an obligatory belief. And it obviously follows that it did not form a part of those traths, or of that system, which the Jewish people were appointed to maintain and to transmit. It was not divinely intrusted to them, as part and parcel of their special work. Was there, then, any other, even if it were an indeterminate, provision among the nations for the conservation of this belief?

Undoubtedly, in this wayward world of ours, truth commonly has error on its borders, and in the neighborhood of religious beliefs, in themselves just and weighty, there may lie all round a set of opinions, more or less openly avowed, which, if as. sociated with them at all in the order of thought, are no better than their spurious offspring. Thus, from the Christian point of view, it was a great fact of religion that, long before the Advent, and indeed from the outset of buman history, God had selected a portion or portions of the human race for high and special purposes to which He perceived their adaptation. From the call of Abraham onward, we perceive that great and wonderful selection of his posterity, which proclaims itself to the world down to this very day. But upon such a positive truth men have allowed themselves to graft the negative assertion, that the rest of mankind were outcasts, without any sign of the Divine favor, or of possessing a share in the designs of the Almighty for the education of mankind.

It is likely that this misconception may have been extended and strengthened by the great movement of the sixteenth century. That movement threw the mind of the reformed communities upon Scripture, as a bulwark of defence against the ruling authorities of the Latin Church; and this not upon the New Testament only, which records the final breaking down of the wall of severance, but upon Scripture as a whole so that, especially within the energetic sweep of Scottish Presbyterianism, and of Puritanism in England, the Old Testament was lifted more nearly to a level with the New. In details the Old Testament itself testifies, by hundreds of passages, to the active providential relation with persons and races outside the confines of the Abrahamic race and the Mosaic dispensation. The dealing with Melchisedec, the marriage of Joseph to

the daughter of the priest of On,* and of Moses to the daughter of the priest of Midian,† the assignment of portions of country in the promised land to Canaanites, the remarkable history of Balaam, the beautiful episode of Ruth the Moabitess, the explicit language of the Psalms, and of the prophets, among whom Jonah had no other mission than to Ninevehall these circumstances, which might be stated with very wide development, ought to have made the enlarged knowledge of Scripture a guarantee against narrow conceptions. But the resort to the sacred volume was of necessity in a great degree polemical; and the polemical frame of mind, however effective for its immediate purposes, however inevitable in the case before us, is too commonly fatal to enlargement and impartiality of view. The notion of a race preferred over other races, and employed in a particular case to administer punishment for depravity, was magnified into an absolutely exclusive love, and a not less sweeping condemnation or neglect.

It was a breaking of new ground when,' in 1815, there was published an essay of Bishop Horsley's which treats of Messianic prophecy and of various portions of truth preserved among the heathen. Among these were included the immortality of the soul; and the Bishop, in anticipation of researches to come, makes reference to the sacred books of Persia.

It has been, indeed, the belief of the Christian Church and community, that the history not only of the chosen people but of the world throughout a very wide circle was, before the coming of our Lord, a grand præparatio evangelica. In some respects, the forms of this preliminary discipline were obvious enough. The conquests of Alexander secured for that inarvellous instrument of thought, the Greek language, such a currency as, when backed by the influence which in the West had been acquired by its literary monuments, dispensed as it were with the day of Pentecost in the general action of the Christian Church, and supplied a channel of communication and a vehicle of worship

* Gen. xiv. 18; xlii. 50.

+ Ex. ii. 21.

A Dissertation on the Prophecies of the Messiah dispersed among the Heathen, pp. 16, 115. The essay, which was posthumous, is wider than its title.

available in most parts of the civilized world. What the genius of Greece was to secure in the region of thought, the vast extension of the Roman empire effected in the world of outward fact. It prepared the way of the Lord and made the rough places plain. Immediately before and after the advent, it levelled the barriers between separate and hostile communities, and for the first time established the idea of police in its highest form, and made peaceable and safe intercourse everywhere possible among men. Everywhere it was, as with us in Britain: "when the Roman left us," then it was that again "the ways were filled with rapine.'

Another stage on the way to the comprehension of a truth of the widest reach and highest value was attained, when the world began to be sensible of its debt to ancient Greece. It may well be, to us of this day, a marvel to conceive how it could have been that, down to a time when poetry and the arts had already achieved the most splendid progress, the Christian world remained insensible to the superlative dignity and value of the ancient Greek literature and art. In Italy at least, the compositions of the Greeks must all along have survived in numerous manuscripts. But the Greeks had not merely produced a certain number, not after all a very large one, of great works of mind and hand they had established habits of mind and of performance, alike in art, in letters, and in philosophy, such that they furnished the norm for civilized man in the ages to come. Hellenism became a capital fact for the race. Greece supplied the intellectual factor under the new dispensation of Christianity, as truly as the Hebrew race supplied us with the spiritual force which was to regenerate the heart and will of man. And this was done for millions, who knew little but the name either of Greeks or Jews. And if this transcendent function was assigned to the Hellenic race, outside the bounds of any continuing revelation, the question surely arises whether other races may, through their forms of religion or otherwise, have made their special contributions to the fulfilment of the grand design for establishing the religion of the Cross, and for giving it an ascendency which is already beyond dispute, and which may be des

* Tennyson's Guinevere.

tined even to become, in the course of time, universal over the surface of the earth.

The last, and in a much higher degree the present, centuries have opened the door to a knowledge wholly without precedent of these ancient religions, which took and long held their place in conjunction with advanced civilization and commanding political power. I suppose that Sir William Jones and Anquetil du Perron will be forever famous aniong the pioneers in this great undertaking, the one for his services with regard to the Vedic, and the other to the Zoroastrian religion. Besides the vast subsequent progress in the spheres of knowledge there opened, the interpretation of the Egyptian and the Assyrian monuments has effected nothing less than a revolution with regard to the archaic religions of the earliest great empires of the world. It is of the deepest interest to examine whether in any and what particulars, now recognized by Christians as undoubted portions of revealed truth, those religions were more advanced or more enlarged than the religion of the favored race. The question is hardly one entangled with controversy. No doubt, if it be found that these extraneous and independent religions taught in any point more fully than the Hebrews what Christians now acknowledge, this will be for Christians a new and striking proof that in the infancy of the race of Adam, and before its distribution over the earth, the Almighty imparted to it precious knowledge, which it could hardly have discovered, and was but indifferently able to retain. But those, who view religions as simply the formations gradually effected by our own unaided powers, from fetichism upward, will have their solution ready also: the diversities of the onward movement, as between one race and another, will for them only show variety in tastes and in capacity for progress. Let me proceed to an example.

It is a favorite observation with the negative writers on religion, that the narrative of the temptation in the Garden of Eden lends no support to the doctrine of the existence of Satan or of devils, inasmuch as the seduction of Eve from obedience is ascribed simply to the serpent. The personal action of the evil spirit is mentioned in several places of the Old Testament. But there is no identification

of him with the serpent of Paradise; and further, there is no distinct intimation that he came to be what he was through a rebellion against God followed by a fall from heaven. The magnificent description by Isaiah of the fall of Lucifer from above, though it may well serve for a description of such a rebellion, is primarily referable to the king of Babylon. It is only passages of the New Testament, and these not systematically combined in its text, which inform us that he was a fallen spirit, once in conflict with the servants of the Most High. We hear nothing, in fact, from the Old Testament of the War in heaven. But while this awful tradition was waiting for its sanction from the pens of Apostles, and was apparently unknown to the Hebrews, there was sufficient recollection of it in the heathen religions. We are told of it as late as by Horace.t Homer gives it us in various forms-of the Titans punished in Tartaros, of the Giants, and perhaps also in the attempt of Otos and Ephialtes to scale the heavens. Still, we had not until recently had easy means of carrying the tradition further back into remote antiquity. But the Assyrian monuments, though as yet but partially unveiled, furnish a tablet, thought by Mr. Smith to be one of those about which Berosus states that they were buried before the Deluge, and disinterred after it had subsided. This tablet contains the story of the seven wicked gods or spirits, who conspired together to make war against Hea. And Hea sends his son Merodach to put them down, even as Horace in his fine ode assigns to Apollo a capital share in quelling the attack of the Giants.** Probably much more evidence could be collected to the same effect. But what has been said is sufficient as an instance in support of my general proposition, namely, there may be cases where the independent religions of antiquity have enshrined in very pointed forms traditions justly to be called primeval, which have obtained no clear notice in the Old Testament, but which subsequently appear as authorized portions of the New. If this be true, then it is surely also true that

these religions were employed pro tanto in the counsels of Divine Providence, for purposes reaching beyond and above the consciousness of those who proclaimed and practised them.

Let us now proceed to take a somewhat higher flight. It will be admitted on all hands that the doctrine of a life beyond the grave is an article essential, to speak moderately, for the completeness of religion. Locke, in his famous Essay, excluded from toleration those who did not believe in a future state, because without such belief, as he held, they could give no sufficient guarantee for their conduct as good citizens. No one perhaps would act upon such an opinion now. There is a law written in our nature itself, apart both from temporal sanctions and from the prolongation of existence after death, which of itself imposes upon sound minds a real obligation to good conduct. there are several things which may be fairly urged. First, all men have not sound minds; and secondly, that the doctrine of a future life not only harmonizes with, but very greatly strengthens that obligation. And moreover, that any power, which society now possesses to dispense with this powerful sanction, and yet enjoy comparative impunity, is largely due to an elevation in the social standard of right and wrong, both public and private, due to the long reign of Christianity in the manners, policy, and belief of civilized

man.

But

We have seen that the doctrine of a future life was not among the sanctions of the Mosaic law. It is not necessary for my purpose to endeavor to track it through all the non-Mosaic religions of antiquity. It will be enough to dwell upon two of them, in which it appears to have attained, at a very early date, a remarkable development. And it is noteworthy that, while the recipients of special religious light in prehistoric times were Semites, neither of these cases is found among members of that family the one being Aryan or Japhetic, and the other what is commonly called Turanian. They are respectively the cases of Iranians or Persians, and of Egypt. And there is a certain amount of resemblance between the two forms of development, which tends to favor the presumption of a common origin.

66

The strain to faith," which Professor Cheyne regards as unsuited to an early

stage in the existence of the race, seems to have been put upon the Egyptians and the Iranians at a very early stage indeed. Perhaps the case of Egypt carries us nearer to the fountainhead of historic time by its certified antiquity. But the date of Zarathustra, or, according to the Latin corruption of the name, Zoroaster, is thrown back by many beyond the reputed age even of the Egyptian remains. The mod ern Parsees bring him down to about 550 B.C.; but Drs. Haug and West point out that the movement, which he led, is noticed in the earlier Vedas, and conceive it not unreasonable to place him as a contemporary of Moses.

The great work of Sir J. Gardner Wilkinson, published in 1837-41, made us familiar with the belief of the Egyptians, not only in a future life, but in a life of future retribution. Their funerals seem to have been celebrated with the utmost pomp of religious rites.* It is a wellknown and at least plausible opinion, that the skilled preservation of the mummy was intended to conserve the remains in a condition fit for renewed occupation by their former owner. On the Monuments, a procession of boats cross, from Thebes, the Lake of the Dead, and at the necropolis the body is set up in the ancestral sepulchre. The final judgment is held before Osiris, no sinecurist like Aïdoneus in Homer, but the real working sovereign of the Underworld and its inhabitants; who governs as well as rules. Before him justice was administered, without the law's delay; administered there and then. The actions of the dead man were weighed in the scales of Truth, and recorded by Thoth. Horos then conducted him into the presence of Osiris, Anubis also taking a share, and the four Genii of Amenti waiting to do their part. It was not dread of disgrace, says Wilkinson, which the Egyptians were taught to look upon as the principal inducement to virtue, but the fear of that final judgment, which awaited them in a future state, and which was to deal with their omissions as well as with their crimes. The all-scrutinizing eye of the Deity penetrated into the secrets of the heart; and, as the rewards of the good were beyond conception, so

were the punishments of the bad, who were doomed to a transmigration into the forms of the most detested animals. The evidence of their belief is to be found amply recorded upon the oldest among their monuments. * In later times, the features of ritual and presentation were perhaps less strongly impressed upon the masses, but the tenet continued to be acknowledged by the Egyptians, and it seems sufficiently clear that from them the doctrine of immortality was learned by Pythagoras and Plato.t

Let us now turn to the testimony, perhaps less remarkable, of the Zoroastrian religion. In the person of its great teacher, it was mainly based, says Haug, on Monotheism, although the motor, or evil principle, was present with that of good in Ahuramasda, or Ormuzd, himself. § He taught a future life which was to succeed the present one: nor did he hold survival only, but retribution, and likewise the resurrection of the body. On the third night after death, the soul of the dead man approaches the bridge of Chinvat (or assembling), and is contended for by Deities on one side, and Devas on the other, while he is examined by Ormuzd himself as to his conduct in the flesh. The pure soul passes the bridge, with a company of its fellows, and an escort of the blessed ones, into heaven.

But the souls, which come to the bridge full of terror and sick, find no friend there: the evil spirits, Vizaresha by name, lead them bound down into the place of the dead; into the darkness, the dwelling of the Druj.¶

Thus the Persian religion had a developed doctrine of immortality, like that of Egypt; though they were shut out by their rejection, in the early stages, of imagery and ritual from using those means of stamping it on the general rind, which were so freely employed by the Egyptians on their monuments. Nor can we doubt that the belief in immortality continued to hold its place in the authoritative standards of the religion, for we understand that it is cherished by the Parsees at the present day as a practical tenet. Whether

* Wilkinson, i. 211.

* Munners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, by Sir J. Gardner Wilkinson, Second Series, vol. iii. plates 83-8. † Wilkinson, iii. ix-xi,

it had not lapsed long ago from its position of influence may be doubtful. At any rate, a passage which we find in Herodotos seems to suggest a change of that character under the Achæmenid sovereigns of Persia. Cambyses, absent from his capital, had put to death his brother Smerdis. The murdered man was personated by an impostor, who proclaimed himself king, and sent a herald to make the proclamation in the camp. Cambyses at once challenged on the subject the person whom he had sent to commit the murder. This was Prexaspes, who replied by saying "If the dead rise again, then indeed you may expect also to meet Astyages the Mede; but if things continue as they have been, you need have no anticipation of trouble from that quarter.' 19 *

Prexaspes spoke with the object of removing alarm from the mind of the king. This speech indicates a decline; and deterioration had also been manifested in other great articles of the religion of Zoroaster. First, it had been developed into an absolute dualism. Each of the two contending powers was surrounded with a council of six members, over which he

simply presided, like a moderator in a presbytery. Under the sacerdotal and ritualistic system of the Magi, as Duncker * assures us, Ormuzd himself was represented as offering sacrifices to Mithra and others; actual images of the deities were fashioned under the first Artaxerxes; † and Artaxerxes II., falsifying the account of Herodotos, erected a temple, as well as statues, to Anakita at Ecbatana.§

To conclude. Both the conservation of the belief through so many centuries, and the immense force with which it seems to have acted on the public mind at the earliest epochs, stand in singular contrast, as to this great article, with the Mosaic system: nor do I see how we can refuse to recognize a sublime agency for the preservation of truth in the one case, as well as in the other. The God of revelation is the God of nature. The means employed may be different, but the aim is the same. And when the Redeemer, standing in Judea, brings life and immortality fully into light, He propounds a doctrine already not without venerable witness in the conscience and tradition of mankind.-Nineteenth Century.

The first section of this convenient summary, the "History of Ancient Civilization," edited by Rev. J. Verschoyle, was published two years ago. The two parts of course belong to each other, and fit into a well-ordered plan, though each one may be profitably used by itself. The new and concluding section follows the same general method as its predecessor, in being something more than a translation. Views of history and theories of historical investigation have changed mucb since M Ducoudray's masterly digest was written. The tendency to study events with reference

* Herod. iii. 62, misquoted, as I conceive, by Duncker (vol. v. p. 181, Abbott's translation). The text runs : εἰ μέν νυν οἱ τεθνεῶτες ἀνεστέασι . . . εἰ δ ̓ ἔστι ὥσπερ πρὸ τοῦ, κ.τ.λ. I note the tone and spirit, as well as the words. Hang, p. 305.

to their causes and the principles which underlie and instigate external movements has grown with a wonderful impulse. To meet the new needs demanded by this change of purpose, adaptation and revision have entered as largely into the work as translation, till the original can be regarded as little more than a basis. While, perhaps, the changes, effected by wider as well as by more exact and detailed instruments and methods of research, have not played as great a part in the reconstruction of modern as of ancient history, they have still been useful in enlarging our conceptions of the growth of society since the Christian era began.

The order of arrangement in the present volume follows the same plan as that which governed the first section. The text is thoroughly classified with reference to subjects, and disentangled from all that confusion which naturally arises from the treatment of