As I think it probable that the reader may admit. this idea in the instance of the patriarch Shem, I shall attend somewhat further to the evidence for the practice of this art among Gentile nations.

Plato, in Phædro, expressly attributes the invention, practice? of letters to the Egyptian Thoth, the Hermes, or Mercurius Trismegistus, thrice-great, of the Greeks; but Thoth is understood to have been assistant and secretary to his father Mizraim, and Mizraim was son of Ham. Vide Diod. Sicul. lib. i. cap. 8, 35; Euseb. Prep. Ev. p. 36. But from whence did Thoth receive these letters? for I take for granted that he did not invent them. Some authors attribute the invention of letters to the country of Syria, as Diodorus Siculus, lib. v. cap. 43. reports, who says, "as to those who affirm that the Syrians are the inventors of the letters which they transmitted to the Phenicians, who brought them into Greece with Cadmus, it is replied, that the Syrians did not really invent letters, but only varied the forms of some of their characters." This disagreement may be reconciled, by remarking, that ancient authors did not always correctly distinguish between Syria and Assyria; so that it may be very true that the Syrians only changed the forms of letters, while the Assyrians may have invented them: and this clears the sense of the passage; for, how should the Syrians transmit letters to the Phenicians? Were not the Phenicians themselves Syrians? But, understand Assyrians, and all is right; moreover thus understood, there is no contradiction between Diodorus and Pliny, who says, lib. vii. cap. 56. "Literas SEMPER arbitrior Assyrias fuisse; sed alii apud Egyptios à Mercurio, alii apud Syros repertas volunt?" Letters were always, i.e. from the earliest ages, extant in Assyria, as I have thought; though some refer the invention of them to the Egyptian Mercury, [the Thoth we mentioned above ;] others to the Syrians: i.e. the Phenicians, as appears from what follows. I think, therefore, that we only follow the current of evidence, if we infer, that Thoth in Egypt, received the knowledge of letters from Assyria, where they had always been extant, says Pliny; and this leads us to ascribe to them at least as early a date as the building of Babel, in Assyria, since Thoth and Mizraim must have been contemporaries with the undertakers of that edifice; and thus we are brought to "the gods" again, or the early second fathers of the human race.

There is yet another thought to be added: we are informed that Thoth wrote inscriptions on pillars, no doubt of stone; but others say, of clay, i.e. meaning, some pillars were of stone, others were of clay hardened in the fire; and this, if it were proved, but the circumstance can only be glanced at here, would probably be found to be the very same procedure as that to which our Babylonian bricks have been subjected, that is to say, an impression made, stamped? on the clay while moist, and render

ed permanent by induration of the brick. I shall only refer to one author on this article at present. Eusebius, in Chron. says, "The remains, or records of Thyoth, Thoth, were inscriptions on pillars [ΣΤΗΛΩΝ, ιερα διαλέκτω και ιερογραφικοις γραμμασι expanτngioμevwv] written upon in the sacred language, and in sacred characters; and Agathodemon translated them, out of the sacred language into the Greek tongue, in sacred letters." These pillars were in caves, &c. i.e. temples, in rocks, grottoes, &c. places at once sacred and secure, such as are now extant in India.

I hasten to undertake the desperate cause of a passage in Josephus, Antiquities, lib. i. cap. 2. which has usually been treated as no better than fabulous by learned men; where he says, "The posterity of Seth, having been forewarned of the deluge, erected two columns [ETHANN] one of stone, the other of brick, on which they recorded their discoveries in astronomy, &c. The column of stone is still extant in the land of Seirath, or Syrias."

Observe, 1st, this conduct before the flood was exactly the counterpart to that of Thoth after the flood, who wrote on pillars of brick and stone; it therefore is by no means incredible as a matter of fact. 2dly, The ancients having confounded very frequently the names Syriad, Syrias, with Assyria; understand this Seirath or Syrias of Josephus, as denoting Assyria, and this will agree with what Manetho relates, apud Euseb. et Syncell, that "Thoth had engraved sacred characters on columns erected in Syriad:" understand Assyria here also, and the evidence of letters being, semper, as Pliny speaks, always extant in Assyria, is greatly confirmed. 3dly, In our history of the deluge, in loc. we have assumed principles which are perfectly coincident with the preservation of columns of stone or brick during that great catastrophe; nay, I see no impossibility that temples, like those of Egypt, might survive it, and if it be true that the celestial observations, recorded on their ceilings, refer to an antediluvian state of the heavens, let no one fear for the divine authority of Moses, but only endeavour correctly to understand his narration. Lastly, by taking Syrias, Seirath, Assyria, &c. for countries still further east than that we usually call Assyria, we may come to what was designed by Diodorus and Pliny, as well as by Josephus and Manetho, for there are actually extant recesses, grottoes, &c. i.e. temples with devices, which, perhaps, when examined, may prove historical, and which, for aught that appears to the contrary, may have even survived the deluge, in the land of the first establishment, and the after re-settlement, of mankind: such is the language of tradition respecting them, and such may be their character, though we cannot at present prove it, for want of sufficient information and documents.

We must again repeat, that this can be only a sketch, a mere occasional sketch, on the subject of

after his victory over Chedorlaomer, and the kings who were with him: the king of Sodom went out to the valley of Shaveh [the valley of equalising] that emphatically called, the king's valley. And Melchisedec, king of Salem, brought out [the same word in its root, as that used respecting the king of Sodom,] from his royal residence, no doubt, i.e. Salem, bread and wine. Now, he himself emphatically, was priest of the Most High God. And he blessed Abraham, and he, Abraham, gave to him, Melchisedec, for consecration, or sacred uses, tithes of all which he, or his people, had taken from their enemies.

Psalm cx. Jehovah hath sworn, and will not retract; be thou the priest to perpetuity, on my appointment, according to the manner, order of Melchisedec.

Heb. v. 10. Thou art a priest in perpetuity, according to the order of the priesthood of Melchisedec, who, in the days of his flesh, applied himself with prayers and supplications, to the power that could deliver him from death; with strong, efficacious, cryings and tears; and was graciously heard. By reason of his piety, his filial piety, he exemplified obedience. [So the Syriac version reads this pas sage.] Now this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him: to whom, also, Abraham gave a tenth part of all his spoils, being first, by interpretation, king of justice, or righteousness; and then again, king of peace: άarap, fatherless; aunt, motherless; pedigree-less, genealogy-less, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but assimilated to the Son of God: continues a priest perpetually. Now consider what a great personage this was! to whom our father Abraham himself, of whose greatness we are nationally so fond, gave the tenth of all his spoils; and who received them by right of office and dignity. Levi, who in the Jewish establishment receives tithes, paid tithes on this occasion... And Melchisedec, who has no right by [Levitical, or other priestly] pedigree, not only received tithes, but exercised the most solemn part of the priestly office, by giving an authoritative benediction to Abraham; as being unquestionably Abraham's superior. Now, in the Levitical priesthood, men who are well known to be mortal, receive tithes ; but, in that order of priesthood, he received tithes of whom it is witnessed, believed on general and allowed report, that he is now living.

From these allusions to the life of Melchisedec, we learn, 1st, That he had undergone deep distresses; had implored the preserving power to interfere on his behalf, and had been heard. 2dly, That he exemplified great filial piety and obedience. 3dly, That he was not a priest by due course of official descent; i.e. not by birth, but by appointment. 4thly, He was a king. 5thly, That the Levitical priesthood is very inferior to his; as, 1st, It is comparatively modern. 2dly, It has not equal dignity, wanting royalty. 3dly, It often changes hands, and sometimes is held by not very holy persons. 4thly, It extends only to

The first tradition says, " Canaan fell to the lot of Shem." In FRAGMENT, No. 19, we read, that Satyavarman, Noah, gave Japheth the north of the Snowy Mountains, and Shem the south. Now certainly, both these patriarchs had the east and west, as inspection of our map will readily determine; since Europe itself, the acknowledged residence of Japheth's posterity, is west of Caucasus. Canaan therefore, though west, yet being south of the latitude of Caucasus, Japheth's allotment being north, fell to the share of Shem.

Of the traditions which respect the parents of Melchisedec, the first and second are the same; for Eraclas, the ancient Ercles, or Hercules, was beyond all doubt the sun; but so many later personages assumed, or received, this glorious title, that the original application of it was forgotten, even by the learned; and certainly the person whom it primarily denoted, was utterly unknown to the generality of those who adored him: even Cicero "wishes they could tell which Hercules it was whom they worshipped." Macrobius tells us expressly, so does Nonnus, and so does Plutarch long before, that the Bel of Babylon, the Con of Egypt, the Apollo of Greece, and in fact all the deities of the heathen, terminated in the sun, or Helios.

But the reader may observe, that we refer these divinities to a person, no less than to a power, and many things said in reference to one of these distinctions, are true of that distinction only; but may not be applied to either indiscriminately. A hint or two may prove that Helius is not, restrictively, the solar body.

1st, Helius was said to have traversed the vast ocean in a boat, which Oceanus lent him.

2dly, Porphyry, apud Euseb. P. E. lib. iii. says, the Egyptians, to describe Helius, represented a man in a float or ship, supported by a crocodile.

3dly, Jamblichus says, "the emblem of Helius was a man on a lotus, in the midst of the water; and a woman on a lotus, was Selene, the moon." Now the lotus was emblematical of preservation from a flood; because in the inundation of the Nile, the broad leaf of this plant rises with the water, and never is overwhelmed, never is drowned. Hence the Egyptians placed Helius on a lotus in the water; and said, that he arose on this plant in the form of a newly born child. [Vide the medals on the Plate of Noah's ark, and their explanation, Gen. vi.] These particulars identify Helius with Noah; and thereby ascertain the true father of Melchisedec, and of Shem, in the same great restorer of the human race.

The mother of Shem was, 1st, the moon, 2dly, Asteria, or Astaroth. It is unnecessary to prove that Astaroth is the moon. It is admitted. We have

seen that Selene is the moon on the lotus, in conjunction with Helius. The crescent typified the ark, the "receptacle of all mankind," and hence it was worn by Isis, &c. In short, this particular so naturally follows the former, that we shall not enlarge in support of it.

These traditions, we find, mutually confirm each other: it is true, they have been so hidden under the allegories of mythology, that the learned, startled by their uncouth appearance, have rejected them, at first sight, without concerning themselves to penetrate into their true meaning, or to determine their true reference. Nevertheless, they have undoubtedly preserved the memorial of an undeniable fact. Melchisedec, say the Jews, in our third tradition, was born of "unclean parents;" I do not see how this affects his natural descent; but if referred to his priesthood, to which he derived no claim from his birthright, I apprehend the notion is correct; though extremely uncouthly expressed: he was certainly deficient in the Levitical requisitions of birth and parentage... Athanasius says, "The earth had opened her mouth, and had swallowed up all his relations:" why then, he must be either Noah, Shem, Ham, or Ja. pheth. Noah, he certainly was not: Japheth was established too far north, it is not likely to be him: Ham it might be, but very feeble reasons are those which support his pretensions; his character is utterly irreconcilable with the dignity, both royal and sacerdotal, of this illustrious comparison to Jesus Christ. It follows, that Shem is the person to whom we must look ; and this tradition, thus understood, agrees perfectly with our reasonings already stated; and is augmented to certainty by those which we shall shortly submit to the reader.

We turn now to the Bible history of Shem, who was, we know, a person of piety after the deluge, as appears from his behaviour to his father, Noah, when Ham, his brother, had exposed, and abused him. Most probably, therefore, he was of the same pious disposition before that catastrophe: his name, which appears to have been given before that event, signifies settled, steady; and, as Noah was "a preacher of righteousness" to the antediluvians, we may think the same of his son Shem, who succeeded in the priesthood.

That dreadful event which was coming on the earth, was certainly foretold to Noah; and if to Noah, to Shem, who also contributed to the preparation of the ark. As a person of piety and sedateness, he could not but look forward with apprehension; and we may most surely conclude, that both Noah and his son would deprecate and deplore the judgment they awaited. I say, the piety of Shem prompted him, under these trying circumstances, to address, with prayers and supplications, and strong cryings and tears, that celestial power which was able to save him

from death, in which he was the very counterpart of our Lord Jesus; who, foreseeing his descent into the silent tomb, as Shem foresaw his enclosure in the floating tomb of the ark, prayed, "if it were possible, let this cup pass from me;" but in the issue, as Shem in obedience entered the ark, so did Jesus enter the grave: "nevertheless, not my will, but thine be done." Shem was saved, and revivified: so was Jesus; one from the ark, the other from the sepulchre.

We have elsewhere [vide FRAGMENT, No. 155,] explained the allusion of the apostle Peter to the ark of Noah, in reference to the death of Jesus; and now we find the apostle Paul alluding to the same event, and with the same intention. Add to this, the time which Shem lay enclosed in his ark; part of one year, the whole of the second year, and part of a third: to complete the comparison to Jesus, who, like Jonah in the sea, lay part of one day, the whole of the second day, and part of the third day, in the heart of the earth.

The ark, we are informed, discharged its inhabitants on the mountains of Caucasus ; from whence the patriarch Shem travelled, as Abraham did, to the land of Canaan, and here he was known as a royal priest; being, first, king of justice and who could more properly exercise that office? was he not the father of the population among whom he dwelt? supreme in dignity, by origin? To promulgate laws, or apply them, to direct in matters of jurisprudence, to combine the dignity of the magistrate with the affection of the patriarch, to promote the welfare of those communities who were his posterity, who could be more proper than Shem? He was truly the "king of justice. Moreover, his tribunal was adjacent to his residence, in "the king's valley:" and wherefore was this called the king's valley? but because, here sat the king; and here, according to the duty of a king, he administered justice, righteous justice. q. "The royal valley, for despatch of public and official affairs."

With this character the other name by which this valley was known, coincides accurately; for the word shuah, or shaveh, as our translators write it, signifies, "to equalise, to liken to, to compare," i.e. to adjudge after comparison made: so we find it used, Prov. xxvi. 5. "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou, teshuah, be compared to him; and after comparison, be judged to resemble him." Prov. iii. 15. "All things thou canst desire are not to be, ishuo, compared in judgment to wisdom." Isai. xl. 25. "To whom will ye compare me as an act of judgment, and decision, says the Holy One?" So, Lam. ii. 13. "To what shall I compare thee, determine thy resemblance as an act of judgment, O Jerusalem?" In these places, the word implies, to draw a conclusion, after well considering a subject: to compare for the purpose of determination.

Some lexicons, however, insist on the sense of equalising, to render equal, for this word shaveh: but this will amount to the same as the former; since a person, whose office it is to judge, should consider all applicants as equal; and if any have suffered in jury, should compensate that injury, till the compen sation equals the damages; in fact, he should enforce equity; which implies discrimination and comparison. This would characterize "the king's valley," as "the valley of equitable compensation," of rendering equal justice to all which is the same in effect with the former sense.

The foregoing sentiments glide very easily into the character of the king of peace: no doubt he was king of the city of Peace, Salem; but besides this, peace was his delight. When young he had been valiant, but now he was for peace: as a patriarch, as a judge, as a priest, as a king, he was for peace: it is probable too, that he drew not the warlike sword, nor constructed defensive walls; for I rather suppose that it was the custom of these great, these venerable patriarchs, not to dwell in cities, i.e. walled cities. Abraham dwelt in tents; so did Isaac and Jacob, and so did thousands of others; as thousands, and ten thousands do at this day; and that Shem lived in tents, appears every way probable: 1st, because Noah his father did so. 2dly, Because Noah says "He shall dwell in the tents of Shem," the handsome, perhaps even, the official tents. [Aheli, vide FRAGMENT, No. 206.] 3dly, The migratory life customarily led by these patriarchs, in visiting, and regulating the different districts of their dominions, demonstrates that tents were the fittest dwellings for their purposes. Much has been said in inquiry, where this city of Salem stood: but Melchisedec is not called king of the city of Salem, it might be a district, not a city. I infer then, 1st, that his personal character and disposition were pacific: 2dly, That his dwelling, where he now pitched his tents, was called by the name of Salem, peace; and this might become its appellation, because such was the well known character of its royal inhabitant.

We suppose, therefore, 3dly, That Salem, afterward Jebus, and Jerusalem, was the residence of Melchisedec. The name Jerusalem, denotes the "vision of peace ;" or, " the possession of peace ;" q. the place where peace was expected to be seen. Josephus, Antiq. lib. i. cap. 10. gives this account: but it seems to follow yet more authoritatively from Psalm lxxvi. 2.

Our reasons in support of this supposition, are, 1st, Jerusalem is in the way from Dan toward Sodom, &c. which way Abraham was now travelling, toward the homes of his retaken captives. 2dly, The name of Jerusalem, in the adjacent countries, has been "the Holy City," throughout an antiquity much deeper than our inquiries can extend; which leads to the conclusion, that before it became the seat of justice and worship among the Hebrews, it had been esteem

ed holy. 3dly, Which character it resumes, without difficulty, as without competition: for Gibeah, &c. which were seats of authority and sanctity, yield to its prior claims. 4thly, These claims might be well known to Moses, who mentions, twice at least, "a place which the Lord had chosen to put his name there," Deut. xii. 4; xvi. 11. 5thly, Something very like allusions to this matter, are introduced by the prophet Isaiah, ii. 3. and what is very extraordinary, the prophet Micah also inserts the same, verbatim, chap. iv. 2, &c. which raises a suspicion, that both drew from the same source; and that, in this instance, they have preserved an oracle of deeper antiquity than themselves: besides, the passages become much clearer, if we suppose that they compare past times and events, with succeeding times and

"On; and we will go up to the mount of Jehovah,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
And he shall teach us of his ways,
And we will walk in his paths:

In like manner as from Sion has gone forth his law,
And the decision of Jehovah from Jerusalem:
Yea, it judged among great peoples;
And corrected powerful people, though remote ;
And they beat their swords into ploughshares;
And their spears into pruning hooks:
People take not the sword against people;
Nor do they thereafter learn war.

But they sit, each chief, under his vine,
And under his fig-tree, and none alarms."

To such effect hath the mouth of the Lord of hosts decided.

This oracle describes exactly the blessings produced by the judicial interpositions of a king of justice and peace: it certainly attributes to Jerusalem a character which combines at once policy and sanctity, effectual over nations, great, yet submissive; and remote, yet obedient. It is not the only ancient oracle Micah has preserved: vide chap. vi. 15.

Moreover, this train of reasoning, if admissible, is confirmed, by our statement of the incidents, 2 Sam. v. 6. EXPOSITORY INDEX, where we supposed, that through an understood sanctity of their town, the Jebusites refused David's residence there: what superior principle could induce them to refuse the reception of their king? I may add here, though perhaps not so properly placed as it might be, that "the king's valley" was, as we have seen, adjacent to Salem, aud was the place of judgment: now, it is current among the traditions of the East, that in the "valley of Jehoshaphat," shall be the universal judgment; whence