1 very ancient."* The antiquity of Uranolatria, or wor ship of the heavenly bodies, is also maintained by Selden, (De Diis Syris, c. 3,) Beyer, (Additamenta ad cap. 3. Joh. Seldeni,) Pococke, (Specimen Historia Arabum, Note, p. 138,) Hyde, (Hist. Relig. Vet. Persar. c. 1,) Prideaux, (Connection of the History of the Old and New Testament, p. 1. b. iii,) and other learned Orientalists. Zabianism, or Sabæanism, was not only the most ancient species of idolatry, but extended its influence more universally than any other. "This religion," says Mr. Young, "having taken its rise in Chaldæa, was soon carried into Egypt, and from thence into Greece. It spread itself to the most distant parts of the world, and infected not only the eastern and western Scythians or Tartars, but the Mexicans too, for there the Spaniards found it when they first came amongst them."+ Traces of this worship are still found in the island of Ceylon, where it is termed Baliism, a word of uncertain etymology, but which will remind an" antiquary of the names of Baal, Bel, and Bal, given to the sun, by the Chaldeans and other ancient nations, and the Baltan or Bealteine fires of Ireland and Highlands of Scotland.§ These Singhalese worshippers of the stars are few in number, and generally conceal their opinions. "The worship consists, entirely, of adoration to the heavenly bodies; invoking them in consequence of the supposed influence they have on the affairs of men. The (Singhalese) priests are great astronomers, and believed to be thoroughly skilled in the power and influence of the planets." Among the valuable paintings, illustrative of the religious opinions of the native inhabitants of Ceylon, brought from thence by • Long's Astronom. B. ii, chap. 2, p. 179: B. iii, chap. 3, p. 194. + Young on Idolatrous Corruptions in Religion, Vol. i. p. 35. + See Selden De Diis Syris, Syntag. 2. et Additamenta Beyerii. Amst. 1680. 12mo. § See Ency. Perth. in voc. and the authorities referred to in that work, and Toland's History of the Druids, Let. 2. pp. 101–106. Sir Alexander Johnstone, are several referring to the worship just described.* Abulpharagius affirms, that the major part of the ancient Greeks were Zabians, (Græcorum plerique Sabii erant,) worshipping the stars, and forming idolatrous representations of them.+ This opinion is supported by R. P. Knight, Esq. in "An Inquiry into the Symbolical Language of Ancient Art and Mythology," in which he remarks, "The primitive religion of the Greeks, like that of all other nations not enlightened by Revelation, appears to have been elementary; and to have consisted in an indistinct worship of the sun, the moon, the stars, the earth, and the waters, or rather to the spirits supposed to preside over those bodies, and to direct their motions, and regulate their modes of existence." In this he follows the early Heathen and Christian writers, who assert that the principal persons among the ancient Greeks held the sun, and moon, and stars, to be gods; which, Plato assures us, was the species of worship prevalent among the greater part of barbarous nations.§ Landseer, further states, that the ancient Sabæan faith in the stars, is well known to have reached from the lands of Nimrod and Jemsheed, westward through that of Canaan, to the shores of the Mediterranean southward to the straits of Babel-mandel, and the Erythrean ocean; and northward to the farthest extremities of Scythia."|| The superstitions accompanying this mode of idolatry, varied among different nations and at different periods, as is fully proved by the mythology of the Greeks, and For this information I am indebted to the Rev. Benjamin Clough, an intelligent and learned Wesleyan Missionary, in Ceylon, one of the translators of the Cingalese Scriptures. + Greg. Abul Pharajii Hist. Dynast. a Pocock, p. 6, Oxon, 1663, 4to. Classical Journal, No. XLV. March, 1821, p. 1. § Eusebii Præparat. Evang. Lib. i. c. 9, and iii, c. 2.-tom. I. Coloniæ 1688, folio. || Landseer's Sabæan Researches, Essay viii. p. 264. D Romans, and others, as detailed by their best and most authentic historians, as well as by those who have expressly treated upon the rites and ceremonies of the ancient idolatries. Eusebius, in his "Præparatio Evangelica," has discussed this point with considerable learning; and the names of Grotius, Jablonsky, Bryant, Leland, and many others among the moderns, are too well known to need eulogium. I shall, therefore, only add from General Vallancey, who supposes IRELAND to be the ancient Thule, and to have derived its idolatrous worship from the Carthaginians, that, "The chief deity of the Carthaginians was Baal, Beal, or Bel, the Sun, to whom they offered human sacrifices. The chief deity of the Heathen Irish was Beal, the sun, to whom also they offered human sacrifices. The sacrifice of beasts was at length substituted among the Carthaginians; the same custom, we learn from the ancient Irish historians, prevailed in this country. The month of May is, to this day, named Mi Beal teinne, i. e. the month of Beal's fire; and the first day of May is called la Beal teinne, i. e. the day of Beal's fire. These fires were lighted on the summits of hills, in honour of the sun; many hills in Ireland still retain the name of Cnoc greinne, i. e. the hill of the Sun; and on all these are to be seen the ruins of Druidish altars. The Carthaginians did not represent Baal, as they had him before their eyes daily in all his glory; they made their addresses immediately to him according to the ancient rite. No idol of Baal is ever mentioned by the ancient Irish historians, or was any ever found since Christianity was introduced."* To show the peculiar fitness of the Mosaic Ritual for eradicating the opinions and practices of the Zabii from the congregation of Israel, forms an important part of the design of Maimonides in the ensuing treatise translated from his celebrated MORE NEVOCHIM, or "Teacher of the Perplexed." For this interesting exposition, he Essay on the Antiquity of the Irish Language, p. 19, 1772, 8vo. was peculiarly qualified by his extensive and intimate acquaintance with the works extant amongst the Egyptians and Arabians on the subject of the Zabian idolatry; his profound knowledge of the Talmudical and Rabbinical writings; his opportunities of investigating the idolatries of Egypt during his residence in that country; and his uncommon acuteness and energy of mind, joined to his patience in research and soundness in judgment. "Maimonides," observes Mr. Townsend, "was the first who endeavoured to solve the mysteries which had so long perplexed the world. He perused, he tells us, with great attention, all the ancient authors on the rise and progress of idolatry. He did this, to explain the reasons of the enactment of those ordinances and rites of the Jewish Law which appear to have no meaning, unless they are considered in connexion with the idolatrous customs of the surrounding nations."*-The result of these investigations is comprised in the following treatise, which, with every allowance for Jewish prejudices, presents one of the best compendiums of expository remarks on many of the Mosaic Precepts, with which we are acquainted, and fully justifies the eulogiums which have been passed upon him by the learned of different ages and countries. * Classical Journal, No. XLII. June, 1820, p. 322. DISSERTATION III. ON THE ORIGINALITY OF THE INSTITUTIONS OF MOSES. IT T has been justly remarked by an ingenious writer, that they who suppose Moses himself to have been "the author of the institutions civil or religious that bear his name; and that in framing them he borrowed much from the Egyptians or other ancient nations, must never have compared them togther, otherwise they could not but have perceived many circumstances in which they differed most essentially from them all.”—That a correspondence subsisted between some of the Mosaic ordinances and the customs of other people, is granted, but that they were derived from the practices of idolatrous nations appears inconsistent and absurd. The true source of the similarity is to be traced to those primitive revelations and patriarchal examples retained by the Israelites and corrupted by the Gentiles;-whilst the striking and radical opposition discoverable between the most important parts of their respective systems of worship and religious service, mark, with indubitable evidence, the design of the Deity to separate the one from the other. It is only necessary to give to the following instances of the dissimilarity betwixt the Laws and Institutions of Moses and those of other nations, the consideration they merit, to be fully convinced, that the Mosaic ritual was vastly |
