vast mass of population to

Judea." Dr. Aikins' work, and his authorities are not mentioned.

The Culdees of the British Isles (p. 193,) were Priests, who succeeded by hereditary descent: this is not, and never was the case with any denomination of Christian priesthood. Is Culdee and Chaldee the same? The last memorial of the Culdees was in the church of St. Peter, at York in England, A. D. 936.

Of Iona, Jupiter, Janus, (the Etruscan Deity) Dhia, Dia, Jah, Jeue, Jeu, Zeus, Jupiter, Iow, sos, Deus, Esus, Hesus, Joun, Iauna, (Basque language.) lonn, Ianus, Eanus. (p. 196–200,) a great deal of ingenious but inconclusive play of etymology, which we cannot stop to examine.

The Druids guilty of human sacrifices. (p. 202). From the mortifying evidence of Cæsar, (says Mr. Higgins,) I am obliged, however unwillingly, to acknowledge this. There are passages which, (independent of the devoted daughter of Jeptha,) look very much like this practice in the Old Testament: perhaps they may be otherwise explained. (Joshua vi. c. 26. 1 Kings, c. xvi. 34.)

Coarbs of Iona. (p. 203.) Are they the Cabiri, Corybantes of Herodotus and Strabo?

St. Patrick. (p. 206.) Never mentioned by any author in any work of veracity in the fifth, sixth, seventh or eighth centuries. Other circumstances are here mentioned, militating against the existence of this saint.

No idol worship in the primitive ages. (p. 209.) Many proofs in support of this position.

The Grecian Lithoi, Stela. (p. 210.) Pillars of stone, obelisks, or single stones set up to commemorate the dead; or for other memorials. (See Gen. xxviii. 18, 19, 22. Joshua xxiv. 26, 27. 1 Sam. vi. 14, 15, 18. Judges ix. 6. 1 Sam. vii. 12. 1 Sam. xx. 19. 2 Sam. xx. 8. Gen. xxxv. 20.)

The lithoi or cromlechs of the Irish and Britons, are single stones, or a stone on another, or across two or more others.Toland says Crom, in Irish, is to adore: an Irish friend informs us, the meaning is, bent down. Leach, a stone. The stone mentioned in (Levit. xxvi. 50) akn mskit, called in the vulgate lapidem insignam, is called in the Chaldee paraphrase, lapis incurvationis. (Rowland, p. 216.) These lithoi are common in Hindustan. The monolithoi must not be confounded with the heaps called Carns. Have the monolithoi of the ancient people degenerated into linghams in the East? There are traces but no good evidence of these lithoic linghams among the western Druids.