subjected to a series of subsidences with long intervals of repose; that the trees and perhaps smaller plants were submerged under tranquil water, in the places of their growth; and that very inconsiderable portions, if any, of the beds are owing to drifting.

[N.]

Referred to at page 165.

ON THE COMPARISON OF THE EGYPTIAN AND THE MOSAICAL

COSMOGONIES.

IN Mr. Lyell's Principles of Geology, Book I. chap. ii. under the title "Oriental Cosmogony," he has given ample and interesting descriptions of the doctrines held by the ancient Hindoos and Egyptians, and those brought from the east into Greece and Italy by Pythagoras, concerning the changes which the surface of our globe has undergone. Now, as every reader knows that, under the name Oriental, the documents of the Hebrew Scriptures cannot but be included, the expectation is raised (I might say almost necessarily) that some direct and specific notice will be taken of the Mosaic Cosmogony. This expectation is strengthened by the fact, that certain writers of the German antibiblical school have maintained that Moses derived his materials for the commencement of the Pentateuch, from Egyptian sources. From these considerations I cannot but fear that the total silence upon what most readers will think the chiefly interesting branch of the subject, will be construed into the inference, that the author deemed the Hebrew account to be no more than a human production, and to be justly thrown into the same class with the allegorical, mythological, or fabulous traditions of the grossest idolaters. It would have been happy and signally beneficial, if Mr. Lyell had pointed out the differences between the Egyptian and the Phoenician Cosmogonies, and the simple, beautiful, and majestic description of the Hebrew Genesis; and if, which he might have briefly done without entering into philological discussions, he had said that the Scripture account of the creation is susceptible of a fair interpretation, in perfect consistency with the facts disclosed by Geological research.

With respect to the identity or similarity alleged by the critics just adverted to, I may remark that it is assumed by them in a way. little better than a gross begging of the question. Because Moses was educated as the adopted son of an Egyptian princess, and must

therefore, they say, have been instructed in all the histories, traditions, and doctrines of the Egyptian priests; as also the first martyr testifies concerning him, that he "was educated [èñaidɛvoŋ] in all the wisdom of the Egyptians;" and because Simplicius (a Greek philosopher of the sixth century, zealously adherent to the expiring cause of heathenism,) calls the relation of Moses concerning the origin of the universe, "a certain mythic tradition, drawn from the Egyptian Mythi;" the inference is boldly drawn that he made that tradition the basis of his narrative, simplifying and accommodating it to his fundamental doctrines, the unity of God, and the creation by him and dependence upon him of all other existences. But, if we look at the earliest authorities that we have, (and they are 1400 years later than Moses,) Diodorus Siculus and Plutarch, we find but a scanty resemblance; and so much as does obscurely appear, suggests the idea of being a far-removed and adulterated cast of traditions, derived from that primeval fountain of knowledge, which had flowed down to Moses in its original purity. The passage of Diodorus, (who was an industrious compiler rather than an independent historian or judicious collector,) which, in the opinion of the best critical philosophers, details the Egyptian doctrines, is the following. "Concerning the race of all men, and the things which have been effected in the parts of the habitable earth subjected to our knowledge, so far as is possible in relation to objects so ancient, we shall write accurately, beginning with the earliest times. With regard then to the first production of men, two opinions have been proposed by the most distinguished inquirers into nature and history. One party, assuming the world to be without beginning and to be incapable of destruction, maintain that the human race has existed from eternity, having never had a commencement of child-bearing. The other party, supposing the world to have had a beginning and to be destructible, affirm that mankind, like the other parts of the universe, had a first production, in fixed periods of time." [This is the Egyptian theory.] "They suppose that, at the original constitution of all things, heaven and earth possessed one uniform appearance, their respective natures being mixed up together. But, after this, the material substances [owμara] separating from each other, the world" [evidently meaning the solid earth, as distinguished from the atmosphere,] "took the entire constitution which is now seen in it, and the air acquired a perpetual motion. Hence, on the one hand, the fiery part of the air ran into one mass in the higher regions of the atmosphere, its nature being such as would be borne upwards on account of its lightness; from which cause also both the sun and the remaining multitude of the stars became involved in the universal rotation: and, on the other hand, the earthy and dark miry part, combining with the moist

substances, sunk down to the lowest situation, in consequence of their weight. This mass then being compressed within itself and continually rolled round, from the watery portions was produced the sea, and from the more solid the land, which was as yet clayey and quite soft. By the heat of the sun acting upon this earthy body, it first received consolidation; and afterwards fermentation taking place on the surface, in consequence of the heat, some of the moist matter swelled up into bubbles in many places, and around them putrescent pieces were produced inclosed in thin membranes. Such an effect is, even in the present condition of the earth, sometimes brought to our view, in bogs, and such low places as are continually turned into marshes by the irruption of water; when, while the ground is cooled, the air suddenly becomes very hot, not being with sufficient rapidity susceptible of the change of temperature. In this way, those moist spots became, by means of the heat, impregnated with animal life [τινὰ τῶν ὑγρῶν—ζωογονουμένων]; receiving nutriment by night out of the mist which fell from the surrounding air, and being made firm and strong by the heat in the day-time. At last, these embryos [Kvopopovμeva] having acquired their full growth and the enveloping membranes being dried up and bursten, all the various forms of animals were brought forth. Of these, those kinds which had partaken of the greatest heating went away to the higher regions, becoming birds: those which retained the earthy constitution were reckoned into the order of creeping animals, and the other kinds which live upon the earth: those which had gotten the greater abundance of a moist nature, ran together to the place of the same watery constitution, and these are called swimmers. The earth being thus continually more and more dried and hardened, by the heat of the sun and the action of the winds, in the end became incapable of procreating the larger animals; and consequently henceforth all the kinds of animated beings were produced by sexual union with each other."

Here, in some manuscripts, a pretty long paragraph follows, intended to confirm the preceding statements, by affirming that the Egyptians down to the present time produce instances of such generation, in that, after an abundant overflow of the Nile, when it has subsided and the sun has acted upon the putrescent surface, an innumerable multitude of mice is brought forth out of the mud. But this passage, though no doubt very ancient, the best critics reiect as spurious; its matter is however taken, almost word for word, from a subsequent part of the same book. The historian then proceeds:

"And such are the declarations which we have received concerning the first production of all things; [† πρwτη τŵv öλwv yéveσis.] The human creatures produced from this beginning, are said to have existed in a way of life disorderly and brute-like; wandering dis

persed over the verdant plains, and for food seizing upon the plants which they found most agreeable to the taste, and the spontaneous fruits of the trees. Being attacked by wild beasts, they were taught by the sense of mutual advantage to aid each other; and, being driven by fear to associate, they learned, by slow degrees, to understand one another."-Diod. Sic. lib. i. cap. vii. viii.

The next authority appealed to by the German antibiblicists, is Plutarch's Treatise on Isis and Osiris. But the reference must have been handed from writer to writer, in the hope that readers would seldom take the trouble of examining it. That tedious treatise consists almost entirely of ridiculous and disgusting tales concerning Osiris and Isis, Typhon, Horus, Anubis, and their cognates: and these the moralist declares to be utterly worthless and contemptible, unless regarded as fables, and as he interprets them in a variety of physical, historical, and moral significations. I can discover but two short passages, in which there are any ideas of a cosmogony that could, in even a slight degree, be imagined to possess affinity to the Mosaic narrative. That the reader may judge, I will cite them.

"He who is God is the originating principle" [άpxìì ỏ 0ɛós' yet I fear, Plutarch took the term generally, and without a clear recognition of the Only God:-] "but every originating principle, by its productive power, multiplies that which issues from itself: and the idea of multiplication we usually denote by the numeral three; as when we use" [the phrases of Homer] "Thrice happy! and Fetters indeed thrice so many numberless wrap all around him. [Odyss. vii. 340.] Unless it were the fact that the ancients by such expressions meaned literally the number three: since the natural quality of moisture, being the beginning and producing principle [ȧpxỳ kai yéveσLS] of all things from the beginning, made the three primary bodies, earth, air, and fire."- "One might suppose that the Egyptians were peculiarly fond of comparing the nature of the universe to the most beautiful of triangles," [a right angled one:]—" one line the male, another the female, and the hypothenuse the offspring of both and so, Osiris is to be considered as the beginning, Isis as the principle of reception, and Horus as the complete effect."-Then follow some allegorizings of the numbers, three, four, and five; and of the Egyptian names of Horus and Isis; summed up by saying"The matter of the world is full, and is composed of the good, the pure, and the well-arranged. It is probable also that Hesiod entertained the same views of producing principles [dpxal] making the primary existences [ra para návra] to be chaos and earth and tartarus, and love; since, of these names, we may understand that of the earth to belong to Isis, that of love to Osiris, that of Tartarus to Typhon; for chaos seems to be put under the whole [or, the uni

verse, [rò av,] as space and place." Plutarchi Moralia; ed. Wyttenbach, vol. ii. pp. 497, 532.

Diodorus the Sicilian flourished about 50 years B. C. Plutarch, more than a century later. All the value of their statement depends therefore upon the authenticity of their sources, which are unknown, though no doubt, mediately or immediately, they were from Egypt: but they are far too late to have the stamp of authority, and we well know that, many centuries before, the ancient learning of the Egyptians had been metamorphosed into fables and allegories. Diogenes Laertius, Porphyry, and Macrobius, who lived still later, have only repeated less completely what we have already.

I have written this long and tiresome note, that my readers may determine for themselves, whether the allegation is not devoid of all evidence and probability, that the Mosaic narrative was an offshoot of the Egyptian mythology: the one shining in the most beautiful and majestic simplicity; the other, artificial, low and paltry, absurd and degrading. Much more reasonable appears the supposition, that the traditions which came from the family of Noah, in the line of the Mizraim (a plural name), were the ground-work upon which the Egyptian priests, after the prevalence of polytheism, built up their system of perversion and disguise.

[0.]

Referred to at page 165.

ON SOME PASSAGES IN MR. LYELL'S PRINCIPLES OF GEOLOGY.

THE allusion here is to some remarks upon Mr. Lyell's chapter v. of book i. published in the Christian Observer, April 1834; p. 200. It is in no captious spirit, but with sincere respect and solicitude, that I would ask this eminently gifted man, why, in his beautiful chapter (the viiith of book iii.) on the Introduction, Extinction, and Vicissitudes of Species, he has made so slight mention of the Almighty Creator? He has not said indeed, or implied, that a new species has ever, in the world's history, come into being without God as its cause; but it is painful to see the semblance of reserve on so soulstirring a theme. He speaks of " admiration-strongly excited, when we contemplate the powers of insect life, in the creation of which nature has been so prodigal."-Nature ?-Creation? O, why did not his heart grow warm within him, and bound with joy, at the opportunity of doing some homage to the GOD of glorious majesty?

Sec. ed. It would have afforded me great pleasure to have can