signify the same thing precisely; they contain distinct Lord." That the trees are here mentioned (i.e. the ideas. But the calling of the Church takes place while earth's grandees and powers) in connexion with the the kingdom exists in mystery; and all the professors tree of the Lord's planting is evidence that this prowho are found in the field claim to belong, in some phecy looks forward to the millennium, when every sort, to the Church. This greatly modifies the posi- power and Gentile dynasty shall recognize the_sution of those comprehended within (if we may so periority of the kingdom of the Son of David. In a say) the boundaries of the kingdom. Many things word, this is the kingdom established in power, and are true of God's Church (real members we here not the mysterious form of the kingdom of heaven, speak of) which cannot be predicated of the subjects which is the subject in the parables. But here, as in of the kingdom, as such simply. The being mem- the former case, setting aside the moral character of bers of Christ's body, the Church, or bride, involve the kingdom, it is a great power over the earth that privileges, and responsibilities too, which are beyond is foretold. Turn now to Dan. iv. Here is Nebuthose of the kingdom merely; but seeing they assume chadnezzar himself under the similitude of a great this position, they lie under increased obligations. tree. All the power of his kingdom was absolutely More than this, it follows that the professing body vested in his own person. More instances might be is here under the similitude of a tree, and whatever adduced; but these are sufficient to show that a tree the character of the tree before God, such is the cha- in scripture is used to typify an earthly power, racter of the nominal Church. for good or ill. Hence we conclude that the kingdom of heaven has assumed the aspect and the position of an earthly power; that is to say, the result of bringing in the Christian dispensation has been that men have availed themselves of Christianity, and have used the name of Christ, for the establishment of a vast hierarchical power, for the establishment of a kingdom, which, as represented by the tree, has shot forth its branches, and extended itself far and wide. Shelter, protection, and a habitation are given to the birds of the air; "they lodge in the branches thereof;" and this is dignified with the name of the " Church of God."* (Ver.31.) "Another parable put he forth," &c. The kingdom of heaven is symbolized by a grain of mustard seed, which becomes a great tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof. We have not the explanation of both these symbols given us in this chapter; but we have them in God's book, which therefore alone furnishes the key by which we may unlock the meaning of this parable. To look elsewhere is to dishonour it and the Spirit of God. Every symbol in His word has also its meaning there. However contrary it may be to any cherished human theory, it behoves us to accept His explanation, and to reject every other. We find, in Ezek. xxxi, 3—9, the Assyrian power compared to a great tree, a mighty cedar in Lebanon. His branches are fair, his boughs cast a broad shadow, in them the fowls of heaven make their nest, under them the beast of the field bring forth their young. "I have made him fair by the multitude of his branches: so that all the trees of Eden, that were in the garden of God, envied him." It is evident here that Assyria is a vast power, for great nations dwelt under his shadow. It is under the similitude of a tree; and the fowls that nestled in his branches, and the beasts that sought protection and shelter under them, are, according to the word of God, the surrounding nations. We do not enter into the moral character of the antitype. All that is necessary now to observe is that the tree typifies a towering earthly power. Again, we have the prophecy of the Lord's kingdom established in power, under a similar image, (Ezek. xvii, 22-24,) and here also is a place for fowl of every wing. This is the millennial kingdom described in Isa. xi-the Lord's earthly glory, when He will reign in righteousness and power, giving forth His law from mount Zion, and holding in subjection all nations. "All the trees of the field shall know that I am the government on certain given principles. Before this kingdom comes in power, Matt xiii shows us the mysteries of its present form owing to the rejection of the King and His exaltation in heaven, and not yet on earth, as far as manifestation goes. This peculiar phase of the kingdom gives room for our blessed privileges as sharing the sufferings of Christ, to be joint-heirs and to reign with Him, when He takes His great power, and, having received the kingdom, returns. The kingdom does not rise above individual privileges and responsibility. And if we take ever so cursory a view of Christendom, (which we take to be the wheat and tare field,) the connexion between the nations and powers of the world, and the nominal church, is plain. The so-called church lends her influence and authority to the rulers of the world, and they use the name of Christ to further their own political views, to extend their own power, and to crush that of their opponents, whether these opponents are professed enemies to the name of Christ or not. Does not history furnish abundant proof? Has not the pathway of the nominal Church, ever since its first union with the world in the person of the emperor Constantine, been a systematic grasping at the things of the world, seeking for power, for wealth, for worldly influence, for connexion with the rulers of the world; yea, to hold even them under authority? What do we see now in Europe? The last war originated in a dispute about the so-called "holy places" in Jerusalem. The pretensions of the Emperor of Russia to the protectorate of Christians in Turkey are well known, as is the claim of the French Emperor to represent the Latin church. All are agreed that ruling motives were aggrandisement of self and extension of empire. Need we allude to things nearer home-the pronouncing of blessings upon soldiers, and arms, and banners? What is this but using the name of Christ for mere "It was the church, with its institutions, its magistrates, its temporal power, which strove triumphantly against the internal dissolution which convulsed the empire, and against barbarity; which subdued the barbarians themselves, and became the link, the medium, the principle of civilization, as between the Roman and barbarian worlds."-Guizot on Civilization, Lecture II. political purposes? A mighty engine it once was, and may yet be, to move the populace, and to make the desires of ambition popular. But in the sight of God, of Christ, whose name is thus dishonoured, how awful! That which calls itself by the name of Christ is extending its branches, seeking to be identified with every movement in the world, inviting the birds of the air to take shelter in its branches, and saying, I sit as a queen, and shall see no sorrow. There may be no necessity for supposing that such an earthly power as a tree represents is wicked in the abstract. Other circumstances will determine whether it be a good or an evil. But when the Church, whose calling is not earthly, but heavenly, whose city is not made with hands, but built and made of God, which is called to be separate from the world-crucified to the world and the world crucified to it-then we perceive that connexion with earthly power becomes a positive departure, an apostacy. "Plain Tracts on Prophetic Subjects," and attributes it, with the qualifying clause, however, "as I believe," to "Mr. Macintosh." The fact is, the volume was published anonymously, without the least desire on my part for its authorship to be known; but as the French translation of it in two volumes, by M. Recordon, was, without my knowledge, published with my name, there remains no motive for longer withholding it in this country. And as I perceive the "London Monthly Review" has attributed the work to my valued friend, the author of "Outlines of Typical Teaching," a series of papers now appearing in that Review, it seems desirable, once for all, to acknowledge that the sole responpondent, whose name will be found at the close of this letter. sibility for the work devolves on your unworthy corresI have no complaint to make of any one: I am only ashamed to have occupied so much space with so insignificant a subject. The subject of Apocalyptic interpretation, however, is far from being insignificant; and whatever may be the amount of present differences of judgment among prayerful, diligent, students of prophecy, we may well rejoice in the amount of Alas! the professing church is a part of the world, attention which is being directed to it, and we may surely trust the great Head of the Church to bless the calm, disenjoys its power and ease, seeks its emoluments and passionate discussion of points on which differences exist, to honours. To say nothing of Romanism, which is a the gradual clearing up of the subject, so that seeing light professed ruler over secular powers, do not the Pro- in His light, we may see "eye to eye" with one another testant bodies covet and contend eagerly for the also. It ought to be easy to us all to consider what may prizes of the earth? Do we not see the means and be advanced against those views which may have comappliances of the world brought to bear upon the mended themselves to our own minds; and should such extension of what they call Christianity? True, we counter-arguments have real weight, it should be equally are told that the "silver and gold," which Christendom easy to acknowledge our mistakes, and bow to the truth by which our views are corrected and enlarged. boasts in now, is gathered for the extension of the Mr. E. re-asserts, in the Appendix above-named, the gospel; but is this the divine way of spreading the objection urged by him in former works to that which is good news? When the Lord commissioned His dis-known as "Futurism" in the exposition of the Book of ciples to go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature, did He mean them to raise funds from the Gentiles? Doubtless, it is the duty of the Church of God to provide for the wants of those who preach and teach, if needy; but does the going about and begging of the world a maintenance show faith or love? Is this the teaching of Gal. vi, or 1 Cor. ix, or 3 John? And then what a complicated machinery! How full of earthly contrivances! Past history and present facts confirm the prophetic view given in the parable. "PRESENT STATE OF CONTROVERSIES ON APOCALYPTIC INTERPRETATION.” To the Editor of "The Bible Treasury." Dear Brother, The above, as you are, doubtless, aware, is the title of a Fourth Appendix to the recently published volume of "Warburtonian Lectures," by the Rev. E. B. Elliott. A considerable part of this Appendix is occupied with a review of the Futurist controversy, in reference to which Mr. E. notices, among other works, a volume of mine, the title of which he misquotes, and the authorship of which he attributes to another. May I ask a page in "The Treasury" for the purpose of correcting these mistakes? In doing so, I would further, if I may, make a remark or two on Mr. E.'s quotations from the book referred to, as well as on the general question of Apocalyptic interpretation. The title of the volume quoted by Mr. Elliott is "Plain Papers on Prophetic and other Subjects." Mr. E. calls it Revelation, and states his conviction that they have not been answered in any works on the subject which have since appeared. Would it not have been well for him, as he does quote "Plain Papers on Prophetic Subjects," and has evidently read the volume, to notice the reply afforded by the following paragraph to one of his chief reasons for the historical mode of interpretation? His omitting to notice what follows is the more remarkable, as he does, for another purpose, quote the very context of the paragraph itself: "The weightiest argument urged by those who maintain the exclusively historic application of chaps. iv-xix, is, that to interpret them of the future, leaves an interval between the days in which they were written, and the commencement of their application, longer than we can suppose would have been left without any information as to the events by which it should be marked. The whole force of this argument rests on the assumption that it is in chaps. iv-xix, alone, that such information is to be sought for or expected. We have the information in chaps. ii and iii. The argument is, therefore, without value and without force. Nay more, it suggests an argument of real weight in favour of the futurists of chaps. iv-xix. Seeing that we have, in chaps. ii and iii, that which applies to the whole period from the apostles' days to the excision of the professing body, why should we have it repeated in the succeeding chapters? Further, chap. ix begins the declaration of things which must be after these;' and as 'the things which are,' exhibited in chaps. ii and iii are still in existence, it is clearly not in the present or past-not in a period contemporaneous with the things which are'-that we must look for 'the things which must be after these."" (Plain Papers, &c., pp. 350, 351.) Now, who that has read the fourth edition of Mr. E.'s Horæ, and especially his "Review of the Futurist's Apoca lyptic Counter Scheme," in the latter part of vol. iv, does not remember that his first argument is "The supposed instant plunge of the apocalyptic prophecy into the distant future of the consummation." With such a plunge," the futurism of "Plain Papers," &c., is not chargeable; and here I must beg the reader to remember that the paragraph-and this Mr. E. would scarcely desire-or they must be just quoted from the volume is merely a statement of the position maintained, not of the reasonings by which it is supported. For these reasonings I must refer to the work itself; especially the paper on " Apocalyptic Interpretation," commencing from page 341. 66 It is from that paper Mr. E. quotes, in representing me as strongly asserting the principle that a prayerful scripture student, entirely unacquainted with the details of profane history,' or 'the vicissitudes of political and ecclesiastical affairs, during the last eighteen centuries,' may 'equally with the most learned,' study and understand prophetic scriptures, in so far as they concern 'Christ's glory, in His relation to the Church, to Israel, or to the world."" To his charge of inconsistency with myself on this point, I hope shortly to advert. Had the whole passage been transferred to Mr. E.'s pages, instead of a clause here, and another there, his readers would have seen that I am far from denying that human learning is of any use in prophetic studies, or from affirming that history may never with propriety be referred to in their prosecution. What I maintain is, that the Christian is not necessarily dependent on such resources. These are my words:: "If the glory of Christ be the object, the things of Christ the subject, and the Holy Ghost Himself the communicator of prophetic instruction, the Christian cannot be dependent for the possession of it on human learning. A man might possess vast stores of erudition, and be able with ease to quote every page of this world's dark history, and not be in the least better prepared for the study of God's prophetic word. The humble Christian, unable to read the scriptures in any language but his own, and entirely unacquainted with the details of profane history, may, nevertheless, prayerfully study the prophetic scriptures. Equally with the most learned, he may count on his Father's faithful love to enable him, by the teaching of the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, to understand and receive what these scriptures unfold of the diverse glories of Christ, the Son, whether in His relations to the Church, which is His body, or to Israel, the world, and creation, over the whole of which His rule is yet to extend. It is in the establishment of this blessed, universal sway, and in the dealings of God, whether in judgment or in grace, by which it is immediately preceded, that we have the great subjects of prophecy, and especially of the Apocalypse-not in those vicissitudes of political and ecclesiastical affairs throughout the last eighteen centuries, with which the pages of historians are filled." (Plain Papers, &c., pp. 343, 344.) Mr. E. seeks to prove me inconsistent with myself on this point by adducing instances in which I have referred to well known historical facts and epochs, in illustration of certain subjects, or in support of certain arguments. Had I maintained that human learning and historical information were absolutely useless or invariably mischievous, his proof of inconsistency would have been complete, and I must have pleaded guilty to the charge. But when all that I have affirmed is, that these qualifications are not indispensable that "the great subjects of prophecy" are such that the uneducated, but humble and prayerful, student of scripture may become acquainted with them, I see nothing in such a position to interdict my own use of any acquaintance with history I may possess, or to forbid my appealing to well-known historical facts, especially in controverting ws which mainly depend on historical evidence. Such a use of history bears no real resemblance to that made of it by Mr. E. in his "Horæ," and in his Lectures. The results of historical and antiquarian research, and that on the most gigantic scale, form the staple of his Apocalyptic exposition. These results must either be taken on trust, tested by those competent to judge of their accuracy. The qualifications for this are possessed by few indeed: and can we suppose that it is to such a few that acquaintance with God's revelation of the future, is designedly restricted? Mr. E. may seek to identify his principle of historic interpretation with the very occasional and subordinate allusions to history made by writers of futurist views; but there is no more real identity between them than exists between Paul's quotation from a heathen poet, in his address to an Athenian audience, and the sermons of certain preachers of past generations, who make quotations from the Greek and Latin classics the staple of their pulpit ministrations. Had Mr. Elliott deemed the volume worthy of a fuller notice, or even this single paper on "Apocalyptic Interpretation," his readers would have found that there is a kind of "futurism" held by some, entirely distinct from the Tractarian futurism of Dr. Maitland, and differing in several important aspects from that of Mr. Molyneux. They would have found it supported, moreover, by a class of arguments such as Mr. E. has certainly not met, nor attempted to meet, either in his older or more recent writings on the subject. The distinction between the course of providential events, with which history is concerned, and that solemn final crisis, to which prophecy in general seems to point; our Lord's own three-fold division of the book of Revelation, the one part succeeding the other, instead of their being contemporaneous; the possibility of chapters iv-xix, being rightly understood, both on a protracted scale, and as having their definite fulfilment in a short future crisis; the difference between the divine names and titles in the Apocalypse and in the other apostolic writings; the judicial character which attaches to heavenly scenes and personages in this book, so strikingly contrasting with the full, unmingled grace of the present dispensation; as well as the marked differences between the cries for vengeance which characterize the Apocalyptic sufferers and the prayers for forgiveness of their enemies, by which Christ and christian martyrs are distinguished, are all arguments for the futurity of Apocalyptic scenes, with which it would be well for the esteemed author of the "Hora" and the "Warburtonian Lectures" to grapple, when he again writes a review of the Futurist controversy. On one point, if not trespassing too largely on your space, I should be glad to furnish another extract from the Paper on "Apocalyptic Interpretation." It is in reference to the systems, such as Mede's, Bishop Newton's, and Mr. Elliott's own, "which tie down the Apocalyptic visions to a supposed fulfilment in historic details." "It would be easy, from the contrariety of these systems to one another, to show that they are mutually destructive of each others' claims definitely to explain the particulars of what they all allege to be fulfilled prophecy. But though this forms no part of our object, it may be well, in adverting to this topic, to point out to the reader a distinction of no small importanee. Twenty students of the Apocalypse, agreeing in this, that from chap. iv it is as yet unfulfilled, may have different interpretations of this unfulfilled prophecy to suggest. Such differences do but prove that the prophecy is as yet far from being understood. The partial or total ignorance of the expositors accounts for such differences. But suppose twenty expositors should agree with each other in maintaining that these chapters, or most of them, are absolutely and finally fulfilled, and yet 66 Nor have twenty conflicting theories of interpreting them,-what the Nativity at Jerusalem, has also given him the do such differences prove? Not only that the expositors old palace of the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, are mistaken in their theories, but also that the basis on which is annexed to St. Peter's prison. which they all proceed is a mistake. What claim can a Thus, with whatever slight delays and temporary prophecy have to be a fulfilled one, when twenty can sup- checks, the prophetic student will descry the growing pose it to have been fulfilled in twenty different events? Scripture does contain fulfilled prophecies; but no such tendency and desire of the West to facilitate the obscurity hangs over them. There are not twenty ways political restoration of the Jews to their own land. in which godly people suppose the prophecies of our Lord's Alas, an untimely birth! which will issue in the birth, earthly parentage, miracles, betrayal, and crucifixion, deepest sorrows, and in divine judgments upon all to have been fulfilled. And had the Apocalyptic seals, concerned. "For afore the harvest, when the bud is trumpets, and vials been actually accomplished, there would perfect, and the sour grape is ripening in the flower, not have been among expositors so many conflicting methods he shall both cut off the sprigs with pruning hooks, of explaining them." (Plain Papers, &c., pp. 352, 353.) The writer of "Plain Papers" has never represented Anti-and take away and cut down the branches." christ as "both enthroned within the city (of Jerusalem) and will it be merely the disappointment of Israelitish besieging the city from without at one and the same time." hopes; for their Gentile patrons will prove their The truth seems to be that Antichrist, in league with the scourge, and will turn again and rend them. They apostate portion of the Jews who will have returned to shall be left together unto the fowls of the mountains, their own land, will be in possession of Jerusalem, and him- and to the beasts of the earth; and the fowls shall self besieged there by "the king of the North," (Dan. xi, summer upon them, and all the beasts of the earth 40, 41) when the Lord appears, to the destruction of the shall winter upon them." But that very time shall wicked both among besiegers and besieged. Mr. E. notices, as a peculiarity in "Plain Papers, &c.," see the Lord undertake the work, and gather in His that they "make the two sackcloth-robed witnesses' three people with a high hand. "For, lo, I will command, and a half years of witnessing to precede, instead of being and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, identical with, Antichrist's three and a half years of supremacy like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least in Jerusalem, the one being the first half, the other the grain fall upon the earth." "And in that day will I second half, of Daniel's last hebdomad." But," objects make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people; Mr. E., "unfortunately Apoc. xi, 2 expressly defines the all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in two witnesses' three and a half years as the three and a half years of the Gentiles treading down the holy city." I have pieces, though all the people in the earth be gathered turned, since reading this, to Rev. xi, 2, and can find no together against it." Their worst tribulation immemention in it of the two witnesses. They are not named diately precedes their final deliverance, and the putting before the 3rd verse; and it certainly seems to me open to down of the Gentiles, who will afterwards owe their serious question whether the "thousand two hundred and best blessing, as far as means are concerned, to Israel. threescore days" of verse 3 are the same period as the forty" And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall and two months of the previous verse. But the question go out from Jerusalem; half of them towards the of Daniel's last hebdomad, and its connexions with the former sea, and half of them towards the hinder sea, Apocalypse, is much too wide for a communication like the (i.e. east and west :) in summer and in winter shall it The Lord give to all His people humbly and prayerfully be (i.e. always, as depending on God, not upon the to search His word, and vouchsafe to us a good under-mere natural seasons.) And the LORD shall be King standing in all things. over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one." present. 66 Believe me, my dear brother, WM. TROTTER. People and Land of Israel. Ir appears from the Jewish Chronicle that the project for a railway from Jaffa to Jerusalem has been abandoned for the present. It is not that any insuperable difficulties stood in its way, for the line has been surveyed by a civil engineer of celebrity, who pronounces decidedly in favour of its feasibility. But the financial results anticipated are not such as to encourage the enterprise, unless grants of land were made by the Ports, such as are usually given by government in imperfectly cultivated countries. Aali Pacha did not see fit to hold out this inducement; but those interested in it are looking for greater vigour and decision from Redschid Pacha. On the other hand, the Sultan, who had already presented to the Emperor Napoleon the Church of RECENT TRAVELS IN THE HOLY LAND AND 1. Later Biblical Researches in Palestine and the adjacent In the preface, Dr. Robinson states that with this volume closes the record of his personal observations in the Holy Land. "To these my BIBLICAL RESEARCHES in the Holy Land, the fruit of thirty years of preparation, and of personal travels in 1838 and 1852, I can hope to add nothing more." one, and prepared of course on the same principles. "The The present work is intended as a supplement to his former great object of all these travels and labours has been, as formerly announced, to collect materials for the preparation of a systematic work on the physical and historical geo graphy of the Holy Land. To this work, so much needed, should my life and health be spared, I hope speedily to address myself." (p. vi.) The book before us consists of thirteen sections, with a few notes and indexes, the last of which, Passages of Scripture Illustrated, is meagre and incomplete. Judged by that list, one might well wonder why the volume was entitled "Biblical Researches," for Matthew and Revelation are the only books of the New Testament referred to, and these in the most cursory way. As to the Revelation, the solitary allusion is divided with Neh. xiii, 5: and Job xxiv, 14, as well as with one of the two references to Matthew. Even as regards the Old Testament, the prospect looked extremely unpromising. We are glad to say, however, that this is the fault of him who drew up the third index; for the body of the work and the foot notes really discuss a considerable number of points interesting to the reader of scripture, as will appear presently. Section I (pp. 1-32) is merely the introduction and the journey to Beirût, of which, and of the vicinity, we have a full account. Section II (pp. 33-101) describes the places visited between Beirût and 'Akka. Let the reader take the following historical sketch of the latter, omitting the authorities: "This city is the Accho of the Old Testament; from which Asher did not drive out the Canaanites. It would hence appear to have lain in the territory of that tribe, although not mentioned in the distribution of Joshua. Afterwards it took the name of Ptolemais, probably from one of the earlier Ptolemys of Egypt; though the occasion is unknown. It is referred to in the New Testament as visited by Paul on his way to Jerusalem. Several times it is mentioned as Ptolemais in the books of the Maccabees, and also frequently by Josephus, who correctly describes its position, and assigns it to Galilee. Strabo speaks of it as a great city; of which the Persians availed themselves as a point from which to attack Egypt. By Pliny it is called a colony of the emperor Claudius; and it bears the same appellation on coins. In the early centuries of the Christian era, it is mentioned by Eusebius and Jerome; and was the seat of a Christian bishoprick. . . . . . 'Akka, as we saw it, bears few traces of having been a desolated city; at least not more than the other cities of the country, among which it is still the strongest. Yet among the many devastations and renovations which the place has undergone, it is easy to conceive that the remains of edifices from the times of the Crusades should have become less and less distinct." Section III (pp. 102-160) gives the route through Galilee and Samaria to Jerusalem, and numerous identifications of Old and New Testament localities. "Kâna, called also Khirbet Kâna, is known by these names to all the inhabitants of the region round about, both Christians and Muslims. It is situated on the left side of the Wadj coming from Jefât, just where the latter enters the plain of Buttauf, on the southern declivity of a projecting Tell, and overlooking the plain. The situation is fine. It was once a considerable village of well-built houses, now deserted. Many of the dwellings are in ruins. There are also several arches, belonging to modern houses; but we could discover no traces of antiquity. In a former volume I have stated the grounds, which render it certain, that this village, and not Kefr Kenna was the Cana of the New Testament, where our Lord wrought His first miracle in Galilee; and that it was so regarded down to the beginning of the seventeenth century." In p. 122, we have the following interesting note associated with the patriarchal reminiscences. "At the southern foot of the Tell is a fountain called el-Hŭfireh. Here then was the ancient and long sought Dothain or Dothan, where the sons of Jacob were pasturing their father's flocks, when they sold their brother Joseph to the Ishmaelites of Midian passing by, on their way to Egypt. Eusebius and Jerome place it rightly at twelve roman miles north of the city of Samaria. Just in that very situation, the name thus still exists in the mouths of the common people; although overlooked by all modern travellers, as not being on any usual road; and especially by the Crusaders, who thought they found Dothan at the Khân Jubb Yûsuf, south-east of Safed. R. Parchi notes it correctly in the fourteenth century. We learned also at Ya'bud, that the great road from Beisâu and Zerin (Jezreel) to Ramleh and Egypt, still leads through this plain; entering it on the west of Jeuin, passing near the well of Kefr Kûd, and bending southwestwards around the hill of Ya'bud to the great western plain. It is easy to see, therefore, that the Midianites to whom Joseph was sold, coming from Gilead, had crossed the Jordan near Beisâu; and were proceeding to Egypt along the ordinary road. It could not be difficult for Joseph's brethren to find an empty cistern, in which to secure him. Ancient cisterns are very common, even now, along the roads and elsewhere; and many villages are supplied only with rain water. It may also be remarked of Joseph's brethren, that they were evidently well acquainted with the best tracts of pasturage. They had fed their flocks for a time in the plain of the Mûkhna by Shechem; (Nâbulus;) and had afterwards repaired to the still richer pasturage here around Dothan." The interview which our travellers had with a Samaritan priest at Nâbulus is worth extracting. "The priest was courteous and communicative; and showed us the manuscript treasures of their literature, such as it is. Besides their manuscripts of the Hebrew and Samaritan Pentateuch, they have several copies of an old Arabic version of the same which they prize highly. One of the best of these, the priest consented to loan (? lend) to Dr. Smith, to take with him to Beirût, for the purpose of using it, in his own version. It was very neatly written; and originally the heads of the sections were inserted in the Samaritan language and character; but all these had been carefully covered by pasting paper over them. Such an act of courtesy was something before unheard of; and excited the wonder of 'Andeh and others: Dr. Smith, however, had already obtained a less correct copy of the same work from Damascus, which probably had been handed down from the former Samaritan colony in that city. An ancient commentary on the Pentateuch, in the Samaritan character, was also laid before us; held to have been compared by Marky, who is said to have lived about a century before Christ. It is in Hebrew and Samaritan, in parallel columns, covering about 700 pages in octavo; and the copy exhibited was said to have been made more than four centuries ago. They have also several partial commentaries in Arabic, covering together the whole of the Pentateuch." After a few words on Yâlo, which is regarded as the ancient Aijalon, and Kefi, which is recognized as Chephirah of the Gibeonites, afterwards assigned to Benjamin; we have a question of more moment raised as to 'Amwas, once called Emmaus, and subsequently (from A. D. 220) Nicopolis. It is well known that Jerome frequently speaks of this place, as if it were the scene of the Lord's appearance on the day of His resurrection, and that Eusebius had done the same before him. On the other hand the statement of Luke is express: "the village" of which he speaks (xplor of Josephus, de Bell. Jud. vii, 6, 6: which is not very like the "insignis civitas Palæstina" of Jerome,) as distant about sixty stadia (or about 7 miles) from Jerusalem, whereas Nicopolis, or 'Amwas, is almost thrice as far off. It is remarkable too, that Josephus gives exactly the same distance. Some |