CHAP. XIII.

power. Whether we consider, the production PART III. of an habitable land by the removal of the waters which covered it; or, the clothing that land with universal vegetation; or, the commencement of new human and brute races to inhabit and possess it; the resemblance is so exact, and the correspondence so peculiar, that reason instructs us to employ our knowledge of the former, to guide us to a just apprehension of the latter. "God," says Philo, "thought fit to "make NOAH both the end and the beginning "of our race; the end of that which was before "the flood, and the beginning of that which

was after the flood1." So similar, indeed, were the positions of the first parents, of both races, and so intricately did the origins of both races become at length involved in ancient tradition; that we often find the same region, and the same seat, confusedly ascribed to the progenitor of each race.

We may here observe; that as ADAM, the common parent of the first race, was the source from which the knowledge of the important truths imparted to him by his Creator was transmitted to that first race, so NOAH, the common parent of the second race, was the source through which that same knowledge was

De Abrahamo, p. 7.

CHAP. XIII.

66

PART III. extended to the second race. Hence it is, that in the antiquities of the heathen world, we discover such manifest evidence of original iden tity in principles and traditions. Hence it was, that the learned Thomas Burnet thus contended: "What should hinder us from believing, that "those heads of theology and philosophy, "which are found among the ancient barbaric "nations, descended to his posterity, the persons who lived after the deluge, from THIS FOUNTAIN, this ORIGINAL MAN, whose knowledge extended to both worlds? Noah is reported to have delivered moral precepts to "his sons and kinsmen, which are usually "called the precepts of Noah;' and why not "also doctrines, which may as justly be called, "the doctrines of Noah? For, as those precepts "were not about inconsiderable things, or "duties of little moment, but had a reference "to those which were highly necessary to the improvement of human life; so, also, these "doctrines respect the principal orders and "most important articles of the natural world;

66

as, how it began-in what form and structure it

first appeared-what changes or violent motions "it has already undergone, or may hereafter "endure-whether it is to be dissolved or renewed, "and what is to be the last exit and final con"clusion of all things. In these general and

66

66

CHAP. XIII.

"important heads (if I mistake not) the pri- PART III. "mæval wisdom was concerned, or that part "of it which had relation to the world and 66 nature. Now, NOAH was the common heir "of all: therefore, in my opinion, this INHABITANT OF BOTH WORLDS then delivered the lamp of learning from ONE to the OTHER; and propagated through the universe, together "with his offspring and primitive people, some "seeds both of natural and moral doctrine. But, "in after ages they very much declined; and I "must freely acknowledge, that those seminal "doctrines were almost choked by the pre

66

66

vailing tares1." In which vicious crop, we know that the doctrine of a CHAOTIC GEOGONY was eminently luxuriant.

De Originibus Rerum, P. I. c. 14. Eng. Tr. p. 244.

EE

CHAP. XIV.

CHAPTER XIV.

PART III. THERE remains a question, which the proposition of the destruction of the ante-diluvian earth, will naturally suggest to the mind; and which ought, therefore, not to be passed over without notice. It will be asked; if the first earth perished, what are we to understand concerning the description of the rivers of Eden, contained in verses 11, 12, 13, and 14, of the second chapter of Genesis? We cannot cut the knot of this difficulty with so little ceremony as Dé Luc; who, without hesitation, affirms that the rivers therein enumerated were not the present Euphrates, &c. but "certain ante-diluvian rivers, "whose names were afterwards transferred to "rivers of the new earth; as is common in colonies, where new places are called after "the names of the mother-country'."

This is a question, pertaining to an entirely distinct branch of inquiry; yet it is very

material to the present subject, that it should PART III. be resolved here.

That this description of rivers constitutes a parenthesis, intersecting the direct thread of the history, and that it has been inserted for the purpose of illustration, is manifest upon the face of the text; but, a critical question arises upon this parenthesis, which those will best apprehend who are most conversant with ancient manuscripts and with the history of their transcriptions: viz. whether this illustrative insertion was written by the author of the history, or, whether it is not more probable that it was originally a marginal gloss, which, in process of time, became incorporated into the body of the text? To such glosses, Bishop Lowth has occasion to advert in his notes on Isaiah, and Kennicott has treated of them, more diffusely, in his dissertations on the Hebrew text; and there are few ancient authors whose writings have not, in some degree or other, suffered depravation by similar incorporations. Both the Sacred Testaments are known to have sustained such depravations, in several instances.

In order to illustrate this subject for those who may not have had experience in this branch of investigation, I shall adduce an example of

CHAP. XIV.