many ages have the better parts of that country lain under the dominion of the Romans, and then of the Saracens, and now of the Turks in what wickedness, ignorance, barbarity, slavery, misery, live most of the inhabitants? and of the poor negroes how many hundreds every year are sold and bought like beasts in the market, and are conveyed from one quarter of the world to do the work of beasts in another?

Nothing can be more complete than the execution of the sentence upon Ham as well as upon Canaan: and now let us consider the promises made to Shem and Japheth. "And he said, (Gen. ix. 26,) Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant :" or rather, and Canaan shall be servant to them, or their servant, that is to his brethren; for that, as we observed before, is the main part of the prophecy, and therefore is so frequently repeated. A learned critic in the Hebrew language, who hath lately published some remarks on the printed Hebrew text, saith that if it should be thought preferable to refer the word blessed directly to Shem, as the word cursed is to Canaan, the words may be (and perhaps more pertinently) rendered-Blessed of Jehovah, my God, be Shem! See Gen. xxiv. 31.' Or if we choose (as most perhaps will choose) to follow our own as well as all the ancient. versions, we may observe that the old patriarch doth not say Blessed be Shem, as he said, Cursed be Canaan; for men's evil springeth of themselves, but their good from God: and therefore in a strain of devotion breaking forth into thanksgiving to God as the author of all good to Shem. Neither doth he say the same to Japheth; for God certainly may dispense his particular favours according to his good pleasure, and salvation was to be derived to mankind through Shem and his posterity. God prefers Shem to his elder brother Japheth, as Jacob was afterwards preferred to Esau, and David to his elder brothers, to show that the order of grace is not always the same as the order of nature. The Lord being called the God of Shem particularly, it is plainly intimated that the Lord would be his God in a particular manner. And accordingly the church of God was among the posterity of Shem for several generations; and of "them (Rom. ix. 5,) as concerning the flesh Christ came."

But still Japheth was not dismissed without a promise. (Gen. ix. 47,) "God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be servant to them," or their servant. "God shall enlarge Japheth." Some render the word (it is so rendered in the margin of our Bibles) God shall persuade or allure Japheth, so that he shall come over to the true religion, "and dwell in the tents of Shem." But the best See Kennicott's Dissertation, p. 561.

⚫ Bocharti Phaleg. 1. 3, c. 1. col. 149. Clericus in loc. &c.

66

critics in the language have remarked, besides other reasons, that they who translate the word by persuade or allure, did not consider, that when it is so taken, it is used in a bad sense, and governs an accusative case, and not a dative as in this place. "God shall enlarge Japheth," or unto Japheth is the best rendering; and in the original there is a manifest allusion to Japheth's name, such as is familiar to the Hebrew writers. As it was said of Noah, (Gen. v. 29,) "This same shall comfort us," the name of Noah being thought to signify comfort: As it is said of Judah, (Gen. xlix. 8,) "Thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise," and the name of Judah signifies praise: As it is said of Dan, (ver. 16,) " Dan shall judge his people," and the name of Dan signifies judging: As it is said of Gad, (ver. 19,) "A troop shall overcome him," and the name of Gad signifies a troop or company: So it is said here "God shall enlarge Japheth," and the name of Japheth signifies enlargement. Was Japheth then more enlarged than the rest? Yes he was both in territory and in children. The territories of Japheth's posterity were indeed very large, for besides all Europe, great and extensive as it is, they possessed the lesser Asia, Media, part of Armenia, Iberia, Albania, and those vast regions towards the north, which anciently the Scythians inhabited, and now the Tartars inhabit; and it is not improbable that the New World was peopled by some of his northern descendants passing thither by the straits of Anian. The enlargement of Japheth may also denote a numerous progeny as well as ample territory: and if you consult the genealogies of the three brothers comprised in the following chapter, you will find that Japheth had seven sons, whereas Ham had only four, and Shem only fwe: and the northern hive (as Sir William Temple denominates it) was always remarkable for its fecundity, and hath been continually pouring forth swarms, and sending out colonies into the more southern parts, both in Europe and in Asia, both in former and in latter times.

The following clause, " and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem," is capable of a double construction; for thereby may be meant either that God or that Japheth shall dwell in the tents of Shem; "in the tents of Shem," saith he, speaking according to the simplicity of those times, when men dwelt in tents and not in houses. They who prefer the former construction, seem to have the authority of the original text on their side; for

6 с -iis omnino assentior, qui per hæc verba volunt Japhetho promitti, fore ut in terræ divisione amplissimam illí portionem habitandam Deus assignet. Quod Deum abunde præstitisse statim agnoscet quisquis, præter Europam quanta quanta est, ad Japhethi portionem pertinere cogitabit, Asiam

minorem, et Mediam, et Armeniæ partem, et Iberiam, et Albaniam, et vastissimas illas regiones ad Boream, quas olim Scythæ, hodie Tartari obtinent. Ut de novo orbe taceam, in quem per fretum Anianis migrasse Scythas vero non est absimile.' Bocharti Phaleg. 1. 3, c. 1. col. 149.

there is no other noun to govern the verbs in the period, but God; there is no pronoun in the Hebrew, answering to the he which is inserted in our English translation: and the whole sentence would run thus, God will enlarge Japheth, and will dwell in the tents of Shem: and the Chaldee of 'Onkelos also thus paraphraseth it, and will make his glory to dwell in the tabernacles of Shem.' They who prefer the latter construction, seem to have done it, that they might refer this 27th verse wholly to Japheth, as they refer the 26th wholly to Shem: but the other appears to me the more natural and easy construction. Taken in either sense, the prophecy hath been most punctually fulfilled. In the former sense it was fulfilled literally, when the Shechinah or divine presence rested on the ark, and dwelt in the tabernacle and temple of the Jews; and when "the word who was with God and was God," (John i. 1,) kokývwv, pitched his tent, "and dwelt among us," (ver. 14.) In the latter sense it was fulfilled first, when the Greeks and Romans, who sprung originally from Japheth, subdued and possessed Judea and other countries of Asia belonging to Shem; and again spiritually, when they were proselyted to the true religion, and they who were not Israelites by birth, became Israelites by faith, and lived, as we and many others of Japheth's posterity do at this day, within the pale of the church of Christ.

What think you now? Is not this a most extraordinary prophecy; a prophecy that was delivered near four thousand years ago, and yet hath been fulfilling through the several periods of time to this day! It is both wonderful and instructive. It is the history of the world as it were in epitome. And hence we are enabled to correct a mistake of one author, and expose the petulance of another.

1. The first is the learned and excellent Mr. Mede, an author always to be read with improvement, and to be corrected with reverence but yet I conceive that he hath carried matters too far in ascribing more to this prophecy than really belongs to it. For discoursing of the dispersions and habitations of the sons of Noah, he saith that there hath never yet been a son of Ham, who hath shaken a sceptre over the head of Japheth: Shem hath subdued Japheth, and Japheth hath subdued Shem, but Ham never subdued either:' and this passage hath been cited by several 'commentators to illustrate this prophecy. But this worthy person surely did not recollect, that Nimrod, the first monarch in the world, (Gen. x. 8,) was the son of Cush, who was the son of Ham, (ver. 6.) Misraim was another son of Ham; he was the father of the Egyptians, and the Egyptians Et habitare faciet gloriam suam in tabernaculis Sem.'

See Mede's Works, b. 1, disc. 49 and 50, p. 283, edit. 1672. 9 Patrick, &c.

detained the Israelites in bondage several years. Shishak king of Egypt subdued Rehoboam king of Judah, (1 Kings, xiv. 25.) Sesostris king of Egypt (the same probably as Shishak) conquered great part of Europe and of Asia, if there is any faith in ancient history. The Carthaginians too, who descended from the Canaanites, as we noted before, gained several victories over the Romans in Spain and Italy. It was a mistake therefore to say that Ham never subdued Shem or Japheth. It is enough if he hath generally and for much the greatest part of time been a servant to them, as he really hath been for two or three thousand years, and continues at present. This sufficiently verifies the prediction; and we should exceed the limits of truth, if we should extend it farther. We might also as well say (as some have said) that the complexion of the blacks was in consequence of Noah's curse. But though Ham hath in some instances and upon some occasions been superior, yet this is memorable enough, that of the four famous monarchies of the world, the Assyrian, Persian, Grecian, and Roman, the two former were of the descendants of Shem, as the two latter were of the sons of Japheth.

2. The other is the famous author of the Letters on the Study and Use of History, who hath strangely abused his talents in abusing this prophecy. For the true meaning and exact completion of it rightly considered, what room is there for ridicule ? and how absurd and impertinent as well as gross and indecent are his reflections? The curse,' says he, pronounced in it contradicts all our notions of order and of justice. One is tempted to think, that the patriarch was still drunk; and that no man in his senses could hold such language, or pass such a sentence.' But such will be the case when men of more parts than judgment talk and write about things which they do not sufficiently understand; and especially in matters of religion, whereof they are by no means competent judges, having either never studied them at all, or studied them superficially and with prejudice. All that he hath written relating to these subjects betrays great weakness in a man of his capacity, weakness great as his malice; and we might have an easy victory over assertions without proofs, premises without conclusions, and conclusions without premises. But I love not controversy, and will only make two or three reflections just to give a specimen of the boasted learning and abilities of this writer.

His lordship seemeth to take a particular pleasure in railing at pedants, at the same time that he is himself one of the most pedantic of writers, if it be pedantry to make a vain ostentation of learning, and to quote authors without either reading or understanding them, or even knowing so much as who

'Lord Bolingbroke's Works, vol. 2, Letter the 3d, p. 314, edit. quarto.

and what they are. "The Codex Alexandrinus,' 2 saith he,' we owe to George the monk.' We are indebted indeed to George the monk, more usually called Syncellus, for what is entitled Vetus Chronicon, or an old chronicle. But the Codex Alexandrinus is quite another thing; it is, as all the learned know, the famous Greek MS. of the Old and New Testament, brought originally from Alexandria, and presented to Charles I. and now remaining in the King's library, of which it doth not appear that George the monk knew any thing, and it is evident that his lordship knew nothing. If he meant to say the Chronicon Alexandrinum, that is still another thing, and the work of another author.

3

His lordship is of opinion, that 'Virgil in those famous verses, Excudent alii, &c. might have justly ascribed to his countrymen the praise of writing history better than the Grecians.' But which are the Roman histories, that are to be preferred to the Grecian? Why, the remains, the precious remains,' says his lordship, of Sallust, of Livy, and of Tacitus.' But it happened that Virgil died before Livy had written his history, and before Tacitus was born. And is not this an excellent chronologer now to correct all ancient history and chronology, sacred and profane?

His lordship is likewise pleased to say, "that 'Don Quixote believed, but even Sancho doubted:' and it may be asserted on the other side, that Sir Isaac Newton believed the prophecies, though his lordship did not, the principal reason of which may be found perhaps in the different life and morals of the one and the other. Nay the wisest politicians and historians have been believers, as well as the greatest philosophers. Raleigh and Clarendon believed; Bacon and Locke believed; and where then is the discredit to revelation, if Lord Bolingbroke was an infidel? "A scorner," as Solomon saith, (Prov. xiv. 6,) "seeketh wisdom and findeth it not."

But there cannot be a stronger condemnation of his lordship's conduct than his own words upon another occasion, in his famous Dissertation upon Parties. 'Some men there are, the pests of society I think them, who pretend a great regard to religion in general, but who take every opportunity of declaiming publicly against that system of religion, or at least against that church-establishment, which is received in Britain. Just so the men, of whom I have been speaking, affect a great regard to liberty in general; but they dislike so much the system of liberty established in Britain, that they are incessant in their endeavours to puzzle the plainest thing in the world, and

Letter the 1st, p. 262. Ibid.

3 Letter the 5th, p. 340, &c.

• Virgil died A. U. C. 735. Livy accord

ing to Dodwell, finished his history in 745. Tacitus was consul in 850. See Fabricius.

Letter the 4th, p. 130.