the highest rank (Numbers xxii, 15), and consequently were furnished with every appendage of their condition that could contribute to the convenience of the journey.

Mr. Bryant's next difficulty arises from the place, whence he is supposed to set out, not at all corresponding with the country through which he passed, according to the account given by the sacred writer.' Now, to prove this, the evidence adduced by no means distinctly applies. Mr. Bryant denies the existence of Phathura, or Petor, on the Euphrates; and the sacred writer makes Balaam himself say that he had been brought from the mountains of the east. If so, it is certain, from what Mr. Bryant himself allows, namely, that the part of Mesopotamia, which lay towards Armenia, had vines, and was not unfruitful,' would have here admitted of Balaam's riding in a path of vineyards, though Cyrus, with the Euphrates on his right, found nothing in his march, from Thapsacus to the camp of wormwood, but that weed and barrenness; and at Babylon, Herodotus met with no vines.

However, the history itself, upon other evidence, will remove the objection. In Numbers xxii, 21, we read that BaLaam rose up in the morning, and saddled his ass, and wENT WITH THE PRINCES OF MOAB. The appearance of the angel did not take place, till he had arrived at the very region of VINES, which Mr. Bryant points out, and was proceeding, with his two servants, towards the abode assigned him, till the messengers, who had left him to apprise Balak of his coming, should return to introduce him. Thus was it, in the interval of their absence, that the angel appeared; for at that time he had only his two servants with him. Compare verses 21, 22.

34, 35, 36.

What we have above remarked, is, we think, sufficient to show that THE RIVER, which, in Scripture, always signifies the Euphrates, is not at all affected by Mr. Bryant's objection, from the qualification of its being called the river of the land of the children of his people, the Euphrates being, as in the case of Abraham, the boundary between the country of his kindred which he left, where he passed over into Canaan; and therefore that the position of Le Clerc remains untouched. The like observation may be applied to Mr. Bryant's proposed alteration of the sacred text, from D to DN, to serve the purpose of his hypothesis, thus substituting Edom for Mesopotamia, or Aram Naharaim; as well as to his interpretation of O, Kiddim, in reference to the mountains of the East; as likewise his conversion, for the same purpose, of nya, Beni Omi, into y, Bedi Omar, or y, Beni Oman; that is, instead of the sons of his people, reading the sons of Omar, or of Oman; which he asserts is sometimes transcribed Aman, whence he reads the song of Amon and Hamon; and so makes

them Ammonites, and Balaam one of that nation, who, however, according to other positions, is made by him also a Moabite, an Edomite, and a Midianite. To us it appears, that, if such liberties be allowed, the Scriptures may be brought to prove whatever any one pleases. It is not from disrespect to Mr. Bryant that we here enter our protest against this mode of procedure; but, on the contrary, to his abilities, from the wide influence which the authority of his name carries with it; for the more veneration there is paid to his authority, the more neces sity is there publicly to examine the arguments, and try the foundations, upon which his assertions are built.

Should this discussion meet the eye of Mr. Bryant, we trust, therefore, it will be received by him with his well-known candour, presuming that, if our explanations and remarks be just, the will be better pleased to see the integrity and consistency of the Sacred Writings evinced, than any hypothesis of his own embraced at their expense. His sentiments on questions of this kind are always entitled to respect; and it is from respect to their weight that we thus venture to discuss them.-Though we are persuaded, from the reasons above assigned, that Mr. Bryant's opinion concerning the Pethor of Balaam is erroneous, and that it was not the Petra he supposes, yet the error in itself is of no moment; for, whether this Pethor were in Mesopotamia, or Midian, the miracle and prophecy are the same :To these, then, let us return.

Our author, taking Petra for Pethor, rightly explains it, as an oracle, of which Balaam was the minister. The Samaritan expresses it, ; and Jonathan, habitatio ejus erat in Faddan, quæ dicta est Fetora, ob nomen Bileami won n interpres somniorum. Michaëlis adds, Equidem malim ORACULUM vertere (misit ad oraculum Dei) ita tamen, ut loco, ubi Bileamus oracula edebat, hoc nomen tum hæserit: sic erit nomen quodammodo geographicum, localis et præfixi, quibuscum componi videmus capix. (See Num. xxiii, 7. Deut. xxiii, 5. Supplement. ad Lexica, p. 2057. The point then being established, that Pethor was properly an oracle (which, perhaps, like Delphi in Greece, from its celebrity, and the frequency of resort, at length attracted a city round it), Mr. Bryant proceeds to an inquiry concerning Onolatria, or the wor ship of the ass, an animal reputed to possess an oracular nature, from being endued with the faculty of discovering water-springs in the desert, and so of the highest utility to those who lived near, or had to cross, these parched wilds. Analogous with this, many ingenious conjectures are applied to the circum stances of the people and country whither Balaam is brought; and the aspersion on the Jews, particularly in Tacitus, for worshipping the ass, is thus accounted for. To connect these observations with the history, Mr. Bryant proceeds:→ CRIT. REV. Vol. 38. July, 1803.

Z

"If then we look back upon the history of Balaam, we find that he was a prophet of Pethora; probably archimagus, or high-priest of the college. His word of prophecy was esteemed among the neighbouring nations of such prevalence, and certainty, that he was hired by the king of Moab to curse the children of Israel. It was a rule with the God of Jacob to display his suprentacy to his people, by making all other deities and their agents subservient to his will. On this account he often forced their representatives, and their prophets, to be ministers of his commands; and to bear witness of tris superiour power. This is no where more manifest than in the instance before us. The soothsayer of Pethora was by high rewards invited to blast the future happiness of the Israelites. And though the curse could not in reality have had any effect, especially against those whom God had blessed; nor could it have deserved to be recorded: yet, in order to manifest his supremacy, it pleased the Deity to interfere, and to make use of this infernal agent to disclose his purposes to his people. By these means they were taught to despise the oracles, as well as the idolatries of Midian and Edom, to which they had been too much in clined. And they were farther taught, that the powers of hell could not prevail against them. Surely there is no inchantment against Jacob: neither is there any divination against Israel. God had given his blessing; and the person who most hated them was obliged to confirm it. In short, no oracles could be better ascertained, no assurances better founded, than those which were extorted from an enemy; from one who had every inducement to speak evil of Israel; and whom nothing could have bribed to have spoken well. But the hand of Heaven bowed him to its will by a superiour influence; and he was accordingly reproved by his own oracle; and by an angel terrified into obedience. By these means the supremacy of the Deity was manifested to all; and the future glory and happiness of his people ascertained. The whole was accompanied with many prophetic indications, of the highest consequence to those in whose favour they were disclosed, and in which the world in general was concerned. They must have had great weight at all times, as their evidence could never be controverted; for they contained blessings promised to the Israelites, recorded and authenticated by their worst enemies, who could have no interest nor inclination to deceive. And they related to great events in the womb of time, which were many ages afterwards compleated. Of this completion we are witnesses.

In this manner the false prophet was foiled at his own weapons; and the oracle in which he trusted was made to declare against him. The instrument, however, by which he was rebuked, is in our times held in so contemptible a light, that to many it seems inconceivable, that Providence to effect its purpose should have condescended to such vile means. But this objection arises from an idle prejudice, and a misconception of the article employed. All the works of creation are founded in wisdom; and it pleases God oftentimes to make use of the most common and vile instruments towards the manifestation of his will. It signifies little, when Moses divided the sea, whether he grasped a staff of hazel or of gold; or whether the rod of Aaron were of almond, or of elm. We admit of false impressions, and suffer ourselves to be misled by popular opinions, which have no foundation in truth. Hence we are induced to think, that what is proverbially

ridiculous with us, must necessarily appear absurd in the eye of the all creating God, and that the Deity in his mode of operation must act agreeably to our caprice. But this notion, not only betrays great presumption, but is really impious. God, who is no respecter of persons, makes as little difference among animals. The sparrow, which is sold for a third of a denarius, is in his sight of the same value as the eagle. They are both equally the work of his hand; and he caters for them both alike, without any difference or partiality. But we are too apt to be led by fancy, and form a wrong estimate through our false conceptions. In consequence of this we cannot bring ourselves to conceive, that God would open the mouth of so vile an animal, though it were to the confusion of his enemies, and the reproof of a false prophet. It is not so much the fact, as the mode of operation, to which we object. Had it been a lion that uttered its voice, or had a mighty sound been heard from the deep recesses of a vast forest, such as that of the Aius Locutius (ingens vox a sylva Arsia) this would have been admitted, and no prejudices have arisen. But God's ways are not as our ways, nor does he see as we see. All animals are created in equal wisdom, and our contempt is ignorance: and, as to the fact, it is as consonant to reason as any other extraordinary operation; for all miracles are alike, and equally demand our assent, if properly ascertained. The giving of articulation to a brute, is no more to the Deity than the making the blind see, or the deaf hear, which we know was repeate edly effected.' Vol. i. p. 37.

In further abatement of the objection from the meanness of the animal used as the divine instrument of reproving the prophet, Mr. Bryant, after alleging examples of the contempt in which it was held by the Greeks and Romans, applies the observation of the apostle, that God hath chosen the foolish things of the world, to confound the wise; and the weak things of the world, to confound the things that are mighty: whence a fitness is inferred in the instrument used; for, the more vile the means, the fitter to confound the magician.' The refrac tory behaviour of Balaam is adduced also, to obviate an objec tion which might be brought from the permission given him to go (ch. xxii, v. 20); it being said that the divine anger was kin dled at his going.. This order, it should be remembered, was given in consequence of a wicked request; and God saw, in his great wisdom, that his orders would not be obeyed. This permission, therefore, was to lead to the prophet's confusion; for it was upon this account that the angel of the Lord met him, and enforced the divine command. But, notwithstanding the im pression made on him for the time, he soon relapsed to his former disobedience; and, by shifting the scene, had recourse to incantations. At length, overpowered by a superior influence, he was compelled to utter words nót his own; and blessings, instead of curses, were extorted from him. God was displeased with the whole of the prophet's process; but permitted, and even commanded it, in order to show his people his supe

riority over all the powers of darkness. This, as they were prone to superstitions, and were going into an idolatrous region, was highly necessary.'-Some remarkable references to this history are adduced by Mr. Bryant, from the doctrines. of Pythagoras, who was reputed to have borrowed them from the Jews—sας των Ιουδαίων δόξας μιμούμενος. The ass is related to have sunk under Balaam succubuit, ovxabor. συνεκάθισεν. Thus the Grecian philosopher advised his disciples never to proceed in any road where an ass had bent its knees; and in another place, more particularly, they were forbidden to pursue their" route where Ἡ ενός τυπτομένη ώκλασε a FEMALE ass (such Balaam's was), upon being beat, sunk down. This,' adds Mr. Bryant, if I am right in my determination, affords a strong attestation to the truth of the history. The fact must have been well received and notorious, to have become proverbial; and proverbial we find it to have been.' Joseph. Ant. lib. iv. c. 6, p. 214, and contr. Appian. lib. p. 453.

Having brought together many proofs of the repute and value of the ass in the east, shown the great utility of the female in particular, produced instances of the ass being an appendage to several divinities, and represented the several sacred characters under which it was reverenced, our author proceeds to the prophecy of Balaam. On this head, he very properly observes, that the prejudice against the instrument with which it pleased the Almighty to carry on his high purpose has occasioned the prophecy (which is the principal article in the history, and deserves particular consideration) to have been in a great measure overlooked, Mr. Bryant therefore remarks that

It contains a prophetic declaration of God's future favour to wards his people; and is delivered, both in respect to thought and diction, in a manner truly sublime. Many of the great events which are there predicted, did not take place till many ages afterwards; and before they were all compleated, there were versions made of the sacred history: one of which was near three hundred years before the completion, and another still more early. Concerning this there can be no doubt; so that we have the best authority, and the strongest proof that any past fact can demand.' . 67.

After giving instances, in different extracts, of the sublimity of the prophecy which Balaam, by the inspiration of the Almighty, was compelled to utter, Mr. Bryant considers some difficulties attending its explication, and then presents us with his own, of that part in particular commencing at the 17th verse of the xxivth chapter of Numbers.

I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: There shall come a star out of Jacob; and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel; and shall smite the corners of Moab; and destroy all the children of Seth: and Edom shall be his possession.