story told by Strabo, of its being within the tropics, and therefore reflecting the entire image of the sun, it must have been no less than 3,600 years before his time; and yet he hugs this idle tale, this loose tradition, which must have been far more uncertain at that time, than any relating to the oldest monument extant is to us, the interval being nearly equal, and the means of obtaining information infinitely less, and ushers it in with this pompous defiance to the priests: "I think it proper to produce one more example, to show that the systems of Usher, Blair, and all the remainder of our priests, are wrong. I think the following history will give their systems the coup-degrace," &c. This is plainly a case of parturient mountains. What credit is due to Strabo and Diodorus, he might have learned from the evidence of Herodotus, which unfortunately goes so far as to prove the well within the tropics in his own time. In general, the Misohierist is not over civil to these Grecians, but here he takes the evidence of Herodotus, which is palpably untrue, and labours to twist it into something like truth, for the sake of having a fling at the priests. His proof of the antiquity of the world, from the measurement of the celestial arc between Alexandria and Syene, by Eratosthenes, is equally unfortunate. Did Eratosthenes, who lived two centuries before the Christian era, suppose that Syene was within the tropics in his own time?-he was not so bad an astronomer. Did he use in his measurement a meridian, which had not been the true meridian of the well for more than 3,000 years? -he was not so great a fool; but still it is said that he made use of the well. Let us see what a much better judge of these matters than Mr. Higgins conjectures to be the fact. "It is very improbable," says Laplace, in his History of Astronomy, "that this great astronomer should have been contented with the coarse observation of a well enlightened by the sun; this consideration, and the relation of Cleomedes, authorize us to conclude, that he observed the shadow of the gnomon, at the summer and winter solstices, both at Syene and at Alexandria; and in this manner he obtained the latitude of these two cities, very nearly such as it has been found by modern observations." Again, Mr. Maurice having ingeniously suggested that the Maypoles and Tauric festivals in May, were obscure commemorations of the vernal equinox in the constellation Taurus, at the creation, see what marvellous results he deduces from it: "This points to a period for the building of Stonehenge or Abury, which will astonish most persons who have not been accustomed to examine subjects of this kind." This is the truest observation in his book. 5,832 years look very near our orthodox date of the creation." Why that is the very point that Maurice designed to prove: when the sun first shone upon the world, his situation in the heavens was among the stars of Taurus, and then was the first vernal equinox; hence the era of creation has ever since been celebrated by the worship of the bull, or by other rites, on the first of May. No, says Mr. Higgins, it was not the world that was created near 5,832 years * P. 158. Rel. Mag.-VOL. II. ago, but Abury and Stonehenge. It is not easy to make out the connexion in his mind, between Stonehenge and the sun in Taurus, unless it be that it must have been built at that time, because it was designed for the celebration of Tauric festivals; hence, by the same process of reasoning, it may be proved that every church in England, nay, in every part of Christendom, was built about the time of our Saviour's nativity, for they certainly have been built for the celebration of that event. Much the same sort of confusion he makes, in the ridicule with which he treats the notion of Krishna's history being a later invention than the Christian era. It may, or it may not-but his reason is a very bad one, because "his statue is to be found in the very oldest caves and temples throughout all India;" as if the history and the statue were not different things, and as if the one might not be invented to account for the other. Another argument, by which he endeavours to establish the high antiquity of the world, is the removal of the Tauric festival from the 1st of May to the 1st of April, when the equinox ceased to take place in Taurus, but yet he himself testifies that both festivals are observed both in India and in Britain. What then was the change? There was indeed a great change in the state of the world at the deluge, which would most probably introduce another festival, in addition to that of the ver nal equinox. But the argument on which he chiefly relies is, the truth of the Indian calculations, which, he stoutly maintains, were not back-reckonings, but "real and true observations," in spite of Sir W. Jones, and all his plausible reasoning. Upon this point it is quite needless to dispute; the question has been set at rest by the highest modern authority in matters of astronomy, "notwithstanding the nonsense which has been written against the antiquity of the Hindoo astronomy."ş "The Indian epochs," says Laplace, "which go back, one to the year 3102, the other to the year 1491, B. C., are connected with the mean motions of the sun, moon, and planets, in such a manner, that one is evidently fictitious. Notwithstanding the arguments brought forward by Bailli, to prove that the first of these epochs is founded on observation, I am still of opinion that it was invented for the purpose of giving a common origin to all the motions of the heavenly bodies in the zodiac; in fact, computing according to the Indian tables, from the year 1491 to 3102, we find a general conjunction of the sun and all the planets, as these tables suppose, but their conjunction differs too much, from the result of our best tables, to have ever taken place; which shows that the epoch to which they refer was not established by observation."-vol. ii. p. 250. 7. We propose to give some specimens of our author's critical acuinen. i. He attributes to Diodorus Siculus an assertion, that the Druids brought the sun and moon near them, and he refers to the sixth book; this he must have taken from some one, who knew no more about the matter than himself. The passage to which he appeals, and which he af ご本 a is a well; how can it be thrown up? It is the reverse of a tumulus; as is of lamentation! it is a merry noise-a jubilant vociferation. t does not mean collection of people:" the verb is sometimes, but rarely, used for gathering together, as in Isaiah, liv. 15, and for assembling, as Hosea, vii. 14; but there is no noun which has that sense. He professes not to "understand the derivation of the word tumulus." It is evi terwards unknowingly quotes without any re- which it has immemorially been familiar to ference, is not in the sixth book, of which only the Armenians, the Mount of Descent, are far a very small fragment is extant, but in the se- stronger circumstances in its favour, than the cond; and it is not there asserted, that the in- tradition of the Hindoos can countervail. But habitants of an island, west of the Celts, we cannot expect much exactness of criticism brought the sun and moon near them, but that from a person, who argues that because the the moon had quite the appearance of not be- Hebrew and Samaritan copies differ in some ing far from the earth. This is doubtless my places, he may transpose passages ad libitum, thological, (for the moon was worshipped upon even in those where they coincide. On this the Celtic hills,) and had nothing to do with account we are the less surprised at meeting the telescope, of which the Druids knew no with such blunders as these. In Numbers xiii. more than the man in the moon; and if, in- 20, y not Y, as he writes it, has not the stead of playing at dominoes with the parcels most remote connexion with knowledge, unof stones counted in Druidical circles, and arless it be through the tree of knowledge; nor ranging them at pleasure in such a way as to have any of the eastern translators made this form astronomo-oid, for they are not astronogrand discovery, with which the Irish "Aos mical, numbers, he would attend to the mytho- has inspired him. It means a tree, or wood, as logy of the Celts, he might obtain the true it is rightly rendered in our version. His etyhistory of the two small circles at Abury, in-mology of Barrow from the Hebrew is singuclosed by one large one. Probert, a Welch-larly unhappy. 7-7, Bar-ruo, he says, man, who has translated the Gododin, writes "signifies a thrown-up pit of commination or thus: "The bards taught that there were lamentation"t To talk of a thrown-up pit is three regions of existence, which they called rank nonsense. circles; the lowest they called Elbred, or Evil, containing matter, form, and existence; the second, Gwynwyd, or Felicity, in which virtuous men are to exist for ever; and the third, Cylch y Cagant, or the All-inclosing Circle, which God alone pervades." 2. He makes Florus say, "the city of Veii, if there ever was such a place." Florus says no such thing. The ground for this assertion is a strong rhetorical contrast drawn by the historian between its former wealth and its total disappearance afterwards. "Hoc tum Veientes fuere; nunc fuisse quis meminit? quæ reliquiæ, quodve vestigium? laborat annalium fides, ut Veios fuisse credamus." 3. Since, in the eleventh chapter of Genesis, he admits the propriety of the interpretation adopted by Bryant, which understands the expression they travelled from the east," as a partial movement of some families only, without reference to the preceding verse, it is extraordinary that he did not perceive this consequence -that his speculations about Ararat are whol ly inconclusive. Moses does not say that they journeyed direct from Ararat to Shinar; some considerable time must have intervened; and the descendants of Ham, roaming in search of a separate subsistence, may have settled first in Bactriana, if he will have it so, or rather in Khorasan, and Trak, and thence travelled from the east. Upon reaching the Araxes, it would be most natural to pursue its course to the Caspian, and to spread themselves along its southern coasts; or if, at first steering their course somewhat more to the westward, they descended the Euphrates, that river would bring them to the land of Shinar, by an castward course, for eastward is the marginal interpretation, instead of from the east. Either of these suppositions is fatal to his peremptory conclusion, that "if the book be true, the mount where the ark rested cannot be between the two seas;" and we will venture to say, that the name of Ararat, which is not improbably derived from the Celtic, Ar-Aorth, (Mount of the Ship,) its old Phoenician name, Baris, (the Ship or Ark,) and the name by * P. 102. + P. 39. + P. 39. dently from tumeo, which is perhaps from Rough-hewn stone is a very bad translation of socce. He renders, magnets;* ;** but Hutchinson has led him into this error, unreasonably enough: it is usually rendered pearls, or rubies, and the sense, as in Job, xxviii. 18, shows that one or the other is right, because they are articles of the greatest value; and in that passage the question is not concerning the attractiveness of wisdom, but its value beyond every thing else that is valuable. in that passage does not mean attraction, but extension either of time, weight, price, or quantity; and hence the three last senses have all been attributed to it by lexicographers. Passionei gives the first-weight: our Bible gives the second, in Psalin cxxvi.'precious seed:" and the margin gives the third-a basket of seed. This gives us an option of three senses; either magnitude of wis § P.231. * P. 84. P. 235. † P. 231. P.231. ** P. 112. 66 can Strabo used it in the same sense as Moses did Shaimaim, which we now learn ought to have been rendered planets. The best of it is, that he appeals to the authority of the learned and orthodox Dr. Parkhurst, and adds, that he calls the planetary bodies "the disposers of the affairs of men."t Let us confront this bold asserter, with the learned Doctor's own statement. "This (Shaimaim) is a descriptive name of the heavens, or of that immense celestial fluid, subsisting in the three conditions of fire, light, and spirit, or gross air, which fills every part of the universe, not possessed by other matter. It is, literally, the disposers; and this appellation was first given by God to the celestial fluid, when it began to act in disposing and arranging the earth and waters." 8. A few miscellaneous blunders shall be noted of a more amazing character. 1. "From Tager," he says "came the Latin and Eng dom, or weight of wisdom, or the value of wisdom is to be preferred before pearls. Bochart has suggested a fourth-the obtaining of wisdom; extractio sapientiæ is more difficult than the extraction of pearls from the depth of the ocean. The same writer has shown, that the ancients called the shell pinna, and the fishery TROY. In the Lamentations of Jeremiah, iv. 7, the sense of the passage is entirely lost by this interpretation of Peninnim. The prophet is setting forth, in the strongest terms, the former excellency of the professors of a severe religion in Jerusalem. Her Nazarites were purer than snow, whiter than milk, redder than rubies, or, according to the Syriac, the cornelian; or the delicate flesh-coloured tint of some pearls, which is the sense preferred by some translators, would furnish a beautiful comparison: but Bochart suggests a rendering of this last clause, which is certainly more in unison with the preceding compari-lish word agger." Indeed! how long is it sons, "having more lustre than pearls." But the loadstone has neither lustre, nor redness; or even if some specimens have, as Mr. Hutchinson says, the colour of reddish clay, how would it answer the purpose? "Purer than snow, whiter than milk, redder than"-reddish clay! Oh, what a falling off were there. It would indeed be a fine specimen of the Bathos; and yet, it must be owned, it has many advocates. The trifling objections by which Mr. Higgins tries to prove corruption in the Hebrew text are probably his own.* "The 11th and 12th chapters of Genesis," he says, be reconciled by no human ingenuity." Where is the difficulty? It is stated that Terah lived seventy years before the birth of Abram, Nahor, and Haran, and, altogether, 205, Abram being seventy-five when he left his father's house; but it is no where said, that at that time Terah died, or that Abram was the eldest. On the contrary, he married the daughter, as Bishop Patrick thinks, of his elder brother, Haran, who died before they left Ur, of the Chaldees. What is there to "overthrow the common rules of arithmetic" in this? His objection to Chapter xxxv. is much too hypercritical but it is no proof of corruption in the Hebrew at the most, it is but a defect in style. Moses had related the birth of Benjamin at Ephrath, in Canaan: a few verses, afterwards, having enumerated all the sons of Jacob, he adds, "These are his twelve sons that were born to him in Padan Aram." Every reader, but Mr. Higgins, sees, at the first glance, that it must be understood, with an implied exception of the one, whose birth had been just related. One more instance of his skill, in correcting the Bible, shall suffice: it is in the first verse of Genesis. "The word heaven," says he " used in our translation, is nonsense, because it conveys no definitive idea." We needed not this information to satisfy us, that his ideas on this subject were very far from definite; since he gravely contends, that the ancients knew as much of the form of the heavenly bodies as the moderns; because Strabo says, that the earth and the heavens are both spherical. But, perhaps, P. 135. . P. 134. - § P. 305. † P. 134. HP. 51, since agger has been enfranchised and adopted into our tongue? We hope he will transmit this valuable intelligence to Mr. Todd for his next edition of Johnson. 2. He ascribes to Cicero a work upon Etymologies, which was written by Cornificius. 3. He insists that the authors of the Chaldee Paraphrases lived long after the time of Christ; when, in point of fact, both Jonathan and Onkelos were nearly his contemporaries: it is generally supposed, that they lived in the reign of Tiberius. 4. He finds out, that "as fire was supposed to be the first principle of all things, it was also sup. posed, by a peculiar refinement, to be the destroyer." To us it seems, that it would be a much more peculiar refinement to deny or doubt, what every man may learn from his candle or his grate, the destroying power of fire. 5. He rails at Bede for not knowing Scotland from Ireland; as, in his Chronicles. he calls those Scoti, whom, in his History, he calls Hiberni. A serious charge, no doubt; a most heinous offence, for which he deserves to be stripped of his title, as he is by Mr. Higgins, and adjudged no longer worthy of Veneration; and with apparent justice for poor Bede pleads guilty. He says, like Ligarius, Habes quod accusatori est maxime optandum, confitentem reum. But what if, after all, the Scoti and Hiberni were really the same people? It would be useless to bring Latin authorities to prove this fact, especially if they chanced to be from ecclesiastical writers, such as Prosper, Isidore, Bernard, Orosius, &c. The Misohierist would only scoff at their ignorance. Our witness, therefore, shall be a Celt of genuine Hiberno-Celtic origin. Mr. O'Connor, an Irish antiquary, writes thus: "Under Corbmac O'Cuinn, and his successors, the Irish people became known and celebrated in Europe by the name of Scotts-an appellation they always bore at home."** So that if any Scotchman is shocked at the imputation of Anthropopha gic habits, atributed to his ancestors, he has to thank Mr. Higgins for it, and not Jerome. Happy it is for that learned Father, that he is not in Mr. Higgins's way: for such is the fero * P. 51. || P. 159. Hibern. † P. 179. T P. 168. + P. 219. § P. 199. **Collect. de Rebus. consistencies, and contradictions, to come to a misrepresentation more important than the rest: "Faith," he says, "is proved by Mr. Locke to be a matter of necessity, not of choice; a man cannot choose to believe, or not to believe; thus unbelief may be a misfortune, but can never be a crime." If this can be proved by Mr. Locke, or Mr. Higgins, or any one else, Atheism is no sin, and total want of religion is no subject of punishment. But, in the mean time, let the disgrace of this demoralizing sentiment fall on the head of the fabricator. Mr. Locke, is wholly guiltless of it. In his third Letter for toleration, he thus expresses himself: "You suppose the true religion may be manifested to all men, so far as to leave them, if they do not embrace it, without excuse to God indeed, but not to the magistrate." And again, speaking of faith, he says: "The man, who seeks not truth to the best of his power, must be accountable for whatever mistakes he runs into; otherwise, he misuses those faculties, which were given him to no other end but to search and follow the clearer evidence, and greater probability." Does this prove that faith is a matter of necessity-that the guilt of incredulity is nothing, or that unbelief can never be a crime? The intellect of Mr. Locke was cast in quite another mould he knew, full well, that truth is like the precious ores, sometimes to be found on the surface, but, for the most part, not to be obtained without patience and pains, and long attention, and intellectual labour, and the incentive of a strong desire: for this end, reason and understanding were imparted to mankind; and he who shall waste them in idle sport, indifferent to the account which he must render of their use, will doubtless frustrate one great end of his existence; and no one can be surprised if he falls into the snare of many a delusion, and often mistakes lead for silver, and copper for gold. city with which the Misohierist flies at him, that if he were still alive, he might have reason to fear that there were other cannibals besides the Scoti. "Jerome," he says, "deserved a flogging for a lie he told about angels flogging him."* Jerome, no doubt, was a hotheaded enthusiast, and ascetic; but the Misohierist's memory" has certainly "deceived" him, if he thinks, that his is a fair and just representation of the fact. Jerome was in a high fever, and so nearly at death's door, that preparations were making for his funeral, when, evidently in a state of delirium, he imagined himself dragged before the tribunal of Christ, where stripes were inflicted upon him by the angels. No one, with common charity, can doubt that this was the effect of a heated mind, acting upon a diseased body. It is true, he protests that it was no dream or fancy; testis est judicium quod timui-ita mihi nunquam contingat in talem incidere quæstionem-liventes habuisse scapulas, plagas sensisse post somnum. But as, on the one hand, he could not see his shoulders when he was lying upon his back almost dead, so, on the other, it was most natural that he should feel pain and soreness, attributed by his heated imagination to the events which delirium had left strongly impressed upon his memory. More sympathy might have been expected from Mr. Higgins for a case of mental disorder; it is a subject on which he has deeply interested himself, and not without benefit to the public: but, moreover, there is something extremely morbid, if not delirious, in his own ravings about Ishmael and Isaac. One scarcely knows which to pity most-his wish that the wild Arab may never be civilized, or his ignorance that Godfrey Higgins himself may very possibly be one of those "descendants of the pampered Isaac," all of whom, converted or unconverted, "have become a by-word of contempt and the slaves of slaves." So Mr. Higgins assures us; but whatever he may think of the expulsion of Hagar, and its cruelty, Ishmael himself was not half so angry as he is with "the pampered Isaac," or "his doating father." For it is related, that both the sons assisted after Abra-gaged, required a great deal more than a few ham's death, to give him an honourable burial. 6. He seems to consider himself in possession of a great secret just discovered, when he announces the variations between the copies of the Hebrew Bible corrected by Ben Asher and Ben Napthali. "The Rabbies must not flatter themselves that this is unknown;" for Mr. Higgins has found it out! However, "the schism," it appears, has been at length "suppressed throughout all Europe." How? by a Bishop's defence of the Hebrew text, concerning the grounds and nature of which, it is plain that his ignorance is most profound. But 7thly, nothing marks more strongly the confusion in which facts lie jumbled in this author's head, than his assertion, that the authors of the Reformation sat in the Long Parliament. For this is his courteous description of the great struggle that produced the ecclesiastical system established 200 years ago: "The fanatics of the Long Parliament beat the fanatics of the Pope." Lastly, we pass over many minor mistakes, in† P. 68 ‡ P. 132. * P. 97. By this time, if Mr. Higgins should peruse this article, he will probably have added one more to his many great discoveries, namely, that he has been in far too great a hurry, and that the laborious work, in which he was en months of consideration to secure it from innumerable faults. It may teach him, that ridicule and invective are dangerous weapons in unexperienced hands; that to be for ever talking of ignorance, prejudice, and nonsense, when he meets an opinion that differs from his own, is neither courteous nor discreet; and that there is much good sense in the advice of Reynolds, although he was a priest, and a bishop to boot-To correct and keep down the rising of our knowledge, with humility in ourselves, and charity to our brethren-not to censure every one, for dull and brutish, who in judgment varieth from our own conceits.(Vol. iv. p. 296.) From the Wesleyan-Methodist Magazine. GIPSIES IN ENGLAND. THE increase of erime has been very great of late years in England, and a Committee of * P. 428. | gard for our own interest would induce us to pay some attention to their condition. That they support themselves by plundering and defrauding the public, in some shape or other, is not denied; and it is indeed very strange, that, in a country where the smallest deviation from honesty is punishable by death, a whole nation should be tolerated who have avowedly no other means of subsistence but theft and robbery. How many respectable fa common practice of stealing and mutilating children to move pity! and many instances of this crime still occur in England annually. It is not only the crimes which the gipsies themselves commit that ought to be considered, but we are to observe, that all who may be inclined to mischief fly to them for refuge and instruction as their natural teachers and protectors; and this they are well qualified to afford, from their long experience, their vast numbers, and their intimate affiliation and connexion all over the kingdom It is a curious fact for which I pledge myself, that a tribute precisely the same as was paid to Rob Roy M'Gregor, and other freebooters, in the wildest parts of the Highlands of Scotland, a century ago, under the name of black mail, is, at this day, actually paid by farmers within ten miles of London to the gipsies for protection; or, in other words, for not stealing their property. the House of Commons is now inquiring into the causes. One of the causes is abundantly evident to the world: I allude to poverty, a great enemy to virtue. This will readily occur to all: but there is another cause which has always appeared to me to be of very pernicious consequences; and indeed it forms, in every respect, a very remarkable anomaly in the case of England. No country in the world has perhaps ever contributed so liberally to the civilization and instruction of mankind, as Eng-milies have been rendered wretched by their land has done since the end of the last century; and yet it is not a little extraordinary to find, in the very heart of England, and around its capital, a numerous race of people, indeed a whole nation, living in open violation of law and religion: I mean the gipsies. Hundreds of thousands of pounds of our money, and many of our people, have been devoted to the moral and religious reformation of the natives of Otaheite, and many others inhabiting the uttermost extremities of the earth; while this wretched and unfortunate race of our own countrymen, born and bred at our very doors, though in a much more deplorable state, are totally neglected. About sixty years ago, the number of Gipsies in England was calculated at forty thousand; and I have no doubt, that they are now more than double that number. Indeed, I should be inclined to call them above one hundred thousand: and all these necessarily living by means of fraud, theft, robbery, or some species of crime and imposture. I say necessarily, because, whatever their disposition may be, they have actually no alternative: they must practise crimes to support existence. For such is the prejudice against them, that they cannot procure any respectable occupation, and they are betrayed by their very faces: the countenance of a gipsy is recognised in England almost as readily as that of a negro. Perhaps the English gipsies are the only people in the world who are born under the cruel doom of perdition. Enviable indeed is the condition of the naked savage, compared with that of our gipsies. It is truly lamentable to see so many human beings, in the heart of the most civilized, the most generous, the most benevolent country in the world, in the condition which I have described. Whatever may be the origin of the gipsies, they are a fine race of people, handsome in person, and generally possessing much beauty of countenance, notwithstanding the cruel disadvantages under which they labour. That their intellects are of a superior description admits of no dispute; and I have known very remarkable instances of their bravery and courage. In a certain district in the north of England, where they are very numerous, a quarrel took place, not many years ago, between two of their tribes. They fought most desperately, with various weapons; and a very handsome youth, about twenty, had his left arm cut off, about the middle of the shoulder, with a sword. He instantly rushed into a house, thrust the bleeding stump into the fire to stanch the blood; again returned to the battle to avenge his wound, and assist his retreating friends, whom he rallied, and they carried the day. The public has often been amused by various accounts of the origin, history, and policy of this very remarkable race; but we have never heard of any serious attempt being made to bring them within the pale of society. It ap pears from various Acts of the Scottish Parliainent, and other authentic documents, that the gipsies were at one time very numerous in Scotland. Fletcher of Saltoun says, in one of his speeches in Parliament, that the gipsies, and other vagabonds who associated with them, At present the gipsies form a permanent and and whom he describes as living in much the well-trained body of organized hereditary crisame manner as they do at this day in Eng-minals, a great nursery and school for every land, amounted to two hundred thousand souls. The number was probably over-rated; but they must have been a vast multitude to justify such an opinion of them. What precise means were employed to effect the removal of so great a grievance I am not prepared to state; but it would appear that it was accomplished very speedily: it is only about six score years since these remarks were made, and that state of society certainly ceased to exist in Scotland before the days of our grandfathers. Should no compassion be felt for these unhappy people, it might be expected that a re enormity; but it appears to me, that it would be an easy matter to effect a total and rapid change in their condition, and our own character as a nation demands immediate attention to this foul reproach on our legislature and police. Two or three small huts, erected in each parish of England and Wales, would accommodate all the gipsies in these countries, and this expense would be trifling. It would be easy to enforce their residence, as they would be under the eyes of the police; and they should be employed in field-labour and other suitable work; their children would be put to trades |