U N I V E R_ S ITY 
 OF ILLINOIS 
 
 MERTEN J. MANDEVILLE 
 COLLECTION IN PARAPSYCHOLOGY 
 AND OCCULT SCIENCES 
 
 291.37 
 
 In6a 
 v. 1 
 
The person charging this material is re¬ 
 sponsible for its return to the library from 
 which it was withdrawn on or before the 
 Latest Date stamped below. 
 
 Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books 
 are reasons for disciplinary action and may 
 result in dismissal from the University. 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 
 
 7 1981 
 
 d 1588 
 
 r JAN Q5 M 
 
 0 & 1992 
 
 AUG 2 6 1952 
 
 JAN 0 5 1898 
 
 DEC 23 1957 
 
 L161 —0-1096 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2017 with funding from 
 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates 
 
 https://archive.org/details/ancientfaithsemb01inma_0 
 

ANCIENT FAITHS 
 
 EMBODIED IN ANCIENT NAMES: 
 
 OR AN ATTEMPT TO TRACE 
 
 THE RELIGIOUS BELIEF, SACRED RITES, AND HOLY EMBLEMS 
 OF CERTAIN NATIONS 
 
 BY AN INTERPKETATION OF THE NAMES 
 GIVEN TO CHILDREN BY PRIESTLY AUTHORITY, OR ASSUMED BY 
 PROPHETS, KINGS, AND HIERARCHS. 
 
 BY 
 
 THOMAS INMAN, M.D. (London), 
 
 CONSULTING PHYSICIAN TO THE ROYAL INFIRMARY, LIVERPOOL ; 
 
 LECTURER SUCCESSIVELY ON BOTANY, MEDICAL JURISPRUDENCE, MATERIA MEDICA WITH 
 THERAPEUTICS, AND THE PRINCIPLES WITH THE PRACTICE OF MEDICINE. 
 
 LATE PRESIDENT OF THE LIVERPOOL LITERARY AND PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY. 
 AUTHOR OF “ TREATISE ON MYALGIA : ” 
 
 ' “ FOUNDATION FOR A NEW THEORY AND PRACTICE OF MEDICINE ; ” 
 
 “ON THE BEAL NATURE OF INFLAMMATION,” “ATHEROMA IN ARTERIES,” 
 “SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION,” “THE PRESERVATION OF HEALTH,” 
 
 “ THE RESTORATION OF HEALTH,” 
 
 AND “ANCIENT PAGAN AND MODERN CHRISTIAN SYMBOLISM EXPOSED AND EXPLAINED.” 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 SECOND EDITION. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 TRUBNER & CO., PATERNOSTER ROW. 
 
 1872. 
 
LIVERPOOL: 
 
 PRINTED BY DAVID MARPLE8, 
 LORD STREET. 
 
2.°|C37 
 
 vt.l- 
 
 TO THOSE 
 
 WHO THIRST AFTER KNOWLEDGE, 
 
 AND ARE NOT DETERRED FROM SEEKING IT 
 
 BY THE FEAR OF IMAGINARY DANGERS, 
 
 THIS VOLUME IS INSCRIBED, WITH GREAT RESPECT, 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
 
 * 
 
 nSv 
 
 \ X 
 
 - TOV 
 
 CO 
 
 “ Ovtol be rjuav evyevecrrepoi rS)v ev OecrcaXoviicrj, oinves ebe^avro 
 \6yov fiera nacres TvpoOvfx'ias, to kuB ’ rjpepav avaKpivovres ras 
 'jas e\ ravra ovrtos .”—Acts XVII. 11. 
 
This volume is the result of an inquiry, “How it comes 
 to pass that John and Jack are synonymous ? ” The 
 question, once propounded, led me onwards to such other 
 names as Elizabeth, Isabella, Anna, Annabella, William 
 and Bill, Mary and Miriam. The investigation proved 
 very fascinating, and in prosecuting it I found myself 
 surrounded by a mass of facts of which I had no 
 previous conception. These have been almost entirely 
 ignored by English writers, and those few who have 
 treated on them have imparted their views only to 
 a select private circle. Those who are acquainted with 
 the systematic way in which certain subjects are avoided 
 in modern society can well understand, and perhaps 
 easily forgive, the reticence referred to. But when it is 
 known that the suppression of truth has given rise to 
 a series of theological errors, which none could have 
 adopted with a knowledge of the sources from which they 
 were derived, it becomes a grave question whether the 
 interests of literature, and even % of divinity, do not 
 demand a removal of the veil of ignorance. 
 
 Having already experienced in my own profession the 
 advantages of attempting to sweep away the false practices 
 arising from perverted facts and wrong views of nature, 
 it is natural to believe that theology will be equally 
 benefited by a rigid and impartial examination of the 
 
VI 
 
 basis on which it has been founded. In medicine the 
 old reasoning ran, “Our forefathers believed and acted 
 thus, the colleges teach the same, we have learned the 
 practice when young, and we stick to it when old; 
 consequently, the practice of medicine, as at present 
 adopted, must be true, because it has stood the test of 
 time.” Absurd as this is in medicine, in divinity the 
 arguments are even still more puerile, and run thus, “It is 
 written; I am taught to believe 4 The word; ’ I do so, 
 and therefore it is true;” or 44 It is true, and therefore 
 I believe it.” 44 The Church is a witness for 4 The 
 word,’ and 4 The word’ testifies to the Church, and 
 both must be right.” But a moment’s consideration 
 shows that the same assertions may be applied to prove 
 the truth of the Yedas, of the Koran, and of the book of 
 Mormon. If faith in it is to be the test of the 
 infallibility of any religious system, we must allow that 
 the ancient Egyptians, Assyrians, Persians, and the 
 modern Hindoos had and have as sincere a belief as we 
 ourselves, for nothing can be more complete than their 
 entire trust in their spiritual guides. We, who in our 
 missionary zeal believe that our religion is superior to 
 any other, have no scruple in trying to shake the 
 childlike confidence oik the Hindoo, the subtle reasoning 
 of the Brahmin, or the fierce orthodoxy of the Mahometan, 
 and to make them dissatisfied with their religious books. 
 Yet we are intolerant of the faintest suggestion that 
 our own faith is faulty. The rude knights and 
 churchmen of old tried to demonstrate the truth of their 
 doctrine by the strength of their right arms, and he who 
 
Vll 
 
 was the hardest hitter was supposed to be the most 
 favoured by the Almighty. Modern theology, on the 
 contrary, declines the arbitrament of the sword, and 
 calls reason to her aid in deciding controversy. There 
 is indeed a widespread feeling that those who appeal 
 to such carnal weapons as persecution, cursing, excom¬ 
 munication, and the like, do so only because they have 
 no mental armoury from which they can equip them¬ 
 selves for a successful fight. It is human to oppose 
 obloquy against obnoxious proofs, it requires magnanimity 
 to acknowledge ourselves in the wrong, and to kiss the 
 rod that chases away a cherished delusion. There are 
 very few thoughtful men who have not been discontented 
 with the developments of modern Christian divinity. 
 From many professional theologians strictures appear 
 from time to time, which show the workings going on 
 below the surface. To these have been opposed the dead 
 weight of persecuting orthodoxy. The world beyond them 
 sometimes watches with interest the battles of those who 
 profess to lead opinion, and the layman does not scruple 
 to give his adhesion to the combatant who seems to be 
 the strongest in argument. When the controversy raged 
 between rival sects in medicine, the clergy assumed to 
 be arbiters between them; and the Author acknowledges 
 the advantages which he reaped from hearing the opinions 
 of independent minds. En revanche, now that the 
 Church has its disputations, medicine sometimes presumes 
 to form an opinion of its own, and thinks it may assist 
 the development of truth by pointing out some consi¬ 
 derations of which the controversialists are ignorant. 
 
Vlll 
 
 The intrusion of a bystander, however, into a quarrel, 
 invariably brings upon him the hostility of all parties, and 
 he who suggests to many opposing dogmatists that all are 
 in the wrong, will certainly not escape more fortunately. 
 As I have in the following pages done much violence to 
 my own preconceived opinions, and to prejudices lodged 
 in my mind from my earliest infancy, I am certain 
 to give offence to others. Whenever the critic finds 
 that those principles which are called “the holiest 
 instincts of the mind” are thwarted, he allows the 
 wildest license to his senseless lash, and flogs unsparingly 
 the author who has shaken his repose. Such castigation 
 I anticipate, as certainly as does the traveller expect 
 an eruption of boiling water from an Icelandic geyser, 
 whose waters he has ruffled by throwing into them a clod 
 of earth. Yet though there may be much wild hitting, 
 I entertain the hope of meeting with some logical 
 argument or quiet reasoning, which may serve to point 
 out error, and help to set that right which is really 
 wrong. There are observant pedagogues, who know that 
 some boys under their care will submit almost to be 
 flayed alive, rather than acknowledge a fault when they 
 consider themselves wrongfully punished, yet who melt 
 at once at a loving word or kind remonstrance. Authors, 
 being human, are not very different to boys, and are more 
 readily subdued by philosophical argument than by vulgar 
 abuse. In my second volume, I hope to demonstrate my 
 due appreciation both of the one and the other. 
 
PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION. 
 
 In presenting to the Public a Second Edition of “ Ancient 
 Faiths Embodied in Ancient Names,” in a condition 
 nearly identical with the First, the Author begs to 
 state, that it had been his intention to revise, and 
 in some places to re-write, those parts wherein his 
 advanced knowledge led him to believe that the opinions 
 propounded required modification. But he has been pre¬ 
 vented from carrying out his plan by a tedious illness, 
 and the necessity to take a long Continental tour to 
 recover health. During the time when he was invalided, 
 the demand for the First Edition increased so greatly 
 as to exhaust the whole impresssion. Being physically 
 incapacitated from undertaking the labour of re-writing, 
 and being wholly debarred from the power of using any 
 library, the Author resolved upon a simple “re-issue,” 
 those parts only being altered where clerical errors had 
 crept in. 
 
 The supervision of the work was left wholly to the 
 Printer, and the Author gladly takes this opportunity of 
 bearing testimony to his zeal and carefulness. He has 
 indeed proved himself to be a critical coadjutor, as well 
 as a genial friend. 
 
DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES 
 
 IN BOTH VOLUMES. 
 
 YOL. I. 
 
 The oval on the side of Vol. I. represents Assyrian priests offering in 
 the presence of what is supposed to be Baal—or the lepresentative of 
 the sun—and of the grove. The first is typified by the eye, with 
 wings and a tail, which make it symbolic of the male triad and the 
 female unit. The eye, with the central pupil, is in itself emblematic 
 of the same. The grove represents mystically le verger de Cypris. 
 On the right, stands the king; on the left are two priests, the foremost 
 clothed with a fish’s skin, the head forming the mitre, thus showing 
 the origin of modern Christian bishops’ peculiar head-dress. Arranged 
 about the figures are, the sun ; a bird, perhaps the sacred dove, whose 
 note, eoa or coo, has, in the Shemitic, some resemblance to an invita¬ 
 tion to amorous gratification ; the oval, symbol of the yoni; the basket, 
 or bag, emblematic of the scrotum, and apparently the lotus. The 
 trinity and unity are carried by the second priest. The other figures 
 on the side of the book are explained elsewhere. 
 
 FRONTISPIECE. 
 
 This is taken from a photograph of a small bronze image in the 
 Mayer collection of Brown’s Museum, in Liverpool. The figure stands 
 about nine inches high, and represents Isis, Horus, and the fish. It is 
 an apt illustration of a custom, still prevalent amongst certain Chris¬ 
 tians, of reverencing a virgin giving suck to her child, and of the 
 association of Isis, Venus, and Mary with the fish. 
 
 PLATE I. 
 
 Is supposed to represent Oannes, Dagon, or some other fish god. 
 It is copied from Lajard, Sur le Culte de Venus, pi. xxii., 1, la, and is 
 
Xll 
 
 thus described, ‘ Statuette inedite, de gres houiller ou micace, d’un 
 brun verdatre. Elle porte par devant, sur une bande perpendiculaire, 
 un legende en caracteres Syriaques tres anciens’ (Cabinet de M. Lambert, 
 a Lyon). I can find no clue to the signification of the inscription. 
 
 PLATE II, 
 
 Figs. 1 and 4 are illustrations of the respect for the antelope 
 amongst the Assyrians. The first is from Layard’s Nineveh; the 
 second, showing the regard for the spotted antelope, and for “the 
 branch,” is from Bonomi’s Nineveh and its Palaces. 
 
 Fig. 2 illustrates Bacchus, with a mystic branch in one hand, 
 and a cup in the other; his robe is covered with spots arranged in 
 threes. The branch is emblematic of the arbor vitce, or tree of life. 
 It will be noticed that on the fillet round the god’s head are arranged 
 many crosses. From Hislop’s Two Babylons and Smith’s Dictionary, 
 
 p. 208. 
 
 Figs. 3 and 5 are intended to show the prevalence of the use of 
 spots on priestly dresses; they are copied from Hislop’s Two Babylons , 
 and Wilkinson, vol. vi., pi. 33, and vol. iv., pp. 341, 353. Other illus¬ 
 trations of spotted robes, etc., will be seen in other figures. For an 
 explanation of the signification of spots, see Vol. I., p. 360, and Vol. II., 
 p. 769. 
 
 PLATE III. 
 
 Fig. 1 represents an Assyrian priest worshipping by presentation 
 of the thumb, which had a peculiar signification. Sometimes the 
 forefinger is pointed instead, and in both cases the male is symbolised. 
 It is taken from a plate illustrating a paper by E. C. Ravenshaw, Esq., 
 in Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, vol. 16, p. 114. 
 
 Fig. 2 is a Buddhist emblem; the two fishes forming the circle 
 represent the mystic yoni, the sacti of Mahadeva, while the triad 
 above them represents the mystic trinity, the triune father, Siva, Bel, 
 or Asher. From Journal of Royal Asiatic Society , vol. 18, p. 392, 
 plate ii. 
 
 Fig. 3 is a very remarkable production. It originally belonged to 
 Mons. Lajard, and is described by him in his second Memoire, entitled 
 Recherches sur le Culte, les Symboles, les Attributes, et les Monumens 
 Figures de Venus (Paris, 1837), in pages 32, et seq., and figured in 
 plate i., fig. 1. The real age of the gem and its origin are not known, 
 but the subject leads that author to believe it to be of late Babylonian 
 workmanship. The stone is a white agate shaped like a cone, and the 
 
Xlll 
 
 cutting is on its lower face. The shape of this gem indicates its dedi¬ 
 cation to Venus. The central figures represent the androgyne deity, 
 Balaam, Astaroth, Elohim, Jupiter genetrix, or the bearded Venus 
 Mylitta. On the left side of the cutting we -notice an erect serpent, 
 whose rayed head makes us recognise the solar emblem, and its mun¬ 
 dane representative, mentula arrecta; on a spot opposite to the centre 
 of the male’s body we find a lozenge, symbolic of the yoni, whilst 
 opposite to his- feet is the amphora, whose mystic signification may 
 readily be recognised; it is symbolic of Ouranos, or the Sun fructifying 
 Terra, or the earth, by pouring from himself into her. The three stars 
 over the head of the figure, and the inverted triangle on its head, are 
 representations of the mythological four, equivalent to the Egyptian 
 symbol of life (figs. 21, 32). Opposite to the female are the moon, and 
 another serpent of smaller size than that characterising the male, 
 which may readily be recognised by physiologists as symbolic of tensio 
 clitoridis. In a part corresponding to the diamond, on the left side, is 
 a six-rayed wheel, emblematic, apparently, of the sun. At the female’s 
 feet is placed a cup, which is intended to represent the passive element 
 in creation. As such it is analogous to the crescent moon, and is 
 associated in the Roman church with the round wafer, the symbol of 
 the sun; the wafer and cup thus being synonymous with the sun and 
 moon in conjunction. It will be observed that both serpents in the 
 plate are apparently attacked by what w r e suppose is a dragon. There 
 is some difficulty in understanding the exact idea intended to be con¬ 
 veyed by these, our own opinion being that they symbolise Eros, 
 Cupid, or desire, whilst Lajard takes them to indicate the bad principle 
 in nature, darkness, night, Satan, Ahriman, etc. 
 
 Fig. 4 is also copied from Lajard, plate i., fig. 10. It represents 
 the reverse of a bronze coin of Vespasian, struck in the island of 
 Cyprus. It represents the conical stone, under whose form Venus was 
 worshipped at Paphos, and a conjunction of the sun and moon similar 
 to that which may be seen in the chapels of Mary in Papal churches. 
 The framework around the cone indicates an ark. 
 
 Fig. 5 represents the position of the hands assumed by Jewish 
 priests when they give their benediction to their flock. It will be 
 recognised that each hand separately indicates the trinity, whilst the 
 junction of the two indicates the unit; the whole being symbolic of 
 the mystic Arba. One of my informants, who told me that, being a 
 “cohen” or priest, he had often administered the blessing, whilst 
 showing to me this method of benediction, placed his joined hands so 
 
X1Y 
 
 that his nose entered the central aperture. On his doing so, I 
 remarked, “ bene nasatus," and the expression did more to convince 
 him of the probability of my views than anything else. 
 
 Fig. 6, modified in one form or another, is the position assumed 
 by the hand and fingers, when Roman and Anglican bishops or other 
 hierarchs give benediction to their people. The same disposition is to 
 be met with in Indian mythology, when the Creator doubles himself 
 into male and female, so as to be in a position to originate new beings; 
 whilst the male hand symbolises the masculine triad, the female hand 
 represents the mystic feminine circle, and the dress worn by the 
 celestial spouse is covered with groups of spots arranged in triads and 
 groups of four. 
 
 PLATE IV. 
 
 Is a copy of a mediaeval Virgin and Child, as painted in Della Robbia 
 ware in the South Kensington Museum, a copy of which was given to 
 me by my friend, Mr. Newton, to whose kindness I am indebted for 
 many illustrations of ancient Christian art. It represents the Virgin 
 and Child precisely as she used to be represented in Egypt, in India, 
 in Assyria, Babylonia, Phoenicia, and Etruria; the accident of dress 
 being of no mythological consequence. In the framework around the 
 group, we recognise the triformed leaf, emblematic of Asher; the 
 grapes, typical of Dionysus; the wheat ears, symbolic of Ceres, Vabricot 
 fondu, the mark of womankind, and the pomegranate rimmon, which 
 characterises the teeming mother. The living group, moreover, are 
 placed in an arch-way, delta, or door, which is symbolic of the female, 
 like the vesica piscis, the oval or the circle. The identification of Mary 
 with the Sacti is as complete as it is possible to make it. 
 
 FIGURES IN THE TEXT. 
 
 Figure 1, page 53, is fully explained, and the authority whence it 
 was drawn given in the paragraphs following it. 
 
 Figures 2, 3, page 78, are taken from Ginsburg’s Kabbalah, and 
 illustrate that in the arrangement of “ potencies ” two unite, like 
 parents, to form a third. 
 
 Figures 4, 5, page 79, are copies of figures found in Carthage and 
 in Scotland, from Forbes Leslie’s Early Races of Scotland , vol. i., 
 plate 6, page 46 (London, 1866). This book is one to which the 
 reader’s attention should be directed. The amount of valuable infor¬ 
 mation which it contains is very large, and it is classified in a philo¬ 
 sophical, we may add attractive, manner. 
 
XV 
 
 Figure 6, page 90, is from Bonomi, p. 292, Nineveh and its Palaces 
 (London, 1865). It apparently represents the mystic yoni, door, or 
 delta; and it may be regarded as an earlier form of the framework in 
 Plate iv. It will be remarked by those learned in symbols, that the 
 outline of the hands of the priests who are nearest to the figure is a 
 suggestive one, being analogous to the figure of a key and its shank 
 (Fig. 4, Yol. II.), whilst those who stand behind these officers present 
 the pine cone and bag, symbolic of Anu, Hoa, and their residence. It 
 is to be noticed, and once for all let us assert our belief, that every 
 detail in a sculpture relating to religion has a signification; that the 
 first right hand figure carries a peculiarly shaped staff; and that the 
 winged symbol above the yoni consists of a male archer in a winged 
 circle, analogous to the symbolic bow, arrow, and target. 
 
 Figures 7 to 13, page 98 to 102, are representations of the goddess 
 mother, the virgin and child, Ishtar, Mylitta, Venus, Sacti, Mary, 
 Yoni, Juno, Mama Ocello, etc. Fig. 7 is a copy of the deified woman or 
 celestial mother, from Idalium, in Cyprus. Fig. 8 is from Egypt, and is 
 remarkable for the cow’s horns (for whose signification, see Vol. I., 
 p. 54), which here replace the lunar crescent, in conjunction with the 
 sun, the two being symbolic of hermaphroditism, whilst above is a seat 
 or throne, emblematic of royalty. The two figures are copied from 
 Rawlinson’s Herodotus, vol. 2, p. 447, in an essay by Sir Gardiner 
 Wilkinson, wherein other illustrations of the celestial virgin are given. 
 Fig. 9 is a copy of plate 59, Moor’s Hindu Pantheon, wherein it is entitled 
 “ Chrisna nursed by Devaki, from a highly finished picture.” In the 
 account of Krishna’s birth and early history as given by Moor {Op cit., 
 pp. 197, et seq .), there is as strong a resemblance to the story of Christ, as 
 the picture here described has to papal paintings of Mary and Jesus. 
 Fig. 10 is an enlarged representation of Devaki. Fig. 11 is copied from 
 Rawlinson’s Ancient Monarchies, vol. 3,p. 399. Fig. 12 is a figure of the 
 mother and child found in ancient Etruria at Volaterrge ; it is depicted 
 in Fabretti’s Italian Glossary, plate 26, figure 349, who describes it as 
 a marble statue, now in the Guarnacci Museum. The letters, which 
 are Etruscan, and read from right to left, may be thus rendered into 
 the ordinary Latin characters from left to right, MI : GANA : 
 LARTHIAS ZANL : VELKINEI : ME — SE.; the translation I 
 take to be, “the votive offering of Larthias (a female) of Zanal, ( = 
 Zancle = Messana in Sicily) (wife) of Velcinius, in the sixth month.” 
 It is uncertain whether we are to regard the statue as an effigy of the 
 celestial mother and child, or as the representation of some devout 
 
XVI 
 
 lady who has been spared during her pregnancy, her parturition, or 
 from some disease affecting herself and child. Analogy would lead us to 
 infer that the Queen of Heaven is intended. Fig. 13 is copied from 
 Hislop’s Two Babylons; it represents Indranee, the wife of Indra or 
 Indur, and is to be found in Indur Subba, the south front of the Caves 
 of Ellora, Asiatic Researches, vol. vi., p. 393. Indra is equivalent to 
 Jupiter Tonans, and is represented as seated on an elephant; “ the 
 waterspout is the trunk of this elephant, and the iris is his bow, which 
 it is not auspicious to point out,” Moor’s Pantheon, p. 260. He is 
 represented very much as if he were a satyr, Moor’s Pantheon, p. 264; 
 but his wife is always spoken of as personified chastity and propriety. 
 Tn dranl is seated on a lioness, which replaces the cow of Isis, the 
 former resembling the latter in her feminine and maternal instincts. 
 
 Figures 14, 15, page 105, are copies of Diana of the Ephesians ; the 
 first from Hislop, who quotes Kitto’s Illustrated Commentary, vol. 5, 
 p. 205; the second is from Higgins’ Anacalypsis, who quotes Montfau<?on, 
 plate 47. I remember to have seen a figure similar to these in the 
 Royal Museum at Naples. The tower upon the head represents 
 virginity (see Yol. I., p. 144); the position of the hands forms a cross 
 with the body; the numerous breasts indicate abundance; the black 
 colour of Figure 14 indicates the ordinary colour of the lanugo, or, as 
 some mythologists imagine, “ Night,” who is said to be one of the 
 mothers of creation. (See Yol. II., p. 382.) The emblems upon the 
 body indicate the attributes or symbols of the male and female 
 creators. 
 
 Figure 16, p. 106, is a complicated sign of the yoni, delta, or door 
 of life; it is copied from Bonomi’s Palaces of Nineveh, p. 309. 
 
 Figure 17, p. 107, signifies the same thing; the priests adoring it 
 present the pine cone and basket, symbolic of Anu, Hoa, and their 
 residence. Compare the object of the Assyrian priest’s adoration with 
 that adored by a Christian divine, in Fig. 47, Yol. II., p. 648. (See 
 Yol. I., p. 83, et seq .) 
 
 Figure 18, p. 107, is a fancy sketch of the linga and the yoni 
 combined. There is infinite variety in the details, but in all the plan, 
 as given in the figure, is observable, except in the pointed end, which 
 ought to be open, so as to allow the fluid poured over the linga to flow 
 away. 
 
 Figure 19, p. 112, is copied from Lajard (Op. cit.), plate xxii.,fig. 5. 
 It is the impression of an ancient gem, and represents a man clothed 
 with a fish, the head being the mitre; priests thus clothed, often 
 
XVII 
 
 bearing in their hand the mystic bag, are common in Mesopotamian 
 sculptures ; one such is figured on the back of the first volume of this 
 work. In almost every instance it will be recognised that the fish’s 
 head is represented as of the same form as the modern bishop’s mitre. 
 
 Figure 21, p. 119, represents two equilateral triangles, infolded so as 
 to make a six-rayed star, the idea embodied being the androgyne nature 
 of the deity. The pyramid with its apex upwards signifying the male, 
 that with the apex downwards the female. The line at the central 
 junction is not always seen, but the shape of the three parallel bars 
 reappears in Hindoo frontlet signs in conjunction with a delta or door, 
 shaped like the “ grove ” in Fig. 17; thus showing that the lines serve 
 also to indicate the masculine triad (see Fig. 62, Vol. II., p. 649). 
 
 Figures 22, 23, p. 124, are other indications of the same funda¬ 
 mental idea. The first represents Nebo, the Nahbi, or the navel, 
 characterised by a ring with a central mound. The second represents 
 the circular and upright stone so common in Oriental villages. The 
 two indicate the male and female; and a medical friend resident in 
 India has told me, that he has seen women mount upon the lower 
 stone and seat themselves reverently upon the upright one, having 
 first adjusted their dress so as to prevent it interfering with her perfect 
 contact with the miniature obelise. During the sitting, a short prayer 
 seemed flitting over the worshipper’s lips, but the whole affair was 
 soon over. 
 
 Figures 24, 25, pp. 142, 143, are discs, circles, aureoles, and wheels, 
 to represent the sun. Sometimes the emblem of this luminary is 
 associated with rays, as in Plate hi., Fig. 3, and in Figure 10, p. 100 ; 
 occasionally, as in some of the ancient temples in Egypt discovered in 
 1854, the sun’s rays are represented by lines terminating in hands, 
 sometimes one or more of these contain objects as if they were gifts 
 sent by the god; amongst other objects, the crux ansata is shown 
 conspicuously. In a remarkable plate in the Transactions of the Royal 
 Society of Literature (second series, vol. i., p. 140), the sun is identified 
 with the serpent; its rays terminate in hands, some holding the 
 handled cross or tau, and before it a queen, apparently, worships. 
 She is offering what seems to be a lighted tobacco pipe, the bowl being 
 of the same shape as that commonly used in Turkey; from this a wavy 
 pyramid of flame rises. Behind her, two female slaves elevate the 
 systrum; whilst before her, and apparently between herself and her 
 husband, are two altars occupied by round cakes and one crescent¬ 
 shaped emblem. Figure 24 was used in ancient days by Babylonian 
 
 h 
 
XV111 
 
 artists or sculptors, when they wished to represent a being, apparently 
 human, as a god. The same plan has been adopted by the moderns, 
 who have varied the symbol by representing it now as a golden disc, 
 now as a terrestrial orb, again as a rayed sphere. A writer, when 
 describing a god as a man, can say that the object he sketches is 
 divine; but a painter thinks too much of his art to put on any of 
 his designs, “ this woman is a goddess,” or “ this creature is divine ” ; 
 he therefore adds an aureole round the head of his subject, and thus 
 converts a very ordinary man, woman, or child into a deity to be 
 reverenced; modern artists being far more skilful in depicting the 
 Almighty than the carpenters and goldsmiths of the time of Isaiah 
 (xl. 18, 19, xli. C, 7, xliv. 9-19) 
 
 Figure 25 is another representation of the solar disc, in which it is 
 marked with a cross. This probably originated in the wheel of a 
 chariot having four spokes, and the sun being likened to a charioteer. 
 The chariots of the sun are referred to in 2 Kings xxiii. 11 as idolatrous 
 emblems. Of these the wheel w r as symbolic. The identification of 
 this emblem with the sun is very easy, for it has repeatedly been 
 found in Mesopotamian gems in conjunction with the moon. In a 
 very remarkable one figured in Rawlinson’s Ancient Monarchies, vol ii., 
 p. 249, the cross is contrived as five circles. It is remarkable, that in 
 many papal pictures the wafer and the cup are depicted precisely 
 as the sun and moon in conjunction. See Pugin’s Architectural 
 Glossary , plate iv., fig. 5. 
 
 Figures 26, 27, 28, p. 143, are simply varieties of the solar wheel, 
 intended to represent the idea of the sun and moon, the mystic triad 
 and unit, the “ ar'ba,” or four In Figure 27, the mural ornament is 
 introduced, that being symbolic of feminine virginity. For explana¬ 
 tion of Figure 28, see Figures 30, 37. 
 
 Figure 29, p. 145, is copied from Lajard, Op. Git., plate xiv. F. 
 That author states that he has taken it from a drawing of an Egyptian 
 stele, made by M. E. Prisse ( Monurn. Egypt., plate xxxvii.). and that 
 the original is in the British Museum. There is an imperfect copy of 
 it in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, vol. ii. The original is too indelicate to 
 be represented fully. Isis, the central figure, is wholly nude, with the 
 exception of her head-dress, and neck and breast ornaments. In one 
 hand she holds two blades of corn apparently, whilst in the other she 
 holds three lotus flowers, two being egg shaped, whilst the central 
 one is expanded; with these, which evidently symbolise the mystic 
 triad, is associated a circle emblematic of the yoni, thus indicating the 
 
XIX 
 
 fourfold creator. Isis stands upon a lioness; on one side of her stands 
 a clothed male figure, holding in one hand the crux ansata, and in the 
 other an upright spear. On the opposite side is a male figure wholly 
 nude, like the goddess, save his head-dress and collar, the ends of 
 which are arranged so as to form a cross. His hand -points to a 
 flagellum, behind him is a covert reference to the triad, whilst in front 
 Osiris offers undisguised homage to Isis. The head-dress of the 
 goddess appears to be a modified form of the crescent moon. 
 
 Figures 30, 31, 32, 33, pp. 145, 146, represent the various triangles 
 and their union which have been adopted in worship. Figure 30 is 
 said to represent fire, which amongst the ancient Persians was depicted 
 as a cone, whilst the figure inverted represents water. 
 
 Figure 34, p. 147, is an ancient Hindoo emblem, called Sri Iantra, 
 which is fully explained in its place. It has now been adopted in 
 Christian churches and Freemasons’ lodges. 
 
 Figure 35, p. 148, is a very ancient Hindoo emblem, whose real 
 signification I am unable to divine. It is used in calculation ; it forms 
 the basis of some game; and it is a sign of vast import in sacti worship. 
 A coin, bearing this figure upon it, and having a central cavity with 
 the Etruscan letters SUPEN placed one between each two of the 
 angles, was found in a fictile urn, at Yolaterrae, and is depicted in 
 Fabretti’s Italian Glossary , plate xxvi., fig. 358, bis a. As the coin is 
 round, the reader will see that these letters may be read as Supen, 
 Upens, Pensu, Ensup, or Nsupe. A search through Fabretti’s Lexicon 
 affords no clue to any meaning except for the third. There seems, 
 indeed, strong reason to believe that pensu was the Etruscan form of 
 the Pali panca , the Sanscrit punch, the Bengalli pauch, and the Greek 
 penta, i. e. five. Five, certainly, would be an appropriate word for the 
 pentangle. It is almost impossible to avoid speculating upon the value 
 of this fragment of archaeological evidence in support of the idea that 
 the Greeks, Aryans, and Etruscans had something in common; but 
 into the question it would be unprofitable to enter here. 
 
 But, although declining to enter upon this wide field of inquiry, I 
 would notice that whilst searching Fabretti’s Glossary my eye fell upon 
 the figure of an equilateral triangle with the apex upwards, depicted 
 plate xliii., fig. 2440 ter . The triangle is of brass, and was found in 
 the territory of the Falisci. It bears a rude representation of the 
 outlines of the soles of two human feet, in this respect resembling a 
 Buddhist emblem; and there is on its edge an inscription which may be 
 rendered thus in Homan letters, KAYI: TERTINEI. POSTIKNU, 
 
XX 
 
 which probably signifies “ Gavia, the wife of Tertius, offered it.” The 
 occurrence of two Hindoo symbols in ancient Italy is very remarkable. 
 It must, however, be noticed that similar symbols have been found on 
 ancient sculptured stones in Ireland and Scotland. There may be no 
 emblematic ideas whatever conveyed by the design; but when the 
 marks appear on Gnostic gems, they are supposed to indicate death, 
 i. e. the impressions left by the feet of the individual as he springs from 
 earth to heaven. 
 
 Figures 36, 37, p. 151, are Maltese crosses. In a large book of 
 Etrurian antiquities, which came casually under my notice about 
 twenty years ago, when I was endeavouring to master the subject of 
 the language, theology, etc., of the Etruscans, but whose name and 
 other particulars I cannot now remember, I found depicted two crosses 
 made up of four masculine triads, each asher being erect, and united 
 to its fellows by the gland, forming a central diamond, emblem of the 
 yoni. In one instance, the limbs of the cross were of equal length, in 
 the other the asher of one was three times as long as the rest. A 
 somewhat similar cross, but one united with the circle, was found some 
 time ago near Naples. It is made of gold, and has apparently been 
 used as an amulet and suspended to the neck. It is figured in plate 
 35 of An Essay on the Worship of the Generative Powers during the 
 Middle Ages (London, privately printed, 1865). It may be thus 
 described: the centre of the circle is occupied by four oblate spheres 
 arranged like a square; from the salient curves of each of these springs 
 a yoni (shaped as in Figure 18), with the point outwards, thus forming 
 a cross, each ray of which is an egg and fig. At each junction of the 
 ovoids a yoni is inserted with the apex inwards, whilst from the broad 
 end arise four ashers, which project beyond the shield, each terminating 
 in a few golden bead-like drops. The whole is a graphic natural 
 representation of the intimate union of the male and female, sun and 
 moon, cross and circle, Ouranos and Ge. The same idea is embodied 
 in Figure 28, p. 143, but in that the mystery is deeply veiled, in that the 
 long arms of the cross represent the sun, or male, indicated by the triad; 
 the short ones, the moon or the female (see Plate vi., Fig. 4, Vol. II.). 
 
 Figure 38, p. 151, is copied from the Journal of the Royal Asiatic 
 Society, vol. xviii., p. 393, plate 4. It is a Buddhist emblem, and repre¬ 
 sents the same idea under different aspects. Each limb of the cross 
 represents th efascinum at right angles with the body, and presented 
 towards a barley corn, one of the symbols of the yoni. Each limb is 
 marked by the same female emblem, and terminates with the triad 
 
XXI 
 
 triangle; beyond this again is seen the conjunction of the sun and 
 moon. The whole therefore represents the mystic aria , the creative 
 four, by some called Thor’s hammer. 
 
 Figures 39 to 43, p. 152, are developments of the triad, triangle, or 
 trinity. 
 
 Figure 44, p. 152, is by Egyptologists caliid the ‘symbol of life.’ 
 It is also called the ‘handled cross,’ or crux ansata. It repre¬ 
 sents the male triad and the female unit, under a decent form. 
 There are few symbols more commonly met with in Egyptian 
 art than this. In some remarkable sculptures, where the sun’s rays 
 are represented as terminating in hands, the offerings which these 
 bring are many a crux ansata, emblematic of the truth that a fruitful 
 union is a gift from the deity. 
 
 Figures 45, 46, p. 155, are representations of the Hindoo aria, or 
 the four elements in creation. 
 
 Figures 47, 48, p. 155, are representatives of the ancient male triad, 
 adopted by moderns to symbolise the Trinity. 
 
 Figures 49, 50, p. 156, represent the trefoil which was used by the 
 ancient Hindoos as emblematic of the celestial triad, and adopted 
 by modern Christians. It will be seen that one stem arises from three 
 curiously shaped segments, each of which is supposed to resemble the 
 male scrotum, “ purse,” “ bag,” or “ basket.” 
 
 Figure 51, p. 156, is copied from Lajard, Quite de Venus, plate i,, 
 fig. 2. He states that it is from a gem cylinder in the British Museum. 
 It represents a male and female figure dancing before the mystic palm- 
 tree, into whose signification we need not enter beyond saying that it is 
 a symbol of Asher. Opposite to a particular part of the figures is to 
 be seen a diamond, or oval, and a jleur de lys, or symbolic triad. This 
 gem is peculiarly valuable, as it illustrates in a graphic manner the 
 meaning of the emblems in question, and how “the lilies of France ” 
 had a pagan origin. 
 
 Figures 52 to 61, p. 157, are various representations of the union of 
 the four, the arba, the androgyne, or the linga-yoni. 
 
 Figure 62, p. 159, is a well known emblem in modern Europe; it is 
 equally well known in Hindostan, where it is sometimes accompanied 
 by pillars of a peculiar shape. In one such compound the design is 
 that of a cupola, supported by closely placed pillars, each of which has 
 a “ capital,” resembling the “ glans ” of physiologists; in the centre 
 there is a door, wherein a nude female stands, resembling in all respects 
 Figure 62, except in dress and the presence of the child. 
 
XXII 
 
 The same emblem may be found amongst the ancient Italians. 
 
 In modem Christian art this symbol is called vesica piscis, and is 
 usually surrounded with rays. It commonly serves as a sort of 
 framework in which female saints are placed, who are generally the 
 representatives of the older Juno, Ceres, Diana, Venus, or other imper¬ 
 sonations of the feminine element in creation (see Vol. II., Fig. 48, 
 p. 648). 
 
 Figure 63, p. 159, represents one of the forms assumed by the 
 systrum of Isis. Sometimes the instrument is oval, and sometimes it 
 terminates below in a horizontal line, instead of in an acute angle. 
 The inquirer can very readily recognise in the emblem the mark of the 
 female creator. If there should be any doubt in his mind, he will 
 feel at rest after a reference to MafFei’s Gemme Antiche Figurate 
 (Rome, 1707), vol. ii., plate 61, wherein Diana of the Ephesians 
 is depicted as having a body of the exact shape of the systrum 
 figured in Payne Knight’s work on the remains of the worship of 
 Priapus, etc. The bars across the systrum show that it denotes a pure 
 virgin (see Vol. II., pp. 743 - 746). 
 
 Figures 64 to 67, pp. 160, 161, are all drawn from Assyrian sources. 
 The central figure, which is usually called “ the grove,” represents the 
 delta, or female “ door.” To it the attendant genii offer the pine cone 
 and basket. The signification of these is explained in the text. I was 
 unable at first to quote any authority to demonstrate that the pine cone 
 was a distinct masculine symbol, but now the reader may be referred 
 to Maffei, Gemme Antiche Figurate (Rome, 1708), where in vol. iii., 
 plate 8, he will see a Venus Tirsigera. The goddess is nude, and 
 carries in one hand the tripliform arrow, emblem of the male triad, 
 whilst in the other she bears a thyrsus, terminating in a pine or fir 
 cone. Now this cone and stem is carried in the Bacchic festivities, 
 and can be readily recoguised as virga cum ovo. Sometimes the thyr¬ 
 sus is replaced by ivy leaves, which like the fig are symbolic of the 
 triple creator. Occasionally the thyrsus was a lance or pike, round 
 which vine leaves and berries were clustered, Bacchus cum vino being 
 the companion of Venus cum Cerere. But a stronger confirmation of 
 my views may be found in plate xl. of the same volume. This is 
 entitled Sacrajizio di Priapo, and represents a female offering to 
 Priapus. The figure of the god stands upon a pillar of three stones, 
 and it bears a thyrsus from which depend two ribbons. The devotee is 
 accompanied by a boy, who carries a pine or fir cone in his hand, and 
 a basket on his head, in which may be recognised a male effigy. In 
 
XX111 
 
 Figure 65 tbe position of the advanced hand of each of the priests 
 nearest to the grove is very suggestive to the physiologist. Figure 66 
 is explained on page 163. It is to be noticed that a door is adopted 
 amongst modern Hindoos as an emblem of the sacti. (See Yol. II., 
 Fig. 34, p 491.) 
 
 Figures 68, 69, 70, page 164, are fancy sketches intended to repre¬ 
 sent the “sacred shields” spoken of in Jewish and other history. 
 The last is drawn from memory, and represents a Templar’s shield. 
 According to the method in which the shield is viewed, it appears 
 like the os tinea, or the navel. 
 
 Figures 71, 72, p. 164, represent the shape of the systrum of Isis, 
 the fruit of the fig, and the yoni. When a garment of this shape is 
 made and worn, it becomes the “ pallium” donned alike by the male 
 and female individuals consecrated to Roman worship. 
 
 Figures 73, 74, p. 165, represent an ancient Christian bishop and 
 a modern nun wearing the emblem of the female sex. In the former, 
 said (in Old England Pictorially Illustrated, by Knight) to be a 
 drawing of St. Augustine, the amount of symbolism is great. The 
 “nimbus” and the tonsure are solar emblems; the pallium, the 
 feminine sign, is studded with phallic crosses ; its lower end is the 
 ancient T, the mark of the masculine triad; the right hand has the 
 forefinger extended, like the Assyrian priests whilst doing homage to 
 the grove, and within it is the fruit, tappuach, which is said to have 
 tempted Eve. When a male dons the pallium in worship, he becomes 
 the representative of the arba, or mystic four. See Yol. II., pp. 915-918. 
 
 Figure 75, p. 167, is a well known Christian emblem, called “a 
 foul anchor.” The anchor, as a symbol, is of great antiquity. It 
 may be seen in an old Etruscan coin in the British Museum, depicted 
 in Veterum Populorum et Regum Numi, etc. (London, 1814). plate ii., 
 fig. 1. On the reverse there is a chariot wheel. The foul anchor 
 represents the crescent moon, the argha, ark, navis, or boat; in this is 
 placed the mast, round which tbe serpent, the emblem of life in the 
 “ verge,” entwines itself. The cross beam completes the mystic four, 
 symbolic alike of the sun and of androgyneity. 
 
 Figures 76 to 80, p. 168, are Asiatic and Egyptian emblems in use 
 amongst ourselves, and receive their explanation on the page indi¬ 
 cated. 
 
 Figure 81, page 202, is copied from Godfrey Higgins’ Anacalypsis, 
 vol. ii., fig. 27. It is drawn from Montfaupon, vol. ii., pi. 132, fig. 6. 
 In his text, Higgins refers to two similar groups, one which exists in 
 
XX1Y 
 
 the Egyptian temple of Ipsambul in Nubia, and described by Wilson, 
 On Buddhists and Jeynes , p. 127; another, found in a cave temple in 
 the south of India, described by Col. Tod, in bis History of Rajpoot- 
 anah. The group is not explained by Montfauson. It is apparently 
 Greek, and combines the story of Hercules with the seductiveness of 
 Circe. The tree and serpent is a common emblem. 
 
 Figure 81, p. 273, is copied from Lajard, Culte de Venus, plate xix., 
 fig. 11. The origin of this, which is a silver statuette in that author’s 
 possession, is unknown. The female represents Venus bearing in one 
 hand an apple; her arm rests upon what seems to be a representative 
 of the mystic triad (the two additions to the upright stem not being 
 seen in a front view), round which a dolphin ‘dolphin,’ for 
 
 deXcfivs ‘ womb ’) is entwined, from whose mouth comes the stream of 
 life. 
 
 Figure 82, p. 279, is from Lajard (Op. Git), plate xiv. b, fig. 3. 
 The gem is of unknown origin, but is apparently Babylonish; it repre¬ 
 sents the male and female in conjunction: both appear to be holding 
 the symbol of the triad in much respect, whilst the curious cross 
 suggests a new reading to an ancient symbol. 
 
 Figure 83, page 343, may be found in Fabretti’s Corpus Inscrip- 
 tionem Italicarum (Turin, 1867), plate xxv., fig. 303 f. The coins 
 which bear the figures are of brass, and were found at Volaterrse. In 
 one the double head is associated with a dolphin and crescent moon on 
 the reverse, and the letters Velathri, in Etruscan. A similar inscrip¬ 
 tion exists on the one containing the club. The club, formed as in 
 Figure 83, occurs frequently on Etruscan coins. For example, two 
 clubs are joined with four balls on a Tudertine coin, having on the 
 reverse a hand apparently gauntleted for fighting, and four balls 
 arranged in a square. On other coins are to be seen a bee, a trident, 
 a spear-head, and other tripliform figures, associated with three balls 
 in a triangle; sometimes two, and sometimes one. The double head 
 with two balls is seen on a Telamonian coin, having on the reverse 
 what appears to be a leg with the foot tnrned upwards. In a coin of 
 Poperlonia the club is associated with a spear and two balls, whilst 
 on the reverse is a single head. I must notice too that on other coins 
 a hammer and pincers, or tongs, appear, as if the idea was to show 
 that a maker, fabricator, or heavy hitter was intended to be symbolised. 
 What that was is farther indicated by other coins, on which a head 
 appears thrusting out the tongue. At Cortona two statuettes of silver 
 have been found, representing a double-faced individual. A lion’s head 
 
XXV 
 
 for a cap, a collar, and buskins are the sole articles of dress worn. 
 One face appears to be feminine, and the other masculine, but neither 
 are bearded. The pectorals and the general form indicate the male, 
 but the usual marks of sex are absent. On these have been found 
 Etruscan inscriptions (1) v. cvinti arntias culpiansi alpan turce; 
 (2) v. cvinte arntias selanse tez alpan turce. Which may be ren¬ 
 dered (1) “ V. Quintus of Aruntia, to Culpian pleasing, a gift ”; (2) “V. 
 Quintus of Aruntia to Vulcan pleasing gave a gift,” evidently showing 
 that they were ex voto offerings. 
 
 Figure 84, p. 351. The figure here represented is, under one form 
 or another, extremely common amongst the sculptured stones in Scot¬ 
 land. Four varieties may be seen in plate 48 of Col. Forbes Leslie’s 
 Early Races of Scotland. In plate 49 it is associated with a serpent, 
 apparently the cobra. The design is spoken of as “ the spectacle orna¬ 
 ment,” and it is very commonly associated with another figure closely 
 resembling the letter Z- It is very natural for the inquirer to associate 
 the twin circles with the sun and earth, or the sun and moon. On one 
 Scottish monument the circles represent wheels, and they probably 
 indicate the solar chariot. As yet I have only been able to meet with 
 the Z and “ spectacle ornament” once out of Scotland; it is figured on 
 apparently a Gnostic gem ( The Gnostics and their Remains , by C. W. 
 King, London, 1864, plate ii., fig. 5). In that we see in a serpent car¬ 
 touche two Z figures, each having the down stroke crossed by a hori¬ 
 zontal line, each end terminating in a circle; besides them is a six 
 rayed star, each ray terminating in a circle, precisely resembling the 
 star in Plate hi., Fig. 3, supra. I can offer no satisfactory explanation 
 of the emblem. But I would strongly urge upon those who are 
 interested in the subject to read The Early Races of Scotland, quoted 
 above (2 vols., 8vo., Edinburgh : Edmonson and Douglas, 1866). 
 
 Figures 85, 86, page 352, represent a Yorkshire and an Indian 
 stone circle. The first is copied from Descriptions of Cairns, Crom¬ 
 lechs, Kistvaens, and other Celtic, Druidical, or Scythian Monuments 
 in the Dekkan, by Col. Meadows Taylor, Transactions of the Royal 
 Irish Academy, vol. 24. The mound exists in Twizell Moor, and 
 the centre of the circle indicates an ancient tomb, very similar to 
 those found by Taylor in the Dekkan; this contained only one single 
 urn, but many of the Indian ones contained, besides the skeleton of 
 the great man buried therein, skeletons of other individuals who had 
 been slaughtered over his tomb, and buried above the kistvaen con¬ 
 taining his bones; in one instance two bodies and three heads were 
 
XXY1 
 
 found in the principal grave, and twenty other skeletons above and 
 beside it. A perusal of this very interesting paper will well repay the 
 study bestowed upon it. Figure 86 is copied from Forbes Leslie’s book 
 mentioned above, plate 59. It represents a modern stone circle in the 
 Dekkan, and is of very modern construction. The dots upon the 
 stones represent a dab of red paint, which again represents blood. 
 The figures are introduced into my text to show that Palestine contains 
 evidence of the presence of the same religious ideas as existed in 
 ancient England and Hindostan, as well as in modern India. The 
 name of the god worshipped in these modern shrines is Vetal, or 
 Betal. It is worth mentioning in passing that there is a celebrated 
 monolith in Scotland called the Newton stone, on which are inscribed, 
 evidently with a graving tool, an inscription in the Ogham, and another 
 in some ancient Aryan character (see Moore’s Ancient Pillar Stones 
 of Scotland ). 
 
 Figure 87, page 859, indicates the solar wheel, emblem of the 
 chariot of Apollo. This sign is a very common one upon ancient coins; 
 sometimes the rays or spokes are four, at others they are more nume¬ 
 rous. Occasionally the tire of the wheel is absent, and amongst the 
 Etruscans the nave is omitted. This solar cross is very common in 
 Ireland, and amongst the Romanists generally. 
 
 Figure 88, p. 360, is copied from Hyslop, who gives it on the autho¬ 
 rity of Col. Hamilton Smith, who copied it from the original collection 
 made by the artists of the French Institute of Cairo. It is said to 
 represent Osiris, but this is doubtful There is much that is intensely 
 mystical about the figure. The whip, or flagellum, placed over the tail, 
 and the head passing through the yoni, the circular spots with their 
 central dot, the horns with solar disc, and two curiously shaped fea¬ 
 thers (?), the calf reclining upon a plinth, wherein a division into three 
 is conspicuous, all have a meaning in reference to the mystic four. 
 
 Figure 89, page 402, is copied from Higgins’ Anacalypsis, plate 2, 
 fig. 14. Figure 92, page 411, is from the same source. That author 
 appears to have taken them from Maurice’s Indian Antiquities , a copy 
 of which I have hitherto been unable to procure. 
 
 Figure 90, page 402, is also from Higgins, who has copied it from 
 Moor’s Hindu Pantheon. Having been able recently to procure a copy 
 of this work, I find that Moor distinctly expresses his opinion that it is 
 of European and not of Indian origin, and consequently that it is 
 worthless as illustrating the life of Cristna. 
 
 Figure 91, page 410, is stated by Higgins, Anacalypsis, p. 217, to be 
 
XXV11 
 
 a mark on the breast of an Egyptian mnmmy in the Museum of Uni¬ 
 versity College, London. It is essentially the same symbol as the 
 crux ansata, and is emblematic of the male triad and the female unit. 
 
 Figure 92, page 411, is from the same authority, and I have not yet 
 been able to confirm it. 
 
 Fig. 93, page 445, is the Mithraic lion. It may be seen in Hyde’s 
 Religion of the Ancient Persians, second edition, plate 1. It may also 
 be seen in vol. ii., plates 10 and 11 of Maffei’s Gemme Antiche Figurate 
 (Rome, 1707). In plate 10 the Mithraic lion has seven stars above it, 
 around which are placed repectively, words written in Greek, Etrus¬ 
 can and Phoenician characters, ZEDCH, TELKAN. TELKON. TEL- 
 KON. QIDEKH. UNEULK. LNKELLP. apparently showing that 
 the emblem was adopted by the Gnostics. It would be unprofitable to 
 dwell upon the meaning of these letters. After puzzling over them, 
 I fancy that “ Bad Spirits, pity us,” “ Just one, I call on thee,” may 
 be made out by considering the words to be very bad Greek, and the 
 letters to be much transposed. 
 
 Figure 94, page 495, is copied by Higgins, Anacalypsis, on the 
 authority of Dubois, who states, vol. iii., p. 33, that it was found on a 
 stone on a church in France, where it had been kept religiously for six 
 hundred years. Dubois regards it as wholly astrological, and as 
 having no reference to the story told in Genesis. It is unprofitable to 
 speculate on the draped figures as representative of Adam aud Eve. 
 We have introduced it to show how such tales are intermingled with 
 Sabeanism. 
 
 Figure 95, page 497, is a copy of a gem figured by Layard (. Nineveh 
 and Babylon, p. 156), and represents a deity seated on a lotus, adoring 
 the mundane representative of the mother of creation. I have not yet 
 met with any ancient gem or sculpture which seems to identify the yoni 
 so completely with various goddesses. Compare this with Figure 48, 
 Vol. II., p. 648, wherein the emblem is even more strikingly identified 
 with woman, and with the virgin Mary. 
 
 Figure 96, page 529, is copied from plate 22, fig. 3, of Lajard’s Quite 
 de Venus. He states that it is an impression of a cornelian cylinder, in 
 the collection of the late Sir William Ouseley, and is supposed to 
 represent Bel and two fish gods, the authors of fecundity. 
 
 Figure 97, page 530, is copied from a small Egyptian statuette, in 
 the Mayer Collection of the Free Museum, Liverpool. It represents 
 Isis, Horus, the fish, and the serpent. The figure is curious, as showing 
 the long persistence of reverence for the virgin and child, and the iden- 
 
XXV111 
 
 tification of the fish with the eye symbol, both indicating the yoni, 
 whilst the serpent indicates the linga. 
 
 Figure 98, p. 531, is a fancy sketch of the fieur de lys, the lily of 
 France. It symbolises the male triad, whilst the ring around it repre¬ 
 sents the female. The identification of this emblem of the trinity with 
 the tripliform Mahadeva, and of the ring with his sacti, may be seen 
 in the next figure. 
 
 Figure 99, p. 532, is copied from plate i., fig. 2, of Lajard, who 
 states that it is a copy of the impression of a cylinder of grey chal¬ 
 cedony, in the British Museum. It appears to be intensely mystical, 
 but it is unnecessary to go into its minute signification. It has been 
 introduced to show the identification of the eye, fish, or oval shape, 
 with the yoni, and of the jleur de lys with the lingam, which is recog¬ 
 nised by the respective positions of the emblems in front of particular 
 parts of the mystic animals, who both, on their part, adore the symbolic 
 palm tree, and its pistil and stamens. The similarity of the palm tree 
 to the ancient round towers in Ireland and elsewhere will naturally 
 strike the observer. 
 
 YOL. II. 
 
 On the side of the cover is a representation of Siva, taken from 
 Moor’s Hindu Pantheon , plate xiii. He is supposed to be the oldest 
 of the Indian deities, and to have been worshipped by the aborigines 
 of Hindostan before the Aryans invaded that country. It is thought 
 that the Vedic religion opposed this degrading conception at the first, 
 but was powerless to eradicate it. Though Siva is yet the most popu¬ 
 lar of all the gods, he is venerated 1 understand only by the vulgar. 
 Though he personifies the male principle, there is not anything indecent 
 in pictorial representations of him. In one of his hands is seen the 
 trident, one of the emblems of the masculine triad; whilst in another 
 is to be seen an oval systrum-shaped loop, a symbol of the feminine 
 unit. On his forehead he bears an eye, symbolic of the Omniscient, 
 the sun, and the union of the sexes. 
 
 At the back of the cover is seen a figure of Venus standing on a 
 tortoise, whose symbolic import is explained on page 881, Vol. II. It is 
 copied from Lajard, Sur le Gulte de Venus , plate iii., fig. 5, and is stated 
 
XXIX 
 
 by him to be a drawing of an Etruscan candelabrum, existing in the 
 Royal Museum at Berlin. See fig. 74, infra. 
 
 The frontispiece is a copy of a small Hindoo statuette in the Mayer 
 Collection (Free Museum, Liverpool). It represents Parvati, or Devi, 
 the Hindoo virgin and child. The right hand of the figure makes the 
 symbol of the yoni with the forefinger and thumb, the rest of the 
 fingers typifying the triad. In the palm and on the navel is a lozenge, 
 emblematic of woman. The child Christna, the equivalent of the 
 Egyptian Horus and the Christian Jesus, bears in its hand one of the 
 many emblems of the linga, and stands upon a lotus. The monkey 
 introduced into the group plays the same part as the cat, cow, lioness, 
 and ape in the Egyptian mythology, being emblematic of that desire 
 which eventuates in the production of offspring. 
 
 PLATE I. 
 
 Is a copy of figures given in Bryant’s Ancient Mythology, plates xiii., 
 xxviii., third edition, 1807. The first two illustrate the story of Pale- 
 mon and Cetus, introducing the dolphin. That fish is symbolic of the 
 female, in consequence of the assonance in Greek between its name 
 and that of the womb. The tree symbolises the arbor vitce, the life- 
 giving sprout; and the ark is a symbol of the womb. The third figure, 
 where a man rests upon a rock and dolphin, and toys with a mother 
 and child, is equally suggestive. The male is repeatedly characterised 
 as a rock, hermes, menhir, tolmen, or upright stone, the female by the 
 dolphin or fish. The result of the junction of these elements appears 
 in the child, whom both parents welcome. The fourth figure represents 
 two emblems of the male creator, a man and trident, and two of the 
 female, a dolphin and ship. The two last figures represent a coin of 
 Apamea, representing Noe and the ark, called Cibotus. Bryant labours 
 to prove that the group commemorates the story told in the Bible 
 respecting the flood, but there is strong doubt whether the scriptural 
 story was not of Greek origin. The city referred to was in Phrygia, 
 and the coin appears to have been struck by Philip of Macedon. The 
 inscription round the head is AYT. K. 10VA 4>IAIIIIIOC. AYI\ ; on the 
 reverse, EIIMA. YP. AA. ESANAP. OYB. APXI. AIIAMEGN. See 
 Vol. II., pp. 123, and 385-392. 
 
 PLATE II. 
 
 Is a copy of an original drawing made by a learned Hindoo pundit for 
 Wm. Simpson, Esq., of London, whilst he was in India studying its 
 mythology. It represents Brahma supreme, who in the act of creation 
 
XXX 
 
 made himself double, i. e., male and female In the original the 
 central part of the figure is occupied by the triad and the unit, but far 
 too grossly shown for reproduction here. They are replaced by the 
 crux ansata. The reader will notice the triad and the serpent in the 
 male hand, whilst in the female is to be seen a germinating seed, indi¬ 
 cative of the relative duties of father and mother. The whole stands 
 upon a lotus, the symbol of androgyneity. The technical word for this 
 incarnation is “ Arddlia Nari.” See infra , Fig. 44, p. 645, representing 
 the same idea, the androgyne being however decently draped. 
 
 PLATE III. 
 
 Is Devi, the same as Parvati, or Bhavani. It is copied from Moor’s 
 Pantheon , plate xxx. The goddess represents the feminine element 
 in the universe. Her forehead is marked by one of the symbols of the 
 four creators, the triad, and the unit. Her dress is covered with 
 symbolic spots, and one foot peculiarly placed is marked by a circle 
 having a dot in the interior. The two bear the same signification as 
 the Egyptian eye. I am not able to define the symbolic import of the 
 articles held in the lower hand. Moor considers that they represent 
 scrolls of paper, but this I doubt. The raised hands bear the unopened 
 lotus flower, and the goddess sits upon another. 
 
 PLATE IV. 
 
 Consists of six figures copied from Maurice’s Indian Antiquities, 
 vol. vi., p. 273, and two from Bryant’s Mythology, vol. ii., third edition, 
 pp. 203 and 409. All are symbolic of the idea of the male triad: a 
 central figure, erect, and rising above the other two. In one an altar 
 and fire indicate, mystically, the linga; in another, the same is pour- 
 trayed as a man, like Mahadeva always is ; in another, there is a tree 
 stump and serpent, to indicate the same idea. The two appendages 
 of the linga are variously described : in two instances as serpents, in 
 other two as tree and concha, and snake and shell. The two last seem 
 to embody the idea that the right “ egg ” of the male germinates boys, 
 whilst the left produces girls; a theory common amongst ancient 
 physiologists. The figure of the tree encircled by the serpent, and 
 supported by two stones resembling “tolmen,” is very significant. The 
 whole of these figures seem to point unmistakably to the origin of the 
 very common belief that the male Creator is triune. In Assyrian 
 theology the central figure is Bel, Baal, or Asshur; the one on the 
 right Anu, that on the left Hea. See Vol. I., pp. 83-85. 
 
XXXI 
 
 PLATE Y. 
 
 Contains pagan symbols of the trinity or linga, with or without the 
 unity or yoni. 
 
 Fig. 1 represents a symbol frequently met with in ancient architec¬ 
 ture, etc. It symbolises the male and female elements, the pillar and 
 the half moon. 
 
 Fig. 2 represents the mystic letters said to have been placed on the 
 portal of the oracle of Delphi. By some it is proposed to read the two 
 letters as signifying ‘“he or she is; ” by others the letters are taken to be 
 symbolic of the triad and the unit. If they be, the pillar is a very 
 unusual form for the yoni. 
 
 Fig. 3 is a Hindoo sectarian mark copied from Moor’s Hindu 
 Pantheon , and is one out of many indicating the union of the male and 
 female. 
 
 Fig. 4 is emblematic of the virgin and child. It identifies the two 
 with the crescent. It is singular that some designers should unite the 
 moon with the solar symbol, and others with the virgin. We believe 
 that the first indicate ideas like that associated with Baalim, Ashtaroth 
 in the plural, the second that of Astarte or Venus in the singular- 
 Or, as we may otherwise express it, the married and the immaculate 
 virgin. 
 
 Fig. 5 is copied from Sharpe’s Egyptian Mythology, p. 15. It 
 represents one of the Egyptian trinities, and is highly symbolic, not 
 only indicating the triad, here Osiris, Isis, and Nepthys, but its union 
 with the female element. The central god Osiris is himself triune, 
 as he bears the horns symbolic of the goddess Athor and the feathers 
 of the god Ra. 
 
 Fig. 6 is a Hindoo sectarial mark, from Moor’s Hindu Pantheon. 
 The lozenge indicates the yoni. For this assertion we not only have 
 evidence in Babylonian gems copied by Lajard, but in Indian and 
 Etruscan designs. We find, for example, in vol. v., plate xlv., of 
 Antiquites Etrusques, etc., par F. A. David (Paris, 1785), a draped female, 
 wearing on her breast a half moon and mural crown, holding her hands 
 over the middle spot of the body, so as to form a “ lozenge ” with the 
 forefingers and thumbs. The triad in this figure is very distinct, and 
 we may add that a trinity expressed by three balls or three circles is 
 to be met with in the remotest times and in most distant countries. 
 
 Figs. 7, 8, 9 and 10 are copied from Cabrera’s account of an 
 ancient city discovered near Palenque, in Guatemala, Spanish Ame¬ 
 rica (London, 1822). Although they appear to have a sexual design, 
 
XXX11 
 
 yet I doubt whether the similarity is not accidental. After a 
 close examination of the plates given by Cabrera, I am inclined 
 to think that nothing of the linga-yoni element prevailed in the 
 mind of the ancient American sculptors. All the males are care¬ 
 fully draped in appropriate girdles, although in some a grotesque 
 or other ornament, such as a human or bestial head, a flower, etc. 
 is attached to the apron or “ fall ” of the girdle, resembling the 
 sporran of the Highlander and the codpiece of mediaeval knights and 
 others. I may, however, mention some very remarkable sculptures 
 copied ; one is a tree whose trunk is surrounded by a serpent, and 
 whose fruit is shaped like the vesica piscis ; in another is seen a youth 
 wholly unclothed, save by a cap and gaiters, who kneels before a 
 similar tree, being threatened before and behind by some fierce animal. 
 This figure is peculiar, differing from all the rest in having an Euro¬ 
 pean rather than an American head and face. Indeed, the features, 
 etc., remind me of the late Mr. Cobden, and the cap is such as yachting 
 sailors usually wear. There is also another remarkable group, consist¬ 
 ing apparently of a man and woman standing before a cross, propor¬ 
 tioned like the conventional one in use amongst Christians. Every¬ 
 thing indicate American ideas, and there are ornaments or designs 
 wholly unlike any that I have seen elsewhere. The man appears to 
 offer to the cross a grotesque human figure, with a head not much unlike 
 Punch, with a turned-up nose, and a short pipe shaped like a fig in his 
 mouth, The body is well formed, but the arms and thighs are rounded 
 off like “ flippers ” or “ fins.” Resting at the top of the cross is a bird, 
 like a game cock, ornamented by a necklace. The male in this and 
 the other sculptures is beardless, and that women are depicted, can 
 only be guessed at by the inferior size of some of the figures. It 
 would be unprofitable to carry the description farther. 
 
 Figs. 11, 12, are from vol. i., plates xix. and xxiii., of a remarkably 
 interesting work, Recherches sur V origine V esprit et les progres des 
 Arts de la Grece, said to be written by D’Harcanville, published at 
 London, 1785. The first represents a serpent, coiled so as to symbolise 
 the male triad, and the crescent, the emblem of the yoni. 
 
 Fig. 12 accompanies the bull on certain coins, and symbolises 
 the sexual elements, le baton et V anneau. 
 
 Fig. 13 is, like figure 5, from Sharpe’s Egyptian Mythology, p. 14, 
 and is said to represent Isis, Nepthys, and Osiris. One of the many 
 Mizraite triads. The Christian trinity is of Egyptian origin. 
 
 Fig. 14 is a spmbol frequently seen in Greek churches, but 
 
XXX111 
 
 appears to be of pre-christian origin. The cross we have already 
 described as being a compound male emblem, whilst the crescent 
 symbolises the female element in creation 
 
 Figure 15 is from D’ Harcanville, Op. cit., vol. i., p. xxiii. It 
 resembles Figure 11, supra, and enables us by the introduction of the 
 sun and moon to verify the deduction drawn from the arrangement of 
 the serpent’s coils. If the snake’s body, instead of being curved above 
 the 8 like tail, were straight, it would simply indicate the linga and the 
 sun; the bend in its neck, however, indicates the yoni and the moon. 
 
 ' Figure 16 is copied from plate xvi., fig. 2, of Recueil de Pierres 
 Antiques Graves, folio, by J. M. Raponi (Rome, 1786). The gem 
 represents a sacrifice to Priapus, indicated by the rock, pillar, figure, 
 and branches given in our plate. A nude male sacrifices a goat; a 
 draped female holds a kid ready for immolation ; a second man, nude, 
 plays the double pipe, and a second woman, draped, bears a vessel on 
 her head, probably containing wine for a libation. 
 
 Figure 17 is from vol. i. Reclnerches , etc., plate xxii. In this medal 
 the triad is formed by a man and two coiled serpents on the one side 
 of the medal, whilst on the reverse are seen a tree, surrounded by a 
 snake, situated between two rounded stones, with a dog and a conch 
 shell below. See supra, Plate iv., Fig. 6. 
 
 PLATE VI. 
 
 —With two exceptions, Figures 4 and 9,— exhibits Christian emblems 
 of the trinity or linga, and the unity or yoni, alone or combined; 
 the whole being copied from Pugin’s Glossary of Ecclesiastical 
 Ornament (London, 1869). 
 
 Fig. I is copied from Pugin, plate xvii., and indicates a double 
 union of the trinity with the unity, here represented as a ring, 
 Vanneau. 
 
 Figs. 2, 3, are from Pugin, plate xiv. In figure 2, the two 
 covered balls at the base of each limb of the cross are extremely 
 significant, and if the artist had not mystified the free end, the 
 most obtuse worshipper must have recognised the symbol. We 
 may add here that in the two forms of the Maltese cross, the position 
 of the lingam is reversed, and the egg-shaped bodies, with their 
 cover, are at the free end of each limb, whilst the natural end of the 
 organ is left unchanged. See Vol. I., Figs. 36, 37, p. 151. This 
 form of cross is Etruscan. Fig. 3 is essentially the same as the 
 preceding, and both may be compared with Fig. 4. The balls in 
 
XXXIV 
 
 this cross are uncovered, and the free end of each limb of the cross is 
 but slightly modified. 
 
 Fig. 4 is copied in a conventional form from plate xxxv., fig. 4, 
 of Two Essays on the Worship of Priapus (London, 1865). It is 
 thus described (page 147): “ The object was found at St. Agata di 
 
 Goti, near Naples.It is a crux ansata formed by four phalli, with 
 
 a circle of female organs round the centre; and appears by the look 
 to have been intended for suspension. As this cross is of gold, 
 it had no doubt been made for some personage of rank, possibly an 
 ecclesiastic.” We see here very distinctly the design of the egg- and 
 systrum-shaped bodies. When we have such an unmistakable bi¬ 
 sexual cross before our eyes, it is impossible to ignore the signification 
 of Figs. 2 and 8, and Plate vii., Figs. 4 and 7. See supra, Figs. 36, 
 37, Vol. I., p. 151. 
 
 Figs. 5, 6 are from Pugin, plates 14 and 15, and represent the 
 trinity with the unity, the triune god and the virgin united in one. 
 
 Fig. 7 represents the central lozenge and one limb of a cross, 
 figured plate xiv. of Pugin. In this instance the Maltese cross is 
 united with the symbol of the virgin, being essentially the same as 
 Fig. 9, infra. It is a modified form of the crux ansata. 
 
 Fig. 8 is a compound trinity, being the finial of each limb of an 
 ornamental cross. Pugin, plate xv. 
 
 Fig. 9 is a well known Egyptian symbol, borne in the hand of 
 almost every divinity. It is a cross, with one limb made to represent 
 the female element in creation. The name that it technically bears is 
 crux ansata, or “the cross with a handle.” A reference to Fig. 4 
 serves to verify the idea which it involves. 
 
 Fig. 10 is from Pugin, plate xxxv. In this figure the cross is 
 made by the intersection of two ovals, each a vesica piscis, an emblem 
 of the yoni. Within each limb a symbol of the trinity is seen, each 
 of which is associated with the central ring. 
 
 Fig. 11 is from Pugin, plate xix., and represents the arbor vitce, 
 the branch, or tree of life, as a triad, with which the ring is united. 
 
 PLATE VII. 
 
 Contains both pagan and Christian emblems. 
 
 Fig. 1 is from Pugin, plate xviii., and is a very common finial 
 representing the trinity. Its shape is too significant to require 
 an explanation; yet with such emblems our Christian churches 
 abound ! 
 
XXXY 
 
 Fig. 2 is from Pugin, plate xxi. It is a combination of ideas con¬ 
 cealing the union patent in Fig. 4, PI. vi., supra. 
 
 Fig. 3 is from Moor’s Hindu Pantheon. It is an ornament borne 
 by Devi, and symbolises the union of the triad with the unit. 
 
 Fig. 4 is from Pugin, plate xxxii. It is a double cross made up of 
 the male and female emblems. It is a conventionalised form of Fig. 4, 
 Plate vi., supra. Such eight-rayed figures, made like stars, seem 
 to have been very ancient, and to have been designed to indicate the 
 junction of male and female. 
 
 Fig. 5 is from Pugin, plate xvii., and represents the trinity and the 
 unity. 
 
 Fig. 6 is a Buddhist emblem from Birmah, Journal of Royal Asiatic 
 Society , vol. xviii., p. 392, plate i., fig. 52. It represents the short 
 sword, le bracquemard, a male symbol. 
 
 Fig. 7 is from Pugin, plate xvii. See plate vi., fig. 3, supra. 
 
 Figs. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 are Buddhist (see Fig. 6, supra), and sym¬ 
 bolise the triad. 
 
 Figs. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 are from Pugin, and simply represent the 
 trinity. 
 
 Figs. 18 and 19 are common Grecian emblems. The first is 
 associated with Neptune and water, the second with Bacchus. With 
 the one we see dolphins, emblems of the womb, the name of the two 
 being assonant in Greek ; with the other, must be coupled the saying, 
 sine Baccho et Cerere friget Venus. 
 
 PLATE VIII. 
 
 Consists of various emblems of the triad and the unit, drawn almost 
 exclusively from Grecian, Etruscan, Roman, and Indian gems, figures, 
 coins, or sculptures, Maffei’s Gemme Antiche Figurate, Raponi’s Recueil, 
 and Moor’s Hindu Pantheon, being the chief authorities. 
 
 FIGURES IN THE TEXT. 
 
 Figures 1, 2, page 191, represent the Buddhist cross and one of its 
 arms. The first shows the union of four phalli. The single one being 
 a conventional form of a well-known organ. This form of cross does 
 not essentially differ from the Maltese cross. In the latter, Asher 
 stands perpendicularly to Anu and Hea; in the former it is at right 
 angles to them. “The pistol” is a well-known name amongst our 
 soldiery, and four such joined together by the muzzle would form the 
 Buddhist cross. Compare Figure 38, Vol. I., p. 151. 
 
XXXVI 
 
 - Figures 3, 4, 5, page 191, indicate the union of the four creators, 
 the trinity and the unity. Not having at hand any copy of an ancient 
 key, I have used a modern one; but this makes no essential difference 
 in the symbol. 
 
 Figures 6, 7, page 191, are copied from Lajard, Sur le Culte de 
 Venus , plate ii. They represent ornaments held in the hands of a 
 great female figure, sculptured in has relief on a rock at Yazili Kaia, 
 near to Boghaz Keni, in Anatolia, and described by M. C. Texier in 
 1834. The goddess is crowned with a tower, to indicate virginity; in 
 her right hand she holds a staff, shown in Figure 7, in the other, that 
 given in Figure 6 ; she stands upon a lioness, and is attended by an 
 antelope. Figure 6 is a complicated emblem of the ‘ four.’ 
 
 Figure 8, 12, pages 220, 222, are copied from Moor’s Hindu Pan¬ 
 theon, plate lxxxiii. They represent the lingam and the yoni, which 
 amongst the Indians are regarded as emblems of God, much in the 
 same way as a crucifix is esteemed by certain modern Christians. 
 
 Figures 9, 10, 11, pages 221, 222, from Moor, plate lxxxvi., are 
 forms of the argha, or sacred sacrificial cup, bowl, or basin, which 
 represent the yoni and many other things besides. See Moor, Hindu 
 Pantheon , pp. 393, 394. 
 
 Figure 14, page 254. Copied from Rawlinson’s Ancient Monarchies, 
 vol. i., p. 176, represents Ishtar, the Assyrian representative of Devi, 
 Parvati, Isis, Astarte, Venus, and Mary. The virgin and child are to 
 be found everywhere, even in ancient Mexico. 
 
 Figures 15, 16, page 259, are copied from Lajard, Sur le Culte de 
 Venus. The first is from plate xiv. b, fig. 5, and represents a male and 
 female, the symbolic triad and unit. The star on the left appears to 
 indicate “ the four.” The staff below is mystical, and as yet I have 
 not met with anything to explain its meaning. The second represents 
 the male and female as the sun and moon, thus identifying the symbolic 
 sex of those luminaries. The legend in the Pehlevi characters has not 
 been interpreted. Lajard, plate xix., fig. 6. 
 
 Figure 17, page 260, is taken from a mediaeval woodcut, lent to 
 me by my friend, Mr. John Newton, to whom I am indebted for the 
 sight of, and the privilege to copj^, many other figures. In it the virgin 
 Mary is seen as the Queen of Heaven, nursing her infant, and identified 
 with the crescent moon. Being before the sun, she almost eclipses its 
 light. Than this, nothing could more completely identify the Christian 
 mother and child with Isis and Horus, Ishtar, Venus, Juno, and a 
 
XXXY11 
 
 host of other pagan goddesses, who have been called ‘ Queen of 
 Heaven,’ ‘ Spouse of God,’ the ‘ Celestial Virgin,’ etc. 
 
 Figure 18, page 261, is a common device in papal churches and 
 pagan symbolism. It is intended to indicate the sun and moon in 
 conjunction, the union of the triad with the unit. I may notice, in 
 passing, that Mr. Newton has showed to me some mediaeval woodcuts, 
 in which the young unmarried women in a mixed assemblage were 
 indicated by wearing upon their foreheads a crescent moon. 
 
 Figure 19, page 262, is a Buddhist symbol, or rather a copy of 
 Maitnya Bodhisatwa, from the monastery of Gopach, in the valley of 
 Nepaul. It is taken from Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, vol. xviii., 
 p. &94. The horseshoe, like the vesica piscis of the Boman church, 
 indicates the yoni; the last, taken from some cow, mare, or donkey, 
 being used in eastern parts where we now use their shoes, to keep off 
 the evil eye. It is remarkable that some nations should use the female 
 organ, or an effigy thereof, as a charm against ill luck, whilst others 
 adopt the male symbol. In Ireland, a female shamelessly exhibiting 
 herself was to be found sculptured over the door of certain churches, 
 within the last century. See Vol. I., p. 114, and Vol. II., p. 262. The 
 male in the centre sufficiently explains itself. 
 
 That some Buddhists have mingled sexuality with their ideas of 
 religion, may be seen in plate ii. of Emil Schlagintweit’s Atlas of 
 Buddhism in Tibet, wherein Vajarsattva, “ The God above all,” is 
 represented as a male and female conjoined. Rays, as of the sun, 
 pass from the group ; and all are enclosed in an ornate oval, or horse¬ 
 shoe, like that in this figure. 
 
 I may also notice in passing, that the goddess Doljang (a.d. 
 617-98) has the stigmata in her hands and feet, like those assigned to 
 Jesus of Nazareth and Francis of Assisi. 
 
 Figure 20 is a copy of the medal issued to pilgrims at the shrine 
 of the virgin at Loretto. It was lent to me by Mr. Newton, but my 
 engraver has omitted to make the face of the mother and child black, 
 as it ought to be. Instead of the explanation given in the text, of the 
 adoption of a black skin for Mary and her son, D’Harcanville sug¬ 
 gests that it represents night, the period during which the feminine 
 creator is most propitious or attentive to her duties. It is unnecessary 
 to contest the point, for almost every symbol has more interpreta¬ 
 tions given to it than one. I have sought in vain for even a plausible 
 reason for the blackness of certain virgins and children, in certain 
 
 -c- 
 
XXXV111 
 
 papal shrines, which is compatible with decency and Christianity. It 
 is clear that the matter will not bear the light. 
 
 Figure 21, page 276, is from Lajard, Op. cit., plate iii., fig. 8. It 
 represents the sun, moon, and a star, probably Yenus, The legend is in 
 Phoenician, and may be read LNBRB, the diamond being a symbol 
 of Yenus or the yoni; or it may stand for the letter V ain = a, g, 
 or o. 
 
 Figure 22, page 277, is from Lajard, plate i., figure 8. It represents 
 a priest before a vacant throne or chair, which is surmounted by the 
 sun and moon, and a curious cross-shaped rod and triangle ; before the 
 throne is the diamond or oval, which symbolises the female, and behind 
 it is the palm tree, an emblem of the male. In the temple of the 
 Syrian goddess the seat of the sun was empty. See Vol. II., p. 788. 
 
 Figure 23, page 278, is Harpocrates, on a lotus, adoring the 
 emblem of woman; see Figure 95, p. 497, ante. Lajard and others state 
 that homage, such as is here depicted, is actually paid in some parts of 
 Palestine and India to the living symbol; the worshipper on bended 
 knees offering to it, la bouche inferieure, with or without a silent 
 prayer, his food before he eats it. A corresponding homage is paid by 
 female devotees to the masculine emblem of the scheik or patriarch, 
 which is devoutly kissed by all the women of the tribe on one 
 solemn occasion during the year, when the old ruler sits in state to 
 receive the homage. The emblem is, for many, of greater sanctity 
 than a crucifix. Such homage is depicted in Picart’s Religious 
 Ceremonies of all the people in the World, original French edition, 
 plate 71. See also The Dabistan, translated from the Persian 
 (London, 1843, vol. ii., pp. 148-153). 
 
 Figures 24, 25, pages 325, 326, are explained above, Figure 18. 
 
 Figure 26, page 329, is copied from Bryant’s Ancient Mythology, 
 3rd edition, vol. iii., p. 193. That author states that he copied it from 
 Spanheim, but gives no other reference. It is apparently from a Greek 
 medal, and has the word CAMIS2N as an inscription. It is said to 
 represent Juno, Sami, or Selenitis, with the sacred peplum. The figure is 
 remarkable for showing the identity of the moon, the lozenge, and the 
 female. It is doubtful whether the attitude of the goddess is intended 
 to represent the cross. 
 
 Figure 27, page 329, is a composition taken from Bryant, vol. iv., 
 p. 286. The rock, the water, the crescent moon as an ark, and the dove 
 hovering over it, are all symbolical; but though the author of it is right 
 in his grouping, it is clear that he is not aware of its full signification. 
 
XXXIX 
 
 The reader will readily gather it from our articles upon the Ark and 
 Water, and from our remarks upon the dove. 
 
 Figure 28, page 351, is explained. Fig. 16, page 106, Vol. I., ante. 
 
 Figure 29, page 352. See Figure 16, page 259, Yol. II., ante. 
 
 Figure 30, page 354. See Figure 9, page 99, Vol. I., ante. 
 
 Figure 31, page 398, is from Lajard, plate xxii., fig. 3. It is the 
 impression of an archaic Babylonian cylinder, and is supposed to 
 represent Oannes, or the fish deity. It is supposed that Dagon 
 of the Philistines resembled the two figures supporting the central 
 one. 
 
 Figure 32, page 399, is from Lajard, plate xxii., fig. 5, and is sup¬ 
 posed to represent a priest of the fish god. The fish’s head appears to 
 be the origin of the modern bishop’s mitre. 
 
 Figure 33, page 475. See Figure 19, supra. 
 
 Figure 34, page 491, is copied from Maffei’s Gemme Antiche Figu- 
 rate, vol. 3, plate 40. In the original, the figure upon the pillar is very 
 conspicuously phallic, and the whole composition indicates what was 
 associated with the worship of Priapus. This so-called god was 
 regarded much in the same light as St. Cosmo and St. Damian were 
 at Isernia, and St. Foutin in Christian France. He was not really a 
 deity, only a sort of Saint, whose business it was to attend to certain 
 parts. As the Pagan Hymen and Lucina attended upon weddings and 
 parturitions, so the Christian Cosmo and Damian attended to spouses, 
 and assisted in making them fruitful. To the last two were offered, 
 by sterile wives, wax effigies of the part cut off from the nude figure in 
 our plate. To the heathen saint, we see a female votary offer quince 
 leaves, equivalent to la feuille de sauge, egg-shaped bread, apparently 
 a cake; also an ass’s head; whilst her attendant offers a pine cone, 
 and carries a basket containing apples and phalli. This gem is valu¬ 
 able, inasmuch as it assists us to understand the signification of the 
 pine cone offered to ‘ the grove,’ the equivalent of le verger de Gypris. 
 The pillar and its base are curiously significant, and demonstrate how 
 completely an artist can appear innocent, whilst to the initiated he 
 unveils a mystery. 
 
 Figures 35, 36, 37, page 493, are various contrivances for indicating 
 decently that which it is generally thought religious to conceal, la 
 bequille, ou les instrumens. 
 
 Figure 38, p. 494, represents the same subject; the cuts are grouped 
 so as to show how the knobbed stick, le baton , becomes converted either 
 into a bent rod, la verge , or a priestly crook, le baton pastoral. There 
 
xl 
 
 is no doubt that the episcopal crozier is a presentable effigy of a very 
 private and once highly venerated portion of the human frame. 
 
 Figures 39, 40, 41, p. 495, are, like the preceding four, copied from 
 various antique gems; Fig. 39 represents a steering oar, le timon, and 
 is usually held in the hand of good fortune, or as moderns would say, 
 “ Saint Luck,” or bonnes fortunes; Fig. 40 is emblematic of Cupid, or 
 Saint Desire; it is synonymous with le dctrd, or la pique; Fig. 41 is 
 a form less common in gems; it represents the hammer, le marteau 
 qui frappe V enclume et forge les enfans. The ancients had as many 
 pictorial euphemisms as ourselves, and when these are understood 
 they enable us to comprehend many a legend otherwise dim; e.g., 
 when Fortuna, or luck, always depicted as a woman, has for her charac¬ 
 teristic le timon, and for her motto the proverb, “ Fortune favours 
 the bold,” we readily understand the double entendre. The steering oar 
 indicates power, knowledge, skill, and bravery in him who wields it; 
 without such a guide, few boats would attain a prosperous haven. 
 
 Figure 42, page 612, is copied from plate 29 of Pugin’s Glossary of 
 Ecclesiastical Ornament (Lond., 1868). The plate represents “ a pattern 
 for diapering,” and is, I presume, thoroughly orthodox. It consists of 
 the double triangle, see Figures 21, 31, 32, Vol. I., pp. 119-146, the 
 emblems of Siva and Parvati, the male and female; of Rimmon the 
 pomegranate, the emblem of the ertile womb, which is seen full of 
 seed through the “ vesica piscis,” la fente , or la porte de la vie. There 
 are also two new moons, emblems of Venus, or la nature, introduced. 
 The crown above the pomegranate represents the triad, and the number 
 four; whilst in the original the group which we copy is surrounded by 
 various forms of the triad, all of which are as characteristic of man as 
 Rimmon is of woman. There are also circles enclosing the triad, 
 analogous to other symbols common in Hindostan. 
 
 Figure 43, page 642, is copied from Moor’s Hindu Pantheon, pi. 9, 
 fig. 3. It represents Bavani, Maia, Devi, Lakshmi, or Kamala, one of 
 the many forms given to female nature. She bears in one hand the 
 lotus, emblem of self-fructification, whilst in the other she holds her 
 infant Krishna, Ohristna, or Vishnu. Such groups are as common in 
 India as in Italy, in Pagan temples as in Christian churches. The 
 idea of the mother and child is pictured in every ancient country, of 
 whose art any remains exist. 
 
 Figure 44, page 645, is taken from plate 24, fig. 1, of Moor’s Hindu 
 Pantheon. It represents a subject often depicted by the Hindoos 
 and the Greeks, viz., androgynism, the union of the male and female 
 
xli 
 
 creators. The technical word is Arddha-Nari. The male on the right 
 side bears the emblems of Siva or Maliadeva, the female on the left 
 those of Parvati or Sacti. The bull and lioness are emblematic of the 
 masculine and feminine powers. The mark on the temple indicates 
 the union of the two ; an aureole is seen around the head, as in modern 
 pictures of saints. In this picture the Ganges rises from the male, the 
 idea being that the stream from Mahadeva is as copious and fertilising 
 as that mighty river. The metaphor here depicted is common in the 
 East, and is precisely the same as that quoted from some lost Hebrew 
 book in John vii. 38, and in Num. xxiv. 7. It will be noticed, that the 
 Hindoos express androgyneity quite as conspicuously, but generally 
 much less indelicately, than the Grecian artists. 
 
 Figure 45, page 647, is a common Egyptian emblem, said to signify 
 eternity, but in truth it has a wider meaning. The serpent and the 
 ring indicate V andouille and V anneau , and the tail of the animal, 
 which the mouth appears to swallow, la queue dans la bouche. The 
 symbol resembles the crux ansata in its signification, and imports that 
 life upon the earth is rendered perpetual by means of the union of the 
 sexes. A ring, or circle, is one of the symbols of Venus, who carries 
 indifferently this, or the triad emblem of the male. See Maffei’s Gems, 
 vol. iii., page 1, plate 8. 
 
 Figure 46, page 647, is the vesica piscis, or fish’s bladder; the em¬ 
 blem of woman and of the virgin, as may be seen in the two following. 
 
 Figures 47 and 48, page 648, are copied from a Rosary of the 
 Blessed Virgin Mary, printed at Venice, 1582, with a license from the 
 Inquisition ; the book being lent to me by my friend, Mr. Newton. 
 The first represents the same part as the Assyrian grove. It may 
 appropriately be called the Holy Yoni. The book in question contains 
 other analogous figures, all resembling closely the Mesopotamian 
 emblem of Ishtar. The presence of the woman therein identifies the 
 two as symbolic of Isis, or la nature; and a man bowing down in 
 adoration thereof shows the same idea as is depicted in Assyrian 
 sculptures, where males offer to the goddess symbols of themselves. 
 Compare Figs. 62, 64, 65, 67, Vol. I., pp, 159-161. 
 
 If I had been able to search through the once celebrated Alex¬ 
 andrian library, it is doubtful whether I could have found any pictorial 
 representation more illustrative of the relationship of certain symbolic 
 forms to each other than is Figure 48. A circle of angelic heads, form¬ 
 ing a sort of sun, having luminous rays outside, and a dove, the em¬ 
 blem of Venus, darts a spear (la pique) down upon the earth (la terre), 
 
xlii 
 
 or the virgin. This being received, fertility follows. In Grecian 
 story, Ouranos and Ge, or heaven and earth, were the parents of 
 creation; and Jupiter came from heaven to impregnate Alcmena. The 
 same mythos prevailed throughout all civilised nations. Christianity 
 adopted the idea, merely altering the names of the respective parents, 
 and attributed the regeneration of the world to “holy breath” and 
 Mary- Every individual, indeed, extraordinarily conspicuous for 
 wisdom, power, goodness, etc., is said to have been begotten on a virgin 
 by a celestial father. Within the vesica piscis, artists usually repre¬ 
 sent the virgin herself, with or without the child ; in the figure before 
 us the child takes her place. It is difficult to believe that the eccle¬ 
 siastics who sanctioned the publication of such a print could have been 
 as ignorant as modern ritualists. It is equally difficult to believe that 
 the latter, knowing the real meaning of the symbols commonly used 
 by the Roman church, would adopt them. 
 
 Figures 49 to 63, page 649, are copied from Moor’s Hindu Pan¬ 
 theon ; they are sectarial marks in India, and usually traced on the 
 forehead. Many resemble what are known as masons’ marks, i.e., 
 designs found on tooled stones, in various ancient edifices, like our own 
 ‘trade marks.’ They are introduced to illustrate the various designs 
 employed to indicate the union of the “ trinity ” with the “ unity,” and 
 the numerous forms representative of “ la nature .” A priori, it appears 
 absurd to suppose that the eye could ever have been symbolical of 
 anything but sight; but the mythos of Indra, given in note 129, page 
 649, proves that it has another and a hidden meaning. These figures 
 are alike emblematic of the “ trinity,” “ the virgin,” and “ the four.” 
 
 Figure 64, page 650, represents a part of the Roman vestments, 
 called, I believe, a pallium; in shape it resembles the systrum of Isis, 
 and is indicative of the yoni; when donned by a Christian priest, he 
 resembles the pagan male worshippers, who wore a female dress when 
 they ministered before the altar or shrine of a goddess. Possibly the 
 Hebrew ephod was of this form and nature. 
 
 Figure 65, page 650, is taken from Pugin’s Glossary of Ecclesiastical 
 Ornaments; it represents the chasuble, and the yoni. When worn by 
 the minister, “ the four ” are completed. The priest also thus worships, 
 with the emblem of the virgin as part of his dress. The alb, which is 
 also worn by Roman ecclesiastics, is a woman’s chemise; so that these 
 priests are clothed as far as possible in garments intentionally feminine. 
 Even the tonsured head, adopted from the priests of the Egyptian 
 Isis, represents “ V anneau so that on head, shoulders, breast, and 
 
xliii 
 
 body, we may see in Christian churches the relics of the worship of 
 Venus and the adoration of woman ! See Vestments, Vol. II., p. 914. 
 
 Figure 66, page 650, is from Pugin, plate 5, figure 3. It is the out¬ 
 line of a pectoral ornament worn by some Roman ecclesiastic in Italy, 
 a. d. 1400; it represents the Egyptian crux ansata under another form, 
 the T signifying the triad, the O the unit. 
 
 Figure 67, page 650, is taken from Knight’s Pictorial History of 
 England, and represents a mediaeval bishop. The aureole, the tonsure, 
 the pallium adorned with the phallic cross, and the apple in the hand, 
 are all relics of pagandom, and adoration of sexual emblems. 
 
 Figure 68, page 651, represents the cup and wafer, to be found in 
 the hands of many effigies of papal bishops; they are alike symbolic 
 of the sun and moon, and of the “ elements ” in the Eucharist. See 
 Pugin, plate iv., figs. 5, 6. 
 
 Figures 68*, 69, pages 744, 745, are different forms of the sistrum, 
 one of the emblems of Isis. In the first, the triple bars have one signi¬ 
 fication, which will readily suggest itself to those who know the mean¬ 
 ing of the triad. In the second, the emblem of the trinity, which we 
 have been obliged to conventionalise, is shown in a distinct manner. 
 The cross bars indicate that Isis is a virgin The cat at the top of 
 the instrument indicates ‘ desire,’ Cupid, or Eros, The last is copied 
 from plate x., R. P. Knight’s Worship of, etc. 
 
 Figure 70, page 746, represents the various forms symbolic of Juno, 
 Isis, Parvati, Ishtar, Mary, or woman, or the virgin. 
 
 Figures 71, 72, 73, page 767, are copied from Audsley’s Christian 
 Symbolism (London, 1868). They are ornaments worn by the Virgin 
 Mary, and represent her as the crescent moon, conjoined with the 
 cross (in Fig. 71), with the collar of Isis (in Fig. 72), and with the double 
 triangle (in Fig. 73). 
 
 Figure 74, page 881, represents a common tortoise, with the head 
 retracted and advanced. When it is seen that there is a strong 
 resemblance between this creature and the linga, we can readily 
 understand why both in India and in Greece the animal should be 
 regarded as sacred to the goddess personifying the female creator, and 
 why in Hindoo mythoses it is said to support the world. 
 
 Figures 75, 76, page 885, represent a pagan and Christian cross 
 and trinity. The first is copied from R. P. Knight (plate x., fig. 1), and 
 represents a figure found on an ancient coin of Apollonia. The 
 second may be seen in any of our churches to-day. 
 
 Figure 77, page 887, is from an old papal book lent to me by 
 
xliv 
 
 Mr. Newton, Missale Romanum, written by a monk (Venice, 1509). It 
 represents a confessor of the Roman church, who wears the crux 
 ansata, the Egyptian symbol of life, the emblem of the four creators, 
 in the place of the usual pallium. It is remarkable that a Christian 
 church should have adopted so many pagan symbols as Rome has done. 
 
 Figure 78, page 887, is copied from a small bronze figure in the 
 Mayer collection in the Free Museum, Liverpool. It represents the 
 feminine creator holding a well marked lingam in her hand, and is thus 
 emblematic of the four, or the trinity and the virgin. 
 
 Figure 79, page 887, represents two Egyptian deities in worship 
 before an emblem of the triad 
 
 Figure 80, page 917, represents the modern pallium worn by Roman 
 priests. It represents the ancient systrum of Isis, and the yoni of the 
 Hindoos. It is symbolic of the celestial virgin, and the unit in the 
 creative four. 
 
 Figure 81, page 917, is a copy of an ancient pallium, worn by papal 
 ecclesiastics two or three centuries ago. It is an old Egyptian symbol, 
 representing the male and female elements united. Its common name 
 is crux ansata. 
 
 Figure 82, page 917, is the alb worn by Roman and other eccle¬ 
 siastics when officiating at mass, etc. It is simply a copy of the 
 chemise ordinarily worn by women as an under garment. 
 
 Figure 83, page 917, represents the chasuble worn by papal hier¬ 
 archs. It is copied from Pugin’s Glossary, etc. Its form is that of the 
 vesica piscis, one of the most common emblems of the yoni. It is 
 adorned by the triad When worn by the priest, he forms the male 
 element, and with the chasuble completes the sacred four. When 
 worshipping the ancient goddesses, whom Mary had replaced, the 
 officiating ministers clothed themselves in feminine attire. Hence the 
 use of the chemise, etc. 
 
 Figure 84, page 925, is a very common form of yoni and linga in 
 Hindostan. In worship, ghee , or oil, or water, is poured over the 
 pillar, and allowed to run off by the spout. Sometimes the pillar is 
 adorned by a necklace. See Moor’s Hindu Pantheon , plate xxii. 
 
INTRODUCTORY. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 The origin of names. Assumed by or given to adults. In ancient time names were 
 conferred on individuals in infancy. Names given by Parents, or by Priests, 
 or by Oracles. Not hereditary in early times. God-given names tell us of the 
 names and nature of the God or Gods worshipped at the time when certain 
 appellatives were given. Some names appear to be appropriate to the character 
 or career of the individuals who bore them. This indicates mythic writing. 
 The judgment required in recognising mythoses. The motives which influence 
 moderns in their selection of names for their children. Descent of names of 
 unknown significance. Puritan idea of names. Example of ancient names 
 current at present. Names are carried from old to new countries. Examples 
 of Spanish names in America, telling of religious faith—of English names, 
 telling of men or towns in the old country. Names adopted by explorers from 
 aborigines — how changed — sound — the origin of spelling — propensity to 
 assimilate an unknown sound to a known word: Examples — Green, Brown. 
 Varieties in spelling with similarity in sound. 
 
 The Bed Indian of America assumes no name, until he has 
 been, by many painful probations and sundry rites and 
 ceremonies, introduced into the ranks of men and warriors. 
 He then assumes some such title as “ The Agile Deer,” 
 “ The Fierce Bear,” “ The Cunning Snake,” and the like; he 
 changes it at will, and always on an upward scale. But the 
 name is personal, it does not descend to his children. 
 
 Amongst the American aborigines, there are “ medicine 
 men,” but there is no regular class of priests to any settled 
 worship. Belief in the present suffices for the savage : like a 
 child he is cowed by imaginary terrors, but those terrors 
 
 A 
 
2 
 
 have not been reduced to a system. The Negro resembles 
 the Red Indian. Dread of the unseen is perhaps common to 
 us all. 
 
 The comparatively savage denizens of some of our 
 mine districts, and elsewhere, resemble the American too 
 they are “ Long Bill,” “ Broad Bottom,” “ Squinting Dick,” 
 or any other name appropriate to the individual. These 
 names do not descend to their offspring. In some parts the 
 father has a single name, and his son takes for a second one 
 that of his parent, and “Tom of Jones,” or “William ap 
 Richard,” is the name of a person who neither receives nor 
 transmits a family cognomen. 
 
 In no country at the present day, that I know of, is the 
 name of an individual given ostensibly by Divine authority. 
 Yet in days gone by, in Chald£ea, Assyria, Egypt, Judea, and 
 in Phoenicia, names as a rule were given apparently by the 
 Oracle of God, but really by the Priest officiating thereat. 
 In fixing the cognomen he was judicious enough always to 
 introduce the name of the God of whom he said he was the 
 mouthpiece. 
 
 As there were Schools of Prophets founded by Samuel in 
 Judea, so we may believe that there were schools of a similar 
 kind elsewhere, whose model he followed. These Schools 
 would bring about a certain uniformity of doctrine, and would 
 prevent, to a great extent, individual caprice in those educated 
 for the Oracle. Consequently, we should expect diversity in 
 detail in the names given, but unity of purpose — the glorifi¬ 
 cation of the God. When all persons, from the King to the 
 meanest slave, owe their names to the Priest of the Temple 
 which they attend, we can easily understand that none would 
 presume to choose a name for his offspring so long as he had 
 access to the holy man. 
 
 But if by the chances of war, or by a voluntary or forced 
 emigration, a man was not able to have his child named by 
 
8 
 
 Divine command, he would naturally give to the young hoy 
 or girl his own name, and unite it with some other old 
 one. If “ God-given ” to him , it could not be unlucky for 
 his child. Thus, we may infer, it happened, that certain 
 names became hereditary; and if we allow this reasoning, 
 we conclude that hereditary names tell of a past race of 
 devout religious men, governed by an earnest priesthood, 
 who, like the Romish ministers in the efernal city, used to 
 take part in every important event of life. They tell also 
 of a severance between priest and people, and compulsory, 
 rather than optional succession. 
 
 We find that in Chaldsea and Assyria every child was 
 named by the Oracle or the Priest — and one cognomen 
 recorded in the Cuneiform inscriptions was translated by 
 Rawlinson as “Nebo gave the name.” 
 
 All the Old Testament kings, priests, captains, and other 
 great men seem in like manner to have had names given to 
 them as individuals, each one expressive of some religious 
 dogma; and the name was given at circumcision, or soon after 
 birth . 1 The practice seems to have disappeared during the 
 troubled times following the return from “ the Captivity ”— 
 for we find that when John the Baptist was ready to receive 
 his name, he was about to be called after the name of 
 some of his kindred, until his father authoritatively dictated 
 a new one. This is the first evidence we have in the 
 Bible of hereditary names . 2 This episode teaches us, that 
 names were given at that period to the child while still 
 young; and we infer that a similar practice existed in the 
 time of David, for shortly after the birth of his second son 
 by Bathsheba, he receives the name of Solomon from his 
 father, and the name of Jedidiah through the intervention 
 
 1 See Gen. iv. 1. xxix. xxx., Sam. i. 20, Luke i. 59. 
 
 2 From other evidence, — see Kitto’s Cyclopaedia, new edition, article 
 Education,—it appears that names were hereditary in certain families for more 
 than two centuries before Christ. 
 
4 
 
 of Nathan the Prophet. It is of importance to note, that the 
 practice thus indicated seems to have been universal; and 
 the exceptions are few in which the original God-given name 
 was changed. It would indeed have been blasphemous to 
 alter, or even to supplement, the original cognomen given by 
 the Oracle, and such alteration can only have been effected 
 by a second divine command; or (as in the case of Daniel 
 and his fellows) whfcre the original name, telling of a heretic 
 faith, was by royal or divine authority suppressed, to give 
 place to one telling of a more orthodox belief. When once 
 this point is conceded,—and all who know Scripture history, 
 the naming of Cain, Abel, Seth, Reuben, Gad, Samuel, Esau, 
 Jacob, and many others, as children, must concede it readily,— 
 it will follow, that the name given can have nothing to do 
 with the future of the infant. It would be absurd to call a 
 baby u The warrior of Jehovah,” or a female nursling “ The 
 fair one of El,” or a puling infant “ A cord with a noose .” 3 
 
 We conclude, therefore, that the cognomen must refer to 
 the deity after whom the child is called, rather than to any 
 thing peculiar to the individual case. In this view we are 
 supported by the fact, that the word Noah is given to the hero 
 of the Deluge, and to one of the daughters of Zelophehad 
 alike; and that in the Cuneiform inscriptions of Assyria 
 and Chaldaea no distinction can he found between male and 
 female appellatives. 
 
 We expect then to find, in the ancient names of what are 
 called the Shemitic races, the names of the Gods worshipped 
 by the parents of the children — either alone or joined to 
 some attribute ; as “ God the good ”—“ The just ”—“ The 
 merciful ”—“ The strong,” or “ The warrior God.” But as the 
 Almighty had then as now many appellatives, the changes 
 were rung upon these, and we have “ God (is) El,” or “ God 
 the El,” or “ God Jah,” or “ El Jah,” “ El, or II, the Mother,” 
 
 3 See Rebekkah, in Vocabulary. 
 
5 
 
 or “ The mother El,” “El the father,” or “The father Jah,” 
 “ Jah is high,” “ El is bright,” &c. 
 
 By analysing Ancient appellatives in different nations, 
 we are able to trace out the names and attributes of their 
 divinities, and to compare their respective faiths. When 
 the cognomens used by various nations resemble each other 
 closely, we naturally presume that they have something 
 in common; and when we find the names in one people differ 
 so grea/tly from those of another that no resemblance can be 
 traced in any, we conclude that the two are distinct in their 
 origin and faith. 
 
 But another inference to be drawn from the practice of 
 naming children in infancy cannot be passed by in silence ; 
 viz., if we, in any past history, find that the only name given 
 to an individual has strict reference to some peculiar quality 
 of the full grown man, or woman, it is far more probable 
 that such name was given by some writer in his study, than 
 by parents, or by an oracle of God. 
 
 As yet few names have been found in Chaldaea, Assyria, 
 Phoenicia—and, I think, in Palestine generally—which do not 
 contain the name of a deity, his attributes or his qualities, 
 &c. To take the name of a God and apply it to a man could 
 only be done by one who did not know, or care for, the 
 Majesty of the Supreme, or who wished to elevate his hero 
 to equality with the Most High. 
 
 An illustration of my meaning is furnished by the two 
 well known names of Abraham and Sarah, both of whom were 
 Chaldees, born of Chaldee parents, and most probably named 
 by a Chaldee Priest. Their meaning is “The Great Father,” 
 and “The Celestial Mother.” Yet the historian speaks of 
 them as if their appellation was given to them on account of 
 something which happened nearly a century afterwards. The 
 names are taken by the historian as the basis of a sort of 
 Prophetic pun. This would lead the philosopher to consider 
 
6 
 
 the story as mythical; and I shall, in the course of the 
 inquiry, show far stronger reason than this to believe that 
 it is so. It is usual to say, in cases of the kind adverted to, 
 that a name has been given prophetically — we have a few 
 such examples in profane writers — and then the explana¬ 
 tion is, that the prophecy or the oracle was a fiction of the 
 historian. I see no reason to believe that the same fiction 
 was unknown to those called sacred authors. Each writer on 
 divine subjects wishes to demonstrate that the theology he 
 has adopted is superior to all others; and we, who know the 
 falsification of modern history for religious purposes, may 
 well believe it to have existed in ancient times, when there 
 was far less regard to truth than even exists now. 
 
 A Chaldaean of old might have believed the stories of 
 Berosus and rejected those told by Samuel; a Jew would 
 do just the reverse; the impartial critic, weighing both in 
 the same scale, might doubt them all, though he could 
 persuade neither Jew nor Babylonian to modify his faith in 
 each respectively. 
 
 The Komanist, taught by his Church to put implicit faith 
 in all her teachings, credits, as he is bound to do, all the 
 stories of miracles worked by Saints and Virgins which are 
 put forth by authority; to disbelieve them is an act of 
 impiety. Yet there are others, of different faith, who do not 
 scruple to laugh at them all as transparent frauds. The 
 Protestant divines of former days made no difficulty in 
 expunging from the Sacred Scriptures books which they 
 called Apocryphal; those of the present day seem to think it 
 impossible that other books may contain absurdities to the 
 full as great as those told of in ‘ Tobit.’ 
 
 I know of no law which takes the Scriptures called 
 ‘ Sacred ’ away from the same criticism which applies to all 
 writings, and would fain hope that none will formally uphold 
 that blind faith is superior to impartial reason. 
 
7 
 
 f In modern times, and in most Christian countries, we 
 have now two sets of names, one for the most part hereditary, 
 the other given shortly after hirth, with or without some 
 form or ceremony. 
 
 \y The hereditary, or surname, can in many cases be traced 
 back unchanged into the dark chambers of modern antiquity. 
 Into those recesses we shall not attempt to follow it, hoping 
 rather to find or take it up again in the remoter, yet com¬ 
 paratively clear, period of the ancient historic times. Just 
 as the geographer, who sees a river disappear down into some 
 obscure cleft, would rather seek in a distant spot for its 
 emergence, than trust himself to travel with the stream 
 through the sombre caverns along which it flows. 
 
 The birth, or Christian, name is in many instances as 
 old as ancient surnames; and to find out how this happens 
 it is well to pause, and ask ourselves the motives which guide 
 us at the present day in the selection of an appellative for our 
 children. 
 
 1. We call them after our father, brothers, mother, 
 sisters, or friends. As we do, so did our progenitors; and 
 Kobert, Thomas, Charles, George, &c. can be traced as 
 family names in many genealogies, as certainly as any 
 physical peculiarity, from the present to the remote past. 
 
 2. We call them after kings, queens, princesses, or 
 other great, wise, or noble beings; and they, in their 
 turn, have been called after some persons who went before 
 them. 
 
 3. We call them after some eminent Scripture charac¬ 
 ter, and thus, in a Christian country, perpetuate the 
 names of what we now would call heathen deities; for, as 
 we shall show, the names of eminent Jews resembled 
 those borne by eminent Chaldseans, Assyrians, Phoeni¬ 
 cians, &c. 
 
 4. We call them after some Saint, whose legendary 
 
8 
 
 "i. 
 
 $ 
 
 \ history has taken our fancy, whose virtues, as told to us, 
 we admire, and, if we believe such things, whose very 
 particular intercession we wish to bespeak for our child. 
 
 The names given to the late Royal Family in Spain 
 are eminently religious, and tell not only of the saints 
 which are adored, but of certain dogmas in faith believed. 
 
 5. In comparatively modern times, we have seen the 
 Greeks name their children “ Theodore,” or “ The gift of 
 God; ” “ Theophilus,” “ The friend of God; ” and amongst 
 the Romans “Augustus” was used to express “The 
 Majesty ” of an Emperor. English history tells us of 
 Puritans whose children were named “ In the Lord I put 
 my trust,” or any other pious formula; and one of the few 
 names which are retained in my recollection of the 
 history of those times is “ Praise God Barebones.” 
 
 These cognomens, though exceptional, we mention to 
 show, first, that the Puritan scholars, amongst whom we 
 must class Milton, knew the real significance of many of 
 the names current amongst us; and, secondly, that they 
 wished to imitate, in the vernacular, the piety which 
 dictated to the Jews the Hebrew equivalent to that they 
 used. To their minds it was more reverent to call their 
 children, or themselves, “ The Lord careth for me,” 
 than “Jehoiada;” and “The Gift of God,” rather than 
 “Jonathan ; ” and “ The Beloved,” rather than “David.” 
 It is unnecessary for me to go into the subject of Nick¬ 
 names, for they rarely descend, except as occasional surnames, 
 from father to son. 
 
 Of the long duration of the descent of particular names, 
 I may point out the word Melech, which stood for King 
 before Abraham’s time, as it does in Arabia at the present; 
 and Elimelech is a cognomen still to be found in our post- 
 office directories. We find that other names, besides those 
 given to human beings, have had a sacred origin, and have 
 
9 
 
 enjoyed an immense duration of life. Sunday and Monday 
 tell of a Primitive Chaldsean faith, as surely as Tuesday, 
 Wednesday, Thursday and Friday tell of that faith being 
 modified by Scandinavian Priests. Whilst the junction of 
 “ St. Columba,” “ The blessed dove,” with “ The sacred Ai,” 
 Hii or Iona, and the holy “ Aodh ” in Scotland, represents 
 faithfully the sacred dove, the Jonah of the Assyrian race, 
 nestling in a strange and remote nest, side by side with 
 some Phoenician “ Judah.” 
 
 Let us now turn our attention for a moment to the results 
 of European enterprise in distant lands. 
 
 We find that the fierce Spaniards, under Cortez and 
 Pizarro, took with them Missionaries, who carried with them 
 all the religious zeal, doctrine, and practice which charac¬ 
 terised them at home. They forced the natives, conquered 
 vi et armis, to change their own faith, and assume that of 
 the victors. To the places they conquered or colonised, they 
 gave names derived from their own religion, and “ Santa 
 Cruz,” “ Trinidad,” “ Santiago,” “ Monte Christo,” “ San 
 Lorenzo,” “ St. Helena,” “Los Angelos,” “ Concepcion,” 
 and other places in America, tell of the religious names held 
 in respect by old Spain. 
 
 On the other hand, “ New York,” Boston,” “ Troy,” 
 “Louisiana,” “Melbourne,” “Sydney,” and a number of 
 similar names, carried by the more Northern Europeans into 
 America and elsewhere, tell of the names of towns and 
 eminent persons in the old country, without any intermixture 
 of religion. No English explorer has yet named a new 
 island “ The Virgin Mary,” or “ The Holy Ghost; ” nor can I 
 recal a single locality which he has named “ Jesus,” “Christ,” 
 or “ God.” Yet all these are names reverenced more or less 
 by the Anglo-Saxon. 
 
 We infer, then, that the names given by explorers may 
 
10 
 
 tell of faith, of the names of towns or of persons in the old 
 country, or of all, according to the ideas of the discoverers. 
 But when once a lodgment in a new continent is effected, 
 there are always pioneers to be found on the outskirts of the 
 “ factory,” “ fort,” or “ settlement,” who, like skirmishers 
 in an army, are in advance of the main body, and prepare 
 the way for them. These come into contact with the Abori¬ 
 gines, whom, taking America for a pattern, we will call 
 Indians. In their wild life, the pioneers league with some 
 tribes, and oppose others, or trade with all. From this 
 intercourse they learn the geography of unknown parts, and 
 the names of rivers, hills, peaks, and passes, till then 
 unknown. These names subsequently become incorporated 
 into the language of the invader, just as we have incorporated 
 into ours the word Nyanza, the native name for one of the 
 vast lakes whence the Nile flows. 
 
 A number of names will therefore be found, in almost 
 every large continent, which are not derivable from the 
 language of the original conquerors ; and perhaps, as will 
 soon be the case in Eastern America, these names will be the 
 sole remembrances we have of a defunct race. 
 
 But there will always be a tendency to approximate the 
 outlandish name to something like the current diction, and 
 Mississippi, Missouri, and Chesapeake may, and very probably 
 will, become Mrs. Ippi, Miss Houri, and Cheese Peak. Just 
 as the old inn, whose sign was the motto, “God encompasseth 
 us,” became the “Goat and Compasses,” and “Wavertree,” 
 near Liverpool, has become “ Watery.” 
 
 I am not quite sure whether some of our very common 
 names have not this origin. With us Green is a familiar 
 word, and Mr. Green is supposed to be a lineal descendant 
 of somebody who was ‘Jolly Green.’ A minute’s thought, 
 however, will show us that our present association of ‘ Green ’ 
 with absurdity is very modern; and when we find Green&n 
 
11 
 
 in Ireland and Scotland, Green&un in Clair, and Greensdgh 
 in Lancashire; Greene in Brunswick, Greenock in Scotland, 
 and Greenore in Ireland; Grinau in Switzerland, and Grind, 
 Crrmdalythe, Grindenwald, Grindon, Grinnel, Grinstone, 
 and the like in Switzerland and Britain, we may fairly doubt 
 whether there is not some other meaning of the word than 
 colour. Especially when we remember that Grian was an 
 ancient name of the Sun—now Gran or Graun in Ireland. 4 
 We may say the same of Brown. We imagine that the first 
 of the race may have been tanned by .the sun, and so earned 
 a cognomen; but where all alike are so tanned, as our more 
 savage forefathers were, the use of the word as a distinctive 
 appellation is absurd. When we find, moreover, that Bran, 
 Brana, Branas, Branca, Brancas, Branche, Branchon, Brand, 
 Brandeis, Brant, Brantome, Brenes, Brent are names found 
 all over Europe, specially in the maritime districts, we may 
 fairly doubt the connection of the word Broivn with' the 
 colour alone. My present ideas would lead me to associate 
 it with the honourable title of Baron, which coincides with 
 the Phoenician Bar-On, “ Son of the father,” or “ Son of On.” 
 
 Not only do nations change an unknown into some 
 familiar word, but they often change one outlandish form 
 into another equally barbarous and unknown. As we hope 
 to show by and by, the origin of John was Jonah; this has 
 become, as we learn from Miss Yonge, Ian, Jan, Shawn, 
 Eoin, Hans , Jens, Jantje, Jehan, Hannes, Johan, Han, 
 Jean, Juan, Joao, Giovanni, Jannes, Joannes, Vanni, Nanni, 
 Giankos, Ivan, Vanja, Yan, Jovan, Jonas, Janos and Jopan, 
 and Evan, in various countries of Europe. 
 
 Yet, though there be a variety in the spelling of all these 
 words according to the phonetic value we give to the various 
 letters in use amongst us, the difference between them all 
 
 4 The scholar will remember that the Gens Grania was one of the oldest 
 families of ancient Rome. 
 
12 
 
 will be found comparatively insignificant if we give to J its 
 proper sound of Y, and consider that G and J are often used 
 interchangeably; we must also consider that U and Y are 
 essentially the same. The Ancient Romans, like the Hebrews, 
 and I suppose the Phoenicians also, had only one sign for the 
 two, which represented U or V according to its position in a 
 word. If we read for Ivan, Juan, we should call the word 
 as if it were spelled Jew-an ; but if we retain the pure value 
 of the I, we should pronounce the word Yuan or Yawn. 
 
 These observations,introduce us to the difficulties attached 
 to the study of names, which we must consider in the 
 ensuing chapter. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 In tracing names, is sound or spelling to be most trusted ? Speech precedes writing. 
 Correctness in spelling is rarely met with amongst writers recording the names 
 of their countrymen—is more rare when foreign names are reduced to the 
 alphabet of the historian. Varying value of the same letters in different 
 nations. The value of assonance, and of spelling—neither to be trusted. 
 The Arian and Shemitic languages. Their radical words contain few letters. 
 Difficulty in determining whether any long name is simple or compound — 
 Omphelos, Rebecca, Elizabeth. Necessity for the inquirer to identify himself 
 with those of whom he writes. Ancient and modern ideas of propriety in 
 conversation. 
 
 In pursuing the study of names, there are two or three diffi¬ 
 culties which have to be faced, and, if possible, surmounted. 
 The first is, Whether, in tracing their descent, we are to trust 
 more to spelling or to sound ? The second is, Whether we 
 must refrain from tracing a word or name to a foreign 
 language, when there is any interpretation for it in the 
 tongue of the people using it ? 
 
 In considering the first question, we naturally turn our 
 minds to some apparently foreign, but strictly analogous 
 subjects. I know that over the world there are many races of 
 men with black skins. They receive various names—Negroes, 
 Nubians, Caffres, Kroomen, Papuans and the like ; but the 
 philosopher does not therefore conclude that they are essen¬ 
 tially distinct from each other. As we found the belief of 
 the paternity of a child on its resemblance to its parent, and 
 the genus of a plant by its resemblance to others of the same 
 class, so we judge of the alliance of a man more by his colour 
 than his name, and of a name more by its sound than by the 
 way that sound is or has been spelled. 
 
14 
 
 It is clear that words must have been uttered, ere any one 
 thought of committing them to writing; and, from what we 
 know of the early times of our own country, we may be sure 
 that incorrectness in spelling was common, even when the 
 knowledge of writing was considerable. Lysons states 
 that he has seen his own name spelled in seven different 
 methods in one document; and “ Shakespeare” was so uncer¬ 
 tain how to spell his own, that he spelled it in various ways ; 
 and since his time no one has been able to discover the true 
 orthography. 
 
 This difficulty, had enough as it is in our own language, 
 is increased greatly when we try and reduce to writing the 
 names current in lands to whose tongue we are strangers. I 
 may write Father, Murder, Tuscany, and pronounce them in 
 our ordinary way ; hut the German, the Irishman, and the 
 Italian will, in reading those letters, trying to imitate us, say 
 ‘ Yater,’ ‘ Murther,’ and £ Thoscano.’ Those being the nearest 
 sounds to which they can bring their lips, they will, in 
 educating their countrymen, change the English spelling, 
 just as we have changed the foreign spelling of proper names 
 to suit our own tongue; e. g., Buonaparte into Bonaparte, 
 and Louis into Lewis. 
 
 Not only so, we vary the pronunciation of our own words 
 capriciously; and though both archangel and arc/ffiishop 
 have the same first syllable, we talk of it as ark in the one, 
 and artch in the other. 
 
 When we have determined, however, to trace names by 
 sound rather than spelling, and yet not to cast aside the last 
 completely, we begin to study the nature of the departures 
 from strict rule. We can do this to a great extent amongst 
 ourselves, if we carefully note the pronunciation current in 
 the various parts of our island. The Welshman pronounces 
 “ooman ” for “woman,” “Pilly”for “Billy,” while the Scotch¬ 
 man turns out into oot. I was once profoundly puzzled by a 
 
15 
 
 north country gardener, who, while praising his peaches, 
 assured me they were Dutch Hesses, and bothered me still 
 more by asking me to procure him some shir-eeds from my 
 tailor. At last I discovered that he meant “ Duchesses ” and 
 “ shreds.” 1 
 
 We find, as a general rule, that B and P, Y and F, S and 
 Z are interchangeable, and that one vowel is very generally 
 interchangeable with all the rest. 2 
 
 Under all circumstances we must, I think, look very 
 suspiciously, both to similarity of sound and spelling, ere we 
 venture to build any theory upon those grounds alone. 3 
 
 I may speak of a do, a dew, adieu, a Jew, a cfotplex move¬ 
 ment, a <M)ious statement, a long Oration, a duty, and a 
 duel; but though the sounds of dew, do, &c., are similar, 
 their meanings are unlike. Yet I may speak of oinos, vinum, 
 and wine as being essentially the same, though the appear¬ 
 ance of the words does not suggest identity. So, pauper, 
 paper, pepper, piper, poppy, puppy, though sounding much 
 
 1 See the way the writers in the Septuagint have altered the Hebrew proper 
 names; e. g., Elisheba into Elizabeth. 
 
 2 The following letters are interchangeable : 
 
 k with n, v- i, 
 
 A, E, I, O, U, W, Y. 
 
 B, V, T, P, M. 
 
 C, K, G, S. 
 
 D, T. 
 
 s, c, z. 
 
 F, P, PH. 
 
 J, G, Y. 
 
 Q, R, C. 
 
 X, z. 
 
 1 „ 3- 
 
 V „ x, a, 3, p, Y- 
 3 „ 3,1,0- 
 a „ 3.P-1M1. 
 
 i „ to. n - ?- r. 
 n „ n, v 
 r „ y, d, b, ?■ 
 n „ n,a- 
 id „ y, n, % 
 
 3 „ a, \ p. n. 
 
 ^ with ft. 
 
 D „ .3,3,1,?. 
 a „ ‘p, 
 
 D „ T, Y- 
 3 ,, 3,D- 
 x „ o,n,T,b,D,y- 
 p „ 3,3. 
 
 ? ,, ?,a,y,r- 
 
 & ,, D, •¥, T- 
 & ,, T-Y- 
 
 n ,, to- 
 
 8 In Vol. 1, 2nd Series, of the Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature, 
 there is an Essay on this subject by Sir T. Phillips, in which he attempts, and I 
 think successfully, to show that the names of Cingetorix, Vercingetorix, and Orge- 
 torix, given by Caesar as those of certain German chieftains, was the nearest approach 
 that the Roman writer could make to frame in his own language the German sounds 
 for King Dietrich, Viking Dietrich, and Herr Dietrich ; and he concludes the paper 
 with the remark, “ that the names of persons and places are the nearest approaches 
 which we have left to the most ancient mode of orthography, either of lost or of 
 living languages.” 
 
16 
 
 the same, are essentially different; while on the contrary ham, 
 am, and cham; Anna, Hannah, and Channah; Camacha and 
 Gamakh ; Tamyras and Damuras, though looking different, 
 are essentially alike. 
 
 Amongst the many phases the difficulty we have adverted 
 to presents, one of no slight magnitude is—How far can we 
 assume similarity of origins, in words of identical sound and 
 somewhat similar meaning, in nations widely separated from 
 each other ? We find, for example, in Grecian and Roman 
 Mythology, a god called “ Bacchus.” He is frequently 
 attended with a tiger, or leopard. He conquered India. But 
 he is also represented as a young man, handsome, jolly, full 
 of fun and frolic, and one making free use of wine and 
 women. In Indian Mythology, we have Baghis, or Vagis, as 
 a name for Siva, the terrible—the destroyer. It means, I 
 understand, “ Lord of Speech.” Bdgh is the name for a tiger, 
 and, putting the two together, fancy may see the origin of the 
 western god who conquered Ind. But the philosopher refuses 
 to see, or rather is unable to see, any connection between the 
 awful Siva, the murderous bagh, and the rollicking vine- 
 god seated on a cask. He prefers rather to seek another 
 origin for the word, and finds in the Hebrew, one of the 
 living representatives of the language spoken by the colonists 
 from Tyre and Phoenicia generally, the word Pachaz IPP, which 
 signifies “full of fun,” “enjoyment,” “luxury,” &c., “indul¬ 
 gence in luxuries of every kind; ” and he thinks that this latter 
 is so similar in sound and character to Bacchus, that it is 
 preferable to deduce the European god from a Phoenician, 
 rather than an Indian source. It is possible that neither 
 solution is correct, but the last is sufficiently near truth to 
 pass for it until something nearer presents itself. 
 
 Another difficulty consists in the fact, that, in the great 
 families of languages, there are certain words of great 
 similarity in sound, but materially differing in their signifi- 
 
17 
 
 cance ; and this difficulty is the greater when we can recognise 
 in the tongue used a mixture of roots. In the following 
 Vocabulary, I have introduced many Aryan or Sanscrit words, 
 to show their general diversity with the Shemitic, and 
 yet their occasional resemblance. One philologist recognises 
 in Greek, Latin, German and English words, in forms of 
 inflexion of verbs, and in construction of tenses, cases, &c., a 
 strong Aryan and Sanscrit element; while another enlarges 
 upon the strong evidence there is that our language has been 
 framed on a model similar to that of the Hebrew; and 
 both probably are right. In the former, there is a word 
 Ar, which signifies “to plough” or “ till the earth,”—from 
 (I understand) the idea of driving something forwards; 
 and from this biliteral many other words are formed. But 
 in the Shemitic languages, and especially in the ancient 
 Chaldee and Assyrian, “ the Moon God ” had a name 
 pronounced like Har, and another one called Air, Aer, or 
 Ar, was “ the God of the Atmosphere,” the “ Jupiter ” of 
 the Greeks. 
 
 The inquirer who has studied Sanscrit attempts naturally 
 to derive all names containing Ar from an Aryan, while the 
 Shemitic scholar wishes to trace them to a Chaldsean origin. 
 The first would make the name of the renowned Arthur, king 
 of Britain, to mean “ Thor the Ploughman ”—the second 
 would read it as “the Celestial Thor,” the “Prince of the 
 Power of the Air,” “ Jupiter Tonans,” or “ Pluvius.” While 
 the two are contending which is the prettiest conceit, and 
 demonstrating the relative merits, or absurdities, of their 
 own or their opponents’ interpretation, another might step 
 in and say that both are wrong, since Arthur comes from 
 the Persian Athar, which means fire, and since its prede¬ 
 cessor may he recognised in the word Ithuriel. 
 
 This imaginary discussion leads us to notice another 
 form which the verbal difficulty assumes, viz., how far we are 
 
 B 
 
18 
 
 justified in dividing any word into two or more elements ? 
 A great deal depends upon this, of which I give the following 
 as an example. Omphalos in Greek signifies “ the navel,” 
 pure and simple; hut if we cut the word in two, we find that 
 om signifies maternity, and phallos, paternity. This result 
 would be only a curiosity, unless it led us farther. If we 
 pursue the idea of the navel, we come upon an Ancient Indian 
 Myth, to the effect that Mahadeva and Sara-iswata, i.e., the 
 celestial phallus and celestial womb, had a great contest as to 
 their respective power over creation, and the combat was so 
 sharp that neither would have anything to do with the other, 
 the consequence of which was that all creation died out. But 
 Vishnu took upon himself to make all things right. To 
 do this, he slept on the sea on his back, while from his 
 navel sprung a new world. 4 From the shape of the navel 
 we conclude that the Myth was intended to veil the well 
 known fact enunciated by St. Paul, 1 Cor. vii. 4, that union 
 is necessary for the continuance of animated nature. If, 
 then, we find that the single word omphalos signifies this 
 union, we are entitled to believe the word a compound rather 
 than a simple one. 
 
 When we consider that, normally, all Scripture names of 
 Jewish Kings in the later period are compound — that, as 
 a rule, Oriental cognomens are long, and their common 
 words very short, we are justified in assuming, that it is 
 more probable that any given name, if it be a long one, is 
 compound rather than simple . We are, however, sometimes 
 driven to extremities in our choice, of which the following 
 is an example. The name Rebecca is stated by the learned 
 Gesenius to mean “ a rope with a noose; ” adding, that 
 “ it is not unfit, as the name of a girl who ensnares men by 
 her beauty.” But (1) the name was given to her in Chaldaea 
 while a baby and without beauty—(2) “the noosed cord ” 
 
 4 See Nabhi, Nebo, &c., in a subsequent chapter. 
 
19 
 
 comes from an Arabic, rather than a Babylonian root, and 
 (3) “a cord with a noose ” is more likely to remind one of 
 hanging a cat, dog, or oneself, than of a “woman alluring 
 men by her beauty.” Consequently, we reject this inter¬ 
 pretation, and go to the Chaldee. We then find that Rab 
 or Reb means “chief,” “great,” (as in Rabsaris, Rabmag,) 
 and that balnak PC 1 ? is a very old word for “ whiteness,” or 
 “brightness;” and, putting these together, we conclude that 
 the name signifies “ The great white one,” or “ The chief 
 white shiner,” i.e ., “The Moon,” a God in Chaldaea. And 
 in this deduction we are strengthened, when we find that 
 she was the daughter of Nahor, which means light. It is 
 spelled Nachur, which means “ snorting! ” the real 
 signification is Nahur, “ light.” 
 
 In venturing to divide any word, it is I think essential, 
 first, that the division shall be, phonetically, natural,— 
 secondly, that the idea wrapped up, so to speak, shall be 
 consonant with the opinions current at the time. The 
 word “ Elizabeth,” or “ Elisheba,” to which we shall have 
 to refer shortly, is an example of the various ways there are 
 of dividing words, and of the meanings which may result 
 therefrom ; in one form it is derivable from El, issa, and 
 beth, in the other, Eli and Sheba ; and for the latter word 
 we can find two distinct meanings. 5 
 
 In the succeeding pages I have endeavoured, as far as 
 possible, to avoid any derivation which seems incompatible 
 with sound deduction. It has been my endeavour to identify 
 myself with the ideas, forms of belief, dogmas of faith, 
 habits of thought, manner of speaking, &c., which existed 
 amongst the Orientals then, rather than apply to the compa¬ 
 ratively coarse Eastern the modern refined ideas of a highly 
 civilised Englishman. I do not know anything which illus¬ 
 trates the difference between ancient and modern times 
 
 6 See Elizabeth, in the Vocabulary. 
 
20 
 
 more than the frequency with which circumcision is spoken 
 of in the sacred books, and the carefulness with which the 
 subject is tabooed now. To speak of any man as being 
 worthy or contemptible, as men and women did amongst the 
 Jews, according to the condition of an organ never named, 
 and very rarely even alluded to, in a mixed company of 
 males and females amongst ourselves, shows us that persons 
 holding such ideas must have thought far more of these 
 matters, and spoken of them far more freely, than we have 
 been taught to do ; and we shall see in the sequel how 
 all, or nearly all, of the blessings promised to the faithful, 
 culminated in the abundance of offspring; an occurrence 
 which could not happen, except the parts destined to that 
 purpose were in an appropriate condition. 
 
 Another difficulty in ascertaining the meaning of certain 
 proper names arises from the critical canon, “ that if a 
 word can be explained in the language of the persons using 
 it, such explanation must be held to be the good and true 
 one, against all others.” 6 
 
 The value of such criticism we may best appreciate by 
 adducing a few examples. We have in English the words 
 burroiv and borough. The»two mutually explain each other; 
 one is a residence of a community of rats, rabbits, mice, or 
 foxes; and the other is a town, where great and small people 
 live together, and to which they can run, after having made 
 an excursion abroad to pillage from their neighbours [?]. 
 We have, too, a wick in a candle, and a wick a town. The 
 first represents a sort of tower in a plain, whence it draws 
 
 6 The following paragraphs are inserted in answer to strictures which were 
 made by an individual on the author’s views, when he read the draft of this Essay 
 at the Liverpool Literary and Philosophical Society. It was then alleged, that if 
 in the language of Northmen, Danes, Saxons, Germans, &c., a word could be found 
 which seemed to explain another, such explanation must take precedence of any 
 attempt to trace a particular word or name to a Phoenician, or to any other source, 
 more remote than the comparatively modern one. 
 
21 
 
 a supply of fuel to keep the flame burning; the second 
 denotes an erection of houses in the middle of a fertile 
 country, which finds in the town a market for its produce, 
 and helps to keep the citizens alive ! ! We will leave to the 
 imagination of our readers the task of multiplying such 
 absurdities, and pass on to another answer to the canon. 
 There is cause to believe “ that things have been as they 
 are now, unless we have reason to believe them different,” 
 is a fair assumption to go upon. Human nature is not 
 different now to what it was in the days of yore, though 
 education has done much to modify its manifestations. 
 Amongst ourselves there are singularly few names of purely 
 English origin, or which can be explained by our own 
 tongue. Robert, Thomas, Charles, George, John, William, 
 Caroline, Mary, Margaret, convey to us no meaning what¬ 
 ever ; not only so, but the few names which do exist, such 
 as “ Asse,” “ Boots,” “ Cheese,” “ Dunce,” “ Goose,” 
 “ Cheeke,” “ Sponge,” “ Spittle,” “ Teat,” “ Bugg,” and 
 a lot of others , 7 are considered so mean and vulgar, that 
 their possessors wish to change them, and ultimately will. 
 
 Moreover, we do not find that an invader of a country 
 compels the natives to learn the meaning of the victors’ 
 names, and to adopt those names for themselves, adapting 
 them to their own language. It was so in days gone by ; 
 for we find a celebrated oracle laying down the maxim that 
 “ it was not right to destroy the names of barbarians, for 
 that many of them were important in the mysteries.” 
 
 But we do see, on the other hand, that fierce fanatics 
 like the Spaniards have at times forced new names upon 
 their conquered foes; and we know that, at his or her taking 
 religious vows, the monk or nun rejects his or her worldly, 
 
 7 A catalogue of these, copied from The Times newspaper, may be found 
 in Anderson’s Surnames , page 139. 
 
22 
 
 and assumes some sacred, name; but under none of these 
 circumstances has there been any effort to explain the new 
 name which supplants the old one. 
 
 Now we do not for a moment deny that many ancient 
 names find their meaning in the language of the country 
 which has initiated them—indeed the whole of our argument 
 is based upon that fact; but what we deny is the universality 
 of the law in modern times. We hold that names, like 
 faiths, have been imported into nations from without, and 
 that, though such names are twisted by those who adopt 
 them, yet they may still be traced by the philologist to 
 their origin. 
 
 The positive mischief done by converting an occasional 
 fact into a constant law may be seen in the stories in which 
 topographists occasionally indulge, and by which they often 
 stifle further enquiry. Thus, for example, Bury St. 
 Edmonds is said to take its name from being the burial 
 place of St. Edmond, and Bury in Lancashire is of course 
 a vast cemetery for the whole county; but when we find 
 Berri in France, Berry in France and Devonshire, Burai in 
 Bengal, Bure in Switzerland, Belgium, Sweden, and Abys¬ 
 sinia, Buri in Bombay and Bengal, Beer a as an old Jewish 
 name signifying “ a pit,” and Burry in Wales, we may 
 conclude that they all have something in common, and that 
 the bond is not an idea of funereal rights. 
 
 Being discontented with referring this name to Anglo- 
 Saxon, German, Danish, Latin, &c., we turn to some other 
 source. Considering that the Hebrew may help us to the 
 Phoenician, we look to the Lexicon, and find that ( bera ) 
 
 means “a fountain, well,” or “spring;” that ( birah ) 
 
 is “ a fortress ” or “ castle ; ” “ that there is a Persian word, 
 baru, meaning the same thing, and that there are Sanscrit 
 words, burn, buri , pur , = itvpyog and /3( purgos and baris), 
 
with similar meanings.” 8 Finding the same, or nearly the 
 same, word in the Aryan and the Shemitic families, we 
 conclude that the most probable meaning of Bury is a 
 stronghold , and that it has a very close affinity to the word 
 Borough . The one etymology is the result of indolence 
 of mind, and indisposition to think more than is absolutely 
 necessary ; the other involves much labour and considerable 
 thought. The one leads us on to the vast plans of anti¬ 
 quity; the other bids us “rest and be thankful” in the 
 dark ages of modern antiquarianism. 
 
 This same canon is, however, capable of convenient 
 stretching in the hands of those who use it. If, they say, 
 you cannot find an explanation of an English name in the 
 British tongue, and you can find one in Latin, Greek, 
 German, Scandinavian or other north-country part, that 
 must suffice, without going any farther. This observation 
 is essentially the same as the last we animadverted upon; 
 but we may take it as a text for some additional remarks. 
 A recent writer (Lysons) has noticed, that when one of our 
 old invaders conquered any place, or built any town, it went 
 by the name of Ham, or “ The town.” When it again 
 was subdued by another horde, speaking a different tongue, 
 the place would be named “ The town called Ham,” or 
 “ Ham-ton ; ” and when it, again, was captured by another 
 tribe, speaking a different tongue to the foregoing, the 
 place would be called “ wick ” (or town), and designated 
 as the one before called Hampton. Thus a certain locality 
 has become “ Hamptonwick; ” and by a similar process we 
 have “ Berkhampstead.” The etymologist cannot fail to see 
 that such names tell of a succession of possessors, and there 
 perchance his interest would end. If, on the contrary, he 
 were to trace these very words farther, they would tell a 
 
 8 Gesenius, p. 115, ed. Bagster. 
 
24 
 
 more interesting tale. He would find that Dn ( cham or ham), 
 in the Hebrew and Plioenicio-Shemitic, means joined together 
 by relationship or marriage; and that nd!? (latah) is to cleave 
 to the ground; and he would infer that ham and hamlet 
 meant the settlement of a tribe or family who builded huts, 
 rather than used tents or makeshifts. Ton, again, tells 
 us of ( tanah ) habitations, and of (tin) clay. We 
 remember Thun in Switzerland, Ton in Belgium, Tona in 
 Spain, Tonal in Austria, Tonara in Sardinia, Tun or Toon 
 in Persia, Tun in Norway, &c., &c.; and we conclude that 
 the word ton, or town, toon in Scotland, comes from the 
 ancient mariners, the preceders of the Anglo-Saxon in 
 colonisation, namely, the indomitable Phoenicians. Wick 
 we can only trace to Vicus, the Roman name for a straight 
 collection of houses. How this little bit of philology may 
 affect my readers I know not. To me it has given a thrill of 
 pleasure to believe that we have evidence around us of 
 being really lineal descendants from some Tyrian colonists, 
 and that, after long years of inglorious repose, the spirit of 
 the old Phoenician has revived, to carry us onwards far 
 beyond the points they reached. 
 
 I will not, however, indulge this fancy now, as I hope 
 to enlarge upon this part of the subject in a subsequent 
 chapter. % 
 
 Another perplexity, and one far more difficult to avoid, in 
 the study of names, is the propensity to attribute all those 
 which have a similar sound or spelling to some common root, 
 to mistake a coincidence for a relationship, and to see in a 
 recently adopted or coined word the lurking of some grand 
 or ancient idea. This propensity has been happily hit off by 
 Shakspeare, who makes Pistol argue about the identity of 
 Monmouth and Macedon, as a river flows by each ; by Sir 
 Walter Scott, in The Antiquary; and by Dickens, in Pick¬ 
 wick, apropos of Bill Stumps his mark. 
 
25 
 
 We might naturally consider that it would be easy to 
 avoid failing into this error in every case, but I confess to 
 the belief that the most careful author is liable to it occa¬ 
 sionally. Where I can trace, over a large extent of time and 
 geographical space, a set of names so closely allied as Bury , 
 Berri, and Beeri, I feel on tolerably safe ground; and after 
 I have traced a number of others over the same track, I feel 
 emboldened to draw a deduction that others, which I cannot 
 trace by intermediate steps, may be equally closely related. 
 Thus, I may conclude that Ballapur, in Bengal and Madras, 
 owes its name to a similar source to which Ballyporeen in 
 Ireland does, after I have ascertained the readiness with 
 which kindred words may be traced along the course of the 
 Indo - Germanic migration, and yet the particular words 
 selected as typical of lineage may appear to be allied by the 
 merest chance, i. e., not really related at all. 
 
 Being conscious of all this, I have avoided, as far as 
 possible, using as the basis, or even the support, of an 
 argument or position, any word which I could not so fairly 
 trace as to take it out of the “ probable coincidence ” class. 
 Whether or not I succeed in my attempt time will show. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 Origin and meaning of the name of John. The proper pronunciation of the 
 English J. The meaning of Jonah. Mystical names assumed by prophets. 
 Connection between John and the Dove. Artistic ideas of John. John a 
 solar name — the ideas it involves. Joannes a compound word. Jao. Nature 
 of ancient faith. Oannes. Hoa and Anunit. John the Baptist—particulars 
 of his birth and parentage. Eli. Elias. Dionysus. Bacchus. Jacchus, 
 Jack, Jacques, or Jacob. Female ideas predominate over male in certain 
 forms of faith. 
 
 The name of John is not only a common and a favourite 
 appellative in England, but it is equally so all over the 
 world. A glance at Miss Yonge’s pages shows us the way 
 in which it is spelled in twenty-seven different languages, a 
 few of which I have already given. 
 
 In analysing the sound of these and other forms of the 
 word, we find two leading facts: first, that there is in one 
 form the simple syllable Yon —I scarcely need repeat that 
 the letter J has, or ought to have, the sound of Y;—this 
 is commonly pronounced sharply, but originally it had a 
 breathing sound after it, as in the word Jonah : secondly, 
 many of the forms have two elements in them — Jo or 
 To, and an. This is very distinctly seen in the Greek form 
 Tcoavvgj, in Joan and Johanna. 
 
 I propose to consider the word under both these forms. 
 
 The sound of Yon gives us the idea that it is identical 
 with Yonah, or Jonah of the Hebrews. Now the same 
 word means a dove, which bird was held in peculiar honour 
 amongst the Assyrians, Chaldseans, and Jews; the reason 
 we shall give in a subsequent chapter. The Yoni is an 
 Indian emblem, the meaning of which we must also post- 
 
27 
 
 pone, merely remarking, that there is a close connexion of 
 ideas between the words Jonah and Yoni. Knowing that 
 amongst ancient nations generally, and ahvays amongst 
 the Chaldaeans, names were given by the priesthood with 
 reference to some divine emblem or being, we can well 
 understand the use of the name Jonah amongst them, 
 and its being assumed by a prophet, who declares himself, 
 as it were, affiliated with the Almighty, and to be his 
 mouthpiece upon earth. 1 
 
 How closely the idea of the Dove is united to the word 
 John, we may see from the frequency with which both the 
 Baptist and the Evangelist of that name are accompanied 
 by the bird, in Roman Catholic countries and elsewhere, as 
 an emblem. I would also call attention to the way in which 
 St. John himself is pourtrayed. He, of all the Apostles, is 
 characterised as feminine in his appearance. The artist 
 loves to give to the favourite of our Lord all the physical 
 graces that adorn woman, with scarcely sufficient beard to 
 show that he is male. The devout equally love to dwell 
 upon the tender affection which breathes in all his writings, 
 and which, though so thoroughly contrary to the fierce 
 denunciations of a Boanerges, yet have the captivating 
 gentleness of a loving mother. 
 
 If we attempt to examine into the meaning of this sound, 
 Yon , we shall find ourselves in a maze of curious facts. The 
 learned Godfrey Higgins, who gives us a great deal upon 
 the subject, quoting from Jamieson’s Hermes Scythicus, 
 writes thus: 
 
 1 As far as I have been able to investigate the matter, I conclude that the names 
 of the prophets were invariably assumed by them. When they entered upon the 
 profession, they dropped their birth name, and adopted a sacred one, just as any 
 monk, nun, or preaching friar would do. This appellation affords us an idea of 
 the name of the God they professed adhesion to; e.g., Samuel is an adorer of El; 
 Isaiah and Jeremiah, of Jah ; Ezekiel adopts El ; Joel adopts both Jah and El; 
 Daniel’s God is El, the Judge; Iloshea’s God is the Saviour; Chenaanah adopts 
 Anu; Balaam, both Bel and Am. 
 
28 
 
 “ Vallency dit que Jonn etait le meme que Baal. En 
 Gallois Jon, ‘le Seigneur, ‘ Dieu,’ ‘ la cause premiere.’ En 
 Basque Janna, Jon, Jona, &c., ‘ Dieu et Seigneur Maitre.’ 
 Les Scandinaves appelaient le soleil John .... des Troyens 
 adoraient le meme astre sous le nom de Jona. En Persan 
 le soleil est appele Jaivnah. Tous ces noms ont un rapport 
 evident avec le Janus des Etrusques, que etait considere 
 comme le Dieu supreme. On pourrait encore rapprocher ces 
 denominations de P Arab Janab, ‘ majeste,’ et du Persan 
 Jauan, ‘ un chef.’ ” 2 The author calls attention, too, to the 
 fact that the Apostle Peter is spoken of as Bar Jonah, or the 
 son of Jonah , and the frequent connection there is between 
 Peter as a fisherman, and Peter as the door-keeper of heaven, 
 having the keys of the Janua. 
 
 We may still further extend our interest in the name 
 when we remember that amongst the Greeks and Romans 
 Juno was the spouse of the Almighty, the Maker of all 
 things, and the Queen of Heaven. 
 
 We find, then, that the word John combines the idea 
 of the sun, of the dove, and the tenderness of a loving 
 mother. 
 
 In the Sanscrit, Yauna, or Yoni + a, signifies “ uterine,’.’ 
 also “ nubile man ; ” and Yauvana, or Yauvan + a, signifies 
 “juvenile,” “manhood,” “puberty.” 
 
 We now proceed to inquire into the signification of the 
 two sounds, which we presume are elements in the Greek 
 form of the word T cootwsg, and in Joan, Johanna, &c. 
 
 The first I look upon as Jo or Jao, or Jah, and the 
 other Anna, Ana, Hannah, &c. Now, who or what were 
 these ? 
 
 It would not be profitable to reproduce here all the 
 arguments adduced by the ingenious Bishop of Natal, to 
 show the origin of the first name; hut I may say that 
 
 2 Anacalypsia , p. 650. 
 
29 
 
 I have satisfied myself, from a close examination of the 
 names current prior to David’s reign, and after it, that the 
 word Jah was introduced into Judaea by that king himself, 
 or by the prophet Nathan, after sojourning amongst the 
 Philistines and Phoenicians ; and that an old oracle of the 
 Clarian Apollo says that the names of Zeus, Aides, Helios, 
 Dionysus, and Jao represent the sun at different seasons. 
 Macrobius tells us that another oracle of Apollo says that 
 Jao is the greatest of all the gods; and he adds, that Jao 
 is the sun. 3 
 
 Jao , or Jah , is one of the appellations of God the 
 Father, and I must now, I think, anticipate a little of what 
 will come at greater length hereafter, and tell of the nature 
 of the ancient faith. 
 
 It may be described thus:—The world above, around, and 
 below us was made by an Almighty being, whose attributes 
 the human mind could not grasp, and to whom no substan¬ 
 tive name could be given, for a substantive name must imply 
 a person. He was, therefore, spoken of with reverence, 
 under names implying self-existence, as, “ I am,” “ He is,” 
 “ Supreme Wisdom,” &c. 
 
 No man ‘ could by searching ’ find Him out, but the 
 devout might hope to attain to some knowledge of Him by 
 studying His works. 
 
 Of all His works none were more glorious than the sun, 
 the moon, the stars, and the wandering planets : to study 
 their courses was to study the Almighty who created them. 
 As the knowledge of astronomy increased, the system of 
 
 8 Macrobius— Saturn ., i. 18. I Quote from Colenso, vol. 5, p, 805, and the 
 translation in preference to the Greek.—“Helios (the Sun), whom men surname 
 Dionysus; ” again, “ One Zeus, one Aides, one Helios, one Dionysus; ” and again, 
 “ It was right that those knowing should hide the ineffable orgies, for in a little 
 deceit there is prudence and an adroit mind. Explain that Jao is the most high 
 God of all — in winter Aides, and Zeus in commencing spring, and Helios in 
 summer, and at the end of Autumn the tender Jao.” 
 
30 
 
 thought was developed, and the sun in its various phases 
 was spoken of under different names ; e. g., Creator in spring, 
 Preserver in autumn, when it ripened fruit, Destroyer in 
 winter, when its face was hidden or modified by storms. 
 It was natural that the Almighty should be invoked against 
 enemies under His name of Destroyer, and under His name 
 Creator, or Preserver, by those who wished for offspring or 
 success in life. 
 
 With various names came the idea of person, and a 
 person, to human ideas, must have a sex. Observation told 
 men that the male was a finer animal than the female, hut 
 that both were necessary to reproduction. The sun, then, 
 darting his beams upon the earth, was said to be the male, 
 and the earth the female. That idea might suit terrestrial, 
 but not the celestial worlds. The fiction then was started 
 that the Almighty was both male and female. As it was 
 blasphemy to think that carnal connexion could take place, 
 the female idea was associated with Virginity.. 
 
 It is necessary to know thus much before proceeding to 
 the word Annes, or Oannes, The former we shall speak of 
 under the head Anna; the latter was a name given by 
 Sanchoniathon and Berosus to an Assyrian deity, who was 
 the teacher of mankind, and who was mystically united 
 w r ith the form of the sacred fish. Sardanapalus has epithets 
 given to him, in some Cuneiform inscriptions, of “ the Sen¬ 
 tient Guide,” “ the Intelligent Fish.” The Fish was a 
 female emblem. 
 
 Of the nature and meaning of the fish as an emblem I 
 shall treat hereafter, and here content myself with saying 
 that it is intimately associated with the worship of the 
 Divine Mother, or the Queen of Heaven. 
 
 We conclude, therefore, that the word Joannes has an 
 androgynous signification, and that it denotes the belief in 
 the Almighty as both our Father and our Mother. 
 
31 
 
 We now return to consider the writings of St. John the 
 Apostle, and the position of his predecessor, the Baptist. 
 Of the general tenour of the former’s writing I need say no 
 more than what I have already said, and will only refer 
 specially to the account which he gives of the vision he saw 
 and described in the Apocalypse. In the 13th verse of the 
 first chapter, he depicts the Son of man as having the paps of 
 a woman ; the words in the original being e^worpevov irpog roig 
 l^aa-Toig, the last being the same word as is used in the 
 passage, “ Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps 
 which thou has sucked.” The corresponding word used for 
 the small male breasts would have been j aaty~ig. It seems 
 very curious, at first sight, that the idea of androgynism 
 should ever have attached itself to Jesus Christ; still, that 
 it has done so, no one acquainted with the old Italian 
 paintings can doubt. 
 
 The Baptist was born of parents who had become 
 aged. His birth was foretold by an angel. His name was 
 dictated beforehand. His father was “ Zacharias,” or “ the 
 Watchful Sun.” His mother was “Elizabeth,” or “the 
 Temple of the Sun the Helper,” or “of Alitta; ” and 
 his mission was to be as “ Elias,” rjXiog, the Sun. The 
 name of the Angel was Gabriel, or “ the mouthpiece of the 
 Royal Sun.” We find our Lord saying of this John, that 
 he was the “Elias which was foretold.” We turn to the 
 prophecy, and find in the Septuagint version (Malachi iv. 5), 
 iyco onrogTeXXw v[jav 'Hxlotv tov ©£0-/3<tvjv, “I will send to you 
 Elias the Tishbite.” The name of that prophet was Elijah, 
 or “ El is Jah.” “ El” and “Ilos ” are both Shemitic names 
 for “ the Sun,” or God, and "HXiog, heelios, was “ the Sun ” 
 in Greek. 
 
 John, therefore, was the personification of the Sun’s 
 power on earth, the idea being the same as that expressed 
 
32 
 
 subsequently by the Samaritans in regard to Peter (Acts 
 viii. 10), “ This man is the great power of God.” 
 
 Though I am unable to say whether the Jews generally 
 associated the idea of the Godhead with the sun, I cannot 
 see how any of those who wrote or spoke in Greek could fail 
 to see the connexion. I may, in passing, express surprise 
 at the remarks made by the bystanders at our Saviour’s 
 dying cry, “Eli, Eli, lama sabacthani.” They said, “He 
 calleth upon Elias (’Hx/av); let be, and let us see whether 
 Elias (’Hx/aj) will come to help him.” I cannot help 
 thinking that the spectators believed that the sufferer invoked 
 the bright orb of day, in whose sight he endured such unde¬ 
 served anguish, to come and help him; and it is remarkable, 
 when we consider the great reverence in which the Jewish 
 nation held the name Jah, or Jehovah ,—a name which almost 
 entirely superseded El, or Elohim ,—that the word Eli should 
 have been selected by our Saviour. God never told the Jews 
 expressly that His name was Eli, but He did tell them — so 
 at least we read — that His name was Jehovah. That our 
 Lord selected the name known to Abraham (Eli) is pregnant 
 with significance, but it is beyond the scope of the present 
 chapter to follow the subject up. 
 
 Having come to the conclusion that John is an appellation 
 signifying “ The Androgynous Sun,” let us now examine one 
 of the other names which that luminary has obtained. 
 Dionysus is one of the names which was specially favoured 
 by the Greeks. I scarcely like to speculate upon the 
 meaning of the word, beyond expressing the suspicion that 
 it means “ The Divine On, the Saviour; ” 4 but we know that 
 another of his names was Bacchus. This, it will be seen, I 
 deduce from a Hebrew word, Pachaz, meaning “ to be jolly.” 
 Another name for the same deity was Jacchus, which I 
 take to be achaz, “ the one who conjoins,” and some- 
 
 4 See the word Dionysus and Bacchus, in the Vocabulary. 
 
83 
 
 what similar to Ahaz ; 6 or possibly it may be from another 
 word , V?' r yakosh, signifying “to ensnare.” But, whatever 
 its meaning, John was indentical with Elias, Helios with 
 Dionysus, Dionysus with Jacchus, from which legitimately 
 comes our Jack; and from the same derivation, we presume, 
 comes Jacques. 
 
 In continuation of the same subject we note the expres¬ 
 sion, “Every Jack has his Gill,” being a homely phrase for 
 every man is mated. Now, Gill was one of the many names 
 of the sun amongst the ancient races who used the Shemitic 
 language, and whom, for brevity’s sake, I propose to call 
 the Phens , being an abbreviation for Phoenicians. In the 
 Cuneiform we have it as Gull, or Gal; in Scotland it is Gill, 
 as in Gillian ; in France it is Guill, as in Guillaume. 
 
 Jacques or Jacob cannot, however, be traced with equal 
 facility to mean the sun. We hope to show by and by that 
 the word implies the feminine idea of the Creator, and that 
 James and John may be brothers in the same mystic sense 
 as are Esau and Jacob. While writing, I am struck with 
 many coincidences, which seem to show that what I am 
 now speaking of was familiar to the religious writers and 
 teachers in days long gone by. In the Old Testament, we 
 find Jacob preferred before Esau — the female idea before 
 the male—the one personifying gentleness and love, the 
 other turbulence and licentiousness. In the New Testament, 
 John is the “ beloved ” disciple, who outlives all the rest; 
 and in Roman Catholic countries, the worship of the 
 Mother—the Celestial Virgin—the Queen of Heaven, has 
 practically superseded that of “the Father” and of “the 
 Son.” The idea of love is more attractive than that of 
 power or vigour. 
 
 6 Compare -with Jachazi-al (Jahaziel in our version), and STltT Jachas-Jah 
 (Jahaziah of our version), but which literally means “ Jacchus is Jah,” the transla¬ 
 tion of the Hebrew being “Jah, the watcher.” 
 
 0 
 
34 
 
 Moreover, it will be remembered that the name of the 
 mother of John the Baptist was Elizabeth. This name I 
 proceeded to analyse in my Essay ; but if I were to follow 
 the same plan now, I should feel so strongly the incon¬ 
 venience of referring my readers constantly to something 
 yet to come, that it would be almost as intolerable to them 
 as to myself. 
 
 I must, therefore, suspend the consideration of any more 
 names until I have sketched the history and the mythology 
 of antiquity. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 A Leaf from the Books of Ancient History. The story of Columbus. Progress 
 of Spanish enterprise in America. Of England and Holland. The American 
 family — its unity all over the Western Continent — compared with Russia. 
 Progress of an English settlement in America—collision with natives—exten¬ 
 sion of territory. Sketch of the early Babylonians—their progress inland— 
 collision with natives. Phoenician enterprise—their colony at Sidon—spread 
 over the basin of the Mediterranean and along the shores of Europe — 
 influence of their language on natives—extent of their traffic. Abraham, a 
 Chaldee, travelling overland, comes into contact with the branch of the old 
 family who had travelled by sea—similarity of faith and language. Arian 
 influences evident in early Babylonia. Similarity of Hindoo and Chaldsean 
 ideas in matters of faith. Assumption of supernatural powers common to all 
 hierarchs. Modern history coloured by the prejudice of its writers — Ancient 
 history was no better. 
 
 It has been well remarked that “what is, hath already 
 been.” Believing in the saying, we look around us at the 
 present, as a prelude to an examination of the past. 
 
 Our libraries teem with books which tell us the stirring 
 story of the exploits of the great Columbus. They tell 
 how, barely four hundred years ago, he set sail in some 
 small barks, on an unknown sea, to search out an unheard- 
 of land. They tell us, too, of his arrival at the Western 
 shores, and how he found a primitive people, differing from 
 all the world besides. They tell us of scores and hundreds 
 of hardy adventurers who followed in his wake, and took 
 great towns, adorned with vast piles of cumbrous archi¬ 
 tecture ; how they went pushing on, over thousands of 
 obstacles, until they came to the Pacific Ocean, a sea 
 undreamed of; and how they established on its shores a 
 number of new towns, on the ruins of an ancient empire. 
 They tell us how those stubborn warriors took with them 
 
86 
 
 their own faith, and that fierce intolerance, which preferred 
 the destruction of those who differed from them in creed, 
 to permitting them to live in the faith of their ancestors. 
 
 A love of gold drove the Spaniard to this enterprise, 
 but in process of time religious dissensions in England 
 drove a colony of its sons to the Western world, where they 
 could indulge uninterruptedly the faith and the discipline 
 which were denied them in the Eastern world. A legitimate 
 love of trade and the spirit of enterprise multiplied expedi¬ 
 tions, and ere a century had elapsed there were vessels from 
 Spain and Portugal, Holland and England, to be met with 
 in every part of the world. Two hundred years have sufficed 
 for Britain to enable her to plant colonies in Canada on the 
 North and New Zealand on the South, Shanghai and India 
 in the East, and Australia and the Cape of Good Hope to 
 the South East. Her language is spoken over a continent 
 whose shores were unknown in 1496 a. d. ; and where the 
 Red-man roved and trapped, hunted and fought, farms and 
 factories, steamboats and warehouses, and all the para¬ 
 phernalia of peace and trade abound. But though the Indian 
 has well nigh disappeared from the lowlands, he still survives 
 in the highlands; and ere he departs, entirely, the philo¬ 
 sophers amongst his supplanters are. trying to rescue him, 
 his traditions, and his religions from entire oblivion. 
 Conspicuous amongst these is Mr. Squier, who has written 
 most ably on the subject. He tells us that, from North to 
 South, in every portion of the two vast continents of 
 America, the natives are of the same race, bearing the same 
 general features, having the same colour, varying only in 
 shades, and speaking a language common to all, distinct, it 
 may be, in detail, but not to a greater extent than the 
 Somersetshire differs from the Yorkshire dialect of England. 
 We turn thence to Russia, in Europe and Asia, and find 
 
87 
 
 the same tongue spoken in the far East and in the near 
 West, where civilisation has been hitherto unable to alter 
 it. The same may be said of the vast empire of China, and 
 to a certain extent of the great continent of Africa. 
 
 Before, however, going to the ancient times, let us 
 investigate our own more closely. When colonising any new 
 country, Australia for example, a maritime nation makes a 
 settlement on the coast, close by some eligible bay, or near 
 the mouth of a navigable river. That place, by whatever 
 name it may go, is strengthened by art, and furnished with 
 materials to stand a smart attack. It usually contains a 
 church, and slowly, if trade be prosperous, increases in bulk. 
 The jealousy of the natives rouses them to war with the 
 invader, and thus gives him a reason for extending the bounds 
 of his domain at the expense of the vanquished. With 
 increased prosperity comes increase of numbers, and the 
 intruder supersedes the aborigines. The natives are driven 
 farther and farther back from the settlements, until they 
 take their stand in some mountain land not worth fighting 
 for, and to which the colonist cares not to send an army. 
 Few are the Red-men now to be found on the plains 
 of Eastern North America, but they still exist as a miserable 
 remnant in and beyond the Rocky Mountains. 
 
 Three hundred years have sufficed to effect this change ; 
 and when we compare the size of Great Britain on the map 
 with the extent of country more or less dependent upon, 
 affiliated with, or proceeding from her, we feel a pardonable 
 pride in the enterprise of our nation. 
 
 Let us now turn to remote antiquity. 
 
 Some four thousand and three hundred years ago there 
 was a maritime nation, as adventurous as the Spanish, and 
 equally religious, (i. e., possessing as firm a belief in the 
 sanctity of the faith which it had been taught,) which 
 planted a colony near the mouth of the Euphrates. 
 
38 
 
 Whence that people came, whether from the East, or from 
 the West, North, or South, we cannot divine. All that we 
 know is, that they had certain of the arts of civilisation: 
 they had the power of writing, and of course of reading too, 
 and they used characters which, in their style, remind us of 
 the Chinese method of expressing ideas and sounds, by 
 the arrangement of lines. The people were devout, had a 
 somewhat elaborate theological system, knew something of 
 astronomy, and their kings, influenced by the priests, built 
 temples to the planets and “ the greater Gods.” The settle¬ 
 ment was surrounded by tribes who spoke a different 
 language to that of the maritime people, but who were 
 sufficiently friendly to hold intercourse with them, to such 
 an extent as to influence somewhat the language of the new 
 comers, and possibly to modify or extend their religious faith 
 and the number or names of the deities. These natives 
 seem to have spread over a wide space of country, if they 
 did not extend over the whole continent of Asia and of 
 Europe, as the Red-Indians did over America when the 
 white man invaded it. Either in consequence of increase 
 of trade, fecundity, or of fresh importations from the mother 
 country, the colonists multiplied, aijd gradually spread 
 upwards, along the course of the Euphrates and the Tigris, 
 absorbing in their march the original inhabitants, or driving 
 them away before them. 
 
 Though a nation, they do not seem to have had any very 
 close cohesion together, and each large town appears to have 
 possessed a separate king. Things apparently went on 
 smoothly with them till their settlements touched upon the 
 mountains to the East and North; they then came into 
 frequent and hostile collision with their predecessors in the 
 soil, and were sometimes so signally defeated, that the rulers 
 of the people were not of their own blood. 
 
 But the colonists had also quarrels amongst themselves: 
 Babylon and Nineveh were in turn conquerors and con- 
 
39 
 
 quered; just as we have seen the Northern fighting with 
 the Southern States of America. The nation was more 
 trading than pastoral, and the records, which have been 
 rummaged out of its ancient archives, tell of busy traffic, 
 and of merchants whose country was Egypt, Tyre, Pales¬ 
 tine, &c., resident in their towns. 
 
 To the people whom we have described the names of 
 Chaldaeans, Babylonians and Assyrians have been given. 
 
 Leaving them for the present, we return to their 
 brethren. They had a settlement on the Persian Gulf, 
 which, not being suitable for them, they abandoned, and 
 went up the Bed Sea. With bold enterprise, they crossed 
 the Isthmus of Suez, and finding a new and unknown sea, 
 of apparently vast magnitude, they settled on an appropriate 
 part of its shores. I cannot find any evidence of an abori¬ 
 ginal stock here, nor do the emigrants appear to have met 
 with any opposition. They scattered widely, and peopled 
 the whole of Palestine, and were known as Phoenicians, 
 Canaanites, &c. 
 
 From their seats in Tyre and Sidon they traded with all 
 the known world: they brought curiosities from China, 1 
 ivory, apes, and peacocks from Ceylon; elephants, gold, 
 spices, and precious stones from India. They once circum¬ 
 navigated Africa, and traded largely on its Western shores, 
 most probably for slaves, which they paid for in gold made 
 in a peculiar form, and of some curious alloy not yet 
 discovered. 
 
 A colony from the mother country built Utica and 
 Carthage in North Africa, and they made settlements in all 
 the islands of the Mediterranean, and along its northern 
 
 1 Fortune found ancient Egyptian curiosities in virtu shops in China, and 
 Chinese curiosities have been found in ancient Egyptian tombs. Antique Chinese 
 seals have been dug up in Ireland, some 17 feet below the surface, and the Ancient 
 Ring money found in the bogs of the Green Isle is identical with that used still 
 as coin in Africa. 
 
40 
 
 banks. The nation extended its commerce around the shores 
 of France and Spain, Holland and Scandinavia, even 
 reaching as far as Iceland. It traded largely with, if it 
 did not colonise, our own group of islands, and with its 
 ships it brought its religion, faith, and customs. Where- 
 ever it landed its sons, they found a race allied to that with 
 which the Chaldaean settlers came into contact, and by the 
 influence of communion of interests, or trade, there would be 
 a considerable fusion in their respective languages. The 
 maritime nation would pick up much from the nomade, and 
 the latter would get more from the sea rovers; and, conse¬ 
 quently, we should expect, wherever the two met, a mingling 
 of tongues, a sort of ancient lingua Franca, similar to that 
 existing in the Mediterranean of to-day. On the sea coast 
 the maritime element would be the strongest, while in the 
 interior little of it would be known. England, originally 
 colonised largely by this nation, has since been invaded by 
 other maritime people, but all, having had in themselves a 
 strong infusion of the old Phoenician blood, have not materi¬ 
 ally modified British nomenclature. 
 
 To this offset of the old stock the name of Phoenicians 
 has been given in modern books. 
 
 They had a written language, differing from that in use 
 in Chaldsea, and their alphabet became the model after which 
 the Greek, the Hebrew, and, subsequently, the Roman one 
 was formed. 
 
 Since England has spread her fame and her language 
 round the world in three centuries, it is not too much to 
 suppose that the Phoenicians might have done the same 
 in two thousand years. 
 
 Let us now examine another phase of the story. We 
 have a book of ancient date which tells us that, so far as we 
 can judge, some six hundred years after the first settlement 
 
41 
 
 in Chaldaea, one of its inhabitants joined his father, 2 wife, 
 and other kindred, to emigrate to a distant land. Having 
 travelled along the Euphrates for a distance, they turned 
 towards Palestine, where the traders had doubtless told them 
 that there was room for emigrants in plenty. The father 
 died by the way, the rest proceeded. On their arrival, they 
 found cities of greater or lesser magnitude, and kings and 
 priests whose God, faith, religion, and language were the 
 same as their own. There may, however, have been some 
 trifling difference in ritual, or other littleness, which is 
 even yet thought of so much importance as to lead to the 
 estrangement of friends; seeing that w T hen the Chaldsean 
 sought a wife for his son, he sent to his own country, 
 that his offspring might have a consort accustomed to the 
 old orthodox faith and practice. 
 
 As this Abraham is spoken of especially as “ the friend 
 of God,” and as he sent to Babylonia to get a wife for his 
 devout son, it is tolerably clear that the religion of Chaldaea, 
 or at any rate of Ur of the Chaldees, was conformable 
 to the will of the Being whom Abraham adored. Now it is 
 equally clear that Rebecca, like Abraham, preferred for her 
 favourite son, the God-chosen of the twins, a wife imbued 
 with Chaldaeanism to one belonging to Palestine. We 
 conclude, therefore, that the faith of the early patriarchs was 
 the same which was held and taught in the old country of 
 Babylonia. 
 
 The examination of that faith we must postpone to a 
 subsequent chapter. 
 
 The careful reader of the ancient story cannot fail to be 
 struck with the fact, that the Babylonian patriarch spoke 
 
 2 “ And Terah took Abram his son. and Lot the son of Haran, his son’s son, 
 and Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son Abram’s wife ; and they went forth with 
 them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan ; and they came unto 
 Haran, and dwelt there.And Terah died in Haran.”—Gen. xi. 31, 32. 
 
42 
 
 familiarly with kings, priests, and peoples in Palestine 
 without the intervention of an interpreter. We have a 
 graphic description of his bargaining with the children of 
 the land for a possession wherein he could bury his wife. 
 The chieftains of town and country, Ephron and Abraham, 
 Lot and the Sodomite, spoke together with facility, and 
 each interlocutor appealed in a common tongue, to a common 
 God, of whom Melchizedek, a Canaanite, was priest. 
 
 That an interpreter was not required we infer from our 
 having been told that such an officer was necessary between 
 the Hebrews and the Egyptians. The mention of this fact 
 at one time, and not at another, shows that the historian 
 paid attention to such points. We, therefore, conclude that, 
 when not specified, interpreters were unnecessary. 
 
 We observe subsequently that the Israelitish spies, who 
 continued to talk their own tongue, notwithstanding their 
 long sojourn in Egypt, could converse with the harlot Kahab 
 as freely as with their own countrymen; and that the 
 Gibeonites of old could talk to Joshua with the ease of 
 brother Germans of to-day. David, too, consorts easily with 
 the Philistines, without the aid of an interpreter; and 
 Hiram, his friend, sends a congratulatory message to 
 Solomon, the text of which is retained in sacred history. 
 
 The ancient Hebrew alphabet is almost identical with the 
 Phoenician ; and there is -a very close resemblance between 
 the words discovered in Assyrian, Chaldsean, and Tyrian 
 inscriptions and writings, and those current in Hebrew. 
 
 Now, the first three languages have all but perished ; 
 the Hebrew, whether it be really of the Jewish, or later 
 Chaldee family, remains an almost spoken tongue at the 
 present moment. We consider, then, that we may appeal to 
 it to explain many words in the Phoenician or Assyrian 
 language, using only such license as we are justified in, by 
 
43 
 
 noting the variety of dialects in Greece and England, Italy, 
 and Spain. 
 
 If we give any credence to the preceding sketch, which 
 is certainly not drawn from fancy, hut is the result of much 
 reading and thought, we can see that Hebrew is of importance 
 in the explanation of many words which are supposed to be 
 of Phoenician origin. 
 
 The Chaldees, Assyrians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, &c., are 
 called “ the Shemitic group: ” they are distantly allied to 
 the Arian group, having had a common ancestor. 
 
 To prevent the unity of my design being interfered with, 
 I have thought it unnecessary to introduce into this history 
 any speculations upon the Arian, Turanian, or Indo-Euro¬ 
 pean races. We must, however, say a few words respecting 
 the first, to enable the reader to understand the frequent 
 references which will be made to Hindoo mythology. 
 Sir Henry Rawlinson informs us that it is certain that a 
 strong Arian element is to be detected in the earliest Baby¬ 
 lonian records, about 2400 b. c. 3 We find elsewhere that 
 there is strong reason to believe that the old Vedic or Hindoo 
 mythology is of Arian origin ; at what period of time it is 
 unnecessary to inquire. If, as we shall show, there is a 
 great resemblance between the Phen and the Hindoo faith, 
 it does not therefore follow that the one has been a copy of 
 the other, but that both may have had a common origin; 
 and if so, we may fairly use the one to assist in the 
 explanation of the other, and argue from the known to that 
 which is somewhat doubtful. 
 
 One thing, however, is clear, namely, that there is little 
 resemblance between the names of the Hindoo and Chaldee 
 deities, though there is considerable affinity in idea. Some 
 few words, however, must be excepted, to which we shall 
 
 3 See Rawlinson’s Herodotus, vol. 1. page 510, note 1; also, Journal of Royal 
 Asiatic Society , vol. 1, New Series, p. 230, note 4. 
 
44 
 
 refer at length by and bye. I am quite alive to the fact that 
 the human mind will form the same conceptions about the 
 Creator, and His will towards us, in one place as in another; 
 and so similar may be the religions resulting therefrom, 
 that they may seem to he cognate, and yet not he related 
 at all. This fact does not influence my argument in the 
 smallest degree, for it is clear, in the case of similarity of 
 mythology, religion, or faith, either that the system has been 
 founded on direct revelation from the Almighty, or that it 
 has emanated from men who, having the same premises to 
 argue from, and all possessing a human mind, have naturally 
 fallen into the same, or very similar, trains of thought. If 
 a religion, said to be God-given, resemble in all important 
 points another of human origin, the philosopher may doubt 
 whether the first has really a claim to the title it assumes, 
 or whether the latter is not unduly depreciated. Similarity 
 in worship indicates a common idea on religious points, 
 which has been given either by revelation to all alike, or 
 been drawn by men from a common source. 
 
 If the philosopher wish to ascertain the amount of the 
 divine or the human element, he will carefully abstain from 
 using a different standard for different nations. He will not 
 believe a priest or prophet on his own ipse dixit, because 
 he is of one nation, and discredit all others with equal 
 pretensions, because they speak another language, and belong 
 to a different nation. 
 
 I know no people whose priests, oracles, sibyls, pytho¬ 
 nesses, &c., have not assumed to be of divine origin, and 
 to have supernatural powers; nor do I know a religion 
 whose promulgators have not attempted to bolster *t up 
 by the use of miracles, and in some instances by fabricated 
 documents. Even with the care of the modern historian, 
 there are to this day two sets of English histories, and 
 Henry the Eighth, Mary and Elizabeth, Cromwell and 
 
45 
 
 Charles the First, are alternately painted as good or 
 bad according to the predilections of the writer towards 
 Eomanism or its opponent creed. As it is at present it 
 doubtless always has been. 
 
 We will now attempt, as impartially as we are able, 
 to draw a sketch of the Keligion of the Early Babylonians. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 The Religion of early Chaldsea. The Sacerdotal profession exists in every nation— 
 how established—terror a powerful agent—transmission of religious power— 
 in families, schools, or colleges. History falsified. The Philosopher’s idea of 
 the Almighty sketched, contrasted with the idea of ancient hierarchs. The 
 Mosaic, Mahometan and Mormon codes of law compared with each other and 
 the Papal code. Ancient Gods of Babylonia—Gingei, Guthiber, Mir-mir and 
 Hubishaga—signification of their names—development of Chaldee theology. 
 
 From the earliest ages known, to the present day, amongst 
 the most savage heathen and the most polished Christian 
 nations, there has been, and always will be, a set of 
 men who assume to have some peculiar, mysterious, God- 
 given power. Amongst barbarous nations this power is 
 gained by sleight of hand, natural magic, or some combi¬ 
 nation with a confederate, which enables the acute trickster 
 to triumph over the careless mind. Even to this day 
 has come down the annual juggle, at Naples, of the lique¬ 
 faction of St. Januarius’ blood. Here let me note, in 
 passing, that fear of the supernatural is not confined to 
 the human race. Hogs, bears, tigers and other fierce 
 animals are cowed by a heavy thunderstorm; the watch-dog 
 will not bark at a naked thief; and the horse will go wild with 
 terror at the rattling of a chain. It very rarely can “ pay ” 
 any one to take the trouble to work upon this feeling in 
 quadrupeds, but there is much encouragement to do so with 
 man, where immunity from manufactured terrors may be 
 bought by an offering to him that produces them. The 
 more the thinking faculties of man remain undeveloped, the 
 greater is his fear of the supernatural, the stronger is 
 
47 
 
 his belief in the power of the priest 1 to procure good 
 and avert evil; the more profound is his faith in religious 
 dogma, and the greater is his trust in agencies wielded 
 by the hierarchy. The child who shuns “ Old Bogy ” in the 
 dark, because a lad like himself has told him that such a 
 thing haunts cellars, will, if he exercise not his reason, 
 believe, as a man, in “ Old Scratch,” with a long tail 
 nicely barbed at the end, who amuses himself with pitching 
 those who do not pay the priest for hush money, from a 
 bed of burning brimstone to another of eternal ice. 
 
 Faith and superstition always go hand in hand, for 
 “ faith ” means simply credence in that which you are 
 told by somebody else to believe ; and superstition is acting 
 upon and clinging to that faith to the exclusion of reason. 
 We have been taught implicitly to believe what our fathers 
 did, and must therefore not abuse the heathen or the 
 Chaldee for crediting what their fathers told them. 
 
 How large a portion of the religion of Babylon has 
 come down to us, we shall have frequent occasion to show . 2 
 
 The priest who assumes to possess superior power, avers 
 that it comes to him from on high, or that he is the 
 personification on earth of the Creator in heaven. We have in 
 Lucian’s story of Alexander, the false prophet, an interesting 
 account of the details by which this belief may be instilled 
 into the mind of the commonalty. Those whose memories 
 are good, and their reason clear, need not, however, go farther 
 back than to the “ seances ” given by Davenport brothers and 
 sundry other “ spiritualists ” amongst ourselves, who assume 
 to be media by which the living can converse with the dead. 
 
 Sometimes the supernatural power is said to be imparted 
 
 1 1 use this word as I would that of Physician—the name of Priest to include all 
 whose profession it is to influence the mind religiously, the name of Doctor to 
 embrace those who endeavour to influence the body when diseased. 
 
 2 For much information on this head, see Hyslop’s Two Babylons, 3rd edition. 
 
48 
 
 by the parent, himself supernatural, before birth ; 3 and it 
 remains through life. Sometimes it runs in the family, as 
 did “ second sight ” in Scotland; sometimes it comes on 
 with fits , as in the Sibyls and Pythonesses of old, and 
 the dancing Dervishes of to-day. Sometimes, nay very 
 frequently in the East, it is an appanage of insanity; nor 
 can the educated physician wonder at this, for none are so 
 earnestly religious, so fanatically enthusiatic, and so replete 
 with visions, and direct communications from on high, as 
 the religious monomaniac, of whom we believe Swedenborg 
 and Irving to have been apt illustrations. 
 
 Sometimes the power descends through schools and 
 colleges, and a man is taught to wield the prong of the devil’s 
 tail, as easily as the lawyer is taught to draw a brief, or the 
 doctor to amputate a limb. 
 
 But by whatever method the supernatural power is 
 assumed, its wielder is always certain to be cross-examined 
 as to the individual who grants the power. Moses was quite 
 conscious of this, when he asked Him in the burning bush, 
 what he should answer to those demanding the name of 
 the God who gave His commission to lead them. In 
 answering the question put to him, the priest will naturally 
 give his own construction of the character, style, and title of 
 the Almighty. By lapse of time, and the acquiescence of 
 sons in their fathers’ judgment, or by the descent of the 
 writings of some distinguished hierarch, the description 
 becomes more or less uniform. Yet even in our own day, 
 with scriptures of venerable antiquity, our God is described 
 as loving, merciful, just, revengeful, taking vengeance on 
 them that know Him not, &c., punishing children unto the 
 third or fourth generation of those that hate Him, or damning 
 for ever those who whistle on Sunday, but looking leniently 
 
 3 For an account of which, see “ The Prophecy ” in The Lady of the Lake —“ Of 
 Brian’s birth strange tales were told,” &c. 
 
49 
 
 on those who tipple whiskey on the same day to enable them 
 to sit devoutely still, according to the peculiar views of the 
 exponents of “ the word.” 
 
 Before we describe the ideas held by other people 
 respecting the Almighty, it will be well if we endeavour to 
 form some conception of the Deity for ourselves. 
 
 Let any one go out on a calm evening, and contemplate 
 the heavens ; 4 let him think of the vast distance of the fixed 
 stars from us, and from each other; and then let him try 
 to imagine a limit to the space before and around him ; 
 he will be baffled; yet he feels that the Maker of them 
 pervades all. 
 
 Let him again take up a drop of dirty water, and examine 
 the various forms of life which it contains, all beautiful, 
 finished on an exquisite design, and in their way enjoying 
 life. Through the means of the microscope he will become 
 familiar with thousands of details which tell of creative 
 power, but which no mortal eye can view, if unaided by 
 glasses that few can afford to buy. Leaving the micro¬ 
 scope, let us allow our thoughts to roam over the myriad 
 forms of life to be seen in the air, the water, and on land; 
 over the lovely flowers and luscious fruits, which gladden 
 the eye and charm the palate; then turn to spring-time 
 and harvest, blighting heat and killing frost; to the fruitful 
 field laid low by the dread hail-shower, and herds and 
 shepherds destroyed by the thunder-bolt. 
 
 We shall observe that certain animals are made to eat 
 grass; that the carnivorous, again, are made to eat the 
 graminivorous; and that provision is made for the greatest 
 amount of enjoyment in every animal compatible with its 
 powers. The sickly hare, the feeble rabbit, and the 
 diseased rat fall victims to death sooner than the aching 
 man, who strives to prolong a painful and pleasureless 
 
 4 Compare Psalm viii. 3. 
 
50 
 
 existence. We see that, throughout the organic creation, 
 means are ever contrived to bring forward new beings as 
 the old die off; and he must be blind who does not 
 perceive that the primary part of that duty devolves upon 
 the male, who experiences fierce pleasure in the performance 
 of his task, and that the labour is preeminently one of love. 
 
 In farther contemplation, the mind recognises its supe¬ 
 riority, or the reverse, to others with which it measures 
 itself; it recognises a similar disparity in bodily strength and 
 constitutional vigour. In fine, we begin, detail by detail, to 
 see and feel that the Universal Maker does everything that 
 He 5 sees fit: that everything is perfect in its kind—that 
 everything has its appointed place in the economy of the 
 world; and we feel that He is every where present, making, 
 and ruling, and governing all things. Of all His apparent 
 works, the sun and moon seem the greatest, but that is only 
 because we are nearer to them than we are to the more distant 
 stars. As the greatest of His works, we may in a thoughtful 
 mood apostrophise them; hut we know that God is in every 
 part of our body as much as He pervades the sun. To such 
 a being we are always presept—nor could we, if we wished, 
 reach him better through the intervention of another mortal 
 than by the secret utterance of our own thoughts. That 
 * presence ’ knows what I now write, as it will know the 
 thoughts of him who reads. For such an one my reverence 
 is profound . 6 
 
 Admitting this conception, necessarily imperfect, of the 
 God recognised by a Christian philosopher, let us now 
 examine the idea presented by priests, to common mortals, 
 in ancient, and partly in modern times. 
 
 Few systems of theology have been completed at once. 
 
 6 I say He from habit, and to save circumlocution, but, respecting such a 
 being, it is impossible to form an idea of he, she, or it. 
 
 6 Compare Psalm cxxxix., also Pliny’s Natural History, b. ii., c. 5-7. 
 
51 
 
 The Mosaic law, given as we are told directly by the 
 Almighty, was not consummated till the death of the 
 great lawgiver. Questions were constantly arising which 
 required continual recourse to revelations, and the code was 
 perfected through the gradual recognition of the failures of 
 the first draft. It is precisely the same with the Maho¬ 
 metan law; and with that which is still being developed 
 amongst the Mormons ; and I need hardly tell the educated 
 Englishman how the system of Popery, current in the 
 greater part of Europe, has required centuries to attain its 
 present dimensions. The careful historian can give the 
 date of the introducticm of each new dogma, which, when 
 once introduced by authority, became an article of faith. 
 The last new doctrines, the Immaculate Conception and 
 Papal Infallibility, are quite modern. 
 
 The Chaldee mythology was no exception to this rule. At 
 first there was no very clear conception framed of the nature 
 of the Creator. When the priests were asked by their 
 votaries, “ who He was, whence He came,” &c., they 
 answered with stories such as I remember to have been 
 told to me, when, as a child, I asked, whence the little 
 babies came, which we found in the nurse’s arms on our 
 return from some unusual walk. 
 
 Rawlinson tells us that he reads the names given to the 
 Proto-Chaldaean gods as follows :— 
 
 Gingir—who was subsequently replaced by Ishtar. 
 
 Guthiber—equivalent to the later Merodach. 
 
 Mir Mir—the god of the air. 
 
 Hubishaga—the same as Cronos, or Time . 7 
 
 If we attempt to analyse these words, we find that Jan in 
 the Aryan tongue is a woman , and the compounds of the 
 word are all connected with generation and parturition. Gin 
 is a wife, or woman, in Australia; yuvq ( gune ) is a woman 
 
 7 See Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , vol. 1, New Series, page 231, note. 
 
52 
 
 in Greek; regina, or female king, is a Latin word; !■! (gan) 
 is a garden in Hebrew, also a chaste woman; 8 '*13 guni, is 
 “ painted with colours,” as women used to be, and still 
 often are; and Gane sa is a Hindoo deity. 
 
 In Hebrew, “ ,!,a gur i has, amongst other meanings, that of 
 suckling; gir, is “ swelling up like lime does; ” and 
 garah, is “ to be hot,” “jealous,” or “ active.” 
 
 I conclude, then, that the word “ Gingir ” may mean 
 “ the nursing mother,” which answers precisely to the 
 Hebrew word Shaddai . 9 
 
 8 Compare Song of Solomon iv. 12—“ A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse, 
 a spring shut up, a fountain sealed;” upon which Ginsburg’s note is as follows :— 
 “ The trees of Lebanon referred to at the end of the last verse suggested this 
 beautiful metaphor of a garden, under which the shepherd describes the un¬ 
 sullied purity and chastity of the Shulamite. Gardens in the East were generally 
 hedged or walled in, to prevent the intrusion of strangers. (Isa. v. 5; Joseph. 
 de Bell. Jud. v ii.) From this arose the epithet of ‘closed garden,’ for a virtuous 
 woman shut up against every attempt to alienate her affection. The contrary 
 figure is used in viii. 9; there accessibility is described as a door, i. e., open 
 to seduction. A ‘ sealed fountain ’ is another metaphor to express the same 
 idea. The scarcity of water in arid countries renders fountains very valuable. 
 To secure them against the encroachment of strangers, the proprietors formerly 
 fastened their fountains with some ligament, and the impression of a seal upon 
 clay, which would quickly harden in the sun, that would soon dissolve wax. 
 This mode of rendering pits safe is found in Dan. vi. 18-; Matt, xxvii. 66. A 
 fountain, sealed in this manner, indicated that it was private property. Hence its 
 metaphorical use to represent chastity as an inaccessible fountain.” (Song of 
 Songs, with a Historical and Critical Commentary, by Christian D. Ginsburg, 
 p. 160; Longmans, 1857.) 
 
 9 rnttj Shadah. signifies “to shoot,” “to pour oht; ” “a teat;” as Shidah, it 
 signifies “the Lady,” “the Princess,” “the Mistress,” equivalent in the feminine 
 to Baal in the masculine; also “ Spouse,” “ Wife.” 
 
 "nij Shad, signifies “ the breast ” or “ pap,” and ’TO signifies “ my breast,” and. 
 figuratively, “ my mother.” 
 
 'TO Saddai, signifies “ a field,” an euphemism for a female ; and Shaddai, 
 signifies “the most powerful,” “the Almighty.” 
 
58 
 
 Figure 1. 
 
 Figure 1.—The woodcut represents Isis and Horus, and is an apt illustration of 
 the “ nursing mother.” It has, however, much interest on other accounts. 
 The shape of the “glory,” proceeding from the bodies, resembles the Assyrian 
 “ grove,” snd pourtrays to the initiated the door through which all living 
 beings pass into life. The flowers are those of the ciborium , or Egyptian 
 bean, and represent both a bell and a teat. Bells were much used in 
 old rituals. Aaron wore on his priestly garment a fringe of “bells and 
 pomegranates” (Exod. xxviii. 34). The latter (Rimmon) symbolises the full 
 womb, the former by their shape remind us of the mamma, which is supple¬ 
 mental to the uterus. Diana of the Ephesians, and the Indian Bhavani, 
 have their statues covered with paps, indicating that teeming nature has 
 nourishment for abundance of offspring. The matured fruit of the ciborium 
 is somewhat like the male organ, and we are told by Herodotus (b. 2, c. 37), 
 that the Egyptian priests would not even look upon the legume, since it was 
 considered impure. 
 
 The bells in the woodcut have an especial interest when we consider one of their 
 uses in Oriental countries. No greater reproach can be cast upon a woman, 
 than that she has carried into married life the evidence of precedent impurity. 
 Those who are familiar with the Mosaic law will remember the stress laid upon 
 “ the tokens of virginity,” and the importance which the mother attached to 
 being able to produce them for her daughter (Deut. xxii. 13-21). 
 
 There is a belief, that what physiologists call “ the hymen ” may be destroyed by 
 such an accident as too long a stride in walking, running, or stepping over a 
 stile, or by a single jump. To prevent the possibility of such an occurrence, 
 and the casualty which it involves, all maidens have their dress furnished with 
 a light cord or chain about the level of the knees. This enables them to take 
 short paces, but not to “ straddle ” over anything. To make the fetter as 
 ornamental as possible, the ligature is furnished with bells. This custom is 
 referred to in the sentence, “ Moreover, because the daughters of Zion are 
 haughty .... walking and mincing (or tripping nicely) as they go, and 
 making a tinkling with their feet” (Isa. iii. 16-18). The custom also prevailed 
 in ancient Arabia, as is evident from Mohammed's injunction in the Koran , 
 
54 
 
 “ Let them (i. e. the women) not make a noise with their feet, that the 
 ornaments they hide may thereby not he discovered.” (Sale’s Koran , ch. xxiv.; 
 see the note.) 
 
 When marriage is consummated there is no occasion for the use of the jingling 
 chain. “ To bear away the hell,” therefore, is equivalent to “taking a virgin 
 to wife.” In Pompeii and Herculaneum, where paintings still tell us of 
 the inner life of Italian and Grecian cities, a vast number of bronzes and 
 pictures have been found, in which the phallus is adorned with one or more 
 bells. The intention is clearly to show that, like Solomon, it had many 
 wives, all of whom brought with them the tokens of virginity. 
 
 To surround, therefore, “ the nursing mother ” with bells, is to indicate that she is 
 still a virgin, and we recognise in the picture the same dogma which is still 
 current in many parts of Christendom, viz., that the celestial mother is, and 
 always has been, virgo Intacta. Whatever may he the value of the doctrine 
 amongst modern theologians, it is clear that it was held in equal reverence by 
 the Egyptians, the Assyrians, and the Hindoos. 
 
 Upon the head of Isis are placed horns, as of a cow, with a globe, apparently 
 the sun, between them ; but possibly the sphere denotes the planet Yenus, that 
 goddess being sometimes symbolised by a globe placed between the sun and 
 moon. We know that the same divinity is also depicted as a cow, giving suck 
 to her calf. The idea veiled under the symbol is given by iElian (de Natur. 
 Animat., X. 27, thus, Kcop/»} AlyvmLa Xoucrai to ovopa, reAet 8e eg tov 'Epp.oi/7roA.iTj)v 
 vopov, Kai fjuKpa, (lev SoKei xapiWcra piqv—ev rav-nj crefiovcriv ’A^pofiinjv Ovpavtav av-rqv 
 Kakovvreg. Tipwcri 8e Kai 6rj\eiav fiovv, Kai tt)v oXtCov e/ceiVjjv \eyov<n, ireiri<TTev- 
 Ka<nv ainag npotrqKeiv rrjSe rrj SaCpovi. UroCav yap eig a<f>po8i<na iaxvpav ex et /3o0s 
 0-tjkvg, Kai opya tov dppevog paWov aKOvaacra yovv tov pvKrjpaTog eig ttjv p.t£iv 
 Oepporara e^rji/e'/acorat Kai eKne<pkeKTai’ Kai oi Tavra ye (rvvSeiv Seivoi Kai aTro TpiaKOvra' 
 aTaSuov aKOvetv Tavpov f3ovv, epuiTiKOv <ruvOn)p.a Kai a<f>poSicrtov p.vK(vp.evov, <t>aal ; Kai 
 avrqv 8e ttjv ’Iaiv Alyvimoi. fiovKepiov Kai nka< ttov<ti Kai ypa^ovcrt ; which may 
 thus be rendered into English : — There is a place in Egypt called Chusea; 
 it belongs to the Hermopolitan nomos, and though small is very attractive. 
 The Aphrodite is worshipped in it under the name of Urania. The people also 
 worship a cow, and state, as a reason for their faith, that cows belong to this 
 divinity. For the cow has an intense burning for copulation, and longs more 
 for it than the male, so much so that when she hears the bellowing of the 
 bull she becomes exceedingly excited and inflamed. Indeed, those who are 
 acquainted with the subject aver that when the bull indicates the sign of life 
 by his bellowing, the cow hears it at the distance of thirty stadia. The Isis 
 herself, however, the Egyptians depict with horns like a cow. For further 
 remarks upon this subject, vide infra , s. v. Athok, Caleb. 
 
 The figure before us forms a sort of introduction to the import of many of the 
 mysteries which we have to unfold. It is copied from a copper vase, covered 
 with symbols, found near Cairo. The original is to be seen in a book 
 entitled Explication de divers monumens singuliers qui ont rapport d la 
 religion des plus anciens peuples, par le It. P. Dom Martin, a Paris, 1739. 
 
 Guthiber has probably the same origin as the word Gath , 
 viz., “ a wine-press,” “ the place where grapes are 
 trodden; ” it has also a hidden meaning, referring 
 
55 
 
 to the female door of increase. The addition of 
 abar, “ to pass over,” which also signifies “ to impreg¬ 
 nate,” or “ to cover,” leads to the belief that the name 
 is equivalent to “Ceres,” “the female Creator.” Abr, 
 in the Babylonian, meant “ strengthening; ” Heb. 
 abar, “strong,” “to mount upwards;” the word may 
 then mean “ The mother who gives strength,” or, 
 “ quae facit arrigere concha.” 
 
 Hubishaga means probably “ the being whose paternity, 
 or generation, is not known; ” from N? 1 ? Haba, “ to 
 lie hid,” and Shagah, “to be great,” or ^ Shagal, 
 “to copulate.” In the Cuneiform, Shaga is “holy.” 10 
 The god was equivalent to Chronos, or Time, 11 and it may 
 be that the real meaning was “ The Great Unknown.” 
 
 Mir Mir is, I conclude, one of the prototypes of Myrrha, 
 Miriam, or Mary, and means “ The Celestial Virgin.” 12 
 
 10 The connection between the three words in the text opens to our view a 
 strange chapter of human life. To us it is inconceivable that the indulgence of 
 ‘ passion ’ could be associated with religion, hut so it was. The words expressive 
 of “ Sanctuary,” “consecrated,” and “ Sodomite,” are in the Hebrew essentially the 
 same. It is amongst the Hindoos of to-day, as it was in the Greece and Italy of 
 classic times ; and we find that “ holy women ” is a title given to those who devote 
 their bodies to be used for hire, which goes to the service of the temple. The word 
 Shagal , current in the early Jewish times, seems to have been thought by more 
 modern Hebrews to be unfitted for the sacred pages of the Bible, and the law 
 obtained that it should be changed for an euphemism. We find, for example, the 
 following words from the pen of a learned writer : “ Exegetical Keris, or marginal 
 readings, which substitute euphemisms for cacophonous terms used in the text, in 
 accordance with the injunction of the ancient sages, that ‘ all verses in which 
 indecent expressions occur are to be replaced by decent words,’ e.g., natottP by 
 
 [of which the Keri exhibits four instances, viz., Deut. xxviii. 30, Isa. xiii. 16, 
 Jerem. iii. 2, Zech. xiv. 2].” (Ginsburg, in Kitto’s Cyclopaedia of Biblical Litera¬ 
 ture , s. v. Keri and Kethiv, &c.) , Further observations will be found under the 
 words Bit Shaggatha and Kedesh in the Vocabulary. 
 
 The reader who wishes to obtain a definite idea how religion and immorality 
 may be conjoined, will find much curious information in the History of the Sect of 
 the Maharajahs in Western India , p. 300 ; Trubner and Co., London, 1865. 
 
 11 We still speak of Time as if it were a person ; e. g., Time flies. Time con¬ 
 sumes all things. A Time will come. Time tries all things. Time makes all 
 but true love old. &c. 
 
 12 See Mary, in the Vocabulary. 
 
56 
 
 We, who have no less than three creeds in our ritual 
 have yet an indefinite notion of the faith held by ourselves. 
 We talk of a Father, and a Son, and speak of them as being 
 co-eternal — a necessary contradiction in terms. We speak 
 of the Son as begotten by his Father before all worlds, and 
 say that it is necessary to salvation that the dogma shall be 
 held as true, yet think it blasphemy to assign a wife to the 
 Creator. We talk of angels as messengers , yet believe that 
 the Almighty is everywhere present, and cannot require any 
 one to carry his wishes to a distant part. We contrive to 
 mix up the idea of Omnipresence with two localities — 
 Heaven and Hell. We speak of the “All powerful” and wise 
 God, and invoke His aid against an “ adversary ” as omni¬ 
 present, and almost as powerful, as He is — more powerful 
 indeed, if we are to judge from the number of the subjects 
 assigned to him by theologians. We talk of God as one, 
 and yet subdivide him ijito three beings, to which we add 
 Satan as a fourth. In prayer we lift up our eyes unto 
 heaven, as if the Creator resided above us, rather than 
 in and around us, and yet pity the heathen who see His 
 residence in the sun. We are told that the Creator burns 
 “ throughout eternity ” those who do not believe the indivi¬ 
 duals calling themselves His ministers or vicegerents on 
 earth, and yet reprobate those who immolated their children 
 to Moloch, the Great King, that he might receive them 
 purified by fire. We believe that the Almighty maketh 
 His sun daily to rise on the evil and on the good, yet act 
 as if we thought He took pleasure in seeing His creatures 
 abuse, torment, and even kill each other, if they differ in 
 matters of faith. We talk of a Holy Ghost, proceeding 
 from the Father and the Son, and yet co-eternal with both— 
 another contradiction in terms, which no sophistry can 
 harmonise, however much it may muddle it; and we 
 speak so constantly of the Spirit as to lead outsiders to 
 
57 
 
 think that the Father and the Son must be material. We 
 are taught to believe that the Almighty talked familiarly 
 with various men, from Adam to Malachi, during some four 
 thousand years, and yet never told them of a future life ; 
 and not only so, but gave them to understand that all 
 rewards and punishments are meted out to each individual 
 during his life on earth. 
 
 Again, amongst those who call themselves Christians, 
 we have “the Virgin” held in as much reverence to-day 
 as she was in Chaldea four thousand years ago; and 
 controversy is still rampant about the homage due respec¬ 
 tively to the Father, the Son, and “ the Mother of God.” 
 But no matter which is the side taken by theologians, all 
 pertinaciously hold to, and fight fiercely for, their individual 
 influence over their respective flocks. Heresy is still treated 
 by some Christians as it was by the heathen in the days 
 of Socrates; and Priests and Popes anathematise sovereigns, 
 as did the Priests of Meroe the Egyptian kings, and with 
 greater impunity. 13 
 
 13 “ The influence of the Egyptian priests at Meroe, through the belief that 
 they spoke the commands of the Deity, is fully shown by Strabo and Diodorus, who 
 say it was their custom to send to the king when it pleased them, and order him to 
 put an end to himself, in obedience to the will of the oracle imparted to them; and 
 to such a degree had they contrived to enslave the understanding of those princes, 
 by superstitious fears, that they were obeyed without opposition. At length a king, 
 called Ergamenes, a contemporary of Ptolemy Philadelphus, dared to disobey 
 their orders, and, having entered the golden chapel with his soldiers, caused them 
 (the priests I presume) to be put to death in his stead, and abolished the custom. 
 Ergamenes had studied the philosophy of Greece, and had the sense to distinguish 
 between priestly rule and religion, knowing that blind obedience to the priests 
 did not signify obedience to the divine will. But these vested rights on man’s 
 credulity seem to have been afterwards revived among the Ethiopians; and the 
 expedition sent by Mohamet Ali up the White Nile learnt that the same custom, of 
 ordering the king to die, now exists amongst some of*their barbarous descendants.” 
 Note by Sir Gardner Wilkinson in Rawlinson’s Herodotus , vol. ii. p. 86.—While 
 writing this note, I am reminded of the days of the English Henry II. and John, 
 of the submission they made to priestly power, and contrast it with the effect of 
 the excommunication, or interdict, hurled by the present Pope against the King 
 of Italy, and with the imprisonment of a recent Pope by Napoleon. There are few 
 of us who do not applaud resistance to theological influences in those of a different 
 
58 
 
 But although we cannot construct a system of the 
 Chaldee faith, we find sufficient to lead us to the belief 
 that it acknowledged the power of a supreme Being, as 
 maker, preserver, director, and destroyer of every thing. 
 To that Being many names were given, whose full signifi¬ 
 cance is unknown. Like the Hindoos, and the Shemitic 
 nations generally, the Chaldees had the idea of a trinity. 
 They personified the great works of that Being, and spoke 
 of them as active agents. They had a “ god of the air,” 14 
 just as we have amongst us a * clerk of the weather office,’ 
 whom we only name to laugh at. With them the Priest 
 was consulted, and a Cod propitiated, for freedom from 
 storm and hail; whilst we consult the barometer, and can 
 foretel the coming gale without going to the oracle. Baker 
 tells us that “ rain-makers ” are common in Northern Africa, 
 and held in high esteem. 
 
 Like ourselves, the Phens described the Almighty as 
 resembling man. We talk of his right hand and his left, 
 his face and his back parts; they thought of him as 
 requiring a wife. Each division of the trinity had his own 
 spouse, who played no active part in the heaven or world, 
 and seems only to have been introduced to be invoked by 
 women. 
 
 There was a second trinity as well as a first, consisting 
 of the sun, moon, and the heavens generally, which was 
 subordinate to the first. 
 
 My present idea is, that the main characteristics of the 
 
 faith to ourselves; but there are not many who will shake off the fear they have 
 of their own teachers, and the powers assumed by them. 
 
 14 “ There are angels who preside over all the phenomena of nature; an angel 
 presides over the sun (Rev. xix. 17) ; angels guard the storm and lightning (Ps. civ. 
 4; Heb. i. 7); four angels have charge over the four winds (Rev. vii. 1, 2); an 
 angel presides over the waters (Rom. xvi. 5) ; an angel also presides over the altar 
 in the Temple (ibid. xiv. 18).” Ooheleth, commonly called the Boole of Ecclesiastes, 
 by Christian D. Ginsburg, p. 342. London, Longmans, pp. 528. 
 
59 
 
 Phens’ faith and worship resembled those of the mediaeval 
 Koman Catholics. 
 
 The Chaldees believed in a celestial virgin, who had 
 purity of body, loveliness of person, and tenderness of 
 affection; and who was one to whom the erring sinner 
 could appeal with more chance of success than to a stern 
 father. She was pourtrayed as a mother with a child in 
 her arms, and every attribute ascribed to her showed that 
 she was supposed to be as fond as any earthly female ever 
 was. Her full womb was thought to be teeming with 
 blessings, and everything which could remind a votary of 
 a lovely woman was adopted into her worship. 
 
 The worship of the woman by man naturally led to 
 developments which our comparatively sensitive natures 
 shun, as being opposed to all religious feeling. But 
 amongst a people whose language was without the gloss 
 of modern politeness, — whose priests both spoke and 
 wrote without the least disguise, — and whose God, through 
 his prophets and lawgivers, promised abundance of offspring 
 and increase in flocks and herds, as one of the greatest 
 blessings He had to bestow, — we can readily believe that 
 what we call “ obscenities ” might be regarded as sacred 
 homage or divine emblems.” 15 
 
 In India, at the present time, both the thoughts and the 
 conversation of the lords of the soil turn, unpleasantly to 
 us, upon the power possessed by each to propagate his 
 race, and European doctors are more frequently consulted 
 for the increase or restoration of this power than for any 
 other cause. 
 
 Not only does the man think thus, but the female has 
 her thoughts directed to the same channel, and there has 
 been a special hell invented by Hindoo priests for childless 
 
 16 Vide infra, s. v. Asheb. 
 
60 
 
 females. 16 It is curious to see at India’s antipodes a similar 
 idea started amongst the offshoots of a Christian community; 
 but so it is, and Mormon women join themselves in numbers 
 to one man, from the belief that without union with him 
 they cannot attain to celestial glory. 
 
 The Bible student will remember the plaintive entreaty of 
 Rachel—“ Give me children, or else I die; 5,17 the earnest 
 prayer of Hannah, and the spiteful persecution of Peninnah ; 18 
 and he will recall the longing for offspring which induced 
 Abraham to connect himself with a black (Egyptian) slave 
 girl, and how complaisant his wife was in delegating for a 
 time her rights. 19 
 
 In Deuteronomy xxviii. 4, we find “the fruit of the body” 
 promised as one of the special blessings for obedience to 
 the law; and in Psalm cxxvii. 8, we are distinctly told that 
 “ children are an heritage of the Lord, and the fruit of the 
 womb is his reward.” 
 
 If abundance of offspring was promised as a blessing, it 
 is clear to the physiologist that the pledge implies abun¬ 
 dance of vigour in the man as well as in the woman. With 
 a husband incompetent, no wife could be fruitful. The 
 condition, therefore, of the necessary organs was intimately 
 associated with the divine blessing or curse, and the impotent 
 man then would as naturally go to the priest to be cured of 
 his infirmity, as we of to-day go to the physician. We 
 have evidence that masses have been said, saints invoked, 
 and offerings presented, for curing the debility we refer to, 
 
 16 “ The practice of marrying a second wife, in the event of the first having no 
 issue within ten years, also obtained in Italy, till about the fifteenth century; 
 the Pope giving a special dispensation for it.” Ginsburg, in Kitto’s Cyclopcedia, 
 s. v. Marriage. This certainly did not condemn barren women to an eternal 
 hell, but it was equivalent to inflicting misery upon them so long as they subse¬ 
 quently might live. 
 
 17 Gen. xxx. 1. 18 1 Sam. i. 10, et seq. 
 
 19 Gen. xiv. 2-5. 
 
61 
 
 in a church in Christianised Italy during the last hundred 
 years, and in France so late as the sixteenth century,— 
 evident relics of more ancient times. 20 
 
 Whenever a votary applied to the oracle for help, to 
 enable him to perform his duties as a prospective father, or 
 to remove that frigidity which he had been taught to believe 
 was a proof of Divine displeasure, or an evidence of his being 
 bewitched by a malignant daemon, it is natural to believe 
 that the priest would act partly as a man of sense, though 
 chiefly as the minister of a God. He would go through, or 
 enjoin attendance on, certain religious ceremonies — would 
 sell a charmed image, or use some holy oil, invented and 
 blessed by a god or saint, as was done at Isernia — or he 
 would do something else. 
 
 We can readily see, then, how some sacred rites might be 
 intentionally provocative of sexual ideas; how desirable it 
 might have been for hierarchs to compose love philtres, 
 or satyrion, and to understand the influence over the 
 sexual powers possessed by various kinds of aliment; and 
 we can also understand how certain Gods would be invented 
 whose images should act as amulets, and who, like special 
 Roman saints, would take charge of this particular part of 
 the body. 
 
 Even after “the Reformation,” France introduced Saint 
 Foutin into the Christian calendar, to whom offerings 
 were made by the faithful who found themselves unable 
 to procure the blessing of fertility ; — they are thus 
 described :— 
 
 “ Temoin Saint Foutin de Varailles, en Provence, auquel 
 sont dediees les parties honteuses de F un et de F autre sexe, 
 formees en cire; le plancher de la chapelle en est fort garni, 
 et quand le vent les fait entrebattre, cela debauche un peu 
 
 20 See R. P. Knight's work on the Worship of Priapus, 
 
62 
 
 les devotions a F honneur de ce saint.” {La Confession 
 de Sancy, vol. v. Journal de Henri III., by Pierre de F 
 Etoile, ed. Duchat, pp. 888, 391.) 
 
 “ Other saints were worshipped for similar purposes, as 
 St. Guerlichon, or Greluchon, at Orange, Porigny, Cives, 
 Yendre, Auxerre, Puy en Yelay, in the convent in Girouet, 
 and at Bourg Dieu; St. Gilles in Brittany, St. Beni in 
 Anjou, St. Kegnaud in Burgundy, St. Arnaud and St. 
 Guignole near Brest and in Berri. The worship of many 
 of these was in full practice in the last century.” {Two 
 Essays on the Worship of Priapus. London, 1865; 
 privately printed.) 
 
 If, with all the vaunted enlightenment of Christian 
 Europe, there are several canonised mortals whose special 
 care, in the heaven to which they have been promoted by 
 men on earth, is to help unfortunates who require their 
 aid “ pour les parties honteuses,” we cannot wonder that 
 sexual saints should be found amongst the heathen races 
 of Asia; nor can we refuse credence to the idea, that the 
 act of propagation was sometimes the end of certain forms 
 of worship, which were specially adapted to bring about 
 that act. 
 
 As a Physician, I know how much intense misery is 
 felt by those men who, from any cause, are unable to do 
 their part in multiplying their race. I can readily under¬ 
 stand that a cure of impuissance would raise to the highest 
 pitch, in the mind of a soliciting devotee, his estimate of 
 the saint who wrought it; and I do not see why masses 
 should not he said to St. Greluchon, for raising the courage 
 of the living, as much as to St. Denis (or Dionysus), for 
 the consolation of the dead. At any rate, the Chaldees 
 used some of their Gods, or divinities, for comparatively a 
 holy worship, and for a cult as peculiar as that paid to the 
 modern Priapus, St. Foutin. 
 
63 
 
 In the next few chapters, I propose to give an account of 
 some ancient Deities. My information is mainly derived 
 from Rawlinson’s Herodotus, and the various papers written 
 by Cuneiform scholars in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic 
 Society ; hut which I neither servilely copy nor implicitly 
 believe. 
 
CHAPTER VI. 
 
 The gods On and Am. On is not known in the Cuneiform as a God — the word 
 enters largely into composition in ancient Syrian names. On, an Egyptian 
 God — its probable significance — its etymology in Hebrew identical with the 
 Sun. List of names into which On enters, and their probable significance. 
 Am, a feminine deity—the name is still reverenced in India — it is equally 
 honoured in Thibet and Tartary. There are no traces of the name in the 
 Cuneiform. List of names into which Am, Aum, or Om enters in composition. 
 
 I do not find in the Cuneiform translations, or in the Essays 
 by General Rawlinson, or others, any distinct mention made 
 of the name of On or Am. The nearest approach to the 
 former is Ann: there is no name like the latter. On is 
 only once mentioned as a God in the Bible. The first 
 time we meet with the word On as the compound of a name 
 is in Ephron, a Hittite of Canaan, and friend of Abraham; 
 and in the same chapter we find the word Hebrora intro¬ 
 duced. We find it again in the family of Judah as Owan, 
 and we find it also in Zibeow, the wife of Esau, Simeo?z, 
 the son of Jacob, and I think also in Zid on. 
 
 We do not meet with it as the name of a deity until we 
 come to Joseph’s history, when we find that he marries the 
 daughter of the Priest of On. It is not clear whether 
 Potiphera is the high Priest in a town called On, or the 
 minister to a god of that name; but, as cities were often 
 called after the deity therein worshipped, we may take 
 either interpretation. It will be most convenient to adopt 
 the latter. 
 
 History tells us that the name by which the town was 
 known to the Greeks was 'HAjottoA^, or city of the sun; in 
 Mahometan times, “Ain Shems” or “the sun’s eye;” and 
 
65 
 
 during the time of Jeremiah it was “Beth Shemesh ,” or 
 “ the sun’s temple.” “ In the Coptic hooks,” I quote from 
 the Lexicon, ‘‘the place is constantly called On, and it can 
 hardly be doubted that, in the ancient language, this 
 signified light, especially the sun.” An obelisk is said to 
 be still standing 1 to mark its sight; and obelisks, spires, 
 minarets, tall towers, upright stones (Menhirs), or rocks, 
 and, generally speaking, all erections conspicuous for height 
 and slimness, were representatives of the Sun, or the Creator, 
 under his male emblem. 
 
 When we turn to the Hebrew we find that the word fiK 
 or jfc, Ann or On, signifies strength, power, and specially 
 virile power . 2 We therefore conclude that the word, when 
 used in its religious sense, implies the idea of the Sun, 
 or the Creator, as being masculine, and ready to operate. 
 
 There is another form of the word occasionally found, 
 
 1 Kitto’s Cyclopaedia , s. v. On. 
 
 2 Phallic emblems abounded at Heliopolis, in Syria. Not baying any know¬ 
 ledge of their existence at Heliopolis, in Egypt, I took means to ascertain it from 
 a brother Physician, who had recently visited the country. The following is his 
 reply to my query :—“ I am very sorry that I am not enough of an antiquarian to 
 give you much information on the subject you are interested in. I was in Egypt 
 last winter (1865-6), and there certainly are numerous figures of Gods and Kings 
 on the walls of the temples at Thebes, depicted with the penis erect. The great 
 temple at Karnak is, in particular, full of such figures, and the temple of Danclesa 
 likewise, though that is of a much later date, and built merely in imitation of the 
 old Egyptian art. I remember one scene, of a king (Ramses II.) returning in 
 triumph with captives, many of whom are undergoing the operation of castration, 
 and in the corner of the scene are numerous heaps of the complete genitals which 
 have been cut off, many hundreds in all, I should think. This is on the walls of 
 Medinet Haboo, at Thebes,” &c. This letter is very interesting, for it shows 
 (1) how largely the idea of virility was interwoven with religion; (2) how completely 
 English Egyptologists have suppressed a portion of the facts in the histories which 
 they have given to the world; (3) because it tells us of the antiquity of the practice 
 which still obtains among the negroes of Northern Africa, of mutilating entirely 
 every male captive and slain enemy. (Compare 2 Kings xx. 18, and Isa. xxxix. 7 ; 
 also 1 Sam. xviii. 25-27.) In Assyria and Palestine, conquerors counted the 
 heads of the slain, which were piled in heaps before them. The learned Egyptians 
 were content with a less bulky emblem. A man when beheaded is useless; if 
 only emasculated he is of value as a slavo. The Asiatic gratified a temporary 
 revenge; the African had an enduring triumph. 
 
 E 
 
66 
 
 viz,, Avert. This only differs from the former in the way in 
 which the Hebrew letters are pointed, and in the pronun¬ 
 ciation we give to Vav. Of course, reading the v as u the 
 word becomes Aun or Auen, and we recognise in Beth-aven 
 the same idea as in Beth Shemesh, viz., the House of the 
 Male Sun. 
 
 The word On, or Aun, is frequently found as a compound 
 in ancient names. Jupiter Ammon was the Greek name for 
 a deity adorned with ram’s horns (Neapolitans still carry 
 horns in their pockets for luck). Ammon was an offshoot 
 from the stock of Terah, Abraham’s father. Am un Ra 
 was the appellative of a powerful Egyptian king, Amon 
 was the son of the Jewish Manasseh, and Zonn is another 
 name for No-Amon or Ammon. 
 
 Ammon, means, amongst other things, “ a ram : ” 
 the ram was held sacred in Egypt, and especially at 
 Mendes. The figure of Amon, given? in Kitto, 3 has a ram’s 
 head and horns, holding in one hand the crozier, or what 
 has inappropriately been called the shepherd’s or Apostolic 
 crook; and in the other hand the crux ansata, the emblem 
 of the male and female organs. Sheep were held sacred 
 by his followers, and a ram was annually sacrificed in his 
 honour, the hide being used as a covering to his image. 
 His colour was blue, or slatelike. There can be little 
 doubt that he represented “ The Sun in Aries.” 
 
 In the Scriptures we find the word On repeatedly in 
 combination with other words, which help us to understand 
 the nature of the God :— 
 
 On, pN, is a prince of Reuben : Owan is the son of Judah. 
 Aaron, P^, is the brother of Moses. His name seems to 
 be a compound of the Aar, Aer, or Air of the Chaldee, 
 the a vpu, aZpou, or ovpuvos, of the Greeks; and the whole 
 word signifies “ The Heavenly On,” “ The God of the 
 Air.” 
 
 8 Kitto’s Cyclopcedia of Biblical Literature , s. v. Amon. 
 
67 
 
 Abdon, P* 1 ^, means the slave of On. 
 
 Aijalon, f&}8, Aialon, signifies the Great Ram, On; Ail, 
 meaning a ram. 4 
 
 Ashcalon is a town amongst the Philistines, and its name 
 is very significant. It is spelled in Hebrew 
 Ashkelon. No meaning is assigned to it by Gesenius, 
 and Fiirst only calls it the holm-oak; but W**, eshech, 
 is a testicle, and eschol, is a cluster, not of 
 
 grapes necessarily, but metonymically, meaning the 
 whole phallic emblem, which resembles two full plums 
 hanging from a long stem. Accordingly, Ashcalon would 
 mean “the cluster of the Sun,” or “ the cluster of On.” 
 I shall have frequent occasion to show the curious 
 designs used to indicate to those initiated in the ancient 
 mysteries the idea of the male organ—the fleur-de-lys 
 and the trefoil are amongst them. To the vulgar, a 
 cluster, a lily, and a clover leaf have no significance — 
 to the scholar, they are pregnant with meaning. 
 
 Chilion, I take to be, n ^?, Chilah and On; i.e., “ The 
 loins of On,” or “ The inmost mind of On.” The idea 
 of calling an infant boy “ wasting away,” the meaning 
 given by Gesenius to the word, is preposterous. 
 
 Ezbon, seems to come from atzab, and on, or 
 
 “The On toiling, or ready for work;” or it may be 
 from etzba, a finger, used in dipping. 6 
 
 4 See Accho, in the Vocabulary 
 
 6 “ Quadriliterals are sometimes formed for triliterals, (a) by inserting after 
 the first radical, as Fi^t (6) by adding ) at the end, a form which, perhaps, in 
 Phenicio-Shemitic, as well as in Greek, Latin, and German, has been used in a 
 diminutive sense; by adding to the end of Tj'CN we get with only a slight 
 
 difference in the vowel-points.”—Gesenius, Thesaurus , s. v. 
 
 6 The idea of toiling and dipping is often used in connection with paternity. 
 See Isa. li. 1, 2 — “Look to the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of 
 the pit whence ye are digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah 
 that bare you.” The idea is very conspicuous in the Hebrew words "OJ and mp3, 
 8achar, and nkebah. The former, amongst other meanings, signifies the male 
 organ, from the idea of its digging, penetrating, infixing. We have continued the 
 
68 
 
 Elzaphan, is “ El, the Shining On.” 
 
 Enon, AlvJov, tW, is the “Eye of On,” similar to Ain- 
 shems. 
 
 Eglon, is the “ revolving On,” from ty, agal, to roll. 
 
 Ekron, PT$, has a meaning similar to that of Ezbon, 
 acar, being “ to dig, to till the ground, and to prepare 
 it for seed;” and the word would signify the “Digging 
 On,” or, euphemistically, “ On, the Husbandman.” 
 
 I confess to have been staggered when I found cities 
 called by names which, to our ideas, are grossly obscene; 
 but reflection, and my medical experience, led me to 
 see that the emblem of On was one which was in 
 itself characteristic of strength of body, courage, vigour, 
 and boldness—every thing, in fine, of which the natural 
 man would be proud; and familiarity with words from 
 infancy takes away any sense of shame couched in 
 them. 7 
 
 I would note, too, in passing, that the Philistine 
 towns generally had names strongly connected with 
 sexual ideas. Ashdod, ‘in&px, j s a compound of 
 aish, ash , or esh, which means “fire, heat;” and *rV*, 
 dod, denoting “ love — to love, to boil up, to be agitated,” 
 &c.; the whole meaning “the heat of love,” or “the 
 fire which impels to union.” 
 
 Eshton, flWIC, signifies “ the uxorious On.” 
 
 Gath, *">!, means a trough in which grapes were trodden— 
 the poultry fancier still uses the word tread in a certain 
 sense--and I find that in Phcenicio-Shemitic the wine¬ 
 press was an euphemism for the pudenda muliehria. 
 
 appellation to the present day, for the notion of pricking is embodied in a substan¬ 
 tive. The latter signifies a hole, a pit, a place which has been dug out; — an idea 
 expressed by our words, nick, nock, notch. In Genesis i. 27, we have in our 
 version, “ Male and female created he them ; ” in the original the words used are 
 sachar and rikebdh — the part put for the whole. 
 
 7 Vide infra , p. 79, note 2. 
 
69 
 
 We have the word combined with Kimmon in Dan’s 
 towns, and Hepher in Zebulon’s, the former being 
 significant of the full womb, the latter, of the sacred 
 heifer. 8 
 
 Gaza, »TJ?, simply means “ very strong,” a double entendre . 
 
 Gershon, a son of Levi, signifies “ The driving or 
 
 thrusting On garash, meaning to push, to spoil or 
 plunder, to put forth fruit, or that which is propelled 
 or put forth, according to the vowel-points. 
 
 Gideon, I think, is from '[?!, gadi, — good fortune, i. e., 
 “ The Fortunate or happy On.” 
 
 Gibeon, PV23, signifies “ On erected, lifted up,” elevated, 
 gaba, meaning something high, raised up, a hill, &c. 
 
 Helbon, P^n, a Syrian city, suggests halab, and on, or 
 “ The fat, or smooth On.” 
 
 Hebron, 1^5$, is a very significant word. It is derived 
 from Habar or Chabar, which is given as, “to 
 join together, to bind, to fascinate (a word whose origin 
 was fascinum), to connect together,” &c. Accordingly 
 it signifies the On which causes connexion. Hebron 
 had another title, i . e., Kirjath Arba, the last half of 
 which, viz. npy, erva, signifies membrum virile . This 
 Arba was one of the sons of Anak, “ The Great I, I by 
 myself.” Another, or the same Arba, was reverenced in 
 Chaldsea, where it was said to mean “ The four great 
 Gods,” the very ancient ones, more revered than all the 
 others. The name Arbela is classic : it designates the 
 sun as being the four great ones; and these, I surmise, 
 were Mahadeva and Sacti, Eschol and Nun — the triple 
 male in union with the single female organ, thus 
 bringing about creation. 
 
 In the Cuneiform, abr signifies “ strengthening,” and 
 abir, is “ strong, the bull.” The word Hebron may 
 
 8 See Gath Rimmon and Gath Hepher, in the Vocabulary. 
 
70 
 
 accordingly denote The Strong On. See Arba, Heb¬ 
 ron, &c. 
 
 Hezron, = enclosed or guarded by On. 
 
 Horon, |Wn, as in Beth Horon, is The Moon On, Hur 
 being the moon, a male God at first, and still so in 
 German. 
 
 Hermon, = laid waste by On, a barren mountain. 
 
 Heshbon, is the thinking On. 
 
 Helon, the God Sun, or El is On. 
 
 Jadon, P^}, the loving On. 
 
 Kishon, P^'i?, the firm or hard On. 
 
 Mahlon, P^PP, the filling On. 
 
 Maon, fWP, the pudenda of On, V®, mea, = pudenda. 
 
 Madon, PTp ? the lengthened On, mada = to extend. 
 Migron, P^P, the On who throws down, magar, = to 
 throw down. 
 
 Naaman, the pleasant On. 
 
 Naashon, P^P2, the shining On. 
 
 Varan, 1^?, the boring or digging On,.or the proud, erect, 
 or beautiful On, paar, = to dig or bore. 
 
 Pithon, the inflated On. 
 
 Padon, P'l?, the preserving On. 
 
 Punon, p-1D, the setting On. 
 
 Rimmon, P®1, the erect On ; also a pomegranate. 
 
 Shimon, P D T, the glory of On. 
 
 Shimson, or Samson, the shining On. 
 
 Shimron, P*>9^, the watchful On. 
 
 Shier on, P"P^, the rewarding On. 
 
 Simeon, the hearing On. 
 
 Shomeron, P'W, the marginal reading of “ Samaria ” 
 (1 Kings xvi. 24), the watchful On. 
 
 Shushan, the white On, the moon. 
 
 Sion, P'?, the elevated On, n T 'V, tzia, elevated. 
 
71 
 
 Salmon, the strong On, from 
 Shihon, the elevated or erected On. 
 
 Sihon, P 1 " 1 '?, the furious, the expanded On, saah, = to 
 expand, saah, = to rush on. 
 
 Sidon, P‘1'?, the inflated On, It, zaid = inflated, proud, erect. 
 Typhon, Tu$wv. the inflated On, taphah, — to spread 
 out. 
 
 Ziphion, the watching On, zapha, = to watch over. 
 
 Zephron, the shining On, zaphar, = to shine. 
 
 All these epithets suffice to show that there was through¬ 
 out Palestine a great reverence for the Sun God under the 
 phallic emblem. 
 
 In searching through the Lexicons for the etymology of 
 the preceding names, I have been struck with the frequency 
 with which the only word supplying a sensible or proper 
 meaning, harmonising alike with myth and common sense, 
 is designated either as “ old ” or “unused.” I infer from 
 this that the full significance of the names which I have 
 interpreted was not known to the more modern Jews. 
 
 From the time of David there was, in general, an absence 
 of the sexual or astrological element in proper names; still, 
 a glance at Ezekiel’s writings will show that there is not 
 in that prophet’s language any thing like the euphemism 
 enjoined by the later Rabbins. 
 
 As On represented the male idea of the Creator, so Am, 
 Om, Aum, or Umma represented the feminine idea. 
 
 We have evidence of its use in the most remote 
 antiquity, and of its being held in supreme reverence to this 
 day by the Hindoos. Aum is the mystic syllable which, 
 like the Jave of the Hebrews, is never uttered except 
 on holy festivals, or in hallowed rites. We recognise its 
 presence in the West of Europe and in the East of Asia. 
 
72 
 
 “ Ommani pannee,” or “ Ommani padmi houm,” is the 
 “ Ave Maria purissima ” of the Tartar; and Omar Pacha 
 commands a Turkish army to-day. It is in use amongst 
 the Freemasons all over the world. We find Ammon and 
 Amun, Amnon and Amon in Palestine and Egypt, and 
 Amulius and Amelia in ancient Rome and modern London. 
 It is combined sometimes with On, as in Am-on and 
 On-am. Sometimes, but rarely, it stands alone, and the 
 epithets conjoined with it differ materially from those used 
 with the former. 
 
 The Hebrew form is BN, or am, signifying “ a mother,” 
 and also Dty, “to veil round,” “to cover,” “ to protect.” 
 
 In the time of Abraham we find an Elam in Mesopo¬ 
 tamia, which signifies “ The Sun Mother.” Later on we 
 find Amalek, or “ The Mother King.” We subse¬ 
 
 quently find D ^, Adullam, or “ The Mother is Just,” or 
 “ The Just Am.” 
 
 Amam, the mother of mothers. 
 
 Amana, the mother Ana; though it is probable that 
 
 the correct reading of this word is Abana, as in our 
 version = Father Anu. 
 
 Amnon , I think, is a compound of Am and nun, the 
 
 fish . The difference between -1 = u, and i — o, i.e. pj, 
 nun, pj, non , being insignificant. 
 
 Amariah, and Omri, appear to mean (a) “ The 
 
 Maternal Sun is Jah,” ( b) “ The Maternal Sun.” 
 Amorite, 'pkx, Emmor, Hamor, may signify “ The 
 
 Celestial Mother.” 
 
 Ammiel, is “ The Maternal Sun.” 
 
 Ammishaddai, and Zurishaddai, connect the 
 
 ideas of Zur, “ The rock,” or Phallus, with Am, “ The 
 mother,” and Shaddai, “ The nursing mother,” i. e,, the 
 mother with the child. 
 
 Enam, is “ The mother’s eye.” 
 
78 
 
 Mamre , is a Hittite, associated with Aner and Eschol, 
 
 whose names respectively seem to indicate “ The maternal 
 sun,” “ a man,” and “ a cluster.” 
 
 ^Imillarus, ’A piMapos, and ^4mmenon, ’A/^evov, were early 
 kings in Chaldaea. 
 
 At first sight it is a matter of surprise that so little 
 evidence should be found in the Scriptures of the Maternal 
 Creator. I think it must be accounted for by the fact 
 that most of the nations with whom the Hebrews came 
 into contact had adopted the male idea. Baal Peor was 
 evidently masculine, for he could not open anything 
 without an appropriate instrument. Moses always speaks 
 of the God of Israel as a male. The worship of the 
 Groves, or Asheras, leads to the same conclusion. The 
 Tyrian Hercules was, I think, phallic power personified, 
 and we find Maachah making “ a horror ” in a grove, 
 evidently a fascinum , from the context; and, though we 
 would not like to lay much stress upon it, yet we cannot 
 omit altogether the fact that boys were consecrated and 
 attached, during certain reigns, to the Hebrew Temple, 
 where, as Sodomites, they suffered from the lusts of 
 those who showed their faith in the all-sufficiency of On, 
 refusing, in the excess of their zeal, to associate with the 
 representatives of Am. 
 
 Apart from Palestine, we find that Omadeus was the 
 name of Bacchus, and Amadeus is still a name in the royal 
 family of Piedmont. The mythic Amazons were prior to 
 Bacchus and Hercules, and, though said to be of Scythic 
 origin, they came to help at the siege of Ilion. In Carthage 
 we have ^.milcar; in Italy, Amelia was a city older than 
 Rome. 
 
 There is, however, in the Scriptures, an allusion to a 
 doctrine about which much has been said both in ancient 
 and modern times; namely, that, after the lapse of a 
 
74 
 
 certain number of years, a portion of the Deity became 
 incarnate. These incarnations pass in India by the name 
 of Avatars. When they occurred, the Celestial Virgin was 
 said to have conceived an individual who was essentially 
 a portion of the Almighty-incarnate; but as all human 
 beings must have a human mother, the myth obtained 
 that the “ virgin of the spheres ” herself became incarnate 
 as a woman, and as such remained “virgo Intacta ,” 
 and yet became a mother. She, like her own offspring, 
 must be without the taint of human flesh, consequently 
 she must be, like her child, the offspring of a pure virgin: 
 farther back than this it was inconvenient to carry the 
 myth. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception is older 
 than Kome. We see, in the writings of Isaiah, that, as 
 a portentous sign to Uzziah, the Virgin should conceive a 
 son, whose name should be Immanuel. With that easy cre¬ 
 dence which leads men to believe absurdities, provided they 
 are propounded as matters of faith, it is believed that the 
 Prophet gave, as a sign to Uzziah of that day, something 
 which was to happen seven hundred years after his death. 
 No one reading Isaiah, chapters vii. and viii., by the light 
 of common sense, can fail to see that every word there 
 refers to a portent sent for the benefit of Uzziah, who 
 himself declines to ask for one. This being the case, it 
 shows — 1st, that Isaiah had, like the Hindoos, a belief 
 in Avatars; and 2nd, that he considered a new Avatar 
 approaching. This idea is carefully worked out in Higgins’ 
 Anacalypsis . 9 
 
 9 There is strong evidence to prove that Astrology was very largely cultivated 
 in ancient times. How firm has been its hold, we may judge from its existence 
 amongst ourselves, in spite of our boasted civilisation and Christianity. “ Fortune¬ 
 telling ” has ever been a power assumed by Priests; and where they have disclaimed 
 it, as has been done generally amongst the followers of the Saviour, a special order 
 of individuals assumed the cast-off garment. To some, an insight into the future 
 is more captivating than physical enjoyment of the present, and it is natural that he 
 who professes to be able to afford the one should also assert his power to give the 
 
75 
 
 The Roman church, that repertory of Ancient Heathen 
 belief, rites, ceremonies, dogmas, and practices, has recently 
 adopted the idea that the Virgin Mary was born as imma¬ 
 culately as her son; so that now two virgins are striving 
 for preeminence amongst the faithful—the mother and 
 the grand-mother of God. Though we shall see in the next 
 chapter much that is shocking to our ideas, there will be 
 nothing so utterly absurd as that the Son, who was co¬ 
 eternal with his Father, and begotten before all worlds, 
 had two virgins for his ancestors, one of whom preceded 
 the other! 
 
 other. To the Philosopher, there is something fascinating in the inquiry, whether 
 Astronomy was the father or the child of Divination, and whether sages were not 
 obliged to “ humbug the public and pocket the fee,” as a means to enable them to 
 prosecute pure science. “ Vixere fortes ante Agamemnona; ” and we can recognise 
 in the past the existence of intellects as powerful, and knowledge as extensive in 
 many subjects, as is to be found to-day. There was certainly as much false science 
 then as there is now. As it would be difficult for a modern writer to give an 
 account of all the current forms of “ fortune-telling,” so it would be hard for any 
 one to describe those of antiquity. On a future occasion, I may perhaps be able to 
 give some account of ancient oracles; but in the present volume, they will only 
 receive occasional notice. Amongst the many hundred names which I have examined, 
 very few have any apparent connexion with astrology, and a moderate number only 
 with astronomy. I have thought it better, therefore, to postpone any lengthened 
 notice of these subjects to a future period. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 The Gods of Babylonia and Assyria arranged in triads, to which triad a female is 
 added. Ideas associated with triads. Asshur—his various titles and names— 
 the same as On, or Mahadeva. Anu —a God, resembles Diana, is food—his 
 relation to Asshur—his titles. Hea or Hoa — his titles—he is water per¬ 
 sonified— his relation to Asshur and Anu. Ideas of water—its influence in 
 creation. The Phallic element in Egyptian worship. The origin of the triad 
 in India and Babylonia — Moses, Aaron, Hur, and Miriam — peculiarity in the 
 history of the latter. The modern Trinity — amongst Protestants and Papists. 
 The second Assyrian triad, Shamas, Aer, and Hur. The Sun—The moon — 
 The Heavens — Yul. The names of Moses, Aaron, and Hur almost identical 
 with the second Assyrian triad. No names of Egyptian origin to be found 
 amongst the Jews in Moses’ time. 
 
 There is so much difficulty in finding “ who was who,” 
 and “ who was what,” in these ancient mythologies, that 
 we must content ourselves with a meagre description, and 
 a very halting or inconsecutive statement. I learn from 
 Rawlinson that there were two triads of divinities, with each 
 of which was associated a female. The first, or most sacred 
 trinity, — and I use the word intentionally, to signify, as it 
 does with us, three persons and one God, 1 — consisted of 
 Asshur, — whose other names were II, llos, Ha, B>jA, BoAa^v, 
 and Ra, — Anu , and Hea or Hoa. Beltis was the Goddess 
 
 1 It is a curious subject of speculation to inquire how far the triune character 
 of the male emblem of creation has influenced the introduction of the number three 
 into theological systems. The Hindoos have a triad of gods, and another of 
 goddesses. The Babylonians had a double triad of males, and a double triad of 
 females ; and the Kabbalists had a triple triad, each containing a masculine and 
 feminine element, and a third proceeding from the union of the two. They are 
 thus described. — “ When the Holy Aged, the concealed of all concealed, assumed 
 a form, he produced everything in the form of male and female, as the things 
 could not continue in any other form. Hence Wisdom, which is the beginning of 
 development, when it proceeded from the Holy Aged, emanated in male and female, 
 for Wisdom expanded and Intelligence proceeded from it, and thus obtaine male 
 
77 
 
 associated with them. These four together made up Arba, 
 or Arba-il, the four great G-ods, the quadrilateral, the 
 perfect creator. Let us study their names as best we may. 
 Asshur is spelled alternately with one s or two, and in 
 the Samaritan text of Genesis it is written Astun. “ He 
 is the King of all the Gods, and the Father of the 
 Gods.” Sometimes he is called Khi. In inscriptions he 
 is constantly associated with Nin and Nergal, and “ he 
 defeats enemies by his arrows.” If we turn to the Hebrew, 
 we find a word spelled Ashar, which signifies “to be 
 straight, upright, erect, firm; ” “to prosper,” “ to guide,” 
 &c. ; and a name derived from this root is given to a 
 grandchild of the Chaldaean Rebecca, son of the Syrian 
 Zilpah. 
 
 Again, we find that the word Astun is very similar 
 to asheth + On, and is another form for 
 
 or ishah. Variously pointed, the word signifies “ to prop ” 
 or “sustain,” “fire,” “a sacrifice,” “a woman;” and Kip, 
 koa, means “ to cover,” as does a camel its mate, and also 
 “ a stallion,” and “ a prince,”—a metaphor of frequent use 
 amongst the Hebrews and the Arabs ; i. e., princes were 
 assumed to be powerful in “ manliness ” as well as “ state.” 
 
 and female; viz., Wisdom the father, and Intelligence the mother, from whose 
 union the other pairs of the Sephiroth successively emanated.” “ These two 
 opposite potencies, viz., Wisdom and Intelligence, are joined together by the first 
 potency, the Crown, thus yielding the first triad of the Sephiroth." 
 
 “ From the junction of the foregoing opposites, emanated again the masculine 
 or active potency, denominated Mercy , or Love, also called Greatness —the fourth 
 Sephira, which among the divine names is represented by El. From this, again, 
 emanated the feminine or passive potency Justice , also called Judicial Power — 
 the fifth Sephira, which is represented by the divine name Eloha, and amongst the 
 angels by Seraphim ; and from this, again, the uniting potency Beauty, or Mild¬ 
 ness —the sixth Sephira, represented by the divine name Elohim, . . . and 
 
 thus the second trinity of the Sephiroth is obtained.” 
 
 “ The medium of union of the second trinity, i. e., Beauty, the sixth Sephira, 
 beamed forth the masculine or active potency, Firmness —the seventh Sephira, 
 corresponding to the divine name Jehovah-Sabaoth ; and this, again, gave rise to 
 the feminine or passive potency, Splendour —the eighth Sephira, to which answers 
 the divine name Elohim-Sabaoth ; and from it, again, emanated the Foundation, 
 
78 
 
 Amongst the neighbouring nations of the Jews, the 
 worship of Asherah was common, and, at times, 
 
 it obtained even amongst the Jews themselves. Putting all 
 these facts together, I conclude that Asshur was the same 
 
 or the Basis — the ninth Sephira, represented by the divine El-Chat, and 
 amongst the Angelic hosts by Ishim, which is the uniting point between these two 
 opposites; thus yielding the third trinity of Sephiroth. From the ninth Sephira, 
 the Basis of all, emanated the tenth, called Kingdom, and Schechinah, which is 
 represented by the divine name Adonai, and amongst the Angelic hosts by 
 Cherubim. In the arrangement of this trinity of triads, so as to produce what 
 is called the Kabbalistic Tree, denominated the Tree of Life , the first triad is 
 placed above, the second and the third are placed below, in such a manner that the 
 three masculine Sephiroth are on the right, the three feminine are on the left, 
 while the four uniting Sephiroth occupy the centre, as shown in the following 
 diagrams:— 
 
 Figure 3. 
 
 The Endless: 
 
 Figure 2. 
 ins i 
 
 rrftbn io 
 
 Kingdom. 
 
 Abridged from The Kabbalah, by C. D. Ginsburg, LL. D., pp. 180; Longmans, 
 1866. The above figure recals to the antiquarian that a figure like the following 
 
79 
 
 as the Mahadeva of the Hindoo theology — i. e., The 
 Phallus. 2 
 
 (Fig. 4) has been found in Carthage; and another, of which the next figure (Fig. 5) 
 is a fac simile , on an ancient sculptured stone in Scotland. 
 
 Figure 4. Figure 5. 
 
 2 Since writing the above, I have met with the following observations from the 
 pen of Dr. Ginsburg, in Kitto’s Cyclopaedia , which confirm my views on certain 
 points in a very decided manner. When writing upon Oaths, he says, “ Another 
 primitive custom which obtained in the patriarchial age was, that the one who took 
 the oath ‘put his hand under the thigh ’ of the adjurer (Gen. xxiv. 2, xlvii. 29). 
 This practice evidently arose from the fact that th e genital member —which is meant 
 by the euphemic expression thigh (*jt)— was regarded as the most sacred part 
 of the body, being the symbol of union in the tenderest relation of matrimonial life, 
 and the seat whence all issue proceeds, and the perpetuity so much coveted by the 
 ancients. (Compare the phrase *pv 'N5?V, Gen. xlvi. 26, Exod. i. 5, Judg. viii. 30.) 
 Hence this creative organ became the symbol of the Creator, and the object of 
 worship among all nations of antiquity (compare Ezek. xvi. 17 ; St. Jerome, Com¬ 
 mentary in Hos. iv., &c.); and it is for this reason that God claimed it as the sign 
 of the covenant between himself and his chosen people in the rite of circumcision. 
 Nothing therefore could render the oath more solemn in those days than touching 
 the symbol of creation, the sign of the covenant, and the source of that issue who 
 may at any future period avenge the breaking of a compact made with their 
 progenitor.” 
 
 From this we learn that Abraham, himself a Chaldee, had reverence for the 
 Phallus, as an emblem of the Creator; and we infer that the same faith existed 
 in Damascus, to which his steward, who took the oath, belonged. Thus we have 
 
80 
 
 Whilst attending hospital practice in London, I heard 
 a poor Irishman apostrophise his diseased organ as “ You 
 father of thousands; ” and in the same sense Asshur is the 
 Father of the Gods. I find that a corresponding part in 
 the female is currently called “ The mother of all Saints.” 
 
 The idea thus put forward would be simply too coarse 
 for the common people to he allowed to understand it. 
 There can, therefore, be no doubt that, in Chaldaea, as it is 
 to this day in Hindostan, the doctrine was veiled, and the 
 emblem religiously kept secret in the penetralia of Temples, 
 to which few, if any, except the Priest had access. 
 
 It will be seen that Asshur is only another name 
 for On. 
 
 Of Ra, II, 3 El, Ilos, Helos, Bil, Baal, Al, Allah, Elohim, 
 I cannot get any further information than that they were 
 names given to the sun, as the representative of the Creator, 
 who was spoken of reverentially as my Lord, the Lord, &c., 
 the King, &c. 4 
 
 The number of words, into the composition of which one 
 or more of these words enter, is enormous. The following 
 
 evidence that the symbol was recognised by the old inhabitants of Babylonia, by the 
 Syrians, and by the father of the Jewish people; profane history tells us of Phallic 
 worship in Phoenicia, and that the Syrians learned circumcision from the Egyptians. 
 Comp. Herodotus , ii. 104. 
 
 With such strong corroborative evidence as the preceding quotation supplies, I 
 feel little doubt respecting the truth of my other deductions. If the organ was 
 reverenced at all, every thing connected with it would receive attention. Its 
 condition would be considered as a gauge of the amount of favour in which the 
 individual was held by the Almighty, and everything which seemed to increase its 
 prosperity would receive honour, esteem, or reverence. 
 
 My impression is very strong that the “ strange gods ” mentioned by Jacob 
 (Gen. xxxv. 2) were images of a feminine character, and that the Canaanites 
 generally were more inclined to adore the female than the male symbol; but it 
 would be unprofitable to pursue the subject further in this place. 
 
 3 I find a Sanscrit word, Hil, which means “ to express amorous inclination, to 
 dally.” Though the word tallies with my ideas, I dare not trust myself to accept it 
 as an etymon. An “ Asher ” certainly can be said to express amorous inclination, 
 but I distrust the Sanscrit generally to explain the Chaldee. 
 
 4 See Accho, &c., in the Vocabulary. 
 
81 
 
 are derivations of Ra or Re. The Greek Rhea, ‘Pea; in 
 Latin rex, regis, and the feminine regina (pe yvvYj) ; Italian, 
 re; French, roi; English, royal. We have it as a com¬ 
 pound with el in the word Gsibinel, reale, and I think 
 in such English names as Ell-e ray. 5 Having already 
 identified On with the Sun and its phallic emblem, we 
 shall have now no difficulty in identifying II, El, Ra* 
 Bel, &c., with Asher, with the Sun, and with God. 
 No sensible man can imagine that any one ever mistook 
 a part of the body for the Being -who made all things. 
 Such an idea w r ould be as absurd as to say that women 
 adore a plain gold ring. Yet the thoughtful can readily 
 see how much of good or evil might lurk under the sign. 
 I speak as a philosophic student of natural history, when 
 I say that there is no chapter throughout all the hook of 
 creation more replete with the wonderful than that which 
 treats of the renovation of life. The formation of a new 
 being out of old matter is quite sufficient to arrest our 
 thoughts. Hence we are not at all surprised that it should 
 be taken as a type or symbol of creation. 
 
 The second God in the triad is called Ann, but historians 
 have found great difficulty in arriving at definite notions 
 about him. Whatever may have been his nature, his name 
 was, at any rate, a popular one. Anna was one of the 
 names of Dido, and Rawlinson quotes the names of 
 ’A vvfiwTos, Anne dotus = “ given by Anna,” and ’AvufipsT, 
 Andbxst, signifying “ beloved by Anna,” as the name 
 of a Phoenician nymph. 6 Awodaphus, ’A vwdoupog, and Ane- 
 mentus, ’Avfjjxevrof, are mentioned by Berosus as Chaldsean 
 kings. Hannah ( n |C), which seems to he the same word, 
 only with the rough Hebrew aspirate, is the name given 
 
 5 Gul, Gal, or Gil is another name for the Sun, and we have the word 
 Gil-ray amongst us. 
 
 6 We still have current amongst us the name Anna, and its various forms, as a 
 Christian appellative, and Brett as a surname. 
 
 F 
 
82 
 
 to the mother of Samuel; whilst Anna, a prophetess, the 
 daughter of Phanuel (or the shining sun), and of the tribe 
 of Asher, 7 welcomes our Saviour in the temple, and testifies 
 of His mission. In Assyria there was, in Warka, a great 
 temple, the oldest in the country, called Bit-unw; and in 
 Palestine, Beth -any was a place to which our Saviour was 
 partial. 
 
 Annas was the name of the High Priest before whom 
 our Saviour was arraigned ; and Ananias was the cognomen 
 of him who first welcomed Saul as a brother Christian. 
 Anah was the father of one of Esau’s wives ; Hamel was 
 a chief, and hero of the tribe of Asher. We find the 
 word, in combination with other sacred names, as in Anah, 
 Anael, Anai ah, Awa-mmelech, Ananiah; and again as in 
 Susanna and Johanna, Is anna and Susiawu. In the 
 Carthaginian colony, we meet with H anno and Horombal, 
 which is amongst us Hannihol and Honeyhall. Anius was 
 a son of Apollo, into whose history I need not enter; and 
 Mneas was a son of Venus. 
 
 But though the name was so popular, no direct clue to 
 its meaning has yet been given. Rawlinson says that Anu, 
 or Anna, signifies The God; but this will hardly satisfy the 
 etymologist, when he finds the name Anana in Egypt, Anna 
 Perenna in Rome, and Anna Poorna in Hindostan; since it 
 is certain that Anna was not The God in all those places. 
 
 I do not find in the Hebrew any word which satisfies 
 me as being explanatory of the name, since UK, an h is a 
 ship, UK, anu, is we, and K3K ? anna, signifies I pray. 
 Remembering that there is evidence of Aryan influence on 
 the early settlers in Chaldaea, we turn to the Sanscrit 
 dictionary, and find that anna means food; we then 
 
 7 The mention of the tribe of Asher, or Aser, here is very remarkable. There 
 is no evidence, if I recollect rightly, either that any of the ten tribes taken away 
 into Assyria ever returned to Palestine, or that they became reconciled to the tribe 
 of Judah. 
 
83 
 
 inquire into the ideas connected with Anna Perenna, and 
 her counterpart in India, and, finding that both are 
 Goddesses of Plenty, and that their festivals are specially 
 marked by eating and drinking, we conclude that our 
 etymology is tenable. We are confirmed in this conclusion 
 by reading the account of the Indian Goddess Bhav«, who 
 appears to have been the prototype of the Greek Di ana 
 of the Ephesians. Both the Hindoo and the Greek God¬ 
 desses are respectively represented with innumerable breasts, 
 typifying the abundance of food prepared for their children. 
 
 At this period of my enquiry, the thought suggests 
 itself to me that Anna must have some sort of mythical 
 relationship to Asher, “ The erect one,” and I am reminded 
 of the classical aphorism, “ Sine Cerere et Baccho friget 
 Venus,” i. e., that food and wine favour love, union, and 
 creation. 
 
 But there is still another idea wrapped up in Anu and 
 Hoa, an idea which has probably been adopted prior to that 
 of food, namely, that the cognomen Anu has been given to 
 the right testis, whilst that of Hoa has been given to the 
 left. If Asshur represents the Phallus, it is natural that 
 his appendages should be deified with him. The idea thus 
 broached receives confirmation when we examine the opi¬ 
 nions which obtained in ancient times respecting the power 
 of the right side of the body and compare them with the 
 titles given to Anu. It is believed that the right 
 testicle produced the masculine seed, and that when males 
 were begotten, they were developed in the right side of 
 the womb. Benjamin signifies “ son of my right side,” 
 and the name seems to attest the existence of the notion 
 referred to in the mind of his father. The name Benoni 
 l|, given to the same indivdual by his mother, may 
 mean, literally, either “ Son of Anu” or “ Son of my 
 On.” The male, or active principle, was typified by the idea 
 
84 
 
 of “ solidity” and “ firmness”; tlie female, or passive prin¬ 
 ciple, by “ water,” “fluidity,” or “softness.” It is, then, 
 a priori, probable that Anu was the name assigned to the 
 testis on the right side. Now, any one who will look at 
 himself, or at a correctly-designed statue like the Apollo 
 Belvidere, will see that the right “ egg ” hangs on a lower 
 level than the left; for which there is a physiological reason. 
 If our surmise be true, we shall expect to find that some 
 of Anu’s titles express this fact, while others show his 
 simple function of producing seed. We therefore think 
 that the reader will allow the titles “ King of the lower 
 world,” “ Ruler of the far off city,” to be of the former 
 order. To these titles we subjoin Rawlinson’s remark: 8 “A 
 very extensive class of synonyms, however, extending to 
 about twenty names, which are found on the tablets, are 
 quite unintelligible, except on the supposition that they 
 refer to the infernal regions.” As, however, “ infernal 
 regions,” such as we now believe in, were not then known, 
 we consider it to be more probable that the epithets have 
 reference to the anatomical fact, rather than to the mythic 
 Hades. Of the second order of titles are “ The Original 
 Chief,” “ Father of the Gods,” “ The Old Anu,” &c., all of 
 which indicate the belief that Anu prepared the material of 
 which Asher made use. The one is comparatively useless 
 without the other, but of the two Anu might claim pre¬ 
 cedence, inasmuch as he who makes money must be 
 antecedent to him who spends it. 9 
 
 8 Herodotus , vol. i., page 486. 
 
 9 The idea above enunciated receives unexpected confirmation from a contem¬ 
 plation of the Kabbalistic diagrams, given on page 78. In those we see that all 
 the male potencies are placed upon the right side of the figure, and the feminine 
 upon the left, whilst the whole of them are attached to the upright central stem — 
 the crown of beauty, and the foundation of the kingdom. When there are so many 
 corroborative evidences respecting the nature of the ancient ideas about the 
 creation, it would he unpardonable to pass them by as idle stories, or as the fitful 
 fancies of a modern bookworm. 
 
85 
 
 We have seen that the second of the triad was in one 
 respect equivalent to Ceres ; let us now examine whether the 
 third does not in some degree correspond to Bacchus. The 
 third divinity in the triad, Rawlinson states, was probably 
 named Hea or Hoa, and he considers that this deity cor¬ 
 responds to Neptune. He is the presiding deity of the great 
 deep, “Ruler of the Abyss,” and “ King of Rivers.” He 
 also regulates the Aqueducts, and waters generally. 
 
 There is something to be noticed in connection with 
 water, which has never hitherto been observed in discussions 
 on the part which it plays in cosmogony. We find in the 
 Sacred Writings that “ darkness was upon the face of the 
 deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon (or brooded over) 
 the face of the waters .” The Hindoo legend is substantially 
 the same. Berosus tells us that the Chaldee belief was, that 
 “ There was a time in which there existed nothing but dark¬ 
 ness and an abyss of waters , wherein resided most hideous 
 beings, which were produced of a twofold principle.” 10 San- 
 choniathon first speaks of a chaos which embraced the wind, 
 “ and brought forth mot, which some call Ilus (mud), but 
 others the putrefaction of a watery mixture, and from this 
 sprung all the seed of the creation and the generation of the 
 universe. 11 The Hindoos consider that water is sacred; 
 and in one of their prayers the fluid is invoked thus :— 
 “ Waters, mothers of worlds, purify us ! ” 12 
 
 Again, the Ancient Egyptians, and the Jewish people to 
 the present day, have the custom of pouring out all the 
 water contained in any vessel in a house where a death has 
 taken place, under the idea that as the living being comes 
 by water so does it make its exit through water. Hence to 
 drink, or to use in any way, a fluid which contains the life 
 
 10 Cory’s Ancient Fragments , p. 23. 11 Ibid., page 1. 
 
 I 2 Colebrooke, On the Religion of the Hindoos; page 86. New Edition. 
 Williams and Norgate, London, 1858, 8vo. pp. 325. 
 
86 
 
 of a human being, would be a foul offence. We are all 
 familiar with the use of water in our own sacred rites, in 
 which it typifies a new birth, as is proved by the expression, 
 “ born of water.” Amongst all nations water has ever been 
 used as a symbol of regeneration. In Assyrian theology, 
 Hea or Hoa is associated with life and with water, and 
 his name equally signifies the serpent. 13 There is, I think, 
 no reasonable doubt that water plays a multifarious part in 
 mythology. As it falls from heaven into the earth, and is 
 the main cause of the growth of plants, it is considered 
 as the seed of the Gods, and as such especially holy. 
 
 The most important part of the myth which water is 
 made to veil is, I think, the physiological fact that every 
 human being is living, during its intra-uterine life, sus¬ 
 pended therein. Almost as soon as the embryo is formed, 
 the “ amnios ” secretes a fluid in which the foetus floats 
 loosely, and in the midst of that liquid it continues until 
 it has arrived at maturity. When birth begins, a gush of 
 aqueous matter is the first symbol of the imminent approach 
 of the infant; and when it has emerged into life, a second 
 gush of water follows it. As the Priest took the place of the 
 Physician in days gone by, he must have been cognizant 
 of this. Knowing the constant occurrence of this phenome¬ 
 non, and believing that God worked in creation on high as 
 He did amongst men on earth; considering, moreover, that 
 man was made in the likeness of the Creator — an idea 
 which we recognise in the verse, “ So God created man in 
 His own image, in the image of God created He him, male 
 and female (yerforantem et yerforatam) created He them ” 
 (Gen. i. 27); and that everything which told of His work 
 here would be a clue to it in creation, the Priest dressed 
 up the phenomena of conception, growth, and parturition 
 
 13 See Eve, in tlie Vocabulary. 
 
87 
 
 in mystic garments, and deified the representatives of 
 reproduction. 
 
 When once the myth obtained, it was easy to interweave 
 it with others, so as to form a compact web. As the “ fruit 
 of the womb ” is both solid and fluid, it was natural to 
 imagine that the two male appendages had a distinct duty; 
 that one made the infant, the other the water in which it 
 lived; that one generated male, and the other female off¬ 
 spring ; and the inference was then drawn that water must 
 be feminine, the emblem of the passive powers of creation. 
 The use of water would then become the emblem of a new 
 birth; it would represent the phenomenon which occurs 
 when the being first emerges into day. 14 The night, which 
 favours connubial intercourse, and the dark interior of the 
 womb, in which, for many months, the new creature is 
 gradually framed, are represented by “ darkness brooding.” 
 It was night when the world was formed out of a chaotic 
 mass; because it was obscure when the mingling of the 
 male and female fluids started a new being into existence. 
 Over that tiny speck of life the care of the Creator watched 
 for months; and its emerging as male or female into the 
 world of men was the prototype of the emergence of animal 
 life from the bosom of the Earth, or the womb of Time, 
 into actual existence. 
 
 To the philosopher, the mythic stories of the generation 
 of the world are as clear as if he had been initiated into 
 “ the mysteries ” by the priests who invented them. As 
 man cannot invent a cipher which another cannot read, so 
 no theologian can frame a narrative or propound a dogma 
 which another, equally learned, cannot fathom. 
 
 It is often a thankless task to sweep away the cobwebs 
 which enthusiasts have mistaken for costly hangings sur- 
 
 14 See Cunni Diaboli, in the Vocabulary. 
 
88 
 
 rounding a body whose mysterious awe no eye can bear to 
 witness. While Mokanna remained veiled, the poetic fancy 
 of his votaries painted his visage to themselves as one of 
 ineffable loveliness; when, at their request, he drew his 
 veil aside, they started with horror at his intense ugliness, 
 and received with icy blood his sarcastic sneer, “ Ye would 
 be dupes and victims, and ye are.” There is many a 
 votary in the world of to-day who reverences the millinery 
 which veils a form as repulsive as that of the prophet of 
 Khorassan, and who would prefer to hug the sham rather 
 than to know the reality. 
 
 Since writing the above, I have met with the following 
 passage: — “ Yelim equidem ut pauca quae de Osiride 
 supersunt, silentio praetermittere mihi integrum esset; quin 
 vel officio meo, vel Religione iEgyptiacae deesse viderer : 
 Res enim occurrunt quae deformem turpemque aspectum 
 exhibent, ac versantur in cogitationibus quae mentes castas 
 et incorruptas ad obscoena deflectunt. Sed alta mente 
 repostum habere debemus, id descriminis intercessisse 
 semper mysteria inter JEgyptiaca atque Hellenistica, id 
 est caeterarum omnium nationum, ut quae apud iEgyptiacos 
 nativa sunt imago rerum cum divinarum, turn naturalium 
 a Graecis primum deinde a Romanis ad lasciviam, et 
 morum corruptelam traducta fuerint. ( Hanc turpitudinem 
 ab oculis submovere religio fuit.) Facessunt igitur qui 
 peni quern hie Osiris porrectum praefert, flagitia ilia quae 
 in Bacchi, et Cereris sacris peragebantur affingerunt. 
 iEgyptii enim quotiescunque Osiridem humana specie 
 representabant, erectum penem ipsi indebant; ut docerent 
 
 Soli innatam esse vim gignendi et alendi. 
 
 Videntur itidem supra tripodem tres phalli: qui quidem 
 Pamyliorum festa indicant: iis enim diebus circumferebatur 
 simulacrum triplici veretro instructum ; ut teste Plutarcho 
 constaret Deum esse omnium principium : porro principium 
 
89 
 
 vi propria generandi multiplicat id cujus est principinm. 
 Multiplicitas autem ternario nnmero designatur nt cum 
 dicitur O ter felices ter tot vincula. Quamquam veteres 
 proprie forsan triplici pene designare potuerint tria prima 
 elementa,” &c., &c. 15 
 
 To this I might add many quotations from the writings 
 of R. Payne Knight, but content myself with referring 
 the reader to his Inquiry into the Meaning of Symbolical 
 Language, and with expressing my own conviction that the 
 origin of the three emblems mentioned above, and of the 
 triple idea of the Creator, is to be found in “ fascinum cum 
 testibus duobus.” Semen quod veretrum emittat ova duo 
 parant. Tria unum est; singula, singulo, necessaria sunt 
 singulumque singulis. Languet mentula si ova sint sicca. 
 Ova et repleta, sine Asher sive fossore inutilia sunt. After 
 this triad of Gods, and associated with it, comes the 
 Supreme Goddess, but it will be more convenient to postpone 
 a full account of her to the next chapter, as her history is 
 too important to be hurried over, or confounded with that 
 of the Gods. 
 
 I must, however, again advert to the fact that the Trinity 
 is allied with a feminine element. If the opinion expressed 
 above be true, that the origin of the Chaldee triad is to 
 be found in the phallus and its two appendages, 16 it is clear 
 that the addition of the female was to indicate that union 
 of the sexes is essential to creation. The three-fold Lin- 
 gam and the single Yoni, the male and female organs, 
 formed Arba-il, the four great Gods = ymx — biOiN. 
 This idea is corroborated by an examination of the symbolic 
 worship offered by the priests in Assyria and Babylonia to 
 Ishtar, the female element in creation. One priest presents 
 
 15 Explication de divers monumens singuliers qui ont rapport d la religion 
 des plus anciens peuples,j)3i,Y Dom Martin, Religieux Benedictine de la congregation 
 de St. Maur, a Paris, 1739, p. 180. 
 
 16 See the Articles Apples and Eggs, in the Vocabulary. 
 
90 
 
 a pine cone, an emblem of the testis, with one hand, whilst 
 he holds in the other hand a basket, to indicate the scrotum; 
 another priest projects the clenched hand, with the thumb or 
 finger pointing to the sacred “grove” (Fig. 6). That portion 
 
 Figure 6. 
 
 of the hand, amongst Orientals, and some nations of Europe, 
 has always been used as a symbol of the male organ. I.? 3 
 bolien, and etzbali, had a similar signification amongst 
 
 the Hebrews. Nor is it to be altogether passed by without 
 notice, that the Pope, who has inherited so much of the 
 ancient heathen mythology and practice, still uses the thumb 
 and two fingers when he pronounces his benediction on the 
 people—the first representing “ the Father,” and the others, 
 the remaining members of the Trinity. 
 
 An idea so gross could not, however, be made presentable 
 in all its bareness; it was, therefore, wrapped up in mys¬ 
 teries. Amongst the Hindoos, Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva 
 are spoken of as Creator, Preserver, and Destroyer; they 
 are in one myth made to proceed from Mahadeva, and in 
 another they are represented as identical. With them 
 comes Maia, as the Celestial Virgin, forming “ the four.” 
 
 In the Chaldee we do not find a division of the three into 
 Creator, Preserver, and Destroyer, but one into Asshur, 
 
91 
 
 Food, and Drink, and with them is associated the Queen of 
 Heaven. In the Hebrew we find Moses, Aaron, and Hur, 
 joined with Miriam as the feminine element, thus making 
 four leaders of the Jews. To the thoughtful inquirer this 
 would be pregnant with meaning if it stood alone ; but when 
 we find still further that the names we have spoken of form 
 the second Assyrian triad, we shall be still more interested. 
 
 Nothing is more conspicuous throughout Scripture than 
 the earnest desire of the females for legitimate offspring. 
 To be barren was a reproach, and not to marry was equi¬ 
 valent thereto. Jephthah’s daughter associates with her 
 female friends “to bewail her virginity,” and modern theo¬ 
 logians as well as Jews account for this particular desire 
 by the hope which each woman entertained that she might 
 become the mother of the Messiah. We will not dwell 
 upon the reason thus assigned, further than to say that it 
 is very strange to find the ideas of marriage, and offspring 
 proceeding from matrimonial union, with the notion that 
 the Messiah was to be born of a pure virgin! and yet the 
 idea is said to have been prevalent. If the statement proves 
 anything, it ought to prove that all the Hebrew women 
 shunned marriage, so that they might be more likely to be 
 the mother of the Promised One. Be this as it may, it 
 is certain that marriage was desired by all Hebrew women, 
 and virginity deplored; and yet the sister of the Lawgiver, 
 and of the Great High Priest, remained unmarried all her 
 life. This circumstance is of itself singular. It becomes 
 more significant when we examine her name, and its re¬ 
 semblance to that of the Virgin Mary : one is Mari, or 
 Miri + am (the mother); the other is Mary, the mother 
 of the Lord. 17 
 
 This leads us to consider the Trinity as it appears in 
 modern Europe, but specially in the Church of Rome. 
 
 W See Mary, in the Vocabulary. 
 
92 
 
 We have not Creator, Preserver, Destroyer, &c., but Father, 
 Son, and Spirit; to these the Protestant adds only the 
 Devil; while the Romanist, true to the ancient traditions, 
 adds the Virgin, the Mother of the Saviour, Mary-am . 
 Coincidences such as these operate strongly on the thought¬ 
 ful mind, and urge it to penetrate through the region of 
 doubt, in search of the land of certainty. 
 
 The second Assyrian (and I use the name as inclusive 
 of Babylonia or Chaldsea) triad consisted of the Sun, Moon, 
 and atmosphere, or heavens — Shamas, Aer, and Hur. 
 The Sun, which was thought less of than the Moon, 
 had a great number of names, San and Sansi, Samas and 
 Shamas, afterwards Savas and Saos; and he also had a 
 name Parra, which seems to be an altered form of the 
 Egyptian Phra, or Pira. These were the names of the 
 male Sun. Ai, Gula, and Anunit were the female names. 
 The Hebrew word shani, signifies to shine, or bright, 
 whence, or from a word of kindred meaning and signification, 
 we get the words shine , sheen, Shinar, Beth shan, and 
 probably, the Irish words Shane and M&cCheane. San 
 got the titles, “ Lord of Fire,” “ Light of the Gods,” 
 “Regent of all things; ” he was the motor power, inciting 
 to war, ardour and love. He had a temple at Larsa, or 
 Ellasar, words which remind us of the name of Lars 
 Porsenna, which would literally signify Lars, the son of 
 Anna. The name of Lars is still common in Norway; 
 Largo and Lark are in Scotland; and Ellis, Elliston, and 
 Allister, have something in common with Ellasar. 
 
 In Palestine, Shemesh was substituted for Shamas , 
 and the name of Bit-Parra, the temple of the Sun, at 
 Larancha, reappears as Bethabarah beyond Jordan, where 
 John was baptising in later days. In the same paragraph 
 in which Rawlinson speaks of Bit-Parra, he tells us that 
 the Sun had another temple at Sippara, a coincidence we 
 
93 
 
 shall refer to by and by. With one or other of these titles 
 of the sun, under a modified form, a number of names are 
 compounded. 
 
 The Moon was named Sin and Hur. Hurki, Hur, and 
 Ur was the chief place of his worship, for the Satellite was 
 then considered as being masculine. One of his most 
 ordinary titles was Belzuna, often contracted into Belzu; 
 a word which I cannot write without thinking of the inde¬ 
 fatigable Belzoni, who toiled so hard to increase our know¬ 
 ledge of ancient Egypt. 
 
 Hur, the city of the Moon God, was called, in a later 
 age, Kamaxme, from Kamar, an Arabic term for the Moon. 
 Kama is, however, the Hindoo God of love, and the con¬ 
 nexion between the Moon and making love is well known: 
 
 “ She has been ever the go-between friend 
 Of all true love, from beginning to end.” 
 
 We have these names, Sin and Hur, reproduced in the 
 wilderness of Sin , and in $e?macherib, in £<mballat, Sinai, 
 &mim, and $mite. Hor, Hore b, Hore m, Hor Nagidad, 
 Hori, and Horonaim. Again as Ur in Uriah , [7njah, 
 Uriel, and Uri, the son of Hur. 
 
 The name for the Moon in Armenia was Khaldi, which 
 has been considered by some to be the origin of the word 
 Chaldee, as signifying Moon-worshippers. The people of 
 Babylonia, however, did not call themselves Chaldees. (See 
 Daniel ii. 2, and elsewhere, in which they are associated 
 with magicians, astrologers, and sorcerers, as if they were a 
 class in a nation, and not the nation itself.) 
 
 The third in the second triad (I did not refer to rank 
 or position) was the Air, the heavens, the atmosphere, 
 the aether, “ space,” or the expanse around us. Rawlinson 
 informs us that there is singular difficulty in finding out 
 the true reading of this deity’s name. Phul, Vul or Pul, 
 Ben, Iva or Eva, Air or Aur, have all been suggested. 
 
94 
 
 Vul is equivalent to Jupiter Tonans. Vulc&n, the fire 
 worker, was the Prince of the Power of the Air ; as burner, 
 destroyer of trees and crops, he holds a flaming sword; he 
 makes storms and tempests; yet he gives rain, and so is 
 benevolent. 
 
 A son of Ismi Dagon was called Shamus Vul. He 
 reappears, in later times, as Deva-il, the holy sun, the 
 Devil, lord of hell-fire, the devouring flame, the roaring 
 lion, Satan the adversary, Azrael the angel of death. Once 
 he was Lord of Urea, then became Lord of Orcus, the dark 
 grave, and of “the storm-swept Orcades.” It is difficult to 
 decide which of all these names, or whether more than 
 one, is to be selected. Rawlinson brings forward many 
 Babylonian and Assyrian proper names which begin with 
 Eva, and Ivah Lush is given doubtfully as a royal name. 
 Amongst the conquests of Sennacherib was a town called 
 Iva by the Hebrew writer, and the Avim are said to be 
 aborigines of Palestine, being associated very closely with 
 the Horim (see Deut. ii. 22, 23). Gesenius mentions a 
 place in Phoenicia or Arabia called Hmtha. Remembering 
 that the Hebrews aspirated Anna with their harsh guttural, 
 we turn to hava, and find that it means “to breathe,” 
 “to live,” “to shew,” which reminds us of the “breath of 
 life,” and of the Psalmist’s expression, “The heavens declare 
 the glory of God,” &c. 18 But, on the other hand, we have 
 Aer in Latin for the heavens, and ovpotvo$, ouranos, in Greek, 
 and we have Aaron the brother of Hur; his name is spelled 
 Aharon, and Ahar, T!**, is described as an unused and 
 uncertain root, and is evidently an ancient word; but in 
 its place we have Auor, Yik, or Or, which signifies “to be 
 or to become light,” or “ bright,” “ light,” “ light of life; ” 
 and Ur, signifies much the same thing. 
 
 18 See Eve, infra. 
 
95 
 
 Putting these considerations together, I conclude that 
 the Atmosphere has at least two, and probably three names; 
 Vul represents it in its stormy aspect, when he appears as a 
 draped figure wielding a triple thunderbolt. Eva or Iva 
 represents the Air as giving life, and Aer the brightness 
 of the sky, and the galaxy of stars, &c. The idea of this 
 trinity is poetic, and declares that, God is to be seen in the 
 Sun, in the Moon, and in the vast space through which 
 they move. We meet with the same notion, differently 
 expressed, amongst the Greeks, viz., that every thing is made 
 by “ fire, air, earth, and water; ” i. e., that the Maker of all 
 Creation is present in the sun, in space, in the earth, and 
 in the water. 
 
 No one who reads Psalm cxxxix. can fail to see how fully 
 David entertained this view; nor does the sentiment seem 
 out of place in the mouth of the warrior. We are told 
 that the king was a particular friend of Hiram, ruler in 
 Tyre, the centre of the Phoenician faith. If so, we may 
 well believe that this monarch had thoughts as lofty as those 
 of David, though he has left no memory of his cogitations. 
 The Sun’s wife, the female of this triad, was Ai — life 
 = '0, hai, or Gula or Anunit = the female power. Gala ~ 
 rabu = great. Compare ‘p-ia, gul, to rejoice, to move in a 
 circle. Gula is goddess of fecundity ; she presides over life, 
 is Mistress of Life, Mistress of the Gods, presides over births 
 (Juno Lucina). Her emblem is an eight-rayed star; some¬ 
 times a six-rayed one. 
 
 One of the most curious points which I have encountered 
 while studying this subject, is that Moses, Aaron, and 
 Hur make a triad, with Miriam, the virgin, for a fourth; 
 and that the names of the three are close copies of the 
 second Chaldsean trinity. The Sun was Shamas in Assyrian, 
 or Shemsi. He was reproduced amongst the Hebrews as 
 
96 
 
 Sliammah or in proper names, and Shemesh or 
 The name of Moses is spelled or Mosheh ; 19 the single 
 transposition of the first two letters gives ns Shemmah, 
 which is allied to the Shim, Shem, Sham, &c., so frequently 
 found in the composition of ancient Jewish names. His 
 brother is Aaron, or the God Aer ; and Hur, who assisted 
 Aaron to hold up Moses’ hands during the fight with 
 Amalek, is the Moon . 20 (The name was borne by a 
 
 Midianite king, and was not exclusively Jewish.) 
 
 Again, Moses, who bears a name, slightly transposed, of 
 the sun, marries for a wife Zipporah; and Sippara, we find, 
 was a place in Babylonia, where there was a very famous 
 temple to the solar God, and whose present name is Mosaib 
 (Rawlinson’s Herod, vol. i., p. 501.) Zippor, it will be 
 remembered, was a king of Moab. This coincidence be¬ 
 comes intensified when we remember that the successor of 
 Moses was Joshua, the son of Nun, i.e., the Saviour, the son 
 of the Fish. In an inscription on one of the Great Bulls 
 in the British Museum, is to be found, “ I am Sardanapalus, 
 the intelligent priest, the sentient guide or fish; ” and in a 
 note, Rawlinson adds, “ The use of the same signs which 
 represent a fish, and which with that meaning would be 
 
 19 It is probable that a transposition similar to this has taken place in other 
 names. We find the elements rrcn in Mashchil, intellect; Mash, a son of Aram 
 (Gen. x. 28). He appears in 1 Chron. i. 17 as Meshe ch. Mashal was a Levitical 
 city; it combines the two names of the Sun, Shamas and El. It was also called 
 Mishe al and Mishal. Meshe ch was a son of Japheth. Mesha, was a geographical 
 tract, and the name of a king of Moab. Meshacb. was the Babylonian name given 
 to Mish&el, the Hebrew. Mishael is the son of Uzziah, and uncle of Moses. Mash, 
 which we may read Mashah, Mesha, Misha, Mosha, or Mushah. Mishal is one of 
 the towns of Asher. Mish&m is a Benjamite, son of Elpaal. Mishma is a son of 
 Ishmael. J4is7imannah was one of David’s heroes. Mishxa, was one of the families 
 of Kirjath Jearim. Mushi was a common name. It is probable that this form of 
 the Sun’s name is still common amongst us, as Mashaxa. and Mashitex. I abstain 
 for the present from pursuing the train of thought which the apposition of some of 
 these names suggests. 
 
 20 See Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, new series, vol. i., p. 230. From 
 a remark there made, I conclude that Hur is equivalent to Sin. It will also be seen 
 that Hur was a Phoenician as well as a Babylonian God. 
 
97 
 
 pronounced in Assyrian as Nun, as titles of honour, is very 
 remarkable, and can only be explained as a relic of the 
 mythical traditions of Hea and Oannes.” 21 
 
 It astonishes the critic to find that all the leaders of a 
 people, who have been resident as slaves in Egypt for four 
 hundred years (as we are told in one part of Scripture that 
 they were), should have cognomens which tell of Assyrian 
 mythology, and that neither priests, princes, nor any of 
 the vast multitude [which they lead, possess a name akin 
 to the Egyptian language, 22 —and he must either wilfully 
 blind his ej^es, to avoid seeing the significance of the fact, 
 or he must pursue it carefully to its logical conclusion. 
 For the present we pass it by. and return to the Great 
 Mother of the Gods. 
 
 21 Kawlinson’s Herodotus , vol. i., p. 494. 
 
 22 This is the more remarkable, when we see that the short captivity in 
 Babylon, amongst the Persians, altered the nomenclature materially. 
 
 Or 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Ishtar, or Beltis. The Celestial Virgin—her names, titles, and statues — the 
 idea involved — picture of a mother’s love, and a virgin’s loveliness. Mary 
 and Molly — the nursing mother — love-philtres and amulets. Nature of 
 symbols representing Ishtar—the Delta, the sistrum, the grove — the nature 
 of the worship. Laws made by priests. Virginity made a sacred thing, and 
 claimed in some form by the Deity, or his representatives. The ancient 
 ways not always the best. The dove’s note and its signification. The fish, 
 its shape and resemblance—’Ix^s. Dagon. 
 
 With the triune male deity we find a single female asso¬ 
 ciated. She is called by various names, and many are 
 
 Figure 8. 
 
 Figure 7. 
 
99 
 
 the epithets she bears. She is “ The Virgin/’ conceiving 
 and bringing forth from her own inherent power. Now 
 she is wife of Bel Nimrod, now of Asshur, and now of 
 Nin. Then she is the mother of all the G-ods, the Lady, 
 the Queen. Her names are innumerable. She is Multa, 
 Mulita, or Mylitta, or Enuta, Bilta or Bilta Nipruta, Ishtar, 
 or the bright pure being; sometimes Bi, Alitta, Elissa, 
 Beltis, Ashtoreth, Astarte, Saruha or Sara, Nana, Asurah. 
 The same great being is recognised elsewhere as Athor, Dea 
 Syria, Artemis, Aphrodite, Tanith, Tanat, Rhea, Demeter, 
 Ceres, Diana, Minerva, Juno, Venus, Isis, Cybele, Seneb or 
 Seben, Venus Urania, Ge, Hera. As Anaitis (Fig. 7) she 
 is “ The mother of the Child ” ; reproduced again as Isis 
 and Horus (Fig. 8); Devaki with Christna (Figs. 9, 10); 
 
 Figure 9. 
 
100 
 
 Figure 10. 
 
 and Aurora with Memnon. Even in ancient Mexico the 
 Mother and Child were worshipped. Again she appears 
 as Davkina, Gula Shala, Zirbanit, Warmita Laz. In 
 modern times she reappears as the Virgin Mary and her 
 Son. There were Ishtar of Nineveh and Ishtar of Arbela, 
 just as there are now Marie de Loretto and Marie de la 
 Garde. 
 
 She was the Queen of fecundity or fertility, Queen of the 
 lands, the beginning of heaven and earth, Queen of all the 
 Gods, Goddess of war and battle, the holder of the sceptre, 
 the beginning of the beginning, the one great Queen, the 
 Queen of the spheres, the Virgo of the zodiac, the Celestial 
 Virgin, Time, in whose womb all things are born. She 
 figures in many ways, and specially as a nude woman 
 carrying a baby in her arms (Figs. 11, 12, 13); a group 
 which, if draped, would pass current to-day as “ the Virgin 
 and Child ” in any Koman Catholic country. 
 
101 
 
 Figure 12. 
 
 From what has already been said respecting Asshur, 
 there can he no reasonable donht that the primary significa¬ 
 tion of the deity Ishtar is the personification of the female, 
 and of the part she takes in Creation. Of her many names 
 there is one which seems to me to be very significant of her 
 attributes, viz., Multa, Mnlita, or Mylitta. I conceive this 
 to he derived from some words resembling the Hebrew 
 meal, “the place of entrance,” and ta, “a chamber.” The 
 whole being “ a place of entrance and a chamber.” The 
 cognomen Multa, or Malta, signifies, therefore, the spot 
 through which life enters into the chamber, i. e ., the womb, 
 and through which the fruit matured within enters into the 
 world as a new being. The part is made to represent the 
 whole, and beyond the indication of sex we see many 
 
102 
 
 Figure 13. 
 
 recondite thoughts, which may be divided into two heads — 
 woman as we would wish her to be, and woman as she is; 
 or, perhaps, it would be preferable to speak of the ideal 
 and the real, the mental and the physical. 
 
 I hope that there are few of my readers who cannot 
 remember a mother’s love to them in childhood. To her 
 all our infantile sorrows are told; she is the sharer of our 
 joys, and makes us happy by smiling on our school-day 
 triumphs. If we are ill, no bed is so sweet to us as a 
 mother’s arms; and to those of imaginative temperaments, 
 nothing is more delicious than to he soothed to sleep by the 
 musical voice of “Mamma.” If, with the impetuosity of 
 youth, we have been in mischief, or destroyed accidentally 
 
108 
 
 some valued possession of Papa’s, we hasten to the mother, 
 to enlist her sympathies, and to avert the heavy blow which 
 would otherwise make our ears to tingle. Mamma teaches 
 us our lessons, but we know that we can play tricks with 
 her and indulge escapades, and yet woo her into forgive¬ 
 ness ; her nature is soft as her flesh, and gentle as her 
 voice is pleasant. The boy, proud of his manhood, may look 
 fierce and bluster, and defy the weak arm which the woman 
 wields, but a silent tear brings the roysterer to her feet, and 
 with passionate kisses he woos back the smile he chased 
 away. Then, if Papa keeps his pockets too closely buttoned 
 upon pennies and sixpences, and is obdurate against sugges¬ 
 tions of new bats and balls, skates, or ponies, whips or 
 dogs, and the like, it is Mamma who acts as ambassador 
 and tells the tale we dare not utter. Such is the idea we 
 form of women when we are children. As we emerge into 
 manhood our admiration becomes kindled by reading of, 
 hearing, and seeing those who are the ornaments of their 
 sex. Beauty of form and loveliness of feature fascinate our 
 boyish thoughts, and in every young damsel wreathed in 
 smiles we think we see an angel who has visited earth; 
 furtively, or otherwise, we offer flowers to her, as we would 
 to a divinity, and to see a bunch of violets we have plucked 
 adorning her belt, or a rose we have laid in her pathway 
 picked up and noticed, thrills us with delight; while a 
 glance at us, and a smile to thank us for our pains, make 
 us wild with joy, though crimson at being caught. For such 
 a woman we would gladly fight, and we revel with pleasure 
 at fulfilling an order from her when it gives us trouble. 
 
 After a time, adoration of those older than ourselves 
 merges into admiration of some individual of an age resem¬ 
 bling our own. Around her our fancy weaves a net of 
 roseate hue, through which we see everything, and after a 
 
104 
 
 courtship of longer or shorter duration, we are, we think, 
 made supremely happy. But when she whom we wor¬ 
 shipped as a bride has worn out her wedding clothes, and 
 the cares of maternity sit heavy on her head, the angelic 
 delusions vanish, romance gives way to reality, and the 
 matron sometimes sighs for the delicious moments which 
 she enjoyed with him who was her lover ere her ring was 
 donned, but who is now a cross-grained fellow, thinking 
 more of eating a good dinner than of making pleasant 
 speeches. The mature man and the matron, then, can 
 both agree that woman is most full of charms and sweet¬ 
 ness while she is yet a virgin, and the beau ideal of a 
 female is one who combines the loveliness of a virgin with 
 the tenderness of a mother. Some such idea possessed 
 Mahomet when he peopled (for, in his case, no good 
 Christian believes that Allah did it) his paradise with 
 houris of perpetual youth for the benefit of the faithful. 
 
 When Beltis was worshipped by the devout she was 
 regarded as a mother is by a child; and when the Boman 
 Catholics address themselves to Mary they do it with the 
 same idea—the gentle mother being supposed to intercede 
 with the stern father. With us, in current language, Molly 
 frequently replaces Mary, but I never heard, even in the 
 fiercest controversy, the Virgin spoken of as Molly. If I 
 have space to carry out my intention, I shall show that Mary 
 is the Virgin, Molly is the fertile mother. The Celestial 
 Virgin, as the mother of all the Gods, must in some way 
 be designated as one who can nourish a large offspring. 
 As women have special parts for giving food to their 
 children, it is natural that a multiplicity of these should 
 stand for the mark of abundance : it did so, and there is 
 no essential difference between Ishtar, Bhavani, and Diana 
 of the Ephesians. (Figs. 14 and 15.) This is the refined 
 
way of looking at the goddess Ishtar, or Mylitta; the other 
 is very different. 
 
 Figure 14. Figure 15. 
 
 Throughout the Eastern countries of Europe and in Asia 
 men have considered themselves to be the lords of creation, 
 
106 
 
 and looked upon women as made for their gratification. It 
 was so in Western Europe for a considerable period. The 
 pleasure sought in their society was a purely sensual one. It 
 is difficult to believe that Solomon, with his three hundred 
 wives and seven hundred concubines, could have had one 
 intellectual friend amongst them all. When bodily grati¬ 
 fication is all that is sought on the one side, it is natural 
 that it should be cultivated on the other, and the art of 
 pleasing thus became a science. It has been the business 
 of modern charlatans to sell what are called love philtres, 
 and I do not doubt that the magicians, sorcerers, astrolo¬ 
 gers, and Chaldaeans did the same in days gone by. When 
 such persons exercise their art they usually have recourse 
 to visible emblems. But as those emblems were generally 
 held both sacred and secret, we do not know what they 
 were in days gone by. We may, however, divine their 
 nature by noticing the signs which have come down to us. 
 
 No symbol is more common amongst 
 the Assyrian sculptures than a mystic 
 figure, to which the name of grove has 
 been given. That its nature has not 
 yet been generally deciphered I infer from 
 its being used as an ornament on the 
 back of Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible. 
 Nor is this to be wondered at, for great 
 pains have been taken to disguise its 
 meaning. To the initiated every portion 
 of it is plain; to the outsider it is 
 simply a mystic emblem of some very holy thing. (Figs. 
 16, 17.) 
 
 But ere I attempt to explain it I must state the process 
 which initiated me into its meaning. There is in Hindostan 
 an emblem of great sanctity, which is known as the Linga- 
 Yoni. It consists of a simple pillar, in the centre of 
 
 Figure 16. 
 
107 
 
 a figure resembling the outline of a conical earring or 
 
 Figure 17. 
 
 an old-fashioned wooden battledore. (Fig. 18.) A conical 
 figure, similar to this, only supported by a handle, formed 
 the emblem of Isis ; but across its open space Figure is. 
 bars are inserted and turned down on each 
 side, to indicate that entrance through it is 
 effectually barred. A farther exploration of 
 the world of books brought out the fact that, 
 in the most celebrated of all the temples of 
 Venus, the sole image of the Goddess was a 
 conical black stone. As a scholar, I had 
 learned that the Greek letter Delta (A) is 
 expressive of the female organ both in shape and idea. 
 The selection of name and symbol was judicious, for the 
 word Daleth and Delta signify the door of a house and the 
 outlet of a river, while the figure reversed (v) represents the 
 fringe with which the human Delta is overshadowed. 
 
 It was not, however, the door only which had its 
 significance ; but the fig, the almond, the barleycorn, 
 and the pomegranate had also a mystic meaning. There 
 was in Palestine Beth-Tappuah, the temple of the apple ; 
 
108 
 
 Gath Rimmon, or the wine-press of the pomegranate; and 
 Rimmon was a deity in Damascus. To the physiologist, 
 familiar with the human body, it seems clear that the 
 sistrum of Isis and its handle, the fig and its stem, represent 
 what is technically called the uterus and the vagina in a 
 virgin state, while the pomegranate represents the teeming 
 womb, full and ready to bring forth. When I had ascer¬ 
 tained that the Celestial Virgin, the immaculate mother of 
 creation, was worshipped amongst the Assyrians, it was 
 natural to conceive that some sign would be found which 
 could be recognised as analogous to the sistrum of Isis and 
 the conical stone of the Goddess of Love. 
 
 The Grove , as it is called, fulfils all requirements. 
 There we have the door as a line in the centre, barred by 
 linked rings inserted into both sides and into each other, 
 to show that entrance is forbidden. On three sides is the 
 fringe , fantastically, but I think designedly, tied up into 
 thirteen knots, representing the lunar months, as well as 
 the menstruation which affects the female as those months 
 come round, and which has its name therefrom. Above the 
 door, arranged as a fan in shape, but marked by seven 
 divisions, to represent the planets, is to be seen that 
 which is technically called the clitoris. 
 
 However plausible, I did not dare to adopt the belief 
 fully until I found that Ishtar, under the name of Luz, 
 was wife to Nergal and to Ninip. Luz means an almond, 
 or almond-shaped; and those who are familiar with blank 
 walls, on which our youth are apt to draw objects offensive 
 to the general eye, will at once perceive that Luz was the 
 consort appointed in nature for the father of thousands, 
 the prosperous Asher. When such emblems are used in 
 worship we can readily - understand that devotion would be 
 likely to cultivate the sensual, rather than the sacred ideas 
 they involved. In India, I am told, there are two sets of 
 
109 
 
 worshippers ; one who refuse to see anything grovelling in 
 such matters, and another who refuse to see anything else. 
 Doubtless it was so in Ur of the Chaldees ; we are told 
 that it certainly was so in Sodom. 
 
 As a general rule we may assume that priests, who make 
 or expound the laws which they declare to be from God, are 
 men, and, consequently, too often think of the gratification 
 of the masculine half of humanity. The ancient and modern 
 Orientals are not exceptions. They lay it down as a certain 
 fact, that virginity is the most precious of all the possessions 
 of a woman, and, being so, it ought, in some way or other, 
 to be devoted to God. We need not go into details about 
 the manner in which the sacrifice was made; but we must 
 call attention to the fact, that a Christian Church still 
 promulgates the same idea under a spiritual form, and that 
 the nunneries of Christendom are decent counterparts of 
 those Oriental establishments, where women consecrated 
 their bodies and themselves to fulfil, as they were taught, 
 the special duties of their sex, in the name and for the 
 glorification of their Deity. There was a temple in Baby¬ 
 lonia, where every female had to perform once in her life 
 a (to us) strange act of religion, viz., prostitution with a 
 stranger ; its name was Bit-shagatha, or “ The Temple, the 
 Place of Union.” There are some chapters in the history 
 of faiths and religions which are scarcely presentable now. 
 This is one of them. 1 
 
 We would gladly bury the past in oblivion ; but, when we 
 are solicited on so many sides, “ stare super vias antiquas ,” 
 or to adopt the opinions and practices of “ The Fathers,” it 
 is well to ascertain what we are invited to take up ; and if, 
 as we dive deeper into antiquity, we rake up more and more 
 of thick mud, it behoves us to do as the Reformers 
 did, and, like them, sweep away from our teachings every- 
 
 1 See Bit Shaggathu, in the Vocabulary. 
 
110 
 
 thing which has an origin that we dare not trace, or, 
 having traced, dare not speak of openly. 
 
 There is one point in the history of Ishtar, or Beltis, 
 which is peculiarly pregnant with significance as regards 
 ancient rites, and another as regards modern, viz., the 
 homage due to the dove, and the veneration of the fish. 
 Throughout the Roman and Grecian states the Dove was 
 sacred to Venus. That Goddess had her car drawn by them, 
 and every device was resorted to, in order to introduce those 
 birds into pictures, mosaics, or sculptures, which had an 
 amorous design. Under the Mosaic law, doves are amongst 
 the offerings prescribed to be made by women under certain 
 circumstances; 2 and to the time of our Saviour a traffic in 
 these birds was carried on within the Holy Temple. 3 This 
 could scarcely have been allowed by the Jews had not the 
 dove been accounted sacred. 
 
 Amongst the Assyrians and Babylonians the dove was 
 a very sacred emblem. The winged circle, which in later 
 times was adorned by a man armed with a bow, supposed to 
 represent the tutelar Deity, was originally a dove with out¬ 
 spread wings and legs, resembling thus the Roman letter X ; 
 a cross of peculiar sanctity, from its connection with the 
 dove, and one selected, we are told by St. Peter, as being 
 appropriate for his crucifixion. We have already noticed, 
 that the Hebrew name for the dove is Yonah, and 
 shewn its close resemblance to the Hindoo or Aryan Yoni. 
 We cannot, however, associate directly the bird with the 
 part signified by the latter. 
 
 In endeavouring to ascertain the probable reason why 
 doves, rather than any other birds, were selected as sacred 
 by the Assyrian and the Hebrew, the Greek and the Roman, 
 I come to the conclusion that it could not be simply because 
 they were pre-eminently loving, for the sparrow is infinitely 
 more so than the dove, “ mi passer,” or “ passerculus,” being 
 
 2 Comp, Luke ii. 24, and Levit. xii. 6-8. 3 Comp. John ii. 14—16. 
 
Ill 
 
 a cant name for a Roman friend, just as a lively and 
 enthusiastic man is called “ a cock sparrow ” amongst our¬ 
 selves ; whereas the doves are a quarrelsome, rather than 
 an amiable, set of birds. While dissatisfied with the old 
 interpretation, my eye fell accidentally on the word J?«P, Koa, 
 in the Hebrew Lexicon ; and as I pronounced it aloud, 
 I recognised at once the coa coa of the dove. Gesenius 
 describes it as an obsolete, and, I presume, an ancient 
 word, signifying “ to cover the female,” as a male camel 
 does. Turning to the Greek, we find that the word xua> 
 signifies “ to be pregnant,” “to kiss,” “to be tumid,” 
 “swell,” “teem.” In Latin, we have the term “ coeo,” of 
 which the imperative is coi, a word which, as a substantive, 
 assists us in forming the name implying close union. From 
 this, it is evident that groves of trees were sacred, because 
 they were shelters for doves ; and doves were sacred, because 
 their note invited all, throughout the vernal night, to mutual 
 endearments. An explanation like this dissipates the charm 
 with which we have clothed antiquity, and it reads a good 
 lesson to those whose aim is to restore the past rather than 
 to improve the present. 4 Like the Dove, the Fish was 
 sacred to Ishtar, and to many of her representatives in 
 other countries. There was Dagon, a fish god amongst the 
 Phoenicians, and Durga, a fish deity amongst the Hindoos. 
 Both represent a full grown man emerging from a fish’s 
 mouth, and both have a signification akin to the words of 
 Job, (xiv. 1) — “ Man that is horn of a woman , is,” &c. 
 
 In studying the meaning of the fish as an emblem 
 sacred to Ishtar and Venus, we first notice its extraordinary 
 
 4 There seems to have been amongst the early Christian painters a frequent 
 desire to pourtray the story of Leda and the Swan. In the heathen designs, Jupiter 
 is often represented as a spectator looking from on high. These pictures have 
 been copied into missals — Leda being replaced by a fully draped Mary—the Swan 
 by the Dove—and Jupiter by God the Father, or by the Pope with a triple crown. 
 In a small sculpture over God’s Providence House at Chester, the Virgin is repre¬ 
 sented as being impregnated by a large bird—the dove—which breathes strongly 
 up her dress while she sleeps. 
 
112 
 
 fecundity; but if that were all, the wasp, the bee, the ant, 
 the locust (of course I refer to the females, and not to the 
 neuters), are far more strikingly prolific; shoals of fish are 
 not more dense than swarms of flies, fleas, and lice, in hot 
 countries, and we therefore doubt the interpretation. We 
 next note that the fish selected is not cylindrical like the 
 eel, spherical like the diodon, winged like the skate, or flat 
 like the turbot; it is one which, when looked at from above, 
 is almond shaped. A gold carp may stand as the type of 
 the sacred fish. To the surgeon or anatomist, to whom 
 every part of the body is familiar, the side view of a carp 
 is suggestive; the fork in the tail reminds him of what he 
 knows by the French word la fourchette; for medical men 
 are like others, who find it easier, or think it more grand, 
 to use foreign rather than vernacular expressions. The 
 accoucheur will remember how frequently he has heard of 
 the “ os tincse,” and may recollect, as I can, how anxious 
 he was to catch a tench, that he might see the reason why 
 the opening into the womb was called the tench’s mouth. 
 The figure of a priest is given in one of the works on 
 Nineveh, where part of the clothing 
 consists of a big fish. (Figure 19.) 
 The head of the minister is sur¬ 
 mounted by its head, which, having 
 its mouth open, indicates the origin 
 of the Bishop’s mitre. Putting these 
 things together, we conclude that the 
 fish was sacred, because the form of 
 its body represents one door , and the 
 form of its mouth the other door, 
 through which all the animal creation 
 passes into life. 5 
 
 6 For a further account, see the article Fish, in the Vocabulary ; and for door, 
 see p. 52, note, and p. 107. 
 
 Figure 19. 
 
113 
 
 If we now attempt to investigate how this affects 
 ourselves, the first thing which arrests our attention is that 
 the Saviour himself is designated The Fish, or lx^^ 6 The 
 usual explanation of this is, that the words “ Jesus Christ, 
 of God, the Son, the Saviour,” when written in Greek, form 
 by their initials the name referred to; but our Saviour 
 was a Hebrew, not a Greek. Besides, I. N. R. I., another 
 of his emblems, is attributed to a Latin source. 
 
 It is particularly interesting to see the intimate rela¬ 
 tionship between Christ, fish, and fishermen indicated in 
 the Gospels, to mark the feminine representations of our 
 Saviour given by ancient painters in Italy, and to notice 
 the pertinacious use of fish-eating as a sacred diet in the 
 Roman Church, on the day dedicated to Venus. The 
 scholar may, I think, trace, in a series of paintings from 
 early times to our own, a gradual change of thought in 
 the Ecclesiastical mind. At first the Saviour is represented 
 with feminine attributes, whilst the Virgin Mother is in the 
 background ; but as time rolls on, the Virgin becomes the 
 female, and her Son is painted with more masculine charac¬ 
 teristics. We cannot fail to remember that the women 
 who dedicate their virginity to God are still called nuns, 
 the Shemitic name of “ the fish; ” and that one of their 
 garments, on being laid out flat, resembles this aqueous 
 creature. The meaning of the emblem called Dagon is 
 now apparent; it signifies that man is born of woman, 
 and is dependent upon her for life, &c. 
 
 Amongst ourselves we repeatedly hear discussions upon 
 the relative value and importance of the sexes, and women 
 
 6 The Greek legend runs thus : ’irj&ovs Xpioro? ©eov Ytos 2wnjp, J esus Christ 
 of God—the Son — the Saviour. The initials of these words, when put together, 
 form the word l^Ov s ichthus, the fish. I.N.R.I., on the other hand, is from Jesus 
 Nazarion Bex Judceorum, whose initial letters make the above. We shall see in 
 a subsequent page the probable signification of the letters. See the Vocabulary, 
 s. v. I.N.R.I. 
 
 H 
 
114 
 
 are alternately estimated as angels, and as demons. I have 
 myself heard arguments so fiery on this matter as almost 
 to lead to enmity. What is with us a matter of inte¬ 
 resting speculation was once a point of religious belief, 
 and the cause of religious wars. The votaries of the male 
 idea induced young men to consecrate themselves to act as 
 women for fanatic worshippers; 7 while those of the female 
 idea enjoined that the priests should emasculate themselves, 
 and thus approach as nearly as they could to the feminine 
 condition. 8 
 
 It is not without significance that the Church, which 
 exalts a modern Ishtar to a higher place than her son,— 
 which perpetuates the use of fish on Venus’ day, and 
 encourages the growth of nuns, — should also use eunuchs 
 in her most holy Temple; and that under her teaching the 
 horse-shoe, a rude representation of the Assyrian “grove,” 
 should be used as a talisman to bring good luck. Before 
 horses wore shoes, the female parts of a cow, mare, &c., 
 were adopted ; and a personal friend of mine told me that he 
 had seen, in a church in Paris, a relic of very especial 
 sanctity, which was said to be the “pudenda muliebria 
 Sanctse Virginis.” 9 While upon this subject, I must call 
 attention to the shape of the Shield which was worn by the 
 
 7 See Eom. i. 26, 27. 
 
 8 See Kadesh and Eunuchs, in the Vocabulary. 
 
 9 It is too extensive a subject for minute comment, but I may mention that, 
 both in the Eastern and the Western world, natural chasms in rocks or holes in the 
 earth, of unknown origin, have been taken as emblems of the celestial mother. 
 There is much curious information on this point in Godfrey Higgins’ Anacalypsis; 
 where we are told that the early Christian preachers found the custom in Yorkshire, 
 and tried to abolish it by cursing the sacred chasms, and naming them Cunni 
 Diaboli ; Lysons, in Our British Ancestors , also gives some interesting observations 
 on perforated stone entrances to Tolmen or Sepulchres, Holes in the Wall, Hell 
 Holes, &c., and quotes from a Journey to the East, by Miss Ellwood, as follows:— 
 “ There is a sacred perforated stone at Malabar, through which penitents squeezed 
 themselves in order to obtain a remission of their sins.”—(Page 160.) It is very 
 interesting to the philosopher to notice how figurative language, in the course 
 of time, assumes a literal form. 
 
115 
 
 Templars, or which at any rate figured on their tombstones 
 and effigies. It symbolises the broadside of the sacred 
 fish, the central boss represents another emblem, of which 
 I shall shortly speak, namely, the Navel of Vishnu, or the 
 Assyrian Nebo. Before speaking of Neho, it will he well 
 to offer a few remarks upon the names of minor Gods. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 The minor Gods of Chaldaea and Assyria. Angels, Demons, Devils. Insanity 
 mistaken for demoniacal possession. Shala or Tala. Nergal. Nin, the Piscine 
 God—probably a female. Woman a cause of war. Merodacb. List of Gods. 
 Altars. Nebo. Legend of Mabadeva and Sara. Visbnu decides tbe quarrel— 
 decides that both are best. Cbaracteristics of tbe Navel—etymology of word. 
 Proper names compounded with Nebo. 
 
 There is great difficulty in separating a name expressive of 
 an attribute from the individual to whom that attribute is 
 given. We speak of God the Creator, God the Saviour, 
 and God the Holy Ghost as three persons, but one God. 
 In like manner we speak of “ The Vine,” “ The Lamb,” 
 “The Lion of the tribe of Judah,” “Emmanuel,” “The 
 Shepherd,” “The Word,” “The Messiah,” “Jesus,” 
 “ Christ,” “ The Son of God,” “ The Son of Man,” “ The 
 Judge,” “ The Saviour,” &c., &c., and yet mean all these 
 epithets to apply to one divinity. We may therefore believe 
 that the ancients, notwithstanding the idea of many persons 
 and of many names, yet indicated the same deity, and 
 acknowledged one great Being as Lord of all. 
 
 History and tradition alike tell us of a belief that was 
 current that the air or heaven was peopled with intelligences, 
 who influenced the affairs of men. Our Saviour speaks 
 repeatedly of “ Angels; ” in Matt, xviii. 10, he intimates that 
 every infant has a “presence ” angel to guard or watch over 
 it; and in xxvi. 58, he speaks of twelve legions of Angels. 
 At an earlier date, we find in the sacred narrative Elisha 
 showing to his servant how he was surrounded by chariots 
 and horses of fire, 2 Kings vi. 17. St. Paul gave credence 
 
117 
 
 to the idea that there was “ a Prince of the power of the 
 air ” (Ephes. ii. 2); the Pharisees, we are told, believed 
 both in angels and spirits, though the Sadducees, who took, 
 amongst the Jews, the place now assumed by the High 
 Church party amongst ourselves, refused to give credit to 
 what they believed to be a comparatively modern inno¬ 
 vation, derived from the heathen ; whilst the labours of 
 Layard and Eawlinson, which have shown us how strongly 
 the Babylonians believed in astrology, demons, genii, angels, 
 and the like, give us an idea who the heathen were. 1 In 
 the time of our Saviour, and up, we may say, to the present 
 century, persons who are insane have been considered as 
 favoured residences of divine or demoniac spirits. If the 
 madness tallied with current ideas of faith, the “ possessed ” 
 were hailed as prophets ; if, on the contrary, the insanity 
 w r as malignant, horrible, or expressed by heresy, the poor 
 folk were said to be possessed by the Devil. It is not fifty 
 years since ministers of the Church of England tried to 
 cure insanity by prayers, religious ceremonies, and exor¬ 
 cism. 2 Of course they did not recognise the presence of 
 a diseased body, nor imagine that the phenomena of insanity 
 were the natural result of a disordered brain, just as indi¬ 
 gestion results from an impaired stomach. The want of 
 this recognition illustrates how completely the idea of minor 
 deities is current amongst ourselves; whilst our newspapers 
 frequently demonstrate that a belief in witchcraft, i.e., the 
 malignant interference of disembodied spirits with the affairs 
 of men, has a firm hold amongst the lower, and some even 
 of the higher orders. 3 
 
 1 For a full account of the Jewish belief in Angels, Demons, or Demi-Gods, 
 see Coheleth, by C. D. Ginsburg, pp. 840-4. 
 
 2 See Demons, Exorcism, and Charms, in the Vocabulary. 
 
 3 Twenty years have scarcely elapsed since a gentleman, now, and for many 
 years, a member of Parliament, representing one of England’s largest “ consti¬ 
 tuencies,” firmly believed, and endeavoured to convince me, that a certain 
 case which bad recently occurred in the Midland Counties was a powerful 
 
118 
 
 Objection will doubtless be taken to the word deity; it 
 is used only to denote a power, person, or presence which 
 is superhuman, external to man, and therefore not under 
 his guidance or control. To the severe etymologist the 
 devils are as much deities as the angels; the only difference 
 being that one set are, in our opinion, orthodox, and the 
 other heterodox. We look upon the planets as wandering 
 stars, whose place in the sky enables the mariner to tell 
 his position when far away from land, and the movement 
 of whose satellites helps the philosopher to test the speed 
 of light. Yet it is not very long since English Christians 
 thought that comets were portents, sent by the Creator to 
 warn men of impending calamities. We can therefore easily 
 understand, and readily pardon, the ancients, who believed 
 that the planets influenced the fate of mortals. It is all 
 but certain that the minor deities of the Babylonians and 
 Phens represented the planets, but the process of identifica¬ 
 tion is not yet complete enough for general use. Whatever 
 was the status of the so-called minor Gods, it is unnecessary 
 to make any classification of them. Such remarks as will 
 serve to point out their nature, and the names compounded 
 with or from them, will be sufficient for my purpose. 
 
 Shala, or Tala, was the wife of Yul, “ The Princess of 
 the Sky” — (the title “ Queen of Sheba” signifies “Ruler of 
 the Heavens,”) — Sar, Shah, Sheruha, and Sara, were her 
 other names, all of which signify “ chief,” or “ ruler.” 
 From her appellatives we may trace Shela, Shalem, Shallum, 
 Shalisha , 4 Shalman, Shalmanezer, Shiloh, and Shaul (Saul). 
 
 The equivalent of the Roman Mars is supposed to be 
 
 testimony to the truth of demoniacal possession, so constantly referred to in the 
 Scriptures. Yet the documents he placed in my hand proved incontestably— 
 (1) that the patient was insane—(2) that the writers of the papers knew nothing 
 of lunacy—and (3) that they knew little, and thought less, of the laws of evidence. 
 There are still many to whom “ it is written ” is synonymous with “ it is true.” 
 
 4 We have a Baal Shalisha in Palestine. I take it to denote Baal of the triangle; 
 
PLATE I. 
 
119 
 
 Nergal. 5 He is represented as strong, powerful, terrible, 
 “ Leader of Armies,” “ Lord of Strength,” and under a 
 variety of other titles, all of which are compatible with 
 “ courage,” “ chieftancy,” &c., as well as with his title, 
 “The Strong Begetter.” 6 As his wife is Luz , or “the 
 almond-shaped one,” we can readily believe that he is Assher 
 under another name. 
 
 Another God is Nin. He is spoken of as the Fish God, 
 but I very strongly suspect that for God we should read 
 Goddess. Anu is a God in Babylonia ; Anna is a Goddess 
 in other countries. Amongst Nin’s titles are “ Lord of the 
 Brave,” “ The God who gives strength and courage ”; but 
 his name is very similar to the Hebrew pj, nun, or fish 
 (Fig. 20); he is himself the Piscine deity, and this would lead 
 us to the belief that Nun is feminine. “We seldom,” says 
 
 connecting it with Shala as a wife, I presume the triangle to he the A. The 
 Double Delta formed the celebrated amulet called “ David’s Shield,” TH pO (Fig. 21) 
 
 Figure 21. 
 
 6 The name of Nergal is probably derived from the Hebrew Nahar (irr3), light, 
 Gal is the Sun in Babylonian. Hence Noor-gal would be equal to the solar light. 
 We are familiar with the first half of the word, as it exists in “ Koh-i-noor,” the 
 Diamond Mountain of Light, a gem which was at one time a common topic of con¬ 
 versation amongst us. 
 
 6 See Nergal, in the Vocabulary. 
 
120 
 
 Rawlinson, “find his name used openly as an element in 
 the royal appellations; it was usual to speak of him under 
 a periphrasis.” 7 If my surmise is true, I should explain 
 this by saying that men are more proud of their descent 
 from men than from women. A warrior might he proud of 
 his descent from Mars ; he would scarcely vaunt a descent 
 from a female. Even the pious .ZEneas, as he is called, 
 has the general character of tenderness, rather than of 
 vigour, from his supposed descent from Venus. We love 
 our mother, but are proud of our father, provided he is 
 deserving of esteem. Thus all nations trace their pedigree 
 through the male parents; and an extensive inquiry into 
 the experiences of the breeders of horses, cattle, and sheep 
 leads me to the belief that the custom is founded on 
 sound principles. I know, moreover, that sometimes a 
 point is strained, and Royalty is allowed to follow, as 
 in the case of our own queen, the course of a female 
 branch; but as soon as a son comes upon the scene, the 
 male inheritance reassumes superiority. If then Nin were 
 a female, she would certainly not be often mentioned. 
 That she, or he, was held in great favour we presume, 
 from Ninev and Nineveh taking their names therefrom. If 
 we take the feminine idea of Nin, we need not go far to 
 explain how it is that she as a woman can give strength 
 and courage. There is a saying, “ Cunnus belli teterrima 
 causa,” i. e., a pretty woman is the cause of many a dreadful 
 fight. The long Trojan war was all about the possession of 
 the beautiful Helen;—the wrath of Achilles, “to Greece 
 the direful spring of woes unnumbered,” was the result of 
 the lovely Briseis being taken from him by the chiefs. The 
 long Peloponnesian war, if I remember rightly, had its 
 origin in a female. And, without multiplying instances, we 
 may say, that current experience tells us that men’s passions 
 
 7 Ancient Monarchies, vol. ii., p. 254. 
 
121 
 
 are sooner roused to energy, courage, and fierceness by the 
 influence of a woman whom we love than by any other 
 cause. 8 
 
 Of Merodach, or Bel Merodoch, there is little infor¬ 
 mation. We find the name of Merodach Baladan as a 
 king of Babylon, which would read as if it were “ Merodach 
 given by Bel.” Though written as I have copied from the 
 Scripture, in the Cuneiform it is written as Marduk, whence 
 Mardocheus or Mordecai. 9 
 
 The following, as far as can be made out, were the 
 Gods and their spouses:— 
 
 Asshur, El, II, or Ka, Ilos, 
 or Helos. 
 
 Anu. 
 
 Bel. 
 
 Hoa. 
 
 Sin or Hur. 
 
 San, Sansi, Shamas. 
 
 Iva, or Yul, or Aer. 
 
 Nin. 
 
 Merodach. 
 
 Nergal. 
 
 Nebo. 10 
 
 8 See Ninip, in the Vocabulary, 
 
 9 See Merodak, in the Vocabulary. 
 
 10 The following are to be found on a monolith of Ashur-akh-bal, as read by 
 Mr. Talbot:— 
 
 Asshur, the Great Lord, King of the whole of the Great Gods. 
 
 Anu, the Exalted King. 
 
 Bita, King of the Ocean, Lord of Kings, the Flying Fish. 
 
 San, the Sovereign, Lord of Crowns, full of splendour. 
 
 Marduk, Lord of ? 
 
 Yem, the King of the Exalted Gods. 
 
 Bar, (or Minev), hero of heroes, destroyer of heretics. 
 
 Nebo, the Judge who carries the Golden Sceptre. 
 
 Sheruha, whence Sarah (who 
 was a Chaldee). 
 
 Anuta. 
 
 Beltis or Ishtar. 
 
 Davkina or Daukina, compare 
 the modern “ Dawkins.” 
 The Great Lady. 
 
 Gula. 
 
 Shala. 
 
 The Queen of the Land. 
 Zirbanit, compare Bennett. 
 Laz or Luz, compare Lazarus. 
 Warmita, or Ishtar. 
 
 [Murilu 
 
122 
 
 It may be stated in passing,— to show how much the 
 Persian, Medic, or Aryan theology differed from that of the 
 Shemitic races,— that the chief Gods amongst the Medes 
 and Persians were Mithra, Armaita, Oromasdes, Vayu, and 
 Agni. 
 
 The altars used in the rites of worship were of varied 
 form. Some were simply round pillars, miniature repre¬ 
 sentations of a tower, evidently intended, like the round 
 towers of Ireland, to represent the Phallus. Others, again, 
 were of triangular shape, to imitate the Delta; and others 
 were combinations of the two. Smith, in his Greek and 
 Roman Antiquities , p. 116, depicts an altar surrounded by a 
 serpent, which is taking up one of two olive-shaped bodies. 
 The group so closely resembles the Hindoo Linga, with 
 the snake biting its summit, that its meaning can scarcely 
 be doubtful. In the same wood-cut is seen another altar, 
 square, which seems to have been used for sacrificing to 
 Venus or some other Goddess. In the print, the words 
 “ Genius hujus loci montis,” is evidence of the association 
 of Asher with high places and mountains. 
 
 Nebo was a very ancient Babylonian deity. He is men¬ 
 tioned b. c. 1300; but a long time elapsed, we are told, 
 before he became popular in Assyria. As he was not 
 amongst the earliest of those known in Chaldaea, we infer 
 that he was introduced between b. c. 2400 and b. c. 1300. 
 Before I go into his etymology, I must give a short history 
 of the name as it appears in the Vedic or Hindoo mythology. 
 
 Murilu, (Myrilla—compare with Murinna. a Trojan Goddess), Lady of the world, 
 wife of Bel, and mother of the Great Gods — compare with Mylitta. 
 The God Acherib, King of War. 
 
 Bel, the highly Exalted Father of the Gods, the Sire who created me. 
 
 The Sun, ruler of heaven and earth, inspector of the universe. 
 
 Ishtar, Queen of heaven and earth, who is the leader of all heroism. 
 
 These Great Gods are the Givers of Crowns, and they are the supporters of all 
 Boyalty .—Transactions Royal Society of Lit., 2nd series, vol. ii. part ii., p. 138. 
 
123 
 
 We are informed by Captain Wilford, in the Asiatic 
 Researches, that there were in ancient times as strong fends 
 between those who adored the Linga (or Linga^tas), and 
 those who respected the Yoni (or Yonigas), as there were 
 between the Komanists and the Protestants in days not 
 long gone by, if indeed they have yet passed away; and 
 that after centuries of contests some priest, prince, or 
 prophet received a mission to preach the Nabhi, and its 
 virtues, as superseding both that of Linga and Yoni. This 
 historical fact,— if fact it be, for it is difficult to find 
 whether mythoses are made to fit history, or history is 
 imagined to tally with the mythos,— seems to be recorded or 
 wrapped up in the following story:— 
 
 Mahadeva, the most ancient and the father of all the 
 Gods (corresponding to Asher) quarrelled with Saraswati, 
 or Sara-iswati, i. e., “ the lady Queen, or Princess Sara,” his 
 sacti, or wife (corresponding to Beltis or Luz), as to which 
 of the twain was the greatest, or had the most power in 
 creation. The controversy grew so sharp between them 
 that they separated, and never spoke to each other again. 
 This quarrel had a dreadful effect upon the earth and its 
 inhabitants: wild beasts devoured the tame, and then ate 
 each other, for no young kids, lambs, or heifers replaced 
 the old and infirm. The race of cuckoos perished, for no 
 sparrows built nests into which they might drop their eggs, 
 but this did not signify, since they had no eggs to drop. 
 The old folks died, and there was no one to fill their mouths 
 with holy mud, and throw them into the Ganges as the 
 highway to heaven. The race of priests expired, for there 
 were no votaries to bring them the means of living; and the 
 great Gods themselves became weak and thin, from the depriv¬ 
 ation of the offerings of the faithful, the smoke of incense, 
 and the prayers of the devout. Being naturally alarmed, 
 and of course distressed, at such a state of things, the great 
 powers attempted to mediate and bring about the old entente 
 
124 
 
 cordiale, but they were unable to do so, and the desolation 
 still went on. In despair, the Gods laid their fears before 
 Vishnu, and entreated him to find some remedy for this 
 disastrous state of things. He heard their petitions, and 
 as a judicious individual does now, he slept upon it, and 
 took counsel in dreams. To soothe himself completely, he 
 made the sea his bed, and was rocked into a profound 
 slumber. While still unconscious, his navel began to swell; 
 and as he wore no girdle to confine it, it had room to 
 expand, like the grain of mustard-seed, until it filled the 
 whole earth and heaven. From its branches new fruit 
 arose, and different from each twig. The Gods saw, with 
 intense admiration, the world re-peopled. Fresh crops of 
 grain sprang up, grass grew again, and plenty of lambs 
 appeared, for. men to eat, for priests to sacrifice, and for 
 Gods to smell. Men married and paid their fees to the 
 minister, had children and paid the oracle for naming 
 them; and all the world rejoiced together in adoration of 
 Nahbi, or Navel, whence the state of things arose. 
 
 Now anyone who will take the trouble to examine 
 the navel will find, in a fat person a depression, in 
 a lean one a conical eleva- 
 
 Figure 22. 
 
 tion arising but a trifle above 
 the abdomen, and in one of 
 moderate size that it is like 
 a lunar crater with a central 
 hill (Fig. 22). In all these 
 there is an outer ring and an 
 inner protuberance, and, by a 
 flight of imagination, these were 
 supposed to represent the union 
 of the Linga and the Yoni (Fig. 
 
 28), under the name of Argha. 11 
 
 11 See Nahbi, in the Vocabulary. 
 
125 
 
 We will not pursue this point now, but proceed to 
 inquire the meaning of the word. Nahbi in the Sanscrit 
 means “ the navel.” In the Hebrew, one of the modern 
 representatives of the ancient Babylonian, naba, means 
 “ to cause to bubble up,” as of inspired human discourse, 
 like the Greek pew. Hence we may compare the Nahbi 
 with Rhea the Goddess. nabah, an old word, signifies 
 
 “ to be prominent,” “ to project upwards in the form of an 
 arch ; ” n’bo, or Nebo as it is spelled, signifies “ a hill; ” 
 naboth, denotes “fruit,” or “produce,” also “promi¬ 
 nence,” “distinction;” nabhia, is a prophet; W}, 
 
 nabha, means “to bubble forth,” “ to gush out;” l-i:, nub, 
 signifies “to sprout,” “to germinate;” ^'3, nibh, is “fruit,” 
 “ produce; ” *5*2, nebai, is “ the marrowy,” having the vigour 
 of life. All these words are appropriate to the sacred navel 
 of Vishnu ; and we may consider them as equally appropriate 
 to Nebo, who is evidently identical with the mystic Nahbi. 
 
 The number of Assyrian and Chaldee names compounded 
 with Nebo is immense. This arose from the God being 
 very popular,—from his oracle being generally consulted 
 ere the name of a child was settled, — and from the priest 
 always introducing the title of his God into the prescribed 
 cognomen. One hierarch, however, must on one occasion 
 have been bankrupt in imagination; for the appellative 
 which he ordered is read by Bawlinson as “ Nebo gave 
 the name.” We may, I think, trace the knowledge of this 
 God extensively in Palestine. There are two towns and 
 one mountain, near Moab, called by that name. Nabal, 
 though spoken of as meaning churlish or stupid, also 
 signifies “Nebo is God.” Accordingly, Naboth may signify 
 “ the fruit bearers,” as well as “ fruits.” Nebaioth, the 
 eldest son of Ishmael, certainly signifies “ the fruit bearers.” 
 Again we have, as a variant, Nob, a priestly city, and 
 
126 
 
 Nobah, a town in Bashan. Nahbi is given as one of the 
 twelve spies. 12 Nebat is the father of Jeroboam. In Great 
 Britain we find many Nabs and Nebs—McNab is an old 
 Scotch name ; and we not only have these names as memo¬ 
 rials of Nebo, but we have remains in stone and earthworks 
 evidently used in worship by the so-called Druids, which 
 consist essentially of an enceinte surrounding a central 
 conical hill, as at Avebury (see Fig. 28). We think we 
 recognise the word in the Latin Ncevius, and we feel 
 almost sure of its descent by finding this associated with 
 Ennius, the Roman form from Anu. 
 
 12 Compare this name with the remarks made in the last paragraph of the 
 seventh chapter, supra, p. 97. See also Nahbi, in the Vocabulary. 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 The Babylonian faith in Palestine. Scripture names during the first epoch. 
 Manners and customs. Circumcision. Traffic. Slaves. Teraphim—their 
 nature. Mandrakes. Names during the second epoch. The names of the 
 Patriarchs analysed. Evidence of alteration. Euphemisms. The third 
 epoch. Condition of the Israelites at the Exodus—their language unchanged— 
 they communicate with the Canaanites readily. A. Babylonish garment recog¬ 
 nised as such by Achan. List of new names—remarkable points to be noted 
 respecting them. Epoch of the Judges. Samuel’s rise. Origin of the kingdom. 
 Saul—condition of Hebrews in his time. David. List of new names. David 
 crowned. Introduction of the name Jah, associated with a new faith—evidence 
 of resistance on the part of the people—separation of the tribes. Deductions 
 drawn from the preceding chapters. 
 
 In the preceding chapters we have attempted to describe 
 the religion with which Abraham was familiar in his youth, 
 and the faith in which Sarai was educated. It was to a 
 people possessing such a form of worship as that we have 
 depicted, and who were supposed to have amongst them 
 the knowledge of the true God, that the patriarch sent 
 for a wife to his son Isaac. Yet it is clear that the 
 distinction between the cult of the Canaanite and that of 
 the Babylonian cannot have been very great, when we, 
 taking the Scriptures for our authority, examine a few of 
 the names current in Palestine and elsewhere at the time 
 of Abraham, viz., 
 
 Abimelech 
 
 Asshur 
 
 Ellasar 
 
 Mash 
 
 Abram 
 
 Bela 
 
 Hadoram 
 
 Melchizedek 
 
 Amalek 
 
 Bethel 
 
 Hai 
 
 Meshach 
 
 Amor 
 
 Canaan 
 
 Hamath 
 
 Milcah 
 
 Amraphel 
 
 Eber 
 
 Ishmael 
 
 Pharaoh 
 
 Aram 
 
 Eden 
 
 Javan 
 
 Sara 
 
 Arioch 
 
 Elam 
 
 Jebus 
 
 Sheba 
 
 Arka 
 
 Eliezer 
 
 Lamech 
 
 Sidon 
 
 Arva 
 
 Elishah 
 
 Mamre 
 
 Zoar 
 
128 
 
 Though, with two exceptions, these are all non-Jewish names, 
 yet we recognise amongst them ab, father; ar and or, 
 light; ram, high; beth, house of; el, G-od, Sun; bel, 
 Lord; eza, Saviour ; am, mother; shah, ruler ; hai, life ; 
 zedek, justice; mash, sun; melech, king. In addition to 
 the above, we recognise am, “ The Maternal Creator,” and 
 ar, “ The Heavens,” i. e., “ The Celestial Mother,” in 
 Amor, and Aram; “ The Royal Mother,” in Amalek ; “ The 
 Celestial Father,” in Abimelech; “The Giant Solar Mother,” 
 in Amraphel; and “ The Sun ” in Mash, and Meshach, a 
 name we meet with again in Babylon; and “ Sherulia, the 
 wife of Asshur,” in Sara. As these words are Hebrew, we 
 may presume that Abraham’s language was similar to that of 
 the Canaanites, and infer that his religion was equally so, 
 for all those with whom he comes into contact seem to 
 worship the same God as himself, and to one priest of 
 especial sanctity he pays tithes. We do not know much of 
 the manners and customs of that time ; but an episode 
 in Sodom tells us of an affair both of vileness and violence, 
 in the midst of which “just and righteous Lot ” sees 
 no horror in offering his daughters for prostitution, in 
 order that his guests may escape Sodomy; nor do his 
 children subsequently scruple to adopt their father in place 
 of their lost husbands, and to name their children after 
 him as being his offspring. 1 We see no evidence that 
 Abraham was astonished at having to sacrifice his son, any 
 more than was a king of Moab in after times; and to the 
 same patriarch God reveals himself as “ a fire ” and “ a 
 lamp,” whilst turtle doves are used in his ceremonials. 
 In addition to this we note that “ circumcision ” is intro¬ 
 duced — a rite which tells us unmistakeably that the 
 Almighty did not think it contrary to purity and propriety 
 to take especial care of that organ which represented cre- 
 
 1 See Moab, in the Vocabulary. 
 
129 
 
 ative power. It is, however, worthy of note, that the 
 ceremony did not take place till after the Patriarch had 
 visited Egypt; and historians tell us “ that the Syrians 
 of Palestine acknowledge that they adopted the custom from 
 the Egyptians.” 2 It is also interesting to notice in passing 
 the evidence of commerce which existed. Abraham pays for 
 land in money “ current with the merchant,” and he has 
 no qualms whatever in encouraging the slave trade, by 
 purchasing human beings from the dealers in them. 3 
 
 Leaving the time of Abraham, let us in the next place 
 fix our eyes upon the period of Jacob’s death. We still 
 find that slave traders pass along, in companies, from one 
 distant spot to another, and that the materials and nature 
 of their traffic tell of climes in the far East. In the brief 
 period which has elapsed since Abraham’s time, we find 
 the use of “ Teraphim ” introduced, and we notice that 
 these images are first spoken of in that very family to 
 which Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob resorted for wives. Laban 
 had images, which he called “ his Gods,” and Rachel, 
 his daughter, stole them. We do not know much of these 
 “ Teraphim,” but we infer that they w r ere diminutive, or 
 they could not have been concealed by a woman sitting 
 on them. If small, they must have been symbolical, and 
 their signification must have been known to Rachel—they 
 were “ Gods ” to her and to her father, and the parent 
 and child had a reason in common for desiring them. 4 Now 
 
 2 Herodotus, ii. 104. 
 
 3 E. g., Hagar was a bond-woman, bought out of Egypt; and from Gen. xvii. 12, 
 13, it is clear that Ahraham bought slaves with money from strangers. If we believe 
 that our God and the God of Abraham are the same, it is difficult to understand 
 the dictum of many of our contemporaries, that slavery is a design of the devil. 
 
 4 The critic might fairly say, looking at Genesis xxxv. 2—“ Put away the strange 
 Gods from among you ”—that there were images of God which were not strange, 
 and that in those early times there were orthodoxy and heterodoxy in images, as 
 there are now. In ancient times the emblem of life-giving energy was an orthodox 
 emblem — it is now “ a horror,” and its place is taken by an image of death. We 
 infer from the context that Laban’s Gods were orthodox. 
 
 I 
 
130 
 
 Laban was a covetous man, very anxious for an increase 
 to his flocks and herds, and Rachel herself was desirous 
 of being prolific. Hence we infer that the images were 
 figures in some way related to fecundity. 5 The root in 
 Hebrew of the word in question is n ??, rapha, the mean¬ 
 ing of which is “ great, strong, high, erect” Almost 
 immediately after the affair of the images Jacob is promised 
 a wonderful amount of fertility by God, in thankfulness for 
 which he sets up a pillar, one of the many emblems of the 
 Phallus, and pours oil thereon, and adds a cairn. 6 In 
 connection with the same family we have a story of man¬ 
 drakes being used as a charm, and those who are familiar 
 with botany are well aware of their shape, and of the ideas 
 suggested thereby. As a visitor to the British Museum, 
 in days gone by, I was familiar with scores of little figures, 
 in which the central organ was disproportionate in size to 
 all the rest. They were, I presume, “ Teraphim,” represen¬ 
 tatives of the Mahadeva and Asher. Of late years, these 
 images have been withdrawn from public gaze. Putting all 
 these considerations together, it is natural to conclude that 
 the Teraphim were phallic emblems, and as such supposed 
 to have fertilising powers. It is clear that figures such as 
 these were not likely to produce a feeling of shame amongst 
 a family 7 who would not consent to their sister marrying a 
 prince, until he, as well as all his people, had been duly 
 mutilated, or improved, as a sacrifice to the God of Israel. 
 
 5 In this conclusion we are corroborated, by noticing that in the family of Jacob 
 there was a belief that the contemplation of certain external forms had an influence 
 upon fecundity. We see, in Genesis xxx. 37 - 42, that Jacob presented to the 
 gaze of those of the flock from which he desired to breed, certain rods (the wand 
 was then a phallic emblem), prepared in a particular form; under the influence of 
 this, offspring with particular marks and of conspicuous strength were formed. 
 Such images then being useful for the inferior animal, similar ones were considered 
 to be of equal value to man, and competent to produce strength and vigour alike 
 in the parent and in the offspring. 
 
 6 See Gilgal, in the Vocabulary. 
 
 7 Vide supra , p. 79. 
 
181 
 
 Amongst the new names introduced shortly before, or 
 
 during, the 
 
 lifetime of Jacob, 
 
 are— 
 
 
 Ammon 
 
 Epher 
 
 Maachah 
 
 Potiphera 
 
 An ah 
 
 Ephron 
 
 Machir 
 
 Kachel 
 
 Ard 
 
 Er 
 
 Moab 
 
 Shammah 
 
 Areli 
 
 Guni 
 
 Naaman 
 
 Shaul 
 
 Ashbel 
 
 Hebron 
 
 Omar 
 
 Shuah 
 
 Bela 
 
 Hezron 
 
 On 
 
 Timna 
 
 Beor 
 
 Hori 
 
 Onan 
 
 Zephon 
 
 Bethuel 
 
 Husham 
 
 Peniel 
 
 Zibeon 
 
 Elon 
 
 Jachin 
 
 Phallu 
 
 
 Ephah 
 
 Laban 
 
 Potiphar 
 
 
 We met with Am, “The Celestial Mother,” in our first 
 category, we now find that On, “ The Strong Father,” is 
 introduced. The word Nath appears also in As math, Tim- 
 nath, TiwpYmath. We find, also, a Rehoboth in Canaan as 
 well as in Assyria; and Aholibamah, a Canaanite, bears 
 nearly the same name as one mentioned in Ezekiel, cen¬ 
 turies afterwards, as Aholibah. 8 
 
 Having reached this point in my inquiry, I was induced 
 to examine critically into the names of the patriarchal 
 families, and found that Abraham signified “ the father 
 on high,” or “ the high father;” that he had for a wife 
 Sara, who may be either Sharai — “ the beginning; ” 
 Sar-ra, “the mother is God,” or n ^, “a princess,” or 
 “the great lady;” or Sheruha, “the celestial Queen.” Sara- 
 iswati, or “ my lady Sara,” in the Hindoo Theology, was wife 
 to Mahadeva. As the genealogy progresses, “the celestial 
 father” and “the celestial Queen” produce Isaac, which 
 means “sporting,” “frolicking,” “toying,” or “laughing.” 
 Isaac marries Rebekkali, “the great white one,” or “the 
 moon,” whose father was Nahor, or “light.” Their offspring 
 
 8 Genesis xxxvi. 2; Ezekiel xxiii. 4. 
 
182 
 
 are Esau, Edom, “ the hairy red one,” and Jacob, “the 
 round smooth one.” 9 Their children are 
 Reuben — The Mother’s Son; Ra-Ben, ri, or ra, being the 
 name of the Celestial Mother, or of God, 
 amongst the Chaldees, equivalent to our 
 Benson, or Rab On, my great 
 
 strength. 
 
 Simeon = The hearing On. 
 
 Levi = Conjunction—the circling one. 
 
 Judah = Udh-a, a warrior, in Sanscrit ? 
 
 Dan = The Judge. 
 
 Naphtali = Belonging to Phthah ? 
 
 Gad = Good luck. 
 
 Asher = Straight up—the erect one. 
 
 Issachar = Abundance of sport. 
 
 Zebulon = The dwelling place of On. 
 
 Joseph — The Increaser. 
 
 Benjamin = Son of the right side. Of these Ban, Gad, and 
 Asher have the same names as Phoenician 
 Gods, 10 whilst Naphtali contains that of an 
 Egyptian deity. 
 
 It is true that the Bible gives another account of the 
 significations of these names ; but there is sufficiently strong 
 internal evidence to warrant the belief that the present 
 version does not truly represent the original writings. It 
 appears to me that some names, current in old stories, 
 have been softened down during transcription, by variations 
 in spelling, or by the historian inventing a tale which puts 
 a new view upon the old matter. 11 It is certainly a hardy 
 
 9 These names will be found, with their derivations, in the Vocabulary. 
 
 10 For a particular account of these names, see the Vocabulary, s. v. 
 
 11 E. g., Jacob is at one time said to get his name from grasping his brother’s 
 heel at birth, and at another is said to have been named so because he was a 
 cunning one, and outwitted his brother Esau, Comp. Gen. xxv. 26 with xxvii. 36. 
 See also Jacob, in the Vocabulary, 
 
133 
 
 thing for any one to make such assertions; but surely, 
 when we find the writer of “ Chronicles ” altering names, 
 which contain Baal in “ Kings ” and changing that word 
 into bosheth ; 12 and when we find it to have been an ancient 
 legal enactment amongst the Jewish Kabbis that every 
 anthropomorphism and indecent expression met with in the 
 Scriptures is to he altered into an euphemism, 13 the charge 
 cannot he evaded. An instance, drawn from a prophet, 
 whose book has always been highly praised for beauty of 
 imagery and loftiness of thought, affords us at once an 
 illustration of the coarseness of thought and language 
 indulged in, even by the courtly, and of the euphemism 
 which tones it down; viz., “ In the same day shall the 
 Lord shave with a razo$ that is hired, the head, and the 
 hair of the feet , and it shall also consume the beard ” 
 (Isaiah vii. 20. Comp, also 2 Kings xviii. 27, margin). 
 
 The next period which we select for the examination 
 of names is four or five generations after the preceding 
 one. There are just three generations between Levi and 
 Eleazar, i. e., Levi, Kohath, Amram, Aaron, Eleazar; and 
 the length of time passed by is, we are told, four hundred 
 years. We do not stop to enquire into this curious fact, 
 but transport ourselves to the period of the return to 
 Canaan. The miseries of slavery in Egypt have passed 
 by; huge flocks and herds, a very fit appanage for those 
 whose time was spent in brick-making, have gone through 
 a wilderness, where there was naturally neither food, water, 
 nor yet space to exist in; arms have been found for a race 
 of fugitives, and courage has succeeded to pusillanimity. 
 The nation living in Egypt, in the most abject slavery, 
 
 12 See 1 Chron. viii. 33, 34; ix. 39, 40; xiv. 7; and 2 Sam. v. 16; ii. 8 
 iv. 4; ix. 6, 10. 
 
 -13 See Levita’s Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, by Ginsburg, p. 194, &c.; Longmans, 
 1867. 
 
184 
 
 with taskmasters on every side, and with a leader learned 
 in Egyptian lore, nevertheless retain their own language 
 intact, and have no difficulty in conversing with the kings 
 of Edom, Moab, and Ammon. Twelve men, speaking 
 Hebrew, go as spies throughout Canaan without arousing 
 suspicion, and others, forty years later, talk familiarly 
 with one of the harlots of Jericho. The men of Gibeon 
 converse with Joshua and Israel’s elders, and the latter 
 believe that distant lands speak the language of Canaan. 
 The country, erst so thinly peopled that two men could 
 kill all the inhabitants in a town, is now, in the fourth 
 generation, densely populated; and there are cities with 
 walls exceeding in height the tower of Babel, — for that 
 was only intended to reach into heaven, whereas these walls 
 actually did so (Deut. i. 28). We do not hear much of 
 trade, but we find incidentally that Achan coveted a goodly 
 Babylonish garment, which shows that there was traffic of 
 some kind between Palestine and Chaldaea; and seeing that 
 Achan, who had been living and brought up in the wilder¬ 
 ness, recognised it as Babylonian, we conclude that he must 
 have gained his experience by meeting with some caravan 
 of merchants in the desert, and that he had seen rich stuffs 
 which he had coveted, although unable to buy them. 
 
 In the list of new Jewish names at this period-—it would 
 be an useless waste of time to repeat old ones, which are 
 precisely the same as those already noticed—we find 
 
 Aaron 
 
 Asriel 
 
 Elizur 
 
 Hor 
 
 Achan 
 
 Dathan 
 
 Elkanah 
 
 Hori 
 
 Ahiram 
 
 Eleazur 
 
 Elzaphan 
 
 Hur 
 
 Ammishaddai 
 
 Eliasapli 
 
 Gamaliel 
 
 Joshua 
 
 Amram 
 
 Elim 
 
 Gideoni 
 
 Miriam 
 
 Anak 
 
 Elisheba 
 
 Helon 
 
 Mishael 
 
 Ashbel 
 
 Elizaphan 
 
 Hezron 
 
 Mushi 
 
135 
 
 Naaman 
 
 Pallu 
 
 Shelumiel 
 
 Zephon 
 
 Naashon 
 
 Pithom 
 
 Sodi 
 
 Zuar 
 
 Nahbi 
 
 Rameses 
 
 Susi 
 
 Zurishaddai 
 
 On 
 
 Shammuah 
 
 Uri 
 
 
 Of new Canaanite names, there are — 
 
 
 Of Persons- 
 
 — Adonizedek 
 
 Of Places—Achsaph 
 
 
 Agag 
 
 
 Adam 
 
 
 Ahiman 
 
 
 Ai 
 
 
 Arad 
 
 
 Ajalon 
 
 
 Balaam 
 
 
 Aphek 
 
 
 Balak 
 
 
 Aram 
 
 
 Chemosh 
 
 
 Arnon 
 
 
 Evi 
 
 
 Ashkalon 
 
 
 Horam 
 
 
 Dibon 
 
 
 Hur 
 
 
 Eglon 
 
 
 °g 
 
 
 Ekron 
 
 
 Piram 
 
 
 Gibeon 
 
 
 Rahab 
 
 
 Hermon 
 
 
 Reba 
 
 
 Heshhon 
 
 
 Shechem 
 
 
 Madon 
 
 
 Sihon 
 
 
 Makkedah 
 
 
 Zippor 
 
 
 Merom 
 
 
 Zipporah 
 
 
 Pethor 
 
 Shimron 
 Taanach, &c. 
 
 That which 
 
 arrests our attention, on 
 
 reading over the 
 
 first part of this list, is that not a single new name can be 
 traced to Egypt. This is the more remarkable, since a 
 sojourn for only seventy years under the Chaldaeans, Per¬ 
 sians, and Medes sufficed to introduce a number of new 
 appellatives, drawn from Aryan or Babylonian sources, and 
 which continued until the final destruction of Jerusalem. 
 We also see that the leaders of the Israelites, Moses, 
 
136 
 
 Aaron, Hur, and Joshua, have all of them Assyrian, 
 Phoenician, or Babylonian names, analogous to those of 
 the kings of the Amorites. Asriel, Ashbel, Helon, Hezron, 
 Mushi, Nahbi, Pallu, Shelumiel, are all derived from names 
 in the Asiatic, not in the Egyptian mythology. Moreover, we 
 note that no name has yet been introduced which is com¬ 
 pounded with Jah, or ehieh, or “ Jehovah,” although 
 
 for upwards of sixty years it has been known as the name 
 by which God desired to go (Exod. vi. 2, 8); and we notice 
 still farther that the use of circumcision has been wholly 14 
 ignored by the lawgiver who imposed it. 
 
 We next pass on to another period. Four generations 
 have passed away since our last review; the Israelites have 
 been subjected to various kings, and have had times of rest, 
 which amount altogether to about four hundred years. The 
 powerful heroes have mostly died out; and no metropolis 
 seems to be occupied by the descendants of Jacob. Samuel 
 arises as a prophet and a judge, and under his supremacy 
 quiet is established. Up to this time there is no evidence 
 of the existence of any writings, besides those in the Ark, 
 which were graven upon stone, like the records of the 
 Assyrians. If in the times after David, “ the law ” could 
 be so completely lost, that no copy was extant in the early 
 days of Josiah, d fortiori, it is probable that such a loss 
 occurred during the time of the Judges. It is certainly 
 clear that there was no law which prevented the Hebrews 
 worshipping Baalim and Ashtaroth. Micah has “a house 
 of Gods ; ” and we read in the Book of Judges of ephods, 
 teraphim, molten and graven images. Even Jephthah, who 
 is specially raised up as a deliverer, does not scruple to offer 
 up his own child as a sacrifice to the Almighty, any more 
 than did Abraham a few centuries before. 
 
 As Samuel advances into years, his sons turn out almost 
 
 14 See Exod. iv. 24-26; Josh. v. 5, et seg. 
 
137 
 
 as badly as did Eli’s. A king is sought for, and, the 
 prophet having the management of the election, the choice 
 falls upon the biggest man. Though of large mould, he is 
 not sufficiently large-hearted to adopt implicitly, and carry 
 out faithfully, the orders of the seer, who, being unable 
 to use him as a cat’spaw, looks out for another man. 
 Accordingly, he on the second occasion selects a youth of 
 sanguine temperament, of soft mind, easily moulded, and 
 possessed of a courage which we should call dauntless, 
 were we not told how abjectly he could play the madman 
 when he was in real terror of his life. 
 
 During the reign of Saul, the fortunes of the Jews were 
 so low, that there was scarcely a man who possessed a single 
 implement of iron, and many men had to hide in caves and 
 holes in the earth. We are not told of any trade having 
 been carried on by the Hebrews at this time. But as we 
 find from bilingual inscriptions on certain weights found at 
 Nineveh that the Assyrians traded with, and that their 
 language was used by, the Phoenicians, b. c. 1000, we must 
 presume that caravans must have passed through Palestine, 
 and brought with them information from each end of their 
 journey. 
 
 The new names which we find at this epoch in Israel’s 
 history are as follows :— 
 
 Abdon 
 
 Aphiah 
 
 Daniel 
 
 Eshbaal 
 
 Abiel 
 
 Araunah 
 
 David 
 
 Gaal 
 
 Abimelech 
 
 Arumah 
 
 Deborah 
 
 G-aash 
 
 Abinadab 
 
 Azel 
 
 Ebenezer 
 
 Gideon 
 
 Abner 
 
 Barak 
 
 Elah 
 
 Hannah 
 
 Absalom 
 
 Bathsheba or 
 
 Eli 
 
 Ishui 
 
 Adonijah 
 
 Shua 
 
 Eliab 
 
 Jesse 
 
 Ahiah 
 
 Bethaven 
 
 Elimelech 
 
 Joash 
 
 Amasa 
 
 Boaz 
 
 Elishama 
 
 Joel 
 
 Ammon 
 
 Carmel 
 
 Elkana 
 
 J onathan 
 
138 
 
 Jezreel 
 
 Joezer 
 
 Kish 
 
 Maon 
 
 Matri 
 
 Melchishua 
 
 Merab 
 
 Meribaal 
 
 Jotham 
 
 Micah 
 
 Mical 
 
 Michael 
 
 Michmash 
 
 Nahal 
 
 Nathan 
 
 Ner 
 
 Nethaneel 
 
 Obed 
 
 Peninnah Shimea 
 
 Phalti Shimshon 
 
 Pithon Solomon 
 
 Rimmon Tamar 
 
 Shalisha Tola 
 
 Shammah Zebul 
 
 Shaul Zerniah 
 
 Shemuel Ziph 
 
 Shephatiah 
 
 An analysis of these names will be given hereafter. In 
 this list appear for the first time a few words compounded 
 with Jah, 15 almost all the rest tell of an origin either from 
 the people of the land, or from a distant Chaldee source. 
 
 David, whom we read of as the chosen successor of Saul, 
 is driven into exile. After a certain number of adventures 
 he goes into the land of the Philistines, and while there 
 makes the acquaintance and gains the friendship of the king 
 of Tyre. Immediately after his return, we meet in com¬ 
 position the name of Jah in almost every new appellative, 
 and the word never wholly disappears to the end of the 
 Jewish history, although it is in abeyance for a long period 
 after the return from Babylon. With the new name it is 
 evident that a new style of religion is introduced, one 
 which David by his personal influence can enforce on his 
 own tribe, though not upon the nation generally. Twice do 
 the other tribes revolt from him during his life-time unsuc¬ 
 cessfully, and a third time do they revolt, and successfully, 
 from under his grandson. As soon as the secession is 
 complete, the old religion is restored among the mass of 
 the Jews. They doubtless considered themselves and their 
 opponents much in the same light as catholics and pro- 
 testants esteem each other now, each believing himself 
 
 15 See Jah, in the Vocabulary. 
 
139 
 
 right, and inventing all sorts of stories, good, bad, and 
 indifferent, about his opponents. The stories current among 
 the seceded ten tribes about what happened in Jerusalem 
 have not come down to us, although we are quite familiar 
 with the tales told about the occurrences in Samaria; 
 miracles being ever performed at a distance from those 
 who hear of them. 
 
 Having attained this point in our investigation, let us 
 pause awhile, and read over the lessons we have learned : 
 
 1. We have learned to doubt the strict truth of history, 
 even when it comes to man as sacred and infallible. This, 
 however, is a fact which we knew before, as regards other 
 faiths, although we refused to include our own Scriptures 
 amongst those to be distrusted. 
 
 2, We have learned the value of proper names as indi¬ 
 cative of the name and the nature of the deities then wor¬ 
 shipped. 
 
 8. We have learned the long duration of certain forms of 
 faith, which have been due to priestly interference with the 
 individual from the cradle to the grave. 
 
 4. We have seen that names were not originally here¬ 
 ditary, and that they did not become so until individual 
 families, or nations, were deprived of their ancient priest¬ 
 hood. 
 
 5. We have seen changes in names tell of a change of 
 Gods, and that with the alteration new mythoses have been 
 invented. 
 
 As it is always well to try to judge the past by the 
 light of the present, we may compare the literature of Judah 
 with that which Rome adopts to adorn her canonised Saints. 
 With her neither Saint nor Martyr is elevated to his high 
 place until long after his death, when all those who knew 
 him personally during life have deceased, and the field is 
 open for a crop of miracles,—the growth of which is strong 
 
140 
 
 and hardy, according to the time and distance intervening 
 between the faithful and the Saint. The miracles per¬ 
 formed by St. Francis Xavier, in India, surpass by far those 
 performed in Europe by any other Saint ; and Eomish 
 miracles are far more abundant in those countries where the 
 papal faith has supremacy, than in protestant districts, where 
 the acumen of the people is exercised by the habit encouraged 
 by their pastors of thinking for themselves in matters of 
 religion. Protestants do not scruple to deride or pity the 
 unreasoning faith which induces the devout Komanist to 
 believe implicitly the sacred stories of canonised moderns; 
 yet they resent, with all the might of superlative bigotry, 
 the idea that similar stories may have been written by astute 
 Jewish priests in ancient Palestine. 
 
 6. We have learned that certain appellatives have de¬ 
 scended from the earliest times to our own. Ab, the father, 
 in the days of Abraham, became Abba in later times, and in 
 our own is still to be seen in Abbot and Abbe;- and Melech 
 or Melchi is still current as Melek and Melchior. 
 
 7. We have seen that the Jews adopted into their 
 nomenclature the names of the Gods of Mesopotamia and 
 Phoenicia, and from the junction between the Samaritan 
 Ahab and the Zidonian Jethebaal, in the person of his 
 daughter Jezebel, we may infer that the religion of the two 
 families was substantially the same. How completely our 
 views are borne out, will be shown in the subsequent 
 Vocabulary, by an investigation into all the names of the 
 Old Testament. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 
 
 Symbols—their antiquity. The disc or circle. The wheel—its varieties. The 
 mural ornament. The crescent. The triangle. The double triangle. The 
 double triangle and the circle. Phallic crosses. Maltese cross. Buddhist cross. 
 Emblems of the triad. The fleur de lys. The T sign. The crux ansata. The 
 shamrock. Pillars in porch of temples. Gilgal. Menhirs and stone heaps. 
 Symbols of Arba-il. Hindoo signs of the Linga Yoni. Female emblems. The 
 shell. Sistrum of Isis. The female sign of Assyria—its meaning. The pine 
 cone and basket. The delta. Sacred shields. The stole. The ship—its 
 meaning. The mast of the boat. The anchor. The ark. The broad arrow. 
 Chinese emblems. Buddhist signs—the fish and triad. The method of 
 benediction by priest and pope. The mitre. Concluding remarks. 
 
 Up to the present time we have been concerned chiefly 
 with the descent of names from a remote antiquity to our 
 own days, with their signification when they were first 
 bestowed by the priest who dictated them, and with the 
 nature of the Gods worshipped when those names were 
 current. We now propose to show that certain figures or 
 symbols enfold a meaning similar to that enveloped in 
 many cognomens, and have had a descent equally long. 
 A vast number of the mystic signs once common in Pagan 
 worship are still domiciled amongst ourselves; and the 
 High Churchman of to-day decorates the edifice in which 
 he officiates with symbols similar to those which awed the 
 worshippers of Asher, Ishtar, or the Sun. To the vast 
 majority, the signification of the symbols used amongst 
 moderns is unknown, nor is their origin even suspected; 
 but, as is usual amongst theologians, whose policy is to 
 adapt new ideas to ancient ones, the Church, which adopted 
 its symbols from Paganism, has invented some story to 
 account for their existence, which by constant repetition 
 has been at last adopted as truth. 
 
 As it is difficult to arrange symbols according to order, 
 
142 
 
 we shall only attempt to do so in a rudimentary fashion. 
 As all are familiar with the serpent and the dove, the obelisk, 
 the pyramid, the round tower, the menhir, or tall upright 
 stone, it will be unnecessary to figure them. We may con¬ 
 sider, first, the circle or disc in all its varied forms; secondly, 
 the triangle; thirdly, the cross; fourthly, the signs used to 
 express the triad; fifthly, the symbols of Arba-il, or the 
 four great ones, which will be followed by what may be 
 called female emblems, and other miscellaneous ones. 
 
 1. The circle or disc .— This is seen in its rudimentary 
 form in “ the Aureole ” round the 
 head of those endowed with divine 
 attributes. At Pompeii and Hercu¬ 
 laneum, numbers of Heathen figures 
 were adorned by this circlet — a pro¬ 
 ceeding very necessary when Gods 
 and Goddesses were, and still are, 
 pourtrayed by painters as men and 
 women, who are often wholly nude. 
 Without such a contrivance, Venus would be simply a naked 
 woman, and the Virgin Ishtar, or Mary, e. g., the Maria 
 del Sedia, without a circlet round her head, would resemble 
 any matron who had a child in her arms. 
 
 In modern as well as in ancient art, a variety of plans 
 have been adopted to make the circle more mysterious. 
 Sometimes it is painted as if solid, the colour adopted 
 being golden ; and sometimes it is actually gilded. Some¬ 
 times the cross is inscribed therein, in as many different 
 varieties, or different forms, as it is possible to conceive. 
 Sometimes, by shading, the disc is made to represent an orb, 
 and that orb is divided into four compartments by a cross 
 made with triangular arms. The origin of the aureole, or 
 disc, was the solar orb, which was represented as a circle, 
 to distinguish it from the moon, whose symbol was the 
 crescent. Being round, it was soon likened to the wheel of 
 
 Figure 24. 
 
148 
 
 a chariot; and the sun was spoken of as a charioteer driving 
 through the sky, as we see in the classic story of Phaeton 
 and his father. A wheel, therefore, was often used as an 
 emblem of the God (comp. Ezek. i. 16, 20), Fig. 25. 
 
 But the sparkling fancy of priestly artists soon improved 
 upon this plain symbol, and adopted 
 plans by which it might be made 
 to infold an increased amount of 
 mystery. The outer end of each 
 
 spoke was designed thus as 
 
 emblematic of the triad ; or another 
 design was adopted, as being more 
 
 artistic, viz., ~ _ __=-8o 
 
 Figure 26. 
 
 Figure 25. 
 
 The obvious intention of the last three is to pourtray, 
 (26), the solar cross, and the mystic four; (27), the solar 
 cross, the mystic four, and the triad; (28), the solar cross, 
 the mystic triad, and the eight-rayed star, emblem of the 
 sun in conjunction with the moon. 
 
144 
 
 Great numbers of small leaden medals have been found 
 in tbe Seine at Paris, in which one or other of these symbols 
 is depicted on one side, while on the obverse is the character¬ 
 istic emblem of the male or female sex. 
 
 To this day, the very ancient parish church of Bebington, 
 Cheshire, has not only the Solar Wheel, each spoke of which 
 terminates in a triad, as one of the adornments of the 
 Reredos, but it abounds with Deltas, Acorns, Maltese crosses, 
 infolding triangles, and Virgins, who, like the ancient Isis, 
 are crowned with the inverted crescent, the chaplet being 
 still farther adorned with the seven planets. 
 
 A further development of the solar emblem seems to 
 have been adopted by some. This may have arisen from a 
 Chaldee source, since a circle so adorned exists in the 
 Assyrian Collection in the British Museum, viz., the addi¬ 
 tion of something like fortifications round the outside ring, 
 as represented in the lower half of Fig. 27; a device which 
 reminds us of the mural crown, and of Mary, the mother 
 of the world. Now the addition of the tower to the head 
 of female deities (see Fig. 14, p. 105), was to indicate 
 that the individual was a pure virgin, unapproachable to 
 the forces of temptation. We see the use of this metaphor 
 in the Song of Solomon viii. 9, 10, which in Ginsburg’s 
 translation, p. 189, is, “ If she be like a wall, we will build 
 upon her a silver turret.” Hence we conclude that the 
 addition of the mural design to the outer circumference 
 of the Solar Wheel was to indicate the belief of the 
 artist who adopted it, that the Sun was feminine as well 
 as masculine. As the disc was sometimes used without 
 the cross, so the cross was used sometimes without the 
 disc; a fact to which we shall refer shortly. The crescent 
 has always been, as it is now, a lunar emblem, and a sign 
 or symbol of the Celestial virgin. As such it appears on 
 ancient gems and sculptures. Sometimes it is associated with 
 the Sun, the latter orb fitting in as it were into the hollow 
 
145 
 
 between the moon’s horns. Sometimes the two are pour- 
 trayed side by side. Occasionally the sign is inverted, and 
 attached to the head of a female deity, as in the annexed 
 
 Figure 29. 
 
 figure of Isis. A figure of a similar 
 design, though slightly differing in 
 detail, is said by archaeologists to 
 have been worn by the Arch Druids ; 
 and many will remember that the 
 most ancient forms of money with 
 which we are acquainted were golden 
 crescents, of varying size and weight, 
 which are to be found equally in 
 the bogs of Ireland, and along the 
 coasts of Africa. As coins were first 
 adorned by effigies of the favourite deity, so the shapes they 
 assumed ere dies were invented were those of the crescent • 
 and the ancient “ ring money,” as it is termed, tells us of 
 the worship of the Yoni in primeval times. 
 
 The triangle plays an important part in the mysteries of 
 India, and amongst the Freemasons generally; it seems to 
 have been equally important in the olden time. I cannot 
 remember to have seen it figured on any Assyrian or Chaldee 
 sculpture, hut it is conspicuous enough in ancient Egypt, 
 where the triangle and the four-sided pyramid may be seen 
 towering high above the ground, the form usually adopted 
 
 Figure 30. 
 
 being equilateral; it is at once 
 an emblem of a trinity, three 
 in one, and of Arba, where all 
 are co - equal. The triangle 
 resembles the flame of sacred 
 fire emerging from the holy 
 lamp; and placed (as in Fig. 
 30) with its apex uppermost, it 
 typifies the phallic triad. With 
 its base upwards, it typifies 
 
 K 
 
146 
 
 what is known to anatomists as the Mons Veneris, the Delta, 
 or the door through which all come into the world. The 
 
 Figure 31. 
 
 union of these two triangles 
 (as in Fig. 81) typifies the 
 male and female principles 
 uniting with each other, and 
 producing a new figure, a 
 star, while each retains its 
 own identity. 
 
 With a line drawn across 
 (at e), the symbol became the 
 shield of David, or the cele¬ 
 brated seal of Solomon, with 
 which he mastered the Ge¬ 
 nii. 1 
 
 Fig. 82 is practically the same symbol as Fig. 81; it exists 
 on the celebrated gates of Somnauth; and Fig. 38 is a 
 
 Figure 33. 
 
 Figure 32. 
 
 1 See Kitto’s Cyclopcedia, article Amulet. 
 
147 
 
 Buddhist emblem, in which the two triangles instead of 
 intertwining are united by the serpent, the emblem of desire. 
 This also is to be seen on Somnauth’s gates. 2 From the 
 same source as the last two, the next diagram is taken. 
 
 This is a much more complicated symbol than any others 
 we have yet seen. In Hindostan it is called the Sri Iantra, 
 
 Figure 84. 
 
 EAST 
 
 and is a Buddhist emblem. It is an ornament in the Boyal 
 Masonic Arch, and is to he met with in our old parish 
 churches. The use made of it by the faithful is this :— the 
 triangles are placed according to the points of the compass, 
 Siva being to the North; — or rather Brahma to the East, 
 and Laksmi to the West; then a sacred relic, or small 
 image of Buddah, is placed in the central circle, and prayers 
 are then uttered, whatever they may be. The symbol signi¬ 
 fies, the world within the universe, as well as the male and 
 
 2 Journal Royal Asiatic Society , vol. xiii., p. 79. 
 
148 
 
 female trinities, combined with each other, yet distinct, i. e., 
 two triads, where each is equal to the other. Amongst 
 the Buddhists this symbol has a great variety of forms: 
 in one the central circle is raised like a dome, which may 
 either represent the round world, the full womb, or the navel 
 of Yishnu; in another it is complicated with the Lotus, the 
 emblem of self-fertilising power; but I have not reproduced 
 them here, as the signs are never used amongst ourselves. 
 There is yet another combination of triangles, which is repre¬ 
 sented by Figure 85; it is both Indian and Figure 35. 
 Greek; but I am unable to divine its use, 
 or, if it be symbolic, its meaning, farther 
 than to suppose that it describes in mystic 
 form the union of perfection under the double 
 five or ten lines—ten being the emblem of 
 perfectness — with the double and infolding triangles. 
 
 Another form of triangle is, as I have mentioned, the 
 four-sided pyramid, where the numbers three and four are 
 united. Another is the cone, the representative of the 
 Paphian Venus ; the most popular one of antiquity was a 
 conical stone. Tacitus thus speaks of it: “ The statue of 
 the Goddess bears no resemblance to the human form. It 
 is round throughout, broad at one end, and gradually tapering 
 to a narrow span at the other, like a goal. The reason of 
 this is not ascertained. The cause is stated by Philostratus 
 to be symbolic.” 3 
 
 “In all Cyprian coins,” says Lajard, Lecherches sur la 
 Culte de Venus, p. 86, &c., “from Augustus to Macrinus, 
 may be seen in the place where we should anticipate to find 
 a statue of the Goddess, the form of a conical stone. The 
 same is found placed between two cypresses under the portico 
 of the temple of Astarte, in a medal of iElia Capitolina; but 
 in this instance the cone is crowned. In another medal, 
 
 3 Tacitus, History, book ii., c. 3. 
 
149 
 
 struck by the elder Philip, Venus is represented between 
 two genii, each of whom stands upon a cone or pillar with 
 a rounded top. There is reason to believe, that at Paphos, 
 images of the conical stone were made and sold as largely 
 as were effigies of Diana of the Ephesians.” 
 
 Again we read in the same Author, “ Medals and 
 engraved stones demonstrate that the hieratic prescriptions 
 required that all those hills which w T ere consecrated to 
 Jupiter should be represented in a conical form. At Sicony, 
 Jupiter was adored under the form of a pyramid.” 
 
 Again,—“ The cone was one of the symbols peculiar to 
 many of the gnostic sects. It had sometimes a funereal 
 sense. A cone in the possession of Mons. Lajard, which 
 was found at Aleppo, proves that in the first centuries 
 of our era the conical form was also employed for Christian 
 monuments, since the one in question has engraved upon 
 it the bust of Christ, with the letters X PI C T 0 Y. Below 
 the bust there is a fish. 
 
 Both the cone and the phallus had the double sense of 
 life and death. 
 
 The union of ideas about the cone, the square, and 
 the pillar are seen in the pyramids and obelisks, and the 
 frequency with which altars were made conical, square, 
 cylindrical, or with an union of all these forms. 
 
 The cone was essentially a female emblem. The pillar 
 was a male sign. The square, or the four-sided cone, was 
 the emblem of the union of the sexes. 
 
 Lajard also adds {ibid. p. 63, &c.), that “Monsieur Creuzer 
 found amongst the ruins of Carthage a large conical stone, 
 which he considered to be a representation of the female 
 Venus.” He also mentions many smaller cones which he 
 had found in Greece, some of them bearing the name 
 Aphrodite. In Gozo a conical monumental stone was found 
 in one of the niches of the ruins of a temple which had been 
 
150 
 
 sacred to Astarte. Many other small cones have been found 
 which have evidently been worn in personal ornamentation, 
 or as charms, and these have usually been engraved with 
 doves or other mystic devices. It must be noted that 
 Lajard is speaking of the Androgynous Venus, not the 
 Grecian Goddess of desire. 
 
 The ordinary pawnbrokers’ sign, often called the Lom¬ 
 bards’ sign, is another form of the triangle, as old at least 
 as the Babylonian empire. 
 
 There can he no doubt, I think, in the mind of any 
 student of antiquity, that the cross is not originally a 
 Christian emblem; nay, the very fact that the cross was 
 used as a means of executing criminals shows that its 
 form was familiar to Jews and Homans. It was used 
 partly as an ornament, and partly in certain forms of 
 religious worship. The simple cross, with perpendicular 
 and transverse arms of equal length, represented the nave 
 and spokes of the solar wheel, or the Sun darting his 
 rays on all sides. As the wheel became fantastically 
 developed, so did the cross, and each limb became so 
 developed at the outer end, as to symbolise the triad. 
 Sometimes the idea was very coarsely represented; and I 
 have seen, amongst some ancient Etruscan remains, a 
 cross formed of four phalli of equal length, their narrow 
 end pointing inwards; and in the same work another was 
 pourtrayed, in which one phallus was made of inordinate 
 length, so as to support the others high up from the ground; 
 each was in itself a triad. The same form of cross was 
 probably used by the Phoenicians, who appear to have 
 colonised Malta at an early period of their career ; for they 
 have left a form of it behind them, in the shape of a cross 
 similar to that described above, but which has been toned 
 down by the moderns, who could not endure the idea of an 
 union between grossness and the crucifix, and the phalli 
 
151 
 
 became as innocent as we see them in the Maltese Cross 
 of to-day. 
 
 Figure 37. 
 
 Figure 36. 
 
 
 
 In this form of cross the male organ is depicted as per¬ 
 pendicular to the scrotum and its contents. In another 
 form—one which is chiefly used amongst the Buddhists, but 
 which is sometimes spoken of, I know not on what authority, 
 as Thor’s hammer—Asher is represented at right angles 
 with Anu and Hoa. In the one depicted below (Fig. 38), 
 
 Figure 38. 
 
 there is an union of four male organs, which are complicated 
 farther by four emblems of the Yoni, in shape resembling a 
 barley corn, four triple triangles, and four conjunctions of the 
 Sun and Moon. The figure goes by the name of Swasti. 4 
 
 4 See Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, vol. xviii., p. 391, a reference to which 
 
152 
 
 Besides these, there were many other forms of cross adopted 
 which would symbolise in one emblem a multiplicity of 
 doctrines; for example, each o'f the three upper limbs has 
 been modified in this manner— 
 
 Figure 40. 
 
 Figure 39. — — , 
 
 - — - L j. — 9 or still farther —-|=- 
 
 both of which are suggestive of the trinity and the triangle; 
 and we occasionally see the same upper limbs modified thus : 
 
 Figure 43. 
 
 == 5 > 
 
 Figure 41. 
 
 Figure 42. 
 
 0 
 
 
 forms which are not only suggestive of the trinity, hut of the 
 nature of the triad as it was originally understood. Another 
 and very ancient form of the cross is similar to our 
 letter T, as T > ancient Tau , in Phoenician ; x r 
 in ancient Hebrew; and 4 T in °ld Greek. In the form 
 of “J", it symbolises the Phallic triad; and when a handle 
 was given to it, as in the crux ansata, as in Figure 44. 
 
 Fig. 44, it became the “ emblem of life,” under 
 which name it is familiar to the Egyptologist, 
 and to most antiquarians. It typifies the arba-il , the four 
 great Gods of the Assyrian mythology, to which we have 
 already referred. It was with the cross, in the form of the 
 Tau , that Ezekiel was directed to stamp the foreheads of the 
 men of Judah, who feared the Lord (Ezek. ix. 4); 5 and 
 
 will show that three feathers joined together, like those in our Prince of Wales’ cap, 
 is also a Buddhist emblem. 
 
 6 The words in the Hebrew are IF) n'Wni, translated by the Vulgate, et signa 
 Thau, i.e., marked Tau on their foreheads, which letter, in the ancient Hebrew, 
 was formed thus: + or x. 
 
153 
 
 our Christian kings and queens still use the old Egyptian 
 symbol of life as the coronation orb, 6 
 
 The particular form of cross which is connected with 
 Saint Andrew, and called after his name, is of Assyrian 
 origin. At first it represented the dove attached to the 
 nave of the solar wheel, with wings and legs extended; 
 and in later times, the cross was used in this particular 
 form to depict the holy dove—the bird sacred to Venus. 
 When we see a symbol like this descend from the remotest 
 antiquity to current times, and often without its meaning 
 being suspected, we may well believe that names, which 
 have essentially the same meaning, may have descended 
 in like manner. The genius of mankind generally is 
 eminently conservative: we copy, as far as we can, the 
 past. In coronations, prorogations, proclamations, and 
 everything which relates to royalty and government, pre¬ 
 cedents are sought for; and past practice has more power 
 than present needs. There are not many, who, like the 
 first Napoleon, will crown themselves, instead of submitting 
 to be crowned by a priest; and few, like the present 
 Napoleon, who w r ould venture, when on a throne, to consult 
 (in the choice of a consort) private feelings more than state 
 customs. It is this constant clinging to examples and 
 antiquity which enables us to-day to recognise the past 
 in the present, as clearly as if our individual age had been 
 prolonged equally with that of Methuselah. 
 
 The symbols which are intended to represent the triad, 
 or trinity, are numerous; they stand either alone, or in com¬ 
 bination with other signs, e.g., the cross and the triangle. 
 
 The most conspicuous is the compound leaf of the trefoil. 
 Modern story has attributed to St. Patrick the idea of 
 demonstrating a trinity in unity, by showing the shamrock 
 
 6 For farther information on the cross, see the article Cross, in the Vocabulary. 
 
154 
 
 to his hearers ; hut, like many other things attributed to 
 the moderns, the idea belongs to the ancients. In a very 
 celebrated temple of the Sun at Marttand, in Cashmere, the 
 trefoil ornament abounds, and its intention has evidently 
 been to expound the Yedic trinity. Close to the temple once 
 stood, but now lies in ruins, an enormous and curiously 
 carved emblem of Mahadeva, the Assyrian Asshur. In 
 the entrance court to this temple are two emblematic 
 pillars. Two similar pillars stood before the temple of the 
 Syrian Goddess, or the Female Sun ; they were so built 
 that their likeness to the thing signified was unmistake- 
 able, and from their summits the prayers of the people 
 were offered up. The account given by Lucian 7 is to the 
 effect, that at a certain festival a man worked himself 
 up on the outside by means of a rope, and that when he 
 reached the top he let down a string. To this the faithful 
 attached a basket containing offerings and forms of prayer, 
 which were drawn up to the summit. The man remained 
 on duty for seven days and nights. It is not without 
 interest that we observe Solomon, the special friend of the 
 Phoenician Hiram, erecting two pillars before his temple, 
 one of which he called Jachin, and the other Boaz—The 
 one meaning “the strong one,” the other, “the active one.” 
 Few who are familiar with the notions then current can 
 doubt the meaning of the symbol; nor can we refuse to 
 see in them the origin of the two spires or towers which 
 adorn so many continental and some British Cathedrals. 
 I cannot also help believing that the high places, so often 
 spoken of in Scripture as having been erected by some and 
 pulled down by other kings, had a phallic origin. Nor, 
 while upon this subject, can I refrain from noticing that 
 Colonel Leslie 8 calls attention to Galgals, or circular heaps 
 
 7 De ded Syria. 
 
 8 The Early Maces of Scotland, vol. ii., 8vo.; Edinburgh, Edmonstone & Douglas. 
 
155 
 
 of stones surmounted by a tall pillar, which are abundant in 
 England and Western France. He ably demonstrates that 
 they were used for council and for justice, and calls our 
 attention to the influence of Gilgal in the time of Samuel 
 the Judge. His circuit courts were held at Bethel, Gilgal, 
 and Mizpeh—“the house of the Sun,” “the wheel” (or 
 “ circuit,” or “the Sun’s heap ”), and “ the tower ” (Asher) 
 respectively. Even in the book of Joshua, we find that 
 Gilgal had a phallic significance; there it was that a huge 
 heap of foreskins from all the host of Israel’s men was 
 made. We may, however, comparing this Syrian heap with 
 those elsewhere, conceive that it had a different origin, and 
 a different meaning. There is in all Galgals a central 
 menhir and a circular heap of stones, to which all passers-by 
 used to add one. The outline of the mound thus produced 
 
 Figure 40. 
 
 Now one of the most common of the emblems of the phallic 
 
 Fig. 47. 
 
 Fig. 48. 
 
 triad is 
 
 A «iv 
 
 and we can readily conceive that 
 
 the fertile fancy of the devout might induce them to increase 
 the proportions of each part, — the perpendicular and the 
 horizontal indefinitely, — and pourtray Mahadeva with as 
 many emblems of virility as they have given emblems of 
 nourishment to Diana of the Ephesians. We might willingly 
 shut our eyes to a few isolated facts, but when all bear so 
 unmistakeably in one direction, we cannot do so. Even 
 
156 
 
 the trefoil has been selected as an emblem, because it 
 contains a double or a treble mystery; Figure 49 . 
 
 the shape of the whole leaf is this — 
 
 Each leaflet is notched in its outer mar¬ 
 gin, and when taken separately, thus, 
 
 Fig. 50 . ( Fi g- 50 >) is suggestive of the up¬ 
 right pyramid, and the sacred bag, 
 the scrotum; and if there were a 
 fourth leaflet, we should recognise 
 the same idea as in the Etruscan 
 Maltese cross. 
 
 Another favourite emblem of the triad, or, as the moderns 
 believe, of the sacred trinity, is the Fleur de Lys of France, 
 a symbol which will readily be recognised in the following 
 figure as emblematic of the male organ, as the corres¬ 
 ponding figure on the left is of the female — 
 
 Figure 51. 
 
 The use of this flower in modern heraldry reminds us 
 of the time of Solomon, and the famous temple which he 
 built. In it were sundry carvings of lilies, open flowers, 
 pomegranates, and palm trees, as well as the cherubim, 
 the bull-headed creatures which figure so largely in the 
 Assyrian palaces. Now there cannot be a doubt that 
 Solomon did not know our modern trinity, for the second 
 and third persons in it had not then been manifested; but 
 
157 
 
 he did know the mystic meaning of the lotus, the pome¬ 
 granate (Bimmon), and the palm tree (Asshur), and as all 
 these have reference to male and female attributes, we must 
 conceive the lily had the same. 
 
 We awhile ago spoke of the Tau, T, a sa cross; it is 
 also an emblem of the triad. I doubt not that the triple 
 leg of ancient Sicilia, and now Figure 52 . Fig. 54 . 
 
 adopted by the Isle of Man, as Figure 53 . 
 
 the Insular emblem, had a similar II r\ 
 
 significance. The Lombard sign y 
 
 0 0 or 0 was also emblematic of 
 o 00 
 
 the same. The symbols of Arba- 
 il or the four great Gods, were— 
 
 Figure 55. Figure 56. 
 
 0 
 
 or 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 e> 
 
 The Hindoo forms are 
 
 Figure 60. 
 
 Figure 57. 
 
 Figure 58. 
 
 Figure 59. 
 
 This, of which the large earth¬ 
 work of Avebury is possibly an 
 example, represents the Arba 
 under another form. It is also 
 Nebo and Argha. 
 
158 
 
 The celebrated Golden Shields, of Solomon and others, 
 will be referred to under the next heading. 
 
 We come now to speak of what we may designate female 
 emblems. It may easily be understood that few people, if 
 any, would he so gross as to use in religious worship true 
 simulacra of those parts, which their owners think it shame¬ 
 ful to speak of, and a punishment or reproach publicly to 
 show. 9 There is therefore circumlocution in language, 
 symbolism in sculpture, &c., wherever reference is made 
 to them. Words and figures are adopted which are suffi¬ 
 ciently veiled not to be understood by the multitude, 
 yet significant enough to indicate them to the initiated. 
 The palm-tree and the pomegranate, the tower and the 
 winepress, are quite innocent in common conversation, while 
 in mythoses they have a hidden meaning. The scholar is 
 of course aware that there were occasions on which no such 
 reticence was used, and where an excessive shamelessness 
 prevailed. Of their nature it is unnecessary to speak, farther 
 than to say that the exposures were made with a religious 
 idea, such as that, probably, which actuated David when he 
 leaped and danced before the ark. 10 
 
 The moderns, who have not been initiated in the ancient 
 mysteries, and only know the emblems considered sacred, 
 have need of both anatomical knowledge and physiological 
 lore ere they can see the meaning of many a sign. I have 
 already referred to the triangle, — the Greek “Delta,” the 
 door of life, — which is simply another name for the part 
 known also as Concha , u a shell. This little fact leads us 
 
 9 See Gen. ix. 21-27, Isa. iii. 17, Hos. ii. 3., etc. 
 
 10 See 2 Sam. vi. 14, 16, 20, 21, and Herod, ii. 60. 
 
 11 “ The female organs of generation were revered (August de Civ. Dei., lib. 
 vi., c. 9) as symbols of the generative powers of nature or matter, as the male were 
 of the generative power of God. They are usually represented emblematically, by 
 the shell, or Concha Veneris , which was therefore worn by devout persons of 
 antiquity, as it still continues to be by pilgrims and many of the common women 
 of Italy. The union of both was expressed by the hand, mentioned in Sir William 
 Hamilton’s letter, which, being a less explicit symbol, has escaped the attention of 
 
159 
 
 on to notice that the Roman Church, specially adapted as it 
 is to the worship of the female element in the Virgin Mary, 
 enjoins upon her pilgrims to wear a shell as 
 part of their dress, and a hat resembling the 
 shield of Solomon ; while pilgrims to the shrine 
 of an old black Venus, but now known as the 
 Virgin of Amadou, in France, wear a medal 
 whose shape tells of its hidden meaning. 
 
 Another of the names for “the door” is navis , 
 a ship or ark, to which we shall refer at length by and by. 
 
 A glance at the Hindoo figures on page 157 will show 
 that one of the conventional signs adopted to express 
 Saraiswati, the sacred Sacti, or female principle, was shaped 
 somewhat like an ear-drop, or a hoy’s battledore. Its union 
 with the pillar prevents our doubting the signification. 
 When we meet, therefore, with the sistrum of Isis, we have 
 Figure 63. little difficulty in recognising the same 
 idea. But the latter symbol embodies a 
 different idea to the Yoni ; the bars across 
 it, bent so that they cannot he taken out, 
 show that the door is closed. It repre¬ 
 sents the mother who is still virgo intacta, 
 a true alma mater. The pure virginity of 
 the celestial mother was a tenet of faith 
 for two thousand years before the Virgin 
 now adored was horn. The bars signify 
 a religious, not a mundane, idea; and it 
 is probable that the symbol typifies both 
 the vagina and the uterus ; but this may 
 he refining too far. 
 
 Amongst the Assyrians we have the 
 same idea typified under a different form. 
 
 the reformers, and is still worn as well as the shell by the women of Italy, though 
 without being understood. It represented the act of generation, which was con¬ 
 sidered as a solemn sacrament in honour of the Creator, as will be more fully 
 shown hereafter.” K. P. Knight, On the Worship of Priapus, new edition, p. 28. 
 
 Figure 62. 
 
160 
 
 Figure 64. 
 
 Figure 65, 
 
 Figure 66. 
 
 fa* Ja 
 
161 
 
 In each of these figures there are 
 certain things in common — a central 
 fissure, the n ?i^, or nekebah of the 
 Hebrews — the entrance to which is 
 barred, in all, by curiously contrived 
 rings, somewhat more artistic than the 
 single rods in the Sistrum. Above 
 each fissure is a fan-like ornament, 
 which represents the clitoris, divided 
 into seven parts, apparently to indicate 
 the planets; and around the whole is a fringe, the lanugo, 
 fantastically arranged, more antiquo, in tufts by ribbons. 
 At first sight there appears to be a difference between Figure 
 64 and Figures 65 and 66; but there is not so much as 
 there seems. The Figures 64 and 67 have thirteen tufts 
 in all; whilst Figure 65, counting the top knot as common, 
 has thirteen on each side. This number suggests an 
 explanation. At every lunar period the female has an 
 affection which, by its regularity, has received the name of 
 menses, or catamenia, and there are thirteen of these periods 
 in a year. In Figure 64, six stars are seen on the left; these 
 we presume are six of the planets, the symbol itself standing 
 for the seventh; but for which of all the planets it is intended 
 to pass, we have small indication. As the six are divided 
 into groups of two and four, we presume that it is neither the 
 Sun nor the Moon which is symbolised. Of the other planets, 
 inference would lead us to select Venus, Alitta, or Mylitta. 
 
 In Figure 65, we find four attendants pointing towards 
 the symbol; each one of the inner pair points a finger, 
 leaving the rest of the hand clasped. The shape of the 
 hand is of itself suggestive of the signification of the 
 symbol. Behind the first devotees are two others, each one 
 of whom carries in one hand a bag, while with the other he 
 
 L 
 
 Figure 67. 
 
162 
 
 presents a pine cone, which in shape resembles the testis of 
 the male. The bag, sometimes called a basket, puzzled me 
 for a long time, and I could find no satisfactory explanation 
 of its meaning. The first clue was given by noticing that 
 it was sometimes adorned by doves, which suggested the idea 
 that the symbol had an amatory design. The shape of the 
 pine cone, which resembles so closely those organs found in 
 the scrotum, commonly called “ the purse,” induced me to 
 search for the Hebrew word signifying the same, I found it 
 to be D ^, Cis or Kis , a name borne by the father of Saul, a 
 Benjamite, and consequently having a mystical meaning. 12 
 Another link in the chain was afforded by a discovery of the 
 true etymology of Ashcalon; whilst a reference to Proverbs 
 xvi. 11, with the marginal reading, and another to Deut. 
 xxviii. 4, 11, 17, IS, served to increase the presumption. 
 The links are scarcely yet so complete as to make a perfect 
 chain, yet I think there is quite sufficient evidence to lead to 
 the belief that the signification of “ the bag ” is that it forms 
 one of the many other symbols of abundant manly vigour, 
 and hence is one of the offerings presented to the symbol 
 of the female. 13 
 
 In Figure 65, the winged figure above seems to repre¬ 
 sent the celestial bowman, who stands in the pennate 
 emblem, which was originally formed by the body and wings 
 of the dove. He is identical with the god known to the 
 Greeks as “ the far darting Phoebus Apollo.” Both the bow 
 and arrow have a hidden meaning; the classical scholar will 
 remember that they are the weapons borne by Cupid. 
 
 For an explanation of the Figure 66, copied from 
 
 12 In searching for the signification of the various names of the Israelites, I 
 have found that there are more names, of what may he called idolatrous and 
 amatory origin, in the tribe of Benjamin than in any other — a fact which tallies 
 closely with the account given in Judges xix. 22-25 of their general character. 
 
 13 Compare Num. xxiv. 7, “ water out of his buckets.” 
 
168 
 
 Layard’s Nineveh, I am indebted mainly to the Bev. S. 
 Lysons. “ On the left,” he remarks, “ stands a tower — 
 (Thor, Tor, Qupa, l>!>fi 14 ) door (Dutch), duhra (Sanscrit), doar 
 (Hindoo)—with a door open. ‘I am the A,’ originally A 
 amongst tent livers; but n and fl amongst those dwelling 
 in stone, &c., habitations. Through the door of the tower 
 is seen the sacred fire burning; the priest approaches in 
 adoration, with sacrificial knife in hand; the tree of life 
 stands behind him, and the victim bull behind.” I am not 
 sure whether there may not be another signification. The 
 bull, with the serpent round its neck, is an emblem of 
 desire and power, yet it comes to salute the Yoni. The 
 tower, emblem of the Linga, is useless without a door; that 
 door is the gate of life, and the priest does homage to 
 the combination. When we remember that there was a 
 Temple in Babylon where, once in a lifetime, an act of 
 prostitution was enforced as an act of religion, we can fancy 
 that the sculpture may have adorned it. 
 
 It will be in the recollection of the Biblical student, that 
 Solomon made a great number of golden shields, which he 
 placed in the forest palace at Lebanon; that these shields 
 were subsequently taken away by Shishak, and replaced by 
 Behoboam with brazen ones. It is clear that the first could 
 not have been for use in war, and the chronicler distinctly 
 tells us that the second were only used when the king went to 
 the temple to worship. 15 They had, then, a mystic meaning. 
 There were sacred shields also in ancient Borne. So far as I 
 can judge from analogy, I think that the shape of the shield 
 was like Figures 68 and 69, in full view and profile. Figure 
 68 represents the os uteri or os tincce; whilst Figure 69 
 represents the navel of Yishnu, the Nahbi or Nebo. Amongst 
 the Templars, whose order was the storehouse of many an old 
 
 14 Tin or -in, thor, or tor, is a turtle dove. 
 16 2 Chron. xii. 10, 11. 
 
164 
 
 heathenism, the shield adopted for their tombs Figure 70. 
 was shaped like Figure 70. We can, by a 
 stretch of imagination, fancy that the form 
 was peculiarly adapted for warfare, but we 
 cannot so explain the use of the central 
 boss. The whole so closely resembles the 
 Nebo, and the Hindoo Argha, that we can 
 scarcely doubt its mystic meaning. 
 
 I have already mentioned that Rimmon, the pomegranate, 
 typified by its shape the full womb. The same idea is 
 apparent in designating the sacti as navis, or a ship. There 
 were many varieties of the sacred ship, ark, or boat: it was 
 represented by a cymbal (emblem also of Nebo), a tambourine, 
 a dish, the crescent moon, a long narrow oval, &c. The 
 Mast, Mat, or Mate of the boat was represented as a pole, 
 or an erect man. The Hebrew word for Mast is ( toren ), 16 
 
 which has a meaning analogous to tower, &c. 
 
 Now the myth might be symbolised by a small figure in 
 a small boat, or by a man surrounding himself as it were by 
 a symbolic figure. The Sistrum of Isis and the Hindoo 
 
 Figure 71. 
 
 Argha was shaped thus C the mystic boat was 
 
 Figure 72, 
 
 shaped thus - r — 
 
 The priest had but to perforate these and wear them over 
 his shoulders, and he then became the representative of the 
 male and female elements combined. 
 
 16 Compare Torrens, Torr, Tur, &c. 
 
165 
 
 This portion of dress, which was called a stole, was 
 originally worn in such a manner, that the back view of 
 the wearer resembled the front. Subsequently, however, the 
 form of the stole was made on the pattern of the Isian 
 Sistrum, and we see it worn by priest and nun, as in the 
 following wood-cuts. 
 
 Figure 73. Figure 74. 
 
 It is curious to recognise in the nun the ancient name of 
 the fish, and in her dress to recognise the navis; whilst she 
 personifies, as best she may, the role of a celestial virgin. 
 Equally strange is it to see the mediaeval priest adorned 
 around bis head by the solar disc, on his crown by the 
 pagan tonsure, whilst on his shoulders he bears the Isian 
 mantle, adorned by Phallic crosses, and terminating in the 
 mystic T* In bis hand, which is shaped like that of the 
 priests who officiate before the Assyrian Yoni , he holds the 
 pomegranate, apple, or other emblem of the full womb, and 
 
166 
 
 Lis seat is adorned by Leads and claws, coarse imitations 
 of Nineveh’s symbolic representations of divinity. If the 
 artist Lad given him a mitre, the link between the Assyrian 
 and the Roman priest would have been complete, inasmuch 
 as the mitre, which adorns the heads of bishops, both in the 
 Roman and our own church, is one of the many remains of 
 Paganism in Christendom — the mitre being nothing more 
 nor less than a representation of the head of a fish with 
 an open mouth. Many priests or divinities in Nineveh are 
 depicted as being clothed with a huge fish, whose head 
 towers above their own. As it would of course be incon¬ 
 venient to wear the whole animal, the head was used to 
 typify the body generally, and the mitre was formed to 
 represent the head. (See Fig. 19, page 112.) 
 
 We have said that one of the names for the female organ 
 is navis , or the ship. The idea connected with the word 
 is a complicated one. Cicero remarks, 17 “Non ignoramus 
 vocabulum navis adhiberi interdum ad significandas corporis 
 cavas illas partes quas qui dividit naufragium facere solet.” 
 Macrobius 18 tells us of a saying of the dissolute Julia, — “At 
 enim ait ilia nunquam nisi navi plena tollo vectorem.” The 
 ship, or boat, is in Egyptian mythology closely associated 
 with the ark, or an ark; and we are told by Rawlinson 19 
 that every Assyrian divinity had an ark or a ship, whose 
 Semitic equivalent was Elippa, or Chaldee Alpa; and I 
 think we may consider such names as Bartsippa, or Borsippa, 
 to mean the Son of the Ship. It is singular to find that 
 there is in the Cuneiform the very name of Ship, which is 
 translated “monarch.” The idea of a ship, carrying safely to 
 a sure haven all who embarked in her, gave the title nave to 
 the long body of a cathedral; and, to carry out the metaphor, 
 
 17 Scip., Saturnalia , lib. i., cap. xxviii. 
 
 18 See Sat. i. 11; vi. 5. 
 
 19 Journal of Royal Asiatic Society , vol. xviii., p. 23 — note. 
 
167 
 
 the mast was replaced by a tower and spire. The 
 ship required an anchor, and this became a Chris¬ 
 tian emblem. This symbol is curiously made up. 
 
 The curve represents the crescent moon and the 
 female navis ; the mast of the boat was the linga, 
 wreathed by the serpent; tho yard across the mast made it a 
 Christian emblem; and there are many who speak of it as 
 “ an anchor of the soul, sure and stedfast.” It is unfortunate, 
 however, for the metaphor, that the anchor thus pourtrayed 
 is one which is called by the sailors a foul one, i. e., one 
 which will not hold. Sir G. Wilkinson tells us, that some 
 of the sacred boats or arks contained the emblems of life, 
 stability, &c.,; and a glance at the article Ark , in Kitto’s 
 Cyclopcedia, will show how intensely mythical the ark was. 
 The reader of it will notice the union of the mural orna¬ 
 ment with a moon-shaped boat, whose stem and stern are 
 adorned by the Solar Virgin, and whose steersman uses a 
 rudder held by a serpent, — in the centre is a chest over¬ 
 shadowed by the sun, the serpent, and the dove’s (?) wings. 
 The mural ornament associates the symbol with Ceres, the 
 fruitful mother, while the crescent moon associates it with 
 Diana, the chaste virgin, yet the presider over births. Putting 
 all these considerations together, it seems probable that the 
 navis signifies the organ in which everything sails into life. 
 Nor, when we speak of life as a river, and time as an ocean, 
 is it an unfair metaphor to call that by which we are carried 
 on to the waters “ a boatand it still holds good when it is 
 spoken of receiving the most precious store of man, carrying 
 it as cargo, and ultimately discharging it at another port. 
 Though we have long ceased to use the ship metaphorically, 
 the Eomish Church still uses the ark as a receptacle for that 
 she holds most precious, and amongst her hierarchy it goes 
 by the name of Pyx. 
 
 Fig. 75. 
 
168 
 
 It is curious that the broad arrow now used 
 in England as a mark of royal ownership is hut a 
 modification of the anchor mentioned on the last 
 page, and a sign long in use in Hindostan to mark 
 
 Fig. 76. 
 
 Fig. 77. Fig. 78. 
 
 the female principle, or Sacti. 
 
 H-J-H and L » s 
 
 are 
 
 signs used to seal the jars of holy water taken from the 
 
 Fig. 79. 
 
 m 
 
 Nile and Ganges; and the trident which Britannia 
 sways is one of the symbols of Siva, the terrible. 
 
 Figure 80. 
 
 Fig. 80 is a well known pattern amongst us to-day, and 
 at the same time an ancient Chinese emblem of the equal 
 division of the world into Sun and Moon, Gods and God¬ 
 desses, Males and Females, and goes by the name of 
 Taekieh. 
 
 Figure 78 is the same as that represented as Thor’s Hammer, in page 151. 
 
169 
 
 One of the most remarkable of ancient Buddhist emblems, 
 is Figure 2, Plate III. It consists of two fishes, so inclined 
 towards each other as to represent an irregular circle. Above 
 them is a representation of the phallic triad; the whole 
 forming a representation of the four great gods — Arba-il. 
 On the same page will he seen three human hands; the 
 single one typifies the triad, and is a representation of 
 the form adopted by the Pope while he blesses the faithful. 
 The joined hands depict the figure adopted by the Hebrew 
 Priest to the present day, when he pronounces a benediction 
 on his flock; each hand typifies the triad, whilst their 
 junction symbolises the single element; the whole thus 
 forming, like the Buddhist sign, an emblem of the “ four 
 great gods,” from whom all creation was said to have arisen. 
 
 Amongst the emblems of antiquity used by us to the 
 present day, the cock stands foremost. His Latin name 
 Gallus comes directly from Gal or Gula, the Shemitic sun ; 
 and he has evidently been supposed to be sacred to that God, 
 because he is the most noisy of all the birds who proclaim 
 returning day. I do not find any reference to it in Hebrew, 
 nor any word which seems to be nearer to our word than 
 which is identical with dear, — the meaning being 
 “ a circle,” “ a globe,” “ a cake.” The name Gal, Gula, 
 or Gallus, resembles the Hebrew n ^|, galah , “ to be or to 
 make naked; ” the same letters, pointed as Gla, signify, 
 in Chaldee, “to reveal;” as Gula, “a fountain,” “spring,” 
 “ source,” “ bowl,” “ ball,” or “ small globe.” The Latin 
 scholar will readily remember the number of names com¬ 
 pounded with Gal in that language ; e.g., Gallus, Galba, &c.; 
 whilst the Briton can point to Galbraith, Galan, Galatti, 
 Gailey, Gale, Gallaher, Gallie, Galloway, &c. In the dawn 
 of Roman history we hear of a mighty nation known as 
 Gauls, whose leader, Brennus, is almost as familiar to 
 our ears as Brown; and at the present day the French 
 
170 
 
 still have the name of Gauls, whilst their national emblem 
 is a cock. The curious in such matters know that the 
 cock is a word not solely descriptive of the bird, and that 
 there are many names amongst us compounded from it; 
 e.g., Alcock, Cockburn, &c., as there were Roman appel¬ 
 latives derived from the Latin Galius. 
 
 We have thus seen how much, even in trifling details, 
 of what once was ancient has come down to present times, 
 and we may fairly conclude that names of certain families 
 and places may be equally old. 
 
171 
 
 In the original draft of this Essay, I proceeded to 
 demonstrate the antiquity of many of the names in current 
 use in Great Britain; hut finding that the ground had 
 been already occupied by the Kev. S. Lysons, 21 I altered the 
 plan of my work, and determined to begin by investigating 
 ancient names, and to work down the stream of time, 
 rather than continue to inquire into modern appellatives, 
 and work up against the current of ages. After various 
 alterations in design, my labours assumed the form of a 
 Vocabulary, which is intended to assist the independent 
 student, and to record ancient names, with a view to show 
 their etymology. 
 
 It has been my desire to avoid, as far as possible, the 
 reproduction of the lucubrations of others; where I have 
 assented to current ideas, it has not been without examining 
 them for myself; and where I have dissented, it has been 
 thought unnecessary to quote statements simply to refute 
 them. 
 
 Here and there, under Bebekkah, for example, the old 
 or common explanation will be found in addition to my own, 
 in order that the reader may compare the two, and judge of 
 their relative value. The Vocabulary could be made far more 
 complete, by quoting largely from Mr. Lysons’ book. But if 
 it were fair to that author that I should do so, such a pro¬ 
 ceeding would he unfair to my reader, who might think he 
 had thus obtained the cream of Mr. Lysons’ book, and deem 
 it unnecessary to go for the milk, thus losing a great treat. 
 
 It will be found that the majority of the names given 
 are of Biblical origin. I have not, to my knowledge, 
 
 21 Our British Ancestors: Who and What were They ? By the Bev. S. Lysons, 
 M.A., F.S.A. Parker, Oxford and London, 1865. 
 
172 
 
 omitted one single proper name which is found in the Old 
 Testament. Until I had laboriously worked them all out, I 
 was not justified in drawing any general conclusions. Nor, 
 until I found that all formed a sort of harmonious whole, did 
 I dare to allow myself to form a theory. In going once over 
 the list, my knowledge increased so much, that it was 
 advisable to go over the whole a second time. After doing 
 so, I felt justified in drawing the conclusions which have 
 been enunciated in the preceding chapters. Amongst the 
 Scriptural names which follow, are intermingled Assyrian, 
 Phoenician, Carthaginian, Egyptian, and some Hindoo names, 
 for the purpose of comparison. There are also a few Hebrew 
 roots, which are introduced to show the probable origin of 
 some of our current English words. There will also be 
 found a few articles on subjects cognate with the inquiry 
 into ancient and modern faiths. 
 
 It will be evident to the reader that a Vocabulary, the 
 printing of which succeeds that of the Introductory Chapters, 
 may differ from them, in consequence of the Author having 
 increased opportunities for studying his subject. Where- 
 ever, therefore, he has seen occasion to modify his views, his 
 more matured opinions will be found in the following pages. 
 
VOCABULARY. 
 
 A. 
 
 A, x, or Aleph, “ a bull,” the first letter in the Phoenician and 
 the Hebrew alphabets, was originally formed in such 
 a manner as to depict, coarsely, the horned head of a 
 bull. It closely resembled our own A inverted, i. e., 
 y. It has been always used to express the idea of 
 power or energy, and amongst the Phoenicians it 
 represented both a memorial stone and a man. As a 
 numeral it stands for 1; and it is curious to notice 
 how naturally we ourselves combine the idea of the 
 head of the Alphahet and the first numeral, in 
 speaking of certain ships being A 1 at Lloyd’s. The 
 name of the letter is reproduced in Greek as v Aa $ol, 
 and fancy considers that Aleph may be the parent 
 of the Danish Olaf. We may certainly recognise the 
 name in Elephant — the beast being supposed to 
 be a big bull, when first it appeared amongst the 
 Phoenicians. As the bull was supposed to open the 
 year with his horns at the vernal equinox, so the 
 letter ultimately was adopted as a symbol of the bull 
 and all his power; and, as such, it was occasionally 
 used as a talisman. The Biblical student is familiar 
 with its use as, V Ain theology, the Alpha and 
 Omega , the first and the last, being one of the means 
 of designating the Almighty. Amongst the Hebrews, 
 Aleph and Tau held the place of Alpha and Omega; 
 and the Tau, originally formed like St. Andrew’s 
 
174 
 
 A, &e.] cross, St. George’s cross, or the letter was used 
 as a sacred sign, as well as the Aleph. We find the 
 idea expressed in the Apocalypse, in Isaiah xli. 4, and 
 xlviii. 12, while in xliv. 6, we have the same idea 
 associated with the Creator as the Redeemer, viz., 
 “ Thus saith the Lord, the King of Israel, and his 
 Redeemer, the Lord of Hosts, I am the first and I 
 am the last, and beside me there is no God.” A 
 somewhat similar idea is contained in the Urim 
 and Thummim , the first of which begins with Aleph, 
 the second with Tau. Throughout the whole of these, 
 there is the belief that the two letters include between 
 them the beginning and the end, the whole of every¬ 
 thing, time and eternity, life and death, &c. 
 
 The mystical importance of the letters N and 
 n was evidently known to the writers of the Septua- 
 gint, as the following quotation, condensed from Hr. 
 Ginsburg’s Coheleth, p. 496, proves:—“ The particle 
 eth, the sign of the accusative, which occurs as 
 such seventy-one times in Coheleth , is in forty-two 
 instances regarded as the accusative, whereas in the 
 other twenty-nine instances it is rendered by c rvv = 
 “ with.” Commentators have been perplexed to account 
 for this barbarism and violation of grammatical pro¬ 
 priety ; but a reference to the Hagadic exegesis will 
 show that this Hebrew particle was looked up to as 
 having a mystical significance, because the two letters 
 and n of which it is composed are the alpha and 
 omega of the Hebrew alphabet. Hence the anxiety 
 of the translator to indicate this particle in Greek 
 when a passage appeared to him to be fraught with 
 special mysteries.” 1 
 
 1 As it is advisable for an author — when assuming the power to interpret 
 words as if they had been originally spelled differently to what they are now — to 
 
175 
 
 A, &c.] Grammatically, K occurs as a prefix or prostatic 
 sound in many words whose beginning appears too 
 hard to be uttered by two consonants; it does not 
 therefore form an essential part of every word in 
 which it is fonnd. It may therefore be dropped by 
 the philologist when he is seeking for the original 
 form of any current word. In some nouns, especially 
 in the Aramaic, the letter K is placed at the end of 
 the word, to serve as the article, instead of the usual 
 n in Hebrew, whose place is at the beginning. N is 
 moreover interchangeable with n, as in for T5 ; 
 
 it is also interchangeable with y, as in for ; 
 
 and sometimes, but more rarely, with 1 and *, as in 
 nw for nv, and ^3? for 
 
 The numerical value of K is one, i.; and it is 
 important to notice that the fact of all names having 
 a numerical value, as well as a theological and 
 phonetical one, explains certain things which would 
 otherwise be inexplicable; e. g., A certain Assyrian 
 king, when stating the reasons that induced him to 
 build an edifice to the gods, says, that it was built 
 so many cubits square, according to “the number of 
 his name.” As each letter stands for a number, the 
 dimensions of a temple might thus depend wholly 
 upon whether the king’s name contained letters 
 which represented units, tens, or hundreds. 
 
 Aaron, Aharon. We have already, p. 96, indicated 
 
 show that he has some reason for doing so, it is well to quote here the following 
 remarks of Ginsburg, a propos of the Septuagint version, Coheleth, p. 406:—“As 
 the object of this mode of interpretation is more to show the recondite and spiritual 
 meaning of every detached verse and clause, than to elucidate the design of the 
 inspired book, such sentences as apparently savoured of heterodoxy are made 
 orthodox, by adding or explaining away some words. Changing letters or words 
 for those which are similar in appearance or sound is one of the rules whereby the 
 many meanings of the text are obtained.” 
 
176 
 
 Aaron] the probability of Aaron representing, as the God 
 Aer, one of the second Assyrian triad, in conjunction 
 with the Sun and Moon, the celestial Virgin in this 
 instance being represented by Miriam; the whole 
 forming the Arba. Respecting this God, Sir H. 
 Rawlinson, when speaking of the difficulty in deci¬ 
 phering the phonetic value of the atmospheric God, 
 writes thus : “ A more probable reading would seem 
 to be Air or Aiir, well known Gods of the Mendean 
 Pantheon, who presided over the firmament; and 
 we might then compare the Greek Oupavbg (Aiiran, 
 the God Ur) as a cognate title, and might farther 
 explain the *0 poroiX of Herodotus as a compound 
 term,” including the male and female divinities of 
 the material heaven, &c. 2 
 
 It is then probable that in the Phoenicio-Shemitic 
 Ar, Aer, O up, had the -same sound and meaning as 
 our Air. 3 In Hebrew, -rix, aur, or, signifies “ light;” 
 and a great number of old Canaanite names are 
 compounded with Ar, which is only a variant of 
 Or; e.g., Aroer, Araunah, or Oman, Arnon, &c. ; 
 Latin, Auron. 
 
 Aaron then may possibly signify “ the atmospheric 
 God,” = “ Jupiter, tonans,” or “ pluvius.” It is 
 possibly, however, identical with P^, Aron, but 
 modified by the introduction of the soft breathing 
 
 2 Rawlinson’s Herodotus , vol. i., p, 498 ; edition of 1862. 
 
 8 Lajard, in his Researches upon the Worship of Venus , establishes, I think, 
 that the Venus, whose emblem was a globe of fire placed between the emblems of 
 the Sun and Moon upon ancient coins, was in one sense considered as the Air, 
 intermediate between the heavens and the earth; and that she had amongst her 
 many attributes that of being a mediator. Her star, the smooth ball, was supposed 
 to effect a sort of junction between the male and female powers of creation, as its 
 orbit seemed to be between the Sun and Moon. If his hypothesis be true, the 
 name Aaron, or the God Air, would be appropriate to a priest, who represents 
 himself as a mediator between the Creator and his creatures. 
 
177 
 
 Aaron] sound n. In that case it would signify “ The ark;” 
 nor can we consider the derivation inappropriate, 
 when we think of the important place which the 
 ark occupied in the theological systems of Egypt, 
 Assyria, Palestine, Greece, and, more recently, in 
 that of the Papacy. It was an emblem of the female 
 Creator, retaining within herself the most sacred 
 offering which she could receive; and as such it 
 was used to conserve those emblems of mundane 
 origin which faith regarded as most holy. It was 
 allied to the mystic boat, Argo, or Argha, and was 
 sometimes figured as a cup, or a shield with a central 
 boss. 4 Whether “Aaron ” means “ the holy ark,” 
 or “ the God Aar, or A 'er; ” both are of Assyrian, 
 rather than of Egyptian origin; and if our surmise 
 respecting the ark being an emblem of the presence 
 of the Almighty is correct, it is clear that the 
 Hebrews were not the only nation who could lay 
 claim to that august honour, for the ark was sacred 
 in Nineveh, Babylon, and Egypt. 
 
 But there is yet another interpretation of this 
 word, which deserves the closest attention, inasmuch 
 as it may assist us in our future efforts to ascertain 
 the probable period when the story of the Exodus was 
 first written. The reader will find under the names, 
 Adah, Cherethites, Lamech, &c., evidence of Greek 
 influence in certain portions of the Old Testament: 
 he may probably he able to recognise the same 
 here. According to the construction of the Hebrew 
 language, the Aleph, in fnnK, may simply be pros¬ 
 thetic ; and the terminal Vav and Nun may be 
 nothing more than a formative, and of no use in the 
 word itself. When these are removed, we have in. 
 
 4 For more particulars about this subject, see Ark. 
 
 M 
 
178 
 
 Aaron] The propriety of such proceeding has been recog¬ 
 nised by the Jews, who consider that the Great High 
 Priest may have been named thus by his mother 
 because she was pregnant with him when the decree 
 went forth to destroy male infants, harah, signi¬ 
 fying to be pregnant. 
 
 This, however, is not sufficient to arrest our 
 attention. We proceed, therefore, to consider whe¬ 
 ther the word may not originally have been the same 
 as Hur, Tin, and the character drawn so as to repre¬ 
 sent the Greek Hermes. Like Hermes, he is the 
 messenger of the Almighty, and the mouthpiece of 
 Moses (Exodus iv. 16),—who was to be to him as 
 God,—he has an Urim and Thummim, whereby to 
 give oracular answers. Like the Greek God, who 
 had a blossoming club (Pausanias, xi.- 81, 18), he 
 has a rod which buds. Hermes has a rod adorned 
 with serpents, Aaron has a rod which becomes a 
 serpent, and swallows up the serpent-rods of the 
 opposing priests (Exodus vii. 10 -12). Hermes 
 also has a staff by which he works magic, and a rod 
 by the touch of which he brings some into life, and 
 ushers others to death ; and Aaron is represented as 
 standing between the living and the dead with a 
 censer, and thus staying a plague (Num. xvi. 48). 
 Hermes was said to have been the inventor of 
 chemistry, and Aaron must have had some such 
 knowledge, when he could so contrive as to put golden 
 earrings into the fire and bring them out as a calf 
 (Exodus xxxii. 24): the which, when Moses put it 
 into the fire, was capable of being ground to powder, 
 and dissolved in water. Hermes offered sacrifices to 
 the twelve gods; and those who wrote the story of 
 Aaron in like manner divided the children of Israel 
 
179 
 
 Aaron] into twelve tribes, so artistically as to represent the 
 twelve signs of tbe Zodiac, introducing Simeon and 
 Levi as the twins, Manasseh and Ephraim for the 
 fishes, or vice versa, and Dinah as the virgin. 
 Hermes was said to have originated divine worship 
 and sacrifices, and to have invented the lyre; and if 
 Aaron did not exactly do this, it is clear that Moses is 
 said to have instituted the method of Jewish worship, 
 and Miriam is the first to use the timbrel, and both 
 the one and the other have Aaron for a brother. 
 Hermes was the god who taught eloquence, and was 
 an adroit speaker: Aaron was eloquence personified 
 (Exod. iv. 14-16). The resemblance between Hermes 
 and Aaron, though not established in every particular, 
 points apparently to the fact, that the author of the 
 story was dimly acquainted with Greek mythoses, 
 either from having travelled, like Solon, Pythagoras, 
 and Herodotus, or from having come into contact with 
 Grecian traders, books, or priests. It is evident, how¬ 
 ever, that he also was acquainted with Babylonian or 
 Assyrian myths. 
 
 Now, the first time that we find any evidence 
 of Assyrian interference in Palestine is in the reign 
 of Azariah (2 Kings xv. 17-19); and in the reign 
 of Hezekiah, two generations later, we read of 
 Sennacherib’s invasion, and of an embassy of Baby¬ 
 lonians. In 2 Kings xvii. 17-23, we read certain 
 moral reflections, sueh as might have been in the 
 mind of the writer of the history of Aaron; and 
 there is some probability that the Pentateuch was 
 composed about this period. We cannot, how¬ 
 ever, amply discuss this subject in the present 
 article, but hope to be able, in the second volume, 
 to enter into a full inquiry as to the probable period 
 
180 
 
 Aaron] at which certain portions of the Old Testament 
 were compiled. 
 
 Ahron, Aah, Aha, loll, Iho = Moon (Egyptian). 
 
 Abari (Cuneiform) = celestials, *!'?**, originally the deities; 
 then E'T?*? (Psalm lxxviii. 45), Angels. —(Talbot.) 
 
 Ab, (2 Kings xviii. 2), (modern lb, as in Ibrahim), 
 in all the Phoenicio-Shemitic languages means 
 *'* father;” “ my father,” in a restricted, and in 
 a general sense. It is frequently introduced into 
 names, and by collating these, as far as we can, we 
 may form an idea of the nature of the religious belief 
 in the Father, entertained by those who used his 
 name. We have the word existing amongst us 
 to-day, in Abbot, Abbe, Abbey, Abbott, Abson, 
 Abbinett, Abelard, &c. 
 
 Abad, (Numb. xxiv. 20), “ to be lost; ” also “ a slave 
 or servant,” because lost to his kindred; also “ a 
 worshipper of.” We have as variants of this word, 
 Abd, as in Abd- alia; Obed , as in Obed-e dom and 
 Obad- iah; Ebd, as in Ebed- melech, and Abed, as 
 in Abed- chal, Abed- nego. 
 
 Abadan (Cuneiform), “ The lost one, The sun in winter, 
 or darkness.” (Compare Abaddon.) This word is 
 interesting to us in consequence of the reference 
 made to it in Kev. ix. 11, where we are told that 
 the king of the devils, the angel of the bottomless 
 pit, is called in the Hebrew tongue Abaddon, whilst 
 in the Greek tongue he has the name of Apollyon. 
 If we pursue this word through all its forms, we 
 find that abad, signifies “ to wander abroad, to 
 be lost;” obaid, is “destruction;” and that 
 
 abadoh, l n ^, abaddon, and abdan, also 
 signify “ destruction.” We have abadoh, trans¬ 
 
 lated, Prov. xxvii. 20, 4 destruction,’ and coupled 
 
181 
 
 Abadan] with Hell in Exod. xxii. 9, Lev. vi. 8, 4, and Dent, 
 xxii. 8, we have abedah, translated as ‘ a lost 
 
 thing; ’ and in Job xxvi. 6, xxviii. 22, xxxi. 12 ; 
 Psalm lxxxviii. 11; Prov. xv. 11, and xxvii, 20, we 
 have the word 1™^?, abaddon, translated ‘destruc¬ 
 tion ; ’ in Esther viii. 6, and ix. 5, abdan, is 
 translated in the same manner. 
 
 In none of these instances is abaddon represented 
 as a devil, as an angel, or a king; the word simply 
 embodies the idea of ‘ loss,’ or ‘ death,’ whether 
 brought about by voluntary or compulsory absence, 
 by destruction, or by the processes of nature. As the 
 Arabs poetically speak of Azrael, the ‘ Angel of death,’ 
 so the Hebrews speak of Abaddon or Apollyon, the 
 ‘Angel of destruction.’ It is very necessary, when 
 reading the account of such a vision as that called 
 The Apocalypse, that we should carefully guard 
 ourselves from raising any theory upon the literal 
 signification of the words employed. From want of 
 this caution, the name ‘ Abaddon ’ has been brought 
 forward as one of the proofs by which the doctrine 
 of fallen angels, so beautifully worked out by Milton, 
 is supported (see Angels) ; but a very short con¬ 
 sideration suffices to show that an abstract idea can 
 under no circumstances be ‘ a person,’ still less a 
 person who was at one time different from what he is 
 now. This will appear in a stronger light, if we 
 compare with the name in question the following 
 words from the same source (Rev. vi. 8), “And I 
 looked and beheld a pale horse, and his name that 
 sat on him was death, and hell followed with him.” 
 In this instance power and locality are personified, 
 and it would be as absurd for us to adopt the literal 
 signification of the passage, as it would be to attempt 
 
182 
 
 Abadan] to depict on canvas all London and its beauty going 
 to “ the Derby,” or for a sculptor to try and represent 
 the “ wings of the wind ” as a stone image, or “ the 
 clouds ” as a modern chariot. 
 
 Abda (Sanscrit) means ‘ a cloud.’ 
 
 Abda, NJiy (1 Kings iv. 6), “ The work, or the servant of 
 El,” the final b being dropped, and the vowel-point 
 altered in accordance with the usual practice of 
 obliterating the divine name. 
 
 Abdeel, (Jer. xxvi. 36), “ The work or servant of El.” 
 
 Abdhi (Sanscrit) means ‘ the ocean.’ 
 
 Abdi, (1 Chron. vi. 44), “ The work or servant of Jah,” 
 the final n being dropped. 
 
 Abdiel, (1 Chron. v. 15), “The worshipper or servant 
 
 of El.” 
 
 Abdon, “ Servant of On; ” (Cuneiform,) * He was a 
 
 son of Hillel,’ 4 The morning star.’ 
 
 Abednego, ‘W. (Dan. ii. 49), 44 The Servant of Nebo,” 
 the letter Gimel and the vowels having been changed. 
 
 Abel, Heb. ^ (Gen. xxxvii. 85), 4 to mourn,’ also 4 a pasture 
 or meadow.’ Abel, the son of Adam, is not the 
 same as this: his name begins with n, is written 
 Hebei, and is designedly postponed. (See Habel.) 
 
 Abel Beth-Maacha, nDypvi'3 (1 Kings xv. 20). (See 
 Beth and Baacha.) 
 
 Abel Keeamim, (Judges xi. 33), 4 The vineyard- 
 
 green ; ’ or 4 the plain of the vineyard.” 
 
 Abel-maim, ^ (2 Chron. xvi. 4), 44 Abel of the 
 
 waters.” 
 
 Abel-Meholah, nbinp bin (Judges vii. 22), 4 The dancing 
 green; ’ Machol, 4 dancing.’ 5 
 
 5 It is a question what the real significance of this word is. Miriam and her 
 
 fellows have timbrels and dances. In the East individuals do not dance for pleasure, 
 
 hut hire girls to dance for them. These dances are provocative of desire, and, to 
 
 our ideas, obscene. (See also Athenceus, xiii., 86.) 
 
188 
 
 Abel-Mizraim, (Gen. 1. 11), ‘ The Egyptian 
 
 green ; ’ Mitzraim, Egypt. 
 
 Abel-Shittim, D'W bnx (Numb, xxxiii. 49), “The Acacia 
 green;” 1W, shaith, plural shittim , *thorny bushes,’ 
 but possibly from ‘ drinking or carousing.’ 
 
 Abez, T?? (Josh. xix. 20), “ He shines or glitters; ” “he is 
 high.” 
 
 Abha (Sanscrit), “ splendour, light.” Compare with Abba, 
 “ Father of Light,” &c. 
 
 Abi, This word, which enters into composition with a 
 
 great number of others, so as to form cognomens, 
 may be rendered in two distinct ways. It may be 
 that it is formed simply by the addition of * i, which 
 is the mark of the possessive pronoun, and gives to 
 the word the signification of “ my father; ” or, as 
 Furst considers, it may mark that the name has 
 been originally compounded with the sacred name of 
 Jehovah, and that the final n of n ' has been dropped. 
 There is great difficulty in selecting the best alterna- 
 native. If the word abi signifies ‘ my father,’ there is 
 often great difficulty in making any sense of the 
 sentence enshrined in certain cognomens ; if, on the 
 other hand, we take abi to be equivalent to 
 abiah, we shall find that it is borne by an individual 
 Abimael (Gen. x. 28), who existed prior to the time 
 when the sacred name Jah was said to have been 
 revealed to Moses : involving the certainty that one or 
 other portion of the sacred narrative is incorrect. 
 Another difficulty arises from the fact that many names 
 bore in full the name of Jah, e.g., Abijah, Elijah, 
 Adonijah, &c., in which no elision of the n at the 
 end has been made by scribes subsequent to those 
 who first wrote the names. Now we have already 
 seen that the cognomens which are compounded 
 
184 
 
 Abi] with Jah were apparently given after the accession of 
 David to the throne, and we shall subsequently 
 demonstrate that Jah entered into names borne by 
 many of the Phoenician kings, and that it was also 
 borne by some of the Assyrian deities. 
 
 Under these circumstances we may consider 
 abi , (1) as a simple variant of ab ; or (2) as 
 signifying 44 my father;” or (8) as being an elided 
 form of abiah . 
 
 Abia, (1 Sam. viii. 2), the same as Abiah and Abijah, 
 “ The father is Jah.” (1 Chron. ii. 24.) 
 
 Abi-albon, (2 Sam xxiii. 81), “My father is the 
 
 bright On,” or “ father, strength; ” from abi, 
 4 my father; ’ alab , 4 he is strong; ’ j-1K, aun, 
 4 On.’ 
 
 Abi-asaph, (Exod. vi. 24), 44 My father is enchanting,” 
 
 or 44 the Enchanting Father.” This word is usually 
 derived from asaph, 4 collector; ’ I think that it 
 comes from ashaph, 6 4 to use incantations, an 
 
 enchanter, a magician.’ (Compare Enoch.) 
 
 6 When assuming, as I do throughout this Vocabulary, that the spelling of any 
 particular name in the Bible as given in the current Hebrew text is not necessarily 
 the correct one, it is advisable that some reason or authority should he given for 
 this course of proceeding. 
 
 I shall perhaps best effect my purpose if I state my system of procedure. 
 When the name for examination was selected, the first point was to examine the 
 interpretation given of it by Gesenius and other writers, whom I could consult, and 
 subsequently Fiirst. If the signification they assigned seemed reasonable, all that 
 I did was to verify it, and ascertain by examinatb n that there was no other mean¬ 
 ing equally probable, and then to adopt it. But if the rendering was unsatisfactory, 
 I then undertook a more extended inquiry. I not only investigated all possible 
 divisions of the word as it stood — with or without attention to the vowel-points — 
 but I inquired into its sound, with a view to ascertain whether it might have been 
 misspelled by inadvertence, and, still farther, whether the reading may not have been 
 intentionally varied, in consequence of the true orthography containing something 
 which was offensive to the doctrines held in the days when each copy of the Scripture 
 was made by hand. Under such names as Abram, Adah, Edom, Eve, Mary, Sara, and 
 others, the method is indicated on the face of the article itself. In the majority, however, 
 it has been retrenched, from a desire to economise time and space. As my researches 
 extended, the conclusion gradually became forced upon me. that a systematic altera- 
 
185 
 
 Abi-athar, (1 Sam. xxii. 20), “My father is abun¬ 
 
 dance ; ” "1DJ, jathar, “ to be abundant, to increase; ” 
 whence possibly may have descended our Arthur. 
 Abi-da, (Gen xxy. 4), “ My father is knowledge, or 
 
 wisdom; ” •W, daiah, ‘ knowledge’ (a Midianite name). 
 Abi-dan, (Numb. i. 11), “My father, the judge;” IJ, 
 dan , “ a judge.” (See Benhael.) 
 
 Abi-el, (1 Chron. xi. 32), “My father is El,” or 
 
 “ Father El.” We have the same name in a different 
 form in the word Eliab. It is to be noticed, how¬ 
 ever, that whilst the vowel-point of ^ is Tzere in 
 Abiel, because the syllable denoting God is at the 
 end of the word, in Eliab, where commences the 
 word, the N has a Segol, in accordance with the 
 uniform practice of obliterating this name of the 
 deity whenever it begins a personal name. 
 
 tion of the original text had taken place; hut that the change was comparatively slight, 
 i. e., one vowel was substituted for another, or such consonants as n h, h t,t z, 
 and D s, were used instead of n h, n t, ^ z, s, or vice versa. Very frequently 
 a vowel or soft sound was dropped, or one or more letters were transposed. After 
 ascertaining this, I next found out that almost every cognomen which had been so 
 treated was originally of such a nature as to offend the ear of the pious Jews of the 
 Pharisaic type, either from its indelicacy or from its implying a heterodox faith. 
 Whenever, therefore, an appellative which could not be interpreted according to the 
 current spelling was found, I began to search for some other etymology which would 
 produce a name similar in sound but different in meaning, and generally found the 
 clue above-mentioned a perfect one. After having drawn these conclusions from 
 what I may call the force of logic, I met with Ginsburg’s translation of Levita’s 
 Exposition of the Massorah, which was published in January, 1867—after three 
 fourths of this Vocabulary were in manuscript, and a large portion of the preceding 
 pages was in type. In that I found that Levita speaks of the law by which the 
 Rabbis enforced the propriety of so modifying certain words, when transcribing from 
 old copies, that the new ones should not offend the ear of the faithful. His words 
 run thus: “ Our Rabbis of blessed memory say that all the words which are written 
 in the Scriptures cacophonically must be read euphemically.” “ The rule which 
 obtained is, that every cacophonous expression was changed for an euphemism, so 
 that man might not utter anything indecent.” Page 194. 
 
 This distinctly demonstrated, first, that there were indecent or coarse expressions 
 in the original Scriptures, and the examples given show that a style of faith was 
 indicated in the early writers, which was so offensive to the more modern Hebrews, 
 as to be entirely ignored. This then seemed perfectly to justify the conclusions 
 which I had drawn, and showed me still farther reasons than I had already enter- 
 
186 
 
 Abi-ezer, (Josh. xvii. 2), “My father the helper;” 
 
 1$, ezer , * helper.’ 
 
 Abi-gail, (1 Sam. xxy. 8, 14), “My father, the circle,” 
 
 or “the circular father,” i.e. the Sun. The meaning 
 assigned by Gesenius is, “ whose father is exulta¬ 
 tion ; ” but this is too far-fetched to be trusted. 
 We have already seen that one of the names of the 
 Sun in the Chaldee was Gil, Gal, Gul, or Gulla; 
 and in Hebrew W, gil, or gail, is “to go in a circle,” 
 or “ a circle.” Now the Sun’s fete days were Gala 
 days, and boisterous mirth was always associated with 
 them. Hence we use the phrase Gala-day for any 
 occasion where nothing but merriment is thought of. 
 
 tained for inquiring into the primitive faith of the so-called ‘chosen race,’ and their 
 original ideas of the Creator. 
 
 But Levita gives very few illustrations of the working of the Rabbinical rule, 
 and I could form no idea of the extent to which it was applied, nor frame an opinion 
 as to the effect it might have in modifying the value I placed upon any Biblical 
 passage. This hiatus has, however, been bridged over to a very great extent, by a 
 work from the pen of the learned Dr. Ginshurg, whose first part is to appear 
 whilst this sheet is in the press.* It is impossible, in the compass of a note, to 
 give the whole gist of the matter which he brings forward; we may summarise it 
 thus— (1) The sacred Scriptures, as they were first known to the Talmudist, con¬ 
 tained matter which was offensive (a) from its apparent obscenity or coarseness, 
 
 ( b) from its being heterodox. (2) Those things which were considered opposed to 
 orthodoxy were— [a) those which seemed to assert the plurality of God; ( b ) those 
 which attributed to the God of any other nation a name or a power similar to 
 that possessed by the God of the Jews; (c) those which were anthropomorphic; 
 (d) those which attributed to God anything which was deemed erroneous; (e) those in 
 which the sacred name was used in short cognominal sentences, or stood for the 
 name of a man ; (/) those which attributed to the patriarchs anything derogatory 
 to their saintly character ; ( g) those which were prejudicial to the fair fame of the 
 Holy nation ; (h) those which attributed to men the functions of God; ( i ) those 
 which spoke leniently of the nations whom the Jews had been taught to hate; 
 ( j ) to introduce into the text certain legal changes. (3) The alterations were to he 
 made with as little departure from the text as possible; they consisted in transposing 
 letters, in dropping one or more, or in substituting one letter for another, which 
 would give a word a different meaning. (4) These variations were not assented to 
 universally, and a comparison of ancient versions of the Bible enables a modern to 
 judge of the extent to which the perversion of the original text has been carried. 
 To this book we shall have frequent occasion to refer in subsequent articles. 
 
 Ginshurg, The English Bible in relation to the ancient and oilier Versions. 
 
187 
 
 Abi-gail] We consider it more appropriate to speak of the 
 Sun as “ The Father on High,” than to conceive of 
 him as a man like David, leaping, dancing, and 
 uncovering himself, &c. Gal also signifies “ a heap 
 of stones, a cairn” (see Gilgal). These cairns were 
 ancient phallic emblems, being always decorated by 
 a central erect stone, which they served to adorn. 
 They were often surrounded by a circle of upright 
 stones; and there is little doubt that the old fashion 
 of dancing in a circle on gala days had its origin in 
 the same idea which arranged the form of Stone¬ 
 henge. 
 
 Abi-hail, Win (2 Chron. xi. 18), “My father is strong.” 
 There is some doubt about the spelling of the latter 
 part of the word, and hail or chail, being 
 the variants. If we pursue the word, we find 
 hellel = “the bright star,” “Lucifer, the morning 
 star; ” hala, means “ remote, far off; ” ^-in, chul, 
 means “ to turn in a circle,” or a circular dance ; and 
 tyn, chail, means “ strength and power,” a word which 
 is not far removed in sound from gail, in Abigail. 
 The name may then signify “ The father the Sun,” 
 or “ The father is far off,” or “ The father is strong;” 
 the last is most probable. One Abihail was the 
 wife of Eehoboam, but the name was also masculine. 
 
 Abi-hu, K-irvai* (Exod. vi. 28), “My father is,” or “He 
 is the father,” or “The father breathes;” K-in, huah, 
 “ he is,” or “ he breathes ; ” or more probably N-inUN 
 is a compound of IN ‘ father,’ and in' 1 Jehovah , with 
 Aleph added at the end to obliterate the divine name. 
 Compare this name, borne by a son of Aaron, with 
 the Assyrian Hoa. 
 
 Abi-hud, (1 Chron. viii. 8), “ My father is splendour, 
 
 glory, power, or beauty ;” ‘■fin, hod = ‘ beauty,’ &c. 
 
188 
 
 Abijah, n T ^ (1 Sam. viii. 2 ; 1 Chron. ii. 24), “ The father 
 is Jah n ', Jah, ‘ Jehovah.’ (See Abijam.) 
 
 Abi-jam, (1 Kings xiv. 81). This name was borne by 
 a son of Jeroboam, who, in 2 Chron. xiii. 1, &c., is 
 called “ the father is Jah,” the D being here 
 
 substituted for the n, to obliterate the divine name. 
 
 Abil (Cuneiform), 4 son.’ (Compare Abel.) 
 
 Abi-mael, (Gen x - 28), “My father covers;” 
 
 maal, “ to cover,” or mil , an upper “ garment.” 
 
 Abi-melech, (Gen. xx. 2), “My father the king;” 
 
 ^5, melech, “ king, ruler, supreme.” 
 
 Abi-nadab, (1 Sam. xvi. 8), “ My father the gene¬ 
 
 rous, the noble;” ^\ , nadab, “ he incites, impels, or 
 gives spontaneously.” 
 
 Abi-ner or Abner, (1 Sam. xiv. 51), is said to mean, 
 
 “ Father of light; ” *t1j, nur , means ‘ to lighten ’ 
 (compare Koh-i -noor and iVoimnahal, iVowreddin, 
 &c.) ; and in Chaldee it means ‘ fire.’ tergal was 
 an Assyrian God. I presume that the true etymo¬ 
 logy of the word is “ The father is light,” or “ The 
 father the Sun.” 
 
 Abi-noam, (Jud. iv. 6), “My father is pleasantness;” 
 
 W, naam , “ loveliness, pleasantness.” 
 
 Abie, (Judges v. 22), “ The strong one,” used for God, 
 ‘ the bullock and the horse.’ (Compare Abari.) 
 
 Abi-ram, E?'?- (Numb. xvi. 1), “ My father on high;” this is 
 the same as Abram ; D-n, rum , high ; ram, or D 'T!, 
 raim, signifies the buffalo, the strongest of wild bulls. 
 It is very probable that this word is really the same 
 as Abram, with the addition of *, so as to prevent 
 any other man than the patriarch using his cognomen. 
 
 Ab-ishai, (1 Sam. xxvi. 6), may signify “ The father 
 
 exists,” or “ The father is erect or stands ; ” or “ The 
 father is broad, or aids,” according as we derive 
 
189 
 
 Ab-ishai] ishai, from B?., aish; asha (= esse); isha 
 (commonly written Jesse); or jasha. Or we mny 
 read it as abi-shai. T, shai, is a gift; NJP, shai, is to 
 impel. I think it means “ The father is assistance.” 
 Abi-shag, (1 Kings i. 8), “ My father who multiplies,” 
 
 or “ who makes us great.” The ordinary meaning 
 assigned to this name, viz., “ Father of error,” seems 
 absurd. sagah = ‘ to increase, to cause to 
 
 increase;’ shag ah — ‘ to be great.’ There are 
 
 many significations to words resembling shag. 
 shaga, is ‘ to wander, to go astray; ’ also, ‘ to he 
 great.’ shagal, is ‘to lie with,’ and, differently 
 
 pointed, the same letters mean ‘ a king’s wife.’ 
 shaga , means ‘ to he strong, brave, vigorous, impe¬ 
 tuous, excited,’ &c. Coupling the name with the 
 nature of the individual who bore it, and what her 
 function was, I conceive that the word may have 
 had a phallic significance, and signifies “ The father 
 who enables men to procreate,” “He who makes 
 small things great, erect, or strong.” 
 
 Abi-shalom, (1 Kings xv. 2), “ My father is per¬ 
 
 fect;” shalaim, ‘perfect.’ Differently pointed, 
 the word signifies ‘ he completes,’ &c. 
 
 Abi-shua, (1 Chron. viii. 4), “My father is liberal,” 
 
 or “ The father is wealth; ” W, shoa, ‘ rich; ’ W, 
 shua, ‘ wealth.’ 
 
 Abi-shub, (1 Chron. ii. 28). By Gesenius, this is 
 
 translated as pater muri, “ Father of a wall!” The 
 word deserves a much better explanation. "M?, shaur , 
 an old root, 7 signifies ‘to leap forwards, or upon,’ ‘to 
 
 7 In passing through a great list of names used in ancient times, I have repeatedly 
 found that the means of arriving at the most sensible meaning for many cognomens 
 is to adopt some old and unused word as their probable root; and I have come to 
 think so much of the point, that it has had great weight with me in the analysis 
 pf the ancient names. 
 
190 
 
 Abi-shur] be strong;’ pointed as Shor , it means “a bull” 
 (taurus); as Sliur, it means 4 to go about,’ ‘ to 
 journey,’ also 4 a wall ’ (from its being round a 
 town). The signification of the word then is solar, 
 and phallic, and it may best be rendered, 4 4 My 
 father the strong one.” 
 
 Abi-tal, (2 Sam. iii. 4). It is difficult to assign a 
 
 meaning to this word; fy?, tal , means, 44 dew,” — 
 rather an absurd name for a father; tul, means 
 44 to be long; ” talali , which is an old root, 
 
 means 44 to be fresb,” and the same, differently 
 pointed, is 44 a young lamb ; ” ^?, tail, is a hill; 
 
 tala, is 44 to hang up,” or 44 to dangle.” Abital 
 was a wife of David, and was probably named during 
 the time of Saul, when there was a different style of 
 belief to what prevailed afterwards. I incline to the 
 opinion that the signification is, 44 My father is long,” 
 and that On is the father referred to, or Eshcol. 
 Ftirst considers that ^9, tal, is derived from 
 total, to protect, and thus makes the word 44 Ab is 
 protection;” but the same word, talal, also signifies 
 44 to be juicy,” and thus 44 Ab is juicy” is deduced, 
 which resembles the interpretation already given. 
 It is proper that I should explain that more than 
 half the Vocabulary was in manuscript before 
 Furst’s Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon was published 
 in English, and that I can only use the information 
 gained from him in a supplementary form. 
 
 Abi-tub, (1 Chron. viii. 11), 44 The father is good¬ 
 
 ness,” or 44 The good father; ” n'lD, tob, 44 to be good, 
 or good.” 
 
 Abn, 1^?, Heb. commonly written Eben, which see. In 
 Cuneiform, abn, 4 a stone,’ is said to have the pho¬ 
 netic value of tag or tak. 
 
191 
 
 Abnil (Cuneiform), an Assyrian stone God of late origin. 
 
 Ab-raham, (Gen. xvii. 5), “ The father is multitude, 
 
 or of multitude;” raham (Arabic), ‘multitude.’ 
 The other and original name for the Patriarch was 
 Abram , derived apparently from the two Chaldee 
 
 words ab and ram, which signify “ The high father, 
 or the father on high.” Ab sometimes enters into 
 composition as a terminal syllable, as well as an 
 initial one. We have seen Abiel, by and by we 
 shall enter upon Eliab. (See Abram.) 
 
 Abram, (Gen. xi. 31), is the name borne by an 
 
 Assyrian, or Chaldee, who emigrated from Ur of the 
 Chaldees into Palestine, in company with his father 
 and his family. As the name must be assumed to 
 be Chaldaic, it shows us that the faith which was 
 current in Mesopotamia at the time of the Patriarch’s 
 birth did not essentially differ from that held in 
 Canaan. The word is compounded of two syllables, 
 the first of which, 2N, ab, signifies “ The father; ” 
 respecting the second, viz., d*i, ram, we have either 
 to select one signification out of many, or we must 
 consider that a second syllable has been selected to 
 qualify the first, of so very ambiguous a meaning 
 that nothing but a “ double entendre ” was designed. 
 ram = ‘ he is high,’ ‘ he lifts himself on high,’ 
 ‘he is prominent,’ ‘he cries,’ ‘he rages,’ ‘he 
 roars,’ ‘he is red,’ like coral. 
 rem or raim, = ‘a buffalo, or wild bull.’ 
 
 0-n, rum, ‘ he is grown high,’ ‘ he is exalted,’ ‘ he is 
 haughty,’ ‘ he is mighty,’ ‘ he exalts himself.’ 
 Dh, rom — ‘a height.’ 
 
 D-n, rum = ‘ a height.’ 
 
 B}, ram = ‘ high,’ ‘ prominent.’ 
 
 B?, ram, ‘ a proper name.’ Gen. xxii. 21. 
 
192 
 
 Abram] A glance at these words will demonstrate that 
 the second syllable of the word Abram may signify 
 an idea analogous to our notions of a heaven in the 
 sky above us, or one which is substantially the same 
 as Mahadeva. If in doubt ourselves, we may turn 
 to the later writers, who invented the plan of 
 changing the original name, to suit the purpose of a 
 time long subsequent to that of the Patriarch. They 
 converted the name into Abraham, the signification 
 of which is “ The father of a multitude; ” this, 
 although in itself a “ double entendre,” was less 
 conspicuously so than the original cognomen; and 
 we infer that the necessity for change arose from the 
 ambiguity of Abram being so glaring that any one 
 who thought upon the matter would recognise it. 
 
 The history which is given to us of the patriarch 
 is as mythical as his name, and its incidents tell of a 
 strange state of morality existing at the period when 
 the legend was composed. Leaving his aged father 
 with his only other son, Abram starts with Lot and 
 Sarai, and pitches his tent between Bethel and Hai — 
 places which had no nominal existence at the time — 
 but being driven by famine, he goes down into Egypt, 
 when at the age of seventy-five years, taking with 
 him Sarai, who was sixty-five. Full of fear for his 
 own life, and having clearly no retinue upon whom 
 he could depend for defence, he bargains with the 
 King of Egypt, whose amatory propensities are tickled 
 at the sight of the old woman Sarai, and who pur¬ 
 chases the use of her from her husband, for such 
 worldly wealth as sheep and oxen, asses and camels, 
 and male and female slaves. With the price of his 
 wife’s dishonour, Abram has become wealthy, and Lot, 
 of whom we hear nothing whilst his uncle was in 
 
193 
 
 Abram] Egypt — although he had many virgin daughters, 
 who were more likely to he attractive than a septuage¬ 
 narian wife—having also become wealthy, they are men 
 of too great substance to live together, and they there¬ 
 fore separate. We shortly find that Abram had no 
 less than three hundred and eighteen soldier slaves, 
 and that with them he is more than a match for five 
 kings, who are on a warlike expedition. Being child¬ 
 less at eighty, a matter which could scarcely have 
 distressed him much, seeing that his father had been 
 seventy years old before he had a family, he adopts a 
 slave for a consort, and has his first son at the age of 
 eighty-six. After this, he and all the males of his 
 household are circumcised ; when he has attained the 
 age of ninety-nine, and his wife is eighty-nine, a 
 period when, according to the testimony of both 
 husband and wife (Gen. xvii. 17, and xviii. 12), they 
 were sterile by reason of their age; and before the 
 promised child appears, Abram, apparently denuded of 
 all his armed retainers, goes down to Gerar, and again 
 passes his wife off as his sister, 8 and again a monarch, 
 becoming enamoured of the old woman, takes her as 
 a wife, and again the complaisant husband receives 
 great worldly wealth as the price of what we must call 
 his wife’s and sister’s infamy. The promised son at 
 length arrives, and after a while Abram is told to 
 sacrifice him ; yet he who pleaded boldly for mercy 
 to be shown to the Sodomites has not a word to say in 
 favour of his son. But before this incident takes place 
 we find that Sarah, proud of her own child, cannot 
 tolerate the existence of the son of Hagar, even though 
 she had herself brought about the connexion with the 
 
 8 It is to be remembered that Isis was said to be the wife and sister of Osiris, 
 and that Ceres was also said to be the wife and sister of Jupiter. 
 
 N 
 
194 
 
 Abram] common father. The lovely old woman, who has 
 fascinated two mighty kings, becomes suddenly a 
 termagant, and the cowardly Abram, who has twice 
 profited by his wife’s disgrace, again shows the white 
 feather, and consigns to almost certain death his 
 eldest son, and her by whom he first attained the 
 blessing of paternity. It is curious that Hagar 
 should wander in the wilderness of Beersheba, a spot 
 which then had no more nominal existence than 
 Bethel and Hai; and it is equally curious to notice 
 the facility with which Abram resolves to sacrifice 
 both his sons. We conclude, however, from the 
 narrative, that he did plead for Ishmael with Sara, his 
 wife, who, on this occasion, certainly did not call him 
 lord (1 Pet. iii. 6), although he made no pleadings 
 subsequently for Isaac. Abram’s wife at last dies, 
 being one hundred and twenty-seven years old, and 
 Abram ten years older. She is buried, and then 
 Abram seeks for a consort for his son. He swears 
 his servant on his thigh ( i . c., the fascinum), and 
 sends him off to his father’s house; on the return of 
 the messenger with a wife for Isaac, the old patriarch, 
 now at least twenty-seven years older than when 
 Sarah had told us of his incapacity to beget offspring, 
 marries again, and has six children. Though very 
 particular about the kindred and religion of the wife 
 of his son, we are not told that he had any such idea 
 about his own second consort, who is called a wife, 
 Gen. xxv. 1, and a concubine, 1 Chron. i. 32. At 
 his death, Abram gives everything to Isaac, who like 
 his father goes to Gerar, and tells the same tale as 
 Abram had done of his wife being his sister. We find 
 moreover that Isaac increased his wealth, and had a 
 great store of cattle and slaves, yet, notwithstanding 
 
195 
 
 Abram] his princely condition, he sends away from his own 
 home the youngest of his two sons, to seek for a 
 wife amongst his relatives, without a single attendant, 
 and with no more wealth than his clothes and a 
 walking stick. It is impossible for any thoughtful 
 mind to accept such a story as a true narrative. It 
 is difficult to understand how any nation could be 
 proud of such an ancestor as Abraham. The careful 
 reader cannot fail to notice how completely the course 
 of time has falsified the statements, said to be made 
 directly to the patriarch by the Almighty, respecting 
 the future power of his descendants; for the Jews 
 never wholly possessed the land of Canaan, and the 
 posterity of Ishmael has been more numerous and 
 more prosperous than that of Isaac, though probably 
 less influential in the main. From the foregoing 
 considerations, we think it far better to consider the 
 story of Abraham and the patriarchs as a pious 
 legend of human invention, than to believe it as a 
 strictly true history, written by the spirit of the 
 Almighty. 
 
 Abrech, (Gen. xli. 43), “tender father;” a Hebrew 
 
 title, said to have been given to Joseph in Egypt, by 
 the natives, who did not know the country of their 
 benefactor, or the language which was most familiar 
 to him. Some think this word to be of Egyptian 
 origin = ‘ bow the knee; ’ considering that it has 
 its present form, because Moses, although speaking 
 Egyptian as his mother-tongue (Exod. ii. 10, Acts 
 vii. 22), was unable with Jewish letters to write the 
 word properly. 
 
 Absalom, (2 Sam. iii. 3), “ The father is peace.” 
 
 Accad, (Gen. x. 10), an Assyrian fortress = “ a fortified 
 place ;” " I ??, achad , ‘to fortify or strengthen.’ 
 
196 
 
 Accho] for (Judges i. 31), aclio for ako, a roebuck. 
 I bad great difficulty in satisfying myself that the 
 signification of this word was “ The Roebuck.” Two 
 days after I had completed the MS., I met with 
 Hislop’s ‘ Two Babylons,* and while cutting the leaves 
 was arrested at page 140, 3rd edition, at a copy of a 
 Tyrian coin, representing the Lingam and Serpent, 
 the former of which is under the form of a short and 
 thick stump. Upon one side of it is a pyramidal 
 shell, the “ concha,” usually called cornucopia, and 
 on the other a palm tree, an euphemism for the 
 phallus. Appended to the figure is this note, which 
 I copy almost verbatim. “ Ail, or 11, is a synonyme 
 for Gheber, The mighty one. ... It signifies 
 also a wide speading tree, or a stag with branching 
 horns (Parkhurst). Therefore at different times the 
 Great God is symbolised by a stately tree, or by a 
 stag . On an Ephesian coin he is symbolised by a 
 stag cut asunder, and there, a palm-tree is repre¬ 
 sented as springing up at the side of the stag, just 
 as here it springs up at the side of the dead trunk. 
 In Sanchoniathon, Kronos is expressly called ‘Ilos,’ 
 i. e., the mighty one. The Great God being cut off, 
 the cornucopia at the left of the tree is empty, but 
 the palm-tree repairs all.” If the reader remembers 
 what has been already said of Asshur or Asher, El 
 or II, obelisks, standing stones, the stocks of trees, 
 &c., as indicative of the active male organ; of the 
 concha and inverted pyramid, as emblematic of the 
 female organ; and then recals the story of the feud 
 between Mahadeva and his Sacti, he will understand 
 the mythos depicted on the coin, and the hidden 
 meaning which exists in naming a mighty man after 
 the Roebuck. (See Beth-Nimrah, and Nimrod.) 
 
197 
 
 Achbor, an Idumaean Prince. This name may serve as an 
 example of the method which I have usually followed 
 in ascertaining the most probable meaning of a word. 
 The cognomen is spelled in the Hebrew Acbor, 
 
 or Achbor; and the meaning assigned to it is ‘a 
 Mouse.' I cannot, however, believe, that any great 
 man would submit to be called after so tiny a 
 creature, and I cannot find any other word either 
 with 3 or p which satisfies me. Supposing the name 
 may be a compound one, I turn to ach, which 
 means *brother,’ and to Via, bor, ‘ a pit; ’ otherwise 
 pointed, * to search out; ’ we find also *i3, bor, ‘ purity 
 and which when pointed signifies bar, ‘ beloved: ’ the 
 word then may mean, ‘ brother to the pit,’ ‘to purity,’ 
 or ‘ to the beloved one; ’ and we conclude that the 
 idea intended to be conveyed is “ Like to the Pure 
 One, i. e., the Celestial Virgin.” Fiirst considers 
 that ach, is a name expressive of the divine Being ; 
 if so, the word denotes ‘ Ach is pure.’ 
 
 Achish, A king of Gath, written achish or akish, 
 
 (1 Sam. xxi. 10.) Here again, taking the ordinary 
 spelling, we find no adequate signification; if on the 
 contrary we take the sound—and it must be remem¬ 
 bered that this was all which the Hebrew writers 
 could go by — and consult achish or ahish, we 
 
 get the meaning of “ Brother to the self-existent one.” 
 Compare Jacchus. Perhaps from achash, ‘ rolled 
 up like a serpent.’ Compare Nahash. Recollecting 
 the possibility of the Philistines being Grecians, we 
 may surmise that the word is a Hebraic form of 
 'axis, akis, “ an arrow,” one of the emblems of El, 
 Bel, and Baal. 
 
 Achan, (Josh. vii. 18, 26.) These words are both 
 
 Achor, explained in the Scriptures to mean trouble, 
 
198 
 
 Achan) and are associated with a story to account for the 
 
 Achor j names being there. These stories I have gradually 
 learned to distrust more and more, until indeed I 
 have come to recognise their existence as affording a 
 certainty that they veil a hidden meaning, to which 
 they thus become a clue; as the peewit, by feigning 
 injury and trying to lure the traveller from her 
 nest, occasionally conducts him thither, when once 
 he has become acquainted with her wiles; i. e., the 
 story has been fitted to the name, and not the name 
 to the story. Taking Achish and Achbor for a guide, 
 I should read these words as meaning “ Brother of, 
 or Like to On,” and “ Like to Hur,” “Brother of the 
 sky.” n ^, ach, ‘brother; 5 jis, aun, On; aur, ‘ the 
 sky,’ or ( Ach is On or Hur.’ 
 
 Achhetha, Knzpntf (Ezra vi. 2), a proper name, probably of 
 Persian origin. I insert it here simply to note that 
 the Hebrews wrote its first syllable as I conjecture 
 the other Achs ought to have been written, viz., as n **. 
 
 Achsah, (Josh. xv. 16), is said to be “ an anklet ” by 
 Oesenius, and “ a serpent ” by Ffirst; but it is impro¬ 
 bable that religious priests, who always introduced 
 sacred ideas into names, would call Caleb’s daughter 
 after a female ornament. It was consonant with their 
 ideas to give her the name of “the serpent,” a 
 creature worshipped in Jerusalem till the time of 
 Ezekiel. We may reconcile the two significations by 
 the fact that anklets were often in the form of 
 serpents, and that both words imply the idea of 
 twining round. It may come from the verb achas, 
 with the addition of the feminine pronoun n. If so, 
 the meaning would be, “ She is tinkling, with bells,” 
 i. e ., a virgin ; or “ She surrounds, or twines round 
 
199 
 
 Achsah] us.” There is another possible etymology—or 
 n ? and n £, acli, sah, or saah, i. e., “ Kindred to the 
 mother, or to the cleft,” or “ ach breaks forth.” 
 
 Achshaph, (Josh. xi. 1), I take to mean “Ach is 
 
 abundance; ” shapha, meaning ‘ to overflow, 
 
 abundance,’ or ‘ach, the uniter,’ 
 
 Achzib, 3'tnN (Josh. xix. 29), is another name which has, I 
 think, been misspelled; as it stands, it has no known 
 signification, but if we take n ^, ach, to mean ‘ kindred 
 with,’ or ‘the god Ach,’ we have only to search out 
 for Zib. Such a name was borne by a Prince of 
 Midian, and we have Zeb&h., Ziba, Zabdi, Zebulon, 
 &c. Now Zaab, is an old root, signifying ‘ to 
 be yellow like gold; ’ and ‘ The Golden One ’ was an 
 epithet of the Sun. Achzib would therefore mean 
 ‘kindred of the Sun,’ ‘Ach is the Sun.’ The name 
 seems to have been Phoenician. 
 
 Ad, "H?—compare with Had and Hod —‘an exhalation or 
 vapour, which forms the clouds.’ Hod, nin, means 
 ‘ swelling, lifting oneself up, becoming lofty, eminent, 
 majesty, splendour, freshness, beauty; ’ spelled as 
 “W, ad, it signifies ‘ eternity.’ The idea seems pri¬ 
 marily, or secondarily, to have been phallic. 
 
 Ad ad, T!*$, the name of the chief deity of the Syrians — 
 the Sun; 9 seen in Benhadad, Hadadezer, Hadad- 
 rimmon. In Syriac it means one . (See Hadad.) 
 
 Adadah, (Josh. xv. 22). Probably the same as adad, 
 
 with a terminal n added, either to represent the 
 feminine of the Syrian God, or, by taking away the 
 identity of the Heathen deity, to sanctify it for 
 Israel. 
 
 Adah, (Gen. iv. 19; xxx. 2, 4). This is a difficult word 
 to interpret. She is one of the wives of Lamech (‘ the 
 
 9 Macrobius, quoted in Kitto’s Cyclopaedia, s. v. Hadad. 
 
200 
 
 Adah] strong young man/' or ‘ the warrior/) and her consort 
 wife is Zillah. nj?, adah, is an old root, meaning 
 * to pass by; ’ adah, has a similar meaning, but 
 it also means ‘ to adorn;’ also ‘to come and go; ’ ‘an 
 assembly/ ‘ an ornament/ ‘ a witness/ ‘ the monthly 
 period of women ’ — witnessing their nubility. Being 
 doubtful which of these meanings to select, we turn 
 to Zillah, and find that zala , is an old word 
 
 meaning “to draw out;” tzal, is “to he thin,” 
 
 “the wild prickly lotus;” tzla, is “to pray;” 
 n ^, tzalah, is “to roast, or pray;” pointed as Zillah 
 it is said to mean “ shadow; ” as tzlacha, it 
 means “ to go over,” “ to flow,” “ to be prospered.” 
 Coupling the idea of “ the strong young man,” and 
 both names having a reference to “ a flowing out,” 
 I conclude that both were just nubile, and his speech 
 to them was an ebullition of jealousy—a threat what 
 he would do if they allowed any young man to come 
 near them. (See Lamech.) 
 
 Since writing the above, I have met with the 
 following in Donaldson’s Christian Theology, p. 258; 
 quoting Ewald, he says, “ The man’s name, 
 lamachos (Gen. v. 25: iv. 18), recurs in Pisidia. 
 (1 Corpus Inscr., No. 4879;) the woman’s name, v ASa, 
 ada (Gen. iv. 19, 28: xxxvi. 2, 4), likewise in that 
 district (Corpus Inscr., c. iii., p. 388). This coin¬ 
 cidence is all the more remarkable, as neither name 
 ever occurs again in the history of Israel.” 
 
 Adaiah, HHg (2 Kings xxii. 1), (2 Chron. xxiii. 1), 
 
 “ Jah is eternal.” 
 
 Adalia, N'.Jhk (Esther ix. 8), a Persian name. Compare the 
 Greek TSaA iov, a town in Cyprus, near which was a 
 forest sacred to Yenus. 
 
 Adam, (Gen ii. 15). This word demands a close 
 
201 
 
 Adam] attention. It was borne, we are told, by the first 
 man — the father of the human race. We remember 
 that all nations have had some myth respecting such 
 a being, and that the priests, who have invented 
 them, have generally founded the figment which they 
 told on some basis of truth. The Vedic story tells 
 of Mahadeva and Parvati; the Assyrian, of Asher 
 and Beltis; whilst the Hebrew writings say that 
 Adam and Eve were the parents of all mankind, just 
 as “the great father” and the “celestial princess” 
 were the parents of the Jews. In searching out the 
 myth, we naturally associate Adam with Edom,—also 
 Esau, who dwelt in Seir (all of which see). We 
 find that B 1 ]?, Adam, means “ to be red,” or “ ruddy;” 
 also “a man.” Edom is spelled with the same letters; 
 the same word, differently pointed, means “ a red 
 gem; ” but it also conveys an idea of whiteness and 
 comeliness. Those who are conversant with the 
 organ represented by Mahadeva, whose image amongst 
 the Hindoos is always painted red, cannot fail to see 
 that the word in question, combining whiteness and 
 redness, would accurately describe it. The idea 
 seems to us a coarse one, and no doubt it is so 
 in our times; but when the story was written, no 
 squeamishness of such a nature existed; a spade was 
 a spade—a man was a digger, viz., ">?!, zachar , and 
 the woman n’keba, was a field to be dug. It will 
 be seen in the margin of the Bible that the man 
 was called Ish , which means “ existence,” 
 
 “being,” “ standing upright.” There was a town of 
 the same name as that borne by the first man, in 
 Canaan (Jos. iii. 16). There were some words appa¬ 
 rently compounded with it, e. g., Adamah, Adami, 
 which seem primarily to have reference to the earth, 
 
202 
 
 Adam] or soil. It is in reality nothing more than a covert 
 name for the phallus, whilst Eve, the consort, 
 signifies the Yoni. (See Eve.) 
 
 In Figure 81,—which is copied from a drawing 
 by Colonel Coombs, in a cave temple in the South of 
 India: G-. Higgin’s Anacalyysis, p. 403, — is seen 
 the nature of the temptation of Adam, in which it 
 is well shown. The introduction of Hercules and 
 the three-headed dog is equally significant. 
 
 Figure 81. 
 
 Since writing the above, I have met with the 
 following. In Gregorie’s Notes and Observations 
 upon several passages in Scripture , vol. i., 4to, 
 Lond. 1684, there is a passage to the effect, that 
 ‘ Noah daily prayed in the ark, before the body of 
 Adam, i. e ., before the Phallus (Adam being the 
 primitive Phallus), the great procreator of the human 
 race.’ I will not pursue the myth farther; the above 
 is sufficient to show that others have adopted the 
 same opinion as I have expressed above. 
 
203 
 
 Adam, (Joshua iii. 16), “ He unites together.” 
 
 Adamah, (Joshua xix. 36), “A fortress.” This word 
 may represent the feminine of Adam, i. e., 
 
 woman ; it certainly signifies ‘ the earth/ and in the 
 Scriptures, equally with Grecian writings, the earth 
 is spoken of as * the universal mother.’ See Ps. 
 cxxxix. 13, 15, Job i. 21, and Eccles. v. 15; and 
 compare this with the ideas associated with r>j, ge, 
 by the Greeks. See also Pliny, ii. 63 : “ The earth, 
 on which alone of all parts of nature we have 
 bestowed the name that implies maternal veneration.” 
 Compare this again with Ecclus. xi. 1 : “ till the day 
 that they return to the mother of all things.” 
 
 Adami, '9?? (Joshua xix. 33), “ A fortress.” Both this word 
 and the preceding one, though said to signify “a 
 fortress,” are most probably altered forms of 
 adamiah, the * being dropped in the one case and the 
 n in the other. If this interpretation be correct, the 
 real signification of the words is “ Jah unites toge¬ 
 ther,” or “ Jah is Adam,” or ‘ creator.’ 
 
 Ad an (Cuneiform), “ a tune.” 
 
 Addan, IJN (Ezra ii. 59), probably an obliteration of P$, 
 Lord , the name of a man who returned with Zerub- 
 babel. 
 
 Adar, “ swelling out, great, glorious; ” a Hebrew month, 
 in which was the vernal equinox; “P?, adar, to swell 
 out, to become great. The idea is phallic, spring 
 being the time when animals, birds, &c., began to 
 pair, and when strength in the male was essential 
 to the increase of flocks and herds, &c. There was 
 also a son of Bela of the same name, but sometimes 
 called Ard. 
 
 Adbeel, (Gen. xxv. 13), “ The glorious Baal,” from 
 
 "n*f, adad, dropping the final n, or “ Baal is eternity;” 
 
204 
 
 Adbeel] from “W, ad, the y being changed for k, to escape from 
 the appearance of giving the attribute of Jah to Baal. 
 
 Addar, TJ** (1 Chron. viii. 3), 44 He is large.” 
 
 Ader, “H? (1 Chron. viii. 15), “ He sets in order.” 
 
 Adiel, (1 Chron. iv. 86), “El is the noblest.” 
 
 Adin, H? (Ezra ii. 15), “delight, pleasure.” Compare rjSov^. 
 
 Adina, (1 Chron. xi. 42), “ The gentle one; ” P?, 
 
 adin, 4 soft, delicate.’ Compare Edin and Edinburgh, 
 and Edinburg, the maiden city. 
 
 Adino, fo'lg (2 Sam. xxiii. 8); also NJHy, adina, probably 
 altered from ^ “El gives pleasure,” literally 
 “El gives the power to enjoy sexual pleasure.” 
 
 Adithaim, BW72 (Joshua xx. 36). This word is probably 
 compounded with ad, or or ath, oth, 
 or aith, and D', im, the dual termination. If so, its 
 signification is “ The two eternal beings.” 
 
 Adlai, ^7- (J- Chron. xxvii. 29). As this word is now 
 spelled, no adequate meaning can be assigned to it. 
 It is very probably an altered form of ada, or 
 idi, + el, which would make it to signify “ The 
 friend of El,” or “ El is a friend.” 
 
 Admah, n ?7^ (Hen. x. 19), “A fortress.” 
 
 Admathah, ^7?7^ (Esther i. 14), a Persian word, = “ given 
 by the highest being.” Furst. 
 
 Adna, (Ezra x. 30), “El is most lovely,” the final t, of 
 el, being dropped, and I7V being substituted for 
 
 ny. 
 
 Adnah, n J7V (2 Chron. xvii. 14), “Jah is most lovely;” 
 most probably this word has been altered from the 
 form 17^, adan, n ', jah. 
 
 Adon, l n ?, “ Lord and master; ” Adonim , 4 My lords; ’ 
 Adonai, ‘The lord; ’ adon, 4 lord, master.’ 
 
 Addon was the name of a certain town, in the Cuneiform. 
 
 Adoni-bezek, (Judg. i. 5), 44 My lord, the radiant 
 
205 
 
 Adoni-bezek] one ; ” pta, bazcik, ‘to scatter or disperse rays, 
 like the Sun ; ’ an old root. 
 
 Adoni-jah, (2 Sam. iii. 4), “ The Lord is Jah.” 
 
 Adoni-kam, (Ezra ii. 18), written in Nehemiah x. 17, 
 
 as Adonijah . The first signifies “ The Lord 
 
 the helper,” the second, “ The Lord Jah,” or “Jah 
 is Lord.” 
 
 Adoni-ram, (1 Kings iv. 6), “My Lord is on high ;” 
 
 D-n, rum , high, exalted. 
 
 Adoni-zedek, (Josh. x. 1, 8), “ My Lord is the Just 
 
 One;” P'??, tzedik, 'just, righteous.’ 
 
 Adoraim, (2 Chron. xi. 9), “the mighty ones;” dual 
 
 of T??. Whence comes also Adar, “to be great and 
 glorious.” 
 
 Adrammelech, (2 Kings xvii. 18). I think this 
 
 means “the swelling ones, the king,” and that it 
 refers to the phallic triad. It will be remembered 
 that Hadrian , Atreides, Atre us, and ^drumyttium, 
 all show that Hadr or Atr had some mystic signifi¬ 
 cance. Adr, * 17 signifies ‘ swelling and tumid ; ’ 
 and T 1 '?, hadar , has the same meaning. The idea 
 has reference plainly to strong virility. Kawlinson 
 surmises ( Journal of Royal Asiatic Society , vol. i., 
 N. S., p. 200), that this word ought to be written 
 ‘■pDYlN, aradmelech, and that arad is a variant of 
 ardu = ‘ a slave,’ equivalent to abd . (See Edrei, 
 below.) 
 
 Adriel, (i s am . xviii. 19), means “ The swelling, or 
 
 powerful El; ” from the same root, V»K, as above. 
 
 Adullam, (Josh. xii. 15), means “ The just mother;” 
 
 adal, ‘to be just or equitable;” and D ?, am, 
 ‘ mother.’ 
 
 Adummim, B'BJK (Josh. xv. 7), The red ones, plural of Adam. 
 
 Ad, = the Almighty; also “to eat.” 
 
206 
 
 Ad ami, = (Sanscrit) the first. 
 
 Adharya, = the Sun. 
 
 Aditi, = a Yedic Goddess, mother of the Gods. 
 
 Aditya, = the Sun, = Surya. 
 
 iENON, A *ivw (John iii. 28), “ the fountain of On.” ain, 
 j-lK, aun, On. 
 
 Agabus, v Aya/3oj (Acts xi. 28), probably similar to Agabim; 
 ‘pleasures,’ 4 things which please God.’ 
 
 Agag, (Numb. xxiv. 7), from an old root, 4 to blaze as fire.’ 
 
 Agali (Cuneiform), goats. Compare Eglon, Eglah, Aglae. 
 
 Agbah, signifies 4 immodest love,’ spcag ; plural, agbim, 
 4 delights.’ Compare Okba, the Arab name for one 
 of the evil spirits, or magicians. 
 
 Agee, #5? (2 Sam. xxiii. 11), 44 He is swift in flight,” 
 equivalent to Phygellus, or <pvye\o$ (2 Tim. i. 15). 
 The reference is to the sun, 44 who rejoiceth as a 
 strong man to run a race ” (Psalm xix. 5). 
 
 Ague, “MX (Prov. xxx. 1). There is much difficulty about 
 this word ; it may signify 44 the collector; ” from 
 agar. Agr (Cuneiform), 4 a field;’ Heb., 13N, acre. 
 The same word is met with in Deut. xxxii. 27, in 
 which it is connected with a very strong anthropo¬ 
 morphism, and in that passage it is translated 44 Were 
 it not that I feared the wrath of the enemy; ” but 
 we can scarcely imagine that Agur, as a proper name, 
 signifies 44 1 feared.” 
 
 Ag, = 4 to move tortuously.’ Agha, Lord (Turkish). 
 
 Aga (Sanscrit), = 4 a mountain or tree; ” Aga-jah, mountain 
 born, = Parvati. 
 
 Agha, „ 4 sin, impurity.’ 
 
 Agni, „ = 4 fire,’ Latin ignis (from anj, 4 to shine’); 
 
 the holy or sacrificial fire,’ for which a lamb was 
 generally used. Latin, Agnus. 
 
 Agra, „ 4 point, summit, front, beginning, best.’ 
 
207 
 
 Ah (Sanscrit), means “dawn ; ” and 
 
 Ahab, (1 Kings xvi. 80), “ brother to the father; ” n ^, 
 ach, ‘ brother to; ’ , ab, ‘ father; * or possibly a 
 
 variant of ahab,. ‘ a licentious man, or idolater; ’ 
 ahab, ‘ a lover.’ Fiirst considers that n ?, ach or 
 ah, is one of the Divine epithets ; it may be so, for 
 there is an old signification of the word which proves 
 it to have been analogous to ‘ fire.’ Fiirst, s. v. 
 
 Ahar (Sanscrit), means “ day.” If we take this as the 
 origin of Aharon, the name would still be an equiva¬ 
 lent for Jupiter, as the God of day. 
 
 Aharah, (1 Chron. viii. 1). This is translated by 
 
 Fiirst as “following Ach, i.e., God;” though unsatis¬ 
 factory, no better meaning can be found. 
 
 Aharhel, (1 Chron. iv. 8), following the preceding, 
 
 we conclude that the signification of this word is 
 “ following Ach El.” 
 
 Ahasai, 'ID** (Nehem. xi. 18), = ‘laying hold on Jah.’ 
 (See Ahaziah.) 
 
 Ahasbai, (2 Sam. xxiii. 84), “Jah is shining, or 
 
 blooming.” 
 
 Ahasuerus, (Ezraiv. 6), “ Akharhdarpan = Satrap.” 
 
 Fiirst. 
 
 Ahava, (Ezra viii. 15), the name of a river. 
 
 Ahaz, “ one who has laid hold on, possessing.” 
 
 Ahaziah, njTnK (1 Kings xxii. 40), “ one who has laid hold 
 on Jah.” 
 
 Ahban, (1 Chron. ii. 29), “ Son of Ach,” or, as Fiirst 
 suggests, “ Ach is knowing.” 
 
 Aher, (1 Chron. vii. 12), the same as Ahiram, (Num. 
 xxvi. 88.) 
 
 Ahi, (l Chron. v. 15), “Jah is Ach,” or “kindred with 
 Jah.” 
 
208 
 
 Ahiah or Achiah, (1 Sam. xiv. 8), “brother to Jab,” 
 or “ Acb is Jah;” tbe same word as the following. 
 
 Ahiam, (2 Sam. xxiii. 88), “ God of fellowship.” 
 
 Ahian, (l Chron. vii. 19), “ Ach is clearness.” 
 
 Ahiezer, TJSPnK (Numb. i. 12), “Ach is a helper.” (See 
 Abi-ezer), which shows as = 
 
 Ahihud, Tirana (1 Chron. viii. 7), “ brother to the glorious 
 one,” or “Ach is splendour;” Tin, hud, ‘majesty, 
 splendour,’ &c. 
 
 Ahijah, mm (1 Kings xiv. 4), “Ach is Jah,” the same word 
 as Ahiah and Ahiam. 
 
 Ahikam, Bi?'™ (2 Kings xxii. 22), “Ach is a helper.” 
 
 Ahilud, (2 Sam. viii. 16), “Ah, or Ach, is creator, or 
 
 procreator, or producer, or one who gives offspring.” 
 Compare Psalm cxxvii. 8, “ Lo children are an 
 heritage of the Lord, the fruit of the womb is his 
 reward.” 
 
 Ahimaaz, (1 Sam. xiv. 50). The ordinary interpre¬ 
 
 tation of this word is “ brother of anger,” a name 
 which seems to be very unsuitable to anybody. The 
 reading of TV®, maatz, as the second syllable, is the 
 cause of this. I believe that this spelling has been 
 somewhat varied from the original. The individual 
 who bore the name was a father of Saul’s wife; and 
 at that period the Jews were conversant with many 
 heathen gods and priests. Amongst the Syrian 
 deities was a God, apparently, Maoz , (See 
 
 Daniel xi. 38, and the marginal Mauzzim.) He 
 was the God of fortified cities or munitions of war; 
 supposed, by Gesenius, to be the same as Mars, 
 between which name and Maoz there is in sound but 
 scant difference. The real meaning of the word, 
 therefore, I conceive to be Brother of Mars. 
 
 Ahiman, (Numb. xiii. 22). “ Ach is man, or the 
 
209 
 
 Ahiman] male divinity of M^vrj, ; ” Fiirst s. v. (See 
 Man.) 
 
 Ahimelech, (1 Samuel xxi. 2), “ brother to the 
 
 king.” 
 
 Ahimoth, riiD'nx (i Chron. vi. 25). This word is spelled, in 
 1 Chron. vi. 85, A™?, machath; M uotQ, in Luke iii. 
 26. The signification is “ Ach is death; ” and we 
 have the analogue of it in MoltQolios, — math (is), 
 n T ', jali, or ‘ god.’ This is so strange a name for 
 an infant just entering life, that it seems better to 
 derive the second element from n™, michjath, when 
 the meaning would be, “ Ach is the renewing of 
 life.” 
 
 Ahinadab, (1 Kings iv. 14), “ brother to the prince,” 
 
 or “Ach is prince,” or “Ach gave.” 
 
 Ahinoam, Byj'nx (1 Sam. xiv. 50), “ brother to the lovely 
 one.” (See Abinoam.) 
 
 Ahio, V™ (2 Sam. vi. 8). This word deserves notice. It is 
 said to mean “ brotherly; ” but as names were given 
 by the priesthood at the time of infancy, such a cog¬ 
 nomen would be inapplicable. Its etymology appar¬ 
 ently yields the signification, “ the brother of Io; ” 
 (“ Ach or God is Jo.” Fiirst.) We postpone the 
 inquiry into the name Io, and only notice the name 
 of Joah, which is merely a transposition of Ahio, 
 and remark that the meaning assigned to it by 
 Gesenius is “Jehovah, the brother,” or, “'whose 
 brother is Jehovah.” 
 
 Ahira, (Numb. i. 15), “brother of, or Ach is the 
 
 Sun,” Ra being both Shemitic and Egyptian for the 
 Sun. Compare Heb. raah, ‘to see,’ and Greek 
 
 opuw. 
 
 Ahiram, DynB (Numb. xxvi. 88), “ brother of, or Ach is the 
 High One.” 
 
 o 
 
210 
 
 Ahisamach, (Exod. xxxi. 6), “ Ach, the supporter.” 
 
 Ahishar, (1 Chron. vii. 10), “Ach, the righteous.” 
 
 (See Jasher.) 
 
 Ahishahar, (1 Chron. vii. 10), “ Ach, the Aurora.” 
 
 Ahitophel, (2 Sam. xv. 12). Amongst the customs 
 
 of the Orientals, which obtained from the remotest 
 antiquity, and still exist to the present day, is the 
 practice of heaping contumely upon an adversary 
 whenever his name is uttered, or praise upon any 
 one who is held in repute; much as Englishmen used 
 to say, “The king, God bless him.” It has more- 
 ever been, and still is, a common usage to falsify the 
 name of some detested man, or to change it altogether, 
 in order to make his memory detested. The word 
 in question is an example of the custom; for the 
 recreant councillor, once famed for wisdom, is now 
 called “brother to nastiness,” or “brother to lies,” 
 according as we derive the last part of the word 
 from '!??, tapped, “to spit out,” “ unsalted,” 
 “insipid,” “foolish,” “false,” or taphal, “to 
 frame lies.” 
 
 Ahitub, (l Sam. xxii. 12), “ brother of, or Ach the 
 
 good one,” or “ goodness.” (See Abitub.) 
 
 Ahlab, ^0*? (Jud. i. 31), “ The father protects,” the k being 
 elided before the i. 
 
 Ahlai, (1 Chron. ii. 31), “ Jah protects,” the n being 
 dropped at the end. 
 
 Ahoah, D' in ^ (1 Chron viii. 4), probably “Ach is Jah.” 
 
 Aholah, (Ezek. xxiii. 4); Aholibah, ; Aholiab, 
 
 Aholibamah, The first two of 
 
 these words were given figuratively to Jerusalem 
 and Samaria on account of their whoredoms, of which 
 a very graphic account is given. The idea conveyed 
 seems to be— of the first two, that they had each a 
 
211 
 
 Aholah] tent for fornication, or were themselves a tent for 
 any one to take lodging with; and of the two latter, 
 that they were habitations for the father, or for 
 the high one, The connexion of ideas between a 
 tent and fornication was, apparently, current in more 
 ancient times, as we learn from Numb. xxv. 6-8, 
 where it is related that Phinehas pursued the man 
 of Israel into the tent. The passage in which this 
 shameful occurrence is narrated, is one that Dr. 
 Ginsburg points out (op. cit.) as having been softened 
 from its original coarseness. The true significa¬ 
 tion is retained in the Vulgate, viz. — “ Et ecce 
 unus de filiis Israel intravit coram fratribus suis ad 
 scortum Madianitidem, vidente Moyse et omni turba 
 filiorum Israel, &c. Quod cum vidisset Phinees * 515 * 
 ingressus est post virum Israelitem in lupanar et 
 perfodit ambos simul .... in locis genitalibus.” 
 
 Now the word rendered tent in our version is 
 kubah , which signifies a peculiar form of dome-shaped 
 covering which was carried about by prostitutes, and 
 was at once an indication of their business, and a 
 means of conducting it. The part through which 
 Phinehas drove the spear is a word of similar 
 spelling, viz., n ?P, kobali , which signifies ‘ the vulva.’ 
 The ideas associated with these two words closely 
 resemble those used by Ezekiel, who declares, accord¬ 
 ing to the Vulgate (xvi. 24, 25), “ et sedificasti tibi 
 lupanar , 3|, gab, et fecisti tibi prostibulum in cunctis 
 plateis; ad omne caput vise sedificasti signum pros¬ 
 titution^ tuse, et divisisti pedes (inguina) tuos omni 
 transeunti.” Again, in verse 31, we find still greater 
 shamelessness attributed to Jerusalem : “ fabricasti 
 lupanar tuum in capite omnis vise—nec facta es quasi 
 meretrix fastidio augens pretium sed quasi mulier 
 
212 
 
 Aholah] adultera quae super virum suum inducit alienos,” 
 &c. Now 3 *!, gab, has, amongst others, a signification 
 precisely similar to that of n ?i?. kubah, and it was 
 used for similar purposes. Associating all these facts 
 together, the philosopher is disposed to conclude that 
 the episode of the Midianitish woman, and the 
 frightful plague which followed, was introduced in the 
 times of Ezekiel by some devout man, who, being 
 scandalised by what he saw around him, and impotent 
 to prevent such abomination, endeavoured to act upon 
 the fears of the nation, by showing how dreadfully 
 God had visited such sins upon their forefathers. 
 But in his zeal he has forgotten his discretion, and 
 has furnished the women of Midian with the trade 
 marks in use at Jerusalem. 
 
 Ahumai, (1 Chron. iv. 2), “ Ach is mi,” or “ semen 
 
 “Ach effects propagation.” Fiirst. 
 
 Ahuzam, P*™* (i Chron. iv. 6), “ Am is preservation,” the 
 K being dropped between T and D. 
 
 Ah (Vedic)), same as Aio, “ I say.” 
 
 Ahi „ serpent. 
 
 Aham „ I. 
 
 Ahan „ day. 
 
 Ah an a „ the dawn. 
 
 Ahn serpent or throat sweller, same as Deva, Dao , 
 
 Deus, Divus — Holy. 
 
 Ahura „ same as Asura. 
 
 Ahuzzath, (Gen. xxvi. 26). This name was borne by 
 a Philistine in the time of Isaac. (See Philist^a, 
 Lamech, and Adah); and it may be a Hebrew adap¬ 
 tation from azetai, “ he stands in awe of the 
 
 Gods.” I should take it to be an irregular plural, 
 signifying “ The preservers,” from T ™, ahaz, and to 
 indicate the “ arba.” 
 
213 
 
 Ai, $ (Gen. xiii. 3), sometimes written Hai (which see), 
 signifies “ a heap of ruins,” the city of that name, we 
 are told, being the heap, &c.; but Ai or I, means 
 “ an Island ” (one of the names of Iona was Ii). 
 Neither of these etymologies, however, accords suffi¬ 
 ciently with others to be accepted; my impression 
 is, either that the existence of the town was a myth, 
 or that it was called after a large cairn or mound, 
 which, like Gilgal, by Jericho, was near its gates. 
 (See Gilgal.) 
 
 Ai or Aa, in the Assyrian, signifies “ the female power of the 
 sun.” 
 
 Ain, l!5?, “an eye, or fountain; ” frequently occurring in com¬ 
 position, but then usually spelled En, as En-dor, &c. 
 
 Airan, an old name for Persia. Compare Yrun, Erin, 
 Arran. 
 
 Akh, one form, and the correct one, of writing the Hebrew 
 HN, brother, “ kindred to,” or “ like to.” 
 
 Akhi-umah, Assyrian name, = “ brother of the mother.” 
 Compare Ahab. 
 
 Akissu (Cuneiform), “ a heretic.” Compare “ akish, 
 a perverse man.” 
 
 Akkad (Assyrian), “ a highlander.” 
 
 Akrabbim, B'?}py (Judg. i. 36), “ the great stags ako, 
 stag; n ?"?, rahab, “great,” possibly “a flagellum,” 
 generally rendered “ scorpion-height.” 
 
 Al, the A being pronounced like the a in ale, fate , hate, 
 gate, &c., whence many write the words as El, &c., 10 
 in which case it is necessary to give the E the French 
 sound of e in mer. We find from Dr. Ginsburg’s 
 
 1° I prefer the spelling in the text to that in ordinary use — (1) because the 
 
 adoption of the hard or long a represents the sound of « better than e, which in 
 
 English is neyer used as a, and which is almost invariably pronounced as if a short 
 
 or soft vowel; (2) because it is the representative of the modern “Allah,” the 
 
 Arabic form of God. 
 
214 
 
 Al] Versions of the Bible , to which we referred in the 
 note, pp. 184-6, that very great liberties have been 
 taken with the names El and Elohim by the 
 modern redactors of the sacred Scriptures. They 
 have indeed been carried to such an extent, that it is 
 necessary for the philosophical student to divide his 
 inquiries into two parts; one of which relates to the 
 real signification of the words, the ideas which they 
 involve, and the extent of country over which the 
 names, or some variants of them, were recognised as 
 belonging to the Creator; the other relates to the 
 manner in which the names have been treated in 
 our Bible. 
 
 In examining into the meaning of the word El, 
 we must first advert to the ordinary method of spelling 
 it, and its variants; we find one form of it written 
 as H*, which consists of a and l , but which is so 
 pointed as to be pronounced ail. The plural of 
 this word is ailim. It may be considered as 
 
 cognate with the Assyrian II, or Ilu, which Rawlinson 
 says (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , p. 193, 
 vol. 1, N. s.) is the Shemitic value of “a God; for 
 which, however, Yahu is sometimes substituted, as 
 in Hebrew.” Another form, of which the plural is 
 more commonly used than the singular, is <3^5*, eloah , 
 and in the plural elohim . This termination 
 
 indicates that the noun is in the masculine gender; 
 but as there are two other forms, both of which, viz., 
 alath, and r '^^, alotli (Deut. ii. 8, 1 Kings 
 ix. 26), indicate feminine terminations, we must pre¬ 
 sume that there was an idea that the Deity was 
 androgyne ; a notion which equally pertained to Baal, 
 whose plural form is Baalim and Baalath. The 
 modern representative of Al is Allah, and that name 
 
215 
 
 Al] is adored over all the localities where once A1 was 
 worshipped. 
 
 That this appellative for the Almighty was not 
 confined to the Jews, we have abundant proof in 
 Scripture. We find, for example, that AmrapheZ 
 is a name born by a Mesopotamian king, whilst 
 Abraham was as yet childless (Gen. xiv. 1); we see 
 that jEJZlasar 11 is the name of a kingdom in Chaldea, 
 and we find that Eld aah is the cognomen of a 
 Midianite (Gen. xxv. 4). We have still farther 
 proof in the difficulty which it is evident that the 
 modern Jews have felt in modifying their Scriptures 
 to demonstrate the reverse. The Rabbins recognise 
 the fact that those whom they called Heathen wor¬ 
 shipped Elohim, just as did their own Hebrew 
 forefathers ; but they endeavour to explain it away 
 by such contrivances as Dr. Ginsburg has com¬ 
 memorated. 
 
 When, therefore, we have examined into the signi¬ 
 fication of the name, and endeavoured to ascertain 
 its nature, we shall have an idea of the early faith of 
 the Jews, as well as of that of other Shemitic races. 
 Now, ail , pronounced il, is an old word denoting 
 the idea of rolling, strength and power, ‘ a ram,’ 
 
 ‘ a pine tree,’ * an oak,’ ‘ a post,’ ‘ pre-eminence,’ ‘ the 
 belly,’ ‘ the body,’ &c.; also as ajal , ‘ a stag, or hart,’ 
 4 a great ram,’ * a wild goat.’ As a means of intro¬ 
 ducing the name of the Great One by periphrasis, 
 ‘ the goat,’ and 4 the deer,’ and ‘ the pine or palm 
 tree,’ were used in metaphor, as in Ajalon, P^, the 
 meaning of which is “ On, the stag,” or “ The strong 
 
 11 Ellasar is spelled with a double 1 in English, and with h in the Hebrew, 
 apparently with the intention of showing that the El of Ellasar was not the same 
 as the El of the Hebrew. 
 
216 
 
 Al] one,” from ajal, * stag,’ and 1^, aun, as 
 
 Elon; the same signifies “ an oak; ” whilst in the 
 later redactions of the ancient Scriptures, or by, 
 ail , is substituted in many places for al, princi¬ 
 pally in passages where something is said in the text 
 which the modern Hebrews think to he derogatory 
 to the Almighty. 
 
 al, pronounced as ail or el, means “ strong,” 
 “ a mighty one,” “ a hero.” It is also used to 
 represent the Most High. Though spelled the 
 word is, I think, closely allied to W, al, which 
 signifies “ most high,” and to ^5??, alah, which means 
 “ to be high, elevated, raised erect,” also “to glow, 
 to burn, to glitter, to sprout.” We can readily see 
 that all these meanings have a double entendre, 
 and apply equally to the Almighty in the skies and 
 his emblem upon earth. a i a (i Kings iv. 18), 
 
 usually written elah, is “a pine tree,” a symbol of 
 the “ fascinum.” alah, “ to be round,” “ thick 
 
 or fat;” also “an oath,” “ an oak,” “a pine,” and 
 “ God.” In all these there are the same letters, r6tf, 
 pointed differently; but as the vowel points are a 
 comparatively modern invention, we must take the 
 word to have all the meanings assigned to it. It is 
 still used as ‘ The Supreme Being ’ by Mahometans ; 
 and those who are conversant with the writings of 
 Mahomet, and his idea of domestic enjoyment on 
 earth and ecstatic bliss in heaven, can readily see 
 how closely the idea of phallic power was connected 
 in his mind with that of happiness and almightiness. 
 In that he resembled all the more ancient Orien¬ 
 talists. 
 
 Closely allied with the foregoing words are 
 Eloha, plural D'C^§, Elohim, signifying “ God,” “any 
 
217 
 
 Al] God.” But although the plural Elohim seems to 
 indicate a masculine God as sensual as that of 
 Mahomet’s religion, we must not forget that the 
 words Elath and Eloth indicate one in which the 
 female element preponderates; in this it resembles 
 such words as Ashtoreth and Baalath. Now, without 
 going deeply into ancient and Hindoo history, there 
 is, we think, a sufficient amount of evidence to show 
 that a religion based upon the idea of the Creator 
 being male, preceded that which was founded upon 
 the belief that the Almighty was a loving mother. 
 We presume, therefore, that the feminine idea, 
 incorporated in the word Eloth , &c., is of later deve¬ 
 lopment than the masculine one found in Elohim . 
 It is probable that it obtained about the time of 
 Solomon (see 1 Kings iv. 16). 
 
 Now it is very remarkable that the expression 
 Jah, or Jehovah, is never used in the plural; 
 consequently we should surmise that the worship 
 of the great Being under this name was a subli¬ 
 mation from the worship of El. In the process 
 known to chemists by the names distillation, or 
 sublimation, those light or spiritual particles which 
 are intermixed with the heavy and gross parts in 
 the original substance are separated from it, and 
 presented to us in nearly a pure condition; but 
 though on a first process a division between the 
 worthy and the worthless is effected to a great degree, 
 the result is not so pure as it may be made after a 
 repetition of the trial by fire. Thus we may conceive 
 that the worship of El, though coarse, gross, and 
 even in some senses obscene, possessed a certain 
 amount of goodness, which after sublimation appeared 
 as the worship of Jah; whilst this again became 
 
218 
 
 Al] purified still farther by another distillation, and 
 emerged as pure Christianity. We may even carry 
 the simile farther. The chemist knows that during 
 distillation some of the ingredients which he would 
 wish to be retained in the alembic will be found in 
 the receiver, and that there are offensive empyreu- 
 matic oils which taint the spirit even after a second 
 distillation. So it is with our own current religion, 
 which, though infinitely superior to that which has 
 been coffined in many of those names whose meaning 
 we are exploring, yet retains in conjunction with it 
 a heavy offensive oil, from which its admirers would 
 gladly see it freed. Some, indeed, there are who 
 admire blemishes, declare assafoetida an aromatic 
 odour, and love the smell of sulphuretted hydrogen, 
 when it is of their own production ; with such we 
 have no sympathy; and we prefer to recommend a 
 more scientific re-distillation of ancient ideas, similar 
 to that which occurred at the Reformation, rather 
 than to preach peace when all around us is fer¬ 
 menting. 
 
 Much has been said and written about the plural 
 form Eloliim 12 having some connexion with the 
 modern Trinity. That it may have some reference 
 to a triad I do not doubt, for the idea of the Creator 
 of all things has been wrapped in the mundane con¬ 
 ception of the father of offspring. This was a triad 
 throughout all the animal kingdom which was known 
 to the Ancients. If, it was argued, man was the 
 likeness of God, then the Celestial Father must be a 
 trinity like his earthly emblem. 13 The object presented 
 
 12 See Baalim. 
 
 13 The same argument has been used to demonstrate that Elohim was androgyne 
 and dual, rather than triple; Elohim, in the plural, says, Let us make man in 
 our image, after our likeness; and Elohim created man in his image, i. e., of 
 
219 
 
 Al] to the eye was gross, but the idea which it symbolised 
 was grand ; and reverence for the thing signified 
 was proved by paying abundant honour to the sign. 
 Whilst this sheet was going through the press, I 
 heard, through a missionary in India, of a Fakir, who 
 was endeavouring to make himself acceptable to the 
 Creator by a contrivance which should augment the 
 proportions of his emblem. As he dragged a stone 
 painfully along, an European clergyman placed his 
 foot upon the latter. The act was construed into 
 a deliberate insult to religion, and the bystanders 
 threatened his life. Though he escaped a death by 
 stoning, the sustained indignation of the natives was 
 such that he was obliged to resign his position, and 
 retire from that part of the country. What happens 
 in India now, there is reason to believe existed also in 
 Palestine. A man whose symbol had not been duly 
 circumcised was to be cut off from life. We are told 
 that even the Lord himself resented this omission on 
 the children of the lawgiver of his people (Exod. iv. 
 24, 25), although he passed by without notice during 
 forty years the neglect of the rite amongst the whole 
 nation (Josh. v. 5), with whom, too, he was always 
 present. We find, moreover (Deut. xxiii. 1), that a 
 man was not to be allowed even to worship, or to be 
 in the congregation of the Lord, in whom any part 
 of the symbolic triad was injured or wanting; and 
 throughout the Old, and even in some parts of the 
 New Testament the highest reproach cast upon the 
 heathen was, that they bore a triad upon which no 
 holy knife had passed to fit it as a sacred symbol. 
 
 The historian might be tempted to linger on the 
 
 Elohim; and the image was duplicate, i. e„ male and female ; therefore it is 
 argued, if “ man” is male and female, and in the likeness of Elohim, it is clear 
 that the Maker must have been dual, i.e., male and female. 
 
220 
 
 Al] use of circumcision as having been originally adopted 
 by the Egyptians, and copied by the Syrians from 
 them; and on the other evidence which there is to 
 show, that the Hebrews derived their religion from 
 the nations around them; but as it would occupy too 
 much space here, we must postpone the matter to a 
 succeeding volume. 
 
 In the Cuneiform, the various names of the Great 
 God have been read as Al, El, II, Ilos, Ra, Asshur, 
 Bel; in the Greek we meet with the same, as eArj, 
 “ brightness,” and f/ HAio£, “ the Sun;” and few will 
 forget the prominence in Jewish history of Elias, also 
 known as Elijah, who was again to appear before the 
 incarnation of the Godhead (Malachi iv. 5). The word 
 Elijah being or “ El-Jah,” the counterpart of 
 
 the II, Yahu, mentioned by Rawlinson. (See supra, 
 p. 214.) In Greek we have still farther—’IAaw, “I 
 am propitious; ” s\6oo, “ I roll round ; ” v iAAo^, is 
 “the eye;” and elAeco, “to turn round.” These 
 would serve to identify the Sun with Al or El. There 
 is corroboration to be found in the emblem of Asshur 
 and Apollo; both appear with bended how launching 
 forth their arrow, the bow and arrow being mystic 
 signs of the fascinum; 14 and fancy would see in the 
 Greek Apollo a resemblance to ab, “ father; ” 
 and alah, “ the strong one,” “ the mighty 
 
 Father On.” 
 
 We believe, from our examination of ancient 
 myths, that Al or El is the Sun, as a representative 
 of the Almighty, typified under a phallic emblem as 
 a sign of his creative power. This emblem was a 
 triad: Asshur was the central organ, Anu was the 
 
 14 See Apulejus, Golden Ass, Book ii.; scene between Fotis and Lucius. 
 
221 
 
 Al] right, and Hoa the left “ testis ” or egg. To the 
 initiated, all these ideas were familiarly known. 
 The Greeks used the phallus sometimes triple as a 
 symbol, the meaning of which seems to have been 
 among the last discoveries revealed to the initiated. 
 In R. P. Knight’s Dissertation on the Symbolical 
 Language of Ancient Art and Mythology , p. 6, he 
 quotes the following:—“Post tot suspiria epoptarum, 
 totum signaculum linguae, simulachrum membri virilis 
 revelatur.” Tertullian adv. Yalentinios. Many 
 others, however, saw in the emblems referred to 
 nothing but their apparent meaning, and adopted 
 forms of worship in which they played very matter 
 of fact parts. 
 
 It is impossible for the scholar to disguise from 
 himself the fact, that a form of religion existed in 
 primitive times all over the known world, similar to 
 that which obtains now in some parts, and amongst 
 certain sects, in Hindoostan, whose basis was sensu¬ 
 ality ; and that there were few emblems, if any, 
 which had not hidden references to the male or 
 female organs or principles. Of this form of belief 
 the Hebrews largely partook (See Aholah, &c.), and 
 we can trace some of its remains still amongst 
 ourselves. 
 
 Having now concluded this long investigation 
 into the signification of the words in question, let 
 us inquire, in the second place, how Elohim is 
 treated in the ancient Scriptures. Notwithstanding 
 the various liberties which have been taken with 
 this word, by writers who have professed to copy 
 from ancient documents, Elohim is really described 
 in the current Scriptures of to-day in the following 
 fashion. In Gen. i. 1, Elohim makes both the 
 
222 
 
 AlJ heaven and the earth; in verse 26, Elohim solilo¬ 
 quises thus : “ Let us make man, in our image,” and 
 he made them so, male and female ; in iii. 8, Elohim 
 walks in a garden, enjoying the cool air, requiring 
 companionship, and calling for a man’s presence ; in 
 iii. 21, Elohim makes coats; in xvii. 1-8, Elohim 
 appears to Abram and talks with him; and, 9-14, 
 gives personal directions respecting circumcision. In 
 Gen. xviii., we find that Jehovah is the word used, 
 instead of Elohim, whose identity we recognise by 
 Gen. xix. 29; and that on this occasion the Deity is 
 triple, appearing as three men, one of whom is 
 superior to the other two, but all of whom talk, eat, 
 drink, and act like human beings. 
 
 In Gen. xx. 8, Elohim appears to Abimelech in 
 a dream, a fact which implies that the king recog¬ 
 nised him as God; in Gen. xxiv. 8, we find that there 
 is an Elohim of the heaven and of the earth. Gen. 
 xxxi. 80-82 tells us that the images of Laban are 
 “ Elohim.” In Gen. xxxii. 28, Elohim is repre¬ 
 sented as inferior to Jacob, with whom he is wrestling, 
 and hence less mighty than a man, whose form and 
 fashion he assumes. In Gen. xxxv. 2, Jacob tells his 
 people to put away the strange Elohim which were 
 amongst them. In Exod. i. 17, 20, Elohim is repre¬ 
 sented as rewarding the Jewish midwives for deceit; 
 and in ii. 28-25 he is spoken of as if suddenly alive 
 to the fact that Israel was in trouble, of which he 
 would have known nothing, unless they had cried and 
 reminded him of a covenant he had made. In Exod. 
 vii. 1, we find that Moses becomes Elohim; and in 
 xii. 12, the gods of Egypt are designated by the same 
 word; whilst in xx. 2 the commandment runs, “ Thou 
 shalt have none other Elohim but me”—a passage 
 
223 
 
 Al] which clearly shews that the gods of other nations 
 were designated by the same name as the God of 
 Israel; in Exod. xx. 23, we read of Elohim of silver 
 and Elohim of gold; in xxi. 6, Elohim appears as 
 a name of ordinary judges; the same occurs again in 
 xxii. 9, and in the 20th verse of the same chapter 
 the word reappears as the name of a strange god; 
 whilst in the 28th verse it is difficult to know dis¬ 
 tinctly what the signification of Elohim may he, 
 whether gods or magistrates; in xxiii. 13, Elohim 
 is the name given to the gods of other people; the 
 same idea is repeated in verses 24, 32, 33. In 
 xxiv. 10, 11, Elohim has a visible appearance, and 
 talks like a man. In xxxii. 1, 4, 8, 23, 31, and in 
 xxxiv. 15, 16, 17, we find that Elohim is the name 
 given to false gods and molten images. The same is 
 also seen in Levit. xix. 4. In Numb. xxii. 9-20, et. seq., 
 it is clear that Elohim was the God of Balaam, and 
 from the twenty-fifth chapter of the same book it is 
 certain that the Midianites and Moabites knew that 
 name as appertaining to their deities ; and we find a 
 confirmation of the fact in ch. xxxiii. 4. We find the 
 name again applied to the gods of other nations in 
 Deut. iv. 28, and also in the repetition of the first 
 commandment, Deut. v. 7, and again in Deut. vi. 14, 
 vii. 4, 16, 25 ; viii. 19 ; xii. 2, 3, 30, 31; xiii. 2, 6, 
 13; xxviii. 14, 64 ; xxxii. 17. Jud. ii. 3, 12, 17, 19; 
 iii. 6 ; v. 8 ; vi. 10, and in a variety of other places 
 in the later books of the Bible. In Judges xvi. 23, 
 Dagon is designated as Elohim, and the same occurs 
 again in 1 Sam. v. 7. In ch. xxviii. 13, the witch of 
 Endor sees Elohim coming up out of the earth, clearly 
 like an evil spirit; in 1 Kings xi. 33, both Chemosh 
 and Milcom are spoken of as Elohim. 
 
224 
 
 Al] Now whenever the word in question is applicable 
 
 to the deities of other nations, it is translated into 
 English as gods, in the plural. If, therefore, there 
 he anything like precision in that rule of grammar 
 which demonstrates the termination D' to he a sign 
 of the plural, and if there is any truth in rendering 
 the “ Elohim ” of other nations by the word “ gods,” 
 it is clear that the “ Elohim” of the Jews must also 
 be a plural form, and signify amongst them the same 
 as it did amongst surrounding nations. But in Deut. 
 vi. 4, we have the enunciation, “ Hear, 0 Israel, 
 the Lord our God is one Lord.” This rendered it 
 impolitic and morally impossible for our translators 
 to render “Elohim,” when it referred to the true 
 God, by a plural noun; in all instances, therefore, 
 where the Jewish God is designated by the name in 
 question, they have interpreted it in the singular, as 
 God. 15 
 
 We conclude, then, that the inexorable logic of 
 facts demonstrates that the early Jewish writers,— 
 those whom so many amongst us regard to have been 
 inspired by the Almighty, and as composing under 
 the direct influence of His will,—considered that the 
 Creator was a plurality; whilst a reference to Gen. 
 xviii. 2, 8, 5, 8, 9, 10, 16, 17, and xix. 2, 18, 16, 17, 
 18, 22, 24, shows us that the Lord is at one time 
 represented as a trinity, a tria juncta in uno; at 
 another, as a dual being. As a triune Elohim, he 
 did not differ from Asher, Hea, and Hoa of the 
 
 16 There are, as Dr. Ginsburg observes (op. cit.), many passages in which the 
 translators of our authorised version have rendered Elohim as ‘ Gods,’ with the 
 erroneous idea that the word refers to a heathen, and not to the Jewish God. There 
 is one verse in which the word Elohim is translated in one part in the singular and 
 in another in the plural, viz., Gen. iii. 5 ; “For God ( Elohim) doth know;” “and 
 ye shall be as Gods ( Elohim)." 
 
225 
 
 Al] Chaldees,—the people whom we learn from Abraham’s 
 
 history were worshippers of the true God ; or from 
 Osiris, Isis, and Horus, or any other of the Egyptian 
 triads. As a dual being, Elohim was analogous to 
 Baalim. 16 
 
 If Elohim originally represented the same idea as 
 Mahadeva, we can well understand that the style of 
 worship rendered to him, and the writings of those 
 who reverenced him, would be too coarse for the 
 more modern Jews to tolerate (See Aholah) ; and 
 we can readily understand how greatly they would 
 desire to expunge from their holy books all evidence 
 of the prevalence of impropriety, in religion or in 
 nomenclature. Notwithstanding all their care, how¬ 
 ever, we shall find that there are a great number 
 of cognomens which are compounded with El, the 
 majority of which have a primary reference to the 
 condition of Asher or the Triad, although they bear 
 a relationship to the Creator as well. 
 
 The remarks which we have made upon Elohim 
 are, mutatis mutandis, applicable to its singular form, 
 elohali. It is applied in 2 Chron. xxxii. 15, to 
 any god of any nation; and in Dan. xi. 37, 88, 89, 
 and in Hab. i. 11, we see the same thing. We 
 cannot help noticing, moreover, that this form of 
 the word, which indicates unity , is very rarely used; 
 it is only found twice in the Pentateuch, Deut. xxxii. 
 15, 17, once in Chronicles, once in Nehemiah, four 
 times in the book of Psalms, once in the Proverbs, 
 once in Isaiah, three times in Daniel, and twice in 
 Habakkuk; but though so rare in other books, it 
 is abundantly used by Job, it being found in that 
 
 16 In Sanchoniathon we read, “ The auxiliaries of Ilus, who is Cronus, were 
 called Eloeim (’EA.«ei /*), as it were the allies of Cronus.” Cory’s Fragments , p. 11. 
 
 P 
 
226 
 
 Al] portion of Scripture upwards of forty times, whilst 
 the form of Elohim only occurs seventeen times. 
 Hence we must conclude that the writer of Job had a 
 clearer idea of the unity of the godhead, as enunciated 
 in Deut. vi. 4, than any other Biblical writer. This 
 curious fact assumes some significance, when we find a 
 scholar like Sir H. Rawlinson assigning the Achaeme- 
 nian period as that during which the book was composed 
 (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , vol. i., new 
 series, p. 288, note), a time when, under the influence 
 of the Persian monarchs, a tolerably pure form of 
 monotheism was displacing the Shemitic Triads. 
 
 In like manner el, is used for ‘ strange ’ deities, 
 as, for example, we find, Judges ix. 46, El Berith, 
 the God Berith, spoken of; like aloah, it is 
 
 used in the book of Job in not less than fifty-five 
 instances; nor can we be much surprised at this, 
 seeing the proximity of Job’s residence to Mesopo¬ 
 tamia, where the word II was constantly used for 
 God: in Psalm lxxxi. 9, 10, the word El is used 
 thus— “there shall no strange El be in thee, neither 
 shalt thou worship any strange El; ” again, in Isaiah 
 xlvi. 6, we find the word attributed to an image — 
 “ he maketh it an El; ” in lvii. 5, we find it again 
 used to signify idols; and in Ezek. xxxii. 21, the 
 same word is translated in our version as “ The 
 strong.” As regards this signification of the word, 
 we learn from Dr. Ginsburg (op. cit.) that so great 
 was the dislike to confound the El of heaven with 
 the El on earth, that the word was actually pointed 
 ail, in some passages. This affords a singular 
 additional argument in favour of our interpretation 
 of the original Elohim, for ail signifies “ a ram ” and 
 “ a post,” both of which had hidden meanings. 
 
227 
 
 Al] The plural of el, is elim, a name which 
 
 occurs for a locality in the wilderness, Ex. xv. 27, 
 where the mystic numbers twelve and seventy are 
 prominently to be noticed. The name thus written, 
 as Ginsburg has observed in the work before quoted, 
 would signify a polytheistic idea ; it w r as therefore 
 changed by the scribes into ailim, by the simple 
 transposition of and *>, and the word thus became 
 ‘the rams/ instead of the ‘ Great Gods.’ There was 
 also, as the same author shows, a Moabite city called 
 Elim, a name which was practically a proof that El 
 was known to this heathen race. To obviate this 
 idea, a 3 was inserted between b and k , and the 
 city became Eglaim, “ drops.” In Exod. 
 
 xv. 11 (we are still drawing our information from 
 Ginsburg’s Versions of the Bible), we find in our 
 English version, “Who is like unto thee, 0 Lord, 
 amongst the Gods ? ” the Hebrew word for which is 
 ba-eZim; this, however, seemed to attribute 
 power to the heathen Gods, which, although not 
 equal to that of the Jewish El, was analogous thereto; 
 the word was therefore altered in some versions to 
 Hem, “ The dumb ones.” There is a similar 
 change in Hah. ii. 18, in which we meet with the 
 words elilim ilmim, instead of elim 
 
 ilmim. Again, in Psalm lviii. 1, we have the word 
 elem, in the present redaction of the Hebrew 
 text, a word which originally was intended to signify 
 “ Judges,” but which is translated in the Authorised 
 Version, “ 0 ye congregation ; ” the ancient word was 
 E'c’K, elim, but as this appeared to be attributing the 
 power of God to man, it was changed, by dropping > 
 and altering chirek into sheva, to qI ?^, alem = con¬ 
 gregation. This form of the plural is masculine ; we 
 
228 
 
 Al] find also a feminine plural, to which we have already 
 referred, viz., and eloth and elath, which 
 
 signified “ The Goddesses ; ” - this interpretation, 
 however, offending the later Jewish writers, they 
 added * between the h and the K, making the words 
 an d eiloth and eilatli , the meaning of which 
 is “ the rams.” There is one passage in which a 
 similar alteration has been made, which we regard 
 with much interest. The twenty-second Psalm is 
 said to have been written by David, who once dwelt 
 amongst the Philistines, and was a friend of Hiram 
 of Tyre. We have quite sufficient evidence that 
 amongst those nations the deity was worshipped 
 under a feminine form, e. g., Ashtoreth. Now in the 
 verse, Psalm xxii. 19, we have, in the authorised 
 version, “ Be not thou far from me, 0 Lord ; 0 my 
 strength, haste thee to help me.” But the original 
 word, translated “ 0 my strength,” was elothi, 
 
 or “ my eloth,” which is put in parallelism with, and 
 metaphorically equal to, “0 Lord,” = Jehovah. 
 But to call upon “the Goddesses,” as being analogous 
 to Jehovah, savoured of blasphemy in the eyes of 
 the modern followers of David, so they changed the 
 eloth of the Psalmist into eilatli, which we 
 
 presume must signify “ ewes,” i. e., the feminine of 
 “ rams,” though we cannot be sure, since the word 
 only occurs in this one place throughout the Bible. 
 We may admire the zeal which prefers breaking the 
 ninth rather than the first commandment, but we ques¬ 
 tion the taste which made David appeal one moment 
 to Jehovah, and the next to a flock of sheep. 
 
 We find, still farther, from the author above 
 quoted, that the modern, or post-Babylonian Jews, 
 would not allow the name of el, to remain, in the 
 
229 
 
 Al] cognomens of individuals who had borne it, in con¬ 
 nection with other words to form a sentence. Thus 
 Tabeal, signifying “ The Good God,” or “ God is 
 good,” was intolerable, if borne by a human being; 
 consequently the K was dropped in certain proper 
 names, or else the spelling was varied sufficiently to 
 remove from the appellative the obnoxious element. 
 Here, again, we meet with a complete justification of 
 the plan which I have adopted in the examination of 
 Scriptural cognomens, and a proof that I have not 
 violated the laws of sound philology in trusting to 
 common sense rather than to the despotic laws of 
 pedantry, which insist that everything which is 
 written and spelled as we find it now, must be 
 accepted as indubitably correct, and, if it be in the 
 Bible, written by the hand of God. 
 
 There are numerous words compounded with Al, 
 which, being usually spelled as El, we shall intro¬ 
 duce in their ordinary form, under the letter E. A 
 comparison of these with others compounded with 
 Jah, will go far to increase the strength of the posi¬ 
 tion which we have taken. 
 
 Alameth, (1 Chron. vii. 8; 1 Chron. vi. 10). This 
 
 name was borne by a man and by a town, which, in 
 Joshua xxi. 18, is found to have been Almon; now 
 the signification of the last is “ The strong On,” and 
 it is masculine; that of the first is feminine; and, 
 notwithstanding its present ‘pointing,’ we conclude 
 that the word is the plural of alma, and signi¬ 
 fies “ The virgins.” 
 
 Alammelech, (Josh. xix. 26), “Al the king.” In 
 
 this word we have another illustration of the con¬ 
 trivances which have been adopted to expunge the 
 sacred form f rom names which have been used 
 
230 
 
 Alammelech] by the Heathen. The change adopted has 
 been to transform the tzere into pathach, and to add a 
 dagesh to the ^ to show that a letter has been elided. 
 It is somewhat cnrions to find that Gesenius and Fiirst 
 have accepted this idea, and attempt to explain the 
 name by conceiving that n has been elided between 
 h and jo, thus rendering the word as alath 
 
 melech, “ The king’s oak,” which Fiirst says “ has 
 reference to the Phoenician oak worship, remains of 
 which were preserved amongst the Hebrews.” As if, 
 however, to indicate that he felt himself upon some¬ 
 what tender ground, he adds “ The assimilation of n 
 is rare, and possibly only in a proper name.” (See 
 Molech.) 
 
 Alba, an old Italian or Etruscan name. Compare Albion; 
 possibly from the Phoenician root alab, or alb , 
 ‘to be strong.’ Compare Elvas, Alp, Elbe, Helbon, 
 &c. 
 
 Aleph, *)?£ (Phoenician), “An ox,” “cow,” “bull;” whence 
 Elephant, which, when they first came to be known 
 in Palestine, were thought to be big bulls; comp. 
 alaph, ‘ to make or bring forth thousands.’ 
 
 Aliah, (1 Chron. i. 51). This is another of the words 
 which have been modified ; as it stands, it signifies 
 “perverseness;” it is clearly the same as aliah, 
 which signifies “ The most High Jah.” The altera¬ 
 tion has been made because the cognomen was borne 
 by an Edomite. This was felt to be the more neces¬ 
 sary, inasmuch as the Jews would not tolerate such a 
 name amongst their own brethren, still less amongst 
 the uncircumcised. The margin reads it '1)^, ‘ Alvah,’ 
 as it appears in Gen. xxxvi. 40. 
 
 Alian, (1 Chron. i. 40), also written alvan (Gen. 
 xxxvi. 23), which signifies “ A high sublime one.’’ 
 
231 
 
 Alian] Fiirst. It is probably a variant of alon, “ On 
 is most high.” 
 
 Alilat, an Assyrian name for the Goddesses, or “ The God¬ 
 dess ” under all her names. 
 
 Alitta (Cuneiform), = Alissa, = Eliza, 17 = Ashtarte, = Ishtar 
 (Easter ?) = Mylitta, = Ashtoreth, = Karnaim, = Me- 
 litta, = Anaitis ; “ The child bearer “ The mother 
 of the Child.” Her temple at Paphos, in Cyprus, 
 which was the most celebrated one in Grecian times, 
 contained no other representation of her than a 
 conical black stone, the significance of which mythos 
 we explained, pp. 107, 148. (See Mylitta.) 
 
 Alleluiah. See Hillel. 
 
 Allon, (Joshua xix. 33), “ The oak, or the strong On.” 
 Allon Bachuth (Gen. xxxv. 8) = “ The oak of weep¬ 
 ing.” 
 
 Almodad “nto’j 5 *? (Genesis x. 26) = "H*?? “ God is 
 
 love.” 
 
 Almon, fitkv (Josh. xxi. 18), “ On the young,” or “ the 
 youthful On ; ” alman, ‘ nubile youth.’ 
 
 Aloth, (Joshua xv. 24, 1 Kings iv. 10). “ The 
 
 Goddesses,” feminine plural of n !?y, aleh, alah, or 
 “ most high.” 
 
 Alush, (Numb, xxxiii. 13) probably a variant of 
 elish, or “ El exists,” or “El is upright.” 
 
 Alvah, (Gen. xxxvi. 40), variant of Aliah = “ Jah is 
 most high.” 
 
 Alvan I (Gen. xxxvi. 23), variant of Alian = “ On is 
 most high.” 
 
 Am, &$$, “ Mother” (literally and figuratively), “ Metropolis,” 
 &c.; Ammen is the name of a wife of Siva, to whom 
 were offered human sacrifices ; um, in the Cuneiform, 
 
 17 Compare with Eluzai, 1 Chron. xii. 5. 
 
232 
 
 Am] signifies ‘a mother,’ and ‘the womb .’ 18 WJ, am, 
 ‘ people,’ ‘ a tribe or communion.’ 
 
 Amad, (Josh. xix. 26). This is probably the modern 
 form of amad, or emad, “ The mother,” or 
 
 “ Am is eternal.” 
 
 Amah, n J??, “A handmaid,” compare French ami; n ??, 
 amah, ‘a handmaid,’ beginning,’ ‘head, ‘foundation,’ 
 ‘cubit,’ or ‘people,’ according to vowel-points. n py, 
 amah, “ he or she unites or joins together.” 
 
 Amal, (1 Chron. vii. 35), “He toils or labours,” “is 
 vigorous or alert.” 
 
 Amalek, (Gen. xiv. 7, xxxvi. 12), Of doubtful signi¬ 
 fication. 
 
 Amam, (Josh. xv. 26), probably from an old root, 
 = ‘ to conjoin; ’ or amam, ‘ to join together.’ 
 
 (See Gen. ii. 24.) 
 
 Amana, = Abana (2 Kings v. 12), “ The faithful; ” 
 |BN, aman, ‘to prop,’ ‘to be faithful,’ ‘to trust,’ ‘a 
 workman,’ ‘firm,’ ‘faithful,’ ‘true,’ as pointed by 
 vowels. 
 
 Amariah, (1 Chron. v. 33), “Jah decrees;” "ion, 
 
 amar, ‘ to say,’ ‘ command,’ ‘ a word,’ ‘ a lamb,’ ‘ a 
 hymn,’ or ‘promise,’ according to the vowel-points 
 used. 
 
 Amasa, (2 Sam. xvii. 25). The word was originally 
 
 written as amesel, or amasdl, which signifies 
 
 18 Tliis word is still current amongst ourselves, in the name Amelia, or 
 Emily. Its composition is very simple, being from Am and ilus, or helios, and 
 signifies the Maternal Sun; and it is interesting to us, as illustrating the descent 
 of names from a remote age. Amongst the Roman people, Julius seems to have 
 been a slight variant of the solar appellative. RomwZtts resolves itself into the 
 Shemitic ram , high, and ilus , the Sun, and signifies “ The High Sun.” Amelia 
 was the name of a city which was much older than Rome. Amulius was the 
 father of that mythical king, and the JEmilii were amongst the most ancient 
 of the Roman citizens; and from their time till now, Amelia and Emily have 
 been favourite appellatives in the Western world. 
 
233 
 
 Amasa] “El is firm,” “strong, or vigorous;” but tbe 
 redactors of the present text have dropped the b of 
 ^8, and altered the vowel points. 
 
 Amasai, '^915 (1 Chron. vi. 25). In the preceding word we 
 found the b of elided from the word; we find 
 in the present one that the n of n> has been dropped. 
 The word originally signified “ Jah is firm,” “ power¬ 
 ful,” &c. 
 
 Amashai, (Nehem. xi. 13). This word is evidently 
 
 a variant of the preceding, with the addition of a 
 D between the * and so as to make the original 
 introduction of the divine name of Jehovah into a 
 human cognomen,—an ancient practice which was 
 very offensive to the modern Jews,—more difficult of 
 discovery. The appellative as it stands has no 
 signification, “ a booty-making hero,” the meaning 
 assigned by Fiirst being preposterous. 
 
 Amasiah, (2 Chron. xvii. 6), “Jah is vigorous, strong, 
 or firm,” from m and ^9?, jah , and amesh. But 
 there is another verb from which the first element 
 of the cognomen may be derived, which is too im¬ 
 portant to be passed by; ^9^, amaish , signifies ‘ he 
 is strong,’ &c., whilst ^9^, amas, signifies ‘he speaks 
 in a way hard to be understood.’ This at once recals 
 to our memory the verse, Ezek. xx. 49 : “ Then said 
 I, Ah Lord God, they say of me, Doth he not 
 speak parables?” and small though the reference may 
 be, it suffices to show that there was quite as much 
 ambiguity in the utterances of the prophets of the 
 Jews, as in the oracles of the Egyptians, Greeks, or 
 Romans. 
 
 Amassu, (Cuneiform,) “He took away;” D»n, hamas . 
 Compare our word “ amass,” to collect riches by 
 plunder. 
 
234 
 
 Amaziah, (2 Kings xii. 21), “ Jah is strong.” (See 
 
 Amasa.) 
 
 Ament, Amenti, Ement, (Egyptian,) = Hades = Erebus = 
 Darkness = West = Sundown. (See Matthew.) 
 
 Ami, (Ezra ii. 57). This word is rendered “Amon,” 
 Nehem. vii. 59. As it stands, we should consider 
 that it was an altered form of aimiah, “ The 
 
 mother is Jah.” (See Amon.) 
 
 Amir, “ The head,” “top,” “chief,” whence Emir and 
 Ameer ; amir, head, &c. 
 
 Amittai, (2 Kings xvi. 25). As it is written, this 
 word has no meaning; we conclude therefore that it 
 has been altered from its original form; ABK, emeth, 
 signifies “ firmness, duration, peace, security, fidelity, 
 integrity, truth;” to this triliteral, nj ‘Jah/ a portion 
 of the tetragrammaton 4 Jehovah,’ has been 
 
 added, and, the last letter having been elided, we have 
 the cognomen as it stands. Its real signification is 
 “ Jah is truth,” &c. 
 
 Ammah, or Ummah, “Mother” (in Assyrian), and in 
 Josh xix. 30; in Chaldsea she was represented with 
 a child in her arms, and was the same as Ishtar. 
 The name is essentially the same as Am; and I 
 would note in passing that many Welsh and some 
 Scotch pronounce (and I think correctly so) woman 
 as if it were written ooman, which certainly gives us 
 reason to surmise that Ammon and woman are in 
 some way connected with each other. The name 
 assigned to the mother, as read by Talbot in one of 
 the Cuneiform inscriptions, is Ki, e.g., in pi Ri 
 ummu banit — “ In the holy name of Ri, the mother 
 who bore me.” 19 
 
 19 Talbot, in Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature , 2nd series, 
 
 vol. viii., pt. 2, p. 243. 
 
235 
 
 Ammah, (2 Sam. ii. 24). It is very difficult to dissociate 
 this name from the preceding one, especially when 
 we find “the hill of Ammah” lying “before Giah.” 
 This last word reminds us so strongly of the Greek 
 yrj, yea, and yoCia, and of the words, “ when I was 
 made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lower 
 parts of the earth ” (Ps. cxxxix. 15), that we are 
 driven to conclude that there is some relation between 
 Ammah and Ge; and we may infer that the word 
 is an elided form of amiah — “Jah is a 
 
 mother.” In this conclusion we are supported by 
 some of the following words. (See also Adamah.) 
 
 Ammiel, (Numb. xii. 12), “Friend of Al.” Note here 
 that amah, ‘ friend,’ is an old word signifying 
 ‘association’ and ‘fellowship,’ ‘conjunction’ and 
 ‘communion,’ and it seems to be reproduced in the 
 Latin amo, and the French ami. 
 
 Ammiel, (Numb. xiii. 12), we consider to be an altered 
 
 form, in which V has taken the place of and that 
 the word signifies “ my mother is El.” As it stands, 
 the only interpretation feasible is ‘ my people God.’ 
 
 Ammihud, ‘Mn'tpy (2 Sam. xiii. 87). This is a word which 
 has been translated by some, “ splendid people,” by 
 others, “ one of the people of Judah,” and by another, 
 “ God is renown.” This of itself sufficiently shows 
 that the cognomen has been so altered as to render 
 it perfectly unintelligible. If, however, we restore 
 the reading to , aimihud , we get the significa¬ 
 
 tion, “my,” or “the mother is great,” or “majestic,” 
 or “ majesty.” We see a similar change to that 
 which we recognise here, in the following word. 
 
 Amminadab, (Exod. vi. 23), “The mother is noble;” 
 
 or aimi, ‘ My mother; ’ nadab, ‘ gives freely.’ 
 
 Ammishaddai, (Numb. i. 12). This word being spelled 
 
286 
 
 Ammishaddai] with y, and not with K, would appear to 
 mean “ conjoined with, or kindred to, or my people, 
 Shaddai.” But in the same chapter (Numbers i. 6-12) 
 we meet with the word ‘ Zurishaddai; * and there 
 is reason to think that the two names may have 
 been given by the same individual, who had, when 
 selecting them, a definite idea. The last word means 
 ‘ my rock (is) Shaddai; ’ the rock having a masculine 
 meaning. We may take ‘ Ammishaddai ’ to have a 
 feminine signification, and to denote ‘ my mother (is) 
 Shaddai; ’ or 'ek, ami , ‘ my mother; ’ shidah, 
 ‘ the lady,’ or ‘ my mistress;’ 20 or shaddai , ‘the 
 
 most powerful.’ If this deduction be correct, then 
 the names are evidently intended to indicate the 
 idea which was once entertained, that God is both 
 the father and the mother of his people. 
 
 Ammxzabad, (1 Chron. xxviii. 6). Here again we find 
 
 that ami, takes the place of airni,, or 
 
 aim, and occupies a position similar to that of El 
 and Jah in Elzabad and Jozabad. It is preposterous 
 to believe that am, “a people,” could give any 
 parent a child, or that a priest would tolerate a 
 parallelism between El, Jah, and a ‘nation.’ We 
 are driven then by the force of logic to conclude 
 that 'PS, ami, or &S, am, is the individual referred 
 to, “the Alma Mater,” “the Celestial Virgin,” “ Sara 
 the princess,” “the Queen of Heaven,” to whom, in 
 later times, offerings were made by the Jews, though 
 denounced by such a prophet as Jeremiah (xliv. 17). 
 The cognomen in question we therefore translate, 
 “ The mother gave.” 
 
 Ammon, (Gen. xix. 88). In Egyptian, Amun and 
 Amun-ra ; known also in later times as Jupiter 
 
 20 See page 52, note. 
 
237 
 
 Ammon] Ammon. The association of the words, signifying 
 “ mother ” and “ father,” indicate that it is to such 
 conjunction we must refer creative power. With 
 such an androgyne element the Sun was associated 
 by ancient mythologists. Jupiter was himself some¬ 
 times represented as being female; and the word 
 Hermaphrodite is in itself a union between Hermes 
 and Aphrodite, the male and female creative powers. 
 We may fairly conclude, from the existence of names 
 like the above, that there was at one time in Western 
 as there was in Eastern Asia, a strong feud between 
 the adorers of On and Am, the Linga^tas and the 
 Yonijas, and that they were at length partially united 
 under Ammon , as they were elsewhere under Nebo 
 or the Nabhi of Vishnu. 21 
 
 There are many variants of the idea conveyed in 
 the word Ammon; the first of which we notice is 
 Moab, which, by a very slight transposition, becomes 
 Om and Ab. Om, or Aum, is the ordinary form under 
 which the Almighty, the Queen of Heaven, is still 
 reverenced in the East, as the following anecdote will 
 show :—One of my brothers, a freemason, in reading 
 certain books of the craft, came upon the word, and, 
 wishing to test the truth of what he read, uttered 
 this word as Aum, in casual conversation, to a very 
 high-caste hindoo, a clerk in his office in Bombay. 
 The man was at once so awe-struck that he scarcely 
 could speak, and, in a voice almost of terror, asked 
 
 21 In the course of investigating the ceremonies of the Hindoos, and in attempt¬ 
 ing to elucidate their meaning, it will he found necessary to draw an analogy 
 between them and most of the Egyptians. The resemblance is very striking, they 
 mutually serve to explain each other. When the Sepoys who accompanied Lord 
 Hutchinson in his Egyptian expedition saw the temple at Hadja Silsili, they were 
 very indignant with the natives of the place for allowing it to fall into decay, con¬ 
 ceiving it to be the Temple of their own God Siva.Osiris is the same 
 
 as Brahma ; Horus, as Vishnu ; Typhon, as Siva ; and Isis, as Parvati. 
 
238 
 
 Ammon] where my brother had learned that word. To the 
 Hindoo it was that incommunicable name of the 
 Almighty, which no one ventured to pronounce except 
 under the most religious solemnity. And here let 
 me pause to remark that the Jews were equally reve¬ 
 rent with the name belonging to the Most High; 
 and that the Third Commandment was very literal 
 in its signification. 22 In Thibet, too, where a worship 
 very nearly identical in ceremony and doctrine with 
 that of the Eoman Papists still exists, amongst the 
 Lamas, the name of Om is reverenced, and “ Om 
 mani pannee,” and “ Om mani padmi houm,” of the 
 Eastern worshipper, takes the place of the “ Ave 
 Maria,” and “Ave Maria purissima,” of the Western 
 devotee. 
 
 Both Ammon and Moah, we are told in the 
 Hebrew myth, were the offspring of a father with his 
 virgin daughter, just as Adonis was the son of Cinyras 
 by his daughter Myrrha. It simply is a gross way 
 of saying Ammon and Moab are a coalescence between 
 ideal creative sexes, i. e., that “ The High Father ” 
 and “ The Celestial Virgin ” were one and the same 
 individual, or essence, or creator. 
 
 Onam is another variant; and G. Higgins suggests 
 the idea that the mystic Numa is Amiin transposed. 
 If so, his name would be found to be doubly mystical, 
 as his surname was Pompilius, i. e., no^nr), ‘ divine 
 impulse and inspiration,’ and f/ HA<oj, ‘the Sun.’ It 
 is, however, more probable than Numen , a deity, had 
 something to do with Numa, the king, and possibly 
 both may come from Naam, the voice of God. 
 
 The original Hebrew form of the first syllable of 
 Amon, was probably niy, which signifies ‘to cover,’ 
 
 22 See Judg. xiii. 18, “Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret?” 
 
239 
 
 Ammon] ‘ to veil round,’ ‘ to enwrap,’ all of which metaphors 
 are applicable to the residence of the infant in the 
 maternal womb. As illustrations of the idea being 
 present to the mind of some writers, we may quote, 
 for example, “ Thou hast covered me in my mother’s 
 womb ” (Psalm cxxxix. 13); and again, “ My sub¬ 
 stance was not hid from thee when I was made in 
 secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of 
 the earth ” (Psalm cxxxix. 16). Again, the word 
 signifies 4 to glow,’ ‘to burn,’ ‘to gape,’ ‘to thirst; ’ 
 which recals the verses—“There are three things 
 that are never satisfied, yea four things say not, 
 It is enough: the grave, and the barren womb,” 
 &c. (Prov. xxx. 15, 16). The word is allied to DN, DJJ 
 and on, and all are evidently closely connected with 
 that idea of union which obtains in the whole process 
 of reproduction. In that mysterious work, father and 
 mother unite as one, and form a third, who is united 
 equally to both its parents; the young being is 
 united to the mother during its intra-uterine life, and 
 to her breast during its suckling season. It is the 
 desire of union between the sexes which induces 
 families to dwell together, and it is the desire to keep 
 up unity amongst our own flocks which makes men 
 join to fight fiercely against those who would spoliate 
 them. 
 
 Amnon, P^, (2 Sam. iii. 2), is said to mean “ faithful,” but 
 it is sometimes written Aminon, which may be 
 
 read as signifying ‘ My mother the Fish; ’ an etymology 
 which receives support by Joshua being frequently 
 designated as the son of the Fish (Nun). 
 
 Amok, pto (Nehem. xii. 7), “ The unfathomable,” or “ (he 
 is) incomprehensible.” 
 
 Amon, PE?, was an Egyptian God, ram-headed, bearing in 
 
240 
 
 Amon] one hand the crozier or crook, similar to that adopted 
 by bishops of the Koman Church, and in the other 
 the handled cross ( crux ansata), emblem of the two 
 sexes. 
 
 In Hebrew, Amon means “ an artificer,” and I 
 presume that the word is applied to the power which 
 makes us all. The crux ansata, and the two sylla¬ 
 bles am, on, indicate an union of the sexes; and 
 the God would thus be the same as Nebo, under 
 another name. Amon was a name borne by the son 
 of Manasseh (2 Kings xx. 18), who was even more 
 intensely idolatrous than his father had been. 
 amn, also signifies “ firm, strong.” It is very pro¬ 
 bable that the name was originally written Ammon, 
 but was changed by the redactors of the present text, 
 so as to prevent the appearance that one of their own 
 kings was no better than a heathen. 
 
 Amokite, (Gen. xv. 16). There are many words which 
 come from the Hebrew » N, a, m, r, viz., “ien, amar, 
 aimer, imer, omer, emor. There are also hamor and 
 chamor. The meanings of these imply 44 speaking,” 
 and 44 flowing.” 44 Homer ” would thus, if his name 
 came from a Phoenician source, signify * an eloquent 
 man,’ 4 an improvisatore,’ &c. Another meaning is 
 44 a lamb,” and a third is “to be red,” “ boiling up,” 
 “erecting or swelling up.” Considering the nature 
 of the other ancient names adopted in Palestine, I 
 incline to believe that 4 Emmor,’ 4 Hamor,’ 4 Amor,’ 
 signified the Sun, as Mahadeva. It is said to mean a 
 44 mountaineer; ” if so, it would be of general, rather 
 than of restricted use. In the Pentateuch we meet 
 with the expression, 44 The Amorites dwell in the 
 mountains ” (Numb. xiii. 29), which, if the words 
 have the signification alleged, would mean “the 
 
241 
 
 Amorite] mountaineers dwell in the mountains,” which 
 seems too absurd for us to attach importance to it, 
 and hence induces us to prefer the etymon suggested, 
 rather than the one currently received. 
 
 We are also told that the son of Hamor, or Emmor, 
 was Shechem, Shakam, which means “he 
 
 is firm, or durable,” or “ the earnest doer; ” and his 
 character accords with the idea which the name would 
 imply, for he, as all folks then aimed to he, was 
 impetuous in love. 
 
 Amos, (2 Kings xix. 2), is said to mean “ a burden ; ” 
 amotz. I cannot help believing that its true 
 signification is ‘ to be alert,’ ‘ firm,’ ‘ strong,’ ‘ active,’ 
 ‘nimble,’ from P 3 ?, and equivalent to Amoz, 
 amotz , and that it has reference to the emblem of 
 the Creator, and not to the man. 
 
 Amoz, (2 Kings xix. 2), “(He is) valiant or strong.” 
 
 Amram, (Exod. vi. 18). We have in this word another 
 instance of Rabbinical alteration, and the substitution 
 of V for There can be no reasonable doubt that 
 this cognomen is derived from &K, arrt} an( j D-n ? rum, 
 which signify “ The Mother on High,” or “ kindred 
 to the High.” In the Septuagint the word is written 
 Ambram, which would signify ‘ the Mother the 
 Creator.’ Coupling with this the strong Assyrian 
 element in the early Jewish names, I conclude that 
 Amram is a counterpart of Abram, i. e., ‘ The 
 Father on High,’ and that both are of Mesopotamian 
 origin. 
 
 Amraphel, ^7?^, (Gen. xiv. 1-9), was a king of Shinar in 
 the time of Abraham, and if we assume that he 
 flourished at the time which the writer of Genesis 
 would lead us to suppose, his name affords us a 
 strong evidence of the comparative unchangeableness 
 
 Q 
 
242 
 
 Amraphel] of language in the East. It signifies “the 
 maternal giant Sun.” am, ‘mother;’ raphah, 
 i giant; ’ ^8, el, God, or Sun, the Aleph, as usual, 
 being elided before the Lamed, to obliterate the name 
 of the Deity. In later times we find that Raphael 
 is the name of an angel in the Babylonian mytho¬ 
 logy ; and the name Raffaele is well known to 
 moderns. Fiirst tells us that Raphel was the Ara¬ 
 maean Saturn. (See Raphael.) 
 
 Amzi, (1 Chron. vi. 46), “ Jah is valiant,” from 
 
 amaz, and n J, the He, after the Iod, being elided, to 
 obliterate the name Jah — Jehovah. It may, however, 
 also he rendered “Jah glistens or shines.” 
 
 Amar, Arabic for “ man.” Compare with Amor and the 
 present Omar. 
 
 Ami, Assyrian for “water.” 
 
 Am, Vedic, “ To be hard,” “ strong,” “ powerful.” 
 
 Amb, 
 
 Amba 
 Ambhas, 
 
 Ambhoya, 
 
 Ambudhi, 
 
 Amh, 
 
 Ammara, 
 
 “ To go,” “ to sound.” 
 “ A mother.” 
 
 “ Water.” 
 
 “The Lotus flower.” 
 
 “ The ocean.” 
 
 “To go,” “to send,” 
 speak.” 
 
 “ The immortal Gods.” 
 
 “ to shine,” “ to 
 
 Amri, “The tops of high mountains,” or “High tops 
 of hills.” 
 
 Anab, (Josh. xi. 21). This is simply another form of 
 anab, “ He is thick, or round.” 
 
 Anah, W, (Gen. xxxvi. 20). It is possible that this name 
 is a variant of Anu, an Assyrian God (vide supra, 
 pp. 64, 77), whose name is associated with such an 
 idea, as to lead us to suppose that his name is 
 connected with ‘ he is low, or sunk; ’ more 
 
243 
 
 Anah] probably the word is derived from W, anah, ‘ he 
 answers.’ 
 
 Anahaeath, rnpJN (Josh. xix. 19). This word cannot be 
 satisfactorily explained as it is now spelled; it is 
 probably an altered form of I**, on haraish, the 
 n being used instead of t?, as tt in modern Greek 
 replace the harsh era-. This derivation would give 
 us the signification of “ On shines or glitters, sprouts 
 or grows.” 
 
 Anaiah, (Nehem. viii. 4), “ Jah hears, or answers.” 
 
 Anak, PJ5J, or PW (Num. xiii. 22). It is difficult to trace 
 the signification of this word, and the current idea 
 is that it denotes “ a long neck or collar.” If 
 we take the ordinary spelling of the Hebrew as 
 infallibly correct, we shall often meet with similar 
 difficulties. Whenever, therefore, it is found that 
 the usual orthography leads to apparent absurdity, 
 it is better to trust to the ear for assistance. Now 
 Anak is spoken of in connection with Arba, or Arva, 
 and Hebron; and these, as we have already seen (vide 
 supra, p. 89), have a solar, divine, or sexual meaning. 
 Mahadeva was the great Creator; he was On or 
 Aun; and the syllable n ^, acli, which is equivalent 
 to P T , signifies ‘brother of,’ or ‘like to.’ Anak would 
 accordingly mean “ kindred with,” or “ brother to 
 (the creative) On.” (See Abba.) 
 
 Anam, or Onam, B-fw, “ability,” “power” (Gen. xxxvi. 23, 
 1 Chron. ii. 26). An Edomite and Jewish name. 
 
 Anamim, (Gen. x. 13). “ The firm, the strong ones.” 
 
 Annamelech, (2 Kings xvii. 38). One of the gods 
 
 imported into Samaria by the Sepharvites. No such 
 name has been found in the Cuneiform inscriptions; 
 and as the Hebrew word without points is written 
 Anmelech, I presume that the name signifies 
 
244 
 
 Annamelech] “ An, On, or Anu, the king.” (See Adram- 
 melech, and Molech.) 
 
 Anani, (1 Chron. iii. 24), “Jah protects, or covers,” for 
 By, anan iah ; or possibly “ Anu is Jah.” 
 
 Annaniah, or Annanias, n ^ : , (Nehem. iii. 28, and Acts v. 1). 
 This word, occurring in the later Jewish history, 
 tells of the combination of Judaism with Chaldean 
 mythology ; for we have here “ Jah,” the chief name 
 of Israel’s God, joined to Anna, Anu, or Anunit 
 of the Phoenicians and Babylonians. 
 
 Anath, TO (Judg. iii. 81), “ Hearing, or answering.” 
 
 Anathoth, Anathothijah, iT “ The club of Anna or 
 
 Anu; ” i. e., thothah, or thothach, ‘ a club,’ and 
 
 Anu. It appears from certain coins, a copy of one of 
 which I find in Hislop’s Tioo Babylons, that a club 
 of peculiar form was one of the emblems of Bel, and 
 of his associates Anu and Hoa. The form of the 
 club cannot fail to remind any one, familiar with the 
 ideas prevalent in those times, of Ashcalon , the 
 cluster of On; it is simply a fascinum cum multis 
 testibus. The usual explanation of the word is 
 “ answers to prayers ” ! ! 
 
 Andrew, ’A vtipeotg. A word of Greek origin, = 'av§ps~io$, 
 
 “ manly.” 
 
 Anesh, “ a Man;” oftener used as ish (a man). 
 Compare Ines, Owesimus, Owesiphorus. 
 
 Angels, To treat this word as it deserves would 
 
 require a small volume. We should have to trace the 
 idea of “ messengers ” from the Almighty, through¬ 
 out the sacred Scriptures and profane writings — to 
 show the origin of the belief in such beings — the 
 time and place where it first obtained — the gradual 
 development of the dogma, and its analogies in other 
 creeds or nations; and we should have to sum up 
 
245 
 
 Angels] by pointing out the deductions to be drawn from 
 the historical sketch. 
 
 As we cannot afford space for all this, the reader 
 must be content with a summary of the deductions 
 which we have ourselves drawn, during the course of 
 our reading — (1) The idea of the Hebrews as to the 
 existence and nature of Angels does not differ from 
 that held by the Greeks and Romans respecting the 
 gods Mercury, Cupid, Hymen, and other minor 
 deities ; and just as Homer and others represent the 
 gods as eating, drinking, &c., so the Psalmist 
 represents the angels as living upon manna, the food 
 of the Deities = nectar, Ps. lxxviii. 24, 25, whilst the 
 writer of Genesis regales his angels with veal, butter, 
 milk, and bread, Gen. xviii. 5-8. (2) It is doubtful 
 
 whether the notion of Angels was in existence 
 amongst the Jews prior to their intercourse with the 
 Babylonians ; it is certain that none are mentioned 
 by name. (8) It is certain that the Chaldaeans before 
 the time of Nebuchadnezzar had framed a scheme 
 of angelic interference. (4) It is equally certain 
 that the Jews, after their residence in the capital of 
 Nebuchadnezzar, knew, or at any rate wrote, more 
 of Angels than they ever did before. (5) It is equally 
 certain that the early Christian writers adopted the 
 Babylonian ideas, and developed them still farther. 
 (6) And, as a result, the modern heaven is peopled 
 with a greater number of 4 demigods * or ‘ intelli¬ 
 gences ’ than were known in Greece and Rome. 23 
 
 The etymology of the names of the principal 
 Angels recognised by the later Jews of itself tells 
 a tale. Jah, or Jehovah, was the name of Judah’s 
 
 23 See Goheleth , by C. D. Ginsburg, LL.D., pp. 340-344, 528. London, 
 Longmans, 186L 
 
246 
 
 Angels] God. El was the name which Jah superseded; 
 and El was the title given to the supreme Lord in 
 Babylon, which ultimately replaced Jah, or Jehovah, 
 and all the Archangels are called after him; e. g., 
 MichacZ, RaphaeZ, Gabri el, Uri el, PhanicZ, RagucZ, 
 and SarakicZ. These are all messengers of El. 
 There are no messengers who have taken the name 
 of Jah in any form. 
 
 Some of the ancient Jews seem to have been 
 aware that the introduction of the doctrine of Angels 
 and Spirits took place in the modern times of their 
 history, for we find that the Sadducees denied the 
 existence of both one and the other, and accounted 
 in a very prosaic way for utterances which the 
 Pharisees thought fit to attribute to some angelic or 
 celestial dictation (Acts xxiii. 9). Like the Saddu¬ 
 cees of old, the physician of to-day sees in a lunatic 
 the existence of a diseased brain rather than the 
 presence of a devil, and cures him by attention to 
 the body rather than by appeals to the spirit. 
 
 It is difficult to find out the basis upon which 
 the current ideas respecting the fallen angels have 
 been founded, unless it he in the Babylonian legends 
 with which the Jews became familiar during their 
 residence in the land of the Chaldees, and in the 
 development which those doctrines farther received 
 from the residence of some of their principal men at 
 the Persian court. 
 
 The nature of the Chaldaean doctrines we may 
 learn, to some extent, from a perusal of the inscrip¬ 
 tions found on certain Babylonian bowls, which 
 have been exhumed in recent researches, and whose 
 translations are to he found, with the fac-similes 
 of the originals, in Layard’s Nineveh and Babylon , 
 
247 
 
 Angels] pp. 512-528. After their residence in that locality, 
 the Jews not only affected to know the names of all 
 the good angels, but the names of the bad, and to 
 know everything which had passed in Heaven before 
 the creation of man. If they received the knowledge 
 through the Chaldseans; and if, after they adopted the 
 belief, we must consider their reception of it as 
 the result of a Divine interference, or as an indirect 
 revelation; it is clear that we must consider the 
 Babylonian priests to have been more favoured by 
 the Almighty, than were the “ chosen race.” If, on 
 the other hand, we, with the Sadducees, or Con¬ 
 servative party in the time of our Saviour, decline to 
 give credence to the modern Jewish notions, because 
 they come entirely from a heathen source — from 
 which we must remember that Abram, the father of 
 the faithful, sprang—we cease to give that unreason¬ 
 ing reverence which we have been accustomed to 
 render to the writers of the New Testament. 
 
 The Sadducees, in the age referred to, adhered 
 strongly to the writings of Moses and of the prophets, 
 and, finding no angels named there, refused to 
 believe in those influences to which such names 
 as Raphael, Asmodeus, &c., had been given. To 
 them the idea that there were angelic spirits, who 
 were known by their names to mortals, was com¬ 
 paratively of modern growth. Hence they refused to 
 receive it, much in the same way as the Puseyites of 
 to-day decline to entertain certain doctrines of the 
 Puritans. We, on the contrary, who believe that 
 time is a means of proving the truth of any dogma, 
 implicitly believe the statements, that there are 
 angels who, though once upright, are now prostrate 
 and imprisoned, but nevertheless go about as roaring 
 
248 
 
 Angels] lions, seeking whom they may devour; and that 
 the cognomens of all these are as certainly known 
 by men, as are their forms. 
 
 Putting aside all the poetic imagery of Milton, we 
 have no evidence whatever on which to sustain our 
 current notions about the fallen angels, beyond the 
 very apocryphal book of Jude, which tells us, ver. 6, 
 that “the angels which kept not their first estate, but 
 left their own habitation, are reserved in everlasting 
 chains under darkness, unto the judgment of the 
 great day.” Of the value of this testimony, persons 
 will judge for themselves; and there are few who will 
 believe that the testimony of a man is inspired, when 
 he quotes from the book of Enoch, “ the seventh from 
 Adam.” But even were his testimony true, it is clear 
 that an imprisoned angel cannot be the active devil, 
 the prince of the power of the air. The only other 
 scrap of evidence on which the superstructure is built, 
 is the use of the word Abaddon, Kev. ix. 11, to which 
 we have already referred. This meagre evidence 
 being wholly inadequate to support the assevera¬ 
 tions, that the devil was once an angel of light, 
 that he fought with the Almighty, that he was 
 conquered, that he was sent to hell, that he comes 
 out daily to try and vex his original master, and 
 yet is kept in chains under darkness ; we naturally 
 ask ourselves whence we have imbibed that faith, 
 which is by many guarded as “ the apple of the 
 eye.” We can find no traces of it prior to the 
 Christian era, except in such individuals as Ahri- 
 man, Typhon, and Chimera; but after the short 
 period of pure Christianity had passed away, we find 
 abundant evidence of human imagination running 
 riot in describing hell and the devil, and the 
 
249 
 
 Angels] eloquence or astuteness of preachers showed itself 
 in the description of that place to which all who 
 differed from them in belief were to be consigned. 
 
 Those who credited the teacher, necessarily im¬ 
 bibed the lessons taught, and thus in the course of 
 time each Minister of religion has himself learned to 
 believe, and determines to teach others, as gospel 
 truth, a series of fond fables, which have no more 
 solid ground than the saying that the moon is made 
 of cheese, because it is in the milky way. There are 
 some who always feel implicit confidence in the truth 
 of any assertion which has been held uninterruptedly 
 for one or two thousand years. Such resemble 
 those who punished Galileo for asserting that the sun 
 did not move around the earth. With them we have 
 no sympathy. Instead of pinning our faith upon the 
 wisdom of the ancients, we prefer to adhere to the 
 thoughtfulness of the moderns, who refuse to believe 
 that Heaven is a locality where a king or queen 
 reigns, surrounded by such ministers as are to be 
 found at London, Paris, or Berlin ; and that Hell is 
 to Heaven what England was to France during the 
 last century. We cannot understand literally that 
 there is now, or ever was, “ war in heaven ” (Rev. 
 xii. 7); and we would as mercilessly reject the 
 testimony of the man who affirms that he knows 
 all about it, as we do the stories told by the Greeks 
 of the wars between Jupiter and the Titans. We 
 regard with the same feeling the man who believed 
 that Jupiter dethroned his father Saturn, and him 
 who believes literally the statement that God had 
 a fight with the devil, and, having beaten him, 
 chained him up. 
 
 The natural answer to the doubt which we have 
 
250 
 
 Angels] expressed whether we are to receive Chaldsean fan¬ 
 cies for sacred truth is, that our Saviour often spoke 
 with evil spirits, and that St. Paul says (Eph. vi. 12), 
 “ we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against 
 principalities, against powers, against the rulers of 
 the darkness of this world, against wicked spirits in 
 heavenly things ; ” and that Isaiah, who wrote prior 
 to the time of the captivity, says (xiv. 12), “ How art 
 thou fallen from heaven, 0 Lucifer, son of the 
 morning; ” to which may be added the obscure verse 
 in 1 Pet. iii. 19, 20, “ By which also He went and 
 preached unto the spirits in prison ; which sometime 
 were disobedient,” &c. But if we grant all these 
 points, they do not serve in any way to connect the 
 devil with the fallen angels; on the other hand, the 
 episode mentioned in Job i. 6-12 and ii. 1-7, would 
 lead us to the opposite conclusion, that he was at 
 large. 
 
 The statements made in the New Testament 
 respecting Angels, Spirits, Thrones, Principalities, 
 Powers, have naturally great weight with us : but it 
 will not suffice to the philosophic inquirer to assume, 
 in the first place, that every thing which we read in 
 the gospel and epistles are to the letter infallibly true, 
 and then to use the assumption as incontrovertible 
 argument. For, though the Apostles were holy men, 
 neither they, their words, their writings nor their actions 
 were indisputably divine. St. Peter was reproved by 
 St. Paul, for halting between Judaism and Christianity; 
 and if we credit the account given in Mark xi. 13, we 
 must conclude that the knowledge possessed by their 
 master and ours, even upon matters of common occur¬ 
 rence, was not so perfect as we are apt to assume; 
 since from the passage in question, it is clear, first, 
 
251 
 
 Angels] that He did not know the time of figs, secondly, that 
 He could not tell till He came to look at it closely that 
 the tree did not bear the fruit He sought. The son of 
 God was also the son of man, and as a man He gained 
 human knowledge by “ hearing and asking questions,” 
 (Luke ii. 40, 46, 52), and by close observation. He 
 spoke too the current language, and adopted many 
 of the current opinions of the day. To cast out 
 devils was then a familiar expression, to intimate 
 the cure of lunacy; and, though we regard all our 
 Saviour’s words with due reverence, we cannot 
 consider them as intended to convey any distinct 
 information respecting the spiritual world. (See 
 Demon, Devil, &c.) 
 
 Anna, is one of the names borne by the Tyrian or Cartha¬ 
 ginian Dido, and still a favourite one amongst 
 ourselves. We have already referred to its probable 
 signification (pp. 81-84), and the association of the 
 name with the Baal of the Phoenicians; and it is to 
 be found in the modern words Annabel, and Anna- 
 bella. The word Anna, so far as I can find, was 
 more popular, in one form or another, amongst the 
 Hebrews and Phoenicians than amongst the Greeks 
 and Romans. In the first we have Annas, Ananias, 
 Anani, Isanna, Susanna, Susianna, &c. Amongst 
 the second we have Hanno and Hannibal; and it is 
 mentioned by Miss Yonge, in her History of Chris¬ 
 tian Names, that Hannibal is a favourite name in the 
 county of Cornwall. If we refer to the Geographical 
 Index, we find that the word has been extensively 
 adopted for places, as well as for persons. We have 
 Annaberg in Austria, Saxony, and Silesia; Anna 
 Cariga, Anna Carty, and Annacb in Ireland; Annaok 
 Water in Scotland; Anna Clay, Annacotty, Anna- 
 
252 
 
 Anna] dorn, Annag assan, Armagh., Annaheg , Annamore , 
 Awrcahill, all in Ireland; the number of Annaghs 
 being eight. There is Aimak in Egypt; and, again 
 to return to Ireland — so strongly marked, both in 
 language and antiquities, by Phoenician evidences — 
 we have Afiwakisha, Annalee , Anna-long, Annamoe, 
 Annamoj. In Scotland we have Annan, Annat; 
 and in Indian parts we have Annatom, Annavaram, 
 Annawutty, Annantagarhi. 
 
 Anthropomorphism. When a Christian hears of any people 
 or nation reverencing Gods whom their own hands 
 have made, his first impulse is to consider them 
 as “ poor benighted heathen,” to think of them 
 with contempt, and to speak of them with pity. 
 Kemembering the forty-fourth chapter of Isaiah, 
 where the makers of graven images are denounced 
 in eloquent terms by the Prophet, he is prepared 
 to execrate all those in whose worship any likeness of 
 the human form holds a place. Greeks and Komans, 
 Papists and Hindoos, Assyrians and Egyptians, are 
 all alike anathematised, because in their temples 
 are to be found statues, of elegant or grotesque 
 forms, ‘ fashioned by art and man’s device.’ With 
 sturdy iconoclastic views, like those which inspired 
 John Knox, he sees in the image the personi¬ 
 fication of devilry, and associates with it every 
 evil thing. In this estimate of those who used 
 ‘ idols,’ as they are called, he is fortified by the 
 clergy, whose propensity to paint in the blackest 
 colours all whose religious faith and practice differ 
 from their own has been conspicuous, from the 
 earliest times to our own. Those who leave their 
 classic studies behind them when they leave school 
 have no means of correcting these impressions, but 
 
253 
 
 Anthropomorphism] those whose reading extends over a 
 larger surface know full well that the use of symbols, 
 which can he seen, is not incompatible with a life 
 of purity, and a piety and reverence for the great 
 Creator, in every respect equal, and in some respects 
 superior, to that which obtains in Great Britain; a 
 subject to which we shall refer at length in our 
 second volume. 
 
 If we proceed to analyse the reason why we so 
 strongly object to a graven image, it is found to 
 consist mainly in the idea enunciated by Isaiah, 
 viz., that it is absurd to present the Almighty to the 
 senses under the gross figure of man, woman, or 
 any mundane being which a human creature has 
 himself conceived. But what, we may ask, is the real 
 difference between pourtraying the features of the 
 Almighty in a visible or tangible form, and depicting 
 them in words which appeal to the ear alone ? The 
 word which stands at the head of this article is 
 defined to signify “ the representation of the Deity 
 under a human form, or with human attributes and 
 affections.” 
 
 Now a representation like this may he effected 
 by the sculptor, the painter, or the writer; the first 
 designs with the chisel, the second with the brush, 
 and the third with the pen; and all are equally 
 anthropomorphists, who describe Him that fills all 
 space, as having the parts of a man. If a prophet 
 chooses to depict the God who sends him as having 
 a head, a nose, ears, eyes, hands, &c., he cannot 
 blame an artist for attempting to realise his de¬ 
 scription. We cannot ourselves impugn a man who 
 describes a vision which he has seen, for attempt¬ 
 ing to figure it on canvas; but we can, when we 
 
254 
 
 Anthropomorphism] see it pourtrayed, demonstrate to our¬ 
 selves how completely the appearance was of terrestrial 
 rather than of celestial origin. As there is, strictly 
 speaking, no difference between the man who is a 
 word-painter, and the man who embodies in stone 
 ideas which the other presents, so there is no 
 essential distinction between an artist and an orator 
 anthropomorphist. 
 
 There is, however, often a strong antagonism 
 between the two, for the one who loves to revel in 
 poetic imagery is disgusted at seeing his ideas reduced 
 to vulgar and ocular prose. Hence the theologian, who 
 indulges in rhetorical figments, pursues with hatred 
 those who endeavour to understand his words, and give 
 to the eye what he intends solely for the ear. Many 
 of the Jewish Rabbis have been quite conscious of this, 
 and have done much to alter in the sacred Scrip¬ 
 tures all those texts which describe the Almighty 
 as a man. Notwithstanding all their care, however, 
 our Bible abounds in anthropomorphisms, and its 
 writings teach us to regard the Almighty as a man, 
 as completely as did the chisel of Phidias, and 
 the brush of Apelles. 
 
 In Gen. i. 26, God is represented as talking 
 either to himself or to others. In Gen. ii., he is 
 represented as having been fatigued with six days’ 
 labour, and requiring rest and refreshment (Exod. 
 xxxi. 17); after this he is said to have planted a 
 garden. In Gen. iii. we find that he suffers from 
 heat, and only walks in the garden in the cool of the 
 day; and that he wants companionship, and calls for 
 Adam. He is then pourtrayed as acquiring informa¬ 
 tion by viva voce examination, and, after having 
 obtained it, he treats his old companions as a father 
 
255 
 
 Anthropomorphism] would his naughty family. Now let me 
 appeal to any of my readers, and ask whether he 
 could or would tolerate a picture representing any 
 one of these scenes. Could he endure to see a com¬ 
 position showing God resting, and being refreshed 
 thereby? or God walking in the garden in the cool 
 of the day ? or God talking to himself, or to his 
 equals, in the words, “Behold the man is become as 
 one of us ” ? (Gen. iii. 22.) I cannot conceive a 
 sensible being who would bear the sight of a painting 
 or sculpture of such a group; and yet we find ortho¬ 
 dox divines of the present day, leaders in the national 
 church, sturdy standard-bearers of the Christian faith, 
 and even some who pretend to the name of profound 
 scholars, asserting that the word-painting in the 
 Bible is of divine origin, and the account literally 
 and strictly true. 
 
 When we examine still farther into the subject, 
 we shall find that our Scriptures are as full of 
 anthropomorphisms as any heathen temple was of 
 chiselled gods, or any Papist cathedral is of painted 
 ones. Take, for example, the account which we 
 have in Job i., where God is represented as holding 
 a sort of court, wherein Satan is present, who twits 
 Him with entertaining a belief in the real goodness 
 of a man. What artist dare depict the idea thus 
 grossly presented to our minds, so that we should see 
 what our ear tolerated; and complete the pair by 
 sketching the parellel scene brought before us in 
 1 Kings xxii. 19-22, wherein God is represented 
 as sitting on a throne, surrounded on His right 
 and left hand with the host of heaven, yet puzzled 
 how to accomplish a certain thing on earth, and 
 finally availing Himself of a lying spirit, &c. ? 
 
256 
 
 Anthropomorphism] Now the Prophet tells us that he saw 
 all these things, and what a man sees with his eyes, 
 his hands, if they be skilful, can pourtray. But if 
 Micaiah, the son of Imlah, had depicted the scene on 
 canvas, and had left a copy thereof to us, should we 
 have had any scruple in assigning a human origin to 
 the vision : and if a modern artist were to show the 
 true reflection of the meaning of any word-painting, 
 should we not be equally aghast at what we have been 
 taught to believe as inspired truth ? 
 
 Let us, in the next place, proceed to examine 
 another picture (Mai. iii. 16), in which God is 
 described as having a memory as weak as that of 
 mortal man, and requiring “a book of remembrance,” 
 in which should be inscribed before His face the 
 names of those who feared Him; and choose for a 
 companion painting a view (Kev. xx. 12), wherein 
 is presented to our mind’s eye a scene similar to 
 that which occurs when a large school breaks up, 
 and the good marks or the bad ones of each boy are 
 counted up. We read of a throne, and some one sitting 
 on it, who had a face, who kept books, examined 
 them, and judged according to what was written 
 therein, not according to his own memory. Now 
 John said that he saw these things; and if he saw 
 them, and tells us so, there is no reason why we 
 should not paint them. Yet who would tolerate a 
 picture in which the Almighty is represented as an 
 individual consulting his day-book and ledger? 
 
 The answer made by all varieties of anthropo- 
 morphists is, that the Almighty, being so much 
 above human comprehension, can only make Himself 
 known to us by using words and ideas which are 
 familiar to man; and that expressions similar to 
 
257 
 
 Anthropomorphism] those we have referred to are conven¬ 
 tional only, or metaphorical. A few minutes’ con¬ 
 sideration, however, will show the weakness of this 
 reply. It assumes, in the first place, that man is a 
 judge of the power of the Almighty, and can safely 
 affirm that a description of Himself cannot be given by 
 Him to man, except in certain words; an idea, the 
 blasphemy of which every thoughtful mind must recog¬ 
 nise. It assumes, in the second place, that prophets 
 like Micaiah and Malachi, and an apostle like St.John, 
 either did deliberately tell falsehoods, and said they 
 saw things which they did not really behold, or that 
 they saw visions similar to those which present them¬ 
 selves to lunatics. In neither of these cases can a 
 real inspiration from the Almighty be credited. 
 
 The weakness of the reply is farther recognised by 
 the rejoinder, that it is much more probable that man 
 would be unable to describe to his fellow-mortals the 
 nature of the God who made them all, except by 
 using human words and ideas, than that God should 
 be so impotent. There is no blasphemy in the 
 statement that the power of man is limited; and 
 it is therefore far more safe to ascribe the faults 
 of anthropomorphism to defective power in the so- 
 called “prophet,” or “messenger of God,” than 
 to attribute want of skill to the Almighty. When¬ 
 ever, therefore, a man declares himself to be on 
 earth the accredited agent of the Creator on high, 
 we must judge of the value of his credentials by 
 the description he gives of the donor of them; 
 and when all his sketches are anthropomorphic, we 
 shall feel disposed to distrust him, as completely as 
 we should disbelieve a man, who, calling himself 
 ambassador plenipotentiary from China to Britain, 
 
 R 
 
258 
 
 Anthropomorphism] brings credentials written in English, 
 and only speaks our mother tongue. 
 
 When once the good sense of an inquirer begins 
 fully to appreciate the significance of anthropo¬ 
 morphism, he naturally investigates the motives 
 which have given it so very prominent a place 
 in the sacred writings and utterances of all nations. 
 These he readily finds in the exigencies of the 
 priesthood. Without the fiction that the Almighty 
 heard and spoke in reply to a special class only, 
 the hierarchy could not exist. They feign therefore 
 to have divine powers, a pretension readily conceded 
 by those who are unable or unwilling to think for 
 themselves. By this division of labour, the ecclesi¬ 
 astic becomes as implicitly trusted as the lawyer 
 and the physician. But as there is in all edu¬ 
 cated men a propensity to search out the foundation 
 of the claim to superiority which is advanced by 
 professional men generally, so there is in some 
 a strong determination to examine the claims of 
 those who assume the power to dictate to the 
 Almighty what He is to do with mortals, when 
 they become immortal. 
 
 As an Englishman is permitted to select the 
 “ denomination ” which he joins, and to accept or 
 reject, at the present time, the words of any one 
 who declares himself to be a messenger from God; 
 so he is equally justified in inquiring into the 
 credentials of those who lived in days gone by. 
 Should he then find them to be human beings, who, 
 though professing to be ambassadors plenipotentiary 
 from heaven, can only talk the language of earth, 
 he will then as certainly distrust them as he would 
 “ a medium ” who brought a message to him from 
 
259 
 
 Anthropomorphism] Homer, composed and written in modern 
 English, and speaking of the Electric Telegraph. 
 
 Guided by the principle of impartial sifting of 
 evidence, and taking Anthropomorphism as a text, 
 and dividing the parts of man as conveniently as we 
 can, we shall find the following evidences of human 
 invention in the sacred Scriptures. 
 
 A head is attributed to the Almighty, Ps. lx. 7, 
 and cviii. 8; e. g., “ Ephraim is the strength of my 
 head; ” and in the same passage we are told that 
 God has ‘ a washpot * and wears ‘ a shoe.’ In 
 Isaiah lix. 17, the head is associated with a helmet, 
 and in the same part we read of a breastplate, 
 garments, and a cloak, God throughout all the 
 passage being described as a * man of war ’ (comp. 
 Exod. xv. 8). We find too that the Lord saw, and 
 was displeased, that no man came forward, and so 
 He bared His own arm, and became furious as a 
 conqueror, Is. lxiii. 6. In Rev. xix. 12, the head 
 is associated with many crowns, with fiery eyes, 
 bloody clothes, and a written name which none but 
 He could decipher. 
 
 Nostrils, nose, &c., are attributed to the Almighty 
 by David, Psalm xviii. 8, xxii. 9, “ There went up 
 a smoke out of His nostrils, and fire went out of 
 His mouth, which kindled coals.” “ He rode upon 
 a cherub,” &c. They have too a blasting breath, 
 e. g., “ the blast of the breath of His nostrils.” 
 2 Sam. xxii. 16, Ps. xviii. 15; “by the blast of 
 God they perish, by the breath of His nostrils are 
 they consumed,” Job iv. 9. Compare this with the 
 description of Leviathan, Job xli. 1-34. In Isaiah 
 lxv. 5, we find that His nose is affected as a man’s 
 would be by the smoke from fire, whenever He 
 
260 
 
 Anthropomorphism] finds any one who considers himself 
 holier than his neighbours, and who sacrifices in 
 gardens and builds altars of brick. In Levit. xxvi. 
 81, we are told that the nostrils could be so closed 
 that the smell of sweet savours should not be recog¬ 
 nised ; and in Gen. viii. 21, and Ezekiel xx. 41, 
 we find them enjoying a delicious odour. In Gen. 
 viii. 21, God is said to smell a sweet savour, and 
 to like it so much, that He ‘said in His heart,’ I 
 will not again curse the ground, &c. 
 
 The eyes, and the eye of God, are referred to 
 repeatedly, of which we see examples, Ezra v. 5, 
 “ The eye of their God was upon the elders of the 
 Jews;” Deut. xxxii. 10, “He kept him as the apple 
 of His eye;” Psalm xxxiii. 18, “The eye of the 
 Lord is upon them that fear Him,” xciv. 4, “ Shall 
 not He see?” Prov. xv. 8, “The eyes of the Lord 
 are in every place beholding;” and “ seeing,” “look¬ 
 ing,” and “ regarding,” are constantly met with as 
 actions of the Almighty. 
 
 The ears are referred to as constantly as the 
 eyes; as a specimen, we may adduce Numb. xiv. 28, 
 “As ye have spoken in mine ears;” Ezek. viii. 18, 
 “Mine eye shall not spare, and though they cry in 
 mine ears I will not hear them ; ” Psalm xxxiv. 15, 
 “ The eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and 
 His ears are open unto their cry.” 
 
 The mouth , and speech , are referred to in passages 
 almost innumerable, of which we may cite a few: 
 Numb. xii. 8, “ With him will I speak mouth to 
 mouth, and the similitude of the Lord shall he 
 behold;” Lam. iii. 38, “Out of the mouth of the 
 most High; ” Matthew iv. 4, “ Word which pro¬ 
 ceeded out of the mouth of God; ” Prov. ii. 6, 
 
261 
 
 Anthkopomorphism] “ Out of his mouth cometh knowledge 
 and understanding.” 
 
 The hands are also repeatedly alluded to, of 
 which the following are examples ; Exod. ix. 3, “ The 
 hand of the Lord is upon thy cattle; ” Numb. xi. 23, 
 “ Is the Lord’s hand waxed short ? ” Josh. iv. 24, 
 “ That the hand of the Lord is mighty; ” Jud. ii. 15, 
 “ The hand of the Lord was against them ; ” 1 Sam. 
 y. 6, “ The hand of the Lord was heavy on them of 
 Ashdod;” Psalm lxxiv. 11, “ Why withdrawest thou 
 thy hand, even thy right hand ? pluck it out of thy 
 bosom; ” Psalm lxxv. 8, “ In the hand of the Lord 
 there is a cup, and the wine is red,” &c.; Isaiah li. 
 17, “ Which hast drunk at the hand of the Lord the 
 cup of His fury; ” Jer. li. 7, “ Babylon hath been a 
 golden cup in the Lord’s hand; ” Ezek. iii. 14, “ The 
 hand of the Lord was on me; ” Luke i. 66, “ The 
 hand of the Lord was with him;” Acts xiii. 11, “ The 
 hand of the Lord is upon thee. 
 
 The feet are likewise referred to; Lam. i. 15, 
 “ The Lord hath trodden under foot mighty men; ” 
 Psalm lxxvii. 19, “ Thy footsteps are not known ; ” 
 lxxiv. 3, “ Lift up thy feet;” Isaiah vi. 2, “With 
 twain He covered his face, and with twain He covered 
 His feet;” Rev. i. 15, “His feet like unto fine brass.” 
 
 The bosom is also referred to; Psalm lxxiv. 11, 
 and John i. 18, “ The Son which is in the bosom of 
 the Father.” 
 
 The back is spoken of; Isaiah xxxviii. 17, “ Thou 
 hast cast my sins behind thy back; ” Jerem. xviii. 17, 
 “ I will show thee the back and not the face ; ” Exod. 
 xxxiii. 23, “ Thou shalt see my back parts.” 
 
 Not only is God represented with the parts of a 
 man, as those whom we call ‘ heathen ’ represented Him 
 
262 
 
 Anthropomorphism] in statues, but He is also pourtrayed as 
 being subject to human passions. We are very severe 
 in our remarks upon the Greeks, who pretended that 
 Jupiter, Apollo, Neptune, Venus, and Juno had such 
 weaknesses as love and hate and jealousy, that they 
 were partial in their likes and dislikes, and took 
 opposite sides as they were said to do at the siege 
 of Troy; yet we tolerate complacently the description 
 of the writers of our own Bible, who depict the 
 Almighty as loving and hating, indulging in revenge, 
 making mistakes and repenting, being ignorant until 
 told of a matter, enjoying such a mundane exercise as 
 wrestling (Gen. xxxii. 24-30), in which, however, he 
 was not equal to a being of his own creation ; and 
 still farther, as cohabiting with “ the virgin,” Matth. 
 i. 18, 20; Luke i. 85. (See Mary.) A few quota¬ 
 tions will suffice to show how intensely human the 
 Creator has been represented, by those who declared 
 themselves to be his messengers. 
 
 Anger is referred to; Numb. xxv. 4, “ The fierce 
 anger of the Lord; ” Deut. xxix. 20, “ The anger of 
 the Lord shall smoke;” 2 Kings xxiv. 20, “ Through 
 the anger of the Lord it came to pass ; ” Gen. xviii. 
 30, “ Let not the Lord be angry; ” Psalm vii. 11, 
 “ God is angry with the wicked every day; ” Isaiah 
 xii. 1, “ Though thou wast angry with me; ” Jud. ii. 
 12, “And provoked the Lord to anger;” 2 Kings 
 xxi. 15, “And they have provoked me to anger;” 
 Isaiah i. 4, “ They have provoked the Holy One of 
 Israel to anger; ” Jer. xxxii. 30, “ The children of 
 Israel have only provoked me to anger.” 
 
 We have hatred attributed to the Almighty; 
 thus, Deut. vii. 10, “ He will not be slack to him 
 that hateth Him, He will repay him to his face; ” 
 
268 
 
 Anthropomorphism] Isaiah lxi. 8, “I hate robbery for burnt 
 offering; ” Deut. i. 27, “ Because the Lord bated 
 us; ” Jerem. xii. 8, “ Therefore have I hated it; ” 
 Hos. ix. 15, “ There I hated them, I will love them 
 no more;” Mai. i. 2, 8, “Jacob I have loved, but 
 Esau have I hated.” In this passage it will be 
 noticed that a preference was shown ere the twins 
 were born, which bears comparison with Jupiter’s love 
 for the unborn offspring of Semele, which he regarded 
 with such affection as to keep him in his thigh. 
 
 Again, we have the Almighty described as being 
 jealous, just as the Greeks depicted Juno and Apollo. 
 Exod. xx. 5, “ I the Lord thy God am a jealous 
 God;” Deut. xxxii. 16, “They provoked Him to 
 jealousy with strange gods; ” Josh. xxiv. 19, “He is 
 a jealous God;” Joel ii. 18, “ Then will the Lord be 
 jealous for His land;” Nahum i. 2, “God is jealous, 
 and the Lord revengeful; ” Zech. i. 14, “ I am jealous 
 for Jerusalem; ” Ezekiel xvi. 88, “ I will give thee 
 blood in fury and jealousy.” Upon this presumed 
 weakness of the Almighty, we find Moses playing, as 
 it were, repeatedly; in Ex. xxxii. 12, the lawgiver 
 pleads for the people, and urges as a reason, “ Where¬ 
 fore should the Egyptians speak, and say,” &c.; and 
 again in Numb. xiv. 13-16, the same argument is 
 put still more strongly, “ Then the Egyptians shall 
 hear it, and they will tell it to the inhabitants of this 
 land, and the nations which have heard the fame of 
 thee will speak, saying, Because the Lord was not 
 able to bring this people unto the land which He 
 sware unto them, therefore He hath slain them in 
 the wilderness ; ” and so far from appearing to resent 
 this style of intercession, we are told, ver. 20, “ The 
 Lord said, I have pardoned according to thy word.” 
 
264 
 
 Anthropomorphism] The same idea is even more forcibly 
 expressed, Deut. xxxii. 26-27, “I would make the 
 remembrance of them to cease from among men, 
 were it not that I feared the wrath of the enemy, lest 
 their adversaries should behave themselves strangely, 
 and should say, Our high hand and not the Lord 
 (marginal reading) hath done all this.” 
 
 Even the so-called enlightened Christianity of the 
 Anglican church perpetuates a similar notion in her 
 worship, and appeals to the Almighty as if He were 
 a man to be piqued to jealousy by such trivial con¬ 
 siderations as affect mortal men; e. g., we have in 
 the morning service, “ 0 Lord, arise, help us and 
 deliver us for thine honour; ” then comes a recitation 
 of the deeds of which we have heard and read of God 
 in the old times, and this is followed by the prayer 
 that the Almighty would arise and deliver us “ for 
 His name’s sake.” We can well understand a Jewish 
 prophet, like Ezekiel and others, speaking and writing 
 as if the Great Creator was jealous respecting “His 
 name, His great name ” (Ezek. xx. 9, xxxvi. 28), 
 more than about Himself, as if orthodoxy consisted 
 in a cognomen. But to the finer sense of the present 
 generation, to address the same style of representa¬ 
 tion to the Almighty, as we should to a mercantile 
 firm of long duration and established worth, seems 
 to savour of blasphemy. A man would not scruple 
 to say to a partner of such a company, “You must 
 help me out of my difficulties, or your own names 
 will be dishonoured ;” but he would pause for a long 
 time ere he addressed the Lord of the universe in 
 such terms. 
 
 It is to be hoped, when our Liturgy is purged 
 from the many blots which disfigure it, that an 
 
265 
 
 Anthropomorphism] anthropomorphism so offensive as the 
 one indicated will be removed. 
 
 We find evidence of ignorance attributed to the 
 Almighty, and the necessity for asking questions, in 
 Gen. iii. 9, iv. 9, and very conspicuously in Gen. 
 xviii. 21, “ I will go down now, and see whether they 
 have done altogether according to the cry of it which 
 is come unto me, and if not I will know; ” see also 
 1 Kings xxii. 20-28, and Job i. 7, and ii. 2, in 
 which Satan is asked about his doings. 
 
 We find the Almighty represented as laughing , 
 like a coarse Eastern potentate, at the discomfiture of 
 enemies; in Psalm ii. 4, “ He that sitteth in the 
 heavens shall laugh, the Lord shall have them in 
 derision ; ” and again, lix. 8, “ Thou, 0 Lord, shalt 
 laugh at them, thou shalt have all the heathen in 
 derision.” 
 
 Love is attributed to the Creator in passages 
 innumerable, from which we select a few; Jer. ii. 2, 
 “ I remember thee, the kindness of thy youth, the 
 love of thine espousals, when thou wentest after me; ” 
 xxxi. 8, “ I have loved thee with an everlasting love, 
 therefore, with lovingkindness have I drawn thee 
 Ezek. xvi. 8, “ Thy time was the time of love, and I 
 spread my skirt 24 over thee, and covered thy nakedness, 
 and entered into a covenant with thee, and thou 
 becamest mine, and I decked thee with ornaments,” 
 &c.; Mai. i. 2, “ I have loved you, saith the Lord; ” 
 Deut. vii. 7, “ God did not set His love upon you,” 
 &c.; Psalm xlvii. 4, “ The excellency of Jacob, 
 whom He loved.” 
 
 Again, we find a common human failing, which is 
 disallowed in the community of modern Quakers, 
 
 24 For the import of this phrase, see Ruth iii. 9, et seq. 
 
266 
 
 Anthropomorphism] attributed to the Omniscient, namely, 
 “ change of mind,” and alteration of purpose, or, as 
 we designate it, ‘ repentance.’ In Gen. vi. 6, we are 
 told that “ it repented the Lord that He had made 
 man, it grieved Him at His heart.” 
 
 But there is by no means uniformity in this 
 anthropomorphic attribute amongst the sacred writ¬ 
 ers; for in Ex. xxxii. 14, we read, “ The Lord repented 
 of the evil which He thought to do unto His people; ” 
 and in 1 Sam. xv. 29, “ The strength of Israel will 
 not repent, for He is not a man that He should 
 repent; ” Psalm cxvi. 45, “ He repented, according 
 to the multitude of His mercies; ” Jonah iii. 10, 
 “ God repented of the evil that He had said; ” Jer. 
 xviii. 8, “If a nation turn, I will repent of the evil.” 
 See again, 1 Kings xxi. 21-29. 
 
 There yet remains to be noticed the manner in 
 which those terrible human weaknesses, revenge and 
 vengeance, are attributed by mortal beings to the 
 Lord who made the universe. See, for example, 
 Exod. xx. 5, where we are told that He will visit the 
 iniquities of the fathers upon three generations of 
 their unborn children; Deut. vii. 10, “ He repay - 
 eth them that hate Him, to their face to destroy 
 them,” &c.; 1 Sam. xv. 2, 8, we find “ Thus saith 
 the Lord of Hosts, I remember that which Amalek did 
 to Israel (some four hundred years before); how he 
 laid wait for him,” &c. “Now go and smite Amalek, 
 and utterly destroy all that they have, slay man and 
 woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and 
 ass.” Did ever a more terrible mandate pass from 
 the lips of the most blood-thirsty Eastern tyrant; and 
 must we, on the peril of our salvation hereafter, 
 believe that this injunction came from the Creator 
 
267 
 
 Anthropomorphism] rather than from the mouth of the 
 cruel-minded Samuel, who slew in cold blood the 
 king of Amalek, as ruthlessly as Jehu smote the 
 family of Ahab, and as Nebuchadnezzar slew the sons 
 of Zedekiah before his eyes ? 2 Kings xxv. 7; see, 
 again, Isaiah xlvii. 8, “I will take vengeance;” 
 lxiii. 4, “ The day of vengeance is in mine heart; ” 
 Kom. xii. 9, “ Vengeance is mine,” &c. 
 
 Now in no single instance that we have brought 
 forward would any British Christian tolerate a statue 
 or picture, in which the Almighty Father was depicted 
 as a human being giving way to worldly passions; yet 
 when the ear alone is appealed to, we not only tolerate 
 the idea, but worship it so lovingly, as to persecute 
 with the direst hate any individual who does not fall 
 down before it in prostration. Of its worthlessness, 
 however, any one may readily convince himself, who 
 propounds for his own consideration the questions, 
 Can the God who affirms, <f I am the Lord, I change 
 not” (Mai. iii. 6), be described by different indi¬ 
 viduals as constantly varying, unless those persons 
 were giving utterance to their own human conceptions 
 of what a God should be, and in this differed 
 amongst themselves ? Is it not more consonant with 
 sound philosophy and logical deduction to believe 
 that God has been clothed with human attributes 
 by man, rather than that the Lord of all creation 
 puts on the contemptible dress worn by mortals, 
 who live in one of the smallest of the worlds which 
 He has made ? 
 
 It is clear that an opinion similar to our own 
 has been held by many of the Jewish redactors of 
 the Hebrew text, and the translators of the original 
 into other languages, who, on recognising offensive 
 
268 
 
 Anthropomorphism] anthropomorphisms in the Biblical 
 account of the Almighty, have frequently tried to soften 
 them down, or to obliterate them altogether. These 
 suppressions are abundantly noticed by Ginshurg, in 
 his Versions of the Bible, from which we extract two 
 very striking examples. In Gen. xviii. 22, * the 
 original ’ text runs thus: “ But Jehovah still stood 
 before Abraham; ” and we can recognise, from verse 
 88, that the oneness of the story requires this con¬ 
 struction ; for therein we are told, that as soon as the 
 Lord left off communing with Abraham, “ He went 
 His way.” Now, to suppose thatElohim, or Jehovah, 
 would stand before a man, shocked the sacred jealousy 
 of the scribes; consequently they so changed the 
 expression as to make it read, “ Abraham stood before 
 the Lord.” This is one of the eighteen instances 
 mentioned by Ginshurg (Kitto’s Cyclopaedia, s. v. 
 Scribes, col. iv.) in which the Sopherim altered the 
 sacred text to remove offensive expressions. 
 
 Another very remarkable change has been adopted 
 elsewhere, to remove an anthropomorphism of the 
 grossest kind. We have already referred to the occa¬ 
 sional coarseness of the language of the prophet Isaiah, 
 who does not scruple to use metaphors which in their 
 nakedness would be intolerable (e. g . iii. 17, vii. 20). 
 We cannot wonder, then, that such as the following 
 should he toned town. In chap, lxiii. 6, the original 
 text carries the meaning, “ I (the Lord) will vomit 
 the people in mine anger, and spue them out in my 
 fury.” The words used being those which are applied 
 to men who are sick from over-eating, and defile 
 themselves with the force and copiousness of their 
 ejections. To get over this, a trifling alteration is 
 
269 
 
 Anthropomorphism] made in the mode of writing the objec¬ 
 tionable parts, and they are then rendered, “ I will 
 tread down the people in mine anger, and make 
 them drunk in my fury.” The Septuagint, not 
 altogether liking to adopt so false a metaphor, as 
 punishing a nation by making it drunk, thought 
 it best to suppress the second clause of the verse 
 altogether. 
 
 Surely the simple statement of facts like these 
 should serve to wean us from that blind reverence 
 of the identical words of Scripture in which most of 
 us have been educated; they should also serve to 
 demonstrate the necessity for a revision of the sacred 
 books, such as took place amongst the Jews after 
 their return from Babylon. There is scarcely a head 
 of a household who does not, whilst reading prayers 
 in his family, wish that there were “ expurgated” 
 editions of the Bible, as there are of Shakspeare. 
 We have actually heard it said, that a selection of 
 certain Scriptural stories, with pictorial illustrations, 
 would make a book which every magistrate would 
 condemn unhesitatingly as obscene. Ought we not 
 then to determine boldly to wipe such a reproach 
 from amongst us, and cease to allow our children 
 to read with impunity, in a diluted form, that which, 
 if it were concentrated, our laws would prohibit and 
 destroy ? 
 
 Ana-arba-il, an Assyrian proper name, denoting “ Ana and 
 the four great Gods .” 25 
 
 26 As a general rale, it has been found more convenient to postpone the 
 non-Hebrew words — Phoenician, Assyrian, Vedic, &c.,—until the Hebrew proper 
 names have been gone through. The inconvenience to the reader is obviated by 
 a copious index. 
 
270 
 
 Anab, a Median God. 
 
 Anaku, Assyrian, meaning “I am.” 
 
 Anand, Assyrian, “Joy,” “sexual pleasure,” “happiness,” 
 “delight.” 
 
 Anat, a Phen. Goddess. Greek Anaitis. See Vogue, Phen. 
 Ins. p. 41. 
 
 Anem, M (1 Chron. vi. 78), may signify “ Two fountains;” 
 hut Anim is an equivalent word, which means “the 
 strong ones,” plural of aun = the triple phallus. 
 The place Anim was also called En gannim, ‘the 
 fountain of the garden ; ’ and a garden is an euphem¬ 
 ism for a woman. 
 
 Aner, W (Gen. xiv. 18). This word is a variant of 
 
 anar , “ he pushes, or drives, sprouts, or grows.” 
 The name was borne by a Canaanite chief, brother 
 to Eshcol and Mamre. Gesenius suggests a resem¬ 
 blance to the Greek otvyp, aner, ‘ a man.’ 
 
 Ani, Anochi, “I.” The personal pronouns are 
 nearly the same in Egyptian, Hebrew, Assyrian, and 
 Phoenician. “ I find that in the old Hamitic lan¬ 
 guage Ani meant ‘ heaven,’ and therefore I conjecture 
 that Ani and Anu meant the same.” (Talbot, in 
 Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature, 
 vol. vii., part 2, p. 368.) 
 
 Aniam (1 Chron. vii. 19). Probably, “ I am the 
 
 mother,” being a compound of ani, I, and by 
 — em, mother. 
 
 Anim, b'N (Josh. xv. 50). “ Springs,” a variant of Anem, 
 
 which see. 
 
 Anna. See ante, pp. 81-84. Anna kinni, Babylonian, 
 ‘ worthy of grace.’ 
 
 Anna seems the equivalent in some places to annus, “ the 
 year.” 
 
271 
 
 Anna, Sanscrit, “ food; ” annada, “ giving food ; ” annadya , 
 “ proper food.” 
 
 Anna, an Assyrian deity. 
 
 Annedotus, = “ Given by Anna,” who was an Assyrian 
 as well as a Phoenician deity. This was an epithet 
 of Oannes, who himself bears a name composed 
 of Hoa and Anu. The word has a familiar 
 sound to our ear, for we still use Anna as a 
 proper name ; and we have still dote, dotal, 
 dotation, from the Latin datus, all having the 
 meaning of giving. The name above is Chal- 
 dsean. 
 
 Anobret, = “ Beloved by Anu,” was a Phoenician name. 
 Like the preceding, it sounds familiar to the 
 ear; there are many Anna-Bretts in England. 
 The meaning of Brett or Brit, Brith or Berith, 
 was ‘ feasting with,’ or * in covenant with ; ’ 
 hence, probably, come Bright, Bride, Bridson, 
 Byrth, Perth, Peret, Pritt, Pratt ; possibly 
 
 Britain; e. g., Ano-bret, Bret-anno, Brit-anna; also 
 Brut-us. 
 
 Anu, Assyrian, any God or Goddess. 
 
 Anub, 2-tty (1 Ch. iv. 8). A variant of anab, “ he is 
 thick or round.” 
 
 An, Yedic, “Air,” “to blow,” “to breathe.” 
 
 Ana, „ “Mother.” 
 
 Anas „ “ A burden.” (Onus ?) 
 
 Andhra, „ Name of a royal Indian family. (Compare 
 Andrew.) 
 
 Anga, „ “ A limb,” “ membrum virile.” 
 
 Angada, „ “A bracelet.” (Engedi?) 
 
 Angutiya „ “A finger ring.” 
 
 Anj, ,/ “ To shine,” “to be beautiful.” 
 
272 
 
 Anka, Vedic, “A hook,” “mark or cipher,” “an 
 
 anchor,” from ankh , to take 
 hold. It is one of the symbols 
 of Siva. 
 
 Ankura, „ “A sprout, or intumescence,” “ an erection” ? 
 
 Anna, „ “ Plenty.” 
 
 Ansa, „ Name of a deity. 
 
 Ancus, an ancient Italian Name. (Compare the Scotch 
 Angus.) 
 
 Anunit, “the Sun at noon,” also “the Babylonian Goddess,” 
 who is addressed as “ Great lady ” (billat rabiti), 
 daughter of Sen, the moon God. 
 
 Anutagil, an Assyrian name, meaning “ attached to Anu.” 
 
 Aodh, Sanscrit, “ The hand or power.” 
 
 Apharsachites, (Ez. y. 6). Etymology doubtful. 
 
 Aphek, (Jos. xii. 18), “ Strength.” It is doubtful whether 
 this epithet has not reference to On, rather than to the 
 particular place being fortified. The town was also 
 called Aphekah (Jos. xv. 58), probably ‘the strong 
 Jah.’ It was a city of the tribe of Asher. 
 
 Apple. There is much mystery surrounding this fruit, or 
 rather the Tappuach, which is translated “ apple ” 
 in our Bibles. As there was a Beth Tappuach, or 
 a temple dedicated to the apple, we presume that it 
 had some mystic meaning, which the following 
 remarks will assist in discovering:— 
 
 1. The word is supposed to refer to the citron, 
 which includes the orange, rather than to our apple. 
 (See Kitto’s Cyclodcedia, s. v. Tappuach.) 
 
 2. The citron and palm tree, i. e., the fruit of one 
 and a branch of the other, were borne by every Jew 
 at the Feast of Tabernacles. The same appear on 
 some old Samaritan coins. (Kitto, l. c.) 
 
278 
 
 Apple] 8. The shape of the citron, or lemon, resembles 
 that of the pine cone, which is 
 borne in the hands of the Assyrian 
 priests, who present it to the 
 mystic grove, the symbol of the 
 female. The same priest, I must 
 also remark, carries a basket, 
 emblem of the scrotum, or purse, 
 or “store,’’ in which the testes lie. 
 
 4. It was with such a fruit 
 that Eve was tempted. 
 
 5. The fruit had an amorous 
 significance. See Song of Solomon 
 ii. 2, 5, “ Comfort me with apples, 
 for I am sick of love.” 26 
 
 6. We also see it associated with the palm tree in 
 the Song of Songs vii. 8. It was so associated with it 
 in the hands of the faithful at the feast of tabernacles; 
 who appear to have brandished the two, conjointly, 
 upwards, as I have seen folks shake two turnips 
 and a carrot at the carnival in Rome. (See Kitto’s 
 Cyclodcedia, s. v . Tabernacles, Feast of.) 
 
 7. We see it associated with love and parturition : 
 “ Under this apple tree I won thy heart. Here thy 
 mother travailed. Here labouring, she gave thee 
 birth.” (Song of Songs viii. 5, Ginsburg’s trans¬ 
 lation, pp. 186, 187.) 
 
 8. It is associated with the fig, the pomegranate, 
 and the palm, in Joel i. 12. 
 
 26 Fig. 81 is copied from a drawing by Lajard (Sur le Culte de Venus). The 
 statuette is of silver, and of unknown origin. It depicts Venus in conjunction with 
 the apple and the fish. In the original, the device of the staff, on which the hand 
 is rested, is strongly suggestive of the phallus, being double at one end and single at 
 another. This cannot, however, be shown in the front view. From the fish’s mouth 
 flows an abundant stream. The allegory is obvious. 
 
 S 
 
274 
 
 Apple] 9. The ancients, and many in modern days, have 
 entertained the belief that the shape of anything in 
 the vegetable world is an indication of its utility 
 in diseases of those organs which have a similar 
 shape. 
 
 10. We have abundant evidence, in ancient and 
 modern times, that certain organs have received 
 their names from things resembling them. Thus, the 
 fig leaf is still an euphemism for the parts which it 
 was intended to hide ; whilst the fig itself was 
 intended to typify the virgin womb, and the pome¬ 
 granate the full one, ?. e., the female element in 
 creation. 
 
 11. The palm tree and the pine were emblematic 
 of the active male organ. Putting all these considera¬ 
 tions together, I conclude— 
 
 12. That the citron represented the testis, without 
 which the tree would be sapless. Compare this 
 conclusion with the Hebrew word allied, which 
 signifies “to swell up, to he tumid;” and which 
 closely resembles our own word apple, and the 
 German apfel . 37 
 
 27 Since writing the above, I have met with the following passage, which 
 deserves, I think, to be quoted entire, as it accords closely with the view 
 which I have adopted: “Chez tous les peuples de l’antiquite la pomme 
 fut un embleme de generation, tant a cause de sa forme, qui est ronde 
 comme celle du monde cree, qu’ a cause de ses qualities reputees aphrodisiaques 
 et de l’epoque de sa maturite, l’automne, saison nefaste qui passait pour etre 
 favorable a la descente des ames dans les votes de la generation et au developpement 
 de la vie dans les semence confiees a la terre. Aussi voyons nous l’equinox autumnal 
 caracterise, non seulment par des pommes ou par un pommier charge de ses 
 fruits, mais aussi par un insecte venimeuse de qui l’on a pu dire : Habet in cauda 
 venenum, et qui jouait un grand role dans les rites instituees a Hierapolis en 
 l’honneur de la Deesse de Syrie. Cette remarque me conduit a supposer que 
 dans les langues de l’Asie occidentale les mots qui signifiaient une pomme, 
 durent avoir une seconde aceeption que j’appellerai philosophique. S’il est permis 
 de meler le sacre un profane, la Bible ne nous montre-t-elle pas Satan, sous la 
 forme du mauvais serpent conseillant a Eve de cueiller et de manger la pomme, 
 
275 
 
 Ar (Num. xxi. 15), a city of the Moabites; if spelled with 
 Ain , its signification is “an enemy.” We presume, 
 therefore, that the true etymology is "IK, denoting 
 “Strong man,” “hero,” “giant,” particularly the 
 supreme Baal, in the mythology of the Phoenicians; 
 hence in compound proper names of deities, persons, 
 localities. Fiirst. 
 
 Ara, KIN (1 Chron. vii. 38), “He is strong, powerful, or 
 courageous;” compare ’'ApY}$, ‘ the strong one,’ ‘the 
 hero,’ Mars—also our own name Harry. 
 
 Arab (Jos. xv. 52), as with Aleph, signifies “to knot,” 
 “weave,” “lie in wait,” “ambush;” as with 
 Ain, it signifies “ to mix,” “ exchange,” “ become 
 surety,” “to pledge,” “to be sweet,” “to set, as 
 the Sun,” “to be arid, sterile, or dry,” “to be 
 white or glistening,” “ a very nasty sort of fly,” 
 “ Arabia,” “ the woof,” “ strangers,” “ evening,” 
 “ a raven,” according to the difference of pointing. 
 
 Arad, (Num. xxi. 1). Thus spelled, the word signifies 
 ‘ place of fugitives ; ’ a very unlikely cognomen for a 
 king. It is more likely that the Ain has been substi¬ 
 tuted for Aleph by the modern redactors of the text, 
 who have thought it improper that a Canaanite king 
 should hear the same name as a son of Benjamin, a 
 Hebrew patriarch; it is, probably, identical with Ard, 
 which see. 
 
 fruit de l’arbre du bien et du mal ? D’autre part, les poetes posterieurs a Homere 
 ne transforment-ils pas en un brilliant episode un des dogmes du culte de la 
 Venus Asiatique, lorsqu’ils nous raconte que la Discorde pour avenger de l’oubli 
 des Dieux, lan 5 a au milieu du banquet celeste une pomme avec 1’inscription a 
 la plus belle. Cette meme pomme ne nous la montrent-ils pas ensuite offerte a 
 Venus sur la mont Ida par un Phrygien, le berger Paris? Enfin dans la langue 
 latine derivee des langues de 1’ Asie, comme tous les idiomes d’ Europe, le mot 
 malum , mal, n’est-il pas le meme que le mot malum , pomme, identique avec 
 le grec fxrjkov ? ” Lajard, Sur le Culte de Venus , pp. 213, 21.4, 
 
276 
 
 A •r ad , Assyrian, ‘ a slave, or servant; ’ variants of this are 
 Ard, Ardu, Abd, Abed, Obed, &c. 
 
 Arad-asha, “ Servant of Asha,” an Assyrian cognomen. 
 
 Arah, nix (1 Chron. vii. 89). “He wanders,” i. e., the sun, 
 or some planet. 
 
 Aram, (Hen. x< 22), is closely connected with Ram, 
 “ high.” There is an old verb, aram, the 
 
 signification of which is “to swell up,” “to exalt 
 oneself; ” hence mountains, &c. It is also equivalent 
 to aram, “to uncover, or be naked,” also “to 
 be high.” 
 
 Aran, (Gen. xxxvi. 28), signifies “a wild goat,” “power,” 
 “ strength; ” pointed as Oren , the same letters signify 
 “ a beam,” “ a pole,” “ a cedar,” “ a pine, or mast.” 
 The name has a phallic meaning, and was borne 
 by one of the descendants of Esau. (Compare with 
 Araunah and Aaron.) 
 
 Ararat, BYik (Gen. viii. 4), comes, I think, from “nx, or, 
 “light,” and rathach, = ^ rat, “to boil up;” 
 and might mean “ bursting up into light.” The 
 mountain usually represented by that name is, I 
 believe, of volcanic origin ; and though there is no 
 record of any eruption, a fearfully prolonged earth¬ 
 quake shook the vicinity in 1840. (See Kitto’s 
 Cyclodcedia of Biblical Literature, sub voce.) 
 
 Aras, “ To erect,” “to build,” “a nuptial bed,” &c., 
 “to espouse a woman,” “to long for union.” This 
 word appears to be closely allied with ’'epoo$, the Greek 
 God of love and desire, and y A pvj$, the equivalent to 
 Mars. The idea of manly vigour and bodily strength, 
 impetuosity in fight and ardency in love, ever seems to 
 have been present to the minds of the ancients. Its 
 connexion with ari, “ a lion,” will be at once 
 apparent, as well as with the Sanscrit ary a, “ noble.” 
 
277 
 
 Araunah, (2 Sam. xxiv. 16) ; also spelled Ornah, 
 
 ; Ornan, 1^7 t (1 Chron. xxi. 15) ; and Araniah, 
 (2 Sam. xxiv. 18, marginal reading). 
 
 This cognomen was borne by a Jebusite, in the 
 time of King David; and the various contrivances 
 which have been adopted to prevent the readers or 
 hearers of the word recognising in it the sacred 
 fij, Jah, of the Hebrews, shows how very eager the 
 redactors of the sacred writings were to obliterate the 
 idea that the holy name was ever borne by a heathen 
 Jebusite. Perhaps they were more particularly de¬ 
 sirous to dislocate jah, from its union with such 
 a word as px, “he stretches,” or “ extends,” “he is 
 firm, or hard,” “a firm, hard tree,” 4 cedar,’ ‘pine,’ 
 or 4 mast,’ 44 power or strength,” according as it is 
 pointed, as aren or oren. Now, this gives to the 
 cognomen in question the meaning, “Jah is firm, or 
 strong;” and the idea intended to be conveyed in 
 “ strength ” is indicated by a cognate word, signifying 
 a “ pine tree,” or “ mast,” both of which were sym¬ 
 bolic of the male organ. 
 
 For a long time I was under the impression that 
 the name Jah, the common form in which the 
 tetragrammaton appears in composition, was never 
 connected with what may be called sensual ideas. 
 This belief was shaken to its foundation after the 
 perusal of Dr. Ginsburg’s work (op, cit.), from which 
 it is apparent, that systematic “ correction” of ancient 
 texts has been made to fit them for modern ideas. 
 The word before us is a very striking illustration of 
 his researches. We also learn from it that 4 Jehovah ’ 
 was not a name of God revealed only to the Jews; 
 and that to some votaries, at least, Jah was phallic, 
 like EL 
 
278 
 
 Arba, V?*?*? (Gen. xxiii. 2). Respecting this name, Fiirst 
 remarks, that it signifies “ giant-Baal, or Baal 
 Hercules , the proper name of the progenitors of the 
 giants in Phoenician and Babylonian mythology, also 
 the founder of the oldest cities; ” and he considers 
 that the name is abridged from ar-baal. In 
 
 support of his opinion, he adduces the cognomen 
 572-1^ juba, = ’l6(3a.$, for ju baal, = “ Baal is 
 
 loveliness.” But we doubt very much whether the 
 correct etymons are not ^ arba el, or “ God 
 
 is fourfold; ” or simply the Aramaic arba, 
 
 “ four.” The idea implied by the word in question 
 we have already referred to (see pp. 69, 89). It is 
 allied with erva, — “ the pudenda,” both of man 
 and woman. 
 
 Arbel, in Beth Arbel, (Hos. x. 14). Amongst 
 
 bilingual inscriptions found in exploring the remains 
 of Assyria, is one which transfers a female slave, 
 “Afba-il Khirat,” to “ Bil-Akhisu.” A learned 
 
 dissertation upon Arba-il is given by Rawlinson, 
 in the Royal Asiatic Society's Journal, vol. i., new 
 series, p. 190, et seq. He tells us that the name 
 was a very popular one, adducing many instances 
 in which it has entered into composition, e . g ., 
 Mannuki -Arba-il; Arba-il&i ; Paga-ana-AHw-iZ, &c. 
 The Phoenician characters corresponding to ‘ Arba-il ’ 
 are b"iK, Arbal, unpointed; it is in another part 
 written and signifies the four gods; but there is 
 some doubt about this, says Rawlinson, as II is not in 
 the plural number. This objection, however, is obvi¬ 
 ated by reading the word as ‘the four-fold god.’ There 
 is an ''Ap^YjXoc = Arba-ilu, mentioned as existing in 
 Galilee (1 Maccab. ix. 2), in which case the il of the 
 Assyrian, which equals ‘ god,’ is in the plural. As 
 
279 
 
 Arbel] towns were usually named after some sacred name, 
 and as in Hosea the word Arbel is connected with 
 Beth, “ a temple,” we presume that Arbel had a 
 religious, or symbolic, meaning. From the con¬ 
 siderations advanced in the preceding article, we 
 conclude that it refers to the four-fold god, i. e., the 
 male and female elements combined. 
 
 Figure 82. 
 
 The accompany¬ 
 ing wood-cut of 
 impression of 
 Babylonian g< 
 
 copied from one j 
 figured in Mons. F. ( 
 
 Lajard’s work, Sur 
 le Culte de Venus, 
 will show clearly the 
 
 nature of Arba-il. 
 
 It is curious to be able to notice, in the present day, 
 how the four-fold idea of the unseen powers exists 
 amongst ourselves. Throughout our churches a 
 Trinity is worshipped, and a fourth power deprecated ; 
 the beneficent Being is represented as triple, the 
 malignant one, = Typhon, is depicted as single. In 
 Boman Catholic countries, on the other hand, the 
 Godhead is painted as it was in Babylon; and it is 
 said to consist of a male triad and a female unit. 
 There is, indeed, no single papal church, whether 
 chapel or cathedral, to which the name of Beth-Arbel 
 would not apply; for all are spots in which adoration 
 is paid to the undivided trinity in unity, and the 
 celestial virgin, the mother of God and man. The 
 name has also been traced to in, ar, and bel, 
 
 i. e., ‘ a hero is Bel,’ or ‘ Bel is powerful.’ 
 
 Archi and Archite, (Jos. xvi. 2). This is considered 
 
280 
 
 Archi | to be the same as ’ Opx o>j, orchoe, and as the Chal- 
 
 Archite) daean Erech, and that its inhabitants are the 
 same as the ’Op^yvol mentioned by Ptolemy as existing 
 in South Western Babylonia. Now, the very same 
 word is translated, in 2 Sam. xv. 82, “ the Archite; ” 
 and we find that Hushai, who was an Archite, was a 
 particular friend of king David. We wish to call 
 special attention to this, for it affords us an oppor¬ 
 tunity to refer to the Chaldsean element in the 
 Hebrew writings, and in the Psalms of the son of 
 Jesse. In our succeeding volume, we shall discuss 
 the condition of the Jewish court, at its first foun¬ 
 dation under David, and show that amongst the 
 chief military officers were Greeks, Phoenicians, 
 Philistines, Carians, and Chaldseans, all of whom 
 were likely to modify the theological ideas of the 
 prophets or priests who came into contact with them. 
 We can scarcely imagine that David could have been 
 followed in his misfortunes by such men as Ittai the 
 Gittite, and Hushai the Archite, unless they had 
 been intimate friends. It is impossible to believe 
 that the royal Psalmist could have been friendly with 
 those whom he believed to be idolaters, since he 
 always expresses the most intense hatred for them. 29 
 We therefore conclude that all the three were in 
 unison on religious matters. We shall refer to this 
 subject hereafter. 
 
 Ard, (Gen. xlvi. 21). This name is borne by a son of 
 Benjamin, one of whose brothers was Ashbel, and 
 another Naaman, which words tell of a Phoenician or 
 Syrian origin. We have already seen that the Canaan- 
 
 29 See, for example, Psalm cxxxix. 21, 22 : “ Do not I liate them, O Lord, that 
 hate thee ? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee ? I hate them 
 with perfect hatred ; I count them mine enemies.” 
 
281 
 
 Ard] ites had a king who was called Arad, consequently 
 we infer that the nomenclature of the Hebrews 
 resembled that of the rest of the people of the 
 land. Now the only signification which can be found 
 for Arad, or Ard, is “a sprout,” or, “he descends 
 from;” but this etymology is so very improbable, 
 that we must seek another. Knowing the facility 
 with which words can he altered in the Hebrew, by 
 a very small interchange of letters, either in writing 
 or in the sound, or in both, we look again at Tin, 
 and compare it with Tn. The Aleph is interchanged 
 with the He; and it is well known that, in old MSS., 
 Daleth and Resh are often wrongly used, on account 
 of the similarity of their forms. This has actually 
 occurred in this word, for in 1 Chron. viii. 8, it is 
 spelled TnN ? Addar, the Daleth and Resh mutually 
 supplanting each other. 
 
 If our surmise be correct, we shall then discover 
 the name of Benjamin’s son to be Hadad, who was 
 in the Syrian mythology the king of the Gods. This 
 conclusion is rendered more probable by the con¬ 
 sideration of the names of the other sons, which 
 were Belah, or “Bel is Jah,” Becher, or “He breaks 
 through;” Ashbel, or “fire is Bel;” Gera, or “the 
 abode of El;” Naaman, “the pleasant one;” Ahi, or 
 “ Ach is Jah; ” Bosh, “he is firm or strong; ” 
 Muppim, “the splendid one;” and Huppim, “the 
 protector,” all of which savour strongly of Syrian 
 theology. 30 
 
 so The prevalence of what may be called heathen names in the tribe, or family, 
 of Benjamin, is very remarkable; it is, too, very curious that a family, in whom 
 the reverence for foreign Gods was so well marked, should have associated so firmly 
 as it did with Judah. We strongly suspect, however, that the faith of Judah was, 
 like that of Benjamin, imported from without; a consideration which will receive 
 full attention in our second volume. 
 
282 
 
 Ardan, servant of On or Ann, an Assyrian cognomen. 
 
 Ardon, (1 Ckron. ii. 18), is probably compounded from 
 arad , and P, on, wbicb would give tbe signifi¬ 
 cation “ be is descended from On.” 
 
 Areli, '^7? (Gen. xlvi. 16), from ere h an ^ n !> Jah, 
 
 tbe n as usual being elided. Tbe word thus signifies 
 “ Jah is powerful.” It is possible, however, that it 
 may contain three elements, ^ and n ', and signify 
 “ tbe strong God is Jab.” The root ara, “ He 
 is strong or powerful,” seems to be allied with tbe 
 Sanscrit “Aryra,” ‘noble,’ and v Af»j£, arees , “Tbe 
 warrior God ” amongst tbe Greeks. 
 
 Argob, (T>eut. iii. 4), “ Tbe stony district,” or “ a heap 
 of stones; ” it is situated on a large plateau of rock, 
 rising almost as abruptly as a wall from tbe plain. 
 
 Aridai, (Esther ix. 9), from the Zend airja and dao, 
 “ giving what is worthy.” Ftirst. 
 
 Aridatha, (Esther ix. 8), from airja-data, Zend, 
 
 denoting “ a worthy gift.” Flirst. 
 
 Arieh, (^ Kings xv. 25), “Jab is strong,” from ar, 
 and n ', jah. Tbe first root signifies “ a strong man, 
 a giant,” tbe supreme God amongst tbe Phoenicians 
 and Babylonians. From it we have most probably 
 tbe Her in Hercules; Phoenician archal (Furst). 
 From tbe same root we have— 
 
 Ariel, (Isaiah xxix, 1), a compound of ar, n ', Jah, 
 and el, tbe n being elided. Tbe name signifies 
 “ The strong god Jab,” or “ Tbe strong Jah is El;” 
 tbe word is thus ascertained to be a variant of Areli. 
 It may, however, be also read as ^ “My strong 
 one is El.” 
 
 Arim, (Ezra ii. 25), is found in conjunction with 
 
 Kirjath. This is probably an altered form of 
 arim, and signifies “ Tbe strong ones,” or “ Tbe 
 
283 
 
 Arim] heroes,” referring either to the masculine triad in 
 heaven, or to warriors on earth. 
 
 Arioch, ' ! P v }K (Gen. xiv. 1; Dan. ii. 14), “ noble,” from 
 the Sanscrit drja, and the adjective suffix ka. 
 Fiirst. 
 
 Arisai, (Esther ix. 9), a Persian name, denoting, “ Lion 
 like.” Gesenius. 
 
 Ark. It is impossible for any Biblical student to pass over 
 in silence the subject -of the ark; an object which, 
 more than any other material form, was worshipped 
 or venerated by the Hebrews. We naturally ask 
 ourselves, How came it to pass that a box was regarded 
 with reverence, when a statue was abhorred ? How 
 came it that He, whom the heaven of heavens cannot 
 contain (1 Kings viii. 27), was in some way identified 
 with a small chest, which was kept in a peculiarly 
 small chamber, and to which the priest only had 
 access once a year ? (Heb. ix. 7.) We shall best 
 answer these questions by inquiring—(1) Into the 
 probable etymological relations of the word ; (2) Into 
 the history of the ark, and the ideas with which it 
 has been associated amongst different nations; and, 
 (3) The signification of the mythoses with which it 
 is connected. 
 
 The name given to the ark in which Noah sailed 
 is tebah, which signifies “ a chest,” “ a ship,” 
 and even “ a sarcophagus.” From it Thebes is sup¬ 
 posed to have taken its name. The root seems to 
 be njJj, tabah, “to be bellied, or hollowed out.” 
 The ark in which Moses floated is called by the 
 same name, = Greek Qi(3o$, ©//3>j. The ark of the 
 covenant has the name aron, which signifies 
 
 “ a box,” “ a mummy case,” or “ a money chest.” 
 We may add that aran, means “he is firm;” 
 
284 
 
 Ark] D x , oren, “ a certain hard-wooded tree; ” and 0$, 
 aren, denotes “ strength,” or “ power.” 
 
 When we attempt to trace our own word “ ark,” 
 we find in the first place that in the Sanscrit there 
 are four expressions which somewhat resemble it ; 
 viz., arka, “a ray of light,” “the Sun;” Argha , “a 
 particular form of offering in a certain shaped vessel,” 
 also “inestimable, priceless;” arghya , “deserving 
 worship,” “ an offering made to gods or to great men, 
 a portion of which is water, and which may consist of 
 water entirely;” there is also ark , “to praise,” or 
 “ to heat.” These assume some importance, inasmuch 
 as there is very close relationship between the Aryan, 
 the Latin, and the Greek tongues. Although we can 
 scarcely show much affinity between these and the 
 Hebrew, there is yet in the last language something 
 to associate our modern “ark” with it; a rag , 
 
 is “to plait, or weave,” an operation necessary in 
 making a boat of bulrushes ; also “to shut up.” A 
 word which is derived from this root is absolutely 
 used in 1 Sam. vi. 8, 11, 15. The word in question 
 is argaz. The final T Fiirst considers to he an 
 
 unimportant postfix, adding, “for arg , compare area , 
 opx-avY), orkanee, “ an enclosure; ” arx , “ a citadel, 
 or bulwark,” &c. The words apxeoo, arkeo, “I am 
 powerful, suffice, or satisfy; ” up^odog, archaios, 
 “ ancient, primeval, time-honoured ; ” <%pxv> archee, 
 “the beginning, or origin,” “the first place, or 
 power,” “ magistrate,” “ ruler,” &c.; archo , 
 
 “ I make a beginning ; ” and upxog, archos , “ a 
 leader,” equal to our arch in such names as 
 ‘archangel,’ ‘archbishop,’ &c., are all worthy of 
 remembrance. 
 
 In Latin, area denotes “ a chest, coffer, or trunk; ” 
 
285 
 
 Ark] arcanus, “ secret, private, hidden, a mystery,” &c.; 
 arceo, “I enclose,” “I keep together,” “I ward,” 
 “I keep off,” &c. 
 
 Small though the relationship may be, we do well 
 to remember that the English word arch may have 
 originally been little more than the inverted crescent 
 moon, which was throughout ancient times held to 
 be an emblem of the female. 
 
 Nor can we forget that the word -Apyeia, argeia , 
 is one of the names of Hera, or Juno, or the Celestial 
 Mother (Paus. iii. 18, § 6); it is said that she 
 received this name from being worshipped at Argos; 
 but it is at least probable that both the one name 
 and the other are connected with “the ark.” In 
 Smith’s Dictionary , 31 we are told that “Argeia” is the 
 name of several mythical personages, amongst others 
 of the wife of Argus, who built the ship Argo. We 
 have also such appellatives in the Greek, as Argalus, 
 Argelius, Argennis, Argileonis, Argiope, in which we 
 may recognise the association of Arg with helios , 
 “ the Sun,” “ Anna,” “ the Lion,” and ovy, opee, “ a 
 hole, chink, or orifice, through which light comes.” 
 The Argonauts, apyovavrou, argonautai, were literally 
 sailors navigating “the Argo,” and they were in 
 search of a golden fleece; a myth, of whose signifi¬ 
 cance those who know the reputed origin of the 
 Spanish order of that name may form a notion. 
 
 Throughout these etymologies, the following dis¬ 
 tinct ideas may be traced : — 
 
 (a) A great, noble, primeval Being from which 
 all created beings sprang; ( b ) A something which 
 guards, keeps, encloses, and protects; (c) A vessel 
 which can convey an individual from one part or 
 
 81 Dictionary of Mythology and Biography, s.v. Argeia. 
 
286 
 
 Ark] country to another ; ( d ) The Celestial Mother; and 
 (e) The crescent moon. 
 
 2. We now direct our attention to the history of 
 the ark amongst the different nations, and the ideas 
 indicated therein. 
 
 As regards the Chaldees, from whom we are told 
 that the Jews descended, and whose religion Abram 
 practised, we find, from Eawlinson ( Journal Royal 
 Asiatic Society , vol. xviii., p. 28, note), that “ the 
 Babylonian Gods appear to have each had several 
 arks, or tabernacles, distinguished in the inscriptions 
 by the old Scythic or Hamite names, which they 
 bore from the remotest antiquity. The tabernacle 
 itself is indicated by the same signs, which represent 
 ‘a ship,’ and of which the Semitic equivalent, or 
 synonym, was Elippa (Chaldee iljpa); and some 
 of the bilingual vocabularies exhibit complete lists 
 of the names. The word which thus occurs in the 
 last line but one of the third column of the great 
 East India House inscription, in connection with 
 the temple of the planets of the seven spheres, at 
 Borsippa, and which is also the proper name of a 
 river, is explained in the vocabularies as the special 
 appellation of the ark of the God Nebo; and it may 
 be presumed, therefore, that although the temple of 
 Borsippa was designed and named after the seven 
 spheres, the particular God who was worshipped there 
 was Nebo, or Hermes, who indeed was supposed to 
 have the arrangement of the heavenly bodies under 
 his particular control.” 32 
 
 32 This paragraph is a note to the following text in Rawlinson’s paper on the 
 great temple at Borsippa: — “This portion, then, of brickwork I propose to allot 
 to a superstructure, or chapel, which may have crowned the pile, as in the description 
 that Herodotus gives of the temple of Belus at Babylon ; a description which, in all 
 probability, was borrowed from this site. If such a chapel really existed, containing 
 
287 
 
 Ark] We next notice that the use of the ark was very 
 general in Egypt, in which country it was also 
 frequently associated with a ship or boat; a succinct 
 account of whose varied forms may be seen in 
 Rawlinson’s Herodotus, vol. ii., p. 85, and in 
 Kitto’s Cyclopaedia, s. v. Ark. In the latter article 
 will also be found the statement, that “the discoveries 
 which have been made in Egypt incontestably prove 
 that the tabernacle, made with hands, with its utensils 
 and ministers, bore a designed external resemblance 
 to the Egyptian models.” 
 
 We next proceed to notice that the ark was 
 equally used in religious ceremonies by the Greeks. 
 We find, for example, Lucian (Met. xi. 250), when 
 describing a procession of the goddess Isis, speaks 
 to this effect — “The chief ministers of the sacred 
 rites carried the insignia of the mighty gods, exposed 
 to full view. The first was a brilliant lamp of gold, 
 of a boat-like form, ivhicli emitted a flame of con¬ 
 siderable magnitude, from an aperture in the middle :” 
 apparently intended to represent “the ship” and “the 
 mast,” i. e., the female and the male principles of 
 nature. “ The third bore a palm tree.” “ The 
 fourth carried a golden vessel, shaped like the 
 mamma, from which he poured forth milk on the 
 ground.” “ Then followed the figure of a cow, being 
 the prolific resemblance of the all-parent goddess, 
 borne on the shoulders of one of the blessed devotees 
 of this divinity, who acted gesticulatingly as he 
 walked. Another carried a chest, containing the 
 
 the ‘ ark,’ or tabernacle of the god, its height was probably fifteen feet, like that of 
 the stage which supported it.” This measurement is in close accordance with that 
 of the Holy of Holies, which contained the Hebrew ark, for it was a cube of ten 
 cubits, or fifteen feet; a fact in which we see another instance of Chaldsean influence 
 in the Hebrew religion. 
 
288 
 
 Ark] secret utensils of this stupendous mystery.” Can 
 any one, reading this, fail to recal the scene of David 
 leaping and dancing before the ark ? (2 Sam. vi. 14,15) 
 A similar ark to that of Ceres was carried in the 
 Bacchanalian rites. This one, however, contained 
 branches of trees, pods, ivy, cakes of different kinds, 
 salt, poppies, hearts, and the phallus. (Clem. Alex. 
 Protr.) It is thus referred to by Aristophanes : — 
 ( Acharnians , 1. 242, et seq .)—“Let the basket-bearer 
 advance a little forward. Let Xanthias set up the 
 phallus erect.” “ Well, now, ’t is right, 0 sovereign 
 Bacchus, that I, having led this procession, agree¬ 
 able to thee, and having sacrificed with my house¬ 
 hold, should celebrate the rural Dionysia happily.” 
 “ 0 Xanthias, you, too, must hold the phallus 
 erect, behind the basket-bearer, and I, following, 
 will sing the phallic hymn.” The use of the 
 chest in the processions at the festival of Ceres 
 existed also amongst the Komans. This is referred 
 to by Ovid, in his Art of Love , b. ii., 609, &c.— 
 “ If the mysteries of Venus are not enclosed in 
 chests, and if the hollow cymbals do not resound with 
 frantic blows, although, amongst ourselves, they are 
 celebrated by universal custom, yet it is in such a 
 manner that, amongst us, they demand concealment. 
 Venus herself, as oft as she lays her garments aside, 
 conceals her groin with the left hand.” It is also to 
 be noticed that the mediseval artists who depicted 
 Venus always associated her with an ark, or chest, 
 into which Cupid, or some female attendant, appears 
 to he looking. In all these cases, there are clear 
 indications of the chest, ark, or basket being a femi¬ 
 nine symbol. We find this conclusion strengthened 
 by the following considerations : 
 
289 
 
 Ark] 1. The box, coffin, sarcophagus, or grave, which 
 receives the body after death, is clearly a represen¬ 
 tative of mother earth, “ who receives us at our birth, 
 nourishes us when born, and ever afterwards supports 
 us; lastly, embracing us in her bosom, when we 
 are rejected by the rest of nature, she then covers 
 us with especial tenderness.” (Pliny, Nat. Hist., 
 b. ii., c. 63.) 
 
 2. We are told by Sir Gardiner Wilkinson (Raw- 
 linson’s Herod., vol. ii., c. 63), that “ some of the 
 sacred boats, or arks, contained the emblems of life 
 and stability, which, when the veil was drawn aside, 
 were partially seen.” It is superfluous here to indi¬ 
 cate what those emblems were. 
 
 Mythology informs us that the body of Osiris, 
 when killed by Typhon, was carried in a chest to 
 Byblos, there found by Isis, and brought back to 
 Egypt; but the malignant demon cut up the body, 
 and threw the pieces away. All were recovered hut 
 the pudenda, which were replaced by a model thereof; 
 and this image, enshrined in an ark, became one of 
 the symbols of the God. The missing parts were 
 said to have been eaten by fish. Thus we see “ the 
 ark” and “ the fish” brought into parallelism. We 
 are also told that the holy chest of Isis was carried 
 once a year, in November, to the sea-side; the priests, 
 during the passage, pouring into it drink-offerings 
 of water from the river (De Iside et Osir., c. 39). 
 The signification of this must at once be apparent to 
 those who know that mi, signifies equally “water” 
 and “ semen virile.” 
 
 Ancient stories again abound with anecdotes, in 
 which the offspring of some god, or king, is com¬ 
 mitted to an ark or chest—just as Moses and Apollo 
 
 T 
 
290 
 
 Ark] are represented to have been in Egypt; and their 
 similarity obliges us to recognise that they conceal 
 some myth. In searching for a clue to the mystery, 
 we may readily find it in the surmise, that a female 
 who had been impregnated by some great man was, 
 like Hagar of old, and too many at the present 
 day, cast adrift as soon as her pregnancy became 
 apparent. The poor mother then wandered abroad, 
 as Io did, until she found a resting-place for herself 
 and offspring. 
 
 8. Remembering the strong similarity between 
 Egyptian and Hindoo worship, we turn to the Asiatic 
 Researches (vol. iii., p. 868), where we find the follow¬ 
 ing, from the pen of Colonel Wilford: — “ There is a 
 sect of Hindoos, by far the most numerous of any, who, 
 attempting to reconcile the two systems, tell us, in 
 their allegorical style, that Parvati and Mahadeva 
 found their concurrence essential to the perfection of 
 their offspring; and that Vishnu, at the request of 
 the goddess, effected a reconciliation between them. 
 Hence, the navel of Vishnu, by which they meant 
 the os tinccc, is worshipped as one and the same with 
 the sacred yoni. This emblem, too, was Egyptian; 
 and the mystery seems to have been solemnly typified 
 in the temple of Jupiter Ammon, by the vast umbi¬ 
 licus, made of stone, and carried by eighty men in a 
 boat , which represented the fossa navicularis (see 
 fig. 61). Such, I believe, was the mystical boat of 
 Isis, which, according to Lactantius, was adored in 
 Egypt (. Div . Instit ., 1. i., c. 2).” “ We are assured 
 
 by Tacitus that the German Suevi adored Isis, under 
 the form of a ship” ( Germania , c. 9); “and the Chal- 
 daeans consider that the earth, which is the same as 
 Parvati, is shaped like a boat.” 
 
291 
 
 Ark] The form of the crescent moon affords the type 
 of the sacred ship or ark. 
 
 We find another reference to this subject, in 
 a paper in the Transactions of the Royal Asiatic 
 Society, from the pen of the Rev. Joseph Roberts 
 (vol. i., p. 87). The commencement of the essay 
 runs thus: — “In presenting to the Royal Asiatic 
 Society a model of the tabernacle 33 of the Hindus, in 
 which they take their principal deities out in proces¬ 
 sion, it may be necessary to observe, that a number 
 of men, having placed it on their shoulders, proceed 
 to the appointed spot, accompanied and preceded 
 by priests, singers, players on musical instruments, 
 and the dancing girls of the temple.” The author 
 then quotes Numb. i. 50, and draws a parallel 
 between the Jewish and the Hindoo ark. He next 
 points out that the Jews bore tabernacles for other 
 gods, e.g., “Ye have born the tabernacle of your 
 Moloch and Cliiun, your images, the star of your 
 god, which ye made to yourselves ” (Amos v. 26) ; 
 and adds, that “ the object which the Jews and the 
 heathen had in view, in carrying about these taber¬ 
 nacles, was probably to show that they were under 
 the protection either of the true God or of those false 
 deities whom they respectively served. The Hindus 
 at this day carry out theirs in time of sickness, or at 
 the stated festivals of the deity, to avert the evil, or 
 to show that they are under his protection.” The 
 description of this so-called tabernacle tallies with 
 that given of many ancient arks; and its use in 
 procession may be compared with the peregrination 
 
 33 Which consists of a quadrangular pedestal, on the surface of which are four 
 columns, supporting a roof, or canopy ; at the bottom of the pedestal are fixed four 
 rings, and through these staves are passed. 
 
292 
 
 Akk] of the Hebrew ark round Jericho, and its being sent 
 for in Eli’s time by a worsted army, to restore the 
 fortunes of the field. 
 
 4. It is scarcely necessary to recal to the recol¬ 
 lection of my readers, bow from the three sons of 
 Noah, and the ark or chest, the world became 
 repeopled after its total destruction; a statement 
 which is only a mythical form of putting the simple 
 fact, that it is by union of the sexes that the young 
 arise to take the place of those who die ; and that 
 a wife may produce even after her husband’s decease 
 a new scion of his race, which has been preserved 
 in her womb until its time has become full. That 
 the ancients had such an idea is manifested by the 
 ferocity with which successful soldiers killed pregnant 
 women, whenever they wished to extirpate a hostile 
 race or tribe. 
 
 We are then driven to the conclusion that the 
 holy ark was a feminine emblem, destined to receive 
 and retain the male symbol or principle, just as the 
 Roman Catholic “pyx” is made to retain “ the body 
 of the Saviour.” This being so, we can readily 
 understand the idea of David’s leaping and dancing 
 and shamelessly uncovering himself before it. But 
 though this monarch acted thus, we do not see 
 any other evidences of the ark being associated with 
 indecencies. We recognise, however, the same 
 accompaniments to the Hebrew ark which Lucian 
 saw elsewhere {vide supra, p. 287), viz., the sacred lamp 
 and candlestick; altars; palm trees in columnar 
 form; a symbol of truth ; golden bowls, some of 
 which were to be made like almonds, Exod. xxv. 83, 
 whilst a table and shew-bread replace the golden corn, 
 fan and amphora. 
 
293 
 
 Ark] There are, however, a few indications of the 
 possibility of such a thing, which we may briefly 
 notice. (1) The ark is called the ark of the testimony 
 r ' i,ta W, edutli , Exod. xxv. 22, &c.; (2) f edah, is 
 also used as a “ witness,” Gen. xxi. 30, and as 
 “testimonies,” Deut. iv. 15, &c. ; (3) both these 
 come from the root ad, which signifies “eternity,” 
 “perpetuity;” whence also come the words adah, 
 “to march along,” “to veil or to cover,” “ornament,” 
 and “beauty; ” and yadah, which signifies amongst 
 other things “to lie with,” in which sense it is 
 used in Gen. iv. 1, “Adam knew his wife;” and 
 again in Gen. xxiv. 16, “ neither had any man 
 known her; ” and Gen. xix. 5, “ bring them out that 
 we may know them.” This shows that there is what 
 may be designated a punning resemblance between 
 the ark of testimony and the ark of propagation, 
 the organ through which all life is perpetuated. 
 
 But there is still more significant evidence in the 
 pillars of stone which the ark contained, and on 
 which the law was said to be written. From time 
 immemorial these have been figured as two cylinders 
 or flat pillars, with rounded tops, such as we see 
 to-day in most of our churches. In the earlier 
 representations of them there is always an opening 
 between the two. Coupling this with the reverence 
 which was shown in the Jewish worship to the 
 male organ, there is strong reason for the belief that 
 the two stones, thus arranged, represented the male 
 and female organs in mystic union. In the ark was 
 also placed a sprig of almond tree, which had a 
 particular sexual signification. 
 
 Hence it is possible that the ark really was a 
 symbol originally intended to typify “ the fruitful 
 
294 
 
 Ark] mother,” although it was at an early period purified 
 from all gross ideas. 
 
 From the preceding considerations, we may safely 
 affirm that one, at least, of the religious emblems 
 amongst the Jews very closely resembled those of the 
 heathen around them ; and that there was as much 
 improvement in Judaism over idolatry as we see in 
 the protestantism of the Anglican over the paganism 
 of the Eoman church. We cannot, however, declare 
 with equal certainty that the Hebrew symbol, and 
 the ritual connected with it, were God-given. If 
 we grant such an assumption, we must go farther, 
 and allow that the original of the copy, notwith¬ 
 standing all its flaws, was equally from a divine 
 source. No one refuses credence to the belief that 
 the papal faith and worship, covered though it now 
 is with blots, is from an apostolic origin, and coming 
 direct from the Saviour. From this degraded Chris¬ 
 tianity our British faith has come; but though many 
 of our community consider it as sacred as if it had 
 been revealed, yet all must allow that it is the 
 legitimate and improved descendant from a more 
 ancient but corrupted faith ; just as Judaism is an 
 improved form of Chaldsean, Phoenician, Grecian, 
 and possibly Egyptian worship. To this subject we 
 shall return in our second volume. 
 
 Ark, Noah’s. Whenever an intelligent reader finds, in the 
 book which he is reading, a story so extragavant that 
 it is utterly impossible to be true, his impulse is — 
 (1) to distrust the writer entirely; (2) to inquire 
 if there is any foundation for it; (3) to consider it 
 a mythos ; or (4) to reject it entirely. 
 
 It is perfectly certain that if any Christian were 
 to meet with the story of Noah’s ark in one of the 
 
295 
 
 Ark, \ Hindoo Vedas, or in any other ancient record, he 
 Noah’s J would scout it as an absurdity. The idea of placing 
 a pair of all animals and birds, and seven pairs of 
 clean beasts—(what was meant by a “ clean ” beast, in 
 the time of Noah, who is not supposed to have known 
 the Mosaic law, we are not told)—in a box a little larger 
 than some of our finest war ships, and considerably 
 less than the “ Great Eastern,” is preposterous. The 
 idea of keeping them therein for upwards of a year is 
 monstrous in the extreme; for not only had room to 
 be found in such an ark for the creatures themselves, 
 hut for their food, which would exceed the hulk of the 
 creatures by fourfold ; inasmuch as, in the space of a 
 year, each animal consumes at least four times its 
 own weight. Moreover, there would be no chance 
 of keeping the carnivorous animals alive, without the 
 graminivorous being eaten, and fourteen sheep, goats, 
 hulls, cows, antelopes, buffaloes, bisons, &e., would 
 he a poor supply for two lions, two tigers, two 
 leopards, two bears, &c., for a whole twelvemonth. 
 
 2. If, then, we discredit the story in its entirety, 
 as every intelligent being must do, we next inquire 
 whether it can be traced to any basis. We find in the 
 Greek a story about Deucalion and Pyrrha being saved 
 in an ark during an inundation ; and we can easily 
 understand that if a Jewish writer had heard of it, he 
 would, with that hyperbole of language, that want of 
 exactness in the unity of detail, and that spirit of 
 exaggeration which characterise so many of the 
 Hebrew authors in the Bible, have expanded some 
 local inundation which lasted for a day or two, into 
 an universal deluge which lasted for a year. In like 
 manner, a big corn chest has developed itself into 
 a vast ark, and a couple of human beings into a 
 
296 
 
 Ark, } menagerie of men and animals. But in magnifying 
 
 Noah’s j the story, the artist has forgotten details, and has 
 thus exposed the falsity of his narrative. During a 
 small local flood, we can well understand a man and 
 his wife being saved in a large box; but we cannot 
 imagine them subsisting in such an ark for twelve 
 months, since the art of preserving provisions for an 
 indefinite time, and that in an eastern climate, did 
 not exist in ancient days. We must, moreover, add 
 that there is a story about a deluge told in the 
 Hindoo writings, but it is not necessary for us to give 
 it in detail. 
 
 3. Considering the Biblical story as a mythos, we 
 proceed to ascertain the elements which exist for its 
 solution. We have, in the first place, a box, in which 
 are four pairs of men and women, single pairs of the 
 unclean, and seven pairs of the clean, animals and 
 birds; but no trees, no materials for cooking, and no 
 store of water. The omission of cuttings or seeds of 
 trees, and of water, is one which shews more than 
 anything else the utter impossibility of the Biblical 
 story of the deluge and the ark being a true one. 
 For it is certain that all the trees would be killed 
 by the salt water, proceeding from the foundations 
 of the great deep; and as leaves which remain 
 twelve months in water are certain to rot, the whole 
 vegetable world would be represented by dead 
 and leafless stumps. Even if seeds and cuttings 
 had been preserved, we know that land recently 
 saturated by salt water is inimical to vegetation; 
 consequently, there would not be, at the end of the 
 twelve months during which the salt water deluge 
 prevailed, an olive branch for a dove to find, a 
 spot on which a vine could flourish, or grass for 
 
297 
 
 Ark, ) the cattle to eat. Beyond these things, we see in 
 Noah’s J the mythos no other elements than a flood of 
 water, universal destruction, the salvation of a few, 
 and the dove as a harbinger of good news. 
 
 Out of these meagre materials we are unable to 
 frame any other idea than that “nature,” “the 
 earth,” or “ the womb,” all of which the ark typifies, 
 repeoples the world again, after even so severe an 
 infliction as an inundation. In the pairs we cannot 
 see anything more than the plain fact that male 
 and female are necessary to the creation of a new 
 offspring; nor can we see in the sevens anything 
 more than the adoption of a mystic number as a 
 preparation for food and sacrifice. 
 
 4. All this, however, is so meagre that we cannot 
 accept the idea that any mythos is wrapped up in the 
 story; and we consequently regard the narrative as 
 utterly devoid of truth, or, at the most, as a very 
 exaggerated account of some local inundation, such 
 as is common in Australia, in Hindostan, and in 
 Egypt. 
 
 Of the deluge, from which the ark saved Noah, 
 it is unnecessary to speak farther than to say that 
 such a phenomenon is as apocryphal as is the assumed 
 migration of kangaroos from Australia, elephants 
 from India, hippopotamuses from Africa, mammoths 
 from Siberia, and polar bears from Kamschatka, 
 lions from the forest, and tigers from the jungle, in 
 comfortable pairs; at such times too, and in such a 
 manner, that they should all meet at a certain spot 
 in Asia, at a definite period ; and that, when there, 
 they should all amicably enter a big dark box. 
 
 We shall, however, revert to the subject in the 
 introduction to our second volume. 
 
298 
 
 Arkite 'i?7V (Gen. x. 17), “A Phoenician city north of 
 Tripolis, in Syria, belonging to the Damascene king¬ 
 dom ; at a later period in Greek V A pxyj, archea, and 
 V A pxca, archai, Latin ‘ Arce, 5 now 4 Areas. 5 5 5 Fiirst. 
 (See Archi.) 
 
 Armenia, or Ararat (2 Kings xix. 87), the moun¬ 
 
 tainous district about the range of Mount Ararat. 
 
 Armi, Cuneiform, 44 a mountain goat.” 
 
 Armoni, (2 Sam. xxi. 8). In this instance, again, the 
 
 n of has probably been elided, the original form 
 being armoniah, or 44 A fortress is Jah.” 
 
 Arna, or Arnon (Numb. xxi. 13), in Syriac means 
 
 44 a mountain goat,” or 44 Aries; 55 arnan, is 4 a 
 
 strong one, 5 4 a hero. 5 As Arnon, the Moabite river’s 
 name, it signifies 4 the rushing one. 5 There is some¬ 
 thing connected with the goat which does not come 
 out fully in mythology. There is strong reason 
 to believe that, when the sun entered Aries in the 
 Zodiac, the fact was known to the chief priests of 
 Egypt, and elsewhere, and the animal was commen- 
 surately honoured. But what placed the goat in the 
 Zodiac at all ? Why should kings call themselves 
 44 He-goats,” and why did the Romans call Nero 
 44 an old goat,” in derision ? Why amongst the Jews 
 was one goat sacrificed to God, and another to Azazel, 
 or the Devil, on the most solemn day of the year, the 
 great day of atonement ? My impression is that the 
 animal, being peculiarly salacious, became an emblem 
 of enduring manly vigour, bodily strength, bravery, 
 boldness, and endurance, and thus emblematic of the 
 great powers of both the upper and lower regions. 
 Hence it was that goats 5 flesh was eaten in the hope 
 that it was aphrodisiac. ’Apvo$, arnos , is 4 a lamb 5 in 
 Greek, and ’Apvij, arne, was the nurse of Neptune. 
 
299 
 
 Arna] Probably our Harnet, Arnold, Arnside, may be from 
 the same stock. 
 
 Arnan, (1 Chron. iii. 21), one of the names which has 
 been substituted for Araniah. See Araunah. 
 
 Arnon, (Numb. xxi. 18), “ A rushing stream.” 
 
 Arod, ‘IVW (Numb. xxvi. 17) a variant of Arad. See Ard. 
 
 Arodi, (Gen. xlvi. 16), “name of the Phoenician island 
 state, Aradus, founded by Sidon, through the instru¬ 
 mentality of refugees. Eiirst. 
 
 Aroer, (Numb. xxii. 84), probably from arar, 
 
 “naked,” “poor,” “bare.” 
 
 Arpad, Kings xviii. 84), etymology doubtful, possibly 
 
 ">?, ar, and padah, “ The great one redeems, 
 delivers ”? 
 
 Arphaxad, (Gen. x. 22), “Ar, with overflowing 
 
 breast; ” n ?ip, packha, signifying ‘ to drop down as 
 water; ’ and shad, “ a breast or teat.” 
 
 Artaxerxes (Ezra iv. 7), a Persian name, the true reading 
 of which is not accurately known, and which in 
 the Hebrew is spelled three different ways, i. e., 
 Artachshaseta ; Artachshashte; 
 
 and KrfWpjjOX, Artachshashtah. Fiirst considers the 
 name to be the same as that of Artha-Shetr , found 
 on certain Pehlvi medals, and = Arta-chshatar, or 
 “ mighty king.” 
 
 Aredu, (Cuneiform) “I rode,” from the root red, “to ride.” 
 Hebrew, rachah, rad, or raad, is “to tremble or 
 quake.” I think we have amongst us many words 
 from this old Shemitic root; e.g., Ryde, Ryder, Rydal, 
 Ben-Rhydding, Ridout, Ridalgh, &c.: Wright, Read, 
 Ready, Reddish, Redditch; and many others, of simi¬ 
 lar sound, have possibly come from the same root. 
 
 Aruboth, (1 Kings iv. 10), “ The dovecotes,” or the 
 
 holes, plural of aruhah . 
 
300 
 
 Arumah, (Judges ix. 41). It is probable that the 
 
 original spelling of this word was aramjah, or 
 
 “Jali is high, strong, or firm,” and that it has been 
 changed to obliterate the appearance of the sacred 
 name. It is analogous to Ramah, in which the 
 alteration is more extensive. 
 
 Arvad, "IVJN (Ezek. xxvii. 8), a town in Palestine larger than 
 Tyre or Sidon; “place of fugitives,” as Rome was 
 (Aradus), founded by Sidon, through the instru¬ 
 mentality of refugees, whose inhabitants were skilful 
 seamen and valiant warriors. (Strabo, xvi., 2, 13.) 
 
 Arza, (1 Kings xvi. 9), “ El is strong, or firm,” the 
 
 Lamed being elided, and the vowel dropped from 
 el. The first part of the name signifies “ the 
 earth;” and I have heard an orientalist pronounce 
 this word as ertz, being unable to frame his mouth 
 so as to express the sound involved in our th. 
 
 Asa, NpiJ (1 Kings xv. 8), “El is a physician,” or “ healer,” 
 the b of el, being elided. It is possibly a variant 
 of Asah. (See Asahel.) 
 
 Asahel, (2 Kings ii. 18). This word is evidently 
 
 formed from and another root; but that this sacred 
 name should have been retained is curious. The com¬ 
 bination assists us, however, in our researches upon 
 the nature of the original conception of El. The first 
 two syllables of the name in question come from nfety, 
 asah, which signifies “to labour,” “to create,” “to build 
 up,” “to bring forth out of oneself,” “to beget,” “to 
 press,” “ to squeeze immodestly,” “ to be shaggy,” or 
 “rough haired,” according to the pointing. The cogno¬ 
 men, therefore, must be taken to indicate, “ El created, 
 or creates; ” the idea being much the same as is 
 involved in ordinary paternity. (See Al, Esau, Adam.) 
 We have the same derivation in the following word :— 
 
801 
 
 Asahiah, or Asaiah, n W (2 Kings xxii. 12). “ Jah is the 
 
 Creator ; ” in which Jah replaces El. 
 
 Asaph, *!!?£ (2 Kings xviii. 18). See Abiasaph. Since 
 writing that article, it has occurred to me that the 
 word may he a variant of, or play upon, ashpah, 
 
 “the quiver,” in which are stored the arroivs, or 
 children, of the mighty one. Compare the metaphor, 
 “ happy is he who hath his quiver full of them.” 
 
 Asareel, and Asriel, 34 (i Chron. iv. 16). Of this 
 
 name, Fiirst remarks, that it is equivalent to the 
 Phoenician aser (Osiris), an epithet of Baal, 
 
 husband of Asherah. We are, however, more inclined 
 to consider it as being an altered form of Ashreel, 
 and to signify “El is Asher,” or “Asher is El.” 
 The idea thus conveyed is identical with that em¬ 
 bodied in the cognomen Asahel. (See Asher.) 
 
 Asarelah, nbKTfc'K (1 Chron. xxv. 2), “ The creating God 
 is Jah.” In this cognomen we have a juxtaposition 
 of sacred names which greatly astonishes the inquirer, 
 viz., ‘ Osiris, or Asher,’ ‘ El, or Allah,’ and ‘ Ja, or 
 Jehovah; ’ and, as if to allow of a complete identi¬ 
 fication of this first element of the name with Asher, 
 the upright one, we find it spelled (1 Chron. xxv. 14) 
 Jesharelah , in which jeshar is allied both to 
 ish, asher, and jashar, ‘ the male,’ ‘the upright 
 organ,’ and ‘ the upright man.’ We may probably 
 recognise, in the cognomen in question, a succession 
 of sacred names. Asher was the first worshipped; 
 he was simply ‘ the creator; ’ when ‘ El ’ became 
 sacred, ‘ the creator is El ’ was used; and, sub- 
 quently, the creating God is Jah. (Compare, with 
 
 34 Azrael is to the present time, in the Arabic mythology, “ The angel of death,” 
 and affords a good indication of the perpetuity of names amongst the Shemitic 
 race. 
 
302 
 
 Asarelah] this the remarks made, page 23, supra, upon 
 Hamptonwick and Berkhamstead.) 
 
 Ascalon, or Ashkelon, (Judges i. 18), “ The cluster 
 
 of On.” (See page 67.) 
 
 Asenath, (Gen. xli. 45), said to mean “ dedicated 
 
 to Neith ” (the Minerva of the Egyptians) ; but I 
 very much doubt whether the name is Egyptian 
 at all. It certainly is very unlike any of the words 
 which have come to our knowledge. We have 
 Asnah, the name of a man (Ezra ii. 50) of Persian 
 birth ? and Asnath (written in our Bibles 
 
 Asenath), very closely resembles it. Again, we have 
 Asnappar, a Persian satrap; and we have already 
 given an account of many Hebrew names compounded 
 with as. 
 
 In the Yedic, asna signifies “ great, or distin¬ 
 guished ; ” Nath, or Naut, means “ the Lord ; ” and 
 in the Hebrew Nathan signifies “he gave.” The 
 word then may mean, “ The Lord the Creator,” or 
 “ the Creator gave.” 
 
 Ash, or Esh, “a man,” “a being,” “essence,” “fire,” 
 “ foundation,” &c., according to the vowel points 
 used. 
 
 Asha, is one of the readings adopted provisionally by 
 Bawlinson for the great goddess of Nineveh (Journal 
 Royal Asiatic Society, new series, vol. i., pp. 205-7); 
 it appears to be a variant of niPK, or mn&W, = Ishtar 
 and Ashtoreth. 
 
 Ashan, (Jos. xv. 42), said to he “ a smoke,” but though 
 ashan, has that meaning, the appellative is not 
 appropriate to a town. It is probable that it was 
 originally spelled l^f, ashen, which signifies, “he is 
 hard, firm, or strong.” 
 
 Ashbaal, , or Eshbaal (1 Chron. viii. 33), “ My lord 
 
303 
 
 Ashbaal fire,” a son of Saul. In the Chronicles, in which 
 Eshball) the first appears, names are repeatedly found 
 spelled differently to what they are elsewhere ; if it 
 were not thus, we probably should never have known 
 that both Saul and Jonathan had sons called after 
 Baal. The reason given by Dr. Ginsburg for this is, 
 that the Rabbins, when making corrections in the 
 sacred text, expended their labours on the parts which 
 were in general use, and passed by those which were 
 seldom read in public or private. 
 
 Ashban or Eshban, (Gen. xxxvi. 26), “ The son of 
 
 fire,” or “ of strength,” i. e., “ he is fiery, hard, firm, 
 or strong; ” or possibly the word may be a variant of 
 Eshmun , the Phoenician Esculapius, or Her¬ 
 cules; the name was borne by an Edomite. 
 
 Ashbea, or Eshbea, (1 Chron. iv. 21), is, I think, an 
 euphemism for Ashbaal. (Compare Ashby, &c.) 
 Ashbel, (Gen. xlvi. 21), signifies the same as Ashbaal, 
 i. e., “ My lord fire,” or “Baal is fire ; ” fire and the 
 sun being used interchangeably. It will, however, be 
 remembered, that esh, has many significations 
 besides “ fire,” e. g., masculinity, as being the male of 
 isha, “the feminine.” It is indeed equivalent 
 to "9J, zachar, “the piercer.” We must also remem¬ 
 ber that the idolatrous male images used in the 
 worship of Baal were called I 1 " 1 ?!, zicharon (Furst, 
 s. v.), or “ On the digger,” or “the sturdy workman.” 
 All this helps us to recognise the fact that the heat of 
 the sun producing fructification on earth, and the 
 male fructifying the female, formed the basis of the 
 early ideas of the Creator being phallic. This inter¬ 
 pretation is based upon the idea that Bel and Baal 
 are identical. Some, however, hold that Bel is an 
 independent deity; but we find the attributes given 
 
304 
 
 Ashbel] to each are so much alike, that we consider the 
 objection to be of no moment. 
 
 Ashchenaz, (Gen. x. 8). I can get no satisfactory 
 
 meaning for this word. The name is still used by 
 the modern Jews to designate the Germans. 
 
 Ashdod, (Josh. xi. 22), “ Fire or ash given.” (Com¬ 
 
 pare Ann edotus, Herodotus.) 
 
 Asher, (Gen. xxx. 13) = “ To be straight,” “ upright,” 
 “fortunate,” “happy,” “happiness,” &c.; “ unus 
 cui membrum erectum est, vel fascinum ipsum.” 35 
 My impression is that the name is essentially the 
 same as Asshur, the supreme God of the Assyrians; 
 and I have already stated my belief that he was 
 represented as the Vedic Mahadeva, the human 
 emblem of male creative energy. In India and 
 the East, in Judaea, Egypt, Phoenicia, along the 
 shores of the Mediterranean and the Western coast 
 of Europe, as far north as Denmark, there are still 
 to be seen remains of this idea of the Creator. One 
 country has elaborate obelisks; another, gigantic 
 phalli; another, spires, round towers, columns, or 
 minarets ; whilst another, far poorer in skill, has 
 contented itself wi^h upright stones or logs of wood. 36 
 
 In ancient Britain and Brittany, an upright stone 
 represented the deity, much as a similar stone 
 represented him at Bethel. In all the places where 
 he was thus worshipped, he was anointed with oil 
 to make his top shine. Apropos of this we may 
 notice, that the high priest of any nation has always 
 assumed to be the vicar of God upon earth ; we can 
 
 35 Over a door at Pompeii, is still to be seen the “ fascinum ” as a sign, with 
 the words underneath, “ hie est felicitas.” 
 
 36 Vide Supra , p. 78; see also Pillar Stones and A ncient Monuments. By 
 Thomas Inman, M. D. 32 pp. 8vo. Liverpool: A. Holden, 1867. 
 
305 
 
 Asher] therefore readily imagine that, in the ceremony which 
 attended his consecration, there would be a process 
 similar to that which obtained in the dedication of 
 an emblem representing the Almighty. We do not 
 know exactly what the initiatory ceremony was among 
 other nations, but we are told that amongst the Jews, 
 both Aaron and his successors were anointed with 
 a holy oil, to sanctify them (Lev. viii. 12). The same 
 idea is to be recognised in the consecration of a 
 king (1 Sam. ix. 16 ; x. 1); and the context shows 
 that the pious David considered the monarch who 
 had the anointing oil poured over him was equivalent 
 to God’s vicegerent upon earth. A connexion is thus 
 established between the idea of the pillar stone, the 
 priest, the king, and the Almighty El, which we 
 cannot pass by in silence. In some instances the 
 oil was replaced by wine; and the libation, poured 
 upon the head of the emblem, was collected and 
 stored for future purposes. The wine thus collected 
 was allowed to grow sour, and was then administered 
 to sterile women, who desired to be mothers of 
 offspring. 
 
 We have already adverted to the frequent pro¬ 
 mise of increase of offspring given in the Bible to 
 the Jews {vide supra, p. 60). So much was this 
 thought of as a special appanage of the Hebrews, 
 that David was unable to understand how it was that 
 the wicked, i. e., those who differed from him in faith, 
 were able “ to have children at their desire ” (Psalm 
 xvii. 15, Prayer-book version) ; or, as the original has 
 it, “that thy hidden treasures fill their bellies, 
 and they have abundance of sons.” Ere fertility, 
 however, can be secured, everything necessary to 
 implanting the seed must be in proper condition. 
 
 u 
 
306 
 
 Asher] There can be no wonder, then, that abundance of 
 religious charlatans should have arisen in every age, 
 who promised abundance of manhood, or a restoration 
 of it, if lost, to their worshippers. Hence arose the 
 prevalence of idolatry, i. e., the seeking from the rites 
 or the worship of a strange god, that solace, comfort, 
 or power which had not been found in the old religion. 
 Hence also arises the fulmination of wrath, which is 
 so common in all denominations, against religious 
 quacks; for the very desire of secession in a wor- 
 shipper is a declaration of the belief that the system 
 which is shunned is not a perfect one; that it is 
 inadequate to do what it professes to effect; and 
 that, in the opinion of the ‘ heretic/ another plan 
 of religion, prayer, or ritual will be found more 
 efficacious than the one with which he is familiar. 
 Discontent with one’s instructor is sure to be followed 
 by the desire of changing him, whether the practi¬ 
 tioner be one in divinity or in physic; and there 
 is not any essential difference between the odium 
 tlieologicum et medicum . 
 
 So far as I can see, David was the first to abolish 
 the gross idea about the Almighty which had prevailed 
 throughout the whole of Palestine from the earliest 
 period until his ascent to the throne; Solomon, how¬ 
 ever, evinces, in the pillars Jachin and Boaz, a leaning 
 towards it; Rehoboam stuck to the pure form of 
 faith established by David, and lost four-fifths of 
 his kingdom thereby. Subsequent kings of Judah 
 coquetted seriously with the old forms of faith and 
 practice; but, in the main, they retained the belief 
 and practice of David, and refused to see the Maker 
 of all creation under the image of a phallus, a 
 pillar, or any other form. That their piety, however, 
 
307 
 
 Asher] was not popular amongst the people generally, we 
 have abundant evidence in the writings of Jeremiah 
 and Ezekiel. 
 
 Asherah or Ashrah, (Ex. xxxiv. 18), translated grove 
 
 in the English Bible. There is some difficulty about 
 the meaning of this word, inasmuch as it is associated 
 with “ image pillars.” These being emblems of the 
 male organ, would lead to the belief that the deity 
 was masculine; but the n at the end of the word 
 indicates a feminine idea, and suggests that Asherah, 
 i.e., the female organ, was the counterpart of Asher; 
 if so, the emblems would be offerings to the Goddess. 
 That they were so, we may judge by the inscription 
 which Lucian records as existent on the two enor¬ 
 mous phalli in the vestibule of the temple of the 
 Syrian Goddess, i. e., that they were erected by Bac¬ 
 chus to his mother Juno. Amongst the Phoenicians, 
 Asherah was a Goddess. We may fairly conclude, 
 then, that the word in question typified the female 
 creator under her mundane form. Asherah and 
 Ashtoreth are equivalent to each other. 
 
 The idea embodied in our word grove has nothing 
 to do with a clump of trees, for we find (1 Kings 
 xiv. 23) that groves were erected “ under every green 
 tree,” and that they were objects of worship (Judges 
 iii. 7). When worshipped, they were associated with 
 Baalim, as husband and wife. It has been abun¬ 
 dantly proved, that the image of Baal, or Asshur, 
 was characteristic of his sex; we presume, then, that 
 the emblem of Asherah would be equally so. That it 
 was so in many instances, the learned author of 
 The Remains of the Worship of Priapus in the 
 Middle Ages has demonstrated, for he has figured four 
 stone images of women (which existed till within 
 
808 
 
 Asherah very recently over the porches of certain churches 
 Ashrah in Ireland, and may still be seen in museums), 
 in which the “ Asherah ” is exposed in so flagrant a 
 manner, that we cannot exhibit it pictorially. The 
 same author depicts other images which have existed, 
 or which may still be seen, in ecclesiastical buildings 
 elsewhere, wherein attention is drawn by a female 
 to that part which characterises her sex. 
 
 The same writer remarks that, amongst the 
 Irish, the figures in question were considered as 
 charms to bring good fortune; and we have already 
 mentioned (p. 114) that the feminine emblem for a 
 very long period, and over a vast extent of country, 
 has been considered as a talisman to bring good luck. 
 Now, amongst the Phoenicians, Asherah , or ‘ the 
 grove,’ was the Goddess of good fortune, and we 
 thus obtain evidence confirmatory to our views. But 
 it is probable that the naked truth was generally 
 veiled under certain emblems, and it behoves us to 
 ascertain what these were. The most simple form 
 which was adopted was the closed, or slightly opened, 
 mouth, placed uprightly. Such a figure may be seen 
 in the article Eve {infra), wherein some Egyptian 
 God, seated upon a lotus, is adoring the mother of us 
 all. A farther development of the symbol, which 
 showed it in conjunction with Baal, was the eye; and 
 amongst the most common of all Egyptian charms is 
 that organ open, which was at once the emblem of 
 the Omniscient Creator, and of the erva, or aria , 
 the male and female elements conjoined. 
 
 The same sort of idea may be recognised in the 
 mystic composition on page 156, wherein the emblems 
 of the sexes are conspicuous, though veiled. The 
 “ Asherah,” amongst the Assyrians and Babylonians, 
 
809 
 
 Asherah) was much complicated (see figs. 62-67, pp. 159, 
 Ashrah 160, 161). It is interesting to find that the 
 symbols which I have identified with the sacred 
 mother {vide supra, pp. 158-169), and which were wor¬ 
 shipped in Mesopotamia, are called 4 groves ’ by many 
 Cuneiform scholars. The most difficult part of the 
 subject is to ascertain what is to he understood by 
 the expression, “ where the women wove hangings 
 (or houses) for the grove ” (2 Kings xxiii. 7). The 
 explanation, however, is simply this, that the wor¬ 
 shippers of “ Asherah ” paid their homage in a 
 very matter of fact fashion {vide infra , Bit-Shag- 
 gatha). After some public devotion, a private shrine 
 was sought; and that one might readily be found in 
 the immediate vicinity of the temple, retreats were 
 constructed, over the entrance of which the votaries 
 threw a veil when they occupied them. These hang¬ 
 ings, then, which converted a public spot into a 
 devotional cell, were as much necessaries in the 
 worship of “ Asherah,” as are the vast piles of chairs 
 which we see in continental churches. We may enter 
 such a building from simple curiosity, or we may 
 prefer to offer up our orisons, “ leaning upon the 
 top of a staff,” in which case we pay nothing for the 
 privilege; but if we wish to consult our creature 
 comfort, we hire a chair or two. In like manner, 
 a worshipper of Asherah might adore the Virgin 
 gratuitously; but if he chose to indulge in luxury, 
 and required a votaress with a veil, he paid accord¬ 
 ingly. The more beautiful the curtain (see Ezekiel 
 xvi. 16) and the wearer of it were, the higher was 
 the price which was paid into the treasury. Our 
 authorities for this use of the “ hangings,” or 
 “ houses,” in the text referred to, are certain fres- 
 
810 
 
 Asherah) coes which have been removed from Pompeii 
 
 Ashrah i into the secret chamber of the Musee del Re at 
 Naples. 37 
 
 Ashima, (2 Kings xvii. 80), a divinity of Hamath. 
 
 I think that the word signifies “ The maternal fire,” 
 or ct The mother exists.” “ Umma,” or “ ammah,” 
 is “mother,” and ash, “fire, or existence.” It is 
 probable that many English words, compounded with 
 ash, have a similar origin, e. g., Ash-by, Ash-bourne, 
 Ash-leigh, &c. We have, too, ash and ashes, con¬ 
 nected with the idea of fire. 
 
 Ashkelon, (Judges i. 18). See page 67, supra. 
 
 Ashnah, (Josh. xv. 83), probably for n J? ; \ Jeshanah, 
 
 “ The old one; ” equivalent to Ilos, Time, Cronos, 
 or Saturn. 
 
 Ashpenaz, (Dan. i. 3), of doubtful origin and import. 
 
 Ashtoreth, (1 Kings xi. 5), or Ashtaroth 
 
 (Deut. i. 4). I should feel disposed to derive this 
 word from isha, tor, “ The woman dove,” 
 Ashtoreth being the plural form. ‘Vl'P**, ester, sig¬ 
 nifies the star Venus, the goddess of good luck with 
 wealth and love. (Compare Esther.) The name 
 has also been rendered, * The spouse, or wife ’ (of 
 Mahadeva), ‘ Goddess of love/ &c. Ishtar was one 
 of the names given to the celestial virgin mother 
 in Assyria, and Ishtaroth would be the natural 
 Hebrew plural for “ the Ishtars,” i. e., as virgin and 
 mother, or as the androgyne mother. (See Baal and 
 Ishtar). 
 
 Ashtaroth, Astarte, and Ishtar, (Cuneiform, 
 Iastara,) seem to have been essentially the same 
 deity under different names; and fancy sees in our 
 English Easter a modern variant of this ancient 
 
 37 Herculaneum et Pompeii , par Mons. Roux Aine. 
 
811 
 
 Ashtoreth] goddess. Some Phoenician names, compounded 
 with Astarte, have come down to us through the 
 Greek, e.g., Aj Q^acrrotprog, abdastartos; BaWotcrTupTos, 
 ballastartos; Botiorroop, bodostor; AsAiacrraprof, deli- 
 astartos; and we may possibly trace to this origin the 
 English names Startin, Star, Starleigh, &c. 
 
 Pillars, columns, &c., seem to have been erected 
 to Astarte, the meaning of which may be ascertained, 
 not only from Lucian’s account of the Syrian God¬ 
 dess, but from the pine cone offered at the Assyrian 
 shrines. The erection of the tower indicated one 
 part, and the pine cone, or egg, the other part, of On 
 and his cluster. Hence we conclude that Ashtoreth 
 is practically the same as Asherah. 
 
 Ashtoreth Karnaim, niirrcpy (Gen. xiv. 5), is simply 
 the Goddess Astarte, adorned by the ram’s horns, 
 karnaim , denoting two horns), just as Isis is 
 represented with the horns of a cow. The female 
 deity, when represented with the horns of a mas¬ 
 culine animal, is supposed to be androgyne, and the 
 figure becomes the emblem of divinity and power. 
 Probably the same as Succoth Benoth. 
 
 Ashur, ‘i-WK (1 Chron. ii. 24, and iv. 5). It is evident that 
 this name, which was borne by two Jews, is essentially 
 the same as Asher and Assher; but it has been 
 altered so as to remove the semblance of relationship 
 with the Assyrian. We have amongst ourselves 
 evidences of similar change ,* thus Abraham, by 
 dropping the first a , becomes “Braham;” by other 
 styles of change Levi becomes Elvi; Chajim becomes 
 Hime, or Hyam; Smith, Brown, Green, appear as 
 Smythe, Browne, and Greene; and sometimes the 
 desire of change will convert the homely looking 
 “ Stirrup ” into the aristocratic “ de Styrap.” 
 
812 
 
 Ashvath, (1 Chron. vii. 38), “A stout, firm, or strong 
 one.” Fiirst. 
 
 Asiel, (1 Chron. iv. 35), a variant of Asahel, signifying 
 “ El creates; ” or possibly it comes from asa, and 
 el, “El is shaggy, or hairy.” In this case the 
 el, was allowed to remain unchanged; the early 
 redactors of the modern text having let the books 
 of Chronicles alone, as they were not often read or 
 consulted by the Jews. 
 
 Asnah, njBK (Ezra ii. 50). This word is an indication, 
 apparently, of Persian influence over Jewish nomen¬ 
 clature, for we very naturally associate it with the 
 name, Asnappeb ; if so, it signifies “ great, or distin¬ 
 guished.” If we seek for a Hebrew derivation, we 
 cannot find one nearer than ashen, and jah, 
 of which last the yod is elided ; this would give the 
 meaning, “ Jah is firm, hard, or strong.” Fiirst 
 assigns the meaning as “ dwelling in a thorn-bush ” ! 
 
 Asnappeb, (Ezra iv. 10), “ Greatly distinguished.” 
 
 Aspatha, (Esther ix. 7), Persian, “ The horse 
 
 given ” (Gesenius). The horse was sacred to the 
 Sun in Persia. Here the sign is used for the thing 
 signified. Fiirst states that the emblem of the God 
 Behram was a horse. 
 
 Askiel, (Numb. xxvi. 31). See Asabeel. 
 
 Asshub, (Gen. x. 11), “A mighty man,” “ a hero ; ” a 
 variant of Asheb, which see. 
 
 Assib, (Exod vi. 24), a variant of a sar, “He 
 binds together,” “ he unites,” sexually; the name 
 is also allied to the Phoenician deity Aser, who 
 is the equivalent of Osiris, and every other of the 
 primeval male deities. It is a covert form of express¬ 
 ing the masculine emblem. 
 
 Assybia and Assub are other forms of the Hebrew Asshub, 
 
813 
 
 Assyria) the same name standing in Hebrew alike for the 
 
 Assur i founder of the monarchy and his kingdom. 
 
 Asha-dur-kali, a masculine cognomen in Assyria. 
 
 Ashah, Cuneiform, = “ The woman;” “to be fitted 
 together.” A variant of Ishtar; also Atha, Isha, 
 Ashr. 
 
 Ashar, or Athar. “ A place,” "108. 
 
 Ashur-tzu and Ashur-liah, Cuneiform, male names, —• 
 “ Asshur conquers,” and “ is victorious.” 
 
 Assarak, a modern Arab daemon. Probably from asha, 
 and riN, akh , i. e., “ like to Ishtar,” or “ like to fire,” 
 or “like to the woman.” 
 
 Asshur-akh-iddin. The Cuneiform reading of Esar Haddon. 
 
 An-asura, Yedic, “ a demon.” 
 
 As „ “ to exist,” “to be,” the origin of is. 
 
 Ash, “ to go,” “ to take,” “ to shine.” 
 
 Asi, „ “a sword.” 
 
 Asparas, „ or Apsaras. Nymphs for the gods to 
 
 disport with. 
 
 Astri, „ “ a shooter.” Astra, ‘ a missile weapon,’ 
 
 ‘an arrow.’ 
 
 Asura, „ “ eternal.” 
 
 Asuras, „ “ enemies of Cristna,” “ lightless.” Have 
 
 they anything to do with Osiris ? 
 
 Atar-sura, the name of an Egyptian, living at Nineveh. 
 (Compare Sara, and Surya.) 
 
 Atarah, (1 Chron. ii. 26), “ A crown, or diadem; ” 
 
 Ataroth is its plural. Crowns were emblems of the 
 Sun’s disc; we often call them aureoles, when they 
 adorn the heads of saints, re being one of the solar 
 
 names. 
 
 Ataroth, (Numb, xxxii. 8). See Atarah. 
 
 Ataroth-adar, (Josh. xvi. 5), “ The top of 
 
 Ataroth.” 
 
814 
 
 Ater, (Ezra ii. 16), for atar, “ He surrounds us,’" 
 or “he binds together.” (Compare Assir.) 
 
 Athach, (1 Sam. xxx. 80) “ He is bold, or impudent.” 
 (Compare Ithaca, T0ax>j.) 
 
 Athaiah, n W ; (Nehem. xi. 4), “Jah assists;” from 
 athah, and nj, Jah. 
 
 Athaliah, (2 Kings xi. 1), “The Jah sending earth¬ 
 
 quakes ; ” from athal, “ to shake violently,” and 
 nj, Jah. It seems probable, from the history (see 
 Amos i. 1), that this queen was born shortly after a 
 destructive earthquake; and hence the name. (Comp. 
 Isaiah xxix. 6, “ Thou shalt be visited of the Lord 
 with earthquake.”) 
 
 When writing the preceding, Gesenius was my 
 chief Hebrew authority; but I now find that Fiirst 
 assigns to athal, the following meanings: “ to 
 knot, or tie together,” “to be vigorous, strong, and 
 able; ” if this be correct, the cognomen signifies 
 “Jah ties together,” or “is strong and firm.” We 
 may compare this with Ater and Assir. We have 
 already seen that Jah, like El, was sometimes asso¬ 
 ciated with the sensual idea of the Creator; we now 
 see that the ten tribes who seceded from the Jews 
 carried with them the same reverence for the name 
 of Jah as the latter retained. It is, however, sur¬ 
 prising that the modern redactors of the sacred text 
 should have allowed the word to be spelled in full, 
 thus showing that their own sacred name was borne 
 and respected by one of the offspring of idolatrous 
 Ahab ! This is only to be accounted for by the 
 cognomen occurring in the Books of Kings, which, 
 like those of Chronicles, were very little read. (Comp. 
 Jehu.) 
 
 Athlai, (Ezra x. 28), “Jah ties together,” “is 
 
315 
 
 Athlai] vigorous,” " strong,” “ able.” This is an elided 
 form of the preceding word. 
 
 Athor. The name of one of the divinities of Egypt, which 
 we may best render as “ the sacred cow,” or Isis, 
 with the bovine head. The fruitful mother of all 
 creation was represented under an infinite variety 
 of forms; very frequently as a cow giving nourish¬ 
 ment to her calf, and caressing it with her tongue, 
 as quadrupeds are accustomed to do. We should 
 naturally imagine that a cow might be selected for 
 worship simply as the consort of the bull, but we 
 learn from iElian, whom I have already quoted (page 
 54), that there was a reason why she should be 
 chosen independently of such connection. It is 
 remarkable that the lioness has a like propensity 
 with this creature to roar out, in hoarse bellowings, 
 the want she feels. This instinct directly tends to 
 keep down the race of lions, which, being individually 
 long lived, and too powerful to be killed by other 
 animals, would soon become formidable by their 
 numbers. As is the case with rats, there are a great 
 many males to one female ; and when the latter roars 
 for indulgence, all the lions within hearing rush to 
 enjoy her company; and if there are more than one, 
 they fight until all but one are killed, or put to flight. 
 Hence it happens that many of the Goddesses are 
 represented in connection with, or are symbolised by, 
 the lioness, just as others are by the cow. The amount 
 of knowledge possessed by the ancients respecting the 
 habits of the lower animals seems to have been far 
 greater than is usually thought. (See Heifer.) 
 
 Atroth, (Numb. xxii. 85), a variant of Ataroth, 
 
 which see. 
 
 Attai, W (1 Chron. ii. 85), a variant of Ittai, said to mean 
 
316 
 
 Attai] “ opportune.” I copy the following from Ancient 
 Pillar Stones of Scotland , by George Moore, M.D.; 
 the passage occurs in the attempt to decipher 
 two inscriptions on an upright stone: “ The word 
 is Aithie, Aittie, or Ettie. This is the precise form 
 of the Aramaic word Aittai, which occurs twice in 
 the Old Testament as a proper name; once in 
 Chron. xi. 81, as Ithai, and again in Samuel 
 xxiii. 29, as Ittai; the name being that of the 
 
 same person in each instance.This name 
 
 is well represented by the Scotch patronymic Ettie. 
 This name appears under many spellings, as Aeddie, 
 Eadie, Eaddie, Edie, Adie, Adey, Ade, Ada, Eddy, 
 Eathie, and Etty.” There is much more in his 
 book respecting this name, which he takes to mean 
 “ the living one,” “ the vigorous and distinguished 
 person,” pp. 83, 34. I am glad to see that the learned 
 author of this book, which only came into my hands 
 when I had composed almost the whole of the pre¬ 
 ceding matter, holds the same opinion as myself, as 
 regards the extent of travel, trade, and missionary 
 enterprise in the days of the Phoenicians, although 
 he differs from me very materially in the idea 
 which he supports, viz., that the traders were Jews, 
 of the tribe of Dan. 
 
 At, Sanscrit, “ To go,” “ to move continually.” 
 
 Atmou, Atmoo, Atum, Atm (Egyptian) = “ darkness,” (the 
 atmosphere ?) 
 
 Attan, Cuneiform, “ I gave,” from natan; same as I™, 
 Nathan , ‘ he gives, or gave.’ 
 
 Attata, Scythic, = “ father ; ” Esquimaux, attatak ; Gothic, 
 atta ; Magyar, atya; Syriac, ahha; Gaelic and Irish, 
 aithair; Manx, Ayr; Bohemian, Otee. 
 
 Attala, Sanscrit, “ High,” “ lofty,” “ top room of a house.’’ 
 
317 
 
 Attala] (Compare Atilla, ‘ king of the stars ; 5 and Attalus, 
 a royal name in ancient Asia Minor.) 
 
 Ava, W (2 Kings xvii. 24). See Ayah. 
 
 Avah, a variant of Ivah. This is one of the readings of the 
 name of the God of the air by Rawlinson, the Arabic 
 word for which he tells us is hiva. I will not 
 copy his remarks, but refer simply to Rawlinson’s 
 Herodotus, vol. i. p. 498, second edition. 
 
 Aven, t)? (Josh. vii. 2), or Aun = fiN, on, a variant of On. 
 This is probably the origin of such names as Avon, 
 Avonmore, Aven, Avison, and many others. 
 
 Avim, E'W (Deut. ii. 23). Also called Avims, and Avites ; 
 possibly “ The nomads,” a verbal substantive; pro¬ 
 bably from the root avah, ( to move about a thing, 
 as tents or huts.’ 
 
 Az, Yedic, “ To be strong.” 
 
 Aza, ktm, “ To be hot,” “ to kindle.” 
 
 Azal, ^ (Zech. xiv. 5), “ He is distinguished.” 
 
 Azaliah, :ir Vr , ¥? (2 Kings xxii. 3), “ Jah is distinguished, or 
 noble; ” from azal, ‘ noble,’ Choice,’ ‘select.’ 
 
 Azaniah, n T ^!?, “ Jah hears; ” I!?, azan, ‘ to hear, weigh, 
 ponder.’ 
 
 Azar, Azzur, “W (Jer. xxviii. 1), “ He strengthens.” 
 
 Azareel, (1 Chron. xii. 6). (Compare with Asariel.) 
 
 “El is a helper,” or “God helps.” (Compare also 
 Aznel.) Gesenius compares Hasdrubal, ‘ the help 
 of Baal,’ or ‘ Baal the helper.’ 
 
 Azariah, n ^!^ ; (2 Kings xiv. 21), “Jah the helper.” 
 
 Azaz, (1 Chron. v. 8), is equivalent to “strong,” “to be, 
 or make strong.” 
 
 Azazel, translated scape-goat in our ordinary version; 
 but from the context it would seem that he was some 
 imaginary being, analogous to our devil, or Satan, 
 i. e., the adversary. Fiirst speaks of him as being 
 
318 
 
 Azazel] the same sort of conception as the Etruscan and 
 Greek Typhon. (See Scape-Goat.) 
 
 Azaziah, “ The strong Jah,” or “Jah is strong or 
 
 firm.” 
 
 Azbon, P^yK, ezbon, “On shines;” 3??, azab, ‘to shine.’ 
 
 Azbuk, (Neh. iii. 16), “ He sets free.” 
 
 Azekah, r, iTO (Joshua x. 10), “He will break through;” 
 P!?, ‘ to chop, break, or dig through.’ 
 
 Azel, (1 Chron. viii. 87), “ He is strong, noble.” 
 
 Azem, E.yg, or Ezem (Joshua xv. 29), “He is powerful, 
 firm.” 
 
 Azgad, (Ezra ii. 12), “ Good luck is protection.” 
 
 Aziel, (1 Chron. xv. 20), “El judges,” from TO, azah, 
 ‘ to judge,’ and el, &c. 
 
 Aziza, (Ezra x. 27), “Strong,” “the Syrian Mars.” 
 The name of the Sultan of Turkey is Abdul Aziz, 
 in which the scholar can readily see ‘the servant 
 of El, the strong one.’ 
 
 Azmaveth, (2 Sam. xxiii. 31), “Strong to death;” 
 
 from W, ez, and n-io, maveth. (See Beth Azmaveth.) 
 
 Azmon, t^yy (Numbo xxxiv. 4), “ The might of On ; ” °y^, 
 ezem, or n ^yy, azma, ‘might,’ ‘ strength.’ 
 
 Aznoth Tabor, TOfi ntajK (Josh. xix. 34), “ Summits of 
 Tabor; ” UK, ‘ a point, or top.’ 
 
 Azbibl, ^'yy (1 Chron. v. 24), “El shuts up;” 1«?, azar, 
 ‘ to enclose.’ Hence “ the angel of death,” who shuts 
 up the dead in the grave. 
 
 Azrikam, EjJ'Piy (1 Chron. iii. 23), “God is helper;” Dp, 
 ham, ‘assistant,’ is a periphrasis for Jah , in proper 
 
 names, e.g., Adoni -kam. Fiirst. 
 
 Azubah, n 3TO (i Kings xxii. 42), “ A heap of stones,” 
 “ desolation.” 
 
 Azur, “W (Jer. xxviii. 1), “ He hedges us about, or 
 protects ” = TO, azar . 
 
319 
 
 Azza, or Gaza, (Gen. x. 19), “ Strong,” “fortified;” 38 
 TV, oz, strength,’ &c. 
 
 Azzan, \[W (Numb, xxxiv. 26), “ He is sharp or strong,” 
 
 B. This letter, which is called in the Hebrew beth, or 
 baith , and in the Greek /3rjra, beeta, takes its name 
 from a house, or, as many say, from a tent. In 
 support of the latter statement, it is averred that the 
 original form was conical, and that in the Ethiopic 
 it has still a form resembling a tent. The point 
 is only of importance, inasmuch as it is advanced as 
 an argument to prove that the originators of the 
 alphabet were nomads, not living in houses, and 
 Hebrews, rather than Phoenicians. But a reference 
 to alphabetical signs in general does not disclose any 
 appreciable resemblance to the thing whose name the 
 letter bears. It is true that 4 aleph,’ in the Phoeni¬ 
 cian, bears some likeness to a bull’s head; but j, 
 gimel, would never be mistaken for ‘ a camel,’ or j, 
 nun , for 4 a fish.’ 
 
 As a matter of fact, n resembles a square house 
 more than a conical or other marquee ; but then the 
 letters n> n, n, D, he, cheth, tau, and final mem , are 
 still better outlines than l of an oriental mansion. 
 Moreover, in the Ethiopian alphabet, even the letters 
 l, hh, a, and t, are more like a tent than the letter 
 b; of which, for the reader’s convenience, we give 
 wood-cuts, in the order named,— 
 
 Afftn Am 
 
 l. hh, b, a, t, 
 
 88 There are two meanings to 7122, Azza, or Gazza; the one “he is hard, or 
 stiff,” the other “he shuts, or encloses;” differently pointed, we have the meanings 
 “wood” and “the spine.” Comparing the name with that of the other Philistine 
 towns, I conclude that the signification is, “ he is ready to generate.” 
 
320 
 
 B] From this it will be seen that all resemble tents, 
 with or without the ‘ lodge-pole.’ In none of the 
 alphabets which I have yet seen, does B in any way 
 resemble either a house or a tent; and we consider that 
 no valid argument can be founded on the assertion 
 that it did so once upon a time. 
 
 In the Phoenician, Hebrew, and Greek, the letter in 
 question, when it is used as a numeral, stands for ‘two.’ 
 
 In compound proper names, it is stated by Fiirst, 
 that ? is occasionally used instead of t|, ben, e.g., 
 0?, b’dan, is equivalent to ITI|, ben-dan ; sometimes 
 instead of baal, e.g., Von, instead of 
 baal-on, and b'tam, for BVtp baal taam; 
 
 sometimes for betln, e.g., beshterah, for 
 
 beth-ashtarah. The same author also 
 
 states, that in Phoenician proper names, beth is 
 reproduced by A, te. 
 
 Being a labial, a, b, is interchangeable with 
 others, and occasionally takes the place of a, p, », 
 m, and 1 v. We have in our own country a good 
 illustration of this in the words Billy, Willy, and 
 Pilly, which are variants of each other. The letter is 
 also used as a preposition, and as such added to 
 the commencement of words; its signification then 
 corresponds to the Latin in. It is the most general 
 preposition for motion, near, and may signify ‘ in,’ 
 ‘amongst,’ ‘within,’ ‘at,’ ‘by,’ ‘near,’ ‘on,’ ‘before,’ 
 ‘in the presence of,’ ‘upon,’ ‘to,’ ‘over,’ ‘against,’ 
 ‘ opposite to,’ ‘near,’ ‘ like to,’ ‘as,’ ‘for,’ ‘on account 
 of,’ ‘ concerning,’ ‘ together with.’ 
 
 Baal, Vsb, plural, Baalim. 39 There is strong reason for believ- 
 
 89 Baalim. —Lajard, in Ms researches on the worship of Venus, writes: “ The 
 names Baalim , Baaloth, Eloim, Elooth; Alonim, and Alonoth, employed in the 
 plural, sometimes in the masculine, sometimes in the feminine ; and the plural 
 
821 
 
 Baal] ing that this word has originally been a compound 
 one, consisting of el, and ab, i. e., ab-el, which 
 has been contracted by one family of the Phens into 
 , baal, and by another into bel or bail; ^?, bal, 
 as in Baladan (Isa. xxxix. 1); or bil, as in Bilgah 
 (1 Chron. xxiv. 14). In this case, the original mean¬ 
 ing of the word would he = “ Father El,” an equi¬ 
 valent to Saturn, Cronos, Jupiter, or any other name 
 by which the father of Gods and men is known. 
 
 Without dwelling upon the derivation, we may say 
 that lexicographers assign to the word in question 
 the meanings “ lord,” “master,” “owner,” “pos¬ 
 sessor,” “ husband; ” it also signifies “to be big, 
 strong, mighty.” Sanscrit, bala, “ strength.” Speak¬ 
 ing generally, it is a word used vaguely, much as we 
 use “ Lord,” i. e., “ The Lord ” has one meaning, 
 “ The lord of the manor” has another, and “ My lord ” 
 another. Originally, the name Baal was respected 
 amongst the Jews, for Saul, Jonathan, and David 
 called sons after him, viz., Esh-baal, Meribbaal, 
 and Beelida (see 1 Chron. viii. 88, 34, and iii. 8, 
 marginal reading). Now we are told (Judges x. 6) 
 that the children of Israel served Baalim and 
 Ashtaroth. As these deities are placed in conjunc- 
 
 feminine name, Aschtaroth, which the Septuagint have rendered in Greek by 
 ’Acrraprai, appears to attest that, in the language as well as in the figured 
 monuments, the ancients sought, by certain artifices, to express that the ideas 
 of unity, of duality, and of androgynism are inseparable from the idea of divinity.” 
 And he adds, in a note, “ One of the consequences of the employment of the plural 
 forms to connect the idea of divinity with that of androgynism, was to give to the 
 words Baal and Allah the mutual faculty of being employed either as masculine or 
 feminine; when, in consequence of a theologic reform, the divinity was found 
 divided into male and female. We have the proof of this in Hosea ii. 8, in which 
 part the Septuagint translate Baal as if a feminine deity; and again in Rom. xi. 4, 
 where Baal is again spoken of as a female divinity.” The Babylonian figure 
 (see Plate II., Fig. 3) is described by him as answering equally to Baalim and 
 Ashtoreth. And he adds, “that the Greek word 0eos is also both of a musculine and 
 feminine gender.” (Page 111, edit. 1.) 
 
 X 
 
322 
 
 Baal] tion, and as the termination *of the plural form shows 
 them to be masculine and feminine, and moreover as 
 we know that Ashtoreth is a female, it is tolerably 
 clear that, whatever form Baal assumed, he was a 
 male deity. My impression is, that he was the same 
 as the Hindoo Mahadeva. I doubt whether there were 
 really more Baals or Ishtars than one. We should 
 ourselves be indignant if any one said that we had 
 polytheism amongst us; and yet, in our Prayer 
 Books, we have supplications addressed to three 
 distinct persons, and in Papal books of devotion a 
 fourth is added; and besides these, there are an 
 innumerable host of saints to whom prayers are 
 offered. 
 
 Amongst the Komanists, there are “ Mary of the 
 Guard,” “ Mary of Sorrow,” “ Mary of Loretto,” and 
 many others. In our own Scriptures, the appellations 
 of the Creator, &c., are very numerous, yet they all 
 have reference to one (see 1 Cor. xii. 4, 5, 6, et seq.) 
 As a foreigner, studying our English books, receives 
 an idea of the British estimate of God by the appel¬ 
 lations which we use, e. g., “ God of love, ” of 
 “mercy,” of “judgment,” of “life,” “death,” &c., 
 so we may form an idea of the notions of Baal 
 which were held by the ancients, by ascertaining his 
 varied appellatives, and their nature. We take them 
 seriatim. 
 
 Baal-berith, (Judges viii. 28), “Baal the cove¬ 
 
 nanter,” “ the lord of the covenant,” i. e., consenting 
 to do good, &c., to those w r ho agreed to worship him. 
 So far as we can judge, the idea of men making a 
 covenant with the Almighty was a very ancient, and is 
 still a very common one. Now “ a covenant,” in 
 plain English, signifies “ a bargain ; ” and to the 
 
323 
 
 Baal-Berith] philosopher, the notion of making a bargain 
 with the Omnipotent savours of blasphemy. But 
 setting this aside, let us try to form a notion what 
 sort of a bargain would be made between Baal-Berith 
 and his votaries. Being a so-called heathen god, he 
 would promise them, as gypsies do silly men and 
 women of to-day, “good luck in everything,” “hand¬ 
 some and rich spouses,” “great wealth,” “ success in 
 business,” “ abundance of ‘ bonnes fortunes,’ ” every¬ 
 thing, in fact, which earth could bestow to yield and 
 intensify pleasure. 
 
 Let us turn next to the covenant proposed by 
 “Jah, or El Berith ” (Deut. xxviii. 1 to end). We 
 find that He promises “ pre-eminence amongst 
 nations;” “blessings in the city and in the field, 
 in the fruit of the body, of the ground, of the cattle,” 
 &c.; “ blessings of basket and store ; ” “ blessings 
 against enemies;” “courage unlimited; ” “abundance 
 of manly vigour,” &c. (Ibid., verse 11, see marginal 
 reading). On the other hand, if El Berith was not 
 worshipped as his priests prescribed, a variety of 
 curses are menaced, being the opposite of the 
 blessings promised. 
 
 After this, let us ask ourselves the real difference 
 between Baal- and El-Berith. Both, through their 
 priests, equally promise sensual gratification; and both, 
 through the same medium, would doubtless be able to 
 attribute any misfortune which happened to a votary 
 to a breach of covenant, or a breaking of the bargain. 
 
 Even at the present day, our ideas are the same 
 as those of the votaries of any ancient covenant god. 
 We believe, as we are told, that the terms of the 
 bargain with the Almighty are to be found in the 
 Bible; and when any misfortune befals us, no matter 
 
324 
 
 Baal-Berith] in what shape soever it may come, we are 
 assured by those who assume to be divine ministers 
 that we have broken the terms of the covenant, and 
 hence have come to grief. We are thus constantly 
 led to attribute results, which emanate entirely from 
 our own stupidity and thoughtlessness, to the interven¬ 
 tion of a being who lies * at the catch ’ for our destruc¬ 
 tion. Now if a man ruins his health by dissipation, 
 then becomes *pious,’ marries, and loses his children 
 by scrofula, he may regret it; but he has no right to 
 say that the death of his dearest is a punishment 
 sent because he broke the covenant of God. As a 
 matter of punishment, a prolonged life of suffering 
 in the person of a darling child is a greater curse than 
 its sudden or speedy death. In like manner, if a 
 nation neglects all sanitary precautions, and then is 
 decimated by pestilence, it is not right to assume that 
 the scourge is a chastisement for a national sin. 
 But there never has been, and probably there never 
 will he, a people amongst whom the priesthood do 
 not attribute every calamity to offences against the 
 god which they worship; to propitiate whom, some 
 offering is to be made, which serves to aggrandise 
 the power or extend the influence of the hierarchy. 
 (See Berothah.) 
 
 Baal-Gad, laVi (Josh. xi. 17), a combination of one of the 
 names or attributes of Astarte with that of Baal, 
 equivalent to “ the lord of good fortune; ” probably 
 the same as the “ fortuna virilis ” of the Bomans, 
 and of the Greeks at Pompeii. 
 
 Baal-Hamon, (Cant. viii. 11), “ The God of riches;” 
 
 hamon, “ riches; ” or amon, “Ammon,” or 
 “ Amun ” of Egypt. Equivalent to the Greek and 
 Roman “Plutus.” 
 
325 
 
 Baal-Hanan, (Gen. xxxv. 88), “Baal is gracious,” 
 
 or “ the merciful Baal.” 
 
 Baal-Hazor, “tiwrtpa (2 Sam. xiii. 28), “ The Lord of 
 safety,” “ my fortress,” “ deliverer,” &c. “*10? hazar, 
 
 “ to surround, to protect.” 
 
 Baal-Hermon, (Judges iii. 3), “ The Lord of 
 
 Hermon,” “ worshipped on Hermon.” It is stated 
 that the remains of a shrine for worship are still to 
 he recognised on the summit of the mountain. 
 
 Baal-Meon, ttto-ba (Josh. xiii. 17), “ The Lord of the 
 heavenly habitation ; ” I 'W, meon, “the dwelling of 
 God,” &c. In this appellative we see the same idea 
 associated with Baal as we find elsewhere with Jah 
 (see Deut. xxvi. 15, and Psalm lxviii. 5); by which it 
 is clear that there was as exalted an idea of Baal, as 
 there was of the Jewish God. (But see Beth-Baal- 
 Meon, infra.) 
 
 Baal-Peor, (Numb. xxv. 3); W3, peor, signifies 
 
 “ the opening of the maiden’s hymen.” (See Peor, 
 compare Belphegor.) The word in question therefore 
 signifies “ My Lord the opener.” This particular 
 form of god is Mahadeva, Siva, Crishna, Bramah, El, 
 Asher, Ash, Dionysus, Bacchus, Ab, Saturn, Jao or 
 Jupiter, Osiris, Adonis, Hercules, under a different 
 name. Every ancient god has nearly as many syno- 
 nymes as our own. By multipying the names of 
 a god, we do not divide the essence of which we 
 speak; nor by the cognomen which we select, do we 
 clothe the Almighty with a form. We speak of the 
 Almighty as HE—a word, a pronoun; the ancients 
 symbolished the Creator by the ‘ organ,’ rather than 
 by the pronoun, which characterises man. This 
 Baal-Peor was reproduced in later times as Priapus, 
 under which name modern Europeans speak of him. 
 
826 
 
 Baal-Peor] There is something very interesting to the phi¬ 
 losopher, who studies the gradual development of the 
 coarse ‘ past/ into the Christian and somewhat moral 
 * present.’ When once he has overcome his disgust 
 at the idea involved in the name of this deity, he will 
 find a somewhat similar notion to that which obtained 
 about the ancient gods is still current in Europe, in 
 the days of what is called Christianity, though it 
 deserves another name. From time immemorial, the 
 virginity of woman has been spoken of as her greatest 
 treasure. Hence it has been claimed for the Deity. 
 Amongst the Roman Catholics the claim is made and 
 allowed to this day, in a metaphorical sense. In 
 ancient times the claim was made by the god, as 
 personated by, or inhabiting the body of, his priest on 
 earth. Sometimes the demand was made for the god 
 as represented by his image, which was specially 
 formed for the purpose. When these practices fell 
 into disuse, the claim was made by the emperor of a 
 nation, or by the lord of the soil; and in France, 
 the “ Droits de Seigneur” were not abolished till the 
 Revolution. 
 
 It is hard to believe that the sacrifice of a maiden’s 
 virginity could ever now be in any way the occasion 
 of a religious ceremony; yet we see that it is so still in 
 the church of Rome. In Eastern countries, too, we 
 find at the present time that maidens dedicate not 
 only their maidenhood but themselves to their god, 
 just as they do in Europe, though in a less mystical 
 and very matter of fact manner. 
 
 Amongst men, the “ prepuce ” was the portion 
 claimed for the Deity. 
 
 Baal-Perazim, (2 Sam. v. 20), “ Baal of the 
 
 fissures,” Clefts in the earth were at one 
 
327 
 
 Baal-Perazim] time considered sacred, and persons went 
 into and came out again, so as to be born anew. (See 
 page 114, note 9.) 
 
 Baal-Shalisha, (2 Kings iv. 42). This name 
 
 involves some curious inquiries; shalosh, signifies 
 “ three,” and it is also written as Shelesh, Shlashah. 
 As Shelesh (a proper name), it signifies ‘ the three,’ 
 ‘ triad, or trinity.’ Another variant is Shilshah, 
 and Shalisha, both meaning triad; we may read the 
 word, then, “ My Lord the trinity,” or “ My Lord 
 is three,” i. e., the complete phallus. But I think 
 we may equally read it “ The Lord of the triangle.” 
 We have already said how ancient, as an emblem of 
 the Deity, the equilateral triangle has been. The 
 double triangles were known to David and Solomon 
 (see pages 119, 145-147, supra); and such a figure 
 formed the celebrated seal of Solomon, by which 
 he conquered the genii; they still possess sufficient 
 sanctity to figure in our churches. Though the two 
 meanings are apparently different, they are in reality 
 the same, the latter being emblematic of the former. 
 
 I do not find any indication that the trinity was 
 openly talked of in ancient times, though I believe 
 it was taught in the mysteries, and signified the 
 triple genital organ of the male. We may notice, 
 too, that the Bible contains nothing which directly 
 hears upon it. The most diligent student of Holy 
 Writ, whose theological ideas are derived solely from 
 the Bible, could never from its pages frame an idea 
 of the Trinity such as is current in the Koman and 
 Anglican Churches. Let him, however, start with the 
 heathen dogma, and he can then find sufficient 
 evidence, both in the Old and in the New Testament, 
 to make the Pagan doctrine appear to be the Christian 
 
828 
 
 Baal-Shalisha] one. There are many who believe that if 
 Christ had thought the doctrine of ‘ the Trinity ’ 
 important, He would have taught it. The same may 
 be said, though with less force, of the Apostles. 
 
 Now, the triangle is a sacred symbol in our 
 modern churches, and it was the sign used in ancient 
 temples before the unitiated, to indicate the Trinity— 
 three persons ‘ coeternal together and coequal; ’ and I 
 conclude that “Baal of the trinity, or of the triangle,” 
 is the interpretation of the word in question. 
 
 Baal-Tamab, (Judges xx. 2, 8), “ Baal, the palm 
 
 tree.” In the last half of this word we have 
 a clear indication of the nature of the God. It 
 signifies “ My Lord who is, or causes to be erect,” 
 or “My Lord the palm tree;” this tree being, like 
 the pine, an euphemism for the male organ. We 
 have no doubt that there were pilgrimages made 
 to his shrine for the cure of infirmity, or sterility 
 (maleficia vel impotentia ), just as there were to the 
 shrine of Saint Cosmos, at Isernia, near Naples, 
 almost to the end of the last century. 
 
 The word Tamar, ‘ the palm tree/ was a favourite 
 appellative for females; and we have the name still 
 existing amongst our English rivers, e. g., Tamar, 
 Thames. With us the poplar is a favourite emblem 
 for a handsome young man. 
 
 Baalzebub, or Beelzebub, (2 Kings i. 2), is usually 
 
 said to mean “ My Lord of flies; ” but this seems to 
 me to be absurd. The word MJ, zabab, signifies ‘ to 
 murmur/ ‘ hum, or buz ; ’ and when we remember the 
 Memnons in Egypt, which give out a murmur at 
 sunrise, I think it more consonant with what we know 
 of priestly devices, to consider that the word signifies 
 “ My Lord who murmurs.” The appellation would 
 
329 
 
 Baalzebub ) certainly have suited 44 the Memnons,” and they 
 
 Beelzebub! were held very sacred. In the temples of Isis, 
 at Pompeii, may yet be seen a contrivance, by which 
 a priest could creep under a statue, unseen by the 
 worshipper, and utter through a hole, placed behind 
 the feet of the goddess, any response which he might 
 fancy. Such a deity we might ourselves characterise 
 as the one who 4 mutters; 5 for no distinct speech 
 would be adopted, lest the human voice should be 
 too clearly recognised. 40 (See Deborah.) 
 
 Baal-Zephon, (Exod. xiv. 2), signifies 44 My Lord 
 
 the shining On ; ” »">£¥, tzapha, 4 to be bright.’ There 
 is, however, some doubt whether this name has not 
 another origin. Fiirst thinks {Lexicon, s.v .) that 
 Zephon is equivalent to 4 Typhon,’ the heavenly ruler, 
 4 the lord of the storm and the whirlwind.’ But as 
 the Hebrews, whenever they adopted a Greek word, 
 seem to have copied the Greek spelling as far as 
 possible, it is difficult to conceive that Tzephon 
 would be made the equivalent of Typhon. The pro¬ 
 nunciation might raise an idea as to relationship 
 with 4 Tiesiphone,’ one of the 44 Furies,” and L Tisi- 
 phonus,’ a Greek general, who lived prior to the time 
 of Philip of Macedon; but these etymons are both 
 unsatisfactory. Another and more probable conjecture 
 is, that Zephon is a Hebrew form of £*$o£, xiphos, 
 4 a sword ; ’ in which case Baal Zephon would be 
 4 Baal with the sword,’ as contradistinguished from 
 4 Baal with the club.’ Whichever idea we adopt, the 
 
 40 “ The name of Baal, at Ekron, as ‘ the averter of the insect.’ Similarly Zevs 
 an6fj.vi.os (Paus. 8, 26, 4), the deus Myiagrus of the Romans (Solin. chap, i.) 
 Compare the epithets, wtoktovos vermin killer, KopvonCiov locust killer.” — Fiirst’s 
 Lexicon, sub voce I’llt. The reader may select the interpretation which best 
 
 pleases him. 
 
330 
 
 Baal-Zephon] name affords us another illustration of Gre¬ 
 cian influence in the Pentateuch. 
 
 Baalah, ntoa (josh. xv. 9), signifies “ My Lady,” and refers 
 to Ishtar, or Astarte ; and I presume that — 
 
 Baalath, (Josh. xix. 24), is probably the plural of 
 
 the same, and is identical with Ashtoreth, = “ My 
 Ladies the Goddesses,” and possibly with Baalim. 
 (See Baaloth.) 
 
 Baaliah, or Bealaiah, (1 Chron. xii. 5), means “My 
 Lord, or Baal, is Jah.” This name, which was 
 borne by one of David’s mighty men, is one of the 
 cognomens wdiich has escaped alteration. It tells us 
 clearly that, in the ears of David, the word Baal was 
 not associated with the idea of idolatry; to him Baal 
 and Jah were the same deity, under two names. The 
 cognomen in question has been changed to Eliada 
 (2 Sam. v. 16). 
 
 Baalidah, or Beeliada, (l Chron. xiv. 7), means 
 
 “ My Lord the Seer.” I may notice here that 
 ada, or ida, seems to be the progenitor of our idea, 
 the Greek Ida and EtSco, and the Latin Video, ‘ to 
 see.’ 
 
 Baalis, D’tya (Jev. xl. 14). It is probable that this is a 
 variant of baalish, and signifies “ Baal is self- 
 
 existent,” or “Baal the upright one,” or “My Lord 
 exists; ” D' being placed for &•>, ‘ upright,’ or ‘ self- 
 existent.’ (See Bel.) 
 
 Baaloth, or Bealoth, (Jos. xv. 24), “ The ladies,” or 
 
 “the androgyne Baal.” 
 
 Baana and Baanah, (1 Kings iv. 12; 2 Sam. iv. 2), 
 
 “ Son of Anna, or Anu; ” NJV?, = I? and N3N ; also 
 spelled ; it is equivalent to Benoni. 
 
 Baara, (1 Chron. viii. 8), “ She,” i. e., the celestial 
 
 Virgin, “ burns, glows, or sets fire to.” 
 
831 
 
 Baaseiah, rxton (1 Chron. vi. 40), “Jah is valiant;” 
 
 ‘ to be valiant.’ 
 
 Baasha, K&yz (i Kings xv. 6), possibly from and baash 
 and ish, “ The valiant man.” 
 
 Babel, ^3 (Gen. xi. 9). The Scriptural writers have made 
 the name derivable from ^3, ballal , = ^72, balbel; 
 but as the tower was in Chaldaea, it is to the 
 language of that country that we should look for its 
 meaning; and in the Cuneiform, its meaning is 
 “the gate of El;” Babylon, “the gate of Ilos;’ , 
 Babilee, Babilam, Babil. 41 There are many instances 
 in which the historian, not finding a meaning for a 
 name occurring in an older myth, has invented a 
 story to agree with it. The tower was most probably 
 a phallic emblem, resembling, on a large scale, the 
 round towers of Ireland. 42 (See Bel, Eschol, and 
 Ashkelon.) 
 
 Babylon, (2 Kings xvii. 24). The town has the same, 
 name as the tower Babel, or Bavel. 
 
 B^etuli, Ba/r vko$, plural, B«/tuAoj, were Phoenician deities. 
 They consisted of meteoric stones, which, having 
 fallen from heaven, were supposed to partake of the 
 divine essence. History tells us of many celebrated 
 stones. The Paphian Venus was a stone of conical 
 shape; Diana of the Ephesians was said to have 
 fallen down from Jupiter; the same was said of 
 the Palladium of Home and Troy. 
 
 As to the etymology of the word, it is, I think, a 
 corruption, or Greek rendering, of Bethel. Bit, or 
 Beth, = B^t, or B«k, = 4 habitation of,’ and falo$ t 
 
 41 See Rawlinson, Royal Asiatic Journal , vol. i., new series, p. 195. 
 
 42 See Ancient Pillar Stones and Cairns , by Thomas Inman, M.D. (Lond.) 
 Holden, Liverpool, 1867. 
 
382 
 
 B^tuli] hellos, ‘the San/ which is equivalent to El, II, or 
 Ilos, in the Shemitic. 
 
 A G-od called Bital, or Vital, is still worshipped 
 in India, and his emblem is an upright stone. Siva 
 is worshipped under the form of a stone, in at least 
 forty places, in Hindostan. Indeed, throughout that 
 country, there are a vast number of shrines, where 
 the God is represented as a stone; though only a 
 few, as above, are of peculiar sanctity. The stone 
 under the coronation chair at Westminster Abbey is 
 said, if I remember rightly, to be a Bgetulus, and it 
 has been reverenced for many centuries, and perhaps 
 is so still, for it performs an important, though silent, 
 part in the coronation ceremony. 
 
 Bahurim, 0'‘V ,n T l > “ The shining ones; ” plural of T 1 ?, bahar, 
 “to shine/ ‘ to be white.’ 
 
 Bajith, (Isa. xv. 2). Probably signifies 4 the temple/ 
 equivalent to Beth, or Bit. 
 
 Bakbakhar, ‘■'WS (1 Chron. ix. 15). This name, and the 
 following, are very curious. In both of them, philo¬ 
 logists consider that they see reduplications ; this one 
 is said to be a doubled form of 1?.?, biker, “ he rises 
 in the morning,” i. e., the sun. But we may also 
 derive it from baca, “ the flowing one cleaves,” 
 the meaning of which is obvious. 
 
 Bakbukiah, (Neh. xi. 17). This cognomen is said to 
 
 be a doubled form of p-12, buk, with Jali, added, 
 and to be equivalent to “ earnest speech of Jah.” But 
 bakbuk, signifies “the bottle,” as all the readers 
 of Old Rabelais will remember; and thus the name 
 may mean “the bottle of Jah.” This recals at once 
 the remarkable expression (Ps. lvi. 8), “Put thou 
 my tears into thy bottle, are they not already in thy 
 book? ” In this verse the word “bottle” is T&O, nod , 
 
333 
 
 Bakbukiah] and “ book,” "^D, sephar . There is then some 
 unison of ideas between the metaphor of a “ book ” 
 and “bottle,” as being used by Jehovah; both 
 are strongly anthropomorphic; and the prayer of 
 David seems to consider that God will find the one a 
 better receptacle than the other for what has to be 
 retained in the memory—the book may remain at 
 home, the (water) bottle was constantly at hand. 
 
 Baka, tfPJ, “ To cleave asunder,” “ a valley.” ‘ To cleave 
 the mountain/ is an euphemism for ‘to cut open 
 pregnant women.’ Compare Baca, Psalm lxxxiv. 6 ; 
 in which place, however, the word is spelled and 
 is supposed not to be a proper name. 
 
 Balaam, (Numb. xxii. 5), signifies, I think, “ My Lady 
 the mother,” from balah, and BN, am, ‘ mother. 
 (Compare Balah and Bilhah.) 
 
 Baladan, Kings xx. 12), signifies “My Lord of 
 
 pleasure, or delight,” from bel, and 1*$, eden. 
 
 Baladam, Balatha, Malatha, Cuneiform, “ Abundance.” 
 
 Balah (Jos. xix. 3). For this word we may find many 
 etymons; but, though distinct from each other, they 
 are all allied. It may be a ‘corrected’ form,—of which 
 we have seen many, and shall see more,—in which the 
 yod in n ', Jah, has been elided, so as to suppress 
 the fact that Jehovah and Bel were under any 
 circumstances associated together; or it may be a 
 form of balah, “ she is tender ; ” possibly it may 
 have relationship with Bala rama, “the strong high 
 one,” a name of Cristna; or ‘ Baly,’ an Indian 
 deity. 
 
 Though these connections are possible, the most 
 probable conjecture (to us) is, that the word in 
 question is an altered form of baalah; and as 
 the addition of a n at the end in the Hebrew is 
 
834 
 
 Balah] equivalent to the termination ess with us, we con¬ 
 clude that Balah is the same as “the governess,” 
 “T imperatrice,” “my lady,” “the wife, or female 
 form, of Bel, or Baal,” i. e., “ the celestial virgin.” 
 Balak:, (Numb. xxii. 2). When once the presence of a 
 systematic alteration of cognomens in the sacred 
 writings is recognised, the task of discovering an 
 appropriate etymon for a particular name requires 
 much care. When examining the appellative before 
 us, we may consider that the word has been changed 
 (a) accidentally, or ( b ) that it is an invented name like 
 Ahitophel. (a) If it is a cognomen really apper¬ 
 taining to a king who once existed, we may see in it 
 an union of Bel and Ach, which signifies “Bel is 
 a brother,” or “ related to Baal.” ( b ) If it be an 
 opprobrious epithet, we recognise the etymon in 
 balak , “ he wasted, destroyed, or caused a separation.” 
 My own impression is, that the first interpretation is 
 the best. 
 
 Bali, is one of the names given to a wife of “ Siva,” under 
 which appellation she assumed the form of a girl of 
 twelve years of age; and in Madura, Balane, and 
 other places, beautiful virgins used to go to the 
 temple once in their lives to offer themselves in 
 honour of the Goddess. The story was that a God 
 had converse with them. There is a grossly indecent 
 festival, resembling the Roman Saturnalia, in her 
 honour, under the name of Sakti, in which, amongst 
 other things, were introduced fighting of cocks and 
 rams. — Roberts, in Journal Royal Asiatic Society, 
 vol. i., p. 90. 43 
 
 43 The paper from which the above excerpt is taken is too long for me to 
 reproduce it here. It corroborates very fully the statements I have already made 
 respecting the resemblance of the worship and the gods of the Hindoos, the Baby¬ 
 lonians, Assyrians, Phoenicians, and Jews. 
 
335 
 
 Bamah, (Ezek. xx. 29), “ Castle,” “fortress;” Bamoth, 
 (Numb. xxi. 19), plural, “ High places.” High 
 places were either natural elevations, such as moun¬ 
 tains or hills, or they were erections in the form of 
 pillars, or mounds artificially raised. The round 
 towers in Ireland, and at Avebury in England, are 
 examples of these. High cairns had a similar desig¬ 
 nation ; and I think we may call the Tynwald Mount, 
 in the Isle of Man, a 4 high place,’ though it is barely 
 ten feet high. Gibbon gives us an interesting record 
 of Hermits in the East who dwelt on pillars; and 
 these I conceive were a form of £ high place.’ The 
 idea of worshipping on high places is distinctly given 
 in Lucian’s account of the Syrian Goddess; wherein 
 we are told that prayers were uttered from the summit 
 of the tall phallus, because the man then was so much 
 nearer to the God than he was on earth. To those 
 who believe that God resides above us, it is very 
 natural to pray and offer sacrifices on the top of a 
 mountain. Moses himself is represented to have 
 had this idea, when he went up to the top of 
 Sinai to commune with the Almighty, and receive 
 the law. 
 
 We still have a relic of the ancient idea in the 
 high or raised altars of the Homan Catholic churches. 
 
 Bani, (2 Sam. xxiii. 36). This may be a variant of HJ5, 
 banali, ‘ he erects, or builds; ’ but it is more probable 
 that it is equivalent to 1? and ben, jah, the n, as 
 usual, being elided, and that it signifies ‘ the son 
 of Jah.’ 
 
 Bar, "'S, both in the Assyrian and in the Hebrew, has many 
 significations, according to the vowels with which it 
 is associated; as bar, it signifies ‘corn,’ ‘grain,’ 
 ‘a field,’ ‘tried,’ ‘approved,’ ‘pure,’ ‘clear,’ ‘select,’ 
 
336 
 
 Bar] ‘beautiful,’ ‘a son,’ ‘open country; ’ as bor, it signi¬ 
 fies ‘cleanliness,’ ‘purity,’ ‘integrity.’ 
 
 Bara, “ To cut, form, fashion, create ; ” as ^2, bare, 
 it signifies ‘ to be filled full,’ ‘ to be fat, strong, or 
 lusty.’ In these words we see clearly the phallic 
 idea of creative power. There is close resemblance 
 between this word and Brahm, or Brahma, the 
 Omnipotent God in the Hindoo mythology. 
 
 Barabbas, Bccpa(3(3ag (Matt. xx. 16), “ Son of the father.” 
 
 Barachel, 'jxrna (Job xxxii. 2), “ He adores El,” from Vh 
 barach, ‘ lie adores,’ and -’K, e l, 
 
 Barachias, B upoc^iotg (Matt, xxiii. 35), “ Son of the striking 
 Jah; ” raka, ‘ to strike the earth,’ &c. 
 
 Barak, P}?, barak (Judges iv. 6), “ Lightning ; ” or P*]?, ‘ he 
 shines.’ 
 
 Bariah, P'P? (1 Chron. iii. 24), “ The Son of Jah.” (See 
 Beriah.) 
 
 Barjesus, BotplY)<rovg (Acts xiii. 6), “ Son of Jesus.” This 
 cognomen was borne by a Jew at Paphos, who 
 strongly opposed the introduction of the Christian 
 faith; it is not, therefore, probable that his name 
 was imitated from that borne by our Saviour. We 
 presume then that Jesus was a common name at 
 that time. The man’s other appellation, Elymas, 
 signifies “El is wonderful,” from el, and HBD, 
 massa. 
 
 Barjonah, Bap-loovoi (Matt. xvi. 17), “ Son of the dove; ” 
 yonaln, * a dove.’ 
 
 Barkos, Crip]'? (Ezra ii. 53). This cognomen appears to be 
 derived from , bar, “ son,” and fcyip, kosh, “ a bow,” 
 and to be equivalent to “ son of a bow,” which may 
 have been equal to ‘ a bowyer,’ or have had a hidden 
 meaning. 
 
 Barnabas Bapva/3af (Acts iv. 36), “ Son of Nabuz, or 
 
837 
 
 Barnabas] Nibhaz; ” nabash, ‘ to glitter, or burn.’ 
 
 (Compare Nebuz-aradan.) 
 
 Barsabas, Bap<ra(3u$ (Acts i. 28), “ Son of abundance; ” 
 y? 1 ?, saba, ‘ abundance,’ &c. 
 
 Bartholomew, BotpQoXo^uiog (Matt. x. 3), “ Son of Tolmai.” 
 One Talmai was a son of Anak; another was a 
 father-in-law of David. Talma is a current French 
 name; it may be from the same root as Ptolemy. 
 We have amongst us Tolmen, or Dolmen, which 
 signifies ‘ a tall, upright stone.’ talmai , is a 
 
 ‘ bold, spirited one; ” and talam, is ‘ to be 
 
 courageous, stout-hearted.’ 
 
 Bartimeus, B otprlpotios (Mark x. 46), “ Son of uncleanness 
 
 temes, ‘ in slime, slimy ’ ? i. e., ‘a very filthily 
 dirty fellow.’ 
 
 Baruch, *^3 (Nehem. iii. 20), “ Blessed,” “ Benedict.” 
 
 Barzillai, (2 Sam. xvii. 27), “ The son of prayer ? ” 
 zalah, ‘ to pray; ’ or zilah, * protection,’ &c. 
 
 Bashan, (Numb. xxi. 33), “ Basalt land.” (Fiirst.) 
 
 Bashemath, (Gen. xxvi. 34), 4 ‘ Sweet-smelling; ” from 
 basam, ‘to have a sweet smell,’ ‘ to be fragrant.’ 
 
 Basket, “ Blessed shall be thy basket (N.J9, teneh), and thy 
 store ” (Deut. xxviii. 5). A basket is borne by all the 
 Assyrian priests who offer at the shrine of Ishtar. 
 They offer a pine cone, shaped like the mystic egg. 
 The egg is euphemistic for testis ; it is probable that 
 the basket represents the “ scrotum.” To this belief 
 . we were drawn by the following considerations: We 
 have, 2 Kings x. 7, Jerem. xxiv. 2, the word n-n, dud , 
 rendered ‘ basket; ’ and in Jerem. xxiv. 1, 
 dudai, is also rendered 4 baskets; ’ but this word 
 dudai is rendered ‘ mandrakes,’ or ‘ love apples,’ in 
 Gen. xxx. 14-16, and Cant. vii. 13. 
 
 Now the ‘ mandrakes ’ are like our plant the 
 
 y 
 
338 
 
 Basket] Orchis mascula, and their roots closely resemble 
 the ‘ scrotum,’ or the two testicles; consequently they 
 were supposed to have potency in love affairs, and 
 were offered to Venus. There is a picture at Pompeii, 
 in which a loving couple are presenting offerings 
 to the God of the Gardens, amongst which the man¬ 
 drakes may be recognised. (Compare also Gen. xxx. 
 
 14-16.) 
 
 It is clear that the ancients thought that a full 
 ‘ basket ’ was an appropriate offering to Ishtar ; 
 hence we conclude that the word in question is an 
 euphemism, into which it is undesirable to enter 
 more fully. 
 
 Babil, Cuneiform, = “ The gate of II, or God.” 
 
 Babius, „ “ A son of Belus,” = “ gate of life.” 
 
 Badia, „ an Assyrian female name. (Compare 
 
 Biddy.) 
 
 Badones, „ Genii amongst the Babylonians. 
 
 Bakhar, „ “ The eldest son.” Baker ? Barker ? 
 
 Bal-Shamin, „ “ Lord of the heavens. ” (Compare 
 
 Shimmin.) 
 
 Barkat, Bil, Bin, Ara, Cuneiform, an Assyrian name. 
 (Compare Birkett, Bill, Ben, &c.) 
 
 Barmuri, Cuneiform, name of a deity. Assyrian, “ Son of 
 Myrrha? Mari, or Mri-am.” 
 
 Bartsippa, or Borsippa, Cuneiform, “ Son of the ship.” 
 Each of the Babylonian Gods had an ark, or ship, 
 called ‘ elippa ’ and ‘ alpa,’ as well as ship. 
 
 Bacha, Vedic, 
 
 Bad, or Vad, „ 
 Bagh, „ 
 
 Bagha, „ 
 
 Baghis, „ 
 
 “ To speak clearly.” (Compare Bacher, 
 Bache, Bacon.) 
 
 “ To bathe.” (Baden-Baden.) 
 is also the name for the female organ. 
 
 “ Sacred tiger,” an attendant on Bacchus, 
 also Vagis, a name of Siva. 
 
839 
 
 Bala, or Vad, “Strength;” Baladeva, “air, or wind,” 
 “ elder brother of Cristna.” (Compare 
 Baly, Bailey.) 
 
 Bali, „ also Pali, a name of Cristna. 
 
 Balin, „ “Strong,” “a bull,” “a camel.” (Palin, 
 
 Baleine, Bellona.) 
 
 Bandh, „ “To bind, fasten, or unite;” Bandhu, “a 
 
 kinsman.” 
 
 Barb, „ “To go.” (Barb, a horse, Old English.) 
 
 Barta, ,, “A word.” (Compare Bard, Barden, 
 
 Barter, Burton, &c.) 
 
 Bath, A?, “ Daughter,” “ maiden,” “ virgin,” “ woman,” 
 “ disciple, or worshipper.” 
 
 Bath-rabbim, (Cant. vii. 4), a name given to a gate 
 
 in Heshbon. It has been translated “ The populous 
 gate,” by Ginsburg ( Song of Songs , p. 179). My 
 impression is that it indicated a favourite place of 
 resort for lovers. 5^, rabah , ‘to couch down,’ ‘to 
 lie,’ ‘ to lie with,’ &c.; for it is coupled with the fish 
 ponds, and fish were emblematic of love. 
 
 Bath-sheba, (2 Sam. xi. 3), “ Daughter of the 
 
 heavens,” or “ of Sheba.” The name is rendered in 
 the Septuagint B>jp(ra/3ee, beersabee, which would 
 enable us to read the name as daughter of 
 saba, or ‘ abundance.’ (See Beersheba.) 
 
 Bath-shua, (Gen. xxxviii. 12), “ Daughter of a noble 
 
 one.” 
 
 Bavai, •'!!? (Nehem. iii. 18). The man bearing this name 
 is a son of Henadad, which looks so very like a 
 variant of Benhadad, that I conclude that Bavai is 
 also a variant, possibly of ab, and A', Jah , and 
 signifies “Jah is a father.” 
 
 Bebai, (Ezra ii. 11), Persian ? “ The fathers.” (In 
 
 Pehlevi, bab signifies ‘ father.’) Gesenius. 
 
340 
 
 Bechee, *>5? (Gen. xlvi. 21), “A young camel;” becher , 
 “ a youth.” (Compare Beecher, Beechy, Abubekir, 
 &c.) 
 
 Bechoeath, (1 Sam. ix. 1), “ First born?” from 
 
 bichrah, “ a young she camel, or virgin, or the first 
 born,” probably “ the heifers.” 
 
 Bedad, T!? (Gen. xxxvi. 35), “ The basket,” from T??, 
 badad, “to be intertwined.” “Possibly vadad , or 
 equivalent to Ben-liadad } dedicated to Adad.” Fiirst. 
 
 Bedaiah, (Ezra x. 35), “ Dedicated to Jah.” Fiirst. 
 
 Bedan, H? (1 Sam. xii. 11), “Dedicated to Dan.” Fiirst. 
 
 Beee, (Numb. xxi. 16), “ A well, or a pit.” “A well,” 
 Cuneiform, biri. 
 
 Beee-elim, &bit ‘jKa (Isaiah xv. 8), “ The well of the Gods.” 
 It is remarkable that the ‘ correctors ’ of the sacred 
 text should have allowed this word to remain un¬ 
 changed, in such close contact with the word Eglaim, 
 which they have altered so as to obliterate the idea 
 that a Moabite city should be called after El. 
 
 Beeb-lahai-roi, ’*> '0 1 ? iso (Gen. xvi. 14), “Well of the 
 living God,” or “well of the living one, my seer.” 
 
 Beee-sheba, “The well of the heavens.” (See Eli- 
 
 sheba and Bath-sheba.) I think this is another of 
 those places where a modern story has been invented 
 by a late writer, to explain away names which were 
 familiar to the people, but whose real etymology it 
 would be convenient to ignore. There is no doubt 
 that both the Roman and the Protestant Churches 
 have softened down much that they have adopted from 
 the heathen. To such an extent have later Scrip¬ 
 tural writers done this, that a story about a name 
 invariably leads to some curious fact, if we ignore the 
 tale ; it is like the crafty lapwing’s device to draw 
 intruders from her nest. I may also notice here, that 
 
341 
 
 Beer-sheba] the whole of my inquiry has convinced me of 
 the correctness of conclusions, as to the non-historical 
 character of the earlier canonical writings, arrived at 
 by Bishop Colenso and other Biblical scholars. 
 
 Beera, (i Chron. vii. 37), “ The well of the Sun.” 
 
 Beerah, (1 Chron. v. 6), is a variant of the preceding 
 word, Ra being the Egyptian and Assyrian name 
 for the Sun. (Compare n ?’ 1 , roeh, or 'NJ, rai.) 
 
 Beeri, '^3 (Gen. xxvi. 34), “My pit, or well, or fountain,” 
 “ My mother.” (Compare next word). It is very 
 remarkable that this cognomen should he borne both 
 by a Hittite in the time of Esau, and by the Israelitish 
 father of the prophet Hosea. Now between the time 
 of the one and of the other, a thousand years had 
 elapsed, and the family of Isaac had passed through 
 more trials than any other nation—trials which must 
 have modified their language materially. Hence we 
 conclude that the fact in question proves either the 
 exceptional persistence of some words, or the com¬ 
 paratively modern date of the story about Esau’s 
 wives. 
 
 Beeroth, (Joshua ix. 17) “ The fountains, pits, or 
 
 wells,” plural of beer; possibly a form of Ash- 
 toreth, meaning ‘ the mothers.’ A pit, or hole, is 
 often put for a mother. “Look to the hole of the 
 pit whence ye were digged” (Isaiah li. 1). We must 
 notice, too, that nekebah, ‘ a hole,’ signifies a 
 
 woman. 
 
 Beeshterah, (Joshua xxi. 27), “ House, or temple, 
 
 of Astarte.” = and betli eshterah. 
 
 Bel, (Isaiah xlvi. 1), Bel Merodach at Babylon; B 
 
 or BsXirotv, in Phoenicia; “ The old Bel,” or “ Bel the 
 grave old man.” This word is not altogether under- 
 
342 
 
 Bel] stood. 44 Herodotus tells us of Jupiter Belus (book i., 
 c. 181, p. 255, Bawlinson’s translation), that in his 
 temple was no statue of any kind, only that “ in the 
 
 topmost tower.was a couch of unusual size, 
 
 richly adorned, with a golden table by its side. 
 The chamber was not occupied by night, except by 
 a single native woman, who, as the Chaldseans, the 
 priests of this God, affirm, is chosen for himself by 
 the deity out of all the women in the land; they 
 declare, but Herodotus says that he does not believe 
 it, that the God comes down into this chamber, and 
 sleeps upon the couch; and he then compares this to 
 a temple at Thebes, where a woman always passes 
 the night in the temple of Jupiter,” &c. 45 
 
 Whatever may have been the veil by which such a 
 divinity was concealed or covered, there can be no 
 
 44 In a note to “ Bilingual Readings ” ( Journal of Royal Asiatic Society , vol. i., new 
 series, p 216), Rawlinson gives reasons for his belief that the Babylonian Bil, or 
 Bilus, was the same as II or Illin. Bilu , ‘ a lord,’ may stand for ‘ the Lord; ’ and he 
 then continues, “ Indeed, we have the authority of Damascius for using the two 
 names indifferently (Sr i ^otvi/ces xai %vpoi rov Kpovov ”H\ xal BtjA. nal Bokd&rjv enovop.d- 
 £ovctlv, Phot. Bit. Edit. Hseschel, col. 1050, where Bokd6r)v is perhaps 'jrv for 
 
 with the usual change of the Hebrew Shin to the Aramaic Tau ; and if the 
 generality of authors identify Belus and Saturn, Sanchoniathon, on the other hand, 
 says distinctly, 6 v IAos tovt earlv 6 Kpovog.” 
 
 45 See also Rawlinson’s Herodotus , vol. ii., p. 47, second edition, note about 
 women^of Amun. 
 
 In the original cast of my Essay, it was my intention to enter into a detailed 
 account of the various localities in Great Britain, where in one form or other the 
 name of Bel is introduced, and to give a description of all games, festivals, or 
 customs, which still bear his name. So much, however, has been done upon this 
 subject in Lyson’s work, entitled Our British Ancestors , and in Colonel Forbes 
 Leslie’s Early Races of Scotland , that my intention is abandoned, The resolution 
 was adopted more readily when I found how far more completely they had investi¬ 
 gated the subject than I could ever hope to do. In many points those writers and 
 myself disagree, as is natural when independent authors take up the same subject 
 from different points of view ; but in the main we appear to agree a^ cordially as if 
 we had been brought up by the same tutor. I cannot hope, nor would I try, to 
 induce a minister of our church to give assent to the views which I have expressed; 
 nor can the priest succeed in persuading the philosophic scholar that the Hebrews 
 were a powerful colonising race, which sent ships, organised colonies, and pro¬ 
 secuted commerce all over the Eastern, and probably a portion of the Western hemi¬ 
 sphere. Upon these points we may agree to differ. 
 
848 
 
 Bel] reasonable doubt that it was connected with the 
 phallic idea of the creator; and as such, Bel would be 
 equivalent to On, or Asher. 46 In the Hebrew, bal , 
 means ‘heart,’ ‘mind,’ ‘care;’ a signification equiva¬ 
 lent to that assigned to the words Brahma and Buddah. 
 
 46 J. should wish here to refer the reader to Hislop’s Two Babylons, pp. 38, 
 39, 3rd ed., where he will see an attempt to indentify Bel with Bel-athri of the 
 Etruscans and the Janus of Rome. He will see a copy of a medal, which is repro¬ 
 duced in Fig. 83, wherein a club is introduced, with a triad of halls, not very unlike 
 
 Figure 83. 
 
 the well-known Lombard sign ; the weapon seems to be emblematic of On and his 
 cluster ; a comparatively flimsy veil for “ fascinum cum testibus multis.” “ The 
 Etruscan name on the obverse of the above medal — Bel-athri, ‘Lord of spies,’ 
 is probably given to Janus, in allusion to his well-known title ‘Janus Tuens,’ 
 which may be rendered ‘Janus the Seer,’ or ‘ All-seeing Janus.’” — From Sir 
 W. Betham’s Etruscan Literature and Antiquities investigated. Plate 2, vol. ii., 
 p. 120. 1842. 
 
 From the Assyrian and Phoenician Bel, we may trace Bela,, Belesis, ReZisarius, 
 ReZlienus, Belial, Belshazzar, iZeZteshazzar, Belns, and possibly Balaian, Balaam, 
 Bile am, often spelled Ibleam, (compare William, for which name Bill is ‘ short,’) 
 and Balak ; possibly also Bil- dad, Bilgah, Bilvah, Bilham, Belgse. * BoAAjjv, 
 balleen, was the Phrygian royal name. Compare Balan (India) ; Bal ana, (Greece); 
 RaZlina, a very common geographical name in Ireland; Balin. (Palestine) ; Bale nri 
 and JZaZlenach (Scotland); Bale n (Switzerland) ; Balingen (Wurtemburg); Balian 
 (France) ; also Ballan, Balman, Balmain, and other surnames common amongst 
 ourselves. 
 
 It is probable that some of our surnames are derived from this word ; e. g. Bayle, 
 Bales, Beales, Bailey, Baley, Ball, Bell, Bull (which animal may have been named 
 after the God, as being so strong and powerful). Balleny combines Bel with Anu ; 
 and Ballard, Balingall, Balliston, Balman, Balmanno, Balmer, are all readily 
 explicable by a reference to the Shemitic languages; Belcher, Beley, Bellard, Beilis, 
 Bellas, Bellion, Beloe, and a vast variety of others, appear to come from the same 
 old stock. 
 
 [I am told by a Scotch friend, what I also find in Jamieson’s Dictionary, that 
 in Scotland oe , o, oy, oye, means a grandson. Beloe would therefore mean a grand¬ 
 son of Bel.] 
 
344 
 
 Bela, (Gen. xiv. 2 ; xxxvi. 32; xlvi. 21). This name is 
 borne equally by one of the Sodomite and Edomite 
 towns, and by a son of Benjamin. It is probably a 
 ‘ corrected ’ form of Baal, the y and the h being 
 transposed, and the vowel changed. 
 
 Belat, Assyrian, feminine of Bel. 
 
 Belial, (1 Kings xxi. 10), “ Without God,” from the 
 words 'r 5 ?, belis 1 without/ and el, God. 
 
 Belshazzar, (Ban. viii. 1). Probably “ Bel preserve 
 
 the king.” In the Cuneiform, ‘ Bel-sar-uzzur.’ 
 
 Belteshazzar, (Ban. ii. 26). “Beltis preserve the 
 
 king.” In the Cuneiform, ‘ Beltis-sar-uzzur.’ 
 
 Ben, I?, “ The son of.” (Compare such current names as 
 Benson, Penson, Bennett, &c.) 
 
 Ben-aiah, (2 Sam. xx. 23), *‘The son of Jab;” or, 
 possibly, ‘ Jab builds us banah, ‘ to build up.’ 
 
 Ben-ammi, (Gen. xix. 38). This name is given to a 
 
 son of Lot by bis own daughter. As the son borne 
 by one of bis children is called Moab, which signifies 
 “ conceived from the father,” we may assuredly con¬ 
 sider that the other bears an equivalent cognomen, 
 viz., “ the son of my father; ” W, ami, standing for 
 abi, in accordance with the frequent interchange 
 of aleph with ain, and beth with mem . 
 
 Benebarak, (Josh. xix. 45), “ The son of blessing.” 
 
 Benejaaean, iP£ '3? (Numb, xxxiii. 31). “ Sons of Jaakan” 
 
 (Gen. xxxvi. 27). 
 
 Ben-hadad, "nD/II (1 Kings xv. 18), “ The son of the 
 glorious one,” or of ‘Hadad, the supreme deity of 
 the Syrians.’ 
 
 Ben-hail, (2 Chron. xvii. 7), “ Son of strength, might 
 
 or power;” Hail, properly cliail, ghal, or chil; 
 chail, may possibly be the origin of Gael and Gaelic; 
 we meet with the word so pronounced in Abigail ; 
 
345 
 
 Ben-hail] if we may deduce the word from that root. This 
 cognomen would then signify “the father is strength.” 
 See Abigail. From the same source may come Gill, 
 Childe, Cheil, Sheil, &c. 
 
 Ben-hanan, (1 Chron. iv. 20), “ Son of the gracious 
 
 one; ” 1J 1 ?, hanan, ‘ merciful.’ (Compare Anna, 
 
 Annas, &c.) 
 
 Beninu, (Neh. x. 13), “ The son of Anu ” ? or “ son of 
 suffering;” from IJ?, ana, “a suffering one;” or 
 “son of a pious one;” from TO, anah , “he testifies 
 to.” Pen, as in Pendarvis, is a very common syllable 
 in Cornish names ; and Ben and Pen are common 
 names for mountains in Scotland and Wales, but I 
 doubt their affinity with the Hebrew 1?, ben, ‘ a son.’ 
 
 Ben-jamin, (Gen. xxxv. 18), “Fortunate;” I'PJ, jamin, 
 
 signifies ‘ the bright side,’ ‘ the right hand,’ &c. As 
 the right is far more useful to most of us than the 
 left, everything which is said to be done by it is pre¬ 
 sumed to be done well. We have many metaphors 
 current amongst ourselves which convey the same 
 idea. There are some whom we call “ right-hand 
 men,” as indicating their usefulness to us. In the 
 Scriptures, we see the same notion in the words, 
 “He is on my right hand, therefore,” &c. As most 
 of us are clumsy with our left-hand, we should never 
 think ,pf calling anything after it which was compli¬ 
 mentary; e.g., “a left-handed marriage,” is under¬ 
 stood to mean one of which we must say that “all 
 is not right.” “ Son of my right-hand ” is then a 
 metaphor, and the name is quite in keeping with 
 those given to the brothers of Benjamin, viz., Asher, 
 Gad, Issachar, &c. I shall have frequent occasion to 
 note the prevalence of heretical or heathen nomen¬ 
 clature in persons of this tribe. 
 
346 
 
 Ben-oni, (Gen. xxxv. 18), may signify “ The son of 
 
 my On;” on , ‘strength,’ or ‘son of Anu,’ or 
 
 ‘ son of my sorrow.’ 
 
 Ben-zoheth, (1 Chron. iv. 20), “ Son of firmness ; ” 
 
 tzuah, ‘ to set up,’ ‘ an erection,’ ‘ a cippus.’ 
 
 Beon, tV? (Numb, xxxii. 8). It is probable that this is a 
 variant of Meon. (See Baal Meon.) 
 
 Beor, (Gen. xxxvi. 32), possibly a variant of Peor. 
 Gesenius translates it “torch,” and Fiirst, “ a shep¬ 
 herd.” A torch, a piece of pine wood, or other 
 straight thing, burning at the end, was an euphe¬ 
 mism. Hogarth, in his curious engraving “before” 
 and “ after,” has symbolised the same idea by a 
 skyrocket. It is, of course, well known to all, that 
 Cupid (or desire) bears a torch as an emblem, with 
 the flame burning upwards; at death, or at funeral 
 ceremonies, the torch hangs down, extinguished, or 
 effete. 
 
 Berachah, (1 Chron. xii. 3), “A blessing.” 
 
 Beraiah, r, N'n^ (1 Chron. viii. 21), “ Jah is fat, thick, or 
 vigorous; ” from K'l?, lari , possibly ‘ created.’ 
 Fiirst. 
 
 Berechiah, (1 Chron. vii. 20), “ Jah blessesT??, 
 
 bar ah, ‘ to bless,’ &c. 
 
 Bered, TJ? (1 Chron. vii. 20), “ The leopard, spotty.” For 
 a length of time I doubted the real significance of the 
 spotted robe of the Egyptian and Assyrian priests, or 
 of the leopard skin borne by kings, and the spotted 
 attendant of Bacchus. 47 It appeared that some pun 
 was involved, which might be compared with the simi¬ 
 larity between Bacchus, Baghis, and Bagh; Bacchus, 
 Siva, and the tiger, or ‘ the vulva: ’ but there was 
 good reason for doubting whether this Yedic pun 
 
 4 7 See Plate II., Fig. 3, at the end of the Volume. 
 
347 
 
 Bered] could have been known in Palestine. (See Beth 
 Nimrah.) 
 
 From this root the Greek nuptios, pardos, the 
 Latin 4 pardus,’ and the English ‘ pard,’ are derived. 
 Gesenius. 
 
 Beri, (1 Chron. vii. 87), “He creates,” or “he is 
 vigorous,” from **!??. May we derive from this root, 
 Berri, Bury, Berry? 
 
 Beriah, (Gen. xlvi. 17), “ My Creator is Jah,” or 
 
 “ Jah is vigorous.” (See Bar and Bara.) 
 
 Berith. (See Baal-Berith, and Berothah.) 
 
 Berodach Baladan (2 Kings xx. 12), variant for Merodach. 
 
 Berothah, or thai, nn'na (Ezek. xlvii. 16), “ The cypress.” 
 Berytus, or Beirout ? B pM, brathu , is a name given 
 by Sanchoniathon to a deity in Lebanon, who was 
 called in Phoenician B ypouQ, beerouth, i . e ., n ' n P, beroth 
 = berith ? being the female principle of Jao Adonis 
 amongst the Syrians of El Adan. Fiirst, sub voce 
 (Compare Baal-Berith.) 
 
 Besai, 'P3 (Ezra ii. 49), “ A conqueror, or subduer.” Fiirst. 
 
 Besodeiah, (Neh. iii. 6), “ In the counsel of Jah,” 
 
 or “ friend of Jah.” 
 
 Besor, ‘ riD 5 (1 Sam. xxx. 9), “ To be sour.” 
 
 Betah, (2 Sam. viii. 8), “ He cuts off.” 
 
 Beten, (Joshua xix. 25), a town of Asherites. 
 
 We have already seen the meaning of Asher—we 
 shall not therefore be surprised to find, amongst the 
 towns of that tribe, one whose name was as charac¬ 
 teristic of the female, as Asher was of the male sex. 
 
 The w 7 ord in question signifies “the womb,” or 
 “ the round belly; ” also “ the female organ.” 
 
 Beth, Baith, like Bit in the Cuneiform, and Beit 
 in modern Palestine, signifies “ the house,” “ dwell¬ 
 ing,” “habitation,” or “ temple of.” It may also be 
 
348 
 
 Beth] designated ‘place,’ and thus be equivalent to ’'town/ 
 ‘village/ ‘hamlet/ ‘station/ &c. When used in 
 association with any divine being, or one supposed 
 to be such, its only meaning can be that of ‘ temple/ 
 ‘ church/ ‘ shrine/ ‘ chapel/ &c. 
 
 Now, since there are many ‘ sects ’ amongst Protest¬ 
 ants, and many ‘orders/ often rival ones, amongst the 
 Roman Catholics, and since there are almost as many 
 Virgins Mary as there are towns who own her sway, 
 so we may expect to find in Palestine many rival 
 ‘ orders,’ ‘ systems/ or ‘ temples.’ If a local ‘ Mary ’ 
 will not cure some disease, a pilgrimage to “ Our 
 Lady of Loretto ” is resorted to; and “St. Jacques de 
 Compostella ” is supposed to effect what the “ St. 
 Jacques of Madrid ” declines to perform. In like 
 manner, when the “ Baal ” of Samaria could tell 
 nothing of the result of a certain king’s illness, the 
 royal patient sent to the Baal of Ekron (2 Kings i. 2). 
 In the same way as churches are now consecrated to, or 
 supposed to be under the patronage of, certain saints; 
 so there were in Palestine sacred shrines, which were 
 said to be under the protection of one or more divine 
 or supernatural beings, who were supposed specially to 
 dwell therein. As Macaulay’s New Zealander might 
 find the names of the saints which we acknowledge 
 at the present day by collating the titles of our 
 churches, so we may find the cognomens, and pos¬ 
 sibly the natures, of ancient divinities by the names 
 of their shrines. Let us notice, too, in passing, that 
 in their way, the ancients of whom we are speaking 
 were far more devout than ourselves. With them 
 the shrine of God attracted a town around it; whilst 
 with us the town is often built long before a church 
 is thought of. 
 
349 
 
 Beth] It is with the intention of developing as far as 
 possible the nature of the ancient faith, that the 
 following and other lists are given. 
 
 Beth-abara, B»j0a/3apa, or Bethbaka, (John i. 28), 
 
 “ Temple of the Sun; ” bar a = ‘the Sun’ in Assyrian ; 
 in Hebrew abar , signifies “ to mount upwards.” 
 
 We have, amongst the Cuneiform writings, Bit-barra, 
 or parra, spoken of as a solar temple. 
 
 Beth-anath, BJjrn'a, and anoth, rinyn'3 (Joshua xix. 38), 
 “ Temple, or shrine, of the G-od answering prayer ; ” 
 riiN, anoth, signifying ‘ a cry,’ * alternate song,’ 
 
 ‘ rejoicing,’ or ‘ a hearing,’ or * granting.’ 
 
 Beth-any, B e$ avlet (Matt. xxi. 17), “ The temple of Anu ; ” 
 it may read, ‘ of the ship ; ’ ani = ‘ ship.’ (See 
 Ark.) 
 
 Beth-arabah, (Josh. xv. 6), “ Temple of Arba,” or 
 
 n }T§, erva. (See Arba.) Or it may be the temple 
 in the desert, from arbah, ‘ a waste.’ 
 
 Beth-aram, DnnTi'2 (Josh. xiii. 27), “ Temple of the 
 High one,” from aram, c the high one.’ (See 
 Aram.) 
 
 Beth-arbel, (Hos. x. 14), “ Temple of the four 
 
 Gods.” (See Arbel.) 
 
 Beth-aven, (Josh. vii. 2), “ Temple of On,” pa. 
 
 (See On.) 
 
 Beth-azmaveth, BJOTjrn'3 (Neh. vii. 28), “ Temple of Azma- 
 veth.” This name is probably compounded of W, az, 
 * strong, powerful, impetuous,’ and A}?, maveth = 
 fi-ID, mut, mot, or mavet being a name of the deity of 
 the lower world = Pluto amongst the old Shemites. 
 Fiirst, s. v. (See Ahimoth.) 
 
 Beth-baal-meon, VV^>~bvTT\^ (Josh. xiii. 17), “ Temple of 
 Baal’s dwelling place,” or “ the celestial mansion, 
 the abode of bliss,” 
 
350 
 
 Beth-baal-meon] There is, however, another etymology of 
 meon, or maon, besides the ordinary one, which we 
 must not pass by, as it is very consonant with the 
 ancient myths. We have the words, "TO, maar , 
 maah, and TO, mea, all of which have* the signification 
 of “ the female organ.” Now n, resh, and 3, nun, are 
 interchangeable; and 3, nun, “ is often a post-fix, 
 or termination, to form adjectives, concretes, and 
 abstracts ” (Fiirst). If we apply these observations 
 to the word in question, we find that it will signify 
 equally “ a habitation,” “the female organ,” i. e., 
 the dwelling place of Baal under his phallic symbol, 
 and “ the womb, the residence of the infant ere it 
 sees the light.” Meon is thus a punning euphemism 
 for the ‘ vulva ; ’ and Beth-baal-meon was doubtless 
 a temple where lascivious rites abounded, in honour 
 of the god and goddess of creation. That worship 
 and venery were frequently mixed up together, we 
 conclude from 1 Sam. ii. 22, and Hosea iv. 13-16. 
 It must also he remembered that the town belonged 
 to Heshbon, and thus bore a heathen name. (See 
 Mary, infra.) 
 
 Beth-Barah, (Jud. vii. 24), “ Temple of the Sun,” 
 
 or “ of the Creator,” from the Assyrian bar a, or from 
 the Hebrew ^2, bar a, ‘ he creates.’ 
 
 Beth-birie, 'Npsrn'3 (1 Chron. iv. 31), probably a variant of 
 the preceding. 
 
 Beth-car, (1 Sam. vii. 7), “ Temple of the ram, 
 
 Aries,” which is itself closely allied to V A p^g, arees, 
 = Mars, ‘a warrior,’ or ‘ valiant man,’ or of “fat 
 sheep,” or of the “ leaping-God.” Compare with the 
 places frequented by dancing dervishes in modern 
 Palestine; compare also such words as Caria, 
 Carchemish, Carinthia, Corinth; also Carr, Carron, 
 Kerr, Kerry, &c. 
 
351 
 
 Beth-dagon, ftoyn'a (Jer. xlviii. 22), “ Temple of the Fish 
 God.” (See Dagon). 
 
 Beth-diblathaim, (Jer. xlviii. 22). “ Temple of 
 
 the two circles.” Diblathaim, a word which we shall 
 explain at greater length 
 under the name Diblaim. 
 
 We can readily conceive 
 that this shrine would be 
 marked by some such mystical figure as the one 
 here depicted. It is similar to those which are found 
 in great numbers on ancient sculptured stones in Scot¬ 
 land, and whose sanctity we infer from their being so 
 constantly associated with other sacred emblems. 
 
 Beth-eden, IT™ (Amos i. 5), “ the temple of pleasure,” 
 from |T?, eden, ‘ pleasure.’ (Compare y$ovy\.) 
 
 Beth-eked, T^STJVa (2 Kings x. 12). Possibly from the 
 same root as Accad, in Assyria ; T2K ? acad, signifies 
 4 strength,’ ‘ fortified; ’ it may simply mean ‘ a castel¬ 
 lated dwelling house,’ or ‘the shrine of the strong 
 one; ’ in the authorised version of the Bible it is 
 called ‘ the shearing-house.’ 
 
 Beth-el, (Gen. xii. 8), “ The temple of El, or 11,” 
 
 “ the Sun,” or “ God.” It has been objected that el 
 is not Hebrew for the Sun; but it must be remem¬ 
 bered that Jacob spoke the language of Babylonia, 
 the country of his grandfather and his relatives, and 
 of his own mother; and we are told by various 
 Cuneiform scholars that in the Mesopotamian tongue 
 II, or Ilos, was at the same time God and the Sun. 
 
 Beth-emek, P£V.T’fl'? (Jos. xix. 27), “Temple of the chasm;” 
 P??, emek, being probably a variant of P*?P, amak, 
 “the deep one,” also “ a valley.” As the place was 
 in Asher, we may conceive that the house or shrine 
 somewhat resembled that of Delphi, and was built 
 over ( one of those _deep earth fissures, which were 
 
 Figure 84, 
 
852 
 
 Beth-emek] supposed to be emblems of, and entrances into, 
 the maternal earth, called by Latin priests Cunni 
 Diaboli. (See page 114, note 9.) 
 
 Beth-esda, B yi$e(t^ol (John v. 2), “ House of the springing 
 fountain; ” eshed , “outpouring of brooks, or a 
 
 ravine.” 
 
 Beth-ezel, '^rnvs (Micah i. 11), “ Temple of the noble 
 one,” from azal, “noble, choice, or distinguished.” 
 It is said by Gesenius to signify “ the house of 
 firm root,” which is too strange an idea to be adopted. 
 
 Beth-gader, (1 Chron. ii. 51), “ The temple enclosed 
 
 by a wall; ” from gadar , “ to enclose, or hedge 
 
 round.” Compare this with Stonehenge, Avebury, 
 and other circular fanes in England, the altars sur¬ 
 rounded by circles, or gilgals, and the Nahbi of 
 Vishnu. Compare it also with the Hindoo circles 
 of Pillar Stones, in which the place of sacrifice is 
 within the enclosure. 
 
 Fig. 85. 
 
853 
 
 Beth-Gamul, Horn's (Jer. xlviii. 26),“Temple of the Giver;” 
 from fy?|, gamal, ‘to do good,’ ‘to benefit,’ &c. 
 
 Beth-Gilgal, (Neh. xii. 29), “ The circular temple,” 
 
 or “ the shrine at Gilgal.” (See Gilgal.) 
 
 Beth-hackerem, (Jer. vi. 1), “ House of the vine¬ 
 yard ; ” kerem, ‘ fruitland or vineyard.’ When we 
 
 consider how very common vineyards were all over 
 Palestine, I cannot fancy that any one place would be 
 called after a particular garden ; it would be as if we 
 called London, ‘town of houses.’ I presume, there¬ 
 fore, that some mystic meaning is concealed in the 
 latter part of the word, and that it is equivalent to 
 B*]?, car am, which signifies “he is bright red ; ” the 
 original verb-idea is to glow, to burn, then to give 
 light, to shine, to glitter; whence again arises, to be 
 of a fiery colour, to be red.” (Fiirst, s. v.) It is to 
 he noticed that Mahadeva, the emblem of the male 
 creator of the Sun, is always painted red. Thus red, 
 or scarlet, has ever been a sacred colour. It was so 
 amongst the Jews (See Exod. xxv. 4; Lev. xiv. 4 ; 
 Numb. iv. 8.) It is so amongst the Roman Catholics 
 of to-day. From being a sacred colour, it ultimately 
 became a royal one; kings being supposed to be vice¬ 
 gerents upon earth of the Almighty in heaven. (See 
 Carmi.) But B']?, caram, has also another meaning, 
 which associates it on the one side with the vineyard 
 or garden, and on the other with Mahadeva, viz., 
 “he breaks through, labours, ploughs, or makes 
 fruitful.” Now, there can be no doubt that wine has 
 ever been regarded as an adjuvant to those pleasures 
 which terminate in ‘ fertility ; ’ consequently, “ the 
 house, or temple of the vineyard,” may of itself have 
 been a covert expression for those resorts which, in 
 Japan, are called “ tea houses.” There is strong 
 
 z 
 
354 
 
 Beth-hackerem] reason indeed for adopting this idea, offered 
 to ns in the Song of Solomon, in which we find the 
 expression, 44 He brought me to the banqueting 
 house ; 48 and his banner over me was love.” 44 Stay 
 me with flagons, comfort me with apples, for I am 
 sick of love.” Upon this passage the learned 
 Dr. Ginsburg remarks : 49 — 44 The words CJ? A'?, 
 mean bower of delight , wine being frequently used 
 in this book for delight, and are but a designation 
 for the manifestations of love denoted in the pre¬ 
 ceding verse. The rehearsal of their past union and 
 enjoyment kindled the Shulamite’s affections, and 
 made her wish again for that delicious fruit, i. e. } the 
 tokens of his love.” After this, there can he little 
 doubt of the true signification of the word Beth- 
 hackerem; which, with the definite article would 
 make the name in question signify, 4 the bright red 
 one,’ or 4 the shiner,’ i.e., 44 The temple of the Sun.” 
 
 Beth-hanan, (1 Kings iv. 9), 44 Temple of grace;” 
 
 from IJ?, hanan , 4 grace.’ 
 
 Beth-haram, or Haran, ' (Jos. xiii. 27), 44 Temple 
 
 of the high one,” from haram , 44 to be high,” 
 
 i. e., “ Temple of the lofty one.” In the days of 
 Eusebius its name was Beth-ramphtha, viz., 4 temple 
 of the high Phthali ’ (Kitto’s Cyclopcedia, s. v . Beth- 
 haran), 
 
 Beth-hoglah, r6jrr]V3 (Josh xv. 6), 44 The house or temple 
 of the partridge;” haglah , is 44 a partridge,” or 
 
 44 magpie;” but I cannot believe that this is the true 
 derivation. It may possibly come from eglaim, 
 
 4 a double spring,’ and signify that the temple, or 
 
 48 n’2, beth; Jiajain, “the house of wine,” or “the house of delight.” 
 49 Song of Songs, page 142. 
 
355 
 
 Beth-hoglah] house, was one situated at the meeting of 
 some waters. 
 
 Beth-horon, fnrrrva (Jos. x. 10), “ Temple of the noble 
 one; ” from 0?, liar an, 1 to he noble.’ 
 
 Beth-jesimoth, riio^.TD'3 (Numb, xxxiii. 49). This was 
 an ancient town, named apparently by the aborigines, 
 or Phoenicians. The termination rn, oth, a plural 
 noun, reminds us of ‘Ashtoreth.’ The early syllables 
 remind us of ‘ Ashima ; ’ we may, therefore, read the 
 word as “ Temple of the Ashimas,” or “ toutes les 
 deesses; ” which would be equivalent to our ‘ All 
 saints,’ or ‘All souls ’ churches. 
 
 Beth-leaphrah, (Micah i. 10); the b being simply 
 
 the genitive sign, aphra, or epher, is the word 
 which we have to study. It is usually translated 
 fawn, and the whole is said to signify, “ The temple 
 of the fawn.” Although it is very probable that 
 such is the meaning, the question arises, Why was 
 a fawn held sacred ? That it was so is undoubted, 
 as one of the Assyrian deities is represented as carry¬ 
 ing one in one arm, while in his hand he carries 
 the mystic branch of Bacchus. (See Plate II., 
 Figs. 1, 4.) 
 
 I do not know any particular reason why a fawn 
 should be sacred, except because of its name, or 
 because its skin is spotted. The word accho has 
 taught us something of verbal puns, but I do not 
 see how to apply them here, except to notice that 
 apliar, signifies ‘ to be strong, or vigorous,’ 4 he 
 is fruitful; ’ and that epher, signified, as it does 
 with us, ‘ a heifer, a calf, the young of any animal; ’ 
 and in nomenclature we have Epher, Ephron, just 
 as we have Ophrah in old time, and Aphra as a 
 current name amongst ourselves. We know that 
 
356 
 
 Beth-leaphrah] the calf was an object of idolatry both in 
 the desert and in Dan. 
 
 Amongst other matters, it will he seen from the 
 drawing referred to, that the fawn carried by the 
 priest is a spotted one. We may also remark that 
 the spots on the leopard had some mystic value; the 
 creature was sacred to Bacchus, and Egyptian priests 
 wore a leopard skin on great religous occasions 
 “ Athor, the female Egyptian divinity, corresponding 
 to Apis, is well known as a spotted cow, and it is 
 singular that the druids of Britain also worshipped 
 a spotted cow.” Hislop’s Two Babylons; pp. 62 
 to 72, 3rd edition, where much interesting matter 
 is given respecting the spotted robe, &c.; at p. 67 
 is given another form of fawn like that I have copied, 
 Plate II., Fig. 4, and at p. 65 is seen a calf 
 covered with a spotted robe, with the feminine emblem, 
 or the sistrum of Isis, round its neck. (See Fig. 88, 
 p. 360.) Above its back is a scourge, and on its head 
 is a pair of horns, a globe and two figures, which 
 from their shape I take to be inverted phalli; the 
 whole signifying the power of the sun fructifying 
 the earth. In this figure the ideas of spots, and 
 heifer or calf, are combined. Hislop, moreover, calls 
 attention to the important fact that, *102, namer, 
 or nimr , signifies “ a spotted one; ” and that 'T 1 , 
 radai , means subduing.” Hence, he says, Nimrod 
 means “ the leopard tamer,” and that the spotted 
 fawn, or the spotted one, was a symbol of Nimrod. 
 See Nimrod. 
 
 But it is remarkable that no name like Nimrod has 
 yet been deciphered in the Cuneiform inscriptions, 
 nor, if I remember rightly, does any Assyrian priest 
 officiate in a spotted dress. It may be that in ancient 
 Assyria a worship prevailed something similar to that 
 
857 
 
 Beth-leaphrah] of ancient Egypt, and that it included reve¬ 
 rence for the spotted calf. But this worship was put 
 down entirely by some king, to whom the name of 
 Nimrod has been given, as Bomba was to Ferdinand 
 of Naples. And just as St. Patrick got credit for 
 killing all the real snakes in Ireland because he erased 
 serpents from the crosses on which they were found, 
 so Nimrod got the credit of being a mighty hunter 
 because he abolished the Bacchic emblem, the spotted 
 skin. If this surmise be true, we should presume, 
 from the figures which still survive, that the worship 
 had not been entirely annihilated. 
 
 Whatever interpretation we choose to adopt, it is 
 a very significant fact that the shrine, or house, or 
 temple of the fawn , or calf should be found in 
 Judah (see Micah i. 10). Whilst the prophet puns 
 upon the name ‘W, aphar, which means “ dust,” 
 he associates with it in the same verse the words 
 Gath and Aphrah, and we may remember that 
 the two are conjoined in the town of Gath - 
 hepher. 
 
 The Septuagint translates the word as the house 
 of laughter. (Compare Isaac, or Issachar ?) 50 
 
 Beth-lebaoth, (Josh. xix. 6), “ Temple of the 
 
 lionesses.” (See page 815.) 
 
 60 There is an old root “©St, aphar, which signifies ‘ to cover.’ The name of Apis in 
 Egyptian is Hepi, or Hapi, which is evidently from the Chaldee Hap, ‘ to cove] - .’ 
 In Egyptian, Hap signifies ‘ to conceal ’ (Hislop, p. 65), also ‘ to boil up,’ or ‘ lying 
 down.’ Now the calf which I have referred to in the text has over its back a 
 flagellum. The figure of Osiris (Plate II., Fig. 5), copied from Wilkinson, holds 
 a flagellum in one hand, and a shepherd’s crook in the other; in both cases the 
 thongs are triple. Now it has long been known to tbe learned, that flagellation 
 has been repeatedly resorted to for restoration of the virile power, but the crook 
 has a hidden meaning, which it is difficult to indicate; on the head of the figure 
 are two serpents, puffed up and erected. The vestment worn is spotted. Putting 
 what we have said in the text and this together, we must conclude that Beth- 
 leaphrah signifies ‘the temple where virility was restored,’ or the power of 
 enjoying concubitus given. 
 
358 
 
 Beth-lehem, (Matt. ii. 1). We approach 
 
 this name with peculiar interest. The latter part is 
 spelled and pointed lechem; if we take the 
 original letters as unpointed, and the b to be the 
 genitive sign, as in the last word, we find that, 
 amongst other meanings, ham or chain, signifies 
 * Egypt.’ Accordingly Beth l-ham denotes “ The 
 house of Egypt;” and the saying, “out of Egypt 
 have I called my son ” (Matt. ii. 15, with Hos. xi. 1), 
 at once recurs to our mind. We become still more 
 interested when we remember that one appellative for 
 the place was Ephrath, or Ephrata, which is allied 
 to aphra. See Beth Leaphrah. 
 
 But DH signifies also “heat, union, marriage;” 
 the same letters spell Noah’s son, Ham; and any of 
 these may be intended. 
 
 Though not mentioned in Joshua, we are told 
 in another part of the Scripture that Bethlehem 
 was an ancient place (Gen. xxxv. 19). In all the 
 other Beths, save the last, the Hebrew genitive 
 sign is not found; it is probable, therefore, that 
 we must look to some root including the lamed; 
 we find dp6, laham , variously pointed, to mean * to 
 eat,’ ‘to fight,’ ‘war,’ ‘siege,’ ‘food,’ ‘bread;’ and 
 we have the cognomen Lachmi, 'PDr*, a name borne 
 by a son of Goliath. Bethlehem was also the 
 name of a man, the son of Ephratah (1 Chron. iv. 
 4); and “ The house of bread ” seems to be a poor 
 etymology for a man. It is true that ‘ Lachmi ’ was 
 the Hindoo Goddess of Fortune; but there are too 
 few words of Hindoo origin in Palestine to allow 
 us to dwell upon the similarity of the names. Put¬ 
 ting all these considerations together, I incline to 
 the belief, that the real meaning of Beth-lehem is 
 “The temple of the hot one,” analogous to Beth-el. 
 
359 
 
 Beth-maacha, (2 Sam. xx. 14), “The temple of 
 
 the striking one ” (see Maacha). Compare our word 
 ‘ Sun -stroke.' 
 
 Beth-marcaboth, (Joshua xix. 5), “House, or 
 
 temple, of the chariots; ” also Madmannah (the 
 measure of Anna ?) Mr. Pater, in Kitto’s Cyclo¬ 
 pedia, takes this literally, and considers it may have 
 been a posting house for chariots. It may be so, but 
 if it were, there ought to have been many such places 
 so named (2 Chron. viii. 6, ix. 25; 2 Kings xxiii. 11). 
 When we consider that a king of Judah consecrated 
 chariots and horses to the Sun, and that a chariot wheel 
 amongst the Babylonians 
 was an emblem of the Sun 
 God, and that it is still 
 common with us as a reli¬ 
 gious emblem ; I think it 
 is more probable that the 
 place was a temple where 
 the Creator was worship¬ 
 ped under the form of 
 sacred chariots. 
 
 Fiirst’s article on this word runs thus: “Place 
 of the Sun chariots. The worship of the Sun 
 was practised in Canaan by the Phoenicians; hence 
 names of persons and places have a reference 
 thereto.” 
 
 Beth-meon, (Jer. xlviii. 23). See Beth Baal-meon. 
 
 Beth-millo, Ktevi'3 (Judges ix. 20), “ The fortified house, 
 or temple, or bastion.” 
 
 Beth-nimrah, (Numbers xxxii. 36); TOJ, nimar , 
 
 signifies “ leopard; ” and Beth-nimrah would be “ the 
 house of the leopard, or spotted one.” (See Beth- 
 leaphrah.) The usual explanation of it is that it 
 means “ the house of pure water,” a sort of shrine 
 
860 
 
 Beth-nimrah] built over a holy well, like the well of St. 
 Keyne and Holywell. 
 
 I have long been puzzled respecting the mystery 
 concealed under 
 the symbol of a 
 spotted animal, 
 whether leopard 
 or antelope, and 
 the meaning of 
 the spotted robe 
 of Athor, in Fig. 
 
 88 (copied from 
 Hyslop’s Two 
 Babylons , and by him from Colonel Smith, and by 
 him from the original collection made by the artists 
 of the French Institute in Cairo). It appears to me 
 that the clue to the myth is the following: The 
 flagellum has ever been used to excite desire in those 
 who are almost effete. The cow is conspicuous for 
 the strength of her * heat.’ The collar round the 
 neck of the Goddess represents the sistrum of Isis, 
 or the ‘ concha.’ We conclude, then, that there is 
 some amorous idea lurking under the spotted robe. 
 Now TOJ, namer, signifies “ cut in, indented, notched.” 
 Compare nekebah = “a fissure,” or a “woman,” 
 the whole being named from a characteristic part, 
 as well as “ striped,” and “ spotted; ” and Fiirst says 
 that it is cognate with habar. On turning to 
 this root I find that it means “to be associated, or 
 connected,” “ an associate, male or female, in a good 
 or a bad sense; ” ‘an enchanter, or magician,’ ‘ a 
 spell,’ &c., according to the vowel points. Putting 
 all these things together, I conclude that the spotted 
 robe signified “ the power to have connection with 
 
 Figure 88. 
 
361 
 
 Beth-nimrah] an associate;” and, when worn by an idol 
 and its priest, it indicated that they assumed to 
 possess the secret of restoring virility, temporarily or 
 otherwise. Beth-nimrah would thus signify the 
 temple or shrine where this cure was effected, and 
 be a legitimate ancestor of that Italian Church at 
 Isernia, to which Christian votaries went yearly to 
 be cured of 4 frigidity.’ 
 
 To moderns it seems strange how such a contriv¬ 
 ance as the flagellum should have been discovered; 
 but any one who has ever witnessed the punishment 
 of soldiers by scourging, could not fail to notice one 
 of its physical effects, and would thus learn to con¬ 
 vert a painful process into a great luxury. 
 
 Beth-palet, or phelet, (Joshua xv. 27); 
 
 palat, signifies “to be sleek, or smooth,” “to deliver, 
 liberation;” and the shrine would be equivalent to 
 “ Temple of the Saviour.” It is very probable that 
 the Boman Pilate comes from this source. 
 
 Beth-pazzez, (Joshua xix. 21), “ The house of the 
 
 leaping one; ” from U?, pazaz, 4 he moves to and fro,’ 
 or 4 he divides.’ 
 
 Beth-peor, “nysrn'n (Deut. iii. 29). (See Baal-peor.) 
 
 Beth-phage, (Mark xi. 1), W?, pagah, 
 
 signifies 4 to push, or to strike upon a person, or a 
 thing,’ consequently the word in question means 
 44 the temple of the striking one.” I am inclined to 
 associate the word with Belphegor, for paka, 
 which appears to be the root of the last two sylla¬ 
 bles, signifies 4 he cleaves,’ ‘divides,’ 4 is firm,’ or 
 4 hard ; ’ 4 a pointed cucumber,’ or 44 Bel, the fasci- 
 num,” another form of Baal-peor. The scholar will 
 remember how frequently Bethphage and Bethany 
 are spoken of together; the name of the last was 
 
362 
 
 Beth-phage] eminently of Chaldee origin; the other pro¬ 
 bably was so too. 
 
 Beth-rapha, NBVn'2 (1 Chron. iy. 12), “ The habitation of 
 the giant.” The name was borne by a son of Eshton. 
 This name gives us an idea of the apparent extent 
 and duration of the Shemitic language. Am rapliel, 
 king of Shinar, smites the Rephaim in Ashteroth 
 Karnaim, in the time of Abraham ; Rapha is the 
 name of a giant in Gath in the time of David. 
 Raphael is the cognomen of an angel in Babylon, an 
 Assyrian in the time of Tohit (iii. 17), and of a 
 painter in modern Borne; and there are abundance 
 of English ‘ Ralphs.’ (See Rapha). 
 
 Beth-rehob, ^nrn'3 (Judges xviii. 28). The word ^im, 
 reliob, whatever may be its various vowel points, 
 conveys the idea of “ size, breadth, space,” “ streets 
 and squares,” &c. We find that the word was used in 
 Assyria in a sacred sense, for the name Rehoboth is 
 simply a plural form of the same word. We see in 
 the same word Rahab, the harlot; and in Psalm 
 lxxxvii. 4, it is associated with Babylon. The same 
 word seems to be used indefinitely in Ps. lxxxix. 10. 
 
 The signification probably is “ the great, or large 
 one ; ” and the Assyrian Rehoboth is probably equiva¬ 
 lent to “ the great ones,” i. e., the female creator 
 and her consort, the triad and the unit, Isis and 
 Osis, Bel and Ishtar, Adam and Eve, Mahadeva and 
 Parvati, Abraham and Sarah (see Baal, Arba, &c.) ; 
 it would have much the same meaning as Rapha and 
 Rephaim. (See Rachel.) 
 
 I cannot imagine any people calling a town 
 ‘ streets,’ or * squares,’ ere any existed ; or a temple 
 ‘ street-shrine. 51 
 
 61 Since writing the above, I find that the Cuneiform Ribitu should be pro- 
 
363 
 
 Beth-saida, Brj Qo-ctfia. (Matt. xi. 21). This is usually inter¬ 
 preted as “ The house of fishing,” from tzidah , 
 or more properly the “ house of food.” We may 
 
 fairly doubt both of them, inasmuch as we can 
 scarcely imagine a temple or shrine devoted to 
 catching fish, or preparing victuals. I feel more 
 inclined to compare the name with the oriental 
 Said, and with Sidon. From a cultivation of euphe¬ 
 mism, the Scripture copyists write the name of the 
 latter town with ¥, tsaddi, which is pronounced tz, 
 like the Italian z; when thus spelled, it means 
 Fishing. It is probable that the original was spelled 
 with r, zain, the English z. If so, we shall find the 
 root in the word It ,zaid, “proud, impudent, wanton;” 
 or P^J, zadon, “swelling with pride;” and we then 
 recognise that Sidon has a phallic meaning, just as 
 have Tyre, Ekron, Gaza, Ashkalon, and Gath. 
 
 If we adopt this interpretation, Bethsaida will 
 signify much the same as “Bethrehob.” 
 
 Beth-shan, (Josh. xvii. 11), “Temple of concord,” 
 
 or “tranquillity,” from shan, ‘concord, rest, 
 
 security.’ (Compare Shain, Shaen, Shane amongst 
 ourselves.) 
 
 Beth-shemesh, (Josh. xv. 10), “ Temple of the 
 
 Sun,” from shemesh, ‘ The Sun; ’ Shamas in 
 
 Assyrian, schemsch in Maltese. (Compare Shimson 
 and Simpson.) 
 
 Beth-shittah, n^rrrvn (Judges vii. 22). It is generally 
 said that this word means “ House of the Acacia; ” 
 shitah; and that it represents a locality where 
 
 nounced rihu .— Talbot, in Transactions of Royal Society of Literature, vol. 2, 
 part 2, new series. If this be so, Rehob might signify “ The glorious father,” 
 Ribitu signifying ‘ great, glorious,’ &c.; and Rehoboth would he “ The great ones,” 
 feminine. 
 
364 
 
 Beth-shittah] acacia trees were common. If, however, the 
 word represents a shrine, house, or temple, it is 
 probably derived from shat , plural, shathim, which 
 
 signifies ‘columns,’ or ‘pillars,’ in which case the 
 meaning is “ The temple of the pillars.” 
 
 Beth-tappuach, niBJWa (Josh. xv. 53), “ Shrine of the 
 Apple.” (See the article on Apple ; and compare 
 this word with “the house of Bimmon,” or of the 
 Pomegranate, 2 Kings v. 18.) 
 
 Beth-uel, 'Winn (i Chron. iv. 30), “ Habitation of El.” 
 
 Bethulia, (Judith iv. 6), “A virgin, a betrothed 
 
 woman, not yet joined with man.” Fiirst. 
 
 The most probable etymon for this word is, that 
 it is equivalent to n #5 ?-ina, beth, and S', Jah , the ' 
 being elided from the last name. This will give the 
 signification to the word, “ habitation for the God 
 Jah ; ” and it would indicate the ancient opinion that, 
 so long as a woman remained a virgin, she was not 
 only £ fit to be,’ but really was, a dwelling-place for 
 the Holy Spirit. 
 
 Beth-zachariah, B aiO&xapla (1 Maccab. vi. 32), “ Temple 
 of the celebrated Jehovah.” (See Zachariah.) 
 
 Beth-ztjr, ^’n'3 (Josh. xv. 58), iv, tsor, “ a rock,” or 
 “ upright stone,” which, according as its shape was 
 elongated, or short and conical, had distinct signifi¬ 
 cations ; *!'¥, tzir, also signifies ‘ a messenger and an 
 idol.' 
 
 All the preceding places or temples are described 
 as existing in Palestine. The following existed in 
 Babylonia and Assyria generally. 
 
 Betzal, Cuneiform, “ Temple of the Protector.” 
 
 Bilat, Cuneiform, “ Tribute.” (Compare Bill of Costs, 
 &c.) 
 
 Bit-galla, „ was either “a large temple,” or “temple 
 
365 
 
 Bit-galla] of the Sun.” Gula. (The word Galla may be 
 compared with Gallus, “the cock,” sacred to Apollo.) 
 
 Bit-galla-ktjmta, Cuneiform, “ The large, or new temple 
 of the Sun.” 
 
 Bit-nitsirti, Cuneiform, “ House of treasure.” 
 
 Bit-shakuri, „ “ The black temple.” 
 
 Bit-shaggathu is the name given to the chief temple in 
 Babylon : and we may trace the signification of the 
 word thus: leth, means “ a temple; ” 
 
 shcigah, is “to press into,” “to be constantly occupied 
 with; ” and shagal, the former part of which 
 we still have extant amongst ourselves, means “ to 
 have connection; ” whilst athar, signifies “ a 
 place.” The compound word, therefore, we consider 
 to he equivalent to “ the temple, the place for sexual 
 congress.” 
 
 Shaga signifies “a feast” in the Assyrian language; 
 and of the nature of the feasts of the Babylonians, 
 Diodorus Siculus gives some curious particulars. 
 Our Gala or Solar days often end in like manner, 
 feasting being merely the prelude to another form of 
 sensual enjoyment. 
 
 The above-named temple induces me to reproduce 
 at length certain observations of Herodotus and 
 another writer, which show 7 , (1), that purification 
 for ceremonial uncleanness was not peculiar to the 
 Jews, (2), that religion has been combined with 
 sensuality, (3), that the custom was by the higher 
 orders held in abhorrence. 
 
 “As often as a Babylonian has intercourse with 
 his wife, he sits over burning incense, and his wife does 
 the same in another place ; at break of day both 
 wash, for they will not touch any vessel till they have 
 washed. The same practice is observed by the 
 
366 
 
 Bit-shaggathu] Arabians. The most disgraceful of the 
 Babylonian customs is the following; every native 
 woman is obliged once in her life to sit in the temple 
 of Venus and have intercourse with a stranger. And 
 many disdaining to mix with the rest, being proud on 
 account of their wealth, come in covered carriages, and 
 take up their station at the temple with a numerous 
 train of servants attending them. But the far greater 
 part do thus: many sit down in the temple of Venus 
 wearing a crown of cord round their heads ; some are 
 continually coming in and others are going out; 
 passages marked out in a straight line lead in every 
 direction through the women, along which strangers 
 pass and make their choice. When a woman has 
 once seated herself, she must not return home till 
 some stranger has thrown a piece of silver into her 
 lap and lain with her outside the temple (Compare 
 1 Sam. ii. 22). He who throws the silver must say 
 thus, ‘ I beseech the Goddess Mylitta to favour thee; ’ 
 for so the Assyrians call Venus, Mylitta. The silver 
 may be ever so small, for she will not reject it, inas¬ 
 much as it is not lawful for her to do so, for such silver 
 is accounted sacred. The woman follows the first man 
 that throws, and refuses no one. But when she has 
 had intercourse, and has absolved herself from her 
 obligation to the Goddess, she returns home; and after 
 that time, however great a sum you may give her, you 
 will not gain possession of her. Those that are 
 endowed with beauty and symmetry of shape are soon 
 set free, but the deformed are detained a long time 
 from inability to satisfy the law, for some wait for a 
 space of three or four years. In some parts of 
 Cyprus there is a custom very similar.” 52 
 
 62 Pp. 86, 87, Cary’s translation of Eerodotus. Bolin’s edition, London, 1858. 
 
367 
 
 Bit-shaggathu] We presume that the following translation, 
 from a portion of a cylinder of Sargon, has reference 
 to the above worship, and the king’s opinion there¬ 
 upon. “ I watched over (or protected) their female 
 children until they married. I would not permit 
 handsome damsels of the upper classes to offer prayers 
 and supplications in the temple of the Babylonian 
 goddess.” 53 Sargon was I understand an usurper, and 
 when he came to the throne, he, like Jehu, Jeroboam, 
 Athaliah, Henry VIII., Mary, Elizabeth, Cromwell, 
 Robespierre, and a vast number of other rulers of 
 strong energy, swept away as far as possible the 
 remains of a worship which had become hateful to the 
 most powerful sections of the community. 
 
 Bit-tzida, or Zida, Cuneiform, “ The house of sacred 
 things ” ? It is curious that there is still a temple of 
 this name amongst the Kaffirs of the Indian Caucasus. 
 
 We still have the word Beth amongst us: in 
 Elizabeth, Macbeth, Bethell, Lambeth, Elspeth. 54 
 Betonim, (Josh. xiii. 26). This word may signify 
 
 simply ‘ the hills,’ a curious name for a town. It is 
 more consistent with ancient nomenclature to con¬ 
 sider that it is a plural form of 1^?, beten, “ the 
 round belly,” or “ the cupola heights.” 
 
 Bezai, '¥ 3 (Ezra ii. 17), “ Shining, or high,” from P 3 , 
 butz. (Compare Bootes.) 
 
 Bezaleel, (Exod. xxxi. 2), is said to mean “A1 is 
 
 protection,” as if from ben zalal. (Fiirst.) 
 
 It is more probably a corrected form of ^f 5 ! 3 , basalel, 
 
 63 Talbot, in Transactions of Royal Society of Literature, 2nd series, vol. 7,p. 176. 
 
 64 The following are the names of certain places taken by Sennacherib, all 
 of which begin with Beth:— 
 
 Beth-Ammon, Beth-Car, Beth-Imbiah, Beth-Ritziah, 
 
 „ Aktami, „ Dagon, „ Kilmansakh, „ Yakina, 
 
 „ Baru, „ Gabir, „ Kubitti, „ Zitti. 
 
 „ Bunaki, „ Gitzi, „ Kumri. 
 
368 
 
 Bezaleel] and is derived from *?]?, bazal, to be ‘ hard,’ or 
 * firm,’ or ‘ thick,’ a word from whence comes our 
 basalt; the name would thus read as ‘ El is firm, 
 or hard.’ 
 
 Bezek, PJ? (Judges i. 4), “ Lightning,” from PI?, bazak ; 
 when pointed as bezek, the word signifies “ a fissure.” 
 Adoni-Bezek signifies “ the lord of Bezek,” or “ My 
 lord lightning,” or “the shining one.” 
 
 Bezer, “f-f! (Deut. iv. 48), “Dispersion,” or “ digging out.” 
 It also signifies gold or silver ore, from being cut or 
 dug out; as basar , it signifies 4 he is full,’ 
 
 4 thick,’ ‘ swelling; ’ also, 4 he utters sounds.’ 
 
 Belib, or Belibus, Cuneiform, an Assyrian proper name. 
 
 Bel-rabu, Cuneiform. “ The great lord.” 
 
 Bel-sar, or Shar-uzzar, Cuneiform, “ A son of Nabonidus.” 
 (Compare Belcher, Pilcher.) 
 
 Belni, Assyrian, “ Lord,” or “ Lords.” 
 
 Bel, „ “Lord.” 
 
 Belzuna, Cuneiform, “ The moon.” (Compare Belzoni.) 
 
 Bed, Vedic, 
 
 Bha „ 
 
 Bhaga, „ 
 
 Bhama, „ 
 Bhanda, „ 
 Bhargava „ 
 Bhash, „ 
 
 Bhatu, „ 
 Bhava-ja, „ 
 
 “ Writings.” (Compare “ The Venerable ” 
 Bede, Bedesman, Bedel.) 
 
 “ To shine,” “light,” “ the sun.” 
 
 “The sun,” “Siva,” “divine power,” 
 “virtue,” “beauty,” “the vulva.” Bagh, 
 “ a tiger.” A possible origin of Bacchus 
 and his leopard skin robe; also * the 
 female organ.’ 
 
 “ Light.” 
 
 “ Any vessel, pot, or cup.” 
 
 “ An elephant.” 
 
 “To speak;” Bhasha, “ language.” (Hence 
 bosh ?) 
 
 “ The sun.” 
 
 “Love.” 
 
369 
 
 Bhavana, Vedic, “Nature,” “the wife of Siva,” “creator,” 
 “founder,” “mental perception.” 
 
 Bhratri, ,/ “ A brother ” (frater). 
 
 Bhrud, „ “To cover,” “ to collect ” (to brood). 
 
 Bhuti, „ “ State of being,” “ birth,” “ prosperity,” 
 
 “ wealth.” (Hence booty.) 
 
 Bichri, (2 Sam. xx. 1). This name is probably a cor¬ 
 rected form of or bachriali, or bickeriah , 
 
 the terminal n being elided. If so, it would signify 
 “ Jah breaks forth,” “ Jah is the dawn.” 
 
 Bidkar, T7? (2 Kings ix. 25), either “ The servant of the 
 ram,” "J? for TDK and ">?, or “ worshipping Melkar; ” 
 1? being abridged from (Furst.) 
 
 Bigtha, NJjaa (Esther i. 10), signification unknown. 
 
 Bigthan l^* 1 ? (Esther ii. 21), of doubtful import. 
 
 Bigthana, Nanaa (Esther vi. 2), signification unknown. 
 
 Bigvai, (Ezra ii. 2), of doubtful import. 
 
 Bildad, 1^3 (Job ii. 11), ^ and W, “ To love, or to be 
 united with, Bel,” or “he loves Bel.” 
 
 Bileam, also Ibleam, Bylpa (1 Chron. vi. 70), “Baal is 
 Am ” ? = and baal and am. It is possible 
 that this may be the origin of our word William. 
 
 Bilgah, nAa (1 Chron. xxiv. 14), “Bursting forth,” “first¬ 
 born.” (Furst.) 
 
 Bilgai, (Nehem. x. 8), “Bursting forth,” or “firstborn.” 
 
 Bilhah, (Gen. xxix. 29), from ^ and “Bel 
 
 creates,” or “ Bel moves round us.” 
 
 Bilhan, (Gen. xxxvi. 27), “ He fears On ” ? from 
 bala, “ to fear ; ” or “ Bel is On ” ? 
 
 Bilshan, 1^? (Ezra ii. 2), “Peace of Bel.” “Concord 
 with Bel,” or “ Bel is peace,” and 
 
 Bimhal, ^noa, (1 Chron. vii. 83), “ God is my fortress ; ” 
 from al, and baviah, “ God,” “ A high place, 
 a fortress.” 
 
 A A 
 
370 
 
 Binchodesch, a Phoenician name, “ son of the consecrated 
 one ” ? 
 
 Binea, NittS (1 Chron. ix. 48), and (1 Chron. viii. 37). 
 Both of these words seem to he corrected forms of 
 n T H?, which signifies ‘ Jah is intelligent,’ or ‘ Son of 
 Jah,’ according to the vowel points. 
 
 Binnui, '*133 (Ezra viii. 33), “ Son of rest,” from I?, ben, son, 
 and n*3, ‘ to rest.’ (Compare Noah, Benaiah.) The 
 usual interpretation is * building,’ in which it is 
 difficult to see any sense. 
 
 Birsha, 1^7? (Gen. xiv. 2), this cognomen is said to mean 
 “ son of wickedness.” The interpretation must cer¬ 
 tainly be rejected, unless, as in the case of Ahitophel, 
 the name has been given by the recorder to show his 
 own feelings, for no one would bestow such a name 
 upon a child. If the historian called a king of 
 Gomorrah by that cognomen intentionally, it appears 
 to be clear that he has not written truthfully. There 
 is an old root EHS, barash, or birsh, which seems to 
 have had a meaning of “ cutting or carving out, or 
 splitting as with an axe; ” and as Birsha was con¬ 
 temporary with Abram, ‘ the High father,’ it is 
 probable that the name in question really means 
 “the Creator.” (Compare Persia.) 
 
 Birzavith, nina (1 Chron. vii. 31), “ Son of splendours, the 
 splendid ones,” from the plural of M, ziv, 1 splendour,’ 
 and *13, bar, a 4 son.’ 
 
 Bish, “ Causing shame.” “ If the derivation of dog 
 from 3?, dog , pro-creation, i. e., salacious, lecherous, 
 be accepted, then there can be no reason why bitch, 
 from 3P3, bish, should not be received. The propen¬ 
 sities of these animals were notorious to the ancients 
 as well as to the moderns, and remarks to that effect 
 are to be found in the classical and Scriptural 
 
871 
 
 Bish] writers.” — Our British Ancestors , p. 870; Rev. S. 
 Lysons. Parker, London and Oxford. 
 
 Bishlam, P^J (Ezra iv. 7), A Persian word, of doubtful 
 etymology. 
 
 Bithiah, (1 Chron. iv. 18), “Worshipper of Jah.” 
 
 Bizjothjah, (Josh. xv. 28), There is great doubt 
 
 about the meaning of this appellative; the usual 
 interpretation being “contempt of Jehovah.” This 
 involves the proposition that the word Jehovah was 
 known to the Canaanites, before it was revealed to 
 Moses, if the town were old; or if the town were 
 recent, that those who named it knew all that passed 
 amongst the Israelites in the wilderness, as well as 
 if Moses had issued a weekly gazette. 
 
 Although the proposition that Jah or Jehovah 
 was a common name of the Almighty is not gene¬ 
 rally accepted by the unlearned, there are many 
 concurring circumstances which lead the inquirer to 
 believe that Jah was a sacred name amongst the 
 Canaanites, or Phoenicians, prior to the settlement 
 of the Jews ; e. g., Jabin is king of Canaan, and his 
 name would read Ben Jah, ‘ the son of Jah;’ and 
 there are many other words of a similar nature. 
 But as the Jews claimed the name as that of their 
 own especial God, their writers “ corrected ” the 
 Heathen names in which Jah appeared. (See Jah, 
 infra.) Fiirst translates the word as “ place of 
 excellent olives.” 
 
 Biztha, (Esther i. 10), the word is said to mean 
 
 “ an eunuch.” 
 
 Bil, “ The grave old man.” The same as Bel? 
 
 Bil-akh-isu, Cuneiform, a man’s name; Assyrian, signifying 
 “Bel (is) brother of Isu ” (or Jesus, or Hosi), the 
 saviour or helper; he is the son of Merodach-Abua ; 
 
372 
 
 Bil-akh-isu] and it is noteworthy here that the son has not 
 the father’s name, each person haying an individual 
 name given by a priest, and involving some theological 
 dogma. It is very interesting to the inquirer, to find 
 Isu a sacred name in Assyria, Jesus a holy name in 
 Palestine, and Hesus equally so in ancient Gaul. 
 There are other forms of the words, such as Joshua, 
 Hosea, and Hosi, which are as closely allied in 
 meaning, as our English words ‘ save ’ and * help.’ 
 
 Billu-Ballat, Assyrian, a man’s name. (Compare Billy, 
 Ballet, &c.) 
 
 Birket, Assyrian, means “blessed; ” Birket-Baal, “blessed 
 by Baal,” Both are male names; so familiar do 
 they sound, that we have no difficulty in believing that 
 the modern cognomen, Bill Birkett, may have been as 
 old as Sennacherib or Abraham. One of the names 
 read by Rawlinson was Barkat-Bil-bin-ara (Ninevite). 
 
 Bil-shamin, is another cognomen which sounds familiar to 
 our ears, for we have Shimmins in abundance 
 amongst us, and still more Bills. It signifies 
 “ Lord of the heavens.” 
 
 Bildad, Assyrian name = “ Given by Bel.” (Compare the 
 Jewish Eldad and Medad.) 
 
 Billat, Assyrian, “ Queen ” ? 
 
 Bith-kheira, Assyrian, “ Mistress of the house.” 
 
 Bit-rab Pul-sar-rabu, “The great palace of Pul, the great 
 king.” 
 
 Boar (The). Cristna is represented to have appeared on 
 earth as a boar; and the animal is sacred to him. A 
 hoar is represented as having killed Adonis. A boar’s 
 head is a Christian Christmas dish. For a very 
 interesting account of the boar, in Western Asia and 
 Europe, see Hislop’s Two Babylons, p. 143, et seq. 
 
 Boaz, W3 (Ruth ii. 1). There is considerable difficulty 
 
373 
 
 Boaz] in assigning a meaning to this word; it is said to 
 mean “alacrity;” it may signify “in strength,” = 
 2 and W. It was a name given to one of the 
 pillars in Solomon’s temple. We find it in con¬ 
 junction with the sun, ra, in Bozrah. We find Buz, 
 a son of Nahor (light); and Buzi was the name of 
 Ezekiel’s father. We have also seen the names of 
 Bezai, Bezaleel, and Bazluth, which may or may not 
 be variants of Buz. .Fiirst states that W?, Baaz, 
 signifies ‘ to split, or divide,’ also ‘ to be valiant, or 
 bold,’ or ‘ strength and firmness.’ ‘ To split, or 
 divide,’ is still used as an euphemism; and hardness 
 is supposed to be the quality alike of a valiant man 
 and of the phallus. We may therefore, I think, 
 conclude that Boaz is one of the many by-names 
 for the male organ. 
 
 Bochebu, (1 Chron. viii. 38), “ He is the first-born ” 
 (G-esenius); “ youth ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Bochim, (Judges ii. 1), “ The weepers.” I doubt 
 
 the etymology; if correct, it may refer to some 
 dropping wells, similar to that at Knaresborough, in 
 Yorkshire. It is, probably, a variant for bachim , 
 D 'i?l, or &Ti?4 bkiim, ‘ the chasms, or fissures; ’ and 
 chasms, &c., were held sacred. In England they 
 were called by the early Christians Cunni Diaboli. 
 It was over a chasm, whence certain mephitic vapours 
 were said to arise, that the priestess of Delphi placed 
 herself before she prophesied. 
 
 We have the word V'i??, bukia, used for chinks, or 
 fissures, by Amos (vi. 11), and Isaiah (xxii. 9); and 
 Bukki and Bukkiah are both proper names. 
 
 Bodotria, an ancient name of Scotland. 
 
 The first syllable of this word may be from 
 bada, ‘ to form, or fashion; ’ or it may be a 
 
374 
 
 Bodotria] variant from the Sanscrit Buddl li, ‘ understanding,’ 
 
 * intellect,’ ‘mind;’ or Budli, ‘to know;’ or Bodha, 
 ‘wise.’ As to the probability of the latter surmise, 
 see Dr. Moore’s Ancient Pillar Stones of Scotland; 
 in an inscription on the Newton stone is a 
 cross, one of Buddha’s emblems, and the 
 writing generally resembles ancient Pali; like 
 that which has been found in old caves in India. 
 Budd, in the Erse, signifies the phallus. (See 
 Buduel, post.) 
 
 Bohan, ft 3 (Josh. xv. 6), a son of Reuben. The word 
 signifies “to be short and thick, fat;” also “the 
 thumb.” This is one of the numerous emblems of 
 the fascinum, and is still used amongst the Sclavonic 
 nations. Compare the modern Boliun, Bohn, Bowen. 
 
 Bolitho, is an old Cornish name, still extant; it probably 
 comes from ^V 3 , baalithan , the BsA»t«v of Strabo. 
 
 Borsippa, the ancient Bartsippa, “ Son of the ship.” 
 
 Bow (The), a phallic emblem ; amongst the oriental nations 
 a bended bow signified “a peculiar state of pros¬ 
 perity.” 
 
 Bozcath, n i?¥£ (Jos. xv. 39), “The swellers up;” from 
 P? 3 , batsak, ‘ to swell up.’ Compare Bozrah, and in 
 England, Bosworth, Boscawen. 
 
 In Gesenius the word is rendered “ stony, or 
 elevated ground ; ” scarcely an appropriate name for 
 a town, at a time, too, when religion entered into all 
 appellatives. “ Height, hill.” (Fiirst.) 
 
 Bozez, r.?' 13 (1 Sam. xiv. 4), said to mean “shining” 
 (Gesenius), “ height ” (Fiirst); P 3 , buz , signifies ‘ to 
 be, or make white, or bright,’ also ‘ very fine white 
 linen cloth,’ or ‘ byssus.’ 
 
 Bozra, (Gen. xxxvi. 36), said to mean simply “a 
 
 sheep-fold,” or “ castle, or fortress.” 
 
375 
 
 Brahma, “ Goddess of speech ; ” wife of Brahma. 
 
 Brahman, Yedic, “Prayer,” “austere devotion,” “holy know¬ 
 ledge,” “ chastity,” “ the Scriptures,” “ the highest 
 caste,” “the divine cause and essence of the world,” 
 “the incomprehensible God.” 
 
 Brahmya, one of the five sacraments. The Romanists, who 
 have adopted so many of the ancient and oriental 
 heathen religious ceremonies, faiths, &c., have pro¬ 
 bably adopted the Yedic sacraments, and added them 
 to the Christian two, and thus obtained their seven. 
 
 Branding. Esarhaddon branded a captive king with the 
 emblem of Asshur, some short time before he executed 
 him by beheading. He piles the heads of his enemies 
 in heaps by his city gates. (Compare 2 Kings x. 7.) 
 
 Buddhi, “ Understanding,” “ the God Buddah, or Budh.” 
 
 Budh, “ To know.” 
 
 Budha, “Wise.” 
 
 Buduel, the name of a king of Ammon in the time of 
 Sennacherib. Here Rawlinson supposes that the first 
 syllable may be a form of Beth, = “ house; ” but it is 
 more likely to be from the Hebrew or Phoenician 
 bada, “to create.” This, then, would read, “El 
 created me.” At the same period, “ Padiah,” or 
 Father Jah, or Jah my father, was king of Ekron; 
 a proof, if any additional testimony were needed, 
 that both El and Jah were sacred names amongst 
 others than the Jews. 
 
 Bukki, 'i?? (Numb, xxxiv. 22). See Bochim, above. 
 
 Bukkiah, (1 Chron. xxiv. 4). „ „ 
 
 Buli, “ The vulva ” (the belly ?). 
 
 Bull. There is an immense number of mythoses in which 
 this creature plays a most important part. For an 
 account of them, the reader is referred to Lajard’s 
 Culte de Venus and Rolle’s Culte de Bacchus . It will 
 
376 
 
 Bull] suffice to say, that the animal was intended to sym¬ 
 bolise power of body and unwearied masculine energy— 
 two attributes especially coveted by ancient kings 
 and great men. The bull seems to have been in a 
 manner sacred to Venus, whilst the lion was emble¬ 
 matic of the male creator. The bull and the lion, 
 amongst the Assyrians, occupied much the same 
 places as the lion and the unicorn do in modern 
 heraldry. 
 
 When the sacred bulls are mentioned in Esar- 
 haddon’s inscriptions, the expressions used become 
 mysterious, or symbolical. (Talbot, Transactions of 
 the Royal Society of Literature, vol. vii., page 601.) 
 
 It would be impossible, within the limits of a 
 short article, to give an account of all which has been 
 written respecting the significance of the Bull, from 
 China on the east, to England on the west, as a 
 divine emblem. All my readers are probably aware 
 that it symbolised strength and masculine vigour; 
 and, in consequence of those attributes alone, may 
 have been held sacred; but there seem to have 
 been other hidden causes, which I find tolerably well 
 summed up by F. Lajard in the following words :— 
 
 “ Les deux principaux attributs caracteristiques 
 de Venus furent, en orient comme en Occident, le 
 taureau et le lion, 1’ un, symbole du principe de la 
 chaleur et du pouvoir generateur actif, V autre, 
 symbole du principe humide et du pouvoir generateur 
 passif; et tous les deux signes du zodiaque, mais avec 
 cette difference que le taureau etait le premier signe 
 de F equinoxe vernal et le domicile de la lune a P epoque 
 de sa plus grande exaltation, et que le lion place au 
 solstice d’ete etait le domicile du soleil pendant la 
 canicule. Ces deux animaux furent done aussi les 
 
377 
 
 Bull] hieroglyphes ideograpkiques de 1’ hermaphroditisme 
 de Venus, divinite a laquelle les anciennes traditions 
 assignent, comme a Mithra, une place entre les 
 equinoxes et les solstices, et donnent pour monture 
 le taureau.” (Op. Cit., p. 243.) 
 
 In another passage he writes thus — 
 
 “ Premier etre sorti des mains d’un dieu createur 
 du monde, le taureau, symbole de vie, est appele d’un 
 nom qui signifie a la fois ‘vie ’ et ‘ taureau.’ Par une 
 consequence immediate d’une doctrine qui enseignait 
 que les premiers etres vivants etaient ne dans 1’ eau, 55 il 
 est, en meme temps, le symbole du principe humide, du 
 pouvoir passsif de la generation, ou du sexe feminin. 
 ... A peine ne, ce taureau protogone, de nature pure 
 et lumineuse, devint un sujet d’envie et de jalousie pour 
 le mauvais genie et ses demons; ils 1’ empoisonnent 
 et le mettent a mort. . . . A ce moment, du corps 
 du taureau mourant sortent les prototypes de l’homme, 
 de la femme, de tous les animaux, de toutes les 
 plantes, de tous les arbres qui peuplent la terre. La 
 semence du taureau est portee dans la lune, et la, 
 par 1’ action fecondante du soleil, elle devient la 
 source inepuisable de la reproduction de tous les 
 etres,” &c. (P. 221.) 
 
 65 It is very interesting to the modern physiologist to be able to trace the origin 
 of certain mythological ideas which have obtained in ancient days. We see in the 
 text the idea that all living beings were born in the water. This is simply the 
 expression of the fact, which the hierarchs had learned, that Providence has supplied 
 in the maternal womb an aqueous fluid in which the foetus is suspended during its 
 intra-uterine life. When parturition occurs, this fluid, which is contained in a strong 
 envelope, has much to do in preparing the way for the exit of the baby. When the 
 birth approaches, it is heralded usually by a gush of “ water; ” and when the new 
 being is ushered fully into life, it is followed by a final gush of water, there being no 
 further use for the fluid. Few, very few, there are amongst women, whose womb 
 during pregnancy does not contain a large quantity of this fluid, hence the female 
 was said to be of a humid nature; hence the idea of fecundity of the waters, and 
 the division of creation into the hot and dry, and the hot and moist. Vida sujpra, p. 85. 
 
878 
 
 Bunah, (1 Chron. ii. 25), for Banah, “he built,” or 
 “ he erected me.” (See Buns.) 
 
 Bunaki-beth, a town taken by Sennacherib. 
 
 Bunni, '33 (Neh. xi. 15), “ Built, or erected,” “ upright; ” 
 from ‘ to erect, or build up.’ 
 
 Buns. I introduce this word to enable me to copy one of the 
 very interesting pages from Hislop (Op. Git.): —“The 
 hot cross buns of Good Friday, and the dyed eggs 
 of Pasch, or Easter Sunday, figured in the Chaldaean 
 rites just as they do now. The ‘ buns,’ known too by 
 that identical name, were used in the worship of the 
 Queen of Heaven, the Goddess Easter (Ishtar), as early 
 as the days of Cecrops, the founder of Athens, that 
 is, fifteen hundred years before the Christian era. 
 ‘ One species of bread,’ says Bryant, ‘ which used to 
 be offered to the gods, was of great antiquity, and 
 called Boun.’ Diogenes Laertius, speaking of this 
 offering being made by Empedocles, describes the 
 chief ingredients of which it was composed, saying, 
 ‘He offered one of the sacred cakes called Boun, 
 which was made of fine flour and honey.’ The 
 Prophet Jeremiah takes notice of this kind of offering, 
 when he says, ‘ The children gather wood, the fathers 
 kindle the fire, and the women knead the dough, to 
 make cakes to the Queen of Heaven ’ (Jer. vii. 18, 
 and xliv. 19). At the present day the buns are not 
 offered, but eaten, on the festival of Astarte; but this 
 leaves no doubt as to whence they have been derived.” 
 (Pp. 154, 155.) 56 The author of the book in question 
 does not add that the ‘ buns ’ offered to the queen 
 of heaven, and in sacrifices to other deities, were 
 framed in the shape of the sexual organs of the male 
 
 86 The Hebrew, or Phoenician, name for the cakes offered to Astarte, is ^3 
 cavan, which reminds us strongly of Kavanagh, Cavan, &c. 
 
379 
 
 Buns] or female, or of both combined; but that they were so 
 in ancient and comparatively modern times, we have 
 abundant evidence. Martial distinctly speaks of such 
 things, in two epigrams, lib. xiv., ep. 69, wherein 
 the male organ is spoken of, and lib. ix., ep. 2, 
 wherein the female part is commemorated, the cake 
 being made of the finest flour, and kept especially for 
 the palate of the favoured fair one. We can under¬ 
 stand how such things could be allowed in licentious 
 Home, but we can scarcely comprehend how they 
 could ever have been tolerated in Christian Europe, 
 as we find that they were from the second part of the 
 Remains of the Worship of Priapus ; 57 that in 
 Saintonge, in the neighbourhood of La Rochelle, 
 small cakes, baked in the form of a phallus, are made 
 as offerings at Easter, and are carried and presented 
 from house to house. Dulaure 58 states that in his 
 time the festival of Palm Sunday, in the town of 
 Saintes, was called le fete des pinnes; and that during 
 its continuance the women and children carried in the 
 procession a phallus made of bread, which they called 
 a pinne, at the end of their palm branches; 59 these 
 ‘ pinnes ’ were subsequently blessed by the priest, and 
 carefully preserved by the women during the year. 
 A similar practice existed at St. Jean d’ Angely, 
 where small cakes, made in the form of the phallus, 
 and called fateaux, were carried in the procession of 
 the Fete Dieu, or Corpus Christi. The same author 
 states that in some of the earlier inedited French 
 books on cookery, receipts are given for making cakes 
 
 67 A continuation of It. P. Knight's Work, and which is understood to be from 
 the pen of one of our most distinguished antiquarians. 
 
 58 Histoire Abregee des Dif events Cultes, vol. ii., p. 285, printed 1825. 
 
 69 We have already noticed that ‘ the palm ’ is an euphemism, and it is curious 
 here to see it united with the phallus in Christendom. 
 
380 
 
 Buns] of the form in question, which are broadly named. 
 An author, Johannes Bruerinus Campegius, who 
 wrote in the sixteenth century, describes these con¬ 
 trivances as a proof of the degeneracy of manners 
 amongst Christians. Dulaure informs us that when 
 he wrote (1825), such like cakes were still common ; 
 that the male was symbolised chiefly in Lower 
 Limousin, and especially at Brives, whilst the female 
 emblem was adopted at Clermont, in Auvergne, and 
 in other places. (Pp. 158-160.) 
 
 In our own country, I do not know that cakes or 
 buns are ever publicly made in these grossly obnoxious 
 forms; hut from the ancient conventional female 
 emblem being adopted as the form of some, there is 
 reason to suppose that England can yet show the 
 relics of ancient usages. For example, there was, 
 and perhaps still is, a custom at Nottingham for the 
 bakers to send round to their customers, at Christmas, 
 the modern representative of the ancient saturnalia, 
 large cakes or buns, which are made in a lozenge 
 form; 60 upon these are moulded sometimes the form 
 of the cross, but more frequently the Virgin and Child; 
 a coincidence which stamps the custom as having 
 been religious at a former period, and probably as 
 commemorative of the worship of Astarte. 
 
 Buz, TJ|2 , Buzi, (Gren. xxii. 21), (See Boaz). It probably 
 is a variant of 'V?, or T* 13 , buz, “to be high, or 
 shining.” 
 
 C. There is no single letter in the Hebrew which entirely 
 corresponds to the third letter of our alphabet. Those 
 
 00 See Fig. 51, page 156, where a lozenge of similar shape to the buns 
 described is to be seen between the real and the mystic man. Such a lozenge was 
 the symbol of Ishtar, or the celestial virgin. 
 
381 
 
 C.] names which, in our authorised version, begin with C, 
 are written with 3 , c, or p, k, except once (viz., 
 Charashim), where it is with n, h. Therff is so much 
 similarity between 3 , and c, that we may well imagine 
 them to be the same signs; the one being written 
 from right to left, and the other from left to right. 
 But even if we allow this, we can scarcely identify 
 the two in sound, for 3 has either a guttural or 
 k sound, according to the absence or presence of the 
 dagesh, whilst c has the value both of k and s: for 
 example, cart = kart , and rice = rise; even in the 
 same word the difference is apparent, as scarcely — 
 skairsly. It remains to be added, that 3 is inter¬ 
 changeable with j g, ' j, p k, n h. 
 
 Cabbon, P 33 (Jos. xv. 40), signifies, I think, “On is round,” 
 from an old root, 333 , cabab, ‘ he is round.’ Gesenius 
 thinks that the word signifies ‘ a cake ; ’ whilst Fiirst 
 considers it equivalent to ‘ a hamlet, or circle of huts.’ 
 Cubbon is still a common name in the Isle of Man, 
 and Gibbon is familiar to all scholars. 
 
 Cabihi, Ka/3 sipoi, Deities or angels amongst the Phoenicians, 
 where they were described as the seven sons of P7-f, 
 Zadik. The name appears to be allied to " 1 ' 33 , cabir, 
 which signifies “great, mighty, or overpowering.” 
 I presume that, like the seven archangels amongst the 
 Chaldaeans, the Cabiri were the seven planets amongst 
 the Phoenicians. 
 
 Cabul, ^33 (Josh. xix. 27), i. q. ^ 3I 7, “ A dry, parched 
 place; ” the 3 and n being interchanged; vide supra , 
 under letter C ; and see also 1 Kings ix. 13. 
 
 Cocha, or Coach, t 13 , “ Strength,” especially virile power, 
 wealth, &c. (Compare Cacus, the giant who fought 
 with Hercules, and the modern Cock.) 
 
 Cain, IN? (Gen. iv. 1 ; Jos. xv. 57), “A spear,” “to pierce,” 
 
382 
 
 Cain] “a smith,” “to create.” ‘ La pique,’ ‘le dard, 
 ‘fascinum.’ (Compare Khan.) In Assyrian, kenu 
 signifies ‘ eldest,’ and abil, ‘ son.’ Is this the origin 
 of Cain and Abel ? 
 
 Cainan, VP (Gen. v. 9). This word is probably a variant of 
 P 3 , chanan, or kanan, “he stands upright,” “he is 
 set up,” equivalent to a “ Hermes.” (See Gilgal.) 
 
 Calah, (Gen. x. 11), “ Perfection,” also “ a trunk, 
 or pillar;” also pc’?, “he is firm,” or “pining with 
 desire.” This name was borne by an Assyrian city, 
 and it may have been derived from a word like 
 calah, ‘ adorned,’ ‘ crowned,’ ‘ a bride,’ equivalent to 
 4 the Virgin,’ or Ishtar; if so, we may compare it with 
 xu\r), kalee, ‘ beautiful.’ 
 
 Calcol, (1 Kings iv. 31), also written Chalcol. This 
 word is possibly an altered form of ^^3, k’alcol, 
 k’al, being equivalent to ty, al, “ above,” 
 
 “ all,” i. e., “ above all.” 
 
 Caleb, ^3 (Numb. xiii. 6). This name is one of par¬ 
 ticular interest, because it was borne by one of the 
 only two Israelites who were allowed to enter Canaan 
 after leaving Egypt. The usual signification assigned 
 to ^5, ca leb, is “ the bold,” “ the valiant,” &c.; hut 
 if, neglecting the vowel points as a comparatively 
 modern invention, we pursue the meaning of the 
 letters, we find that they signify “ to lay hold on with 
 violence, pressing, enduring, raging ; ” hence ‘ a dog,’ 
 and sometimes very figuratively * a Sodomite,’ or “a 
 despicable unbeliever ” (Kev. xxii. 15). It also means 
 “to pierce, to penetrate anything, to push in.” Now, 
 it is well known to modern travellers that the dogs of 
 Palestine are unclean scavengers; and, with few excep¬ 
 tions, they were not much better in olden times. When, 
 therefore, we find that Divinities were represented with 
 
383 
 
 Caleb] canine heads, we are surprised, and naturally seek a 
 solution of the mystery. Isis is often depicted as a 
 cynocephalic goddess; and, if painted under another 
 form, she is attended by dogs, or by dog-headed 
 mortals, male or female. Sometimes amongst her 
 attendants we see monkeys, whose heads have some 
 likeness to those of hounds. We find a clue by 
 which the problem may be solved, in examining 
 the other forms assumed by the goddess, who 
 appears sometimes as a cow (see Athor), and again 
 is like a sheep. 
 
 Now we know that these animals are conspicuous 
 for their strong sexual passion, and for the care which 
 they take of their young; and we remember that 
 the dog exhibits its desires in a manner most offen¬ 
 sive to us, whilst the sexual habits of the monkey 
 are equally disgusting. Yet each variety obeys the 
 instinct which the Creator has implanted; and the 
 Egyptians studied His works, and adopted some of 
 them as mystic signs of His power. Memory now 
 takes us to the mummied cats and sacred crocodiles ; 
 the former are still notorious for discordant love-cries, 
 and the latter are patterns for domestic mothers, as 
 none nurse their broods more tenderly. Amongst 
 the same people, too, the frog was regarded with 
 superstitious reverence ; and than it, we know of no 
 animal more prolific, for its size. The mass of ova 
 which she expels appears to exceed her own bulk; and 
 the frog is adored by some, and eaten by others, who 
 wish to imitate her powers. 
 
 To call a man therefore “ a dog,” implies that he 
 is as fierce in love as he is courageous in fight, and as 
 ready for the boudoir as for the battle. 
 
 Calf. (See Heifer.) 
 
384 
 
 Calneh, or Calno, TO? (Gen. x. 10). Signification unknown. 
 
 Cama, fi*??, “ To pine, or long for.” This is the name of the 
 Hindoo God of love, or desire. 
 
 Camon, (Judges x. 5), “ The erect On ” ? from Dip, cum, 
 “ to be erect,” and ffc, On. In this case the word is 
 a counterpart of Kemuel (Gen. xxii. 21), in which El 
 takes the place of On. 
 
 Canaan, (Gen. ix. 18). Compare Cainan. PP, kanan, 
 signifies, “ he creates, or sets up; ” P?, canan , “ he 
 stands upright; ” as n ^P, kanah, “ he mounts up,” 
 “ he is set up, straight, or stiff,” the d and p being 
 interchangeable. (See above, under letter C.) From 
 this word we get Canna, Cane (compare Caen, in 
 Normandy), Canning, &c. 
 
 Although it is possible that the word originally 
 had a phallic meaning, when borne by a man, * the 
 son of Ham,’ it is probable that, when borne by a 
 district, the name is derivable from W3, cana , ‘ to lie 
 low,’ ‘ a plain ’ (as contradistinguished from Aram, 
 ‘ the mountain ’), with the addition of |k, On, which 
 would make it equivalent to “ the valley of On ; ” and 
 “ thus it may be considered as equivalent to to peya 
 Trsdiov, ‘ the great plain,’ as the two Sidonian States 
 were called by Josephus (Ant. v. iii. 1).” Fiirst, 
 s. v., PP?. In later times the word Canaanites was 
 used as “merchants,” a fact which corroborates the 
 belief that they were the same people known to 
 history as the Phoenicians. 
 
 Canneh, r PP (Ezek. xxvii. 28), probably a variant of W3, 
 cana, or Canaan. 
 
 Canon of Scripture. When the author of these pages was 
 a young man, there were few expressions which were 
 more incomprehensible to him than the words ‘ Canon 
 of the Scriptures.’ They seemed to have some hidden 
 
385 
 
 Canon of Scripture] meaning, whereof everybody had an 
 idea, but of which no one could give a definite 
 explanation. By dint of close attention to the sense 
 in which the words were employed, the conclusion 
 arrived at was that the “ canon ” was some unseen, 
 incomprehensible power, which made certain writings 
 hearing the name of one individual * inspired,’ and 
 those of others ‘ apocryphal,’ or of doubtful value. 
 The more closely the nature of this ‘canon’ was 
 investigated, the more mystical, or mythological, did 
 it become. In vain were hierarchs consulted, and 
 books ransacked, the ‘ canon ’ still became more pro¬ 
 blematical than before. It is doubtful whether I should 
 ever have attained any definite result, unless common 
 sense had been consulted more than theological jargon. 
 
 If we wish to ascertain strictly the value of one 
 class of writings, it is well to compare them with 
 another; it is proper, therefore, to compare theological 
 with medical treatises. Now, at one period of medi¬ 
 cine, Hippocrates and Galen were the only writers 
 who were trusted; they were ‘ canonical,’ and stars of 
 such magnitude, that none other were allowed to 
 shine in their sphere. It was right to annotate them, 
 it was wrong to supersede them. After a long period, 
 these distinguished men were supplemented in Eng¬ 
 land by Sydenham. Yet during the lifetime of this 
 illustrious physician—one to whom the name of the 
 British Hippocrates was subsequently given—he was 
 met by the asseveration that the canon of medical 
 writers was closed, and he was opposed with all the 
 virulence of professional jealousy. After his death, 
 however, his writings were added to the “canon.” 
 Since his period, every fresh author has been subject 
 to the same trial; and, as a result, every original 
 
 B B 
 
886 
 
 Canon of Scripture] medical writer trusts to posterity, rather 
 than to his contemporaries, for a correct judgment. 
 
 As it is in physic, so it is in theology. Isaiah, 
 Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and others were treated with con¬ 
 tumely during their lifetime, hut after their decease 
 they were glorified. There are many saints also in 
 the Papal calendar, who during their existence were 
 regarded by all as lunatics, hut who now, when time 
 has shed its halo around them, are authoritatively 
 declared by the court of Rome on earth to he powerful 
 intercessors for men in the court of the Almighty 
 in heaven. 
 
 This clue assists us to understand the expression 
 “ Canon of Scripture.” During the early days of the 
 Jewish kingdom it is doubtful whether any authori¬ 
 tative writings were known. The episode of the 
 finding of a copy of the law in the reign of King 
 Josiah, and the absence of the original, if any really 
 existed, lead us to the belief that no written law was 
 known during the days of Josiah’s predecessor. We 
 know from their own account that neither Isaiah, 
 Jeremiah, nor any other prophet was considered by 
 his contemporaries as inspired. 
 
 The time of “the captivity” at length came round, 
 and this, to a great extent, suspended the propensity 
 to prophesy. It might “ pay ” any one to assume the 
 office of ‘ seer,’ whilst there was a probability of 
 gaining wealth or position ; but a nation of slaves 
 could not afford to remunerate a prophet, nor would a 
 task-master tolerate in a servant the proclivity to 
 preach rather than to work. Hence, when the He¬ 
 brews returned to Canaan, they had only the remem¬ 
 brance of past vaticinations, which were edited by 
 the head men of the nation. Whether this council 
 
887 
 
 Canon of Sckiptuee] admitted everything which was ancient, 
 or whether it made a selection from all older writings, 
 if any really existed, it is certain that the Canon of 
 the Scriptures, such as it was then framed, was a 
 collection of writings made by human beings, and 
 promulgated as sacred by the fiat of a human tribunal. 
 
 After the captivity, those utterances alone were 
 respected which harmonised with the feelings or 
 political views of the Jewish rulers, or of the great 
 council. Thus Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi had 
 their prophecies added to the ancient canon, because 
 they favoured the idea of the restoration of the Jews 
 to political power. 
 
 To the more ancient Jewish writings others were 
 added, much in the same way as Spenser and 
 Shakespeare have been added to Chaucer in the list of 
 English poets. But just as these men were slighted 
 in their own day, so were Jesus the son of Sirach 
 and other writers neglected in theirs. One set of 
 Christians have allowed a place in the Canon of 
 Scripture to those whom another set of “ believers ” 
 reject. Here again man sets himself in judgment 
 over works which purport to be divine. 
 
 At the time of our Saviour, the Jews considered 
 the Canon of the Scripture to he absolutely closed; 
 although it is true that they believed in the certain 
 advent first of a second Elias, and subsequently of a 
 Saviour who was to restore the kingdom of Israel. 
 There are many amongst ourselves who equally anti¬ 
 cipate a second coming of Christ. But the ancient 
 Hebrews considered, and the modern Christians think, 
 that no one can he recognised as Elias or Christ, 
 unless the men then existing should allow the claim. 
 There have been, and still are, many who assume to 
 
888 
 
 Canon of Scripture] be the second saviour, but very few 
 credit their mission. 
 
 With Jesus, the Lord, a new style of teaching 
 began ; and respecting Him and His doctrines, a new 
 literature arose. There are writings which purported 
 to give His biography, that recorded His life, His 
 ministry, His doctrines, His death and His resur¬ 
 rection. The number of these was considerable, 
 and many of them are still extant, in addition to 
 those w T hich are familiar to us all. Besides these 
 histories, which passed by the name of Gospels, there 
 were many other compositions, which passed by the 
 name of Epistles, letters written by one or other 
 Apostle to one or more ‘ churches.’ 
 
 Every Christian who could write was able to com¬ 
 pile a biography or to manufacture a letter. There 
 is scarcely a distinguished man amongst ourselves 
 who does not meet with many historiographers; 
 and there are few popular writers whose style is not 
 copied and whose letters are not falsely multiplied. 
 
 To take one instance out of many; there are 
 biographers of Cromwell, who depict him either as a 
 saint or a demon, according to the predilections of 
 the writer. Now it is clear that if the ‘ Protector’ had 
 been the founder of a new sect, or a new set of laws, 
 like the e Code Napoleon,’ all his admirers would 
 systematically ignore every writing which painted 
 their hero in any other guise than the one they could 
 admire. In collecting therefore every extant history, 
 they would reject as apocryphal the writings that 
 displeased them, whilst those which suited their pur¬ 
 pose would be retained and published ‘ by authority.’ 
 
 It was precisely thus with the scriptures relating 
 to Christianity ; after the lapse of about two or three 
 
889 
 
 Canon of Scripture] hundred years from our Saviour’s death, 
 a body of men considered it to be desirable to select 
 from the current literature those compositions which 
 they deemed most orthodox, and to stamp them as an 
 authorised collection, to be used amongst the con¬ 
 fraternity, and to he considered as ‘canonical.’ In 
 this instance, again, we see man sitting in judgment 
 upon the sacredness of writings, which, when thus 
 stamped by a human seal, are accepted as divine. 
 After this authoritative selection, the ‘canon’ was 
 undisturbed until the time of the great reformation, 
 when another body of men decided to expunge from 
 the list of scriptures, which a preceding body had 
 compiled, the writings known as the Apocrypha. 
 
 Whenever men sit in judgment upon any matter, 
 we know that they are liable to err. Three cen¬ 
 turies have barely elapsed since Shakespeare wrote, 
 yet there are doubts about his identity, about his real 
 writings, and about the text of those works which 
 pass by his name. Each of us may exercise his 
 judgment upon any one of these matters, but no one 
 would consider himself hound by a decree passed by 
 a self-elected committee, and give up his individual 
 opinion in deference to those of a council. 
 
 The same right of private judgment exists about 
 the Gospels and the Epistles. The doctrine of a 
 council demands respect, hut it does not supersede 
 the judgment of individuals; and every one to-day is 
 as much justified in dissenting from the decision of 
 the majority of a self-elected committee on the 
 Scriptures, as if he had lived in the time of the 
 council, and formed one of its body whilst the dis¬ 
 cussion was in progress, and before the division was 
 taken. 
 
390 
 
 Canon of Scripture] From the foregoing considerations, 
 we conclude that the Canon of Scripture is nothing 
 more nor less than a selection of books, made by a 
 set of individuals who assumed the power to judge 
 which of those before them were to he especially 
 patronised. In this respect, the canon resembles the 
 volumes authorised by an educational committee for 
 the use of schools, or by the college of cardinals for 
 Roman Catholic reading. 
 
 When once such a decision is made, it is incon¬ 
 venient that the question should be reopened. It 
 is always particularly difficult to decide upon the 
 writings or the words of a living man. Even if 
 our Saviour were to come again, as we are assured 
 that He will, He would find no more favour with the 
 Protestant and Papal hierarchy than He did with 
 the Pharisees and Sadducees, unless indeed He came 
 in a far nobler guise and with a more imposing 
 presence than He did at first. He would find no 
 favour with Sabbatarian Scotchmen, Ritualistic 
 Englishmen, and the Virgin-adoring Irishmen. He 
 who taught us to love God and our neighbour as we 
 love ourselves, would seem a heretic to those who think 
 that “ doctrine ” is superior to “ good works.” He 
 who describes the Great Judge as dealing out His 
 sentence according to what has been done by the 
 individual, rather than according to the dogmas 
 which he held, would not now be allowed to add 
 writings containing doctrines such as these to the 
 Canon of Scripture. 
 
 Under these circumstances, it behoves all earnest- 
 minded men, who believe in and admire the Saviour in 
 preference to any body of men, be they who they may, 
 to do their utmost to strip away from religion every 
 
891 
 
 Canon of Scripture] false garb, and to attempt to restore it 
 to that simplicity with which He presented it to man; 
 and as this can scarcely be done without a thorough 
 revision of the Canon of Scripture, it is to be hoped 
 that a council of the learned amongst ourselves will 
 do for us what the council of the Jews did for the 
 “peculiar people,” on their return from the captivity. 
 “ What man has done, man may do again.” It is, 
 however, almost too much to expect that any modern 
 ecclesiastic concours, or Pan-Anglican Synod, will 
 equal that of the ancient Jews in earnestness and 
 honesty of purpose. 
 
 Caphtor, ‘WM (Deut. ii. 28), “ The circle,” “ the pome¬ 
 granate ; ” something round, or of ball form ; the 
 island of Crete ; also called rn3, chereth. (Furst.) 
 
 Car, * 13 , (1 Sam. vii. 11), signifies “he shuts around,” 
 “he encloses.” (See Beth-car.) car , signifies 
 
 “a fat lamb, or sheep, or ram;” but it also, as “13, 
 car, signifies “piercing through,” “a piercer;” the 
 root carar, signifies “to be strong, firm, power¬ 
 ful, or fruitful.” When we find so many contrivances 
 used to refer covertly to the fascinum, it is possible 
 that this is one of them. It is certain that the ram 
 has the male organ extraordinarily large, and a pro¬ 
 portionate salaciousness. 
 
 We do not see that there is a particular reason, 
 from any peculiarity of the lamb, sheep, or ram, why 
 it should be selected as a divine emblem, except its 
 great stupidity and ugliness, which are certainly not 
 appropriate. It is therefore probable that the facts 
 indicated above caused it to be chosen; and the devout, 
 being kept in the dark as to this reason, saw in the 
 creature some mystic resemblance to the Creator. 
 The lamb, as an emblem, has descended from the 
 
392 
 
 Car] most remote antiquity to the present time, and even 
 now represents the Son, as the Maker, Monarch, and 
 Saviour of all. We have many words compounded 
 with it, e. g., Assyrian, Car-Ilus; Latin, Carolus; 
 English, Charles, Carr, Ker, Kerr, Carson, Curzon, 
 Cardon, Carden, &c., Caroline is from Car, and the 
 Assyrian Ilin, or Ilinos. 
 
 Car is also the Hebrew equivalent of Kap/a, caria — whence 
 came the Cherethites. 
 
 Carcas, (Esth. i. 10), a Persian name, “The severe 
 one.” (Fiirst.) 
 
 Carchemish, (2 Chron. xxxv. 20), “ Citadel of Che- 
 
 mosh,” = K ipxYjo-iov, cercusium. (Fiirst.) 
 
 Careah, rn? (2 Kings xxv. 23), is said to mean “bald.” I 
 surmise that its real etymology is karah, signi¬ 
 fying 4 he fits together, he joins together,’ or that it 
 is from '“HS, char ah, ‘ he digs.’ 
 
 Carmel, (Jos. xii. 22), is said to signify “ a fruitful 
 field,” “a garden;” a curious name for a mountain. 
 It is far more probable that its etymology is derived 
 from E33, caram , and el, and that it signifies 
 “ El breaks through, or makes fruitful.” It is possible 
 that the name signifies “ The ruddy God,” or “ The 
 crimson one.” It may be compared with Asshur, 
 Bel, Mahadeva, Adam, Edom, Esau, On, and others. 
 Nor must it be forgotten that whenever the God of the 
 Hebrews is spoken of, it is always as a male. The 
 idolatry which was not tolerated was what we may call 
 the feminine heresy. From time immemorial Carmel 
 has been a sacred mount; and even now there is an 
 order of the Monks of Mount Carmel, or Carmelites. 
 In the ancient shrine no figure of the deity was 
 kept. 
 
 Carmi, '9* 13 (Gen. xlvi. 9), “ Jah breaks through, or makes 
 
393 
 
 Carmi] fruitful; ” from E" 1 ?, car am, an old root, signifying 
 Ho plough,’ or ‘ make fruitful;’ and from Jah, the 
 n as usual being obliterated. The name is thus a 
 counterpart of Carmel, and is remarkable as showing 
 that the name of Jah was known to .Reuben long 
 before the time of Moses, and that, like El, it had 
 originally a phallic signification. It has close affinity 
 to carmil, crimson, the colour still assigned to 
 Mahadeva. From this root too comes our carmine. 
 Compare, “ And the priest shall take cedar wood, and 
 hyssop, and scarlet ” (Numb, xix. 6), with the fol¬ 
 lowing account of a Hindoo custom:—“ Red Powder” 
 ( gulal ) is a sign of a bad design of an adulterous 
 character. During the Holi holidays, the Maharaj 
 throws gulal on the breasts of female and male 
 devotees, and directs the current of some water of 
 a yellow colour from a syringe upon the breasts of 
 females. {History of the Sect of the Maharajahs, 
 p. 14, Appendix. Trubner & Co., London.) 
 
 Carshena, (Esth. i. 14), a Persian name; signification 
 
 unknown. 
 
 Casiphia, NJppp (Ezra viii. 17), very like Casiyapa (Hindoo), 
 and Cassiopeia (Greek). Its signification is doubtful. 
 
 Casluhim, (Gen. x. 14), probably from kesalah, 
 
 plural kesalim, “the loins, or flanks.” “Inhabitants 
 of Cassiotis and Colchis.” (Fiirst.) 
 
 Cal, bip, “To call,” “the voice,” “time.” Sanskrit, Kal, 
 Ho sound ; ’ xaXlco, ‘ to call; ’ Latin, ‘ calo,’ ‘calendae; ’ 
 also kahal, ‘ to call,’ ‘ an assembly.’ 
 
 Cam, Yedic, “ Love.” Cama, “ the goddess of love ; ” also 
 spelled Kam and Cama. Heb. chamah, Ho pine 
 with longing for anything;’ Ho become pale,’ as 
 women do in 4 green sickness,’ a complaint very 
 cruelly supposed to arise from disappointed desire. 
 
394 
 
 Cam] Kama is the Hindoo God of desire or love; Kam, 
 Sanscrit, is 4 desire ; ’ Greek, aajxvco (compare Dn, ham, 
 or cham.) I think Chemosh is derived from 
 chama, and esh, and signifies 4 the longing fire,’ 
 figuratively, the fascinum, but, taken literally, 4 the 
 fire king,’ who devours everything (see Prov. xxx. 16). 
 
 Carthage = Kereth, or Carth = City. Hebrew rnjj, also 
 Kirjath; Persian, cirta. There was a Cirta in Nu- 
 midia, and Tigrano cirta in Armenia, and kartat in 
 Zebulun; Carthadam signified new state in Phoeni¬ 
 cian. Utica was the old city near which Carthage 
 was built; an old name for Carthage was Origo. 
 
 Caspar, a common word introduced amongst Assyrian 
 names, corresponding to gaspa, 44 soothing,” 
 
 i.e. “ the comforter.” 
 
 Cesari, Sanscrit or Yedic, one of the names of Christna; 
 also 44 a lion,” from its hairy name. Casa and Casara 
 signify 44 hair.” (Compare Caesar, Caesarea.) Before 
 the time of Julius Caesar, India had become well 
 known, and Koman gold coins of Adrian, Faustina, 
 and Trajan, have been dug up in Hindostan. (Asiatic 
 Researches, vol. ii. p. 332.) 
 
 Cephar-hammonai, (Josh, xviii. 24), Probably 44 the 
 
 village of Ammon,” or of 44 the artificer.” 
 
 Chaldea, or Chaldean, usually written Casdi, '7??. There 
 is something difficult in these words, which I cannot 
 altogether get over. Casdi signifies 44 an astrologer,” 
 44 a magician.” And the Chaldaeans are spoken of in 
 Daniel as a certain class of fortune-tellers in Babylon. 
 In the Bible, the name is given to the whole district 
 of Babylonia. Chesed, was the name of a son 
 of Nahor, hut Babylonia was a kingdom for some 
 centuries before his time, and he was not likely to 
 have given the name to it. 
 
395 
 
 Chaldea, ) It is possible that the word Chaldee is derived 
 Chaldean, ) from calah, to be perfected, and VJ, dai, 
 
 knowledge, i. e., ‘of perfect knowledge.’ There can 
 be no doubt that in Rome the Chaldgeans assumed 
 to have a perfect knowledge of what is called the 
 Black Art. They had, too, attained to a wondrous 
 perfection in priestcraft, in which they have been 
 successfully imitated by the Roman Catholics, who 
 have adopted a vast number of their dogmas, cere¬ 
 monies, vestments, feasts, fasts, angels, devils, &c. 61 
 There is no doubt that the Israelites copied from the 
 Chaldee faith, much in the same way. See Ezekiel 
 xxiii. 15, et seq . 
 
 Charashim, B'Knn (1 Chron. iv. 14), “ The skilled work¬ 
 men.” 
 
 Charms and Amulets. — There is nothing which shows 
 more completely the persistence of ancient ideas in 
 modern times, than the use of certain symbols, 
 that are worn to avert some imaginary evil, or to 
 bring about some fancied good. Our museums 
 contain enormous numbers of ancient Egyptian 
 amulets, which sometimes took the form of a beetle 
 or scarabseus, at another of an eye, at another of a 
 serpent, at another time of a ring, containing an 
 invocation to the deity. The Assyrians and Baby¬ 
 lonians seem to have been equally desirous of carrying 
 about their persons some talisman, which would 
 confound the evil genii. That the Jews had a 
 similar faith Layard shows, by giving descriptions of 
 certain bowls inscribed with Hebrew characters, and 
 found amongst the ruins of ancient Babylon. (See 
 Layard’s Nineveh and Babylon , pp. 510-528; 
 
 61 Khaldi was “ the moon ” in Assyria, but it is unlikely that this is the origin of 
 the name Chaldee. 
 
396 
 
 Chakms ) London, 1853). Their lawgiver himself indeed 
 
 Amulets] seems to have encouraged the practice, and 
 adopted certain passages from the law in the place of 
 other charms, just as the Arab of to-day uses verses 
 of the Koran. 
 
 It would appear that the sale of talismans was at 
 one time the source of a very profitable business. The 
 episode of the riot at Ephesus, which is related in 
 Acts, chap, xix., when the craft associated with the 
 manufacture of charms was in danger, tells us that 
 the trade was in the hands of comparatively few, and 
 that those were connected with the priesthood. When 
 Christianity at first spread, we conclude, from the 
 story referred to, that the use of idolatrous emblems 
 as charms was repressed. But as the fervour of the 
 church gradually subsided, and as its apostles found 
 their warfare with the gentile world increase in 
 difficulty, a spirit of compromise arose, and the 
 Christian priest adopted much of the guile of the 
 Roman flamen. It could not be tolerated that the 
 votary of Jupiter should wear a talisman which saved 
 his life in battle, whilst a worshipper of that Jesus 
 who had upset the ancient idolatry could have nothing 
 of the kind. 
 
 The modern hierarch therefore invented a charm 
 for his own flock, and used the name of the Virgin 
 Mary, where perhaps Cybele had figured before. When 
 the idea was once adopted, the custom was found too 
 lucrative to remain in a rudimentary form, and it was 
 expanded until talismans were used for the future 
 world as well as for the present. We find, from the 
 pages of Boccacio and Chaucer, that a great traffic 
 existed in ‘ pardons,’ 4 the relics of saints,’ ‘ agnus 
 dei,’ and other ‘ blessed images.’ Modern history is 
 
897 
 
 Charms ) full of the stories of ‘indulgences’ granted to 
 
 AmuletsJ the faithful who pay for them. It would occupy 
 a volume were we to describe the various forms of the 
 charms which we have heard or read of; it will suffice 
 us to say that they have been divided by the Roman 
 hierarchy into orthodox and heterodox, the first being 
 those which have been blessed by and paid for to 
 a priest, the second are those which have brought 
 nothing into the saintly treasury, hut which may 
 become orthodox by being blessed, and the usual 
 fees being paid. 
 
 Chebar, T33 (Ezek. i. 1), “Length,” “strong,” “mighty,” 
 “powerful;” like chabar, it signifies ‘union, 
 
 ‘joining together,’ the 3 and n being interchanged. 
 
 Chedorlaomer, Tpy^ViS (Genesis xiv. 1). There is no 
 satisfactory explanation of this word; possibly, it is 
 from Tip, kadar, ‘covered, or protected,’ b, ‘of,’ TDK, 
 amar, ‘ The high one,’ i. e., ‘ protected by God on 
 high.’ 
 
 Chelal, ^3 (Ezra x. 30), “ He perfected ” (me). 
 
 Chelluh, '■T’ta (Ezra x. 85), a Persian word ? or from 
 chaleh , ‘ perfection.’ 
 
 Chelubai, *3^3 (1 Chron. ii. 9). This is another name for 
 Caleb. It signifies “Jah is valiant,” or “ Jah 
 pierces,” &c. 
 
 Chemosh, Ptos (Numbers xxi. 29), Chmosh , the Moabite 
 God, supposed to be equivalent to Mars. I think it 
 comes from cham , ‘ heat,’ and EW, e sh, ‘ fire,’ 
 i.e., ‘ the hot fire ; ’ or jesh, ‘ the being,’ i. e., ‘the 
 one who is hot,’ ‘ the ardent one; ’ or from n*?3, 
 camah, and jesh, “the being causing desire;” 
 or from cliamash, “ he glows or burns,” i. e., 
 
 the sun in his destructive capacity. 
 
 Chenaanah, (1 Kings xxii. 11), is spelled precisely like 
 
398 
 
 Chenaanah] Canaanali, or Phoenicia. It is used, 
 
 however, as a man’s name, in 1 Chron. vii. 10, as well 
 as in 1 Kings xxii. 11; and is probably a corrected 
 form of kananjah, or “Jah creates.” 
 
 Chenani, (Neh. ix. 4), Chenaniah, Cononiah, are vari¬ 
 ants of the preceding word, and as the two last are 
 clearly compounded with Jah, we conclude that their 
 signification is ‘ Jah creates.’ 
 
 Chephirah, (Joshua ix. 17), A Hivite town. Probably 
 “ Jah forgives, or breaks through,” being a corrected 
 form of H'lM, caphariali. It may, however, signify 
 simply ‘the hamlet.’ 
 
 Cheran, P? (Gen. xxxvi. 26), “He hinds, or knots together,” 
 “ union.” This name was borne by one of a family, 
 all whose names ended in an ; a variant of On. 
 If it is a variant of it signifies ‘ On, the shooter, 
 or digger.’ 
 
 Cherethites, &W3 (1 Samuel xxx. 14), “ Executioners,” 
 “ Pelethites,” = “ runners ” (Gesenius); “ archers 
 and slingers; also, citizens of some town amongst 
 the Phoenicians, inhabitants of Crete or Cyprus.” 
 (Furst.) 
 
 Cherith, (1 Kings xvii. 3), “Dividing,” “cut into two 
 parts,” name of a river, “ boundary ” ? 
 
 Cherub, Cherubim, (1 Kings vi. 27), Mystical figures 
 
 of various fanciful designs, “ griffins, dragons, lions,” 
 &c., which occupied conspicuous places in Egyptian, 
 Assyrian, Babylonian, and Jewish theology. They 
 have been reproduced in the Christian theology in the 
 form of winged heads, or winged men and women; 
 the wings being, with the usual carelessness of early 
 designers, made independent of the arms, and placed 
 in positions where, from the absence of muscles to 
 use them, they could never be employed. Possibly 
 
399 
 
 Cherub, ] the word is derived from charab, “to seize,” 
 
 Cherubim] “to lay hold on.” (Whence crab?) It is 
 probably allied to karab, ‘to draw near,’ and the 
 word ‘ Cherubim ’ signifies those in attendance on the 
 Almighty. For various forms of them, see Kitto’s 
 Cyclopaedia , sub voce . 
 
 Chesalon, t*?? (Jos. xv. 10), “Strength,” “fruitfulness,” 
 “the loins, or strength, of On.”? 
 
 Chesed, (Gen. xxii. 20), “ The Chaldean ” ? 
 
 Chesil, ^9? (Josh. xv. 80), “ He is thick, or fleshy,” “ the 
 loins, or flanks.” This may he one of the roots of 
 the word Chesalon ; which, in that case, would 
 signify “ the loins of On;” and we naturally recal 
 the expression, “ Levi was yet in the loins of his 
 father (Iv r >5 oo-Qui roO 7 rccrpog) when Melchizedek met 
 him ” (Heb. vii. 10). The loins being an euphemism 
 for the male organ. 
 
 Chesulloth, (Josh. xix. 18), a town of Issachar, 
 
 signifies “the loins, or flanks;” and 
 
 Chisloth-tabor, “ihrrrii’M (Josh. xix. 12), means “ the flanks 
 of Tabor.” 
 
 Chezib, (Gen. xxxviii. 5), “ The deceiver.” 
 
 Chidon, PTS (1 Chron. xiii. 9), “A dart,” “a javelin;” 
 “ le dard,” one of the many euphemisms for the 
 fascinum; the name belonged to some spot near 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 Chileab, (2 Sam. iii. 3), “The father surrounds us;” 
 or A??, calah, 3N, ab, ‘ The father is firm.’ 
 
 Chilion, (Kuth i. 2), “ The loins of On; ” from 
 
 chilah, — ‘ loins ; ’ and pK, On, or * On is firm.’ 
 ‘ Longing desire.’ (Fiirst.) 
 
 Chilmad, (Ezek. xxvii. 23), a Persian name, signifi¬ 
 
 cance unknown. 
 
 Chimham, (2 Sam. xix. 37), “ Longing with desire.” 
 
400 
 
 Chinneroth, T\\*\& (Josh. xi. 2), “ The basin-shaped ” ? 
 (Fiirst.) 
 
 Chittim, (Gen. x. 4), “ The inhabitants of Cyprus.” 
 The singular is probably Citium (K^tiov, Kmov, 
 Kn-Tiov) ; the word also refers to the Mediterranean 
 islands generally (Gesen.), and Macedonia and Italy 
 (Fiirst). “ The singular form of the word is never 
 found in the Old Testament, but it occurs in a bilin¬ 
 gual inscription discovered at Athens, wherein the 
 name of a man of Citium, buried at Athens, is written 
 in Greek, N ov^vios Kmeu$, Noumeenios Kitieus, in 
 Phoenician letters, 'fDtWBHn p, ben hodesh disk 
 kithi, i. e ., * son of the new moon,’ ‘ a Citian man.’ ” 
 
 Chiun, P9 (Amos v. 26), “The dog star;” Greek, kvwv, 
 “ the dog-headed Apis,” Saturn, as some think. 
 Chiven, or Chiuen, is one of the many names of Siva, 
 one of whose wives is Ammen, to whom human sacri¬ 
 fices were offered. Chiun, Baal-peor, and Siva were 
 all typified by 4 the fascinum.’ 
 
 Chorashan, (1 Sam. xxx. 30). >13, cur, signifies 
 
 “to be hot,” “a furnace” (compare Coire); P’K, 
 ashan, signifies smoking, i. e., ‘ the smoking fur¬ 
 nace.’ 
 
 Chozeba, Nnp (i Chron. iv. 22), “El'shapes beautifully;” 
 from W, katzab, and el, the b as usual being 
 
 elided, and T3 substituted for TP, both being inter¬ 
 changeable. 
 
 Christna, or Chrisna, also Vishnu, is one of the most 
 popular of all the Hindoo deities. An immense 
 number of legends are told respecting him, which 
 are not worth recording here, but the following, con¬ 
 densed from the Anacalypsis of Godfrey Higgins, will 
 well repay perusal. He is represented as the son of 
 Brahma and Maia, and is usually called ‘ the Saviour,’ 
 
401 
 
 Christna of) or ‘ the preserver.’ He, being a god, became 
 Chrisna J incarnate in the flesh. As soon as he was born, 
 he was sainted by a chorus of devatars or angels. His 
 birth place was Mathurea. He was cradled amongst 
 shepherds. Soon after his birth he was carried away 
 by night to a remote place for fear of a tyrant, whose 
 destroyer it was foretold he would become, and who 
 ordered all male children to be slain (an episode 
 marked in the sculptures 62 at Elephanta). By the 
 male line he was of Royal descent, though born in a 
 dungeon, which on his arrival he illuminated, whilst 
 the face of his parents shone. Christna spoke as soon 
 as he was born, and comforted his mother. He was 
 preceded by his brother Ram, who helped him to 
 purify the world of monsters and demons. Christna 
 descended into Hades, and returned to Yaicontha. 
 One of his names is * the good shepherd.’ An Indian 
 prophet, Nared-Saphos, or wisdom, visited him, con¬ 
 sulted the stars, and pronounced him a celestial being. 
 Christna cured a leper; a woman poured on his head 
 a box of ointment, and he cured her of disease. He 
 was chosen king amongst his fellow cowherds. He 
 washed the feet of Brahmins, and when Brahma stole 
 the sheep ancPcowboys of his father’s farm (Nanda’s), 
 Christna made a new set. Christna had a dreadful 
 fight with the serpent Caluga. He was sent to a tutor, 
 whom he astonished with his learning. Christna was 
 crucified, went into hell, and afterwards into heaven. 
 
 Christna and his mother are almost always repre¬ 
 sented as black. Christna’s statue in the temple at 
 Mathura is black, 63 and the temple is built in the form 
 
 62 Over the head of this slaughtering figure, surrounded by supplicating mothers 
 and slaughtered male infants, are a mitre, a crozier , and a cross. 
 
 63 The Bambino at Rome is black; so are the Virgin and Child at Loretto. 
 
 0 C 
 
402 
 
 Christna or | of a cross (Ptolemy calls the place Matura 
 Chrisna J Deorum). As Vishnu he is painted with a 
 
 Fig. 89. 
 
 Parthian coronet round his head when crucified. As 
 Wittoba he is painted sometimes with stigmata in 
 his hands, sometimes in the feet, and one of the 
 pictures representing him has a round hole in the 
 
 Fig. 90. 
 
403 
 
 Christna or| side; to his collar hangs a heart; and on his 
 
 Chrisna j head is a Linga yoni! In another picture 
 he is called Ballaji, and is contending with a seven- 
 headed cobra. His most celebrated temple is at 
 Terputty. The date of Christna’s first mystic birth 
 is about 600 b.c., and of his second a. d. 600. The 
 historian may desire to ascertain the origin of this 
 legend; but as there is every reason to believe that 
 it is more ancient than the Christian era, it is not 
 desirable to enter upon the subject here. 
 
 Chub, n-13 (Ezek. xxx. 5). Etymology uncertain. Probably 
 a variant of tj-lp, hup, “ he moves in a circle.” 
 
 Chun, |-13 (1 Chron. xviii. 8), “ To stand upright; ” also 
 “ establishing or founding the world ; ” also “ a cake 
 or wafer of particular shape, used for offerings to 
 idols ; ” a town in Phoenicia; Latin conna . (Compare 
 with certain names in which con is introduced: Con¬ 
 stantine, Constant, Conde, Condy.) Cun, “ founding 
 the world,” “ Saturn.” (Fiirst.) 
 
 It is to be noticed that these cakes were fashioned 
 into certain shapes representing the ‘ delta,’ the 
 ‘fascinum,’ or the union of both. For such cakes 
 the Shulamite longed (comp. Ginsburg’s Song of 
 Songs, ii. 5, p.*142). The scholar will have no diffi¬ 
 culty in concluding what was the shape of the pa, cun, 
 and will also see to what a high antiquity one of our 
 very vulgar words can lay claim ; he will also remark 
 how ancient is the conceit which calls the ps, cun, 
 “ the mother of all mankind.” 
 
 Circumcision (see Gilgal). 
 
 Cis, (1 Sam. ix. 1), also spelled Kish ; probably from 
 chis, = “ A purse, or bag.” An euphemism for 
 the ‘ scrotum.’ (Compare the basket borne by the 
 Assyrian priests, from which they present a pine cone 
 
404 
 
 Cis] to the goddess.) Or from ^'P, kish, = ‘ a bow, or 
 power; ’ one of the euphemisms for the male organ. 
 
 Cohen, l?* 3 “a priest,” probably also “a prince,” I? 3 , cahan, 
 signifies, ‘ to presage,’ ‘ to predict,’ * to be the medium 
 of executing a business; ’ and a similar word in 
 Arabic signifies ‘a prophet,’/a soothsayer.’ The 
 strict meaning, therefore, of “priest ” is one who is a 
 mediator between God and man, or at least one who 
 professes to be so. This of course involves the 
 farther idea, that the priest assumes the power of 
 selecting the nature of the God he shall proclaim, and 
 the nature of the offerings to be made by those who 
 trust to him as an intermediate agent. As it is, and 
 always was, optional with every man what priest he 
 would select as his special mediator, so it is equally 
 optional which form of deity he selects for worship. 
 It is clearly the interest of all Cohens, that the idea 
 of the existence of a deity shall never be lost sight of 
 by the multitude; consequently, in all ages, the sacer¬ 
 dotal body have combined to keep up the doctrine of 
 a God, and an intermediate class ; they have only 
 disagreed as to the particular form which their god 
 shall assume. Hence the variety of sects. For 
 ourselves we do not doubt in the smallest degree 
 the existence of the Deity; but we have no faith in 
 the assumption that every one who professes to be 
 an intercessor, or intermediate agent, is really what 
 he assumes to be, and that the Almighty in heaven 
 has delegated his power to a set of men on earth. 
 
 Comb. This is one of the many symbols of the female 
 emblem, xrelg yvvotixs~iQo$ 6 h(TTiv sv(prj[xoog xa» fj,u(rixu)$ 
 sWsiv, popiov yvvotixctehv, quoted by Dom. Martin, from 
 Clem. Alexand., Protrept ., p. 14 ; Theodoret, Thera- 
 peut. f lib. 8. 
 
405 
 
 Coni ah, -1^3 (J e r. xxii. 24), “ Habitation or place of Jah.” 
 
 Conical Stone (Bcetulus), one of the forms under which 
 Aphrodite was worshipped, probably equivalent to 
 W"iV3, or Bethel. 
 
 Cononiah, canan-jah-u (2 Chron. xxxi. 12), “ Habita¬ 
 
 tion of Jah,” being a variant of Coniah. 
 
 Cooey. This is the note of the dove, as far as it can he 
 rendered by letters. It closely resembles the Hebrew 
 word yip, and the Greek xvw, kuo. Compare xucov, 
 kuon, ‘ the dog star; ’ Latin, coire, coi in the impera¬ 
 tive mood second person singular. The word as a 
 substantive signifies ‘ a stallion,’ or ‘ a prince; ’ 
 as a verb, it signifies “ to have sexual intercourse.” 
 Hence the dove’s note, which is heard on the return 
 of spring in every grove, invited the Shemitic races 
 (compare Song of Songs ii. 12), with the Greeks and 
 Romans, to dalliance, and made the bird sacred to the 
 goddess of love. It was equally sacred to Jehovah 
 (Gen. xv. 9, Levit. i. 14, v. 7, John ii. 14). 
 
 Coz, yip, (1 Chron. iv. 8), Cozbi, (Numb. xxv. 15), 
 “ the deceiver,” or “ the fascinum ; ” chazab, 
 ‘ to bind together.’ 
 
 Creation. It is perfectly clear to every philosophic mind, 
 that man neither knows nor can know any of the 
 details of creation. Geology may do much to instruct 
 him about the course of past events on earth, whilst 
 research into the domains of natural history will tell 
 him a great deal of what exists at present; but no 
 amount of investigation can bridge over that myste¬ 
 rious gap between the finite and the infinite, the 
 maker and the made. It is true that our Bible gives 
 us an account of the details of creation, which many 
 persons believe as if it were a direct communication 
 from the Creator to the creature ; but the statements 
 
406 
 
 Creation] are so opposed to facts, and so evidently mythical, 
 that we are obliged to reject them as positive truths. 
 The orginal author of it, as has been ingeniously 
 remarked by Kalisch (Commentary on Genesis , p. 
 63), arranged his plan as it were upon a table, on the 
 one side of which was represented the three great 
 divisions of the universe, while on the other was 
 represented the particular things which peopled them. 
 Thus— 
 
 1. Light is created, and the celestial orbs. 
 
 2. Water and sky are created, and fishes and 
 
 birds. 
 
 3. Dry land is created, and animals, plants, and 
 
 men. 
 
 A subsequent author has apparently read the table 
 differently to the first, and has arranged creation for 
 six days instead of three, and made an interval of 
 three days to elapse between the formation of the 
 inanimate and the animate. As it is clear that 
 the account was written with a special reference 
 to the Mosaic institution of the Sabbath, we presume 
 that the date of the mythos is subsequent to “ the 
 Law.” Now it is always a matter of interest to trace 
 the signification of a myth, and by attempting to do 
 so we often gain a clue to other mysteries. We find, 
 from the coins of Tyre and Greece, that there was an 
 idea that the whole world came from an egg (see 
 Egg infra). We know that the ancients, like the 
 modern Hindoos, typified the Almighty under the 
 symbols of the male organ, the female organ, or the 
 union of the two. They presumed that man, the 
 noblest creature as regards intellect, must resemble 
 his maker, and that the Creator of the world would 
 operate after the same fashion as He taught His 
 
407 
 
 Creation] creatures to do. Compare Matt. i. 18; Luke i. 85. 
 Speculating on this, they naturally investigated all the 
 phenomena attending the formation of a new being. 
 They noticed that matrimonial congress usually takes 
 place at night, and in obscurity; that the “egg” 
 prepares the seed which grows in the dark interior of 
 the mother, in the midst of ‘ waters,’ from which it 
 emerges completely formed. To frame every being 
 a similar process is gone through, and a double 
 process night and morning is considered to produce 
 twins. With such ideas, it was natural for them 
 to conclude that the world, ere it was formed, was as 
 shapeless as the germen of man; that darkness con¬ 
 duced to give it form ; and that a process of incuba¬ 
 tion took place, similar to that which occurs in the 
 interior of the womb. An evening and a morning 
 sufficed to produce twins, viz., light and the heavenly 
 bodies ; another evening and morning sufficed to give 
 other twins, water and air, fishes and birds; and 
 another evening and morning gave rise to land and its 
 inhabitants. If we found such an account in any 
 ancient Hindoo legend, we could not fail to recognise 
 its origin ; nor can we refuse to mete out the same 
 measure to ourselves which we would mete out to 
 others. 
 
 Cross. In the year 1829, the late Godfrey Higgins, than 
 whom few more original thinkers and more indefati¬ 
 gable readers have existed, wrote, in a work entitled 
 Celtic Druids , the following words. “Few causes 
 have been more powerful in producing mistakes in 
 ancient history than the idea, hastily taken up by all 
 ages, that every monument of antiquity marked with 
 a cross, or with any of those symbols which they 
 conceived to be monograms of Christ, were of 
 
408 
 
 Cross] Christian origin/’ He then proceeds to point out the 
 existence of the cross as an emblem even in the time 
 of the Phoenicians, the evidence being that of an old 
 coin found in the ruins of Citium, where the cross is 
 united to a ‘ rosary;’ and after many other quotations 
 he concludes the chapter with the following remark. 
 “ The cross is as common in India as in Egypt and 
 Europe.” The Rev. Mr. Maurice says (Indian Anti¬ 
 quities , vol. ii. p. 861), “ Let not the piety of the 
 Catholic Christian he offended at the preceding 
 assertion, that the cross was one of the most usual 
 symbols among the hieroglyphics of Egypt and India. 
 Equally honoured in the Gentile and the Christian 
 world, this emblem of universal nature, of that world 
 to whose four quarters its diverging radii pointed, 
 decorated the heads of most of the sculptured images 
 in the former country, and in the latter stamped its 
 form upon the most majestic of the shrines of their 
 deities. In the cave of Elephanta, in India, over 
 the head of the principal figure, again may be 
 seen this emblem, and a little in the front the huge 
 Lingham. The two principal pagodas of India, 
 those of Benares and Mathura, are built in the form 
 of a cross.” 
 
 Higgins, moreover, in his very learned book entitled 
 Anacalypsis , page 217, states that the general opinion 
 had settled into the belief, that the cross symbolised 
 eternally renewing life, but that his own opinion 
 was that it was an emblem of generation and rege¬ 
 neration. 
 
 Respecting the same emblem, R. P. Knight 
 remarks (On the Worship of Priapus, pp. 28, 29) : 
 “ The male organs of generation are sometimes repre¬ 
 sented by signs which might properly be called the 
 
409 
 
 Cross] symbols of symbols. One of tbe most remarkable 
 of these, is a cross in tbe form of the letter T, which 
 thus served as the emblem of creation and generation, 
 before the Church adopted it as a sign of salvation. 
 To the representative of the male organs was some¬ 
 times added a human head, which gives it the appear¬ 
 ance of a crucifix, as it has on the medal of Cyzicus. 
 On an ancient medal found in Cyprus, which from the 
 style of workmanship is certainly anterior to the 
 Macedonian conquest, it appears with the chaplet, or 
 rosary, such as is now used in the Roman churches.” 
 A similar cross, with the rosary attached, has been 
 found in use amongst the Japanese Buddhists and 
 the lamas of Thibet by the Abbe Hue. 
 
 In one of the frescoes of Pompeii, published by 
 Mons. Roux Aine, at Paris, 1840, will be found, 
 vol. 5, plate 28, the figure of a phallic cross, of the 
 ordinary shape of the crucifix, associated with two 
 small figures of Hermes. 
 
 We have pointed out on a previous occasion how 
 the cross was amongst the Etruscans a phallic sym¬ 
 bol, how it was associated with the female emblem 
 amongst the Egyptians, and how in Ezekiel’s time 
 it was used as a sign by which the faithful 
 might be known; the “ set a mark ” mentioned in 
 ch. ix. 4, being in the original “ sign with a tau ,” 
 which letter in the Prophet’s time was a cross. 
 We may now consider some of the other forms which 
 the emblem assumed. 
 
 “ Mr. Maurice describes a statue in Egypt as 
 bearing a kind of cross in his hand, that is to say 
 a phallus, which amongst the Egyptians was the 
 symbol of fertility.” “ Upon the breast of one of the 
 mummies in the museum of the London university, 
 
410 
 
 © 
 
 Cross] is a cross exactly in the shape Fi g- 9i- 
 
 of Fig. 91, viz., a cross upon a 
 calvary.” (Anacalypsis, by G. 
 
 Higgins, p. 217.) The following 
 remarks are condensed from the 
 pages of the same author. Justin 
 remarks that Plato, in his Timse- 
 us, philosophising about the Son of God, says, He 
 expressed him upon the universe in the figure of 
 the letter X? his words being—“The next power 
 to the supreme God was decussated, or figured, in 
 the shape of a cross, on the universe.” The cross 
 was also a symbol of the British Druids. (Borlase, 
 Antiquities of Cornwall, p. 108; Maurice’s Indian 
 Antiquities, vol. vi., p. 68.) The Egyptians marked 
 their sacred water jars dedicated to Canopus with 
 
 i 
 
 the Hindoos do the same, some¬ 
 
 times using instead another form, thus 
 
 + 
 
 The distinctive badge of the sect of Xaca Japonicus 
 
 is 
 
 Higgins then gives (p. 750) an acount of the cru¬ 
 cifixion of Salivahana, Wittoba, and Buddha, Hindoo 
 divinities; and gives a drawing of Ball-ii, from the 
 famous temple of the crucified Wittoba at Triputty, 
 which differs in no respect from the picture of the 
 crucified Saviour with which we are familiar. A halo 
 of glory shines upon his head, on which there is a 
 crown, serrated with sharp angles on its upper margin; 
 
411 
 
 Cross] the hands are extended, the feet are slightly separated, 
 and all are marked with stigmata ; the body is nude, 
 save a simple girdle round the loins. See Figures 89 
 and 90, p. 402. Christna, whose history so closely 
 resembles our Lord’s, was also like him in his being 
 crucified, Fig. 92. There was a crucified Saviour 
 amongst the Romans, for Minucius Felix, a Christian 
 father, in a defence of his religion, has the following 
 passage : “ You certainly, who worship wooden gods, 
 
 Fig. 92. 
 
 are the most likely people to adore wooden crosses, 
 as being parts with the same substance as your 
 deities. For what else are your ensigns, flags and 
 standards, but crosses gilt and purified ? Your victo¬ 
 rious trophies not only represent a simple cross, but 
 a cross with a man upon it.” 
 
 “ When a pure worshipper adores the true Cod 
 
412 
 
 Gross] with hands extended, he makes the figure of a cross. 
 Thus you see that the sign of the cross has either 
 some foundation in nature, or in your own religion, 
 and therefore not to be objected against Christians.” 
 Anacalypsis, vol. ii., p. 116. 
 
 Higgins subsequently concludes a paragraph thus : 
 “It is certainly proved, as completely as it is pos¬ 
 sible in the nature of things for a fact of this kind 
 to be proved, that the Romans had a crucified object 
 of adoration; and this could be no other than an 
 incarnation of the god Sol, represented in some way 
 to have been crucified.” The same author speaks of 
 the crucifixion of many ancient Gods and Hindoo 
 deities, but it is unnecessary to follow him farther. 
 Enough has been said to show that the use of the 
 cross as a sacred emblem is not peculiar to Christi¬ 
 anity. The next question for consideration is, “ What 
 idea was the cross intended to convey ?” The junc¬ 
 tion of the yoni with the cross, so commonly found 
 on Egyptian monuments, as seen in Fig. 44, page 
 152, sufficiently proves that it had a phallic or male 
 signification; a conclusion which certain unequivocal 
 
 Etruscan remains fully confirm, the double tau *j= 
 
 or -|- is the same idea intensified. We conclude, 
 
 therefore, that the ancient cross was an emblem of 
 the belief in a male creator, and the method by which 
 creation was initiated. But it was also a representa¬ 
 tion of the chariot wheel, the symbol of the sun; and 
 it is interesting to observe that the use of £ the wheel,’ 
 as an instrument of punishment, extended from the 
 fabulous times of Ixion, until the seventeenth century 
 of the Christian era, if indeed it is entirely abandoned 
 even now. But though the cross was an emblem of 
 
413 
 
 Cross] the sun, it is remarkable how rarely we recognise it 
 . in the Assyrian or Babylonian sculptures ; in none of 
 the ancient gems depicted by Lajard is any form of 
 cross except the crux ansata to be found. The most 
 remarkable which I have heard of is a votive offering, 
 found in Numidia in 1888, on which was a man 
 surrounded by a wreath of beams, with both his arms 
 stretched out, and holding a branch in each hand, 
 thus representing a perfect cross ; below him there 
 was an inscription, which was translated by Gesenius 
 as “Domino Baali, Solari Kegi seterno, qui exaudivit 
 preces,” i. e. } “ To the Lord Baal, the solar king 
 eternal, who has heard prayers; ” a propos of which 
 it must be noticed that in many ancient pictures of 
 our Saviour, in Italy, the words Deo soli are inscribed, 
 which signify alike, “to the only God,” and “ to the 
 god Sol.” 
 
 It is, however, singular that the punishment of 
 the cross is not to be seen in any ancient sculpture. 
 In the Ninevite remains, the punishment which is 
 depicted as inflicted on the vanquished is impalement. 
 We are told by Herodotus, b. iii. 159, that after the 
 taking of Babylon, Darius impaled about three 
 thousand of its principal citizens, and Seneca tells us 
 (Cons, ad Marc, xx.; Epist. xiv. 1) that this plan was 
 one of those carried out amongst the Romans. When 
 a cross was made of two pieces of wood, there seems 
 to have been no orthodox shape, and the victims were 
 sometimes tied, and sometimes nailed, being usually 
 left to perish by thirst and hunger. We find from 
 Juvenal (vi. 28), “Pone crucem servo,” that cruci¬ 
 fixion was a punishment for slaves. 
 
 Now we see no reason to doubt that our Saviour 
 was crucified, although there is much reason for 
 
414 
 
 Ckoss] questioning whether His cross had a figure similar to 
 that now adopted as the conventional form of such 
 instrument, which, in a country where wood is scarce 
 and very dear, would imply an amount of extravagance 
 in the execution of criminals which was very impro¬ 
 bable. Our interest lies in the idea which possessed 
 the minds of the council of Christian Bishops which 
 met in the third century at Nicsea, and determined 
 that the cross should he the characteristic emblem of 
 the Catholic faith. We cannot doubt that they 
 regarded the emblem as a sign of the death of the 
 Redeemer by a painful method ; but we must also 
 believe that the astute Bishops of Africa and the East 
 recognised in it the emblem of fertility; their doctrine 
 was that all were dead in sins, but that through 
 Christ they received life. Shorn of all its offensive 
 indications, there was nothing in tbe symbol to offend 
 the eye, whilst there was much in it which suggested 
 certain doctrines; from it alone, as from a text, one 
 hierarch might expatiate on the sufferings of the 
 Saviour, whilst another might dwell on the glories of 
 the resurrection; one might paint the horrors of 
 eternal death, another the glories of eternal life; one 
 might view it as a man with arms outstretched so as 
 to receive the whole world under his care, another as 
 an emblem pointing the way to heaven and hell, and 
 to all the world besides. 
 
 Whatever may have been its precedents, one thing 
 seems to be perfectly certain, that its form was 
 extremely simple, and that every modern addition, 
 viz., the addition of the circle and the triple 
 ornaments, are a return to ancient heathenism, a 
 commingling of ancient tenets with modern dogmas, 
 
415 
 
 Cross] and a departure from the pure simplicity of the faith 
 taught by the 1 Son of Man.’ 
 
 Cunni Diaboli. We have had occasion frequently to refer 
 to the earth as an emblem of the universal mother. 
 When once the idea obtained that our world was 
 feminine, it was easy to induce the faithful to believe 
 that natural chasms were typical of that part which 
 characterises woman. As at birth the new being 
 emerges from the mother, so it was supposed that 
 emergence from a terrestrial cleft was equivalent to a 
 new birth. In direct proportion to the resemblance 
 between the sign and the thing signified was the 
 sacredness of the chink, and the amount of virtue 
 which was imparted by passing through it. From natu¬ 
 ral chasms being considered holy, the veneration for 
 apertures in stones, as being equally symbolical, was 
 a natural transition. Holes, such as we refer to, are 
 still to be seen in those structures which are called 
 Druidical, both in the British Islands and in India. 
 It is impossible to say where these ideas first arose; 
 it is certain that they survive in India to this day. 
 We recognise the existence of the emblem amongst 
 the Jews, in Isaiah li. 1, in the charge to look “to 
 the hole of the pit whence ye are digged.” We have 
 also an indication that chasms were symbolical 
 amongst the same people in Isaiah lvii. 5, where the 
 wicked amongst the Jews are described as “inflaming 
 themselves with idols under every green tree, and 
 slaying the children in the valleys under the clefts of 
 the rocks.” It is possible that the “hole in the 
 wall ” (Ezek. viii. 7) had a similar signification. In 
 modern Rome, in the vestibule of a church close to 
 the Temple of Yesta, I have seen a large perforated 
 stone, into the hole of which the ancient Romans are 
 
416 
 
 Cunni Diaboli] said to have placed their hand when they 
 swore a solemn oath, a counterpart of Abraham swear¬ 
 ing his servant upon his thigh, i. e. the male organ. 
 Higgins writes of the things in question : —“ These 
 stones are so placed as to have a hole under them, 
 through which devotees passed for religious purposes. 
 There is one of the same kind in Ireland, called St. 
 Declau’s stone. In the mass of rocks at Bramham 
 Craggs there is a place made for devotees to pass 
 through. We read in the accounts of Hindostan that 
 there is a very celebrated place in Upper India, to 
 which immense numbers of pilgrims go, to pass 
 through a place in the mountains called the Cow’s 
 Belly. In the Island of Bombay, and on Malabar 
 Hill, there is a rock, upon the surface of which there 
 is a natural crevice, which communicates with a 
 cavity, opening below. This place is used by the 
 Gentoos as a purification of their sins, which they 
 say is effected by their going in at the opening below, 
 and emerging out at the cavity above. The ceremony 
 is in such high repute in neighbouring countries that 
 the famous Conajee Angria ventured, by stealth, one 
 night upon the island, on purpose to perform this 
 ceremony, and got off undiscovered.” Pp. 225, 226. 
 
 4 4 The early Christians called these holes Cunni 
 Diaboli.” Anacalypsis, p. 346. 
 
 Curtain. As in the Hindoo temples of to-day, and in the 
 tabernacle of the Jews, so in the Assyrian temple, a 
 veil existed. We have, in an inscription of Nebu¬ 
 chadnezzar, 4 4 Before the curtain of His sanctuary I 
 bowed down my head.” (Talbot, in Transactions of 
 Royal Society of Literature, vol. vii., part 2, page 341.) 
 The veil was covered with embroidery, and Sirdi was 
 the name both in Assyrian and Hebrew. In some 
 
417 
 
 Curtain] Hindoo temples English soldiers have penetrated, 
 and seen the God represented by a phallic stone; and 
 the priest has all but signed to them not to talk about 
 it to the natives. The British might laugh, but that 
 the soi-disant holy man did not mind. So long as 
 he received his dues, and retained his influence 
 amongst his followers — 
 
 “ Pop ulus me sibilat, at milii plaudo ipse domi.” 
 
 Cush, (Gen. x. 6), “ Black, or dark coloured.” 
 
 Cushan, t?* 13 (Habak. iii. 7), is said to signify Ethiopia. 
 
 Cushan-rishathaim, (Judges iii. 8), I take to 
 
 signify “ The bow of On, he shakes it opportunely.” 
 From Bnp, kosh; |K, on; raash; and W, athi. 
 The metaphor of a bow and arrows, as typical of the 
 Almighty and the Sun, has been in common use 
 from very ancient times. The Assyrian Asshur and 
 the Jewish Jah, the Greek Apollo and the Roman 
 Cupid, all were armed with the bow and arrows. 
 There were two meanings to the metaphor, but we 
 need not discuss them. The usual translation of the 
 word in question is ‘most wicked ,’ a name certainly 
 not likely to be assumed by a king, or given to a 
 child. Of course, we may conclude that the name 
 was given by the historian; in which case we assume 
 that the story may be as mythical as the name. 
 
 Cushi, (2 Sam. xviii. 22), “ The Negro,” a name 
 equivalent to our “ Sambo.” 
 
 Cuth, n-13 (2 Kings xvii. 80), Etymology unknown; proba¬ 
 bly a variant of Cush, equivalent to “ dark skins.” 
 
 Cynocephali. These were canine-headed figures, intended 
 to represent Isis. The dog and monkey tribe are 
 more conspicuous for their constant solicitation of 
 love than any other animals. “Isis was represented as 
 
 D D 
 
418 
 
 Cynocephali] attended by Cynocephali, and was sometimes 
 caninely-headed herself. Under this form she was 
 adored at Hermopolis; and we are told hy Strabo that 
 the inhabitants of Memphis honoured her under this 
 form. The Phoenicians also adopted the Cynocephalus 
 as a sort of tutelar deity, and placed one upon the 
 prows of their vessels. Vulcan was said to have been 
 nourished by canine-headed beings” (Recherches surle 
 Culte de Bacchus . Par P. N. Rolle, a Paris, 1824, 
 tom. iii). 
 
 This idea has been reproduced in modern times, 
 and Albert Durer’s picture of the Virgin and the 
 monkey is too well known to require description. 
 (See Athoe, Heifee, and Gingie, p. 52). 
 
 Cyeus, (2 Ch. xxvi. 22), said to be the Persian name for 
 the Sun; otherwise pointed, it signifies (( a bended 
 bow,” “anything bended or round,” e.g., “the abdo¬ 
 men of a pregnant woman.” I find, from Godfrey 
 Higgins’ Anacalypsis, that there was a general 
 Oriental belief that a portion of the Almighty was 
 supposed to become incarnate at the end of a cycle 
 of about 600 years ; that about the period of Cyrus 
 such an incarnation was looked for; and another 
 about the period of our Saviour’s advent. He gives, 
 moreover, a very interesting account of the Roman 
 idea of this incarnation, as expressed in Virgil, Ec¬ 
 logue 4. Cyrus was supposed to be one of the Divine 
 incarnations—the Sun in person ; hence he favours 
 the idea that his name signifies ‘the Sun.’ As he was 
 neither Chaldee, Phoenician, Hebrew, nor Assyrian, I 
 doubt whether we are in a position to form a good 
 opinion as to the real etymology and signification. 
 
 D, n, or daleth , ‘ a door,’ is no more similar in shape to a 
 door of any kind, than a beth is like a house. The 
 
419 
 
 D] present form of the Hebrew letter has undergone very 
 considerable change. The original shape in the 
 Hebrew was identical with the Phoenician and ancient 
 Greek type, and may be described as an ordinary, or 
 angular, form of the figure 9. The modern Greek 
 A, delta , retains the angular part, but has dropped the 
 tail. It is difficult to see whence the modern Hebrew 
 has come. It is a remarkable fact that the shape of 
 the daleth resembles very closely that of the resh, both 
 in the Phoenician and ancient Hebrew; my own eye 
 cannot easily detect the distinction between the 
 Phoenician r and d. It is very extraordinary that the 
 less ancient Hebrews, who must have been aware of 
 the difficulty in distinguishing these letters amongst 
 their neighbours, should in their present square 
 characters have perpetuated the embarrass. Few 
 except keen observers are able to distinguish between 
 1 and n; and in consequence of this similarity errors 
 have crept into the old manuscripts, and are retained 
 in the printed text of the Hebrew Scriptures. 
 
 The confusion which might thence ensue we 
 recognise, by substituting ram for darn, delay for 
 relay , or vice versa. The facility with which the 
 error might be ‘ worked,’ was a recommendation to 
 the correctors of the ancient text, for, by the use of 
 one, rather than the other letter, they could change 
 the signification of a word or sentence. 
 
 T d , is interchangeable with "i r, and n b, D t, nth, 
 sometimes with b l , and r z; *1 and n have been used 
 thus in consequence of the similarity of their forms, 
 the rest on account of a resemblance in sound; we can 
 readily understand how amongst ourselves ‘ Todd ’ 
 might become ‘ Dodd,’ or vice versa; by many, ‘ three ’ 
 can only be pronounced as 4 dree,’ whilst in Greek we 
 
420 
 
 D] have “’Otivcro-evg, Odussseus, tiavjp, daeer, /xeheraw, mele- 
 tao, for which the Latin has Ulysses, levir, meditor.” 
 
 As a numeral, *r stands for 4, with two dots 
 horizontally above it becomes 400. 
 
 Dabbasheth, (Josh. xix. 11), “ The round hump of a 
 camel,” or “ a bee hive ” ? “ the hill place.” 
 
 Daberah, (Josh. xix. 12). A variant of Deborah, 
 
 which see. 
 
 Dagon, faj (1 Sam. v. 2), means “ the dear little fish; ” 
 JJ, dag, signifies * fruitful,’ also * a fish; ’ |-1K, aun, = 
 
 ‘ power, vigour.’ For the signification of the emblem, 
 see Fish, below. t?5, dag an , is however a very old 
 root, and signifies ‘ to cover,’ ‘ to grow,’ * to put forth 
 fruit; ’ dagah, = “ to increase greatly ; ” and 
 1J5, dagan, ‘ the fruit,’ ‘ or ears of corn.’ 
 
 There were abundance of puns in ancient times, 
 and it may be that the same sounds signify ‘he 
 grows,’ or ‘ he covers,’ also ‘ a great fish,’ and ‘ corn 
 ears,’ and that the latter was substituted as a sign 
 of the former. Ceres used to bear ‘ ears of corn.’ 
 
 Dalphon, (Esther ix. 7), a Persian name, of doubtful 
 origin. 
 
 Damascus (Gen. xiv. 15); damesek, said to signify 
 
 “ damask,” a silk stuff, for which the town was 
 famous. 
 
 Dan, I? (Gen. xiv. 14), “ The judge,” “ supreme Lord.” 
 “ Compare Don.) 
 
 Daniel, (Dan. i. 6), “The judge El, or II,” or “my 
 judge (is) El.” 
 
 There is something very fascinating to Biblical 
 students in the book which goes by the name of 
 Daniel, the prophet. In it is to be found a sketch 
 of the inner life of the kings of mighty Babylon. 
 There are also marvellous accounts of the triumph of 
 
421 
 
 Daniel] ceremonial virtue, and the fall of imperial pride. 
 There are also prophecies in which, for the first time 
 in the Bible, we see a date given to coming events. 
 
 From my earliest years I have heard and read 
 speculations upon the signification of the vaticina¬ 
 tions by the prophet Daniel: and the differences of 
 opinion which commentators have shown lead me 
 to doubt greatly whether the laws of interpretation 
 usually employed by them are not radically wrong, 
 and whether it is possible to discover a sound hypo¬ 
 thesis respecting the man and his writings. 
 
 In undertaking the task, we first ask about 
 Daniel himself. From his name being compounded 
 with El, rather than with Jah, we infer that he was 
 horn and named during or after the Captivity; for, as 
 a rule, the later princes of Judah were named after 
 Jehovah, rather than after Elohim. Yet there is a 
 chapter in Ezekiel which purports to have been 
 written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, in which 
 Daniel is twice coupled with Noah and Job, as being 
 an unusually pious man (Ezek. xiv. 14, 20); but we 
 can scarcely believe that this refers to the Daniel of 
 Babylonian fame, for he was an unknown strip¬ 
 ling, or famous only for being handsome and clever, 
 when first he went to the Chaldsean court (Dan. i. 
 4-6). It is possible that the particular chapter in 
 Ezekiel was written, as so many other true prophe¬ 
 cies have been, during or after the Captivity, and thus 
 Daniel’s worth became known to his contemporary. 
 It is by no means improbable that the same hand 
 penned both Ezek. xiv. and Dan. x. 11, but the 
 surmise is too vague for us to trust. 
 
 Abandoning the hope of obtaining any certainty 
 about the man, let us examine his writings. We 
 
422 
 
 Daniel] find, in the first place, that he fattens upon “pulse” 
 more than others do upon meat; an occurrence by 
 no means improbable, as graminivorous creatures are 
 always fatter than the carnivorous, provided they get 
 enough to eat. 
 
 In the next place, we find him giving an account 
 of a forgotten dream, and its interpretation ; at both 
 of which we marvel; hut as the king did not know 
 whether Daniel told him his real vision, and no 
 one can understand the interpretation as the only 
 one applicable, we may omit the consideration of 
 the matter. If we found such a story in ‘ Homer,’ 
 or ‘Virgil,’ we should only laugh at it as an ex post 
 facto production. 
 
 The next account we meet with is the formation 
 of a wondrous statue, which some commentators 
 consider to be the counterpart of the image that the 
 king had not been able to remember, even if he saw. 
 Into the furnace wherein the gold had been melted 
 the king throws three friends of Daniel, who is for 
 the nonce separated from them, and thus escapes. 
 Nevertheless Daniel relates all the occurrences which 
 happened to his friends; what the monarch said to 
 them, and their rejoinder,— what the king saw with 
 his own eyes, — how he was astonished to see four 
 men, where only three had been, — and how, through 
 the fiery atmosphere, he recognised the new comer 
 as a son of God, bar-elahin, a deity with 
 
 whom he certainly was not familiar. 
 
 We next encounter a long history of another 
 dream of Nebuchadnezzar, who seems to have formed 
 a text whereon a Shakespeare has founded the sermon, 
 “ Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown; ” and 
 after the vision the king becomes insane. In this 
 
428 
 
 Daniel] condition the natural characteristics of the man are 
 changed, for his hair becomes like eagles’ feathers, 
 and his nails like birds’ claws. We are told, too, 
 that the monarch ate grass like oxen ; but, seeing that 
 his nose would be very much in the way of his doing 
 so, it is doubtful whether the simile is just. This 
 state of things lasted for “ seven times,” “the mean¬ 
 ing of which is doubtful. But throughout their dura¬ 
 tion the kingdom of the despotic monarch ruled itself, 
 and the head men never thought of despatching the 
 royal madman. When the period was ended, the 
 human beast, with eagles’ feathers and birds’ claws, 
 walked quietly into the palace, and assumed at once 
 the guidance of the state. The whole of this sounds 
 so very like a fairy tale, that we hesitate to believe 
 it, without examining farther. In the chapter follow¬ 
 ing, we find that a king named Belshazzar is seated 
 upon the throne of Babylon. There is a feast 
 described to us by Daniel, at which it is clear that 
 he was not present, until he was summoned to 
 interpret a writing that suddenly appeared upon a 
 wall. The story runs that the king and his wives, 
 his lords and his concubines, were revelling, when 
 the mystic hand came forth; and on their outcry, 
 
 ‘ the Queen ’ entered into the banquet house, having 
 clearly not been included amongst ‘ the wives ’ of the 
 king; by her counsel Daniel is summoned, and imme¬ 
 diately becomes master of the situation. In that 
 night Belshazzar is slain, and the kingdom is taken 
 by Darius, the Mede. 
 
 This remarkable and curious statement staggered 
 me even in the days of my childhood, for we are told 
 in the last verses of the book of Chronicles that it 
 was Cyrus who re-established the Jews, in conse- 
 
424 
 
 Daniel] quence of his having conquered all kingdoms; a 
 statement which is reiterated by Ezra, i. 1-11, iv. 3, 
 v. 13, vi. 1-5, with the distinct intimation that Cyrus 
 had conquered Babylon. History records this con¬ 
 quest as occurring about b. c. 538; it equally records 
 another capture of Babylon, by Darius, about b.c. 516. 
 Now it is clear that if Daniel was a resident in 
 Babylonia during the reigns of Nebuchadnezzar and 
 his son Belshazzar, he must have been cognizant 
 of the capture of the city by Cyrus, and of the pro¬ 
 clamation made by that monarch. But apparently he 
 knows scarcely anything of Cyrus, and chiefly speaks 
 of Darius. This remarkable ignorance of Daniel 
 becomes still more conspicuous when we find him 
 writing—“In the first year of the reign of Darius, 
 I Daniel understood by books the number of the 
 years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah 
 the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years 
 in the desolations of Jerusalem ” (chap. ix. 2). In 
 the verses immediately following this, there is a 
 touching prayer for the restoration of Jerusalem, 
 which the writer regards as being then desolate 
 (vv. 17, 18); at the end of which there is a com¬ 
 munication that the consummation prayed for has 
 been decided upon in the court of heaven, and that 
 in seventy weeks (not ninety days, the favourite period 
 during the war in North America for bringing about 
 political changes) the restoration of Jerusalem should 
 be effected. A matter that had been accomplished 
 already. (2 Ch. xxxvi. 22, 23; Ezra i. 1-11.) 
 
 To my young mind it seemed improbable that a 
 man who knew nothing of the things which had taken 
 place under his own eye, who talked about Darius and 
 the Medes when he ought to have spoken of Cyrus 
 
425 
 
 Daniel] and the Persians, would be likely to know anything 
 about futurity. 
 
 On finding, however, that these difficulties were 
 made light of by devout Christians, it seemed to me 
 to he more judicious to study the real worth of the 
 vaticinations than to reject them as being necessarily 
 valueless. This I was readily enabled to do, as my 
 professional career was begun in the house of a rela¬ 
 tive, whose devotion was sincere, whose respect for the 
 verbal inspiration of the Scriptures was profound, 
 and to whom the interpretation of prophecy was a 
 favourite study. It behoved me to sit and listen, not 
 to argue. With an active and tenacious memory, I 
 soon found that certain opinions, which were hazarded 
 as “ interpretations,” were not consonant with the 
 facts themselves; that occurrences had to be twisted 
 to meet words, and that words had to be twisted to 
 meet facts. Though the verbal inspiration of the 
 Bible was held as the firmest article of faith, it was 
 evident that no respect was paid to its w T ords. A 
 ‘father’ (Dan. v. 2, 11, 18) became a ‘grandfather’ 
 whenever the exigency of the case required it. 
 
 Such a change was necessary, to reconcile the facts 
 given by Daniel with the words of Jeremiah : “ Thus 
 saith the Lord, I have given all these lands into the 
 hand of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, my 
 servant; and the beasts of the field have I given him 
 also to serve him. 64 And all nations shall serve him, 
 and his son, and his son’s son, until the very time of 
 his land come; and then many nations and great kings 
 shall serve themselves of him.” (Jer. xxvii. 4-7.) 
 From this it is necessary that Belshazzar shall be the 
 
 64 It will be observed here that, with all his apparent exactness, the Prophet 
 knows nothing about Nebuchadnezzar ever being a beast himself. 
 
426 
 
 Daniel] grandson of Nebuchadnezzar, else Jeremiah’s pro¬ 
 phecy is worthless. Daniel’s language is therefore 
 held to be uncertain, lest his predecessor should be 
 shamed. But again, it is to be noticed that many 
 nations and great kings are to serve themselves of 
 him; it was necessary, therefore, to manipulate the 
 language of Daniel, so that Darius, the Mede, and 
 his hundred and twenty princes, should come prior 
 to Cyrus, the Persian (Dan. vi. 1-28). Again, it is 
 to be noticed that Jeremiah uses the expression “the 
 very time of his land come.” It is clear that the point 
 of time thus indicated must necessarily be indefinite; 
 but it was considered more judicious to make it 
 definite, and to signify the reign of the grandson. 
 Thus, by a manipulation of words, the verbal inspira¬ 
 tion of the sacred volume was by the same process 
 both refuted and sustained. 
 
 Whilst puzzling over many of the difficulties which 
 the subject in question involved, I was requested to 
 attend a seance , in which a woman was to act as a 
 prophetess, seer, or mesmeric pythoness; and as I 
 was suspected of being a sceptical philosopher, I was 
 challenged to discover any imposture therein. Instead 
 of accepting the challenge as such, an opportunity was 
 taken to examine the laws of evidence which the com¬ 
 pany acknowledged. Two individuals left the room, 
 and were to do something which the blindfolded lady 
 would describe to us. It was my part of the business 
 to take down her words. Twice was the experiment 
 essayed, but on both occasions her failure was signal. 
 But, like peculiar passages in Holy Writ, 4 the diffi¬ 
 culty’ was explained away. Those who had before 
 been confident, now urged a different style of trial, 
 and we were told that if we joined hands with the 
 
427 
 
 Daniel] gifted female, and thought intently of any place, she 
 would describe it. My business was again to record 
 the ipsissima verba of the sibyl, so that any inde¬ 
 pendent observer might judge of their value. A 
 father who was present thought of his own house, 
 and told the son so, and both listened to the portrait 
 which the woman drew; both were satisfied, but not 
 contented; each complained of some feature which 
 was superfluous, and of others which were wanting. 
 Even in this they could not agree. At length it 
 turned out that the one was thinking of their town 
 dwelling, the other of their country villa; yet each 
 believed the description adequate. On examining the 
 words used, it was clear that each 4 assistant ’ had 
 interpreted the same word, or form of words, in a 
 great many different significations. Whilst they did 
 thus unconsciously, they were astonished at the 
 knowledge of the charlatan, and they trusted her 
 implicitly; but when their attention was aroused, 
 such transparent humbug was recognised. A man 
 surrounded by clean plate glass, and looking at a 
 distant object, is unconscious that he is imprisoned; 
 but when once a fly, walking upon a pane of his 
 chamber, calls his eye to the glass, he cannot again 
 enjoy the illusion that he is free. 
 
 On applying these considerations to the study of 
 Daniel’s prophecy, it became clear to the author that 
 those who believe in the prophet’s writings resemble 
 those who credited the mesmerist. In one verse 
 (chap. iv. 16), “ seven times ” are considered to be 
 equal to seven years; in another part (chap. ii. 8, 9), 
 the word ‘ time ’ cannot by any consideration be 
 made equal to * a year; ’ in another (vii. 12), the 
 words “ Season and time” are wholly indefinite. Yet, 
 
428 
 
 Daniel] notwithstanding the vagueness, the words “ a time, 
 times, and the dividing of time” (chap. vii. 25) is 
 taken definitely, and, by an arbitrary interpretation, 
 said to signify twelve hundred and sixty years. Surely 
 if “time, times, and a half” equal so many years, 
 “ seven times” the period of Nebuchadnezzar’s beast- 
 ship can only just have expired. Again, we are told 
 that a certain powerful beast shall think to change 
 “times and laws” (vii. 25); in which case we know 
 not what interpretation to give. 
 
 Not only are vague significations given to the word 
 * time,’ but £ weeks ’ also are similarly treated. The 
 seventy weeks which are spoken of as “ determined 
 upon thy people, and upon thy holy city, to finish 
 the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and 
 to make a reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring 
 in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision 
 and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy ” (chap. 
 
 ix. 24), are variously read as seventy weeks, seventy 
 years, four hundred and ninety years, and I know not 
 what besides; and all sorts of devices are adopted to 
 make real history square with the so-called prophecies. 
 Now let us suppose for a moment that Daniel signifies 
 seven years by a week, we shall then find that he 
 fasted twenty-one years, or three full weeks (chap. 
 
 x. 8). 
 
 There is another difficulty, of the same class, about 
 the use of the word ‘ days,’ by the so-called prophet; 
 he speaks of “ one thousand two hundred and thirty- 
 five days ” (chap. xii. 11, 12.) Some take these 
 expressions literally, others as metaphorical; but both 
 are equally unable to make any scheme out of them 
 which satisfies the mind of an individual who has 
 respect to the intrinsic value of evidence. Indeed, 
 
429 
 
 Daniel] we need not be surprised at this, as Daniel himself 
 declares that he does not know the signification of 
 what he has written. 
 
 The foregoing considerations lead us, at the pre¬ 
 sent time, to attach no value whatever to the Book of 
 Daniel; and, such being our estimation of it, there 
 is no necessity for us to discuss its literary merits, the 
 probable period of its manufacture, and its possible 
 authorship. 
 
 Danjaan, (2 Sam. xxiv. 6), “ The judge speaking 
 
 openly; ” from I jaan, or “ Dan playing the pipe,” 
 Danjaan being the equivalent of Pan. Dan was one 
 of the names of the Phoenician Eshmun = Esculapius 
 = Apollo = Elias = the Sun. 
 
 Dannah, (Josh. xv. 49), “ Jah is judge;” the > in nj 
 being, as usual, elided. 
 
 Dara, (1 Chron. ii. 6), “He lifts up,” or “he bears.” 
 
 Dakda, V: 1 *?? (1 Kings iv. 31), “ Pearl of wisdom.” (Fiirst 
 and Gesenius.) 
 
 Dari, Cuneiform, “ Eternal.” 
 
 Darius, B'JJ'J- (Ezra iv. 5), a Median. Signification of the 
 name not known. 
 
 Darkon, tfPT? (Ezra ii. 56), Persian. Signification of the 
 name not known. 
 
 Dathan, !£;[ (Numb. xvi. 1), “ The fountain of On ” ? 
 
 Dad, T?, “ The breast, or pap; ” dadi, or dadih (compare 
 English “ titties ”), “ the two breasts; ” Greek,r 
 
 Dalu, Old Babylonian, = “ exalted.” Compare Delilah, 
 Dalujah, or Dal-el-jah.) 
 
 Dacar, We insert this word, as it indicates one 
 
 4 hidden meaning,’ or punning contrivance. It signi¬ 
 fies either “a ram,” “to bore,” “to press into,” or 
 the “ mem brum virile ” in a state of activity. To 
 speak, then, of a male sheep might indicate some- 
 
430 
 
 Dacar] thing more than was apparent to the ear; and the 
 sacrifice of a ram would he appropriate for one who 
 wished to recover his lost power “ to press into.” 
 (Compare Dacre, Dacres, Dagger, Daggers, Dakin, 
 Dicker, Docker, &c. Greek, tiacxvw, Ho bite, or prick;’ 
 ‘ a bite/ &c.) Compare Accho.) 
 
 Dainu-kurban, Assyrian proper name, == “ Gift of the 
 judge.” (Compare “ it is Corbart”) We have in 
 England the word Corbyn as a proper name. 
 
 Dalah, signifies “ to hang down,” “to he pendulous ; ” 
 dalal} ‘ to be languid, with desire,’ ‘ feeble,’ 
 ‘ weak; ’ dala, signifies Ho thrust out the tongue;’ 
 and dali, ‘ semen emittere.’ Hence probably 
 Delilah and Dalliance , 65 
 Dandanni, Assyrian, “ Greatest of the great,” 
 
 Dashon, 1?*J, signifies “To be fat,” “wealthy,” “juicy,” 
 &c. (Compare Dash, Dashwood, Dashing, &e.) 
 David, TH (Ruth iv. 7), “ Beloved.” Although I do not find 
 any more satisfactory etymon for this word than the 
 above, yet I object to it, inasmuch as the title applies 
 to the after part of the king’s life, which could not, 
 and unquestionably was not, known when he had his 
 name given. David certainly does not seem to have 
 been any special favourite either with his brothers or 
 his father. He was not beloved by Saul, though he 
 was by Michal and Jonathan. The idea intended to 
 
 65 Respecting this word, Gesenius has the following:—“ Numb. xxiv. 7 : Manat 
 aqua ex situlis ejus, i. e., larga erit posteritas ejus, metaphora ab aqua de situla 
 destillante ad semen virile translata, ex nostro sensu obscoena sed Orientalibus 
 familiari.” Thes , s. v. This shows, as I think, that one of the emphemisms of the 
 scrotum and its contents was a bucket; others were ‘a purse,’ ‘ a bag, ! ‘ a basket.’ 
 It will he remembered that the Assyrian priests officiate before the sacred ‘ grove,' 
 emblem of the ‘ concha,’ with a pine cone in one hand, and a basket, or bucket, in 
 the other, clearly typical of the storehouse of the male. Compare also Deut. 
 xxviii. 5: “Blessed shall be thy basket, and thy store.” n^D = 4 basket,’ also ‘a 
 thing dangling about; ’ also Prov. xvi. 11: “ The stones in the bag.” (Marginal 
 reading.) 
 
431 
 
 David] be conveyed by the appellation is that he was beloved 
 by the Almighty; and I think his historiographer has 
 habitually spoken of him thus, instead of using the 
 name he originally went by, i. e., = ‘ love 
 
 apples,’ or ‘the basket.’ The name of David thus 
 resembles Issachar, and both clearly refer to the idea 
 entertained by the ancient orientals, that “ love 
 apples,” or mandrakes, could enable a man who is 
 advanced in life to perform his marital duties. If 
 our surmise be correct, we see how easily dudi , 
 became David, by the transposition of a letter 
 and changing points. 
 
 In investigating the nature of ancient faiths, the 
 inquirer will be assisted in fixing upon one or more 
 individuals who may be designated ‘ representative 
 men.’ For the purpose which we have in hand, few 
 can serve us better than the first powerful king of 
 Judah, of whom we are assured that he was a man 
 after God’s own heart, which should perform all his 
 will. It is clear that, by studying the character and 
 acts of David, we shall obtain an insight into the 
 character of that God who was worshipped and 
 preached by Samuel, and all those other hierarchs 
 who described the Psalmist (1 Sam. xiii. 14; Acts 
 xiii. 22). 
 
 To understand the subject aright, our history 
 must involve that of his predecessors. Samuel, by 
 force of individual will, had established his authority 
 as an envoy from God, when his sons became a 
 source of discontent; and the people demanded a 
 king, who should be a leader against enemies. 
 Judging that thews and sinews were appropriate for 
 such a chief, he caused to be selected (for no one 
 can believe under the circumstances that God did it 
 
482 
 
 David] directly) a man who towered above the multitude in 
 stature, and exceeded any one of them in strength. 
 The king thus selected feels that he owes his position 
 to Samuel; and the seer, believing that he will act as 
 his tool, orders him to make war upon those whom the 
 prophet unaided dare not fight. Thus it is ever; 
 religion promotes war, but its ministers prefer to 
 fight by deputy rather than in person. It is always 
 easier to convert by the sword, than by words or 
 argument. 
 
 But the monarch is not duly obedient to the advice 
 of the prophet, and presumes to act without his assist¬ 
 ance (1 Sam. xiii. 8-14); therefore, within two years 
 of his accession to the throne, the prophet announces 
 an intention to abolish the dynasty. This threat is 
 renewed upon a subsequent occasion (1 Sam. xv. 10 
 -28). The reason of the reproof in both instances is 
 clear, viz., a refusal to be implicitly guided by the 
 man who assumed to be the mouth-piece of the 
 Almighty. 
 
 From this short history we gather, that Saul 
 believed in the power of Samuel to make and unmake 
 kings, and that Samuel only respected a king who 
 would be ductile in his hands. 
 
 Hot with displeasure at the gigantic king whom 
 he had made, Samuel proceeds to elect another. A 
 young man, of comparatively tender years, and of what 
 is known amongst physiologists as a sanguine tem¬ 
 perament, ardent in war, impetuous in love, sudden 
 in determination, and readily dominated by religious 
 impressions, is selected; and means are at once taken 
 to advance his position. With courage and skilfulness, 
 the young protege of the Prophet soon gains an impor¬ 
 tant advantage over the Philistines, and becomes 
 
483 
 
 David] enthusiastically praised by the people, whose con¬ 
 dition under Saul had been very miserable. Beautiful 
 to look at, and modest in manner, he engages the affec¬ 
 tions of the king’s son, and becomes installed at the 
 royal court. He marries also the king’s daughter, 
 his portion of * the settlements ’ being two hundred 
 Philistine foreskins, obtained by a most unjustifiable 
 massacre. But the inquiries of Abner soon lead the 
 king to the knowledge that David is the man whom 
 Samuel has selected to succeed him (1 Sam. xx. 
 31); and that Jonathan also knows the fact is 
 evident, from the same text. As a natural result, the 
 present ruler attempts to destroy the future king, and 
 endeavours to induce his courtiers to do the like. 
 The astute captain, unable to make head against a 
 combination of enemies in the precincts of the palace, 
 flees away, as Rhoderick Dhu is represented to have 
 done, in the Lady of the Lake, For such a pro¬ 
 ceeding, no one can blame him. 
 
 Hoping to find security from the persecution of 
 Saul, David flies to the Philistines, as Napoleon 
 the First fled towards England. His reception being 
 unfavourable, he plays the madman before the king, 
 who, being disgusted with him, allows him to depart. 
 He then, like many a brigand under similar circum¬ 
 stances, betakes himself to a cave; and, being joined 
 by others equally unfortunate with himself, he becomes 
 the captain of banditti (1 Sam. xxii. 1, 2). The 
 monarch is no more able to destroy his refractory 
 subject and his troop than the governors of Italy 
 have been able to extirpate brigandage from their 
 Christian country. Though David respects the per¬ 
 son of the king, he is by no means so proper towards 
 Nabal, whom he determines to destroy, simply 
 
 E E 
 
434 
 
 David] because the man would not send him a supply 
 of food. The reason why the life of the monarch 
 is regarded with scrupulous care is to be traced to the 
 reverence which David felt for the ceremony of 
 consecration. To his mind it was evident that, if 
 he raised his hand against the anointed one, his own 
 position would be as precarious as that of Saul. 
 Feelings such as his have existed in Europe to a 
 late period, if indeed they are not current now. 
 
 At length, wearied with his miserable life in 
 Judsea, David passes the frontier once more, and 
 again takes refuge with the king of Gath (1 Sam. 
 xxvii. 1-12). On the present occasion, however, he 
 comes as a leader of ‘ condottieri,’ and has a place 
 assigned to him in Philistia, as of old the pirate 
 Danes had in our own country. Whilst there, he 
 makes expeditions against innocent people, and 
 destroys them utterly, leaving not a single soul alive 
 to tell the tale. He then prepares, without a mur¬ 
 mur, to assist in a Philistine attack upon his own 
 country, and remonstrates against the edict which 
 prevents his doing so (1 Sam. xxix. 8). 
 
 On his return to his new home, David finds that 
 the Amalekites, who have been already twice destroyed, 
 once by Joshua (Exod. xvii. 18), and once by Saul 
 (1 Sam. xv. 8), have served him as he had served 
 them (1 Sam. xxvii. 8); but he succeeds in avenging 
 himself, and on his return hears of the success of 
 the Philistines and the death of Saul. 
 
 When he receives certain information of the king’s 
 decease by the hand of him who brings the tidings, 
 he dooms the individual to death, as having shown 
 disrespect to the ceremony of consecration. After a 
 long war between the son of Saul and himself, David 
 
435 
 
 David] hears of the death of Ishbosheth by the hand of a 
 deserter; and him he also kills, although that king 
 was not “ anointed.” At this period the treatment 
 of the house of Saul by David is noble. 
 
 When once firmly established in the kingdom, by 
 the capture of the strong town Jerusalem, David 
 increases his seraglio largely, hut he by no means 
 loses his warlike ardour. He fights with his old 
 friends the Philistines, and reduces them ; and he 
 conquers Moab, Syria, Edom, Ammon, &c. After these 
 campaigns he abides at home, whilst his generals lead 
 his armies; and he gives the rein to. adultery, deceit, 
 and finally to the deliberate murder of one of his faith¬ 
 ful servants. For these crimes, being reproved by 
 Nathan, he duly repents; but shows a very small sense 
 of his crimes, by going again to the fair woman who 
 was the indirect cause of his guilt; and the second son 
 of the adulterous Bathsheba becomes the favourite child. 
 
 David now rouses himself from his quiescence, and 
 repairs to Rabbah, whose inhabitants he slaughters in 
 a horrible fashion, causing them to be put under saws, 
 harrows, and axes of iron, and to go through the 
 brick-kiln (2 Sam. xii. 31). Many who know the 
 punishments inflicted by the Chinese upon their 
 criminals think them dreadful, but they are exceeded 
 by those which David inflicted upon individuals whose 
 only crime was fighting for their country. 
 
 We next notice the style of justice which the 
 king showed when he came to the throne, and subse¬ 
 quently. We find (2 Sam. iii. 27-39) that David 
 became acquainted with the treacherous assassination 
 of Abner by Joab ; but instead of requiting this, as 
 he did the slaughter of Saul, and that of Ishbosheth, 
 he simply tells the guilty man, and all his own 
 
486 
 
 David] surroundings, to weep and lament. In this respect 
 he resembled Napoleon, who considered it good policy 
 to wink at the crimes of his successful generals. 
 The king is equally lenient to his own family; his 
 daughter Tamar is outraged by her brother Amnon, 
 but the only effect upon the father is to make him 
 very wroth (2 Sam. xiii. 21). When Absalom, 
 Tamar’s brother, revenges himself, the king expresses 
 grief, hut he soon is comforted again, and consents to 
 receive the murderer at court. 
 
 The favour which Absalom thus received induces 
 him to conspire against his father; and the latter, 
 whose system and policy must have been contempti¬ 
 ble, gives in without a stroke in his own defence, 
 flees from his capital, and crosses the Jordan. At 
 length,— and why he did not thus act earlier is incom¬ 
 prehensible,—the king makes a stand; his captains 
 overcome his son. When the tidings of Absalom’s 
 death reach David, he bemoans the loss, but is 
 again powerless to avenge it. Not long after this the 
 redoubtable son of Zeruiah again commits cowardly 
 assassination (2 Sam. xx. 10), and again the monarch 
 winks at the offence; thus giving us a scanty idea 
 of his power and justice. We next notice the occur¬ 
 rence of a famine, and the deliberate sacrifice of seven 
 men to the Almighty; men, too, who were of the 
 family to whom the king had previously acted so 
 nobly. The reason of the change of policy it is not 
 hard to find. There had been two formidable rebel¬ 
 lions against the power of David, and it was possible 
 that some descendant of the old dynasty might raise 
 another insurrection against the usurper. It was 
 perhaps difficult to murder in cold blood the most of 
 them in the name of the king. It was easy to do so, 
 
487 
 
 David] when famine pressed, in the name of the Lord. 
 This is by no means a solitary instance of religion 
 effecting the removal of an enemy, whom policy has 
 wished, yet feared, to destroy. A handsome funeral 
 over the bones of all the dreaded race completes the 
 transaction, and God interferes no more with the 
 land; or, in other words, the necessity for priestly 
 intervention has ceased. 
 
 Like a sensible ruler, David desires to know the 
 number of his subjects; hut Joab very much dislikes 
 the business ,* and, a pestilence arising, the monarch 
 is induced to believe that it has been sent in conse¬ 
 quence of his own acts. The monarch may have 
 thought that the difference between seven men being 
 hanged because their father did something over which 
 they had no control, and the slaughter of seventy 
 thousand because the king wished to act as a judi¬ 
 cious ruler, was very disproportionate; but as we are 
 not told his inward views upon this, we forbear to 
 descant upon them. 
 
 At length the conqueror of Goliath becomes aged, 
 powerless in love, and feeble for battle. Urged by his 
 advisers, however, he selects a successor, whilst yet 
 alive; and, having done so, gives to him his legacy of 
 blood. There is something awful in the idea of a 
 man going to face his Maker, so to speak, with lips 
 yet red from the command to murder those who have 
 been left behind. Can any one believe the mandate, 
 “ Thou shalt do no murder,” and yet face the august 
 Lawgiver with the words still hanging on his tongue, 
 “ His hoar head bring thou down to the grave with 
 blood” (1 Kings ii. 9) ? The last utterances of David 
 are frightful. 
 
 Having thus examined the political history of the 
 
438 
 
 David] man after God’s own heart, we proceed to inquire 
 into what we may designate his religious acts. 
 
 We find that he has sufficient regard for Baal 
 to call a son after him, viz., Beelidah, 
 
 (1 Chron. xiv. 7). He has such a respect for 
 idols that he keeps one in his house; and that 
 this must have been something very like what we 
 call a heathen god, such as Apollo, is probable, inas¬ 
 much as Michal uses it to personate her husband 
 (1 Sam. xix. 13). The w T ord is ‘image’ in the 
 authorised version, and “ teraphim ” in the Hebrew. 
 We find him having so little respect for the priest 
 Ahimelech (1 Sam. xxi. 1-6), that he tells him 
 a deliberate falsehood, and in a manner compels 
 him to give up for human use the food which was 
 prepared for the Almighty. He takes, moreover, 
 from the sacred treasury, without compunction, the 
 sword of Goliath, which has been presented by some¬ 
 body, probably even by David himself, to the Lord. 
 We find the king is constantly reported as enquiring 
 of the Lord respecting his proceedings; but we are 
 utterly ignorant of the meaning of the phrase, except 
 that in some way it was connected with an ephod, or 
 linen robe. Such inquiries w 7 ere common throughout 
 antiquity; the sale of “dream-books of fate” tells 
 us that they are so yet. There are many in every 
 country wdio believe that consulting ‘ chance ’ is equiva¬ 
 lent to inquiring of the Lord. Few could, in his own 
 way, have consulted the Lord more pertinaciously 
 than Haman, for he had * the lot ’ cast daily before 
 him, from the first month till the twelfth (Esther 
 iii. 7); yet he has received the name of “wicked” 
 (Esther vii. 6), whilst David, who never took half the 
 trouble, is called ‘ the beloved.’ 
 
439 
 
 David] We can tell nothing respecting David’s religious 
 acts during his residence in Philistia and in Tyre. 
 That he was in Tyre we presume, from the statement 
 that Hiram was ever a lover of David (1 Kings v. 1), 
 which he could not he, unless he had seen and known 
 him. On his return from the Phoenician territory, 
 we find him introducing, or reproducing, the worship 
 of the ark; but it is clear from the context that he 
 did not know much about the symbol, nor about the 
 deity whom it typified; for, when an accident occurred 
 to Uzzah, David is so displeased that he declines to 
 have anything more to do with the affair (2 Sam. vi. 
 6-10). We are next struck with the curious fact that 
 the ark, which was the harbinger of woe to those of 
 Gath in a previous year, should now be the herald of 
 good fortune to a Gittite, and can only explain the 
 matter by supposing that the hierarchs, who overdid 
 their part in the matter of Uzzah, were anxious to 
 reconcile the king to the accident, by showing that 
 the ark brought good luck even to a Philistine. 
 When thoroughly imbued with the belief that this 
 particular box brought good fortune to those who 
 retained it, David once more determined to secure it 
 for Jerusalem. 
 
 Now let us at this point pause to consider in 
 what respect this veneration for a wooden chest differs 
 from adoration of the Palladium of Troy, of the 
 Ancilia and Sibylline books of Ancient Rome, of 
 Diana of the Ephesians, of the sacred stone of Paphos, 
 or of the stone from Scotland which now reposes 
 under the roof of Westminster Abbey, beneath the 
 coronation chair. In what way does this estimate of 
 the ark, which is given us in the Book of Samuel, 
 differ from the belief in charms, talismans, winking 
 
440 
 
 David] virgins, blessed images, bambinoes, bones of saints, 
 toe-nails of martyrs, bits of wood, holy coats, rusty 
 nails, ancient pocket-handkerchiefs, and those thou¬ 
 sand-and-one relics which are respected amongst 
 Mahometans, Hindoos, and Koman Catholics ? We 
 are told at the present time that these are means to 
 excite piety, and are never themselves adored; but 
 when we find that the tarsus of a saint who lived in 
 filth some few hundred years ago will cure ague, and 
 that the blood of St. Januarius brings good luck to 
 Naples, we cannot fail to see that the holy object is 
 supposed to possess specific inherent virtue, and that 
 it is considered as an absolute portion of the deity. 
 Those who believe in the influence of a black bambino, 
 and a consecrated wafer, may well admire the venera¬ 
 tion of David for the ark; but those who prefer to 
 worship the Father in spirit and in truth can only see 
 in the monarch’s adoration of the ark, an idolatry as 
 gross as that prevailing in a heathen country. We 
 can see no distinction between bowing to the stock of 
 a tree, to a statue made therefrom, or to a box 
 fashioned from it. Nor can we allow that David 
 excelled other kings in goodness, because he adored 
 a wooden coffer more than a stone image. 
 
 After bringing the ark into his capital, with a 
 ceremonial which involved obscenity, he feasts the 
 people individually, and goes home. To his wife’s 
 remonstrance about his indecency, he retorts an 
 assurance that he will be yet more vile, or low 
 (2 Sam. vi. 22), and base in his own sight; and 
 thus that he will become honoured amongst his hand¬ 
 maidens, if not amongst his wives. Small as this 
 episode is, it shows us that David held the opinion 
 that the worship of God involved immodest cere- 
 
441 
 
 David] monies, which, though repugnant to the royal mind 
 of the man, became sanctified whensoever they were 
 performed for the honour of God. We are, more¬ 
 over, left to infer that in this matter the king judged 
 correctly, for we find Solomon thus addressed: “ If 
 thou wilt walk in my ways, to keep my statutes and 
 commandments, as thy father David did walk, then 
 will I lengthen thy days” (1 Kings iii. 14). 
 
 When once the ark has come into Jerusalem, 
 David shows his reverence for it by wishing to build 
 a temple to the honour of the Almighty, who is 
 recognised under the emblem of the mystic chest. 
 In this idea he is at first supported by Nathan; but 
 the prophet, on second thoughts, considers that for 
 such an unscrupulous and cruel warrior to build a 
 religious house would not be seemly. He has suffi¬ 
 cient good feeling to know that a foundation of 
 rapine, wrong, and slaughter is not proper for a 
 temple; so he therefore counsels the king to allow 
 his son to construct the sacred edifice. Solomon 
 has not engaged in bloody exterminations to amass 
 wealth; he may, therefore, with a good conscience, 
 use the money which his father has collected. 
 
 Contented with the decree of Nathan, the king 
 becomes quiescent, and little disturbs the even tenor 
 of his way until his crimes in respect of Bathsheba; 
 hut, on being reproved by the prophet, he suddenly 
 repents; to him the voice of Nathan was equivalent 
 to the voice of God. The king is ductile in the 
 hands of the seer; and whenever the latter alleges 
 an interference by the Almighty, the former believes 
 in the dispensation, and commits murder to avert 
 the divine wrath (1 Sam. xxi. 1-9). 
 
 A rigid examination of David’s history compels 
 
442 
 
 David] us to believe that the king knew nothing whatever 
 of the Mosaic law. His own will, and that of Nathan 
 or the priest, were the sole guides of his actions ; 
 but the subject is too large for discussion in the 
 present article. 
 
 The most ardent admirers of David as a king 
 being unable, even with large allowances, to support 
 by his actions his claim to preeminent piety, turn to 
 the Psalms that are attributed to his pen, in proof 
 of the position which they sustain. We proceed, 
 therefore, to analyse the sentiments expressed in all 
 those which bear his name, irrespective of the critical 
 accuracy of their superscription. 
 
 They consist of passionate appeals to the Almighty 
 for personal protection ; they often imply a doubt 
 whether He is as powerful as his worshipper has been 
 led to believe, and whether the gods of other people 
 do not treat them better than he is treated; then, 
 again, as if afraid that his unbelief should operate 
 against him, he reiterates his trust. There are few 
 Psalms in which all these conceptions do not appear. 
 In some the distrust is most prominent, e.g., Ps. 
 ii., vi., x., xii., xiii., xiv., xvii., xxii., xxxi., &c. In 
 others confidence seems to be uppermost, e.g., Ps. 
 ix., xxi., xxiii., xxviii. There are many in which 
 admiration is expressed of the works of the Creator 
 in general, and others in which the works of His 
 hands are said to he destined with pleasure; e. g., 
 “ I have pursued mine enemies, and overtaken them, 
 neither did I turn again until they were consumed; 
 I have wounded them that they were not able to rise. 
 Thou hast also given me the necks of mine enemies, 
 that I might destroy them that hate me. They 
 cried, but there was none to save them ; even unto 
 
443 
 
 David] the Lord, but He answered them not” (Ps. xviii. 
 88-41). In fine, throughout the whole body of his 
 writings, the ear is almost wearied with the expres¬ 
 sion of the belief that God looks especially after indi¬ 
 viduals—that every thing which they receive of good 
 comes from His hand — and that every misfortune 
 results from His displeasure; if David conquers, 
 robs, or murders on a large scale, he thanks his 
 God; if, on the contrary,- he is himself in trouble, 
 he deprecates His wrath. But the robust sense of 
 the man shows him that others are fortunate besides 
 himself, and he is therefore tempted to doubt whether 
 God looks after him alone. When he sees those 
 whom he calls wicked, — i. e., those who do not 
 worship in the same way as himself, — in great 
 prosperity, he is greatly perplexed, nay, he declares 
 himself envious of them (Ps. lxxiii. 3). 
 
 It is clear, then, that with all the beautiful 
 utterances of the Psalmist, his conception of the 
 Almighty was essentially selfish ; he could not con¬ 
 ceive of God as being loving unto all men, and 
 hating wrong, robbery, and uncleanness. Nor did 
 he have any other idea of rewards and punishments 
 than those which exist in this world. 
 
 Putting all the foregoing considerations together, 
 we cannot believe that David received the character 
 of “a man after God’s own heart” from his own 
 intrinsic worth, or from the sublimity of his theology, 
 which does not differ in any w T ay from that of devout 
 Greeks and Mahometans. We can believe that he 
 gained the panegyric from inaugurating a style of 
 monarchy in which the royal was subservient to the 
 priestly power. In ancient times, certain kings of 
 Assyria were eulogised by their hierarchs, just as 
 
444 
 
 David] David was for his devotion to one form of worship, 
 and his persecution of every other; whilst in modern 
 times we find that potentates are praised or blamed 
 for certain actions, according as the historian’s faith 
 and theirs are united or opposed. By some, queen 
 Mary of England is still regarded as a saint; by 
 others, as a demon. The same may be said of Henry 
 the Eighth. Doubtless king David was once estimated 
 in the same way ; hut as only the writings of the 
 eulogists have survived, he has the advantage over 
 the British monarchs. 
 
 Debir, (Josh. x. 8), signifies “ The seat of the oracle,” 
 “ the holiest place of all in the temple ; ” but it is 
 very doubtful whether this is the true meaning of 
 the name, which was borne alike by a king and a 
 town (Josh. xii. 18). 
 
 Deborah, (Gen. xxxv. 8, and Judges iv. 4), “ A bee.” 
 (Compare Greek and Latin Me'Xjcr<ra, Melissa ; German 
 Emma, i. e., Emme, Imme, = “ a bee.”) Fiirst’s 
 
 Lexicon, sub voce . 
 
 While investigating this word, and the idea 
 involved therein, I found a very interesting essay on 
 it, in Hislop’s Two Babylons, pp. 280-289. The 
 article is too long for transcription. It points out 
 that the custom of using lamps and candles in wor¬ 
 ship is very ancient, having prevailed in Babylon 
 (Baruch vi. 19), in Pagan Rome, in Egypt, and in 
 Koordistan; that the Tungusians use wax tapers in 
 honour of their gods, as do the Buddhists in Ceylon 
 and elsewhere ; that the lights are typical of the sun. 
 His conclusion is that the bee was a punning con¬ 
 trivance for “ the word.” The pun existed in Persia 
 and Babylonia, as well as in Palestine; and he gives 
 a wood-cut, which I copy, to show that the three bees. 
 
445 
 
 Deborah] which are the insignia of a deceased Pope, are of 
 very ancient date. The lion in the wood-cut has a 
 star above his head, no 
 
 which identifies him 
 with the sun; the 
 bee in his mouth 
 is held in such a 
 position as to typify 
 the holy triad. The 
 bee was also the 
 symbol of the great 
 revealer. It was one of the emblems of Diana. I 
 have a very strong suspicion that the wax candles 
 which are used in worship, in preference to lamps, 
 were originally intended to represent the phallic 
 emblem, under which the Almighty, in days gone by, 
 was reverenced ; and that wax was preferred to tallow 
 on account of its being the product of the bee, which 
 was a punning emblem of “the word,” and of Him 
 who made the world. Hislop has taken the wood-cut 
 from Wilkinson’s Egyptians , vol. iv., p. 189. 
 
 It is possible that Beelzebub, ‘ the lord of flies, 
 or buzzers,’ w 7 as really ‘ the lord of bees,’ i. e. ‘ of 
 w r ords,’ = ‘ Baal who prophesied.’ 
 
 Dedan, I'J'y (Gen. x. 7), of doubtful meaning. (Compare 
 Dodona. Gesenius.) 
 
 Dekar, “'E’J (1 Kings iv. 9), “He pierces through,” or “ the 
 piercer,” or “lance-bearer.” (Compare La pique; 
 also Digger, Degge, Dick, Dicker, Dickson, Dignan, 
 Dignum, Dickie, &c.) 
 
 Delaiah, (1 Chron. iii. 24), “Freed by Jehovah.” The 
 Phoenicians had the name AeX uiuo-TupTos, or “ freed 
 by Astarte.” 
 
 Delilah, nW? (Judges xvi. 4), “ Pining with desire ” 
 
446 
 
 Delilah] (Gesenius); “ unfortunate,” or “ miserable ” (Fiirst). 
 I doubt this meaning, and tbink it more consonant 
 with Philistine practice that the etymology was 
 Deliliah , from '?J, clali, “ a pail,” also “ the testicles,” 
 as in Numb. xxiv. 7; *?, the sign of the genitive case, 
 and Jah, or “ the bucket of Jah.” Compare “ He 
 shall pour the water out of his buckets,” and “ his 
 seed shall be in many waters ” (Numb. xxiv. 7). 
 
 Demon, to tioapoviov . It would be unprofitable to discuss 
 the question whence demonology has come down to 
 us. We know that a conception of demons was pos¬ 
 sessed by the Etruscans, who were old as a nation 
 when Rome was an infant; and we are equally certain 
 that the Chaldseans were familiar with it. From the 
 latter it spread to the Hebrews ; and, being improved 
 upon by them, its development was conspicuous at 
 the period of the Christian era. As a physician, 
 tolerably conversant with the phenomena of insanity, 
 I do not hesitate to aver that the demoniacal posses¬ 
 sion, which used to be considered as a manifestation 
 of some mysterious being having entered the body of 
 the victim, was nothing more than ‘ mania.’ Epilepsy 
 was known under the name of ‘ morbus sacer * by the 
 Romans of old. The Asiatics of to.day believe that 
 the lunatic is inspired; and the late Dr. Wolff, in his 
 Journey to Bokhara , often attributes his escape from 
 death to the reverence paid to him as the habitation 
 of Allah; his strange manner having led to the general 
 idea amongst the Mussulmen that he was insane. 
 
 Some there are who experience — long before 
 society is able to recognise the existence of insanity 
 in them — visions of various kinds, and hear messages 
 whispered in their ear, or thundered upon their 
 hearts. If they happen to be devout, they consult the 
 
447 
 
 Demon] priest; and be, if he knows nothing of physiology, 
 naturally considers that the effects result from the 
 direct presence of his God. Since it is so in many 
 Christian countries at the present day, we can 
 readily conceive that it was the same in days gone 
 by, when few, even of medical men, had any know¬ 
 ledge of diseases of the brain. When the mono¬ 
 mania is comparatively harmless, as was the case with 
 Swedenborg, the daemon .is thought by observers to be 
 a good one; when it is murderous, like the evil spirit 
 of Saul, it is considered as a bad one. The one is 
 regarded as an emanation from Jehovah, the other 
 as proceeding from Satan. When once this theory,— 
 that the symptoms of insanity are due to spiritual 
 agency,— possessed the mind, the disease was de 
 scribed by reference to the nature of the supposed 
 devil; and where we should talk of mania, melan¬ 
 cholia, dementia, the ancients talked of 4 tearing,’ 
 ‘ deaf and dumb,’ or simply ‘ evil ’ spirits. 66 
 
 66 I take this opportunity to record the important change which has taken place 
 of late years in the ideas respecting insanity. In days gone by, this terrible 
 infliction was considered as the result of demoniac possession. When this belief was 
 abandoned, the complaint was regarded as a disease of the mind. Acting on this 
 idea, patients suffering from insanity were treated as naughty and wayward children, 
 and hence were subjected to castigations and other punishments. If a man’s mind 
 allowed him to he strange, lie was argued with quietly at first, hut if he persisted in 
 his fancies, he was subjected to tortures of gradually increasing severity. Now, on 
 the contrary, insanity is regarded as one of the symptoms of a diseased brain — one 
 which tells of some physical change within the head as completely as “ cough ” tells 
 us of disease within the chest. The condition of the mind depends upon the 
 integrity or otherwise of the brain. When this organ is affected, it may he so 
 with such suddenness that the transition from health to mania is almost instan¬ 
 taneous, but, as a general rule, the approach of the disease is slow. As the 
 consumptive commonly have some indication of the approach of phthisis long ere 
 any change can he detected in the lungs, so the lunatic has some intimation of the 
 existence of disordered brain for weeks, months, or years before any physical 
 alteration of that organ can he observed. Whilst in this latent condition, the mind, 
 wielded by the healthy portion of the brain, can resist a disordered fancy; but this 
 resistance has no more tendency to cure the complaint, than a determination not to 
 cough can stop “ consumption.” The experienced physician can recognise the early 
 
448 
 
 Demon] The time has scarcely yet gone by in England 
 when the old belief existed; for I can remember 
 reading a pamphlet given to me by a gentleman, who 
 has now a seat in Parliament, in which a case of 
 demoniacal possession was detailed. The young 
 woman was clearly insane; yet her parents, and the 
 neighbouring clergy, could not be convinced of this, 
 and tried all sorts of ‘ exorcising ’ projects ; nor could 
 I repress my surprise at finding that my informant 
 credited the priests in preference to the physicians. 
 
 The belief that lunacy was a proof of the existence 
 of some evil demon has tinctured the phraseology of 
 a large portion of the Sacred Writings; and has led 
 us to the conclusion that it is far safer to trust to the 
 spirit of those records than to their ipsissima verba . 
 
 When used so largely in the sacred writings, we 
 can readily understand that words descriptive of 
 demoniac possession would appear in the compositions 
 of the earlier Christians. Amongst them no doubt 
 whatever was entertained that the devil had power to 
 make himself apparent to mankind, and to do them 
 mischief in one manner or another. Thus we learn, 
 from the legendary lives of certain saints, that Satan 
 appeared to them under various disguises — as a goat, 
 a ram, a crocodile, a boar, and sometimes even as a 
 
 indications of approaching insanity as readily as he can those of phthisis, or of water 
 in the head ; but those who are not accustomed to observe closely, or have no oppor¬ 
 tunity of doing so, cannot see any disease until it is fully developed. Hence we 
 find, that those who know most about lunacy are derided, under the name of 
 “ mad doctors,” by those who are wholly ignorant of it. Now it does not follow that 
 all those who are threatened with consumption and have a cough die of “ decline ; ” 
 many indeed recover completely their usual health; in like manner, every one who 
 shows indications of lunacy does not become insane, he may he perfectly restored. 
 But as the physician would not attempt to cure phthisis by ordering his patient not 
 to cough, so would he not try to cure monomania by logically demonstrating its 
 absurdity. In both, and indeed in all cases, he attempts to cure disease by the 
 closest attention to all the requirements of the bodily health. 
 
449 
 
 Demon] lovely woman. So far, indeed, were these ideas 
 carried, that many a learned council has discussed the 
 question, whether it was possible for devils in any 
 form to engender with human beings. During the 
 dark ages of superstition, advantage was taken of the 
 abject terrors of the mind ; and, in the obscurity of 
 night, a designing man or woman would steal into the 
 bed of youth, and accouple with him or her. These 
 supposed demons received the name of “ succubi ” 
 and “ incubi.” As we may well imagine, they always 
 disappeared before daybreak. It was this habit which 
 was supposed, more than any other, to stamp them as 
 supernatural and demoniacal. 
 
 Yet why a ghost or a demon, whether good or bad, 
 should always think it incumbent upon him or her 
 to disappear ere the day dawned, we cannot divine, 
 unless it is that all are the creatures of distorted 
 imagination, or the result of some jugglery which the 
 light discloses (John iii. 19-21, 1 Thess. v. 5). It is 
 not without a doubt about the truth of the whole 
 narrative, that we read of the “ man ” who wrestled 
 with Jacob being obliged to depart when the day 
 broke (Gen. xxxii. 24-26) ; for verse 28 tells us 
 that the “man” was “God;” and we cannot see 
 any obligation upon the Creator to shun the daylight. 
 He who lives in light, and is Himself the light of 
 the world, cannot fear the approach of day. If then 
 Jacob wrestled with one who dreaded the brightness 
 of the sun, it is questionable whether he was what 
 he is represented to be. 
 
 Deuel, (Numb, i, 14), “Invocation of God” (Gesen.) 
 “ El is knowing (Fiirst). 67 
 
 67 It is probable that there is a close connection between this word and Deva, 
 or Di, the Hindoo for holy, Latin divus (compare Dives). Riches were often taken 
 as a mark of God’s favour, and their owner accounted holy. 
 
 F F 
 
450 
 
 Devil. — If we pursue this word through its more ancient 
 forms, we find it in the Anglo-Saxon as deofl, deofol, 
 dioful, diobul; in Old Saxon, as diubhal. Low 
 German, duwel. Danish, diavel. Dutch, duivel. 
 Swedish, djevul. Icelandic, diofidl or diffill. High 
 German, diufall or tiufall, or teufel. Gothic, diabula , 
 diabulus. Latin, diabolus. Italian, diavolo. French, 
 diable. Spanish, diablo. Greek, diu(3o\o$, diabolos — 
 which is translated 4 slanderer, or calumniator.’ 
 
 Now, although all these names appear to be 
 derived from the Greek, there is reason to believe 
 that the idea of the devil did not originate at the 
 Christian era. If it he so, the Greek word may itself 
 have come from some older language. If we seek 
 for an etymon in the Hebrew, we find daval, 
 which means ‘to press together,’ ‘to embrace amor¬ 
 ously ; ’ and ^5-> devel, signifies ‘ coition; ’ of the 
 first, Gesenius remarks, “In usu fuisse videtur hoec 
 radix etiam de glohulis stercoris — unde stercus a 
 very appropriate name for one anathematised by a 
 zealous hierarch. But amongst the Hebrews, the 
 devil went by the name of Satan, “the adver¬ 
 sary;” we can scarcely imagine, therefore, that either 
 of these etymons is satisfactory. Consequently we 
 conclude that the Greek derivation of the current 
 word is correct. From the various ideas respect¬ 
 ing him, which have been expressed by different or 
 opposing theologians, from the earliest times to the 
 present, I gather that the Devil is considered to he 
 the moving spirit of the heterodox; all those who 
 believe the priest then speaking and acting, are the 
 children of God; all who do not, are children of the 
 Devil: e.g., those who believed Calvin and Luther 
 thought that the papists were children of Satan, while 
 
451 
 
 Devil] the last returned the compliment; both could not be 
 right. In the Bible, Satan , when spoken of, is called 
 the adversary ; and all the names given to him 
 demonstrate that he was considered to be the moving 
 spirit of those who obstinately refused to give cre¬ 
 dence to priests and prophets. Of course, when a 
 people believe that there is no salvation for those of 
 an opposite creed to themselves, such unbelievers 
 will naturally be called children of the lost one. But 
 a man is not always what he is called. 
 
 As to the very existence of such a being, and 
 whether he has horns and hoofs, &c., &c., 68 there is 
 room for much doubt. If the Almighty be omni¬ 
 present, and omnipotent, it is difficult to comprehend 
 how any separate being, opposed to omnipotence, can 
 find a part to exist in ; much more difficult is it to 
 believe that the Almighty and the Devil can chat 
 familiarly together, as they are represented to do in 
 the book of Job, chapters i. and ii., and 1 Kings xxii. 
 21 - 22 . 
 
 How much the ipsissima verba of Scripture are to 
 
 68 There is a pleasant story told of a practical joke played upon the learned 
 Cuvier, which is illustrative at once of the absurdity of the medieval conceptions of 
 the Devil, and the contempt with which a philosopher regards them. The account 
 runs thus : Some earnest Koman Catholic, anxious to withdraw the great naturalist 
 from evil pursuits, viz., the study of all the works of God, which the Church 
 considers as certain to lead to everlasting perdition, attempted to frighten the 
 bold enquirer by personating the Devil, and in his guise summoning the infidel 
 to his court, very naturally concluding that the apparition would drive the victim 
 to such sacerdotal relief as “ masses,” &c., could afford. A dim twilight enabled 
 Cuvier to see something in his room, and the philosopher asked “Who are you?” 
 The reply was “I am the Devil,” &c.; but the naturalist soon noticed the horns 
 worn on the head, and the hoofs on the feet of the joker, and all the remark 
 he made was “Homs and hoofs — horns and hoofs — must be graminivorous. 
 I dont care for you,” and turned round to go to sleep again. Si non e vero 
 e ben trovato. The story should serve as a hint to those priests who delight 
 to paint the Devil, that it would be safer to use St. Paul’s simile, and depict 
 him as a lion, than to figure him as a grass-eating creature, to whom flesh meat 
 is not a luxury. 
 
452 
 
 Devil] be relied on when taken literally, we may see by a 
 comparison of 2 Sam. xxiv. 1, with 1 Chron. xxi. 1, 
 where the Lord and Satan are spoken of as if they 
 were the same individuals. 
 
 When we attempt to trace the belief in the 
 Devil, we find it apparently coexistent with man. 
 Nothing can be more natural than for the savage 
 to consider that there is a good power, which gives 
 him health, strength, plenty, warmth and luxury — 
 and that there is a bad one, who sends darkness, 
 storms, famine, cold and desolation. Such ideas 
 are found wherever our missionaries have learned to 
 understand the language of aborigines. As a natural 
 result, the leaders of thought amongst them teach 
 their votaries to deprecate the wrath of the bad, 
 and to propitiate the good deity. This has been 
 the basis of all systems of religion. In the Hebrew 
 we find Elohim and Satan, Jehovah and Azazel as 
 mutually opposed: in the Persian, Oromasdes and 
 Ahriman ; in the Egyptian, Osiris and Typhon are 
 the antagonists. We have the same conception 
 amongst ourselves : we believe that there are two 
 opposing powers, who contend against each other, in 
 air, on land, and within us all. We people the 
 unknown immensity with innumerable beings, who 
 sit or act on adverse sides, like whigs and tories, 
 radicals and conservatives, and style the Devil the 
 leader of the opposition. Sometimes we believe 
 that he positively becomes the prime minister — the 
 head of the strongest party. It is doubtful, how¬ 
 ever, whether we understand the subject any better 
 than did the ancient Etruscans, from whom most 
 of the medieval conceptions of Satan are drawn. 
 The mind of the thoughtful philosopher is some- 
 
453 
 
 Devil] times agitated by the consideration that it is down¬ 
 right blasphemy to entertain the idea of the existence 
 in the universe of any other power than that of the 
 Almighty—for it is a contradiction in terms to say 
 that He is Omnipotent and Omnipresent, and yet 
 that He is habitually thwarted, and His acts con¬ 
 trolled, by some adverse power. Yet as the observer 
 sees in the Devil one of the most useful, means 
 whereby human beings can be terrified into doing 
 good, and avoiding wrong, robbery, and rapine, and 
 the most potent weapon in the hieratic armoury 
 whereby a sinner may be dragooned into heaven, 69 he 
 is unwilling to urge his philosophic doubts too far. 
 Diblath, (Ezekiel vi. 14). We have already seen a 
 
 variant of this word in Beth-Diblathaim. The 
 original idea conveyed by the root Sm, clbl, is “to 
 “press or squeeze,” “anything pressed or heaped 
 up; ” hence one form ^ J?, debel, came to signify 
 sexual congress—and debelah, “a cake of figs.” 
 These, being round then, as they are now, gave an 
 extension of meaning, and diblali, became “ a 
 
 circle.” When a word had so many and such signi- 
 
 69 The expressions in the text wiil not be considered too strong by any one who 
 is acquainted with the plan adopted by the Papal hierarchy to influence the minds 
 of their votaries. Though net very conversant with the devotional works used by 
 the laity amongst the Roman Catholics, I am tolerably familiar with the pictorial 
 designs by means of which the weak minded are terrified. In our own country, I 
 have seen gaudily painted pictures exposed for sale, in poor districts where Roman 
 Catholics abound, wherein are represented the death-beds of saints and sinners; 
 by the former stand a priest and an attendance of angelic beings; by the latter 
 stand a host of demons, who are depicted with grotesque ferocity. When once the 
 worshipper’s mind becomes imbued with the terror of these objects, he is driven by 
 his fear to seek for priestly aid. There is scarcely a medieval history in which we 
 do not see some lawless king or turbulent noble driven in his old age into the arms 
 of the church, by the terrors of the devil which he was saturated with in youth. 
 We have indeed heard many divines of our own church express the opinion that 
 men were driven to do good, and kept from grievous sin, to a far greater extent by 
 the fear of the Devil than by the love of God ; and there is strong reason to believe 
 that their idea is correct. 
 
454 
 
 Diblath] fications, there is reason to believe that it was 
 intentionally adopted by the ancient priesthood, for 
 a cake of figs might be typical of the snn and moon, 
 of both, or of amorous embracements. 
 
 Diblaim, (Hosea i. 8), dual of and signifies 
 
 “ double copulation.” This name was possessed by 
 the mother of Gomer (see Hosea i. 8). In verse 2 
 the prophet is told to take a wife of whoredoms, 
 npx, eslieth-zenunim, and children of whore¬ 
 doms, that he may be a sign to the children of 
 Judah. 
 
 Whilst sitting as a listener in church, I have 
 been repeatedly struck with the profound credence 
 which is given to ancient men, when they assert 
 that the Lord speaks by them ; although to modern 
 men is accorded a totally different reception. We 
 are told, from many a pious preacher of to-day, that 
 the sins of Britain have called down from heaven the 
 murrain upon our cattle and the cholera on ourselves; 
 or, in Scriptural language, that our cities are defiled 
 with sins, and our villages steeped in wickedness, just 
 as was Judaea and Jerusalem in Hosea’s time. But 
 could we tolerate that any one of our shining lights 
 of the pulpit should adopt—as the means of con¬ 
 vincing us of our great iniquities—the plan of taking 
 a harlot to his bosom, and holding a feast at the 
 baptism of his bastards ? If he announced that a 
 message from God had told him to do so, none would 
 allow the plea, and it would be a question whether 
 the gaol or the lunatic asylum was the most fitting 
 place for him. Had we lived in the time of Hosea, 
 with our present lights, we should probably have 
 thought the same; and, this being so, I think we are 
 bound to believe that many an ancient “ Thus saith 
 
455 
 
 Diblaim] the Lord ” ought to be read as, “ Thus saith a 
 man who is a lunatic,” or “who is a criminal, hiding 
 his innate immorality under the guise of a canting 
 hypocrisy.” There is more of blasphemy in believing 
 such an one than in denouncing him. 
 
 Dibon, P s '? (Numbers xxi. 80), “ River place” (Fiirst). 
 
 Dibri, or Divri, (Leviticus xxiv. 11), “ Jali arranges ; ” 
 from *P;f, dabar, and n !, yah, the n being elided. 
 
 Diklah, f&i?? (Gen. x. 27), “ The place of palms.” 
 
 Dilean, (Joshua xv. 88), said to he “ a cucumber 
 
 field ” ! it really signifies “ On is thick,” or “ On 
 thrusting out the tongue;” from dalah, and |K, 
 on, “to be thick,” or ‘to thrust out the tongue.” 
 There are in Payne Knight’s work copies of two coins, 
 in which a male God is represented with the tongue 
 thrust out. There is therefore no doubt, as coins 
 were at first embodiments of religious faith, that the 
 reading given above is consonant with classical know¬ 
 ledge. Of the significance of the emblem it is 
 unnecessary to speak. 
 
 The name was given to a town in Judah. 
 
 Dimashk, Assyrian, Name of Damascus, whose king, temp. 
 Sennacherib, was Mariah. (Compare with Mor-iah 
 and Mar-ia.) 
 
 Dimi-shemsi, Assyrian, “ The Sleep of the Sun,” “the 
 west;” also Shalam, Shemsi, “Peace of the Sun.” 
 
 Dimnah, (Joshua xxi. 35), “ A dunghill ” (Gesenius), 
 “river, place” (Fiirst). 
 
 Dimon, (Isaiah xv. 9), “ River, place ” (Fiirst). Pro¬ 
 bably “ the semen, or viscous discharge, of On.” 
 
 Dimonah, (Joshua xv. 22). It is probable that both 
 this word and the preceding are the progenitors of 
 the name “ Demons ,” the first being equivalent to 
 “ incubus,” the second to “ succubus,” 
 
456 
 
 Dinah, nj'? (Gen. xxx. 21), “Judged ” (Gesen.), “avenged” 
 Fiirst). A name which leads us to infer that it 
 was given by the historian after her adventure with 
 Shechem. 
 
 Dinhabah, nanjn (Gen. xxxvi. 32), “ A lurking place for 
 robbers” (Gesenius), “a little place ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Dionysus, was an ancient God, often identified with Bacchus. 
 He was stated to be the same as Aides, or Aidoneus, 
 Helios, Jao, Pluto, and Osiris. In the eighth volume 
 of Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature, 
 p. 296, Mr. Talbot has endeavoured, and I think 
 successfully, to prove that the name is of Assyrian 
 origin, the formula for it being Dian-nisi, or Dayan - 
 nisi, words signifying “ Judge of men,” the Dian, or 
 Dayan, being equivalent to the Hebrew Dan; and he 
 quotes a line from the Michaux inscription, running 
 thus, “ Shemesh dayan rabu shamie u irtsit,” i. e., 
 “ The Sun, the Great Judge of heaven and earth.” 
 He goes on to say that one of the most curious 
 traditions respecting Dionysus was, that he some¬ 
 times assumed the shape of a bull, with a human 
 countenance, and was then called Hebon. By a very 
 ingenious argument, Mr. Talbot also shows that the 
 Greek Rhadamanthus, Judge of Hades, was a God of 
 Egyptian origin, his name in that language sounding 
 as Rad-amenti, and signifying “ Judge of the dark¬ 
 ness.” He also adduces an Assyrian inscription, 
 where the Sun has the following title : “ The Sun, 
 judge of men ( dian-nisi ), whose flail, Zalul (flagel¬ 
 lum), is good. This flail, or whip, was one of the 
 emblems of Osiris. Nebuchadnezzar built a temple 
 to Dionysus in Babylon. He was often called 2a/3o/.” 
 
 Dishon, fw? (Gen. xxxvi. 31), !£’?, daslien, signifies “to 
 be fat, juicy, full of marrow, strong, large, power- 
 
457 
 
 Dishon] ful.” 1^'?, dishon, signifies “ a mountain goat,” 
 or “ antelope.” Now the antelope, like the ram, was 
 a sacred, or mystical animal; he was carried in the 
 arms of the priests in Assyria and Babylonia. See 
 Plate II., Figs. 1, 4. For a long period I could find 
 no clue by which to explain the meaning of the 
 symbol. The word in question appears to afford it; 
 for by a sort of pun, apparently very common amongst 
 the ancient hierarchy, the same word may express 
 the animal, or the fact that a certain organ is fat, 
 thick, or strong. Double entendres are not exclusively 
 of modern origin, and they have descended from the 
 priests to the people. 
 
 Dizahab, (Deut. i. 1.) “A place abounding with 
 
 gold” (G-esenius). 
 
 Dreams. The subject of dreams is one which is full of 
 interest to the philosophic student. The educated 
 man and the mental philosopher recognise in them 
 nothing more than the workings of a tired or dis¬ 
 eased brain, which reproduces grotesquely the ideas 
 formed during waking hours under the domina¬ 
 tion of the will. All alike refuse to see in dreams 
 any direct communication with the divine mind, and 
 reject the idea that God speaks thus to man in modern 
 times. Yet though this is the general feeling, I 
 have known a pious Christian gentleman so influenced 
 by his sleeping thoughts, as to mould his waking 
 opinions upon them, and to refuse, under the influ¬ 
 ence of dreams, to do what his judgment, and that of 
 others under whose advice he had begun to act, 
 dictated as a proper course. But the philosophic 
 Englishman is very different from the child-like 
 Oriental, whose uncultivated mind swallows every¬ 
 thing which is presented to it in the way of religion, 
 
458 
 
 Dreams] and refuses to reject, or even to modify, the belief 
 which is first instilled into his soul. To him a dream 
 is something very mysterious; and its explanation 
 must be sought from those who profess to be learned 
 in such matters, viz., priests, prophets, diviners, 
 soothsayers, and the like. They, not knowing, nor 
 perhaps caring to learn, much respecting psychology, 
 readily attribute the visions of the night to celestial 
 agency, and declare that dreams are as completely 
 the means of communication with the God whom 
 they worship, as the utterances of a madman were 
 considered in Asia, those of a shrewd pythoness in 
 Ancient Greece, or those of an insane dervish in 
 Modern Turkey. 
 
 We see abundant evidence of the importance 
 attached to dreams in the Old Testament. In 
 Gen. xx. 8, Elohim speaks to Abimelech when the 
 latter is asleep. Jacob and Laban have each commu¬ 
 nications from God in a dream, Gen. xxxi. 11-24. 
 The dreams of Joseph, of Pharaoh, his butler and 
 his baker are well known. Moses was so strongly 
 imbued with the celestial origin of dreams, that we find 
 him reporting the following as the words of Jehovah— 
 “ If there be a prophet amongst you, I the Lord 
 will make myself known unto him in a vision, and 
 will speak unto him in a dream” (Num. xii. 6). A 
 similar idea is expressed by Job (xxxiii. 14-16), “For 
 God speaketh once, yea twice, yet man perceiveth it 
 not. In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep 
 sleep falleth upon men, in slumberings upon the bed, 
 then He openeth the ears of men, and sealeth their 
 instruction.” We have some indications of the use 
 made of dreams in Jeremiah xxiii. 25, “ I have 
 heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies in 
 
459 
 
 Dreams] my name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed. 
 How long shall this be in the hearts of the prophets 
 
 .which think to cause my people to forget my 
 
 name by their dreams which they tell every man to 
 his neighbour ? ... . The prophet that hath a dream, 
 let him tell a dream,” &c. Every reader of Daniel is 
 familiar with the respect in which dreams were held in 
 Babylon ; whilst we find, from Matthew’s gospel, that 
 dreams continued to be held in estimation up to the 
 time of our Saviour, both amongst the Jews and 
 Romans (Matt, xxvii. 19). Though Solomon had a 
 memorable dream (1 Kings iii. 5), we nevertheless 
 find him estimating them as ordinary occurrences 
 (Ecclesiastes v. 8). 
 
 Throughout the whole Bible we find no plan 
 described by which the real value of a dream could be 
 discovered, but we do find that dreamers are repeatedly 
 associated with diviners, enchanters and sorcerers. 
 
 For those men who pretended to be diviners, no 
 machinery could be found more valuable than dreams 
 to effect their purpose. By this means, the shrewd 
 man was able to gain time for reflection. Throughout 
 the quiet hours of night he could ponder over the 
 questions which had been submitted to his notice 
 during the day. If the matter admitted of an 
 easy solution, and one the truth of which circum¬ 
 stances were not likely to oppose, he, the diviner, 
 could readily feign to have had a dream, in which the 
 answer to the proposed question had been revealed; 
 but if the matter was one of which the most astute of 
 fortune-tellers must have felt considerable doubt,— 
 for example, whether a Saul, who had never shown 
 himself a particularly skilful general, after the defec¬ 
 tion of his lieutenant David to the opposite side, 
 
460 
 
 Dreams] would be able to conquer tbe Philistines in the 
 coming strife,—the diviner very judiciously decided 
 not to dream at all; so that even a king might 
 complain that he could get no answer from priest, 
 prophet, or dreamer (1 Sam. xxviii. 15), i. e., from 
 those who claimed to be inspired by day, or those 
 who averred that their inspiration came on by night. 
 
 In considering the subject of dreams from a 
 religious point of view, we must look upon them 
 as being of either divine or human origin ; if we 
 regard them as the first, we are driven by logic to 
 allow that God has spoken equally to all nations, to 
 kings, priests, and diviners who are “ heathen,” as to 
 those who are orthodox, and by thus treating all alike 
 He has demonstrated His friendliness alike to all 
 mankind, which He has “ made of one blood” (Acts 
 xvii. 26). If, on the contrary, we adjudge that dreams 
 are of human origin, it is impossible to accord to the 
 dreamers the authority which they claim, and when 
 we read “ Thus saith the Lord,” we must understand 
 the words to mean “ Thus saith the visionary.” If, 
 desiring to steer clear from both these horns of the 
 dilemma, we assert that some dreams are real com¬ 
 munications from the Almighty, and others not, we 
 only get into another difficulty, namely, the means by 
 which the two are to be discriminated, nay, even how 
 we can ascertain with certainty that the diviner has 
 dreamed at all. If we allow the claim of Moses, and 
 believe that he received direct communications from 
 the Almighty by day, whenever any new difficulty 
 required to be adjusted; how can we refuse the claim 
 of the Arab lawgiver Mahomet, who claimed to have 
 intercourse with Allah during the darkness of night, 
 in visions on his bed ? Some there are who would 
 
461 
 
 Dreams] make the fulfilment of the prophecy the test of the 
 divinity of his message ; but from this even we are 
 precluded by the dictum in Deut. xiii. 1-5 : “ If there 
 arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, 
 and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, and the sign or 
 the wonder whereof he spake of thee come to pass,” 
 &c., he shall not be believed if he be not thoroughly 
 orthodox. If we take orthodoxy as the standard by 
 which to judge of the sac.red nature of the message 
 divulged in a dream, it is clear that what was a divine 
 dream in Samaria would be considered a human one 
 in Jerusalem, and vice versa. This again raises the 
 question as to who has the power of deciding as to 
 what orthodoxy is. By no possible definition of the 
 word can we consider that our Saviour was orthodox 
 during His lifetime ; it is impossible that any one who 
 promulgates a new religion or ritual can he otherwise 
 than “heterodox” in the estimation of the believers 
 in the old. “ The great reformers,” as they are called, 
 were heterodox in their day. Yet although we 
 believe in their worth and commend their doctrine, 
 which being established amongst ourselves is held to 
 be orthodox, there are nevertheless others in Christian 
 Europe who regard them as dreadful heretics, incar¬ 
 nations indeed of the Devil. 
 
 If, in default of all logical methods of distin 
 guishing between dreams of divine and human 
 origin, we content ourselves with the belief that all 
 those which are admitted into our sacred writings are 
 true, we must allow those who profess a religion 
 other than our own to use the same plea. If we 
 once permit ourselves to argue that 4 such a doctrine 
 is true because I believe it,’ we must in fairness allow 
 the same argument to be used by another; and thus 
 
462 
 
 Dreams] we are compelled, by our own logic, to admit that 
 the dreams of Grecian and Roman soothsayers are of 
 equal value with those of the Jewish diviners; or, by 
 refusing to admit this, we must put everything, as 
 did the Mahometans and the Christians, to the 
 arbitrament of the sword, and consider that those 
 visionaries whom the Almighty loves the most must 
 win the day; a conclusion which asserts that brute 
 force is better than intelligence, and that the religion 
 of Mahomet is superior to that of the Saviour. 
 
 Now when a sensible priesthood, trammelled by 
 these difficulties, finds itself unable to contend with 
 the intelligence of the present day, it is a grave 
 matter for their consideration whether it is not 
 advisable to abandon all the weak points of doctrine, 
 and strengthen the main bulwarks of Christianity, 
 “ The reformers ” did not scruple in their days to 
 expunge from the canon of scripture fifteen books, out 
 of eighty-one; and Luther even went so far as to 
 exclude the epistle of Saint James, because it opposed 
 his doctrine of faith without works, calling it a truly 
 straw epistle, since it does not contain any evangeli¬ 
 calism. I consider that we of to-day have power 
 equal to that of the reformers, if we choose to exercise 
 it. How any one can reject the story of Susannah 
 and the three elders as apocryphal, and yet retain the 
 words of Hosea as inspired, is to many moderns 
 incomprehensible. 
 
 We have introduced dreams in this place, simply 
 because it was in conformity with them that some 
 cognomens were given; see, for example the account 
 given in Luke i. 11, 22, 63, where that which we 
 must presume to have been a dream is described as a 
 vision; and again, consult Matthew i. 20, 21, where it 
 
463 
 
 Dreams] appears that the name of Jesns was prescribed to 
 Joseph in a dream; see also ch. ii. 18. 
 
 Dod, nil is a word which signifies “ sexual love,” = epoog ; 
 a fit offering to make to the lovely alma-mater . 
 Hence Dod, Dodd, Dodson, Dodgson, Doddridge, 
 Ashdod, Eldad, Medad, &c. 
 
 Dodai, (1 Chro. xxvii. 4), signifies “loving, amatory;” 
 also a certain root, mandragora, 70 which was supposed 
 to have influence in sexual matters (Gesenius). Now 
 this word is precisely the same as David , except 
 
 that in this the yod ' comes before, instead of after, 
 the final daleth 1, or d. A change so simple could 
 readily he made by a scribe, and thus a name, origi¬ 
 nally 4 the mandrake ,’ would become 1 beloved .’ 
 
 Dodo, hM (2 Sam. xxiii. 9), and Dido, are both variants of 
 the word In passing, I must notice that Dudai, 
 
 or '*1^, signifies “ a basket,” as well as “ mandra¬ 
 gora ; ” and it is possible that from such a pun arose 
 the practice of the priests carrying a basket, when 
 worshipping at the shrine of Ishtar. 
 
 Doeg, ^ (1 Sam. xxi. 7)- This cognomen signifies simply 
 “ The fish; ” which was a sacred symbol, in con¬ 
 sequence of the extraordinary quantity of milt or roe 
 which each one contains at breeding times, thus being 
 an emblem of fecundity. 
 
 Dor, th (Jos. xvii. 11), “An age,” “generation,” “habi¬ 
 tation;” also “to go in a circle,”—the sun? Assy¬ 
 rian, Dar, “ a habitation.” Compare En -dor, Dorcas, 
 Dorah, Doran, Doring, Dorrington, &c. 
 
 Dothan, (Gen. xxxvii. 17), “The two wells, or double 
 fountain” ? 
 
 Dove (see page 110) ; a possible etymon for our English 
 
 70 For an account of this plant see Kitto’s Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, 
 
 s. v. Dtjdaim, and Song of Songs , by Dr. Ginsdukg, p. 183, Note. 
 
464 
 
 Dove] word is in, duv, which signifies “to pine away,” 
 “ to languish.” 
 
 Dud, *m, signifies “to love erotically,” “a beloved one,” 
 “a friend.” Pointed as if reads “David,” and 
 signifies ‘beloved/ in an amatory way; every mean¬ 
 ing, indeed, given to *m, in the lexicons, seems to 
 have reference to love matters. (Compare Dudley, 
 Dz/dding, Dztddingstone, Diulson.) 
 
 Dudai, “love apples.” Dudaim, mandrakes, used 
 
 for aphrodisiac purposes. 
 
 Dumah, (Gen. xxv. 14), “ The silent one.” It may 
 
 be from D 1!, ‘ likeness.’ 
 
 Dura, (Daniel iii. 1). Dur, in, signifies “ to go in 
 a circle,” “ a circle,” “ a ball,” “ a burning pile, or 
 round heap of wood.” In the Cuneiform, it is read 
 as Duru. 
 
 E. There is no Hebrew letter which corresponds to the 
 second vowel of our own language, Those Jewish 
 and other names, which in our Bibles are found to 
 commence with E, begin in the Hebrew with Aleph, 
 or Ayin, which are marked with certain vowel-points 
 that give them the sound of the French e, equivalent 
 to our ai, of which Elohim is an example, wherein 
 the E has the sound of a in “ ale; ” it has also the 
 ordinary sound of our own e as in “ ell.” The e is 
 also introduced into the English form of Jewish 
 names, when the initial letter in the Hebrew has 
 sh’va, (:) under it, and is immediately followed by 
 another consonant, in which case e is pronounced as 
 faintly as possibly. 
 
 Eagle, nesher. This bird has always been a sacred 
 emblem, and an attendant upon the Great God, as 
 being the largest known bird, and one which takes the 
 
465 
 
 Eagle] highest flight into the air. Its sight too is as keen 
 as its flight is powerful, and it thus becomes a symbol 
 of the all-seeing Creator. (Compare Nisroch, Mac- 
 neish, Neish, Nash, &c.) 
 
 There is, in Deuteronomy xxxii. 11, a very 
 curious mistake respecting the habits of this bird, 
 and one for which it is difficult to find any explana¬ 
 tion, viz. “ As an eagle stirreth up her nest, 
 fluttereth over her young, taketh them, beareth them 
 on her wings, so the Lord did lead him,” &c. 
 Now the closest observers of the eagle tell us, that 
 she not only does not stir up her nest, but that she 
 makes a new one every year on the top of the old one, 
 and neither she nor any other known bird bears its 
 young upon its wings. 
 
 Earth, aretz; yij? gee, in Greek; terra in Latin. 
 
 The earth has played a very important part in all the 
 ancient theologies which we know. All the great 
 gods are said to have descended from the marriage 
 of heaven and earth; sometimes they are also said 
 to have “time” for a grandfather, and for their 
 destroyer. In other words, the idea of there being 
 a god at all is the result of human considerations 
 about heavenly things, which time brings to per¬ 
 fection, but again swallows up. Just as Sennacherib 
 inquired, Where are the gods of Hamath and of 
 Arpad ? so we may ask, Where are the gods of Greece, 
 Phoenicia, and Egypt ? Time has destroyed them. 
 
 The supposition, that the earth is the universal 
 mother, is a very natural deduction for a semi- 
 civilised man to form. He sees how all things 
 spring from the soil; how all animals are refreshed 
 and strengthened by resting on the ground ; he sees 
 that all creatures take their sustenance from the 
 
 G G 
 
466 
 
 Earth] products of the soil; and when he contemplates the 
 process of feeding, he sees that every portion of the 
 human body has at one time been a portion of the 
 ground on which he treads; still farther, he sees 
 that all things become converted into earth again. 
 The gigantic tree, when dead, is decomposed like the 
 humblest leaf; whilst man, the lord of creation, is no 
 better in this respect than the vilest worm ; 4 4 dust he 
 is, and unto dust he doth return.” 
 
 When once this sentiment obtained, it was very 
 natural that every thing connected with the pheno¬ 
 mena of germination should be noticed, and the 
 observer would soon recognise the influence of the 
 sun and rain upon the earth; without these, vege¬ 
 tation languishes or dies, just as the female remains 
 sterile without her natural consort. It was easy, 
 therefore, to compare the earth to a fruitful mother, 
 and the heaven to a fructifying father. 
 
 The poetical Greeks embodied these consider¬ 
 ations in a legend, and made Demeter the mother 
 of all below. Of the Roman idea, Pliny gives us a 
 good account (Natural History, book ii. c. 68), of 
 which the following is the opening sentence : 44 Next 
 comes the earth, on which alone, of all parts of 
 nature, we have bestowed the name that implies 
 maternal veneration.” It is not, however, so much 
 with these that we have to deal, as with the ideas 
 which we find in the Hebrew scriptures, as being 
 held by those whom many persons at the present 
 day consider as divinely inspired. If we find in 
 the Bible the same doctrines as those held by other 
 nations, we must accept them as of divine origin, 
 or of human invention. It may be that one people 
 has borrowed the faith and copied the practice of 
 
467 
 
 Earth] another, or that both have been taught by inspira¬ 
 tion, or simply by their own cogitations. To decide 
 into which category we are to place the idea that the 
 earth is our mother, we must ascertain that which 
 our sacred scriptures enunciate. 
 
 We find the maternal idea at the very threshold 
 of the Bible. No sooner is the woman cursed, by 
 haying an accession of pain on the occasion of par¬ 
 turition, than the earth is associated with her, and 
 the sentence goes forth — “Cursed is the ground, 
 
 . . . thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee,” 
 Gen. iii. 16, 17, 18; or, in other words, there shall 
 be an infliction of misery even upon the soil, which, 
 instead of bringing forth trees pleasant to the sight 
 and good for food, w r ith trees of knowledge and of 
 life, should travail with briers and all sorts of 
 prickly bushes. Adam, himself, is also informed 
 that he was taken from the ground, and that to it 
 he should return. The same idea is expressed with 
 equal strength in the account of the creation, Gen. 
 i. 11, 12 ; “ Let the earth bi'ing forth grass,” &c., 
 “and the earth brought forth grass and herbs,” &c.; 
 and again, we have in verse 24, “ let the earth 
 bring forth the living creature, cattle, and creeping 
 things, and beasts.” 
 
 We next find the earth treated as an individual: 
 in Gen. ix. 18, “ It shall be a token of a covenant 
 between Me and the earth ; ” and again, in Num¬ 
 bers xvi. 82, where the earth is said to have opened 
 her mouth and swallowed up Korah and his company. 
 The idea in question is very clearly enunciated by 
 David, in Psalm cxxxix. 15, thus: “ My substance 
 was not hid from thee when I was made in secret, 
 and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the 
 
468 
 
 Earth] earth.” (See Isaiah li. 1, also Job i. 21, and 
 Eccles. v. 15, with Ginsburg’s remarks thereon, p. 
 852.) From these passages it is evident that no 
 difference exists between the Hebrew and the Greek 
 idea. The former distinctly avers that the earth 
 brought forth plants and animals of all kinds, at the 
 commandment of the God of Heaven. The latter 
 says that Hemeter is the earth when called into 
 activity by heaven; and the story of Prometheus, 
 who made a man of clay, hut could not animate it 
 until he acquired some fire from on high, is precisely 
 a counterpart of the making of Adam but of dust 
 and breathing into him the power of life. In both, 
 there is a recognition that the earth is sterile without 
 the influence of heaven ; but whether this knowledge 
 is of higher origin than human invention, we may 
 leave to the decision of men who are more acute in 
 recognising the marks of divine interference than we 
 feel ourselves to be. 
 
 Ebal, or Aibal, (Gen. xxxvi. 28), also read as Gaibal 
 and Hebal, signifies “ a bare mountain, or rock.” 
 
 Ebed, (Judges ix. 26), the same as Abd, “ A servant.” 
 
 Ebed-melech, ">5v (Jerem. xxxviii. 7), “ The king’s 
 slave.” 
 
 Eben, 15?, signifies “A rock, or stone.” Amongst the 
 ancients generally, and amongst the Hebrews them¬ 
 selves, an upright stone indicated the Creator; as 
 a phallus at Cyprus, the celebrated Paphian Venus, 
 was a conical stone. 
 
 Ebenezer, "1^5 1?? (1 Sam. iv. 1), “ Stone of strength.” 
 
 Eber, ^ (Gen. x. 14), a part situated on the other side 
 of a river, sea, or desert, “ to pass over.” It is also 
 spelled abar , and may be pronounced in strictness 
 
 avar, and be the origin of Havre. Various Abers in 
 
469 
 
 Eber] Scotland, Wales, and England, and our word over, 
 are all but identical with it. 
 
 *n&5, abar, also signifies ‘ to be strong, firm, pow¬ 
 erful, vigorous,’ also ‘ to veil,’ ‘ to cover,’ and ‘ the wing 
 or pinion of a bird,’ according to the vowel-points. 
 Abari, in the Cuneiform, signifies “the celestials.” 
 
 Ebiasaph, *!!?'?£ (1 Chron. vi. 23). See Abiasaph. 
 
 Ebna, Assyrian, signifies “created;” Abna nebo = ‘ Nebo 
 made me; ’ Shemsebna == ‘ the sun made me.’ 
 (Compare Abi-ner.) 
 
 Ebriu, Assyrian, signifies “purified,” also “dividing into 
 parts,” either victims or the heavens; and thus 
 “priests” or “astrologers,” or both. 
 
 Ebronah, (Numb, xxxiii. 34), “A place by the coast.” 
 
 Eden, DV (Gen. ii. 8), “Delight, softness, pleasure,” equiva¬ 
 lent to Y]dovvj. (Compare the garden of the Hesperides 
 in Greek fable, also the names Aden, Edensor, and 
 St. Aidan, one of the Culdees.) 
 
 Eder, (Josh. xv. 21, 1 Chron. xxiii. 23), “He arranges,” 
 or “ the disposer of events,” also “ a flock.” 
 
 Edom, (Genesis xxv. 30). The three letters DHK signify 
 “to stamp firmly,” “man,” “to be red,” or “red,” 
 according to the vowel points. There is something 
 mystical about red as a colour. Bed powder is used 
 to-day in Hindoo worship. For the priest to throw 
 it on a woman’s breast is equivalent to soliciting to 
 adultery. Jaganath is painted red ; Lingams are 
 usually so coloured. Scarlet and hyssop were burned 
 with the sacred red heifer (Numb. xix. 26). Bams’ 
 skins for the temple were dyed red (Exod. xxv. 5). 
 Zechariah speaks of red horses (chap. i. 8) ; and 
 in Bev. vi. 4, and xii. 3, we read of a red horse and 
 a red dragon: and in chap. xvii. 3, the woman sits 
 on a scarlet coloured beast, and is herself clothed 
 
470 
 
 Edom] in the same hue. In the Romish church the preva¬ 
 lent colours for sacred dresses, &c., are purple and 
 scarlet; and the same are seen in our Universities. 
 There is still faith in red flannel; and a scarlet dress 
 is very attractive to those of the opposite sex to the 
 wearer. We find, too, that the hull is readily excited 
 to fury by a red flag; and that a turkeycock is made 
 very fierce by a crimson rag. But though the phy¬ 
 siologist may readily account why red should be 
 adopted by the followers of Mahadeva, the reason 
 will not apply universally. Many have doubtless 
 used the colour simply because it was handsome, 
 attractive to the eye, and not much given to fade by 
 exposure to the sun. (See Esau.) 
 
 Edrei, TT]? (Numb. xxi. 83), signifies “ strong the name 
 was borne by a town in Bashan and in Naphtali. 
 The word is probably a variant of T?£, adar , which 
 means “ to shine, to be splendid, renowned,” &c.; also 
 “ great, swelling, inflated, magnificent, large.” (Com¬ 
 pare Hadrian, Admmyttium, &c.; Addar, and the 
 Puff Adder.) 
 
 Egg, Beza, compare Besai, Bezaleel, Beza, &c. 
 
 Omne vivurn ex ovo , — “Every living thing comes 
 from an egg,” — wrote Haller, one of the most distin¬ 
 guished physiologists of modern times. No wonder 
 then that the egg has figured in sacred mysteries. 
 We have it alike in Hindostan and Greece, Egypt 
 and England, amongst the Babylonians of ancient and 
 the Romanists of modern times. It was related to 
 the crescent moon in Heliopolis; and in other places 
 was to he seen surrounded by a serpent. In Cyprus, 
 there is a huge specimen of one, which is adorned by 
 a bull, in a recess, arched over by a crescent, sup¬ 
 ported on two fan-like ornaments. In Assyria, the 
 
471 
 
 Egg] egg is associated with Venus and the doves. The 
 aphorism of Haller would of itself go far to account 
 for the reverence in which the egg was held, if 
 it could only be shown that the ancients knew that 
 mammals ever existed in an egg condition. As 
 they did not know the fact, it is clear that we must 
 look elsewhere for the origin of the myth. If the 
 reader will refer to what we said of the apple and 
 the pine cone offered to the female deity—if he 
 will still farther remember the ideas connected with 
 the worship of Mahadeva, and our surmise of the 
 hidden meaning of the Assyrian triad, he will pro¬ 
 bably conclude that the shape of the egg is intended 
 to typify that of the testis; and he will be still 
 farther convinced of the truth of his surmise when 
 he finds that the small organs, to which we give the 
 name of “witnesses,” are called, in ancient and modern 
 oriental languages, the “ eggs.” As Mahadeva or 
 Asshur per se would be powerless, and as he derives 
 all his fertilising power from his dependents, we can 
 readily understand the myth which created the mun¬ 
 dane egg before the oldest of the Gods, and which 
 made the egg to be brooded over by the Holy Spirit, 
 thus bringing about creation. 
 
 Eglah, nbty (2 Sam. iii. 5). “ The calf, or a heifer ; ” 
 
 agal, “ is to roll or to revolve ; ” agol is “round.” It 
 is possible that the calf became a sacred animal 
 because its name resembled that of the round or 
 revolving one, the Sun. In the later period of Jewish 
 history, the worship of the golden calf was held in 
 such horror, that every contrivance was adopted to 
 keep it out of sight. It is therefore very remarkable 
 that we should find certain cognomens apparently 
 derived therefrom. The name Eglah was borne by 
 
472 
 
 Eglah] one of David’s wives; but we can scarcely imagine 
 that he would have tolerated such an appellative, had 
 he felt like the modern Jews. It appears, therefore, 
 probable that the monarch did not know of the story 
 of Aaron’s shame. There are many indications that 
 the Pentateuch had no existence in the time of David, 
 as we shall show in our second volume. This is one 
 of them. 
 
 agalah , also signifies “ a waggon or chariot,” 
 from its rolling, and it is possible that we derive 
 eagle , French aigle, from the wheeling flight of the 
 bird. Aglae is still an appellative in France. (See 
 Heifer.) 
 
 Eglaim, (Isaiah xv. 8). This word was originally 
 
 written without the gimel, and signified the same as 
 Elohim; but the early redactors of the sacred text, 
 unwilling to allow that the sacred name of El was 
 known to the Moabites, inserted gimel between the 
 two first letters. Ginsburg’s Versions of the Bible ; 
 also p. 227, supra. 
 
 Eglon, (Josh. x. 8, Judg. iii. 12), probably “ On is 
 round ; ” from W, agal, and ftf, on. 
 
 Egypt, (Gen. xii. 12), Mitzrim, signification doubtful. 
 
 Ehi, V* (Gen. xlvi. 21), “ My brother, or friend.” It may 
 also signify “ Jah is a brother, or friend,” the yod 
 being elided from ; or if, with Eiirst, we consider 
 that ach f is one of the names of the Almighty, 
 the word in question will signify “ Jah is Ach.” 
 
 Ehud, (Judg. iii. 15), “ Conjunction, union;” also 
 
 “powerful,” “ strong,” or “ the One;” “the incom¬ 
 parable.” 
 
 Eker, (1 Chron. ii. 27), “A shoot, stock, or trunk.” 
 One of the euphemisms for the testes; “he is a 
 son of Ram,” or “the high one.” aiker, is 
 
473 
 
 Eker] however probably a later euphemism for achar, 
 or ichar, ‘ to plough, or dig,’ whence we have 
 
 Ekron, PTy (Josh. xiii. 18). Vide supra, page 68. 
 
 El. See Al. 
 
 El, Cuneiform, “ The name of any God,” plural El-im, 
 or Ilin. 
 
 Eladah, (1 Chron. vii. 20), “ El is lovely.” 
 
 Elah, (1 Kings iv. 18), “ An oak.” Probably a h is 
 elided, and the name means “El is strong as the 
 oak.” It is spelled n ^, 1 Sam. xvii. 2, which is 
 perhaps an elided form of “El is Jah,” or is simply 
 “ an oak.” (See Elealah.) 
 
 Elam, (Gen. x. 22), of doubtful signification. 
 
 Elamu, Cuneiform, one of the Kings of Elam. 
 
 Elasah (1 Chron. ii. 39). See Eleasah. 
 
 Elath, (Deut. ii. 8), = “ the goats,” or simply “ the 
 loving ones,” or “ the mighty women.” Originally 
 it has been a feminine plural of Eloah, signi¬ 
 fying “ the goddesses; ” but, this being offensive to 
 the modern Jews, the word has been modified, by 
 converting ^jj, el, into al. Aloth, niby (1 Kings 
 iv. 16), is clearly a variant of the same word. 
 
 Eldaah, njn'w (Gen. xxv. 4), = “El is knowledge,” or 
 “omniscient,” from '^7., dea or daiah, ‘know¬ 
 ledge.’ He was a son of Midian; thus clearly show¬ 
 ing that El was not an exclusively Hebrew word for 
 God. 
 
 Eldad, (Numb. xi. 26), “ Beloved by El,” l-n, * love,’ 
 literally “ El loves.” 
 
 Elead, *15^5 (1 Chron. vii. 21), “ El the witness ; ” from 
 
 aid, ‘ witness,’ and el. Compare this with Ga leed 
 or Gilead, where Gal or Gil, the Sun, is the witness, 
 whose sign is a menhir, or upright rock, with a heap 
 of stones at its base. 
 
474 
 
 Eleadah, (l Chron. vii. 20), “ The El passing over 
 
 us ; ” from »TJK, ada, ‘ to pass by, or over.’ 
 
 Elealah, (Numb, xxxii. 3), ‘‘El the high one (the 
 
 morning Sun) ; ” r6tf, ‘ to be round or thick,’ ‘ an 
 oath,’ ‘an oak,’ or ‘pine,’ or ‘God,’ according as 
 it is pointed; alah, ‘to go up ;’ possibly 
 alai, is written for aila, and the word signifies 
 “El is strong as the oak,” we may also read the 
 name as “ El is Allah,” or “ El goes up.” (Com¬ 
 pare eAvj, ‘splendour;’ sTAco, elAea;, f/ HA n$.) 
 
 Eleasah, (i Chron. ii. 89), “ El the Creator,” 
 
 possibly, ‘ El is hairy, ; ’ from n *^; asah, ‘ to be 
 covered with hairs ’ (Compare Esau) ; it may come 
 from ashah, ‘to sustain.’ 
 
 Eleazar, (Exod. vi. 23), “ El is a helper.” 
 
 Elel, an Assyrian God. (Compare Ellel, Lancashire). 
 
 Elhanan, (2 Sam. xxi. 19), “ The merciful El,” or 
 
 “El is merciful;” I5IJ, chanan, ‘he is gracious.’ 
 
 Eli, (1 Samuel i. 9), means “ The goer up,” “ The high 
 one.” (Compare the Greek e’/Avj = i'Arj, and *A>j, the 
 modern Ali, and the Latin ille. 
 
 Eli, in Cuneiform, signifies “to ascend.” 
 
 Eliab, (Numb. i. 9), “ The strong Father.” 
 
 Eliada, (2 Sam. v. 16), “ El is knowing.” 
 
 Eliahba, (2 Sam. xxiii. 32), “Protected by El;” 
 
 chaba, ‘ to hide, to protect,’ &c. 
 
 Eliakim, (2 Kings xviii. 18), “ El sets us up.” (Com¬ 
 
 pare Jakim.) Jackin, a twin pillar with Boaz in 
 Solomon’s temple, and Hakeem, the present Arabic 
 name for “ doctor,” in the East. It is the expe¬ 
 rience of European physicians, practising their pro¬ 
 fession in Oriental countries, that they are more 
 frequently consulted by men, propter impotentiam 
 virilem, than from any other cause. 
 
475 
 
 Eliam, (2 Sam. xi. 3), “ El the mother.” (See Am.) 
 
 Eliasaph, (Numb. i. 14), “ El the fascinator, or 
 
 enchanter,” possibly “ collector.” (See Asaph.) 
 
 Eliashib, (1 Chron. iii. 24), “ El is a requiter.” 
 
 Eliathah, (1 Chron. xxv. 4), “ El is wonderful,” the 
 
 '"•A? being probably a variant of or nitf, atli or oth. 
 
 Elidad, (Numb, xxxiv. 21), “Beloved by El;” Vn, 
 
 dod, ‘a friend, or lover,’ ‘love.’ 
 
 Eliel, (1 Chron. v. 24), “ My God is El.” 
 
 Elienai, W'r’S? (1 Chron. viii. 20), “ To El my eyes are 
 directed.” Fiirst. 
 
 Eliezeb, ir'pg (Gen. xv. 2), “ El the helper.” 
 
 Elihoreph, (1 Kings iv. 3), “ The Eli of harvest; ” 
 
 *D n , horeph, ‘ harvest.’ 
 
 Elihu, (1 Chron. xxvi. 7), “ El, He is; ” n-in, huh, 
 
 ‘ to breathe,’ ‘ to be,’ ‘ desire ’ (see Hoham) ; possibly 
 compounded of El and Hoa, he is son of Barachel, 
 i. e., son of the Ewe. 
 
 Elijah, (2 Kings ii. 6), “ El is Jah.” Also called 
 “Elias,” a variant of "HXtog, or Ilus, “the Sun, or 
 God.” 
 
 There are two methods by which we may judge of 
 the theology or of the principle that influences a 
 writer, and those who adopt his accounts as inspired. 
 One is by the observation of what he says and 
 does, the other by noticing the words and actions 
 which he attributes to some one else, whom he sets 
 up as a hero. 
 
 Now it is perfectly clear, from the nature of 
 things, that the Jewish writer of Kings could not 
 know all the events which took place in Israel whilst 
 the two nations were antagonistic. It is equally 
 clear that, if the dynasty of David had a greater 
 claim upon the favour of the Almighty than had 
 
476 
 
 Elijah] the rnlers of the revolted tribes, there would have 
 been a greater manifestation of the divine power in 
 Jerusalem than in Samaria. A Protestant of to-day 
 would not think it a mark of divine favour to his 
 cause, if the Creator were to send prophets to modern 
 Rome and neglect London ; but if he heard that the 
 messengers were commissioned to uphold the doctrine 
 of Luther, and to destroy all those who opposed it, 
 he would naturally be proud. If he were a philo¬ 
 sopher, and had the means to gratify his desire, he 
 would go to Rome to examine the truth of the report 
 which had reached him. Until he was able to do so, 
 the logical observer of to-day would hesitate ere he 
 acknowledged the mission of the alleged prophet. 
 As we would act in respect to the present, we may 
 do as regards the past. We see no means by which 
 the chroniclers of Jerusalem were able to compile 
 the history, even the very words, of an individual 
 who resided in a hostile kingdom; consequently we 
 prefer to see in the history of Elijah the beau ideal 
 of a prophet, such as a Jewish priest would have 
 manufactured, if he had the power, rather than one 
 which the Almighty designed and produced. 
 
 Let us for a moment pause to consider what a 
 good Roman Catholic of Italy would like to see done 
 to heretical England, or what a thorough-going low 
 churchman would be glad to notice as happening to 
 a red hot ritualistic congregation. Without entering 
 into particulars, we believe that both would rejoice 
 to see some conspicuous indication of their opponents 
 being wrong, and to witness the infliction of condign 
 punishment. If I am not mistaken, the Popish 
 literature possesses many evidences to show the union 
 of Protestantism with the Devil ; and we cannot 
 
477 
 
 Elijah] therefore he surprised that the orthodox Jews should 
 have ample proof of the complicity of the ten revolted 
 tribes with Satan. 
 
 Guided by this light, let us examine the history 
 of Elijah, as written by an historian of Judsea. We 
 first hear of him (1 Kings xvii. 1) as predicting a 
 drought, a fearful occurrence even amongst ourselves, 
 which should afflict only the land of Israel. With 
 curious carelessness of detail, however, the prophet is 
 said to get his water from a brook for an indefinite 
 time ; and when the rivulet at length dries up, Elijah 
 is sustained entirely by meal of some sort and by oil, 
 a diet upon which no one could live long. In the 
 continuation of the story of the Tishbite, we find that 
 Obadiah had on an occasion fed a hundred of “ the 
 Lord’s prophets,” in two caves, with bread and water; 
 a business of no small difficulty during a drought, 
 for the required supply would not be much less than 
 an eighteen gallon cask per day. Without inquiring 
 into the propriety of Jezebel slaying the Lord’s 
 prophets, we pass on to the very wonderful scene in 
 which, after a long absence of rain, at the top of an 
 arid mountain, Elijah orders men who are his enemies 
 to collect water to saturate a sacrificial pile. We are 
 somewhat struck with the curious circumstance that 
 Ahah the king should personally search the land to 
 find some fountain, brook, or grass, that the horses 
 and the mules should be kept alive,—which shows 
 the excessive scarcity of animals, — and yet that ‘ the 
 Tishbite,’ the king’s enemy, should he able to per¬ 
 suade the monarch to find two bullocks, as a test 
 whether Elijah was what he pretended to be. At any 
 rate, after the scene described 1 Kings xviii., the 
 Tishbite succeeds in killing all Baal’s prophets; an 
 
478 
 
 Elijah] achievement that must be compared to the murder 
 of the Huguenots at Paris, on the day of Saint 
 Bartholomew. We cannot fairly eulogise Elijah, and 
 yet despise the rulers of France. The human holo¬ 
 caust being completed, rain arrived for Israel. The 
 benefit that arose for France from her bloody sacrifice 
 has not yet been discovered. After the scene referred 
 to, Elijah has a solitary adventure, the upshot of 
 which is that he is commanded to anoint one man as 
 king, and another as a prophet. The first order he 
 neglects altogether, the second he duly fulfils. We 
 pause here for awhile, to notice this specimen of 
 priestly or prophetic assumption. Feigning an order 
 from the Creator, a man assumes the power to elect, 
 and therefore to depose, sovereigns. We know that 
 ancient hierarchs arrogated this faculty, and history 
 tells us that Christian Popes have assumed the same 
 authority. As the English Protestant refuses to 
 accord to the Bishop of Rome the right to select 
 the successor to Queen Victoria, so he must deny to 
 Elijah the right to name and anoint the successors 
 to the Israelite Ahah, and the Syrian Benhadad. 
 
 In the twentieth chapter of the same book we find 
 no mention made of Elijah, who disappears entirely 
 at the time of Israel’s need, and is replaced by some 
 other prophet. But in the subsequent portion of the 
 scripture he again comes on the scene, to denounce 
 the rapacity of the king, and to foretell his decease. 
 
 Having arrived thus far, we are perfectly staggered 
 to find, from 1 Kings xxii., that Elijah is apparently 
 unknown both to Ahab, the monarch of Israel, and 
 Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah. We cannot possibly 
 conceive how a chronicler in Judaea could record all 
 the deeds of Elijah, and yet that the ruler should not 
 
479 
 
 Elijah] know of his existence; nor can we understand how 
 Ahab, who had seen so much of the power of Elijah, 
 should have sent for Micaiah rather than the Tish- 
 bite. The next chapter, however, reintroduces Elijah 
 upon the scene; and he again appears as a theologi¬ 
 cal champion, denouncing the son of Ahah. Whilst 
 acting thus, he does not scruple to destroy a hundred 
 men. We might ourselves doubt whether this deed 
 was one that could be commended ; but we have the 
 certainty that it was reprehensible, from the judg¬ 
 ment of the Saviour, which is recorded in Luke ix. 
 54-56. It is impossible to believe that “the Father” 
 authorised a deed which “the Son” condemned; we 
 prefer, therefore, to believe that the story of Elijah 
 is apocryphal, rather than allege, as many good men 
 do, that he was the chief of the Old Testament 
 prophets, and is to return again as the forerunner 
 of a second Saviour. 
 
 Over the last days of “the Tishbite” we must draw 
 a veil; all that we are informed of him is that he and 
 Elisha were alone, and that the last only returned 
 to their companions. The story of the chariot and 
 the horses of fire is sublime ; it is doubtful whether 
 any novelist at the present day could invent a more 
 ingenious plan for the disappearance of his hero. 
 Many great men—Moses, Romulus, and King Arthur 
 amongst the number—have disappeared from the 
 scenes of their greatness without their bodies being 
 found; but no one in our own times would believe 
 the account of any man who declared, on his return 
 alone from a walk with a friend, that the latter had 
 been “translated.” We might listen to the statement 
 about the fiery chariot, but we should suspect, in 
 spite of ourselves, that murder had been committed. 
 
480 
 
 Elika, (2 Sam. xxiii. 25), “ obedient to El; ” n i£, 
 
 ikali, 4 to obey,’ 4 to reverence,’ &c. 
 
 Elim, the masculine plural of El. (See Al.) 
 
 Elimelech, (Ruth i. 2), 4 El the king.’ (See Melech.) 
 
 Elin, or Ilin = 44 The Assyrian G-ods.” (Compare Helen.) 
 
 Elioenai (1 Chron. iii. 28), a variant of Elienai. 
 
 Eliphal, (1 Chron. xi. 85), “ El the wonderful ” ? 
 
 pala, 4 he is wonderful ; ’ paal, 4 he 
 
 makes.’ 
 
 Eliphaleh, (1 Chron. xv. 18), 44 El the distinguished.” 
 
 Eliphalet, (1 Chron. iii. 6), 44 El the smooth, or the 
 
 deliverer;” P; 5 ^, palet , 4 to be smooth,’ &c. 
 
 Eliphaz, (Gen. xxxvi. 4), 44 El the pure;” *3, phaz, 
 
 4 purified,’ 4 pure.’ 
 
 Elisha, (1 Kings xix. 16), 44 El is deliverance.” 
 
 This name is very conspicuous in Samaritan history; 
 he was a prophet — a bald headed, and, from his 
 age, probably a hoary and venerable man. The 
 first element in his name is Al, or El, the equiva¬ 
 lent of the Assyrian II; the second may be 
 jashah, 4 to stand upright,’ 4 to be strong,’ 4 to exist,’ 
 4 to be,’ i.e., 44 Al is upright;” or from ashah , 
 44 to be firm.” W!., jesha, signifies 44 deliverance,” 
 and pointed as asha, is 44 to save;” and it may be 
 that the name Elisha signifies 44 El is the deliverer.” 
 It must not be forgotten that Elisha was supposed 
 by Naaman to be essentially opposed to the worship 
 of Rimmon — the Pomegranate, emblem of the full 
 womb or of the celestial mother ; and that he lived 
 at Mount Carmel. (See Carmel and Carmi.) Put¬ 
 ting all these together, we come to the conclusion 
 that the name is intended to signify — though to 
 our modern notions in a coarse form — 44 God is the 
 father.” 
 
481 
 
 Elisha] When once a writer of fiction, whether religious 
 or otherwise, has conceived a story which experience 
 shows to be popular, it is a very common thing to 
 find that he has imitators. The wonders which Moses 
 is said to have wrought were copied by Jannes and 
 Jambres; whilst, in our own days, the wonders of 
 mesmerism have been eclipsed by table-turners, 
 spirit-rappers, and other jugglers. It was the same 
 in olden time, and the character of Elisha was 
 pourtrayed to improve upon that of Elijah. 
 
 From the earliest indication of his career, we find 
 that his fame is to eclipse that of his master; he is 
 represented as having a double portion of the spirit 
 of Elijah (2 Kings ii. 9-14). He restores one dead 
 being, and his bones restore another (2 Kings iv. 
 84-36; xiii. 21). He cures leprosy, and is so clever 
 as to be able to lead a whole army into a trap 
 (2 Kings vi. 18-28). With the same carelessness of 
 detail, however, which is so common amongst the 
 ancient Hebrew writers, the holy prophet, who has 
 command over horses and chariots of fire, and who 
 can blindfold a host of enemies (2 Kings vi. 17-28), 
 has no influence in preventing Samaria being besieged, 
 and a woman killing, cooking, and eating her son. 
 As we discredit the story of Elijah, we are equally 
 incredulous of the account of Elisha. Yet, though 
 we reject the account of their life and doings as 
 historically true, we accept it as an indication of the 
 belief and practice of the writer who has written the 
 histories of these prophets in our Scriptures. 
 
 Elishah, (Gen. x. 4), “El is uprightness,” “El is,” 
 “ The erect El.” (See Elisha.) 
 
 This name is given to a region of the Mediter¬ 
 ranean sea, whence purple was brought to Tyre. It 
 
 H H 
 
482 
 
 Elishah] is mentioned in Genesis x. 4, and again in Ezekiel 
 xxvii. 7. It can scarcely be pretended that this 
 was a Hebrew name, and we may fairly assume that 
 it had a common origin with Elisha. This we must 
 compare to Elissa, Eliza or Alitta, a name which we 
 have still amongst us, as Elizabeth, and which is 
 associated with Mylitta, Astarte, and Venus. 
 
 Elishamah, (Numb. i. 10), “ El is on high, or in 
 
 heaven; ” shamah, ‘ he is high, or he who 
 
 hears; ’ also 
 
 Elishaphat, (2 Chron. xxiii. 1), “El is the judge,” 
 
 or “El ordains; ” shaphath, ‘to put in order; ’ 
 
 shaphat, * to judge, or a judge.’ 
 
 Elisheba, (Exod. vi. 28). This word is rendered by 
 
 the Septuagint “ Elizabeth,” and is commonly said to 
 signify “ the oath of God,” which gives us the notion 
 of oaths and swearing going on in heaven. It is 
 true that we are told that “God swore an oath unto 
 David ” (Ps. cxxxii. 11), and that, “ as He could 
 swear by no greater, He sware by Himself” (Heb. 
 vi. 13) ; but few would take this literally, and say that 
 Elisheba, the wife of Aaron, was the oath sworn. 
 
 The word is spelled thus Of the signifi¬ 
 
 cation of Ali there can be no doubt; y?f?, shaba , is 
 ‘ he swears,’ and pointed as sheba, means 4 seven, or 
 The seven.’ Now there was a Queen of Sheba ; the 
 same name was also borne by an Israelite, and 
 Beer sheba was a well in Canaan. I can scarcely 
 conceive a “ Queen of an oath,” or “Her swearing 
 majesty,” or a man called “ curse ”—for oaths imply 
 curses, if they are broken-—but I can readily con¬ 
 ceive a name signifying “ The seven.” Seven was a 
 mystic number, from that being the number of the 
 planets known ; and “ The seven ” meant the whole 
 
483 
 
 Elisheba] of the moving lights in the sky. We conclude, 
 therefore, that the name signifies, “ A1 is sevenfold,” 
 or “ A1 is the seven.” 
 
 Elishua, (2 Sam. v. 15), “ El is deliverance, El of 
 
 riches,” JN8?, shua i ‘ to be large, wide, free, noble,’ 
 &c., whence probably shah; MB*, is also ‘to thunder,’ 
 and the name may be equivalent to “ Jupiter tonans.” 
 
 Elizabeth, ’EAi<ra/3er (Luke i. 5), “ The house of Elissa,” 
 possibly daughter of Elissa, or Eliza, or “ El the 
 helper.” Eliza was one of the names of Dido, or 
 of Alitta, a softened form of Eliza, and equivalent to 
 Venus Urania. 
 
 Elizaphan, (Numb. iii. 30), “El is secret, unsearch¬ 
 
 able ; ” zaphan, ‘ to hide,’ ‘ conceal,’ &c. 
 
 Elizur, (Numb. i. 5), “El the rock;” liv, zor, ‘a 
 
 rock.’ When we come to speak of Gilgal, we shall 
 attempt to show that a stone pillar, or a long stone 
 set upright, was emblematic of the Almighty through¬ 
 out the East, and all over Europe. The idea can 
 readily be traced from Babylon to Rome and Britain, 
 by the cairns erected to Hermes. It must be clear 
 to the critic that to call El ‘ a rock ’ is metaphorical. 
 The idea is that El is ever firm, hard, strong, 
 unchanged, and never soft. Nor is it surprising that a 
 piece of rock should be adopted to express this senti¬ 
 ment. The rock in general gives a high conception 
 of the symbol; the pillar rock, or menhir, gives a 
 low one ; but both were used (Isaiah li. 1). 
 
 Tyre was literally “ The rock; ” and if we com¬ 
 pare it with the names of Eshcol, Accho, Gath, &c., 
 we must believe that it was used metaphorically for 
 the strong On, i. e., the fascinum. 
 
 Elkanah, (1 Sam. i. 1), “ El the erect one,” or 
 
 “ El the tall reed,” or “ El burning with desire; ” 
 
484 
 
 Elkanah] ™P, kanah, ‘ to erect,’ ‘ create; ’ whence Khan, 
 Canna, Cane ; and probably canis, ‘ a dog ’ (from its 
 salacity). 
 
 Elkoshi, Vpfy (Nahum, i. 1), “ El the hard one; ” VP, 
 kshi, ‘hardness.’ 
 
 Ellasar, "'9^ (Gen. xiv. 1, 9), “ The angry Sun; ” "'D, sar, 
 ‘angry,’ a variant of Eleazar; possibly from 
 ‘ to bind,’ or ‘ make fast,’ i. e., “ El makes firm.” 
 
 Elnaam, (1 Chron. xi. 46), “El is delight.” 
 
 Elnathan, I™ 1 ?** (2 Kings xxiv. 8), “ God the Giver,” or 
 “ God’s gift.” 
 
 Elon, (Gen. xxvi. 84), “An oak,” or “pine tree;” for 
 l**, elon . 
 
 Eloth. See Elath. 
 
 Elpaal, (1 Chron. viii. 11), “El the maker;” 
 
 petal, ‘to make,’ ‘to do.’ Probably the word was 
 
 originally El-baal. 
 
 Eltakah, ngpta (Josh. xix. 44), “ El my hope ” ? 
 tachah, ‘to lean upon.’ 
 
 Eltekon, (Josh. xv. 59), “ El the straight one; ” li?£, 
 takan, ‘ to be or become straight.’ 
 
 Eltolad, (Josh. xv. 80), signification doubtful. 
 
 Eluzai, (1 Chron. xii. 5), “ El the strong one; ” 
 
 uzai , ‘ strength,’ ‘ firmness,’ ‘ majesty.’ 
 
 Elzabad, (1 Chron. xxvi. 7), “ God-given.” 
 
 Elzaphan, (Numb. iii. 20), “ The shining El; ” its?» 
 
 tzaphah, ‘to shine, or be bright;’ tzaphon, 
 
 ‘the North quarter;’ 19?, tzaphan , ‘to hide,’ ‘to 
 conceal.’ 
 
 Emins, (Gen. xiv. 5), “ Terrors; ” apropos of the 
 
 word “ terrors,” Coverdale renders the passage now 
 read as “ Thou shalt not be afraid of the terror by 
 night,” by “ Thou shalt not be afraid of the bugs 
 by night.” The origin of this word was bog , = ‘ a 
 
485 
 
 Emins] place for ghosts; hence bogie . There is, too, a 
 river Bug, which takes its rise in a bog. 
 
 En, or Ain, (Numb, xxxiv. 11), “an eye, or a fountain.” 
 Either may be read in the following :— 
 
 En-am, (Josh. xv. 84), “ The eye, or fountain, of the 
 mother.” 
 
 En-an t T W (Numb. i. 1), “The eye of On, or Anu”? 
 
 En-dor, I'V (Josh. xvii. 11), “ The eye of the circling 
 one, the Sun.” 
 
 En-eglaim, py (Ezek. xlvii. 10), “ The eye of the 
 
 calves.” 
 
 En-gannim, (Josh. xv. 84), “ The eye of the pro¬ 
 
 tectors.” 
 
 En-gedi, '1J P.V (Josh. xv. 62), “ The eye of good luck,” 
 '15, gadi, “ fortunate.” (See Gad.) 
 
 En-haddah, r? (Josh. xix. 21), “ The eye of the protec¬ 
 tors, or of the glad one;” n 11, hadah, ‘ to rejoice,’ &c. 
 
 En-hakkore, Nnipn (Judges xv. 19), “ The well of him 
 who called.” 
 
 En-harod, py (Judges vii. 1). This is probably an 
 altered form of En-hadad, “ The fountain of Hadad,” 
 a god amongst the Syrians and Edomites. 
 
 En-hazor, P5> (Josh. xix. 37), “The eye of the rolling 
 one ;” 1!!J, bazar , = “to turn, or wind about.” 
 
 En-mishpat, r.V (Gen. xiv. 7), “Fountain of Judg¬ 
 ment;” = “judgment,” “sentence,” &c. 
 
 En-rogel, ^ T.V (Josh. xv. 7), ^1, ragal, signifies “to 
 move the feet.” “ A fountain with a tread-wheel ” 
 would explain the name. 
 
 En-shemesh, P* (Josh. xv. 7), “ The eye of the Sun.” 
 (See Beth-shemesh.) 
 
 En-tappuah, r? (Josh. xvii. 7), “The fountain of the 
 apple.” (See Apple.) 
 
 Enoch, (Genesis xiv. 17), signifies “initiated,” also 
 
486 
 
 Enoch] “ a teacher.” There were four persons of this 
 name, (1) eldest son of Cain, (2) father of Methu¬ 
 selah, (8) eldest son of Reuben, (4) a son of Midian. 
 There is something about this word which leads us 
 to think much. One bearing the same name as 
 the eldest son of “ the accursed Cain ” is a special 
 friend of the Almighty; and one of the profane 
 Midianites has a cognomen similar to one who was 
 taken living from the earth to live on high. If 
 names were given after people’s death, or when they 
 had grown up, “ initiated ” (in the mysteries ?), or 
 “ a teacher,” would be an appropriate appellation ; 
 but as we learn that the custom was to give a cog¬ 
 nomen in infancy, indicative of the faith held or the 
 God worshipped, this may not be the correct signi¬ 
 fication, but it is difficult to find any other. 71 
 
 Enos, or Enosh, (Gen. iv. 26), a practical way of 
 
 signifying “ man.” 
 
 Epaphroditus, 'EiraQp&tTOf (Philip, ii. 25), is, we conceive, 
 a mongrel word, probably from ab , * father,’ or 
 the Greek Wo, ‘ from,’ and ’AQpoSlrvj, Aphrodite, or 
 Venus, and signifying “Love was my parent,” or 
 “ given by Venus.” 
 
 Ephah, (Gen. xxx. 4), Ephai, (Jerem. xl. 8). I 
 have some doubt as to the real meaning of these 
 words ; they imply 4 flying,’ ‘ fainting,’ ‘ brandishing, 
 or darkening;’ it is possible that they are altered 
 forms of aphejah , ‘ Jah is darkness.’ 
 
 Epher, aipher, signifies “ a calf,” “ a fawn,” “ a 
 
 heifer,” also “to join,” “to be strong,” “to grow 
 
 71 Enoch. “ Philo finds the astronomical number of the solar year in the 365 
 years of Enoch’s life ; the name must therefore mean beginner (initiator); e.g., of 
 the new year, which becomes new after 365 days, whence perhaps arose the legend 
 that he was the first teacher of astronomy.” Fiirst, a. v. 
 
487 
 
 EpherJ white,” Gath-hepher literally signifies “ the heifer’s 
 wine press ; ” i. e. pudenda vaccce . 
 
 Epher, (Gen. xxv. 4). This is evidently an altered 
 form of epher , “the heifer.” (See Heifer.) 
 
 Ephesdammim, t??*? (1 Sam. xvii. 1), I take to mean 
 “the flowings of Apis.” ( n 9’? J from damah, to flow 
 viscous and slow). 
 
 Ephlal, (1 Chron. ii. 87), “Judgment” (Gesenius). 
 “ Judging” (Fiirst). “ The baking Sun”? from 
 apkah, * to cook or bake.’ 
 
 Ephod, an upper garment worn by priests when 
 
 officiating at certain rites. Whatever its form may 
 have been, the thing itself was imitated by others, 
 and used as a sacred emblem, an object of worship. 
 (See Judges viii. 27.) I cannot help associating it, 
 in my own mind, with the sacred stole used by the 
 Roman Catholic priests and nuns; its shape when 
 
 off the body is this : 
 
 I 
 
 2 
 
 or 
 
 The latter is the 
 
 form of the sistrum 
 
 of Isis, and represents the female organ, the sacred 
 mouth through which oracles were supposed to be 
 delivered. The former is almost identical with the 
 
 old Babylonian 
 
 which was the conven¬ 
 
 tional representation of the same organ on coins and 
 signets. The Papal religion is essentially feminine, 
 and built on an ancient Chaldsean basis. I think 
 we may recognise the same kind of cultus in the 
 lamb’s wool worn by Academic Bachelors on their 
 hoods. 
 
 Ephraim, B'HaK (Gen. xli. 52). This word is rendered 
 “ twin-land ” by Gesenius, whilst Fiirst translates it 
 
488 
 
 Ephraim] = 'l?, “fruit, posterity,” as “formed as a 
 plural from a singular noun.” Both these etymo¬ 
 logies are unsatisfactory. If we take the word as 
 spelled with V, instead of with sounds which do 
 not materially differ, we can then readily find a deri¬ 
 vation from epher, im, being the plural 
 
 sign. To call a son after the emblem of Isis would 
 not be an unlikely thing for an Egyptian priest to 
 do. The mother of Ephraim was daughter of the 
 Priest of On, and to him she would naturally turn 
 for the name by which his grandchild might he 
 introduced into the congregation of the faithful. We 
 all remember the worship of “the calves,” and are 
 not surprised to find some one named after them. 
 It seems curious to the philosopher to find an Egyp¬ 
 tian priest, or prince, giving his child a Hebrew or 
 Phoenician name; it is equally so to find that writers 
 in ancient times considered such thing as very 
 natural. Compare with Ephraim the name of Epher, 
 Oprah, Ephron, and in later times, “ Aphra,” which 
 is in use amongst ourselves. 
 
 Eprath, (Gen. xxv. 16, 1 Chron. ii. 19). This word 
 
 is probably the feminine plural of ">??>, and signifies 
 “ the heifers; ” or it may he the plural from 
 “ a hamlet.” 
 
 Ephron, (Gen. xxiii. 8), signifies, probably, “ the calf, 
 or fawn, is On.” 
 
 Er, (Gen. xxxviii. 8), “ The watcher.” This is one of 
 the many names given to the Almighty. Some 
 ancients typified his presence with them by wearing 
 the figure of an eye, as a charm. Such amulets 
 were very common in Egypt. Eri, in ancient 
 Chaldee, is translated by “I watched over.” 
 
 Eran, rj? (Numb. xxvi. 86). “ The watcher On.” 
 
489 
 
 Erebus, an Assyrian word for 44 darkness.” Ereb is the 
 West, whence Arabia and Europe. arab, in 
 
 Hebrew is 44 to lie in wait,” i 3 e., where the sun rests 
 till day. (Compare Oreb, Horeb.) Amongst the 
 Greeks, epe ( 3 o $ was the place where the dead went 
 to, and it is associated in idea with Hell, 4 the hole, 
 and darkness.’ 
 
 Erech, 'W (Genesis x. 10), almost identical in meaning, 
 as in sound, with “ erect” 
 
 Eri, (Genesis xlvi. 16), airi, 44 Guarding,” compare 
 eyrie , 44 the eagle’s nest; ” eyre , 44 a court of justice,” 
 (Bailey’s Diet.) Earey, Eyre, Airey, ear and hear. 
 
 Eros, v E pco$ f was the name of a well known divinity amongst 
 the Greeks, called Cupid by the Latins. In both 
 languages the word simply means what I would call 
 44 instinctive love.” We find in the Hebrew (and 
 Phoenician), that there is feny, aras or eres, 4 to bind, 
 unite, or fit into one another,’ also 4 a bed, or couch 
 for love.’ We see here the idea that framing a bed, 
 or preparing a covering, a sort of arched roof, not 
 unlike a gypsy’s tent, was associated with Eros, or 
 erotic love. This helps us to understand what is 
 meant by 4 hangings for the grove,’ &c. 
 
 The 4 hangings for the grove,’ which we read of 
 in 2 Kings xxiii. 7, were light screens, which could 
 be hung up in certain appropriate places by those 
 smitten by Eros, to conceal themselves from the public 
 eye. In Pompeii have been found two wall paintings 
 illustrating this, too coarse for reproduction here; 
 but we may notice that in one, the Hermes is covered 
 with a lion or leopard skin, while in another there 
 is an altar of three stones before another form of 
 Hermes; amongst the offerings to him we readily 
 recognise the pine cone, the orchis mascula , and man- 
 
490 
 
 Eros] drake. Hera, f/ H pa, was one of the many names of 
 Juno, and we have still Harry amongst ourselves, 
 also Herrie s, Harris, Harrison ; German Herr. 
 
 Esarhaddon, pirr-iDK (2 Kings xix. 37). Etymology un¬ 
 known. “ The victorious conqueror ” (Fiirst). I 
 think it is more probably “ Asshur is the Judge.” 
 "iDK or |h n, asar ha-dan. 
 
 Esau (Genesis xxv. 25). This name is allied to Edom, or 
 Adam, and also to Seir, or Mount Seir; and he 
 who bore it is represented as a hairy man, a rough 
 fellow, and a hunter. He was twin son with Jacob. 
 His name is spelled TO, asau. Now fTO, asah, 
 signifies “to make, to press, to dig, to build up, to 
 press or squeeze immodestly.” There is an older 
 form, which signifies “to be covered with hairs;” 
 (and we have the word Asahel, which may mean 
 “ The hairy El,” or simply “ El made.”) The 
 story tells us that Esau meant hairy. But Esau 
 was Edom, red (see Adam), (compare Carmel and 
 Carmi,) and he frequented Mount Seir. The appel¬ 
 lation, therefore, involves the idea of “hairiness, 
 redness, and creative power, producing by digging.” 
 This clearly indicates “the fascinum.” The twin 
 brother, at first Jacob, signifies “ the female ele¬ 
 ment,” “ the swelling womb.” Seir signifies ‘ hairy,’ 
 and Mount Seir * the hirsute mount; ’ and the phy¬ 
 siologist sees a confirmation of the philologist’s 
 deduction, quum phallum frequentare veneris montem 
 arvaque cognoscit, since we are told that Esau, 
 Edom, frequented Mount Seir. 
 
 Esek, i m (Gen. xxvi. 20), “ Strife.” 
 
 Esh-baal, tyaefe (1 Chron. viii. 33); aish , signifies 
 
 “fire;” pointed as ish, it signifies ‘is, or are;’ 
 aish, signifies ‘ existence.’ Sanscrit, as; Zend, asti ; 
 
491 
 
 Esh-baal] Latin, esse. We presume that Eshbaal signifies 
 “ the Fire Lord,” “ the Fire King,” or “ my Lord is ” 
 (Hero Baal—Fiirst). This name was borne by a 
 son of Saul, who is called (2 Sam. ii. 8) Ishbosheth; 
 the real name of Baal being changed into bosheth, 
 or shame. This, if it stood alone, would suffice to 
 show that the early redactors of the Bible have not 
 scrupled to alter the text materially, where they 
 considered that the interests of religion required it. 
 
 Eshban, (Gen. xxxvi. 26), “ The son of fire, or Ish.” 
 “ Intelligent hero,” Fiirst. 
 
 Eshcol, (Gen. xiv. 18), “A cluster.” ( Vide supra, 
 
 p. 67.) 
 
 Eshean, (Josh. xv. 52), “ Fire of On; ” or probably 
 
 eshen , or eshain, = ‘ he is hard, firm, strong.’ 
 
 Eshek, P&V (1 Chron. viii. 89), “He presses, squeezes, 
 penetrates into.” 
 
 Eshmun, |b^K, is the name given to a god amongst the 
 Phoenicians, equivalent to Esculapius ; the word 
 signifies, it is supposed, “the gleaming, shining, 
 or warning one; ” it is probably another form of 
 “ Ashima.” It is possibly derived from asham, 
 and ftf, on, i.e., “the shining On,” viz., the sun. 
 From this ancient god come probably the modern 
 names Esmond, Desmond, Ashman. 
 
 Eshtaol, (Josh. xv. 88), “ The hero Hermes ; ” 
 
 ^ tel, signifies c a heap of stones, a cairn, a hill; ’ 
 ‘ hollow way.’ (Fiirst.) 
 
 Eshtemoh, nbriKW (Josh. xxi. 14), a Levitical city. It 
 signifies “ The fire of the erect one,” or possibly 
 “miraculous fire,” according as we read ^5, or npn, 
 for nba or pbn. 
 
 Eshton, I possibly “ the power of woman,” from 
 isha, and on, “rest.” (Fiirst.) 
 
492 
 
 Esther, (Esther ii. 7), supposed to be the same as 
 
 a<TTY)p, aster, ‘ a star.’ (Compare Ishtar, Ashto- 
 
 RETH.) 
 
 Etam, Etham, (Judg. xy. 8), “ A lair of wild beasts.” 
 Fiirst. 
 
 Ethan, (1 Kings iv. 31), “ He is firm, hard, enduring,” 
 “ a rock, or crag.” 
 
 Ethbaal, (i Kings xvi. 31), “ From, or near to, 
 
 Baal.” 
 
 Ether, [W (Josh. xv. 42), “ Plenty, abundance,” “ to 
 burn incense to a G-od,” “ to smoke with perfume,” 
 “ odoriferous smoke,” “ a worshipper of God.” The 
 word yet survives unchanged. 
 
 Ether, a God in the second Assyrian triad, his colleagues 
 being the Sun and Moon; his name may be read as 
 Eva, Iva, Air, Aer, Aur, Er, Ar, also Vul . He 
 seems to be the same as *0 vpavo$, Uranus, Jupiter 
 Pluvius, or Jupiter Tonans, and probably also Yulcan. 
 Hebraice, *W, ether — “ fulness.” 
 
 Ethnan, PA** (1 Chron. iv. 7). This word literally signifies 
 “ a harlot’s fee,” or “ begotten by harlotry.” 
 
 Ethni, (1 Chron. vi. 41), “He is bountiful,” “muni¬ 
 ficent.” 
 
 Eunuchs. We need not do more in this place than describe 
 this mutilation when it was regarded as a sacred 
 rite, and I avail myself of the following description 
 of the Feast of Atys, from a French pen: — “ Atys 
 sleeps, the Phrygians say, and he ought to awake 
 with nature. The third day of the feast recals his 
 mutilation. At length, joy breaks out, and is mani¬ 
 fested by delirious movements. Then are to be seen 
 the frenetic Priests of Cybele rushing about in bands, 
 with haggard eyes and hair disordered, like troops 
 of Bacchanals, or foaming Pythonesses. In one 
 
498 
 
 Eunuchs] hand they brandish the sacred knife, in the other 
 they carry burning firebrands from the pine tree. 
 They dive into the recesses of the woods and valleys, 
 and climb rocks and mountains, uttering while they 
 do so the most horrible groanings. An intoxicating 
 draught has carried madness to their brain ; upon 
 themselves they turn their active hands, and beat 
 each other with heavy chains ; they dance, and regard 
 with joy the blood which flows from their bodies ; 
 they pierce their bodies, flagellate their backs, and at 
 length mutilate themselves completely, in honour of 
 the God whose coming they await, and they invoke 
 his name while offering to him their gaping wounds 
 and the bleeding spoils of their virility.” “ These 
 mutilations are also made in honour or commemo¬ 
 ration of the dismemberment suffered by Osiris, 
 Mithras, Adonis, Esmun, and Bacchus ; and by 
 them is explained, in allegorical style, the cessation 
 of the active male or fecundating power of the sun 
 at the Autumnal equinox.” The author then quotes 
 Matthew xix. 12, where it is said approvingly, “ that 
 some have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of 
 the Kingdom of Heaven,” and states that “ Origen, 
 one of the Christian fathers of the Church, reduced 
 himself to the same condition as did the Priests of 
 Cybele.” 72 
 
 When recovered from the self-inflicted injury, the 
 Galli, as the Eunuchs were called, adopted the 
 female dress. (See Lucian’s account of the Syrian 
 Goddess ; and for an account of the habiliments worn 
 by some of the fraternity, see the Golden Ass of 
 Apuleius, book 8.) There is little doubt that the 
 
 72 Fetes et Courtisanes cle la Greet. Supplement aux Voyages d' Anacharsis 
 et d' Antenor. — Anonyme, a Paris, 1803. 
 
494 
 
 Eunuchs] “ Sodomites/’ which are referred to in the Books 
 of Kings,” were individuals who had been emasculated 
 at wild orgies similar to those described above, the 
 intention being that they might conserve as long as 
 possible the softness and graces of youth. It is cer¬ 
 tain that the Galli gave themselves up to pederasty, 
 and, like the modern Vallabhacharyas of India, 
 mingled horribly the profane with the sacred. 
 
 In ancient times, and the custom still survives 
 in Eastern countries, all the male attendants on the 
 person of the king, and on his women, were eunuchs; 
 so much so that the word literally signifies bed- 
 keeper. It has often appeared to me a strange thing 
 in the story of Joseph that he was allowed to have 
 access to his master’s wife without having been made 
 an eunuch; this in itself would induce me to doubt 
 the truth of the affecting tale. I may also notice, as 
 a most remarkable fact, that the church of Rome, 
 whose worship resembles in so many particulars that 
 offered in various places to Ishtar, Astarte, Venus, or 
 Cyhele, still retains the use of eunuchs in her church 
 in the eternal city. The idea seems to be that the 
 Almighty delights in what men call fine music, and 
 that it is better that the treble notes shall be 
 chanted by mutilated men than by ordinary women. 
 For ourselves, we see no reason why female voices 
 now may not be raised in St. Peter’s at Rome, just 
 as Miriam sang of old. But if such a practice were 
 to be adopted in the chief temple of Popery, she 
 would lose one of the links which connect her with 
 paganism. 
 
 Euphrates, (Gen. ii. 14), signifies “ Sweet water.” 
 
495 
 
 Fig. 94.73 
 
 Eye, (Gen. iii. 20), chavah. So much interest surrounds 
 this word that it deserves a very close attention. Let 
 us first examine into the various meanings of those 
 words, the characters of which closely resemble the 
 name in question ; and in doing so, we must remem¬ 
 ber that the n and the n are interchangeable, and 
 that the present vowel points did not exist in the 
 primitive Hebrew writings. 
 
 havah, or hauah = “to breathe,” “ to 
 blow,” “ a breath,” &c. 
 
 ■7}?, hauah , or havah , = “eagerness,” “lust,” 
 in a good or bad sense. 
 
 7 3 For an explanation of this Figure, see Dubois, Religion universelle, vol. 3, p. 33. 
 
496 
 
 Eve] J'7, hayah, = “to be,” elfu = ‘I live, am, 
 exist.’ 
 
 ^l 1 , hayah , = “calamity.” 
 
 chavah, = “to live,’ = vivo; also ‘to say, 
 or relate,’ ‘ to move in a circle about a thing,’ 
 ‘to wind round a thing,’ ‘a serpent,’ also ‘to 
 put or bind together.’ 
 n 'n, chayah, — “the vital force,—life.” 
 n J0, chavooh , = “a circular tent.” 
 
 chiveh, = “a hamlet.” 
 
 ™ n , choocha , = “ to cut into, to pierce.” 
 chucha, = “ a thorn.” 
 
 chavach, = “a cleft, fissure, or gap.” There 
 is a goddess in Assyria whose name is read as 
 &on, hiya , = “ eviva,” “viva,” “ vive” 
 
 Ere we proceed farther let us turn to the words, 
 “ Male and female created he them ” (Gen. i. 27). 
 The Hebrew words are "9J and zachar, and 
 
 n'keba, which signify literally “ digger,” and “hole.” 
 If we turn to Adam, we find that it means “the 
 red one,” “ the male.” We then find, that the 
 word which signifies life in the majority of the 
 Shemitic tongues, also signifies the serpent; while 
 in those called Indo-Scythic, the bull and life have 
 the same words to express them. 74 
 
 All these considerations lead us to the belief 
 that the word Eve, in strictness, signifies “the 
 concha,” or “ the female fissure.” We are told that 
 Adam gave the name to his wife “ because she was 
 the mother of all living ” (Gen. iii. 20). And some 
 modern dictionaries of to-day tell us, that the part 
 in question is designated as “the mother of all 
 saints,” or “ the mother of all men.” 
 
 74 Lajard, Recherches sur le Culte de Venus, p. 30. Paris, 1837. 
 
497 
 
 Eve] In the annexed wood-cut, Fig. 95, Fig. 95. 
 which is copied from an Egyptian seal, 
 by Layard (Nineveh and Babylon , p. 
 
 156), the Egyptian god, Harpocrates, 
 is seen seated on the mystic lotus, in 
 adoration of the Yoni, or njn, 0 r havah, “the mystic 
 mother of all.” In other words, Adam and Eve 
 signify the same idea as “ Abraham and Sara,” 
 “Esau and Jacob,” man and woman ; thus embody¬ 
 ing in the Hebrew the Indian notion, that all things 
 sprang from Mahadeva and his sacti, * my lady Sara ’ 
 (Saraiswati). 
 
 This deduction enables us at once to recognise, 
 as did the early Christians, the mythical character of 
 the account of the creation; and we must conclude 
 that the story means, that the male and female 
 lived happily together so long as each was without 
 passion for the other, but that when union took place 
 between them, the woman suffered all the miseries 
 inseparable from pregnancy, and the man had to toil 
 for a family, whereas he had previously only thought 
 of himself. 75 The serpent is the emblem of “ desire,” 
 
 76 It is I think evident, that one of the writers in Genesis has had a similar 
 opinion to my own, and by the introduction of the words, “ Nihilominus mariti tui 
 consuetudinem denuo appetes, — thy desire shall he to thy husband,” — has inten¬ 
 tionally made a pun. 
 
 The following is from the pen of Mons. Felix Lajard. “ Le role particulier 
 du serpent dans tous les systemes religieux de l’antiquite nous montre que l’on con* 
 siderait le serpent comme un symhole de vie, et que pour cette raison, on l’attribuait, 
 dans sa bonne acception aux divinites dont la principale fonction est de presider a 
 la creation du monde, a la reproduction des etres, a la conservation de la vie ou de 
 la sante. Aussi voyons nous, dans la plupart des langues dites Semitiques le mot 
 qui signifie la vie , Tiayy ou Jiay, haya, heyo, huyya, signifier egalement le serpent; de 
 meme que dans certaines langues appelles Indo-scythiques , le mot qui sert a designer 
 le taureau, autre symhole de vie, a la double signification de vie et taureau.” 
 Recherches sur le Gulte de Venus, pp. 35, 36. The connexion between life and 
 that which is typified by the serpent, is seen more conspicuously in the French 
 language than in any other modern tongue which I am acquainted with. In it 
 
 I I 
 
498 
 
 Eve] indicated by the man and recognised by the woman. 
 After writing thus far, I consulted the book of Jashar , 
 by the late learned Dr. Donaldson, 76 and found that 
 his conclusions were similar to my own; differing 
 only in such small details as are usually found to 
 exist in accounts drawn up by independent observers. 
 
 There is a striking resemblance between the 
 Hindoo and the Hebrew myths. The first tells us 
 that Mahadeva was the primary Being, and that 
 from him arose the Sacti. The second makes Adam 
 the original, and Eve the product of his right side; 
 an idea which is readily recognisable in the word 
 Benjamin. After the creation, the Egyptian, Yedic 
 and Jewish stories all place the woman beside a 
 citron, or pomegranate tree, or else one bearing both 
 fruits; near this is a cobra, or asp, the emblem of 
 male desire, because these serpents can inflate and 
 erect themselves at will. The unopened flowers of 
 the citron and its fruit resemble a testicle in shape; 
 the flower of the pomegranate is shaped like a bell, 
 which closely resembles the female breast, and when 
 arranged in hunches of three recalls to mind the 
 phallic triad. The fruit of the pomegranate typifies 
 the full womb. The eating of the apple is equivalent 
 
 the phallus and existence have the same sound, the former being, however, 
 masculine, while the latter is feminine. 
 
 76 Jashar , 2d edit. Lond. and Edin., Williams & Norgate, 1860. His words are: 
 “ Ac primum quidem cin: ille sive serpens, qui incentivas struit mulieri non viro 
 insidias, phallicum Baai-Peoris signum denotat. Quanta intersit inter hoc signum 
 et generationis organon similitudo non opus est ut fusius exponam.” Jashar, editio 
 secunda, p. 48. Once again I find my views supported by him, in his remarks upon 
 the legend of the temptation: “ Ut omnia uno tenore currant redeamns ad mysticam 
 serpentis significationem. Si igitur sub serpentis imagine phallicum signum 
 intelligimus, quam piana sunt et concinna cuncta picturse lineamenta.’ “ Neque 
 enim pro phallo poneretur serpens nisi res significata cum typo accurate congru- 
 eret,” p. 51. 
 
 For a farther confirmation of this view, see Jacob, infra. 
 
499 
 
 Eye] to receiving to a-Trsp^ot , which is at this day, to many 
 a young and fair daughter of Eve, “ the direful 
 spring of woes unnumbered.” 
 
 It is rude thus to destroy the groundwork of some 
 of our finest poetic images, but the philosopher ought 
 not to indulge in fancy, nor allow the prejudices of 
 early teaching to set aside the stern logic of facts. 
 The Christian fathers considered the book of Genesis 
 as mythical, their sons will not be less Christian if 
 they adopt the same belief. 
 
 Evi, (Numb. xxxi. 8), signifies “desire.” 
 
 Evidence. There are few words with which we are more 
 familiar than this, yet there are none which we 
 interpret more vaguely. The mathematician, the 
 physicist, and the lawyer consider it a part of their 
 business to investigate rigorously, and cross-examine 
 closely, every thing that offers to give testimony in 
 establishing a particular truth. The theologian, on 
 the contrary, takes for fact every statement which 
 is consonant with his own views, and only thinks 
 it right to cross-examine witnesses when they are 
 on the side opposed to his own. If a man comes 
 to a chemist, and declares that an ornament is gold, 
 though it is lighter than silver, the professor’s first 
 impulse is to call the man a goose for believing 
 such nonsense, his second is to examine what the 
 counterfeit actually consists of. In like manner, if 
 an individual comes to a philosopher with a book, 
 and says this is the infallible word of God, whilst it 
 abounds with blunders, and is dotted with obscenities, 
 there is an inclination to say something uncompli¬ 
 mentary to the bearer, and a propensity to inquire 
 into the real nature of the volume. In the case of 
 spurious gold, the opinion and assistance of the 
 
500 
 
 Evidence] chemist are gratefully taken, for in so worldly 
 a matter as the value of money, all can feel an 
 interest; but in the case of the book, which only 
 concerns something far more valuable than hard cash, 
 both the assistance and opinion of the philosopher 
 are despised. The theologian lays down the evidence 
 in favour of his assertion thus: The Bible must he 
 inspired, because it has always been believed to be 
 so; it must be the word of God, because it says that 
 it is so, and that cannot err; adding, as a rider— 
 because, if it is wrong, what can be right ? To 
 bolster up this assertion, every testimony which seems 
 to be favourable is fostered and expanded to the 
 utmost, but it is not rigidly tested under any circum¬ 
 stances. Like Don Quixote’s second helmet, it is 
 not tried by a sword-stroke, lest it should he found 
 weaker than it looks. On the other hand, every effort 
 is made to prove that an opposing witness is of bad 
 reputation, that he is speaking from hearsay, and 
 knows nothing about the subject. If the testimony 
 succeeds, however, in escaping the ordeal unscathed, 
 it is by no means respected, and if possible is shelved 
 under the name of a “ difficulty,” and carefully con¬ 
 cealed from observation. 
 
 Such a style of treating evidence is not calculated 
 to elicit truth. As an illustration of its operation, 
 let us examine the effect produced by 1 Kings xiii., 
 which is read annually in our churches on the eighth 
 Sunday after Trinity. The thoughtful boy, just 
 breeched and taught to respect his Bible, considers the 
 chapter as a wonderful illustration of the foresight of 
 a prophet, of the vindictiveness of “ the Lord,” and 
 of the magnanimity of a lion. But as his familiarity 
 with the subject increases, he wonders how it was that 
 
501 
 
 Evidence] the seer, who could foretell all about Josiah, knew 
 nothing about the beast; how it happened that he 
 who knew “ the word of the Lord ” so well, could not 
 ascertain that the other prophet was telling lies. The 
 lad then feels surprised that there was any necessity 
 for the prophet to go from Judah, to tell the disagree¬ 
 able news which he did to Jeroboam, whilst the old 
 Bethel seer, who lived on the spot, knew all about 
 it (see ver. 32). When* in our youthful days, we 
 propounded such considerations to our elders, we 
 were 4 put off ’ with such observations, that we could 
 not fail to see that our questions were “ difficulties.” 
 As year by year came round, our imagination was 
 fired by the secession of the Southern from the 
 Northern United States of America, and we endea¬ 
 voured to compare and contrast this with the rebel¬ 
 lion of Jeroboam. We tried to realise the story of 
 the Prophet going from an ancient Washington to 
 an ancient Richmond. Our eye saw the venturous 
 missionary start upon his pony and reach the line 
 of sentries, the outposts of Judah; there, when 
 challenged by the outposts, he would declare that 
 he had a divine message to carry, and must advance. 
 If he escaped being shot as a deserter or as a spy, 
 he might then reach the advanced guard of the 
 Southern army, where, if he again escaped the fate 
 of a spy, he would be fortunate. We now see him, 
 in fancy, arrived at Richmond, and thundering out 
 a statement that at some future time a President 
 in Washington, named Queechy, would gobble up 
 Richmond ; we then imagine that we see him 
 attacked by a mastodon, which, having killed him, 
 quietly looks on. Now it will he noticed that we 
 have been obliged to draw upon our imagination 
 
502 
 
 Evidence] for our description of every step taken after the 
 fanatic left the friendly lines of his own people. We 
 have no means of knowing what he said and what 
 he did, whom he saw, and what he talked about, 
 except by the enemy’s narrative. Wherever, then, 
 there is no communication between the capitals of 
 foes, there can be no true narrative given in the 
 one, of the transactions and conversations occurring 
 in the other. If any one, therefore, were to narrate 
 a history, resembling that of the false prophet, as 
 having occured at Richmond during the late war, 
 it would be utterly scouted. The evidence in favour 
 of the story told in the Book of Kings is equally 
 valueless. 
 
 By attempting to analyse the testimony still 
 farther, we shall probably ascertain the true character 
 of the witness. We notice that the denunciation of 
 the prophet against the altar erected by Jeroboam 
 is directly against the king and the rebellious Israel¬ 
 ites ; yet the seer cannot foretell that the acts of 
 Josiah, of whom he speaks, will be directed against 
 men “ from Babylon, from Cuthah, from Ava, from 
 Hamath, and from Sepharvaim ” (2 Kings xvii. 24). 
 He who tells by name the prowess of the future 
 king cannot see that the annihilation of Israel will 
 precede Josiah’s accession to the throne. 
 
 Again, the writer of the story makes the Jewish 
 augur to be killed by a lion. Let us examine, for a 
 moment, what this involves. There are not lions 
 without there being thickets for them to dwell in, 
 and there are not thickets large enough to harbour 
 wild beasts except when the land is very sparsely 
 populated. With the cultivation of the ground, and 
 the spread of inhabitants, all wild woods are cut down. 
 
508 
 
 Evidence] Now, during the reign of Solomon, the prosperity 
 of Judah and Israel is described in such terms as to 
 lead us to the belief that no place of habitation for 
 lions could have existed between Bethel and Jeru¬ 
 salem, or in any part of Palestine. To suppose that 
 within a year of his death the high roads throughout 
 the kingdom could be infested with wild beasts, 
 would be a blot upon the fair fame of Solomon. 
 This antagonism between population and wild beasts 
 is recognised by the writer of Deuteronomy (chap, 
 vii. 22), consequently we are standing on strict Biblical 
 analogy when we say that the presence of the lion 
 on a public highway indicates a thinly inhabited 
 country. Now in the time of Josiah Palestine had 
 been greatly depopulated. The Syrians had devas¬ 
 tated Israel; Syria and Israel, combined, had ravaged 
 the whole of Judah, with the exception of Jerusalem. 
 The kings of Assyria had carried away all that 
 remained of the ten tribes; and though they brought 
 some other men to take their place, still it was clear 
 that lions had begun to multiply in the land (2 Kings 
 xvii. 25). At a subsequent period, again, Senna¬ 
 cherib had harried the land with an army, which, 
 for so small a country as Palestine, was enormous. 
 In the very years of Josiah’s father, the Assyrians 
 had again entered Judaea, and, we presume, had 
 taken Jerusalem, for they carried away its king, 
 Manasseh. There was, then during the reign of 
 Josiah, valid reasons for the frequency with which 
 lions were seen; and that they were common, we 
 infer from the small surprise which was manifested 
 when the adventure of the prophet became known. 
 
 If we next turn to the political condition of 
 Palestine at the period in question, we find, both 
 
504 
 
 Evidence] from the Bible and from the Cuneiform writings 
 deciphered by Kawlinson and others, that the whole 
 country had been repeatedly ravaged by the Assy¬ 
 rians ; and even if Jerusalem had escaped, — which, 
 from the captivity of Manasseh, we greatly doubt, — 
 the amount of men left, who would be able to form 
 an army, must have been miserably small. Even 
 after a series of successful wars, we have seen, in 
 Napoleon’s day, a country so large as France denuded 
 of strong men so completely as to make the raising 
 of a powerful army impossible. Whilst king over 
 a miserable remnant only, Josiah and his court could 
 not fail to be humiliated when they heard of the 
 glorious memory of Solomon. To compensate for 
 this, it was natural that some scheme should be 
 adopted which would promise something great. Now 
 that Samaria was ruined, it was easy to ravage 
 Bethel ; if there were no men left for them to 
 encounter, there were the bones of the ancients 
 which could be burned; to revenge oneself upon the 
 dead is much easier than to conquer the living. 
 Some astute writer was then found to concoct a 
 story, which gave the flattering unction to the king, 
 that his coming had been forseen, and the nature 
 of his acts foretold; the desired expedition was 
 then made, and thus the royal vanity and the 
 priestly pique against an ancient foe were both 
 rewarded. 
 
 We conceive, then, that the rules of evidence 
 oblige us to conclude that the thirteenth chapter of 
 the first book of Kings is as untrue as are the fables 
 which strew the histories of Greece and Rome; that, 
 so far from being a prophecy, it is nothing more than 
 a contrivance to effect an ignoble purpose, and wholly 
 
505 
 
 Evidence] undeserving a place in a book whose every page 
 is said to be inspired. 
 
 The sole objections offered to the testimony 
 here adduced are, that* they shake one’s faith in the 
 verbal inspiration of Scripture, and stultify certain 
 modern preachers. 
 
 We shall best understand the value of the state¬ 
 ment by putting an imaginary case. Let us suppose 
 that the government of a country issues the whole 
 of the gold coinage in the realm, and warrants every 
 piece to be the pure unalloyed metal ; let us 
 imagine, still farther, that the authorities act at 
 first with good faith, and that the practice of 
 issuing the same coinage has continued for many 
 hundred years without any decided complaint. Let 
 us now conceive that, by the development of trade, 
 merchants have had to exchange or to compare their 
 coins with those current elsewhere, and have been 
 unable to demonstrate to others that the gold is as 
 genuine as it professes to be. The merchants then 
 will naturally complain to the executive about the 
 baseness of the standard. If the government respects 
 honour, truth, and justice, it will thank the dis¬ 
 coverers for their information, and inquire into the 
 subject ; if, on the contrary, its members are 
 indolent, careless of honour, and content to allow 
 counterfeit to pass for sterling coin, they will im¬ 
 prison, expel, or otherwise persecute—if possible to 
 destruction — the pioneers of knowledge, and enact 
 penalties upon every one who questions the purity 
 of its gold. 
 
 But a time will come in which the increase of 
 knowledge becomes more general, and all who are 
 able scientifically to investigate the fineness of gold 
 
506 
 
 Evidence] recognise the fact that the metal, which passes 
 current as being unalloyed, contains in reality a 
 great deal of dross. In direct proportion to the 
 number of these discoverers, is the executive per¬ 
 plexed. To acknowledge the errors of former govern¬ 
 ments is thought to be a fatal step, for they have 
 been adopted by the present; and for a ministry 
 to acknowledge itself fallible, is to abdicate its 
 power. The most natural result is, that all sceptics 
 of the coin are condemned to outlawry, and the 
 spurious gold is more fiercely thrust upon all those 
 who can be made to receive it than it ever was 
 before, whilst ‘ bigot ’ and ‘ infidel ’ become the watch¬ 
 words of opposite parties. This is the last step 
 towards the catastrophe which occurs, when all who 
 are in the realm alike refuse to believe in the 
 genuineness of the government gold. Even the 
 bigots become infidels, as happened in France prior 
 to the revolution. Such a misfortune seems to be 
 approaching towards us. 
 
 The Church of England has long been circu¬ 
 lating as pure gold, or absolute truth, that which 
 has been long recognised by the thoughtful as alloyed 
 with base metal ; but she has hitherto adhered to 
 her own coinage, and despised the warnings of her 
 disciples. She very determinately closes her eyes 
 to the signs of the times, and looks upon every 
 complainant as a sworn enemy ; if, however, she 
 will investigate evidence, and set herself to examine 
 rigidly the value of that which she puts forth as 
 pure and unadulterated gold, she may yet retain 
 the power of uttering our coinage. Assuredly, if she 
 does act thus, she will find a sympathy, which is 
 withheld so long as the belief exists, that she knows 
 
507 
 
 Evidence] but dare not acknowledge the intrinsic value of 
 that which she calls truth. 
 
 Evil-merodach, 7 1T 1 P (2 Kings xxv. 27), I should read 
 
 as “Merodach is Lord of the Air.” 
 
 Ezbai, (1 Chron. xi. 37), spelled thus instead of Etzba, 
 “the forefinger,” a phallic emblem; azab , 
 
 “to sprout,” “to grow;” also “to shine,” “to be 
 beautiful.” 
 
 Ezbon, (Gren. xlvi. 16), “ The finger of On,” or “On 
 
 the finger.” 
 
 Ezekiel, ^1?.!$ (Ezekiel i. 3), or Jahezakal, “El 
 strengthens.” 
 
 A study of the writings and character of this 
 individual will give us a good insight into the nature 
 of those claims upon which we have been accustomed 
 to award the title of prophet to a man. In the first 
 chapter of the book we find a vision, in which the 
 Almighty is described much in the same way as he is 
 depicted by the heathen— i. e., as many-faced and 
 many-limbed — combining a likeness of the human 
 figure with that of the bull, the lion, and the eagle ; 
 these being again united with the figure of a wheel, 
 the typical representation of the sun. After thus 
 describing ‘ the Lord ’ as resembling the sacred em¬ 
 blems of the Assyrians and Babylonians, the prophet 
 tells us that he was sent to the children of Israel. 
 Ere he started, he is told to eat a book, and does so. 
 Now in this trait the physician at once recognises 
 the existence of lunacy; one of the most common and 
 characteristic features of insanity being the frequency 
 with which hallucinations occur, during which strange 
 sights are witnessed, and queer mandates are heard, to 
 which implicit obedience is rendered. For example, 
 some power becoming visible to the lunatic will order 
 
508 
 
 Ezekiel] him to plant himself as a tree in the garden, so 
 that he may bear fruit; forthwith, in obedience to 
 order, the patient digs a hole, stands in it, heaps the 
 earth around him, and calls himself an apple-, pear-, 
 cherry-tree, &c., according to his fancy. To the book¬ 
 eating the prophet now adds (chap. iii. 15) an obsti¬ 
 nate silence of seven days, although the mandate given 
 to him was to preach. Forgetting this order, he has 
 another vision, which speaks to him alone; and then, 
 under the influence of the spirit, he goes to shut him¬ 
 self up in his own house (chap. iii. 24). After farther 
 converse with “ the Lord,” the prophet takes a tile, 
 and pourtrays upon it a town, which he calls Jeru¬ 
 salem ; and he ** makes believe ” to besiege it, using 
 an iron pot for a bulwark. To accomplish his end, 
 he lies down on his one side three hundred and ninety 
 days, in consequence of the sins of Israel, and forty 
 more days on his other side for the house of Judah; 
 and as he thinks that each day symbolises a year, 
 he imagines that he is doing some stupendous work 
 (chap. iv. 1-6). After this, apparently, he lies upon 
 his back, but this process is interrupted by the neces¬ 
 sity for food; but even in procuring the necessaries 
 of life the diseased brain is apparent, for the man 
 attempts to cook his food with human dung (ver. 12); 
 but as this cannot be managed, he betakes himself 
 to the droppings of cattle, just as do the majority of 
 orientals when wood is scarce. The next freak of 
 the poor prophet is to shave off all his hair, to weigh 
 it into three parts, to burn one, to subdivide another, 
 and to scatter the rest to the winds. Some of these 
 are then collected and treasured up in a pocket; but 
 again taken out and burned; and when this is done, 
 there is afterwards a message given to the prophet, 
 
509 
 
 Ezekiel] the burden of which is a denunciation of wrath for 
 alleged sins, which have been committed by every 
 nation which has ever existed, as much as by the 
 Jews. Now it must be noticed, that, up to the 
 period at which we have arrived, Ezekiel has appa¬ 
 rently uttered no sound; the Lord speaks to him, 
 so he says, but he in his turn does not communi¬ 
 cate with the people. 
 
 In chapter vi. we find that he sets his face 
 towards the mountains of Israel, and thunders his 
 denunciations to the empty air, and ends by smiting 
 himself with his hand and stamping with his foot, 
 and muttering to himself lamentations, and mourn¬ 
 ing, and woe. Chapter vii. is a continuance of the 
 communication from the Lord to Ezekiel, but there 
 is no evidence that the message is imparted to the 
 people. 
 
 We then find, chapter viii., that whilst Ezekiel 
 is sitting in his own house — which we presume 
 was in Tel-abib, by the river of Chebar — he has 
 some elders of Judah before him. Without any 
 warning, he ceases to observe what is before him, 
 but sees a flame and brightness, which, being also 
 furnished with a hand, carries him off by a lock of 
 his hair right away to Jerusalem ; but as the prophet 
 clearly tells us that all this was visionary, we 
 cannot attach any weight to the description which he 
 gives us of what he saw there. The delusion then 
 continues, and Ezekiel hears a mandate given to six 
 men to go and destroy certain individuals in Jeru¬ 
 salem ; and, finally, the vision changes into that 
 which was first seen by the river of Chebar. Again 
 the vision changes, and the prophet is in the presence 
 of twenty-five men, and his Mentor whispers into 
 
510 
 
 Ezekiel] his ear what dreadful fellows they are, and what 
 shall be their doom. One of them then seems to 
 fall dead, and the prophet is horror-stricken ; but 
 after awhile the glorious vision reappears, and carries 
 him into Chaldea. On his imaginary arrival there, 
 he gives a visionary discourse, chapter xi. 24, 25; 
 after which we conclude that he finds himself wide 
 awake in his own house. The lunatic affection now 
 assumes another phase; for he makes a parcel of 
 his goods and carries them about from place to place, 
 and makes believe to be a captive going into slavery; 
 then he digs through a wall, and eats and drinks 
 as if in horrible distress (chapter xii. 8-5, 18, 19); 
 but even yet there is no communication made to 
 outsiders ; all that we have hitherto read has been 
 revealed to the prophet alone. In chapter xiv. we 
 again find the prophet in the presence of some 
 elders of Judah, when another message comes, with 
 orders for it to be delivered; hut we seek in vain 
 for evidence that the communication ever passed the 
 prophet’s lips. In this chapter we find references 
 made to Noah, Daniel , and Job (vv. 14, 20), and to 
 “ the house of Israel and the stranger that sojourneth 
 in Israel ” (ver. 7) —anachronisms which it is impos¬ 
 sible to explain; for Israel at the time of Ezekiel had 
 not any land of their own in which a stranger could 
 dwell, and Daniel — at least he whom we know as 
 such — had not then arisen. In the sixteenth chap¬ 
 ter, Ezekiel is told to let Jerusalem know her 
 abominations; but this he could not do as long as 
 he was in the captivity by the river of Chebar. 
 He does, however, receive the message, and a more 
 foul one it is difficult to conceive. After other 
 communications, we find once more that some elders, 
 
511 
 
 Ezekiel] on this occasion elders of Israel, sat before him 
 to inquire about the word of the Lord. Without 
 noticing this apparent anachronism, we turn our eyes 
 to the message which reaches Ezekiel, but again are 
 unable to find any evidence whatever that the com¬ 
 munication reaches the elders. The sole sentence 
 on which we can build the idea that he was not a 
 dumb prophet is, “ Ah ! Lord God, they say of me, 
 Doth he not speak parables ? ” (chapter xx. 48) ; 
 words which have not necessarily any reference to 
 the message which he tells us that he had received. 
 Ezekiel once again, in chapter xxi., vaticinates to 
 the winds, or rather towards distant Jerusalem; and 
 in the two subsequent chapters, he again receives 
 “ from the Lord ” a description of the sins of Sama¬ 
 ria and Jerusalem, which exceed in coarse obscenity 
 all other parts of the sacred writings. Passing by 
 a few chapters, we come to the twenty-sixth, seventh 
 and eighth, wherein we find the real value of the 
 “ word of the Lord ” as it came unto this so-called 
 prophet. In the first of the two named, Ezekiel 
 distinctly asserts that Nebuchadnezzar shall conquer 
 Tyre, and raze the city to the ground ; if all his 
 other vaticinations have been vague, this is clear 
 as the day. But, though unequivocal, the prophesy 
 is absolutely false; for in the twenty-ninth chapter, 
 verses 18 to 20, we find “ the Lord ” again speaking, 
 to the effect that Nebuchadnezzar did not gain any 
 advantage against T}Te, but that he should have 
 Egypt again. 
 
 After this, it is utterly impossible to believe that 
 the formula, “ Thus saith the Lord,” signifies any 
 more than ( thus thinketh the prophet.’ We are 
 unable to give any more weight to the writings or 
 
512 
 
 Ezekiel] utterances of such a man than we would give to 
 those of any other astute observer, whose mind, being 
 occasionally touched with insanity, evinces that 
 wonderful apitude for close observation, vigorous 
 thought, powerful declamation, and bizarre imagery 
 which is common amongst those lunatics whose 
 malady is not very severe. If we may believe the 
 testimony of the late Dr. Wolff, who travelled across 
 from the west coast of Asia to Bokhara, a man who is 
 insane is still considered by Orientals as a prophet; 
 but that is no reason why we ourselves, who are 
 familiar with all phases of lunacy, should do so too. 
 
 In studying the lives of the prophets, the reader 
 will find few things more striking than the want of 
 cohesion amongst the individual seers. Each man 
 seems, to use a current expression, 4 to go upon 
 his own hook; ’ Elisha, Jonah, Amos and Isaiah are 
 all more or less contemporary, so are Nahum, Hosea 
 and Micah, so also are Habakkuk, Jeremiah and 
 Zephaniah, and the interval between Obadiah, Ezekiel, 
 Haggai and Zechariah is by no means great, yet 
 not one of them seems to he aware of the existence 
 of the other. Ezekiel does not seem to have known 
 that the utterances which went no farther than to his 
 own mind, Jeremiah was speaking aloud to the 
 people at Jerusalem. Yet none can doubt that the 
 message of both when united would have been 
 stronger than when separately given. Each prophet 
 might have solaced his companion, and compared the 
 message before it was delivered. We will not attri¬ 
 bute the want of union to antagonism; we presume 
 that it was due to a strong feeling of individuality. 
 It is this very yielding to a natural propensity which 
 makes us doubt so strongly as we do the divine 
 
513 
 
 Ezekiel] inspiration of their utterances. We shall, how¬ 
 ever, postpone what we have to say upon this subject 
 for the present. See Peophets, Peophecy, &c. 
 
 Exoecism. The belief that the air is peopled by a variety of 
 beings called angels, or demons, is very naturally 
 associated with the idea that these essences can enter 
 into the body of a human being, and produce therein 
 a series of strange phenomena. When a man pre¬ 
 viously quiet, and differing in no appreciable manner 
 from other mortals, suddenly takes to preaching, 
 prophesying, starving himself, and scolding other 
 people, it is very natural for him to assume, and 
 for other people to believe, that he is in reality 
 divinely possessed; nor can the modern physician 
 wonder at this, for his experience of insanity shows 
 that many of its victims see visions of the Almighty, 
 and hear utterances from His lips, which have no real 
 existence. Such men have a profound belief that they 
 are in reality that which their diseased brain leads 
 them to suppose. Again, when either man or woman 
 is affected with mania, and rages more like a wild beast 
 than a human being, tearing into shreds every article 
 of clothing which he or she possesses, not abstaining 
 even from murdering others, injuring himself or 
 herself, or yelling out day and night the most 
 horrible blasphemies or obscenities, it is equally 
 natural that the idea should prevail that the victim 
 is possessed by an evil spirit. The former have been 
 canonised as saints, the latter have been subjected 
 to the most ingenious system of religious exorcism. 
 
 The first indication of a belief in demoniac pos¬ 
 session which appears in the Bible is the statement 
 that Saul was troubled with an evil spirit from the 
 Lord (1 Sam. xvi. 14); but it is very doubtful whether 
 
 K K 
 
514 
 
 Exorcism] the meaning of the passage is not simply that 
 Saul’s temper became moody; so that we lay no stress 
 upon it. We again find evil or unclean spirits men¬ 
 tioned in Zechariah xiii. 2, but here it is clear that 
 the words are used to signify the propensity to com¬ 
 mit idolatry, with all its attendant iniquity. 
 
 It was not until the Hebrews came into close con¬ 
 tact with the Greeks that their modern notions of 
 demonology prevailed. The first evidence we find of 
 it is in the apocryphal book of Tobit, wherein we are 
 told that Raguel had a daughter who was loved by a 
 wicked spirit, who killed all those that attempted to 
 marry her, seven men having fallen in succession 
 before him. Tobias is then instructed by the angel 
 Raphael, in disguise, that the demon can be driven 
 away by the smoke of the heart and liver of a fish; 
 the young man acts accordingly, and overcomes the 
 wicked spirit. In this instance it is clear that the 
 historian wishes the reader to believe that a demon 
 was in love with a female, and not that the latter was 
 simply so intensely vicious as to kill seven husbands 
 because she did not get the one she wanted. Leaving 
 Palestine for a time, and turning our eyes to Greece, 
 we find that demoniacal possession and exorcism were 
 believed therein at least as early as the time of 
 Demosthenes, who refers to it, b. c. 380, in his 
 Oratio de Corona , wherein he reproaches iEschines 
 with being the son of a woman who gained her 
 livelihood as an exorcist; and his brother Epicurus 
 seems to have been equally taunted by the Stoics. 
 
 From the Greeks the practice spread amongst the 
 Jews, and in our Saviour’s time we find that there 
 were many Hebrews who practised the profession of 
 exorcists, for we find, Luke xi. 15, the words, “ and if 
 
515 
 
 Exokcism] I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your 
 sons cast them out?” Again, we find, shortly after 
 this period that there were “ vagabond (Trepisp^o^vcov) 
 Jews, exorcists,” seven of whom were of one family 
 (Acts xix. 13, 14). These appear to have gone round, 
 like itinerant charlatans, to various towns. At a 
 later period, Josephus {Antiquities, viii. 2, 5) states 
 that he saw a Jewish practitioner drive out a devil 
 from one possessed therewith, in the presence of 
 Vespasian and a large party of soldiers, and that, 
 to prove the reality of the expulsion, he ordered 
 the spirit to upset a certain basin of water, placed 
 for the purpose. 
 
 Now we can readily understand how individuals 
 could attain the appearance of power over unclean 
 spirits. Each practitioner would have in his service 
 some, who would, whenever it was thought necessary, 
 feign insanity of various kinds; these, being duly 
 tutored how to act, might raise the reputation of the 
 master to the utmost extent. It is indeed highly 
 probable that some of the seven sons of Sceva were 
 alternately decoys and attendants. Their practice, I 
 doubt not, resembled that of our modern thimble- 
 riggers, who always travel with a gang of men whose 
 business it is to bring dupes to the net of the masters. 
 A plan like this, with the addition of some leger¬ 
 demain, or the judicious employment of horsehair, 
 would suffice to gull a superstitious multitude; and 
 that only such were deceived, • we infer from the 
 bold manner in which Demosthenes speaks of the 
 contemptible trade of the mother of ^Eschines. 
 
 But though we may speak thus of the vagabond or 
 itinerant Jews, we cannot speak so of our Saviour; 
 nor can we believe that He would really give such an 
 
516 
 
 Exokcism] evidence that demons had actually been expelled, 
 by directing them to enter into a herd of swine. We 
 therefore conclude that those portions of the New 
 Testament which give detailed accounts of the exor¬ 
 cism practised by our Saviour are apocryphal, being 
 most probably additions by his successors, who, with 
 an amiable desire to prove that he was superior to all 
 the world besides, have recorded occurrences which 
 had more foundation in imagination than in reality. 
 
 With the belief then current amongst all nations, 
 we cannot understand how the Evangelists could 
 describe the cures of insanity which they say our Lord 
 effected otherwise than they did. He who could cure 
 disordered brain as indicated by palsy, could equally 
 well cure another which produced lunacy; but it is 
 to be regretted that His words should thus have been 
 given so literally as to enforce the belief on so many 
 succeeding generations, that insanity can better be 
 cured by exorcisms and prayer, than by attention to 
 the bodily health. 
 
 We may conclude this article in the words of 
 J. F. Denham (Kitto’s Cyclopaedia, s. v. Exokcist), 
 “ The office of exorcist is not mentioned by St. Paul 
 in his enumeration of the miraculous gifts (1 Cor. xii. 
 9), though it was a power which he possessed himself, 
 and which the Saviour had promised (Mark xvi. 17. 
 Matt. x. 8). Mosheim says that the particular order 
 of exorcists did not exist till the close of the third cen¬ 
 tury, and he ascribes its introduction to the prevalent 
 fancies of the Gnostics ( Cen . iii. 11, c. 4). Fairness 
 also induces us to notice Jahn’s remark upon the 
 silence of St. John himself, in his Gospel, on the sub¬ 
 ject of possessions, although he introduces the Jews 
 as speaking in the customary way respecting demons 
 
517 
 
 Exorcism] and demoniac possession, and although he often 
 speaks of the sick who were healed by the Saviour. 
 This, coupled with the fact that St. John wrote his 
 Gospel in Asia Minor, where medical science was 
 very flourishing, and where it was generally known 
 that the diseases attributed to demons were merely 
 natural diseases, is very significant.” 
 
 Ex-voto, is a name given to offerings which are presented 
 by individuals as a thanksgiving for some favour 
 received, or as a means of propitiating the deity to 
 grant some particular request, or remove some inflic¬ 
 tion. The idea involved in the custom, is that the 
 god or saint to whom the gift is made, either requires 
 a constant reminder of the nature of the prayer which 
 is offered, or to see before him or her the constant 
 token of a votary’s devotion. Amongst Roman Catho¬ 
 lics the use of ex-votos is very conspicuous; the 
 chapel of St. Mary de la Gard, at Marseilles, contains 
 an immense number; its walls are literally covered 
 with pictures, of varied merit, which depict the condi¬ 
 tion of the individual who made a vow to the Virgin 
 and obtained deliverance. This forcibly reminds me 
 of an anecdote quoted by Lord Bacon, to the effect 
 that some ancient, when shewn a collection of ex- 
 votos, from those who had prayed to the god of the 
 place, and obtained safety in consequence, naively 
 asked if any record was made of those who offered 
 vows to the same deity, yet never lived to pay them. 
 It was the custom of offering ex-votos of Priapic forms, 
 at the church of Isernia, in the Christian kingdom of 
 Naples, during the last century, which induced 
 Mr. Knight to compile his remarkable work on 
 Phallic worship. As a general rule, the ex-voto is 
 formed after the likeness of the particular thing 
 
518 
 
 EX'VOTo] respecting which prayer is offered. Thus Aaron’s 
 rod, which by its budding insured the priesthood in 
 his family, was laid up in the ark of the covenant, 
 beside the pot of manna, the emblem of the super¬ 
 natural food which sustained the Israelites for forty 
 years. When the people are afflicted by fiery serpents, 
 they are cured by looking at the effigy of another, 
 equally fiery. We find the same idea amongst the 
 Philistines, for they are instructed by the diviners 
 (1 Sam. vi. 4, 5), to make an offering to the God of 
 Israel of five golden mice, the images of those which 
 marred their land, and of five golden emerods, similar 
 to those from which they suffered, under the hope 
 that he would then relieve them of the affliction under 
 which they laboured; and the offering seems to have 
 been accepted. We find, from the classic writers of 
 Greece and Rome, that a similar idea prevailed in 
 those countries, both men and women offering cakes, 
 or other material, in the form of those parts to which 
 they wished the gods to be gracious. In Knight’s 
 work, before alluded to, is a good specimen of a 
 female, who is offering such “ex votos ” on an altar. 
 A description of votive offerings, of a similar nature, 
 will he found on pages 61, 62, supra. 
 
 Ez, U? aiz, signifies “ a she goat,” also “ Aries ” ? It also, 
 differently pointed, signifies “ strong,” “ vehement,” 
 “ firmness,” “ splendour, majesty, glory, praise.” 
 As V5?, aitz, it signifies “ a tree,” “ a staff, a bone.” 
 Originally having a phallic meaning, it subsequently 
 had the idea of “counsel,” “ advice;” and some of the 
 learned will recal an ancient representation of 
 “ Priapus taking counsel with himself,” which was 
 found in Pompeii or Herculaneum. 
 
 For a long period I H S, IEES, was a monogram 
 
519 
 
 Ez] of Bacchus; letters now adopted by Romanists. 
 Hesus was an old divinity of Gaul, possibly left by the 
 Phoenicians. We have the same I H S in Jezebel, 
 and reproduced in our own Isabel. 
 
 The idea connected with the word is “phallic 
 vigour ; ” from it come Ezbon, and possibly Hesbbon 
 and Ezbia. 
 
 Ezem, oyy (1 Chron. iv. 29), “ To fit firmly to one another, 
 to be strong, or firm; ” also “ a bone,” so called from 
 its firmness and strength. 
 
 Ezer, “A leader or prince,” also “stay, strength, 
 help,” also “ dominion, rule.” 
 
 Ezion Gaber, P-W (Numb, xxxiii. 35), “ The backbone of 
 the Giant.” 
 
 Ezra, WW (Ezra i. 7 ; 1 Chron. iv. 17), “Help;” rnjfj, 
 £ born on the feast day,’ would be a more probable 
 etymology, if we suppose the name to have been given 
 to him when an infant. 
 
 There is something so remarkable in the book 
 which passes in the Bible under the name of this man 
 that it deserves an extended notice. It purports to 
 tell of the return of the Jews to their own land; and it 
 must be read in conjunction with the book that goes 
 by the name of Nehemiab, which relates to the same 
 subject, and with which indeed it erst formed one. 
 
 Now it is certain that the Jews did return from 
 Babylon to Jerusalem, that they did rebuild the walls 
 of the town, and that they did reconstruct the temple. 
 These main facts are indisputable; but there is 
 strong reason for doubting whether the details of the 
 process are literally such as have been handed down 
 to us. We have seen how the Northern States con¬ 
 quered the Southern States in America, and yet, 
 throughout the war, there were very few of the 
 
520 
 
 Ezra] published accounts of battles gained by the Northern¬ 
 ers which were truthful. We equally recognise that 
 Judah returned from captivity, although we disbelieve 
 that he was at the same time rich and poor. 
 
 In the first chapter of the book in question, we are 
 told that Cyrus encouraged the Jews to return to 
 Jerusalem, and that he restored to them all the vessels 
 of gold and silver that Nebuchadnezzar had taken 
 away, in number five thousand and four hundred. 
 Throughout the portion referred to, we recognise two 
 very striking facts, viz., that the ark of the covenant, 
 rich in gold though it was, was neither carried away 
 to Babylon nor returned therefrom, and that, amidst 
 all the treasures that were presented by Cyrus, there 
 is not a single roll book nor manuscript. There is 
 not even the faintest allusion made to the existence 
 of any; consequently, we infer that the King of 
 Babylon either did not find, or, finding, did not care 
 to keep, any of the records of the ancient Jews. 
 Hence we conclude that the authentic history of the 
 Jews can only date from the time of the restoration. 
 
 We are next informed that the Jews who went up 
 with Sheshbazzar amounted in number to about fifty 
 thousand persons in all, and they were accompanied 
 by eight thousand beasts of burden and two hundred 
 choristers. There is no mention made of cattle, 
 goats or sheep; nor can we well understand how a 
 nation, who had been slaves till recently, could pos¬ 
 sess flocks and herds. It is curious that in their 
 flight from Egypt, which was a land of horses, the 
 Jews should have had no beasts of burden; it is equally 
 curious that in their escape from Babylon they should 
 be attended by horses, mules and camels only. Not¬ 
 withstanding the omission, we are led to infer that 
 
521 
 
 Ezra] flocks and herds did accompany the returning Jews, 
 for their priests offered the daily sacrifice (ch. iii. 
 8-6), which consisted of two lambs per day (Num. 
 xxviii. 3); offerings which could not be made without 
 there being a flock of about three thousand sheep. 
 
 We soon lose sight of the horses, mules, camels, 
 &c .; a necessary consequence perhaps, inasmuch as 
 there was no pasture for them in a ruined city; and 
 we find that the forty thousand Jews are in terror of 
 the Samaritans. But though the work of the quon¬ 
 dam captives is hindered, we find, from the account 
 of their enemies (ch. iv. 12), that the walls of Jeru¬ 
 salem were set up, and the foundations joined together. 
 In this condition matters stood for an indefinite time; 
 but although nothing was done to the city wall, those 
 of the temple were raised, and the hands of the 
 faithful were strengthened by the prophets, Zechariah 
 and Haggai (ch. v. 1, 2). By and by, however, the 
 opposition offered by the Samaritans is reversed by an 
 order from Darius, who ordains that the elders of the 
 Jews shall be helped with “that which they have need 
 of, young bullocks, rams and lambs, for the burnt 
 offerings of the God of heaven ” (ch. vi. 9). This 
 verse is contradictory of the inference which we have 
 already drawn, and the reader must select between 
 the opposing statements. 
 
 The temple at length is finished, in the sixth year 
 of Darius (ch. vi. 15), after a period of forty and six 
 years, as we learn from the New Testament (John ii. 
 20). There is a grand feast of dedication, but we 
 search in vain for any particular style of worship. 
 The only mention which is made of sacred days is in 
 ch. iii. 5, wherein we are told that the new moons 
 were kept, to which is added vaguely, “ all the set 
 
522 
 
 Ezra] feasts of the Lord.” It is well worthy of remark that 
 neither Moses nor the Sabbath is mentioned, and the 
 writer appears only to know “the ordinance of David” 
 (ch. iii. 10). 
 
 In the seventh chapter, Ezra makes his appearance 
 on the scene, and he puzzles us no little; for we find 
 that the very Artaxerxes, whom we are told in ch. iv. 
 hindered the rebuilding of the city, now enjoins it. 
 He makes the same decree for Ezra that Cyrus had 
 made for Sheshbazzar, and gives him abundance of 
 gold and silver to buy “bullocks, rams and lambs,” 
 as well as all the vessels which Cyrus had already 
 sent to Jerusalem ! (Comp. ch. i. 6, 7, with ch. vii. 
 15-19). Ezra was ordered to appoint magistrates 
 and judges in the land, and was enjoined to teach 
 the laws of God to those who knew them not. To 
 him was also given power to kill, banish, im¬ 
 prison, or confiscate the goods of those who would 
 not do the law of God and of the King (ch. vii. 
 25, 26). We are, moreover, told that Ezra was a 
 “ ready scribe ” (ch. viii. 6), and that he prepared 
 his heart “ to seek the law of the Lord, and to do it, 
 and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments ” (ch. 
 vii. 10). This statement implies, firstly, that the 
 people did not know “ the law of the Lord,” that even 
 Ezra himself had to seek it; consequently we infer 
 that there was not then in existence any authoritative 
 “ book of the law : ” a conclusion that bears out the 
 deduction which we drew from the first chapter. As 
 we advance towards Judea with Ezra, we are sur¬ 
 prised to find that he is doing again what had been 
 already done by Sheshbazzar—of whose existence he 
 is apparently ignorant—but he evidently has not forty 
 thousand men with him, or he would never have 
 
528 
 
 Ezra] thought of a band of soldiers and horsemen as a safe¬ 
 guard. After the arrival of Ezra at Jerusalem (ch. 
 ix.), we find to our utter astonishment that the people, 
 priests, and Levites are able to find wives amongst 
 the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Am¬ 
 monites, Moabites, Egyptians, and Amorites, and have 
 married accordingly. The resuscitation of nations 
 long since destroyed is as remarkable as the ordinance 
 which Ezra enjoins for an almost universal divorce ; 
 for Moses allowed the Jews to marry the daughters of 
 the Midianites (Num. xxxi. 18), although he prohibited 
 them from intermarrying with the tribes of Canaan 
 (Deut. vii. 8); but though we can find the prohibition 
 now, it is clear that neither Solomon nor the Jewish 
 priests and Levites, in the time of Ezra, were cogni¬ 
 zant of it. After Ezra has enforced the decree which 
 he himself has made, his name disappears from the 
 pages of the Bible. 
 
 If we ask ourselves in what way he has distin¬ 
 guished himself, we can only answer, as a law-maker. 
 In him we recognise all the characteristics necessary 
 for organising a code, for the benefit of a compara¬ 
 tively ignorant people, who have just emerged from 
 slavery. In this capacity we find him recognised by 
 Nehemiah, who, although living at the court of 
 Artaxerxes during the lifetime of Ezra, seems to 
 have known nothing about him, or the orders which 
 the king had given to him respecting Jerusalem. At 
 the command of the pious Nehemiah, and of the 
 people, Ezra produces “ The hook of the Law of 
 Moses ” (Nehemiah viii. 1), and reads it out to the 
 people, who, by their attentive consideration, give clear 
 evidence of the fact that they were unacquainted with 
 it previously. 
 
524 
 
 Ezra] Guided by this light, we can readily understand 
 why we find so complete an apparent retrospect of the 
 history of the children of Israel in Nehemiah ix.; we 
 find no such knowledge shown by Samuel, David, 
 Solomon, or subsequent kings; neither Isaiah, Jere¬ 
 miah, nor Ezekiel gives such a recapitulation. It is 
 true that such an one is to be found amongst the 
 Psalms, e.g., lxxviii., but it is clear that this was not 
 written by David, any more than was the succeeding 
 one, and the cxxxviii. 
 
 In continuation of the narrative, we now proceed 
 to the history given in the book of Nehemiah. 
 Therein we find that in the time of Artaxerxes, the 
 second in succession at least after Cyrus, and in the 
 twentieth year of his reign, the wall of Jerusalem 
 was broken down, and the gates burned. Nehemiah 
 then is instrumental in building the wall of Jerusa¬ 
 lem, which we find, from Ezra iv. 12, had been built 
 already. 
 
 In the eighth chapter we find Ezra comes again 
 upon the scene, and on this occasion he attends with 
 a clean copy of the law of Moses; and in the last 
 chapter we find Nehemiah doing over again what 
 Ezra before had done, separating husbands from their 
 wives, because the latter were the people of the land. 
 We find, also, for the first time in Jewish history, 
 an authoritative enforcement of the Sabbath. From 
 the fifteenth and twenty-second verses it is clear that 
 neither the ordinary Jews nor the Levites had known 
 anything of this institution before, nor does even 
 Ezra himself, or Sheshbazzar, make any mention 
 of it. 
 
 With contradictions such as we have noticed, we 
 
525 
 
 Ezra] cannot assign any more historical value to the books 
 of Ezra and Nehemiah than we did to the Russian 
 bulletins of the progress of the allied forces before 
 Sebastopol, or the partizan accounts of the English 
 or the American rebellion. 
 
 Now it is perfectly clear to the scholar, and even 
 to the ordinary reader of the English version, that 
 many hands have been employed in writing the books 
 of the Old Testament. Two individuals at the least 
 have been concerned in Isaiah, and two probably in 
 Jeremiah. The visions of Ezekiel have no relation 
 with the foul practices of Hosea, nor can we attribute 
 Deuteronomy to the same author as Leviticus. This 
 being so, we cannot for a moment suppose that Ezra, 
 either with his own hand, or by the assistance of 
 others, fabricated the whole of the Old Testament. 
 It is much more probable that he and his coadjutors 
 had some manuscripts to manipulate, which purported 
 to be the work of bygone days. These could readily 
 be collated and digested,— a word, a sentence, a 
 paragraph, or a whole chapter being introduced, 
 whenever the exigency of the history seemed to 
 require it. 
 
 This supposition entirely removes the idea that 
 the ipsissima verba of the Bible are inspired. It 
 distinctly affirms that the Old Testament is as much 
 the work of man, as were the laws of Numa, pro¬ 
 pounded to him by the nymph Egeria, or the codes of 
 Mahomet, Joe Smith, and Brigham Young. It asserts 
 that the so-called sacred books of the Jews have no 
 more especial claim to sanctity than have the Shasters 
 and Yedas of the Hindoos, the Chinese book of Con¬ 
 fucius, or the Zend Avesta of the Persians. 
 
526 
 
 Ezra] Into the traditional accounts of Ezra, and the 
 peculiarities of the book which hears his name, we 
 forbear to enter; hut we must request the reader of 
 these pages to collate the account given by Daniel, 
 Ezra and Nehemiah. The first knows nothing of 
 either Ezra or Nehemiah, nor of the decree of Cyrus. 
 The second knows nothing of the wonderful Daniel, 
 although, as he informs us, he resided in Babylon 
 (Ezra vii. 9). The third is apparently equally igno¬ 
 rant both of Daniel and of Ezra, until he reaches 
 Jerusalem, when he hears of the latter. When all 
 were residing at the same court, and all were inte¬ 
 rested in the same subject, it is impossible to believe 
 that they could have been strangers to each other, 
 except upon the hypothesis that the existence of two 
 out of the three, if not of the whole, is apocryphal. 
 
 Ezri, (1 Chron. xxvii. 26), “ Jah is a helper.” 
 
 F, As there is no letter/in the Hebrew alphabet, there are 
 no Jewish names in which it occurs. The sound of 
 our / is equivalent to the Hebrew D, which may 
 be rendered by pk, whose pronunciation in English 
 does not materially differ from /. 
 
 Fig. —The fig tree is repeatedly joined with the vine by 
 the sacred writers. Both the trees have particular 
 significance to the initiated. The vine, amongst the 
 Greeks and Romans, was specially sacred to Bacchus. 
 The wine made from its fruits promoted jollity; and 
 as there are many to-day who find a higher poetic 
 inspiration from the moderate use of champagne 
 than from an extravagant use of “ tea,” so there were 
 many amongst the ancients who recognised a similar 
 influence, and saw therein the advent of a god. The 
 
527 
 
 Fig] very word “ spirituous,” which we apply to certain 
 liquors, tells of the same idea. 
 
 The fig tree has a similar signification. Its 
 Hebrew name is tenah, and it is derived 
 
 from the root 1^, which signifies “to be crookened 
 or bent,” like the stem of a fig tree ; also “to copu¬ 
 late,” “ to pant, toil, work, strive, groan, sigh or 
 complain.” The word expressive of the fig tree is 
 the same as that used for coitus. It was of the 
 leaves of this tree that aprons were made to cover 
 our naked parents, and none can see the leaf with¬ 
 out understanding the reason of the selection; it 
 resembles the “ trefoil,” the “ fleur de lys,” and 
 sundry other emblems suggestive of the triad. 
 
 It was from this cause, we presume, that fig leaves 
 were carried in processions in honour of Osiris in 
 Egypt, and that in Greece and Rome the wood of 
 the fig tree was selected for phallic statues. The 
 tree itself was sacred to Bacchus. The fruit of 
 the tree resembles in shape the virgin uterus; with 
 its stem attached, it symbolises the sistrum of Isis. 
 Its form led to the idea that it would promote 
 fertility. To this day, in Oriental countries, the 
 hidden meaning of the fig is almost as well known 
 as its commercial value. 77 
 
 We can point to other fruits which have been 
 used to symbolise things which it might be incon¬ 
 venient to express. The pine cone, the apple or 
 citron, the quince, the pomegranate and the almond 
 
 77 We have in use amongst us to-day the expression, “I do not care a fig;” 
 for an explanation of which, the reader must he referred to Two Essays on the 
 Worship of Priapus , London, 1855, wherein this expression is traced to its original 
 
 source. 
 
528 
 
 Fig] had all a well-known significance in ancient times. 
 The apricot is an euphemism to-day amongst the 
 French. We cannot doubt, when we put these con¬ 
 siderations together, that “ to sit under the vine and 
 the fig tree,” was an expression equivalent to enjoy¬ 
 ing all the luxuries of life — as an old prayer-book 
 expresses it— “ at bed and at board.” 
 
 We see, in pictures, that the virgin and child are 
 associated in modern times with the split apricot, 
 the pomegranate, rimmon, and the vine, just as was 
 the ancient Venus. 
 
 Felix, seems to owe its origin to an old Latin word, feo, 
 Greek, <pvoo, to fertilise or render fruitful; and there 
 are many frescoes taken from Pompeii which show 
 the idea the ancients had of felicity. 
 
 Fish = ^ dag = “to be fruitful”; also j-13, nun, = “to 
 sprout, to grow, increase, endure.” The fish was as 
 sacred amongst the Babylonians, Assyrians, and 
 Phoenicians as it is amongst Bomanists of to-day. 
 Christ is called Ix^S, or the fish. Jonah was 
 swallowed by a fish. The Jews were led to victory 
 by the Son of the Fish, whose other names were 
 Joshua and Jesus (the Saviour). Nun is still the 
 name of a female devotee. 
 
 The fish selected for honour amongst the ancients 
 was neither flat, globular, nor cylindrical; it was 
 more or less oval, and terminated in a forked tail. 
 In shape, it was like the almond, or the ‘ concha,’ 
 with the ‘ nates.’ Its open mouth resembles the “os 
 uteri,” still called “ os tincse,” or tench’s mouth. 
 Ancient priests are represented as clothed with a 
 fish, the head being the mitre (Fig. 19, p. 112). The 
 fish’s head, as a mitre, still adorns the heads of 
 
529 
 
 Fish] Romish bishops. The fish was sacred to Venus, 
 and was a favourite esculent amongst the luxurious 
 Romans. Fish was an emblem of fecundity. The 
 word nun, however, in the Hebrew, signifies to sprout, 
 to put forth, as well as fish; and thus the fish 
 symbolises the male principle in an active state. 
 The creature had a very strong symbolic connection 
 with the worship of Aphrodite, and the Romanists 
 still eat it on that day of the week called Dies 
 Veneris, Venus’ day. 
 
 At the present time, there are certain fish which 
 are supposed to give greatly increased virile power 
 to those who eat them. I have an indistinct recol¬ 
 lection . of a similar fact having been recorded in 
 Athenaeus, who quotes Theophrastus as his autho¬ 
 rity. The passage is to the effect, that a diet on 
 a certain fish enabled an Indian prince to show 
 one hundred proofs of his manhood in a single 
 day. The same writer mentions goat’s flesh as 
 having something of the same effect. The Assyrian 
 Oannes was represented as a man fish, (Plate I., 
 Fig. 20, page 119;) and the Capricorn or Goat, with 
 fish tail, in the Zodiac, is said to have been an 
 emblem of him (Fig. 96). 
 
 Fig. 96. 
 
 L L 
 
580 
 
 Fish] The fish was also asso¬ 
 ciated with Isis, who, like 
 Venus, represented the fe¬ 
 male element in creation. 
 
 This will readily he recog¬ 
 nised in Fig. 97, which is 
 copied from a small bronze 
 statuette in the Mayer 
 Museum, in the Free Li¬ 
 brary, at Liverpool. It 
 would be almost impossible 
 to find a group more illus¬ 
 trative of the connection 
 between the modern and the 
 ancient ideas of the virgin 
 and child and the fish. 
 
 The fish was also a sacred emblem amongst the 
 Buddhists, and Fig. 2, Plate III., shows very distinctly 
 the feminine nature of the type; it is associated with 
 the triad, the whole group forming the arba-il, the 
 four great gods, the originators of living beings. A 
 similar idea may he recognised in Figures 5 and 6, in 
 the same Plate. Fig. 6 represents the episcopal 
 method of giving benediction, in the name of the 
 Trinity ; whilst Fig. 5 illustrates the position of the 
 hands of the Jewish priest, when he blesses the 
 congregation ; the union of the male triad with the 
 single virgin is therein quite as conspicuous as it is 
 in the Buddhist emblem and the Assyrian theology. 
 
 Since writing the above, I have ascertained that 
 eating fish for supper, on Friday night, is a Jewish 
 custom or institution. As amongst that nation 
 fecundity is a blessing specially promised by the 
 Omnipotent, so it is thought proper to use human 
 
531 
 
 Fish] means for ensuring the blessing on the day set apart 
 to the Almighty. The Jewish Sabbath begins at sun¬ 
 set on Friday, and three meals are to be taken 
 during the day, which are supposed to have a 
 powerful aphrodisiac operation. The ingredients 
 are meat and fish, garlic and pepper; and the 
 particular fish selected, so far as I can learn, is the 
 skate — that which, in the Isle of Man, is still sup¬ 
 posed to be a powerful satyrion. The meal is 
 repeated twice on a Saturday. Mons. Lajard bears 
 testimony to the extent of this custom in the following 
 passage, though he does not directly associate it 
 with the fish, except that the latter are constantly 
 seen on coins, with the other attributes of Venus. 
 After speaking of the probable origin of the cult, he 
 says : “In our days, indeed, the Druses of Lebanon, 
 in their secret vespers, offer a true worship to the 
 sexual parts of the female, and pay their devotions 
 every Friday night —that is to say, the day which 
 was consecrated to Venus; the day in which, on his 
 side, the Mussulman finds in the code of Mahomet, 
 the double obligation to go to the mosque and to 
 perform the conjugal duty .”—Recherches sur le Culte 
 de Venus , p. 53. For the association of the fish with 
 Mvlitta, see Moladah, infra. 
 
 Fleur de Lys (Fig. 98). The flower is known 
 as one of the Koval emblems of Ancient 
 France. It has been adopted, apparently, 
 in consequence of its embodying the idea 
 of the Trinity, or Tria juncta in uno. But the 
 very fact of its being so will enable us to see that the 
 original idea of the triad was very different from, 
 that which now obtains. In the following wood- 
 cut, the position occupied by the lozenge and the 
 
 Fig. 98. 
 
582 
 
 Fleur de Lys] fleur de lys, tell unmistakably that the 
 latter had a phallic signification; and, by implication, 
 we learn hence that the modern Christian Trinity 
 is a modest adaptation of an ancient and indecent 
 myth. In no part of the New Testament is the word 
 ‘ Trinity ’ to be found; nor can the idea be seen, 
 distinctly, either in the Gospels or the Epistles. 
 When the later followers of Christ adopted the 
 heathen notion of a triune God, they very naturally 
 endeavoured to make the Apostolic doctrines square 
 with the new views, and some went so far as to 
 interpolate passages to suit their purpose. 
 
 The wood-cut below is copied from Plate I., 
 Fig. 2, Lajard’s Culte de Venus —having been taken 
 by him from a cylinder in the British Museum. 
 
 The central tree corresponds to the Hebrew 
 tamar, “ the palm tree,” one of the emblems of the 
 phallus. The fruits hanging therefrom are appa¬ 
 rently intended to represent the testes, while the 
 tall stamen , with its two anthers , equally symbolise 
 the masculine. The diamond, in front of the male, 
 is a conventional form of the female element. The 
 fleur de lys, in front of the female, we have already 
 
 Fig. 99. 
 
 (Copied from a Babylonian gem, figured by Lajard.) 
 
588 
 
 Fleur de Lys] described. The animal itself is the spotted 
 goat, Leaphrah ? (See Beth Leaphrah.) 
 
 The palm tree, Sarah, is an emblem of the 
 celestial goddess, because the same letters have the sig¬ 
 nification of f being prominent,’ as during pregnancy. 
 
 G-, in Hebrew i, gimel, the third letter in the Phoenician, 
 Hebrew, and Greek alphabets, is named after a camel. 
 In all three its original form resembled the English 
 L, transposed thus T; when the style of writing from 
 right to left became changed, as it did in Greece, to 
 our present fashion, the 'j became T, a form it still 
 retains as gamma. In sound, a is related closely with 
 n ch, D k, p qu, or k , and y; it is interchangeable 
 with all of them, and more rarely with * y, 2 h, and h l. 
 
 Gaal, (Judges ix. 26), “ The proud or erected Al,” or “A1 
 is high or lofty,” from ^ and We must, I think, 
 associate this word with Gil, Gal, Gallus, Gaul, Gull, 
 and a great number of other modern words of similar 
 sound. It also signifies ‘ impurity,’ but in the later 
 Hebrew it may signify ‘ pushed up,’ equivalent to 
 our ‘ peak , or pike. ’ 
 
 Gaash, (Joshua xxiv. 30), “to push,” “to thrust.” 
 
 Gabbi, (Neh. xi. 8), “an exacter of tribute,” Gesen. 
 This word may be a contraction of **!, and ', 
 ge, ah , and i, and equivalent to “ High is my father.” 
 
 Gabkiel, ^' 133 , (Daniel viii. 16). This is the name of 
 one of the Assyrian or Babylonian Angels, adopted 
 into the Jewish and Christian Theology. We may 
 readily find two etymologies. In the Cuneiform, gahah 
 signifies “ to speak,” and gah is “ the mouth,” 
 whilst riel (which we have repeatedly as reel , e.g. Jez- 
 reel,) is the same as regal, royal. Ra, re, or ri was 
 an ancient name for the Sun, now roi, rex , re, ‘ reg ina,’ 
 
534 
 
 Gabriel] and Al, El, or II, was * The Almighty.’ Thus the 
 whole word would have the meaning of 44 The mouth¬ 
 piece of the Almighty, Sun, or God.” Nor does this 
 etymology seem inappropriate to Gabriel’s character, 
 inasmuch as he is often sent by the Almighty to 
 communicate with men by word of mouth. We have 
 the word Gab amongst us, signifying 4 to prate.’ 
 Gabej, is a fool, who goes about open-mouthed. 
 44 The Gift of the Gab ” represents eloquence; and we 
 still have the word Gob, which means 4 a mouthful.’ 
 
 The Hebrew etymology would be gabar, and 
 el. The first signifies to be 4 strong,’ 4 proud,’ ‘erect,’ 
 also 4 a man.’ The second denotes 4 God,’ the 4 Sun,’ 
 or 4 Asshur,’ and this rendering would make Gabriel 
 4 the Man God,’ or 4 the Strong Al; ’ or 4 A1 is 
 strong, erect; ’ or 4 Al is a Hero.’ I prefer the first 
 etymology, as more consonant with probability. 
 
 Gad, (Gen. xxx. 11), means 4 Luck,’ 4 Good Fortune,’ in 
 every way. It was a name borne by a Phoenician 
 and Babylonian goddess, who has been identified with 
 Astarte or Ishtar. We infer from the meanings of 
 n ?|, gadah, i. e. “ to swell up on high, swelling flesh, 
 to cast out, the fruit of the body, an epithet of Yenus; ” 
 that the Good Fortune implied, was that which 
 brought les bonnes fortunes, increase of offspring, as 
 well as of material riches. Lajard tells us that, to 
 this day, the Arabs call Jupiter the star of Great 
 Fortune, and Yenus that of Small Fortune. Amongst 
 the Romans, Yenus was called 4 the fortune of heaven.’ 
 (Op. Cit. p. 77.) The Greek equivalent to the name 
 was tv’x/i, whence comes the modern Tyclio. The 
 word Gad resembles the modern Good. 
 
 That Gad was a name used by nations whom the 
 Jews called Heathen, we see in 2 Sam. xxiv. 5, Num- 
 
535 
 
 Gad] bers xxxiii. 45, 46, Josh. xv. 37; and we may fairly 
 express surprise that a prophet, respected by David, 
 should have borne the name of a Phoenician goddess, 
 Astarte; but when we remember that king’s dancing, 
 performed in honour of the ark, the wonder ceases. 
 We can readily believe that his mind was essentially 
 religious and moulded by prophets, just as that of the 
 modern Queen of Spain is influenced by the confessors 
 to whom she trusts her conscience. Almost all 
 ancient, and the bulk of modern, history has been 
 written by individuals of the priestly order, or by men 
 who have themselves a strong opinion as to the supe¬ 
 riority of their faith over every other; and a king is 
 painted as superlatively good, or outrageously bad, 
 according to the measure of power he allows to the 
 hierarchy, and the extent to wdiich he permits him¬ 
 self to be influenced by their chiefs. Solomon is 
 depicted by the sacred scribes in very different guise 
 to that in which he appeared to the people. To the 
 former, he was almost a demigod; to the latter, he 
 was a grievous tyrant, who indirectly brought about 
 the rupture of the kingdom — just as the glories of 
 Louis Quatorze and the dissoluteness of Louis Quinze 
 were the causes of the Revolution in the days of 
 Louis Seize. 
 
 Gaddi, ^ (Numb. xiii. 11), is very probably an altered form 
 of P'1?, gadiah, or ‘ Jah is good fortune,’ the n being 
 as usual elided. This etymology is strengthened by 
 the following word, in which Gad is associated with 
 El. (Compare Cadi, Gades, Cadiz.) 
 
 Gaddiel, ^?'?? (Numb. xiii. 10), “ El is Gad.” 
 
 Gadi, (2 Kings xv. 14), a variant of Gaddi. 
 
 Gaham, (Genesis xxii. 24), = “ He is flaming.” See 
 Nahor, whose son he was; also Rebekah. 
 
536 
 
 Gahab, “^1 (Ezra ii. 47), ‘ A hiding place.’ 
 
 Galah, ; galah, signifies “ To be, or to make, naked.” 
 Compare the feast in which David figured, which 
 his wife saw, and described thus bitterly: “ How 
 glorious was the king of Israel to-day, who uncovered 
 himself to-day in the eyes of the handmaids of his 
 servants, as one of the vain fellows shamelessly 
 uncovereth himself” (2 Sam. vi. 20); David pleading 
 not that he had not done so, but that it was ‘ before 
 the Lord; ’ thus giving us an indication of the 
 coarse (as we think) nature of certain holy ceremo¬ 
 nials. Compare this, we say, with our galas , and the 
 ancient feasts on gala days in Babylon; in the 
 former of which there is usually a vast amount of 
 licentiousness, while in the latter, the partakers of 
 the feast threw off their dress, as the heat of wine 
 and wassail increased, until they became entirely 
 nude. 
 
 Galal, (1 Chron. ix. 15), “the roller,” “he rolls like a 
 stone.” A variant of Gallim; possibly from 
 gelah, and el = ‘El reveals.’ 
 
 Galilee, (Josh. xx. 7), I think signifies “ the rolling 
 sun.” 
 
 Galli, See Eunuchs. 
 
 Gallim, (1 Sam. xxv. 44), signifies “ the balls, or small 
 globes,” “oil cruets,” “bowls, reservoirs, springs.” 
 A town of the Benjamites, most probably the plural 
 of n ^, ‘ the testes.’ The usual translation is, 4 the 
 two fountains,’ which is more euphemistic. 
 
 Gallus. The connection between the cock, the sun, and 
 the idea of masculinity, has existed from the earliest 
 known times to the present. We do not find any 
 Hebrew name for the bird; the Greek word is uxUrwp. 
 or tx\sxTpuwv; nor have I any knowledge whether 
 
537 
 
 Gallus] the name Gall as is anterior, or posterior, to the 
 Shemitic Gula, the Assyrian name for the female sun; 
 Hebrew ^in, gul, ‘ to move in a circle.’ The union 
 of ideas appears to be— 1. That the cock proclaims 
 the sun-rise. 2. That the cock is for its size 
 unusually strong, ‘plucky,’ and courageous. 3. That 
 it seems to have unlimited powers amongst the 
 hens. 
 
 In myths, it is associated with the head, and 
 sometimes with the body, of a man, and sometimes 
 with the head of the ram. There is a very remark¬ 
 able figure copied in Payne Knight’s work, in which 
 we see on a man’s shoulders a cock’s head, its beak 
 being the zachar; whilst on the pediment are placed 
 the words 2I2THP K02M0T, Soter Kosmou, ‘ the 
 Saviour of the world.’ 
 
 Gamaliel, (Numb. i. 10), probably “ El expects,” or 
 
 “El is strong,” “El recompenses;” from HD3, gamah , 
 and el. 
 
 Gammadims, (Ezek. xxvii. 11), “ warriors, mercenaries, 
 or professed soldiers.” 
 
 Gareb, (2 Sam. xxiii. 38), “ he scratches, or scrapes; ’ 
 hence Grub, Grab. The name was borne by one of 
 David’s captains ; and Gesenius renders it £ scabby; ’ 
 it was probably a nickname. 
 
 Gard, Cuneiform, “Powerful.” Compare Lago di Garda, 
 Marie de la Gard, the Saint par excellence of 
 Marseilles; also Guard. 
 
 Garmi (1 Ohron. iv. 19), “ He is bony, or strong; ” 
 most likely a variant of Carmi, ‘ the crimson one.’ 
 
 Gaspur, Caspar, Kasper, Cuneiform, means “ The Omni¬ 
 scient,” “the comforter;” Hebrew Nip&pJi, gashpa, = 
 ‘ attentive listening ; ’ also * to soothe tenderly.’ 
 
 Gatam, BW* (Gen. xxxv. 11), said to mean “ Their touch” 
 
588 
 
 Gatam] (Gesenius), “ a dried up valley ” (Fiirst) ; more 
 probably a variant of Gittaim, “ the wine presses.” 
 
 Gath, ^ (Josbna xi. 22), signifies “ A wine press,” or 
 rather “the trough in which the grapes are trod¬ 
 den ; ” also “ slit, pit, hole, well.” This is one of 
 the many euphemisms used for the vulva. It was 
 also one of the names of Ashtoreth. Its etymology 
 may be gath = 1?, gad (Fiirst). (See Gad.) 
 
 Gath-hepher, (Josh. xix. 18), signifies “ The heifer’s 
 
 trough; ” and 
 
 Gath-rimmon, ttern* (Josh. xix. 49), signifies “The pome¬ 
 granate’s wine press; ” whilst Gittaim, a town of 
 Benjamin, is named after the troughs of all the 
 goddesses. Gathibir was the name of one of the 
 four very old Bahylonian gods. (See supra, p. 54.) 
 
 Gaza, W (Gen. x. 19), signifies “Strong;” and VTJ, geza, 
 signifies ‘ the trunk of a tree.’ A phallic emblem. 
 
 Gazzam, (Ezra ii. 48), “ A swaggerer ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Gazez, W (1 Chron. ii. 46), “ He or it is firm or strong; ” 
 also “the strengthened” It is sometimes rendered 
 “ Azaz.” 
 
 Geba, Gibeah, Gaba, (Josh, xviii. 24), “ Hill,” (Gesen.) 
 The word conveys the idea of anything gibbous . In 
 Arabia the mountains are still called Jibel, or Djebel. 
 That there is union in idea between the full womb 
 and a hill, cannot be doubted by those who attend 
 to the marginal readings of our Bibles, for in them 
 we find that the phrase translated “ripping up women 
 with child ” signifies literally “ dividing the moun¬ 
 tains.” We may accept the etymology of “ a hill ” 
 for any town on a rising ground, but not as the 
 proper name of a man; and though Geba may 
 simply signify ‘ a town,’ Gibea , as a man’s name, will 
 signify something different. 
 
589 
 
 Gebal, ^ (Ps. lxxxiii. 7), is simply “a mountain,” or 
 “ mountain of El.” 
 
 Geber, ">9v (1 Kings iv. 19), “A man,” or “strong, mighty, 
 impetuous.” 
 
 Gebim, (Isa. x. 81), “ The high ones ; ” plural of^33. 
 
 Gedaliah, (2 Kings xxv. 22), probably “Jah is 
 
 majestic.” 
 
 Geder, (Josh. x. 13), “ He surrounds with a wall.” 
 
 Gederah, (Josh. xv. 36), “ The fortress,” or “ she 
 
 surrounds, or guards.” 
 
 Gederoth, Gederothaim, (Josh. xv. 41, 36), plural 
 
 of the preceding word. 
 
 Gedor, (1 Chron. iv. 4), “ Wall of defence.” 
 
 Gehazi, or 'ly* (2 Kings iv. 12). There is no satis¬ 
 factory etymon for this word. 
 
 Gemalli, (Numb. xiii. 12). This is rendered by Gese- 
 nius and Fiirst, “ one who possesses camels; ” it may 
 be so, but as names were given, as a rule, shortly 
 after birth, we can scarcely fancy such a name appro¬ 
 priate to an infant. It is probably from gamal, 
 and n ', jah, the n, as usual, being elided, and sig¬ 
 nifies “Jah makes perfect,” or “Jah is strong.” 
 
 Gemariah, n HP* 1 (Jerem, xxix. 3), “ Jah is perfection,” or 
 “Jah perfects; ” from ">P|, gamar, and jah; in 
 this instance the n being retained. 
 
 Gentiles, goim, (Josh. xii. 23), simply signifies “The 
 nations,” “other peoples,” “the heathen.” 
 
 Genubath, (1 Kings ii. 20'. I find no satisfactory 
 etymon for the name. Fiirst reads it as “ connected 
 with K vou<pi$.” 
 
 Gera, (Gen. xlvi. 21), signifies “ El glows, burns, or 
 is jealous,” “ El splits; ” from garah, and el, 
 the b being, as usual, elided. The name was borne 
 by a Benjamite, and it is amongst that tribe that 
 
540 
 
 Gera] the most coarse allusions in the nomenclature are 
 found. 
 
 Gerar, “n* (Gen. x. 19), “ The circle, or region” (Fiirst). 
 
 Gerizim, (Jud. ix. 7, Deut. xi. 9), “ Desert mountain.” 
 
 Gerizite, or Girzite, (1 Sam. xxyi. 8), “ Desert land,” 
 or “ waste places ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Gershon, I*™ (Exod. ii. 22), “ On thrusts, or puts forth 
 fruit,” from garash, and jitf, On. 
 
 Gesham, (1 Chron. ii. 47), “Firm or strong” (Fiirst). 
 
 Geshem, (Nehem. ii. 19), = “rain,” or “he rains;” 
 probably altered from M?}, gasham , ‘ he is thick, or 
 firm.’ 
 
 Geshur, (2 Sam. xiii. 87), = “ He binds,” also “ a 
 bridge,” “bridge-land” (Fiirst). 
 
 Gether, (Genesis x. 28), Etymon unknown; possibly 
 a variant of Geder. 
 
 Geuel, (Numb. iii. 15), “ El is magnificence,” or 
 
 “ El is on high; ” geeh, ‘to be high, or lifted up.’ 
 
 Gezer, or Gazar, TO (Joshua x. 88), compare Gaza. If 
 TO = Gaza, Gezer may be derived from TO. The 
 usual etymon is “ a piece cut off,” or “ a precipice ; ” 
 a very absurd name for a royal city. That adopted 
 from the one suggested would be either “he strength¬ 
 ens,” or “ he hedges us round about,” and this would 
 be analogous to Gaza. 
 
 Giah, TO (2 Sam. ii. 24), “ He bubbles up,” “ a fountain.” 
 
 Gibbar, 13? (Ezra ii. 20), “A hero, or soldier,” or gibur, 
 ‘ he is strong, mighty.’ 
 
 Gibeon, PV?* 1 (Joshua ix. 8), “ On is exalted,” “ Heights 
 of On; ” gabah, ‘to be high,’ and pK, On. 
 
 Gibea, (1 Chron. ii. 49), probably “El is high, or 
 arched,” from V?|, gaba, and the h being as usual 
 elided. 
 
 Gibeah, HJTO (Joshua xv. 57), probably “ Jah is high,” the 
 
541 
 
 Gibeah] ' being elided from n ', to obliterate the name of 
 Jehovah from a Canaanite village. 
 
 Gibbethon, (Joshua xix. 44), “A high place.” 
 Giddalti, (1 Chron. xxv. 4). I can find no satis¬ 
 
 factory etymon for this name. 78 
 Giddel, (Ezra ii. 47), “the great one,” probably an 
 
 altered form of ^7^ gadal, “El is good fortune, or 
 Gad,” the k of being elided. 
 
 Gideon, (Judges vi. 11), “ On breaks asunder.” 
 
 Gideoni, (Numb. i. 11), a variant of the above. 
 
 Gidgad, (Numb, xxxiii. 32), “ The cleft.” 
 
 Gidom, (Judges xx. 45), “ Desolation.” Fiirst. 
 
 Gihon, (Gen. ii. 18), “A stream.” 
 
 Gil, signifies “exultation, rejoicing, to leap for joy, to 
 rejoice;” and is ‘a heap of stones/ 4 a circle,’ 
 ‘he goes in a circle,’ i. e. the sun (see Gilgal). 
 Compare Giles, St. Giles, Gillian, Gilchrist, Gilfillan, 
 Gilbert, Gilbrid, Gilcolum, Gildas, Gileber, Gilescop, 
 Gilfred, Gill, Gillespie, Gillel, Gilli, Gillies, Gil- 
 michel, Gilmony, Gilmour, Gilmore, Gilpatrick, 
 Gilbey, Gilpin, Gylbyn; also, possibly, Julia, Jill, 
 and others. 
 
 Gilalai, (Neh. xii. 86), most probably from ^|, gallal, 
 
 78 Fiirst’s explanation of tliis word is too interesting to be omitted. He remarks 
 that Giddalti is one of the musical sons of Heman; and they are thus given (1 Chron. 
 xxv. 4): “ Giddalti and Romamti-ezer, Joshbekashah, Mallothi, Hothir, and Maha- 
 zioth; ” and that his name, with the names of four of his brothers, form an old 
 prophetic saying, i. e., “ I have dealt out fame and victorious help ; I have spoken 
 oracles in fulness; ” one with which an oracle began. The words in Hebrew are the 
 following: *Vj» 'rfna rrtannn *vnin which reads Mallothi, Hothir, 
 
 Mahazioth, Giddalti, and Romamti-ezer. 
 
 I cannot fail to acknowledge the superior sagacity of Fiirst, nor to express my 
 interest in the clue thus afforded as to the methods adopted by the oracle, or by the 
 historian for the selection of cognomens. If the names were given consecutively by 
 the former, we must admire his memory; if by the latter, we presume that he was 
 familiarly acquainted with the usual oracular formula. In whichever way we regard 
 it, the appellative is evidence of the existence of Oracles amongst the Jews, whose 
 nature resembled that of Delphi, Dodona, or Jupiter Ammon. 
 
542 
 
 Gilalai] and jah , the n being dropped, and signifying 
 “ Jah moves in a circle.” 
 
 Gilboa V 3 r 5 - 1 (1 Sam. xxxi. 1), “ The Snn is Baal,” from >13 
 gul, ‘to move in a circle’ = Sun = Gula (Assyrian); 
 and being an elided form of just as ^ and 
 are represented by « and *, the h and n being dropped. 
 
 Gilead, (Gen. xxxi. 21), “the Sun,” ‘the witness.’ 
 
 Gilgal, (Deut. xi. 30), ‘A wheel,’ ‘a circle,’ or ‘the 
 Sun’s heap of stones.’ ^ Gal, signifying ‘a heap of 
 stones,’ also ‘ a bowl,’ so called from its being round. 
 It also signifies ‘a rolling,’ or ‘a rolling away.’ The 
 word is translated To AyoA,raAy«Ao£, 
 and TaAyaA#, by the Septuagint. 
 
 Three Gilgals are mentioned, one 
 near Jericho, one a royal city of 
 the Canaanites, and one in the 
 mountains. 
 
 The one near Jericho consisted of a circle of twelve 
 stones; and we are told that Samuel came regularly 
 in circuit to it. It was also a sort of rendezvous for 
 Saul’s army. 
 
 Though a circle, it was also a hill — “the hill of 
 the foreskins;” and I would notice, in passing, that 
 circumcision forms a link between the stone and iron 
 age, inasmuch as Zipporah circumcised the sons she 
 bore to Moses with a sharp stone, and the sharp knives 
 which Joshua employed were flint, a material still 
 used amongst the Jews when an adult is circumcised. 
 I doubt the value of the link, for shell knives were 
 used for castrating the Galli; very probably, because 
 ‘concha’ meant both ‘a shell,’ and ‘the female organ;’ 
 and chalmish , ‘flint,’ the hardest known rock, 
 
 may have been used, as foreshadowing the stony 
 hardness which the adult would desiderate. The word 
 
543 
 
 Gilgal] Gilgal is specially interesting to us, as we have 
 almost the identical word amongst ourselves, in Gaelic 
 Scotland and Brittany, to designate a “ cairn,” or hill 
 of small stones, usually circular, and with a central 
 menhir, or tall stone in the centre. The modern 
 word is Galgal, and a very interesting account of the 
 nature of the erection will be found in Colonel Forbes 
 Leslie’s Early Races of Scotland. Galgals, dedicated 
 to Betal or Vital, wonderfully like to the Baetuli of 
 the Phens, are to be found in India, where they are 
 both of ancient and modern construction, and along 
 all the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, in Central 
 Europe and Asia, and in almost every part of the 
 British Islands, including the Orkneys, where the 
 number is considerable. 
 
 They were common in the time of the classic 
 Greeks and Romans, and through them we have 
 tolerably good proof of the ideas with which they 
 were constructed. By them they were known as 
 Hermai. 
 
 The learned Dr. Ginsburg, in his Life of Levita , 79 
 apropos of an observation in a letter, “ Do you think 
 that I would throw stones to a Hermes?” has the fol¬ 
 lowing note, which, thought short, is pregnant with 
 meaning: — “Levita alludes to the ancient mode of 
 worship offered to the heathen deity Hermes, which 
 consisted in mere heaps of stone, called 'Ep^aToi A otpoi, 
 eppoiiot or eppctxes, being the symbol of Phallus, and 
 thus giving rise to the ithyphallic arrow-form of 
 Hermes. These heaps of stones were more especially 
 collected on the road-sides, and each traveller paid 
 his homage to the deity by throwing a stone to the 
 
 79 Note 28, page 98, The Massoreth Ha-Massoreth of Elias Levita, London, 
 Longmans, 1867, pp. 307. 
 
544 
 
 Gilgal] heap as he passed by, or anointed the heap of stones 
 in which a Hermes was frequently set up, or offered 
 up the firstlings. Comp. Gen. xxviii. 10-22, xxxi. 
 45-48 ; Sanhedrin 61a- 64a; Midrash on Prov. 26a, 
 pK p"M3 YQ3 p*?W b, being the law 
 referred to by Levita. Pauly, Real Encyclopadie der 
 classischen Alterthumswissenschaft, s. v. Mercurius.” 
 
 Any worshipper, or any sufferer who wished to 
 invoke the God’s aid, might set up a Hermes. This 
 was originally nothing more than an upright stone ; 
 Dolman, Tolman, or Menhir. It varied, however, 
 according to the fancy or wealth of the devotee, and 
 became a hewn obelisk, or a sort of inverted long 
 pyramid, surmounted by a head ; and then, as if to 
 show the idea unmistakeably, the upright stone was 
 adorned by the phallic triad. After being once set 
 up, every traveller was expected to add a stone to the 
 original heap. In India, at the present day, where 
 Galgals are still erected, all those who wish to join in 
 the religious ceremony take each a stone, which they 
 set upright in a circle, leaving a larger space between 
 a certain two than between the others, to indicate the 
 entrance for the procession (Figs. 85, 86, p. 352). 
 The parties then form in line, and proceed round the 
 enclosure, in the course of the sun. In some places 
 each stone is smeared with red paint at the top—the 
 present form, it is surmised, of a baptism of blood— 
 the older custom being to sacrifice one of the party 
 selected by lot, his blood being used to anoint the 
 pillars; the place thereafter became sacred. When 
 the party was numerous, the stone circle was filled up 
 and became a Cairn or Galgal. Whether in the form 
 of one or other, the chief performer, whether regular 
 priest or local magician, was represented by the 
 
545 
 
 Gilgal] largest stone, where he took his place. Such heaps 
 were used as trysting places, whence judgment decrees, 
 &c., were given. The Tynwald mound, modern repre¬ 
 sentative of the Danish “ Thingwell,” in the Isle of 
 Man, is probably such a hill. It is still resorted to 
 on certain occasions, and at it new laws are confirmed 
 and promulgated. 
 
 Those who will take the trouble to read Forbes 
 Leslie’s hook will be struck with the identity of cus¬ 
 toms prevalent over a large surface of the globe; 
 and will see, I think, reason to believe that two 
 nations have existed over Asia and Europe, the one 
 nomadic, and ramifying entirely by land, the other 
 maritime like ourselves, and extending itself by ships. 
 As the respective families have spread themselves, so 
 their religions have accompanied them, and the Philo¬ 
 sopher, when he sees heathen rites, ceremonies, or 
 customs still extant among ourselves, in spite of 
 centuries of Christian preaching, cannot fail to put 
 to himself the questions—how far the ancient has 
 modified the modern faith ? to what extent certain 
 ecclesiastical practices are the modern representatives 
 of ancient heathendoni ? and how far the ancient 
 theological dogmas have given rise to those which are 
 current now ? The Gilgal near Jericho forcibly brings 
 to mind the subject of circumcision. We are told that 
 this rite was specially given by God to Abraham, in 
 token of a covenant; and when the ordinance was 
 given He declared the penalty of death against a man- 
 child who had not been duly circumcised (Gen. xvii. 
 14); yet Moses neither circumcised his own offspring, 
 nor took any pains whatever to see that the Israelites, 
 who were under his guidance and rule for forty years, 
 should regularly undergo this operation. So careless 
 
 M M 
 
546 
 
 Gilgal] was lie indeed about it, that Joshua bad to superin¬ 
 tend the circumcision of the whole of the male popu¬ 
 lation. We conclude, then, either that Moses did not 
 order or enforce the rite, or that he thought nothing 
 of it. Moreover, we must believe that the Almighty 
 cared no more about circumcision than Moses him¬ 
 self ; for we are told that He habitually visited the 
 lawgiver and the camp, and punished with severity 
 such sins as discontent with the manna and gathering 
 sticks on the Sabbath, and yet habitually passed by 
 in silence the neglect of the most important rite, the 
 very sign of His covenant with Abraham ! 80 
 
 Again, if we turn to such contemporary history 
 as is open to us, we find that the Egyptians were all 
 circumcised; as were also the Syrians of Palestine, 
 who, according to Herodotus, copied it from the for¬ 
 mer. By the nature of the rite it could only be used 
 
 80 It is impossible for a thoughtful mind to overlook the vast importance of this 
 fragment of circumstantial evidence. As the crime of murder is frequently 
 detected by a scrap of paper, or a bit of rag, so the crime of bearing false witness 
 is detected by incongruities in testimony. We remember the story of Susannah with 
 the elders, whom Daniel convicted of perjury, and we may to a certain extent 
 imitate his example. 
 
 The theory advanced by our theologians is, that the Bible is the infallible word 
 of God—that the books which it contains were written by those whose names they 
 hear — that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, and that every thing therein contained is 
 real history. But when we examine the witnesses brought forward to support 
 this assertion, we find that their testimony does not agree together. Genesis asserts 
 that the rite of circumcision was given to Abraham as the token of a covenant, 
 between him and his seed on one side, and the Almighty on the other. Exodus is 
 all but silent on the point; it merely tells us that Zipporah circumcised her son to 
 save him from the Lord (Ex. iv. 24-26); but it does not tell as that circumcision was 
 then an Egyptian custom, and, when cross questioned, it demonstrates that Moses 
 either did not know or did not care anything about the rite, although, being brought 
 up as an Egyptian, he must himself have been circumcised. Leviticus and Numbers 
 not only testify that Moses knew nothing of the subject, but that the Almighty was 
 equally indifferent about it. Yet Deuteronomy speaks as if the ordinance was fami¬ 
 liar to the Jews in the wilderness; e. g., what possible idea could men form of the 
 metaphor, “Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart” (Deut. x. 16), unless 
 they knew what was meant by circumcision, and how could they tell this unless 
 they habitually practised it? We find the same metaphor repeated in Deut. xxx. 6. 
 
547 
 
 Gilgal] for males; consequently, if it were a mark of a cove¬ 
 nant between the Almighty and man, it is clear that 
 women were not included in that covenant. With this 
 accords the ancient and modern idea, that females 
 only enter Paradise if franked by males. The surgeons 
 to-day tell us that circumcision was adopted as an 
 effectual preventive of certain forms of disease to 
 which the natural organ is peculiarly liable. I 
 cannot myself imagine that the God whom we adore 
 as the maker of all things, would only tolerate the 
 worship of those who adopted the plan of mutilating, 
 in one particular part, all the males which He had 
 formed, thus allowing that man had been bunglingly 
 made; but I can readily understand how a priest, 
 himself a man, should promulgate such a rite, and 
 dignify his sanitary direction with the pretended 
 sanction of Divine authority. Such things are done 
 in Mormondom to-day. It is a question whether 
 there is greater blasphemy in disbelieving the man 
 who assumes to wield the authority of the Most High, 
 or in giving him credit, and endeavouring to believe 
 that the Deity is intensely carnal. Of one thing we 
 may be assured, that the rite during its palmy days 
 
 Joshua, the next witness, tells us that the Lord himself endured for forty years 
 in the wilderness the culpable neglect of Moses, hut that Joshua inaugurated his 
 own rule by a sweeping revolution. Now the testimony of these witnesses is hope¬ 
 lessly irreconcileable, and, instead of supporting the theory advanced, such evidence 
 leads us to infer, 
 
 1. That the law, as found in Exodus, Numbers and Leviticus, was written before 
 the Jews had learned the rite of circumcision, or after it had become so very general 
 that no legislation on the subject was necessary. 2. That Genesis was written about 
 the time when the custom was imported from the Egyptians, either directly in the 
 time of Solomon, or indirectly through the Philistines or Phoenicians, about the 
 time of Saul. 3. That the Jews certainly did not learn the practice prior to their 
 alleged sojourn in the land of Pharaoh. 4. That Deuteronomy was written after 
 the practice of circumcision had become general. 5. That Joshua was written 
 between the promulgation of Genesis and of Deuteronomy. To this subject we 
 shall return hereafter. 
 
548 
 
 Gilgal] shows as completely the fleshly ideas that entered 
 into the human conception of the Creator, as the 
 disuse of the ceremony, and the adoption of baptism 
 in its place, typifies a spiritual faith, the abasement 
 of brute instincts, and an endeavour to cultivate 
 mental virtues rather than corporeal powers. 
 
 Giloh, (Jos. xv. 51), = “The revealer;” signifies 
 4 to be, or make, naked,’ 4 to uncover, disclose, or 
 reveal.’ 
 
 Gimzo, (2 Chron. xxviii. 18), 44 A place abounding with 
 sycamores.” (Gesenius.) 
 
 Ginath, fU'l (1 Kings xvi. 21), probably the virgins ” ; 
 plural of IJ or n 2*! or 44 the goddesses.” (See supra, 
 
 pp. 21, 22.) 
 
 Ginnethon, (Neh. x. 6), 44 The power of the virgins ”? 
 JUJI, ginath, and fix, on. 
 
 Girgashite, (Genesis x. 16), 44 Dwelling in a clayey 
 
 soil”? (Gesenius.) 
 
 Gispa, (Nehem. ii. 21), 44 Soothing,” or 44 attentive 
 
 listening.” 
 
 Gittaim, (2 Sam. iv. 8), 44 The two troughs, or slits,” 
 4 wine presses; ’ possibly a plural form of Gad, or 
 4 Alma Mater,’ 4 the Mother of the Child.’ 4 Diana 
 and Ceres.’ 4 Alitta and Ishtar.’ 
 
 Gittite, (2 Samuel vi. 10), 44 An inhabitant of Gath.” 
 The cithera or harp was said to be of Gittite origin, 
 whence its name. (Gesenius.) 
 
 Gizrites, 'JJI (1 Sam. xxvii. 8), compare Gezer and Gerazim ; 
 as gizrah, mrn, signifies 4 the form or figure of a 
 man, from cutting and forming,’ it is possible that 
 it may also mean 4 tattooing; ’ or it may come from 
 "1!J, and signify 4 astrologers.’ 
 
 Goath, (Jer. xxxi. 39), 44 The heifers.” Wj signifies 4 to 
 low as an ox,’ whence the Greek, yoaco ; Sanscrit, 
 
549 
 
 Goath] gau; Malab. ko; Persic, kau,gau; German, ko,cow, 
 kuh. (Gesenius.) 
 
 Gob, (2 Sam. xxi. 18), “ A pit, or den.” 
 
 God, ?*?, mn\ A word used very indefinitely, 1. For 
 any one held in reverence by the ancients, and of 
 the male sex. 2. As a convenient method of express¬ 
 ing our ideas of the Almighty, e. g. God of Love, 
 Mercy, &c. 8. To express the Being whom we 
 
 ourselves reverence. Any one, who will carefully 
 analyse his own thoughts on the subject, will readily 
 see in what way that confusion which exists in 
 Theology has been produced. 
 
 To grasp, however faintly, the idea which we 
 endeavour to express by the word in its third signifi¬ 
 cation, involves an examination, so far as we can 
 make it, into the wonders of creation ; the more we 
 know of the heavens, and their vastness, — of the 
 earth, and the changes it has undergone, — of the 
 innumerable varieties of living beings, similar in 
 some things, unlike in more,—resembling each other 
 in the mass, yet distinct in detail; the more we 
 see of the surpassing beauty of animalcules, which 
 are invisible to the unaided eye of man, and yet are 
 found to possess forms so lovely, and movements of 
 such exquisite grace, as almost to make the micro- 
 scopist shout with delight; the more we think on 
 the mysteries of reproduction, growth, maturity, 
 decay, and death, — of the infinite variety of plants 
 and trees, and many more wonders of a similar 
 character; the more exalted do our minds become, 
 and the more impatient are we of the human dress 
 in which our teachers have clothed the Eternal. I 
 cannot conceive a philosopher doubting the existence 
 of a Power, great beyond conception. I can hardly 
 
550 
 
 God] conceive any being, of full reasoning capacity, who 
 could believe that great One is such a Being as 
 He is painted by those who profess themselves His 
 messengers, His mouth-pieces, or His vicegerents 
 on earth. The Hebrew forms to express the idea 
 were to nito, ayito nx ; fm 2K ; nin; n;, toa an a 
 perhaps ffc; Assyrian, II, or El, or Ilus, = “the 
 strong one,” Elohim, “ the strong ones,” in the 
 dual; possibly in the plural, as three or four, i. e., 
 the triad, or arba-il. Baal, “my Lord;” Adonai, 
 “my Lord; ” Shaddai, “the holy One.” Afterwards 
 Jah, or Jehovah. Our word God may come from 
 Good, or from the Phoenician I* 1 , Gad, or from the 
 Sanscrit Gad, ‘ to thunder ; ’ Gada, ‘ speech; ’ Gard, 
 
 ‘ to sound; ’ or Gardh, ‘ to desire; ’ or Gadh, ‘ to 
 stand, to desire ; ’ or Gud, ‘ to defend; ’ possibly 
 from the Persian klioda or goda, ‘lord,’ ‘ master,’ 
 &c.; or it may have nothing to do with any of 
 them. Bailey, in his Dictionary, gives God, Saxon; 
 Gud, Danish; Goed or Gott or Gutt, Teutonic; all 
 signifying 4 good.’ Possibly the name is the same 
 as 13, gad. 
 
 Goddess, the Great, Cuneiform, = Asha or Ashat = “ The 
 woman ” (Eve was called Isha) = “ the female creator, 
 or queen of fecundity,” equivalent to “ Regina,” i. e., 
 re, ‘the Sun, or the king,’ and yovrj, ‘the woman,’ 
 or 1 $, gan, ‘ a garden, or virgin.’ 
 
 Gog, jin (1 Chron. v. 4), Etymology unknown. 
 
 Gol, (Gen. xliv. 2), “A bowl, or cup ; ” such as were 
 
 used for divination (See Gen. xliv. 5). As far as I 
 can learn, there is no evidence whatever that divina¬ 
 tion by the cup was ever common in Egypt, whilst 
 there is very strong evidence that it was general in 
 Greece, Assyria, Persia, and India. 
 
551 
 
 Golan, (Deut. iy. 43) “A circle, or region ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Goliath, (1 Sam. xvii. 4). There is great doubt about 
 the etymology of this word. The one which suggests 
 itself as being the most probable, is Gula, “the 
 Sun,” and ath, “ a portent.” If the giant was 
 as large when a baby as he was great when a man, the 
 name, “ a wonder from Gula,” would be appropriate. 
 This assumes that Goliath was his real cognomen. 
 If the historian coined the name, we should then 
 derive it from goel and ath, and read it ‘ a wonder 
 of pollution,’ or ‘ portent of defilement.’ 
 
 Gomer, (Gen. x. 2), Etymology unknown. 
 
 Gomorrah, spelled n ‘W (Gen. x. 19), “A fissure or cleft ” 
 (Fiirst). Probably a town situated like Petra. 
 
 Goshen, (Gen. xlv. 11), Both the etymology and the 
 locality are doubtful. 
 
 Gozan, (2 Kings xvii. 6), “ A stone quarry ” ? (Gesen.) 
 “A pass or ford ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Guni, signifies “ Painted with colours ” (Gesenius); 
 hence, I presume, the Greek yyv>), ‘ a woman.’ 
 
 Gur, ‘Via (2 Kings ix. 27), “ a calf; ” also “ a dwelling 
 place.” 
 
 Gur-Baal, (2 Chron. xxvi. 7), “ Temple, or sojourn¬ 
 
 ing of Baal.” 
 
 H. n and n is with the Hebrews, as with ourselves, the sign 
 of an aspirate, and as we have many words in which 
 the h is mute, and others in which it is pronounced 
 forcibly, so the Jews have some in which n is used, 
 and others in which the strong or rough n is adopted ; 
 both being aspirates, the two are interchangeable 
 with each other and with N a, whilst n is in addition 
 interchangeable with 1 v or u, and n with 3 g. In 
 consequence of the above mentioned peculiarity of 
 
552 
 
 H] this letter, it is occasionally necessary to give the 
 meanings to be found under both forms of spelling. 
 
 Habel, or Hebel, or (Gen. iv. 2), “ To breathe, 
 to exhale,” “ breath, vapour, mist.” This etymology 
 is to me very unsatisfactory, but I cannot suggest a 
 better. Abil, in the Cuneiform, is ‘ a son.’ 
 
 The intention of the myth respecting the sacrifices 
 of Cain and Abel, is to show that a preference is 
 given by the Deity to an offering of flesh over one of 
 vegetables, and to enforce an offering of which the 
 priests could partake with satisfaction. It was gene¬ 
 rally an understood thing that “ they which ministered 
 about holy things lived by the things of the temple, 
 and that they which waited at the altar were par¬ 
 takers with the altar” (1 Corin. ix. 18). Hence those 
 ministers who preferred flesh meat to a vegetable diet 
 prescribed offerings of lambs, heifers, &c., as being 
 most acceptable to the Almighty; thus affording us 
 another example of the frequency which which hier¬ 
 archs assume the powers of the Almighty, and profess 
 to be his vicars upon earth. 
 
 Since writing the above, I have seen Dr. Donald¬ 
 son’s remarks upon Abel ( Jasher , second edition, 
 pp. 96-8). He considers that the true orthography 
 is habail, and that it signifies either ‘ he who 
 
 offered a grateful offering to God,’ or ‘beloved by,’ 
 or ‘ the friend of God,’ Like myself, he objects to 
 the current method of explaining the word. 
 
 Habaiah, (Ezra ii. 61), “ Jah is a protection.” 
 
 Habakkuk, (Hahak. i. 1), “ Embrace of love.” 
 
 Habae, “inn, signifies “To be bound together,” “to practise 
 magic,” “to cut into, or wound,” “to be striped, as 
 the panther,” “an associate, male or female,” both 
 in a good or bad sense, “ a conjuror,” “ an enchant- 
 
553 
 
 Habar] ment,” “ a community,” &c., according to the vowel 
 points; and thus the word gives us a clue to the use 
 of the spotted robes of the priests, and the sanctity 
 of the spotted antelope, &c. 
 
 Habaziniah, (Jer. xxxv. 3), “Lamp of Jehovah.” 
 
 Habor, (2 Kings xvii. 6), “ Conjunction, associated to 
 idols.” 
 
 Hachaliah, (Neh. i. 1), “ Jah is darkness.” 
 
 Hachilah, nteq (1 Sam. xxiii. 19), “ Obscure, dark.” 
 
 Hachmoni, (l Chron. xi. 11), “ Jah is wise,” from 
 
 E??* hacam, and !T>, jah, the n being as usual elided. 
 
 Hadad, T!l] (Gen. xxxv. 35), “Powerful, mighty;” the name 
 of a Syrian god. “ The Sun was worshipped under 
 this name at Heliopolis, and Macrobius ( Satur . i. 23) 
 states that he was venerated as the greatest and the 
 highest of the gods, adding the words, the interpre¬ 
 tation of his name signifies ONE ” (Gesenius). 
 Remains of the Phoenicians, page 385, &c. Leipsic, 
 1837. From this, it appears that some of the heathen 
 had as distinct an idea of the unity of the Almighty 
 as we have ourselves, and Only appeared to be poly¬ 
 theists by speaking of gods where we should speak 
 of angels. 
 
 Hadadezer, (2 Sam. viii. 3), “Hadad is my help.” 
 
 Hadad-rimmon, ttormn (Zech. xii. 11), “Hadad the pome¬ 
 granate.” 
 
 Hadar, (Gen. xxxvi. 39), “ He is large, or tumid,” 
 “ shines, or glitters.” 
 
 Hadarezer, Tjrnp (2 Sam. x. 16), “ The strong one is my 
 help.” 
 
 Hadassah, ^3 - (Esther ii. 7), “ She sprouts,” or “ the 
 myrtle.” 
 
 Hadashah, (Jos. xv. 37), “Newly built.” (Fiirst.) 
 
 Hades, (Isa. xxxviii. 11), “The place of rest;” Hades 
 
554 
 
 Hades] in Egypt = Ament or Amenti = Erebus = West 
 = Ement. (See Hell, infra.) 
 
 Hadid, WfJ (Ezra ii. 38), « Sharp.” 
 
 Hadlai, (2 Chron. xxviii. 12), “ Rest,” probably a 
 
 variant of Adalia, a Persian name. 
 
 Hadoram, Q'jnn (Gen. x. 27), “ The high director.” 
 
 Hadrach, ^fTjn (Zech. ix. 1), a Syrian God; possibly signi¬ 
 fying “ the circling one.” 
 
 Hagab, (Ezra ii. 46), “ He pierces,” “ a prick, or 
 thorn.” 
 
 Hagabah, Nljn (Neh. vii. 48), “ She is hollow,” or “ the 
 love-apple tree.” 
 
 Hagar, (Gen. xvi. 1), “ He flies ” (modern Hegirah). 
 
 Hagarites, (i Chron. v. 10), “ Fugitives.” 
 
 Haggai, (Ezra v. 1), “Festival,” “festive;” “born at 
 the Feast of Tabernacles ” (Fiirst). Haggi (Gen. 
 xlvi. 16), probably variants of Haggiah. 
 
 Haggiah, (1 Chron. vi. 30), “Jah is festive;” compare 
 ayiog, “holy.” 
 
 Haggith, (2 Sam. iii. 4), “ The festive ones.” 
 
 Hai, 'H, ig a word which signifies “ life, living, existence,” 
 &c. Assyrian aa, or ai, ‘ the female power of the 
 Sun.’ 
 
 Hakkoz, PPf} (1 Chron. iv. 8), “The thorn;” koz , coz, are 
 variants of the same. 
 
 Hakupha, (Ezra ii. 15), “bent” (Gesenius); “incite¬ 
 ment, urging on ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Halah, (2 Kings xvii. 8), “ She is lovely.” 
 
 Halhul, >in^n (J 0 s. xv. 58), “ The defence is strong.” 
 
 Hali, (Jos. xix. 21), probably “ Jah is lovely,” from 
 
 halah, and n J, jah , the n being dropped from both 
 words. 
 
 Hallal, .signifies “To be clear, or brilliant,” “to 
 rejoice, sing praises;” “ell, ell, ell!” was the shout 
 
555 
 
 Hallal] of the Ethiopia women on occasions of rejoicing, 
 signifying “he shines; ” we still have the chant in 
 Alleluiah, or Hallelujah, 
 
 Halohesh, (Nehem. iii. 12), The “enchanter,” “the 
 
 whisperer,” “the oracle-giving one.” 
 
 Ham, DJ (Genesis xiv. 5), “ A father-in-law,” “ connected 
 by marriage” (ya^og); also “hot, warm,” 
 
 ‘ together ’ (amo, amicus); Ham is a name of Egypt; 
 it also signifies “dark coloured, black.” 
 
 I would notice in passing that the descendants of 
 Ham were not black ; that they were never known to 
 be in subjection until the rise of the Persian power; 
 that there is not a scintilla of evidence that the Negro 
 race have anything in common with the Assyrian 
 nation, or any other descendant of Ham. That the 
 Egyptians in old times were not blacker than the 
 Jews is clear, from the story of Joseph, who is, by 
 his own brothers, mistaken for an Egyptian. Indeed 
 we gather from Egyptian paintings, and from a figure 
 now in the museum of the Louvre, of which an 
 accurate copy may be seen in the frontispiece to 
 Nott and Gliddon’s Indigenous Races of the Earth 
 (London: Triibner, 1857), that the colour of the 
 Egyptians was a peculiar red, like that of the North 
 American Indian, and equally far removed from the 
 white and from the black. 
 
 Haman, (Esther iii. 1), probably from Sanscrit, Heman, 
 ‘ the planet Mercury’ (Gesenius). 
 
 Hamath, npn (Numb. xiii. 21), “To be hot,” also “defence,” 
 “ a citadel,” “ warm baths.” Its king was Seli, or 
 Saul. 
 
 Hamman, (2 Chron. xxxiv. 4), “Some form of Sun images 
 standing on the altars of Baal.” An epithet of Bel 
 among the Phoenicians (Fiirst). In a work recently 
 
556 
 
 Hamman] published by the British Museum, on Phoenician 
 Inscriptions at Carthage, edited by Mr. Davis, the 
 god Baal-Haman is the only male deity named. 
 
 Hammolecheth, ^ Chron. vii. 18) “ The Queen,” 
 
 “ the moon,” Ishtar = Nijffl = Phoenician = 
 T aval's, or T oivotirig, tanais = N ah, with the Egyptian 
 article (Fiirst). In Phoenician Inscriptions at Car¬ 
 thage ; London, 1868 ; Tanith is the only goddess 
 named to whom vows are made. 
 
 Hammon, pen (Joshua xix. 28), a variant of Hamman. In 
 Toison d’ or de la Langue Phenicienne, by L’ Abbe 
 F. Bourgade, 2nd Edition, Paris, 1856, we find 
 an account of many Phoenician inscriptions from 
 Tunis, in about half of which \DV hv2, Baal Hammon, 
 is named as the god. This shows that a very strong 
 similarity existed between the deities of the Jews, 
 Carthaginians, and Phoenicians generally. (Compare 
 the Jupiter Ammon of the Greeks, and the people 
 of Ammon.) 
 
 Hamonah, Hfibn (Ezek. xxxix. 16), “Multitude.” 
 
 Hamor, "^n (Gen. xxxiii. 19), “ The swelling up one,” or 
 “the red one,” from ; also “to be dark red.” 
 “ Sudden in rising,” also “ an ass,” an animal 
 notorious for its salacity, and one which was said, in 
 derision, to be the god of the Jews (Tacitus, Hist., 
 B. v., c. 4); we may readily see the connection of ideas 
 in his mind, when he speaks, a few lines farther 
 on (c. 5), of the Jews as a people given to unbridled 
 lust, “ projectissima ad libidinem gens.” (Compare 
 with Amor, Amour.) 
 
 Hamuel, (1 Chron. iv. 26), “El is a sun” (Fiirst). 
 
 Hamul, ^•IDn (Numb. xxvi. 12), “ The heat of El.” 
 
 Hamutal, (2 Kings xxiii. 81), “ God is fresh life ” 
 
 (Fiirst). 
 
557 
 
 Hanameel, (Jerem. xxxii. 7), “ The graces of El,” 
 
 “ El is a rock, or safety ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Hanan, IJ7 (1 Chron. viii. 28), “He is gracious, or merciful.” 
 
 Hananeel, ^?33n (Jerem. xxxii. 7), “El is gracious.” 
 
 Hanani, Hanini, or Hananiah, n l??7 (1 Chron. iii. 19), “He, 
 or Jah, is merciful; ” subsequently Ananias. 
 
 Hanes, (Isaiah xxx. 4), a town of Egypt, called by the 
 Greeks, “the town of Hercules,” = “ y Avo<nj, ‘the 
 merciful Isis ’ ? (Fiirst.) 
 
 Hannah, (1 Samuel i. 2), “He is gracious,” “grace, 
 compassion; ” also “ he pierces.” Possibly from the 
 Assyrian Anu, and the Phoenician Anna. 
 
 Hannathon, (Joshua xix. 14), “ On is gracious,” or 
 
 “ the graces of On.” 
 
 Hanniel, ^3311 (Nehem. iii. 1), “El is gracious.” 
 
 Hanochi, (Numb. xxvi. 5), “ Initiated into mysteries.” 
 (See Enoch.) 
 
 Hanun, (2 Sam. x. 1), “ The gracious one,” “ the 
 given one ” ? An Ammonite king. 
 
 Haradah, n 77-7 (Numb, xxxiii. 24), “ Terror, fear.” 
 
 Haran, 177 (Genesis xi. 81), “Parched by the Sun,” also 
 “ a noble, or free man.” 
 
 Harbonah, a Persian name, of doubtful significa¬ 
 
 tion. 
 
 Hareph, *177 (1 Chron. ii. 51), “ The powerful, or strong 
 one.” 
 
 Harhaiah, nwn (Nehem. iii. 8), “Jah is burning.” 
 
 Harhas, d 777 (2 Kings xxiii. 14), probably a variant of D 77? 
 heres , “ the sun.” 
 
 Harim, d 77 (1 Chron. xxiv. 8), “ The devoted, or conse¬ 
 crated.” 
 
 Harnepher, *13377 (1 Chron. vii. 86), “ The strong heifer; ” 
 probably a compound of 177? haran, and *13?, epher. 
 
 Haroeh, (i Chron. ii. 52), “ The prophet.” 
 
558 
 
 Harod, ^5 (Judg. yii. 1), “He sends earthquakes,” or “ he 
 terrifies.” 
 
 Harosheth, ntfin (Judges iv. 2), “The enchanters.” There 
 are so many significations to the singular form 
 of this word E$hn, that our choice is embarrassed; 
 it signifies 4 to engrave, cut, or plough,’ 4 to shine,’ 
 4 to grow,’ 4 to whisper, or mutter ’ (compare with 
 Isaiah viii. 19, wizards that peep and mutter), 4 to be 
 soft, or viscous, like clay,’ 4 loam,’ 4 a forest,’ 4 deaf,’ 
 4 a worker in brass,’ 4 a cutting tool.’ 
 
 Harsha, NJpn (Ezra ii. 52), 44 An enchanter.” 
 
 Harum, (1 Chron. iv. 8), 44 The high one.” 
 
 Harumaph, ^0^5 (Nehem. iii. 10), 44 Flat-nosed ” (Gesen.) ; 
 44 snub nosed” (Fiirst). 
 
 Haruz, 1*™ (2 Kings xxi. 19), 44 the borer;” also “judg¬ 
 ment ; ” also, as pn, 44 the loins.’ A father-in-law of 
 Manasseh. Harutz and Marutz are judges in hell, 
 according to Arab tradition. They were angels, 
 attracted by earthly women, to whom they told the 
 incommunicable name of the Almighty; the women 
 rose to heaven, and the angels were condemned to 
 hell, though to an exalted rank therein. 
 
 Hasadiah, (1 Chron. iii. 20), “Jah is love, or 
 
 benignant.” 
 
 Hashabiah, (p Chron. vi. 45), 44 Jah takes thought; ” 
 
 also written Hashabnah and Hashabniah (Nehem. 
 x. 25, and iii. 10). 
 
 Hashbadanah, (Nehem. viii. 4), 44 The judge is wise,” 
 
 “Eshmun is a friend” (Fiirst). 
 
 Hashem, (1 Chron. xi. 34), 44 He is fat,” 44 he shines, or 
 glitters ; ” also 44 rich, wealthy.” 
 
 Hashmonah, n:b^n (Numb, xxxiii. 29), 44 Fulness of Jah.” 
 
 Hashub, 2i i^n (l Chron. ix. 14), 44 Understanding” (Gesen.); 
 44 associate, or friend ” (Fiirst). 
 
559 
 
 Hashubah, (1 Chron. iii. 20), 44 Estimated ” (Gesen.) ; 
 
 44 association ” (Ftirst). Probably 44 Jah is a friend.” 
 
 Hashum, (Ezra ii. 19), 44 Rich.” 
 
 Hasrah, fpBn (2 Chron. xxxiv. 22), 44 Jah protects, or is 
 strong; ” from "wn, hazar, and jah , the * being 
 
 elided. 
 
 Hasupha, ns-IKTI (Ezra ii. 35), 4 4 Uncovering,” 44 nakedness,” 
 probably a variant of Hashubah. 
 
 Hatach, (Esther iv. 5), a Persian word, 44 Truth ” ? 
 (Gesenius.) 
 
 Hatath, npn (1 Chron. iv. 13), 44 He terrifies,” 44 he is 
 terrible.” 
 
 Hatipha, (Ezra ii. 54), 44 Seized, caught ” (Gesenius); 
 
 44 robbery, violence” (Fiirst). Possibly a variant from 
 rtSJ-rn, = 4 the thick, or swelled one.’ 
 
 Hatita, ND'Dn (Ezra ii. 42), 44 The digger, the explorer.” 
 
 Hattil, ^'99 (Ezra ii. 57), 44 He is pendulous,” 44 he waves 
 to and fro.” 
 
 Hattush, (1 Chron. iii. 22), 44 He conquers.” 
 
 Hauran, pip (Ezek. xlvii. 16), 44 The boring On,” or 44 On is 
 white, splendid, or noble,” from “i-in and 44 Cave 
 district ” (Ftirst). 
 
 Havilah, n ^'1p (Gen. ii. 11), 44 A circle, or district” (Ftirst). 
 
 Hazael, (1 Kings xix. 15), 44 He sees El or Al,” or 44 A1 
 sees; ” hence w r e find that El was a God amongst the 
 Syrians, as well as amongst the Hebrews and Chaldees. 
 
 Hazaiah, ?wn (Nehem. xi. 5), 44 He sees Jah,” or 44 Jah 
 sees, or decides.” run being 4 to split, or divide,’ 4 to 
 see,’ or 4 a prophet,’ according to the vowel points. 
 
 Hazar-addar, (Numb, xxxiv. 4), 44 A court, or temple 
 
 of Addar,” or 44 splendour.” 
 
 Hazar-enan, t^jnvn (Ezek. xlvii. 17), 44 A court, or temple 
 of Enan,” 44 the holy fountain.” 
 
 Hazar-gaddah, (Josh. xv. 27), “ A court, or temple 
 
560 
 
 Hazar-gaddah] of Gaddah, or Venus Urania, possibly = mu, 
 i. e., ‘tlie goddesses of fortune.’ 
 
 Hazar-haddatah, "lisn (Josh. xv. 25), “New Hazor.” 
 Hazar-hatticon, (Ezek. xlvii. 16), “A court, or 
 
 temple of Hatticon,” “the middle Hazor.” 
 Hazar-mayeth, nionyn (Gen. x. 26), “ A court, or temple 
 of Maveth, or Mut, the God of the lower world.” 81 
 Hazar-shual, (Joshua xv. 28), “ A court, or temple 
 
 of Shual.” This may be derived either from or 
 from W, or from both, and may mean 4 a chink 
 in the ground,’ whence oracles proceeded, as at 
 Delphi. 
 
 81 Mu, Mut, Mot, Maut, was a name applied to the Great Mother in Egypt; 
 one of her symbols was a winged eye, whose form is sufficiently suggestive of a 
 double entendre, to make us believe that the symbol had one signification for the 
 initiated, another for the multitude. Sanchoniathon says that “ Chaos knew not its 
 own production, but from its embrace with the wind was generated Mot, which some 
 call Ilus, but others the putrefaction of a watery mixture; and from this sprung all 
 the seed of creation, and the generation of the universe ” (Cory’s Ancient Fragments , 
 p. 1). I think that the physiologist may here be allowed to surmise that the myth 
 is founded upon the phenomena of conception, in which the male semen seems to be 
 converted in the female into a new being, and a quantity of ‘ water.’ Again, the 
 same author states that Cronus had a son by Rhea, who was called Muth, which 
 the Phoenicians esteem the same as “Death and Pluto” (Ibid.,j). 15). It would 
 seem that the myth enfolds the idea that heaven ordains us to die. Time brings 
 about the death, and after that man sleeps in the bosom of his mother Gaia, ‘ the 
 earth.’ We see this idea enunciated in Ecclesiastes v. 15: “ As he came forth 
 from his mother’s womb, naked shall he return, to go as he came.” On this verse 
 the erudite Dr. Ginsburg remarks: “ The innermost recess of the earth is repre¬ 
 sented as the bosom where the embryo of all things living is generated. The earth 
 receives us at our birth, nourishes us when born, and ever afterwards supports us, 
 and finally receives us into her embrace, when we are rejected by the rest of nature, 
 and covers us with special tenderness. Hence the Psalmist speaks both of the 
 womb of his mother (d« and of the earth nvnnn), as the place where 
 he was formed (Ps. cxxxix. 13-15); and Job, when deprived of all things, spake of 
 his departure as returning to the bosom of the earth in as destitute a condition as 
 when he came from the bosom of his mother , using the very words of the passage 
 before us, ‘ Naked came I forth from the bosom of my mother, and naked I return 
 thither’ (Job i. 21),” et seq. ( Coheleth , p. 352, note). “Maut,” says Wilkinson 
 (Rawlinson’s Herodotus , vol. 2, p. 448, foot note), “was without any child, the 
 abstract idea of mother.” To this day we have the words mot and motte, in 
 Western Europe, to signify ‘the female organ, the universal mother.’ The Hebrews 
 changed mn, muth, into npo (Fiirst). 
 
561 
 
 Hazar-susah, np*D-wn (Joshua xix. 5), “ A court, or temple, 
 of Susah,” or of the ‘horse of the sun.’ 
 
 Hazazon-tamar, (Genesis xiv. 7), “ The row of the 
 
 palm trees.” 
 
 Hazelel-poni, (1 Chron. iv. 8), “The shadow 
 
 looking at me ” (Gesenius). “ Protection of the 
 Presence ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Hazerim, (Deut. ii. 28), “ The enclosures, villages, 
 
 or caravanserais.” 
 
 Hazeroth, nVwn (Numb. xi. 85), “ Camps, hamlets, or 
 villages.” 
 
 Haziel, (1 Chron. xxiii. 9), “He sees El,” or “El 
 
 watches over.” 
 
 Hazo, (Genesis xxii. 22), “The seer,” “a vision,” “he 
 sees.” 
 
 Hazor, ^0 (Joshua xi. 1), “ The castle, or strong fortress.” 
 
 Hazor-hadattah, (Joshua xv. 25), “The new 
 
 castle, or new Hazor.” 
 
 Heaven, signifies “The sky;” in other words, “the 
 
 abode of the sun.” 
 
 Our English word, which is a direct descendant 
 from the Phoenician, appears in the Anglo-Saxon as 
 heofon, or heben ; Old Saxon, hebhan, heban, or 
 hevan; Low German, heven , or heben. These words 
 seem to have been derived from the Teutonic word 
 hebban, ‘ to raise,’ ‘ to elevate,’ or from the Anglo- 
 Saxon word hefan, ‘to be arched,’ 
 
 The current idea responds to the definition, for 
 the general belief is that its locality is in the sky 
 above us, just as we locate Hell in the centre of the 
 Earth beneath us. In all ages the vast expanse of 
 sky has been spoken of as the residence of the 
 Almighty, and the throne assigned to Him on earth 
 has been some hill of commanding height. 
 
 N N 
 
562 
 
 Heaven] Of the nature of His dwelling the ancients for 
 a long period professed to be ignorant, hut as time 
 rolled on, and the hieratic exigencies increased, the 
 knowledge assumed by mortals developed itself, the 
 eyes of the priests penetrated into the invisible world, 
 and the Creator was described as a king, holding a 
 court, with prime ministers around him for trans¬ 
 acting business, other ministers to attend upon them, 
 and a bureaucracy almost as extensive as that of the 
 United States. His palace had seven courts, and 
 the seventh was His particular abode. To it the 
 prayers of the faithful reached through the interven¬ 
 tion of officers, much as mundane petitions arrive at 
 the presence of an earthly monarch; and from that 
 empyrean height He promulgated His decrees, which 
 He sent down by messengers to certain men. 
 
 Those who drew up this scheme developed it still 
 farther, and held out to their votaries the hope of 
 attaining a place in the celestial court. To make the 
 proffered reward attractive, it was necessary to con¬ 
 sider what things human beings most coveted; with 
 these the Heaven was stocked, whilst Hell was filled 
 with every thing that men most dread. As most 
 earthly joys are corporeal, so were those painted in 
 the world above. Fine clothes, abundance of gold, 
 music, singing, an absence of hunger, thirst and dark¬ 
 ness, and the pleasure of seeing enemies overthrown, 
 formed the attractions held out by one school ; 82 
 
 82 It is clear that many Anglican divines of the present day consider that one 
 of the delights of Paradise will be to gloat over the Hellish miseries of those with 
 whom they had contended upon earth. I shall not soon forget the shock with which I 
 read, in a sort of manifesto issued not many years ago by some eminent theologians,— 
 whose names it rejoices me that I have forgotten,—a paragraph to this effect: “We 
 do not believe that the happiness of the blessed would be perfect in Heaven, unless 
 they were perpetual witnesses of the tortures of the damned; ” the exact words were 
 clothed in ecclesiastical garb, but there was no mistaking the meaning. Now I can 
 
568 
 
 Heaven] while another proclaimed a paradise well stocked 
 by Houris, with whom the faithful could everlastingly 
 disport with ever-recurring freshness and delight. 
 The philosopher may doubt the certainty of the infor¬ 
 mation thus detailed, and hesitate to accept from 
 heathendom, and specially from the Babylon of yore, 
 an account of His court which the Almighty withheld 
 from His chosen people and His personal friends for 
 more than four thousand years. 
 
 Heber, "9^ (Gren. xlvi. 17), signifies “ to join together,” “to 
 bind,” “ to fascinate,” “an associate or companion;” 
 as “an, hbr, it signifies “to cut,” “to practise 
 magic,” “to cut out or divide the heavens as an 
 astronomer;” as “ax, abr, it signifies “to soar 
 upwards,” “a wing feather;” as naK, abir, it signifies 
 “the strong and mighty one, like a bull; ” ‘ bulls of 
 Bashan 9 is ‘ abiri Bashan in the Hebrew. 83 
 
 In the Cuneiform, abr is rendered as ‘ strengthen¬ 
 ing ; ’ Ninib-dil abar’% , is read by Norris, or Oppert, as 
 * Lord of mighty deeds ’ (see Ninip). 
 
 imagine a fierce bigot like Torquemada revelling with delight at burning heretics in 
 this world, and preaching to his brethren that one part of the bliss of Heaven was 
 to see such combustion going on everlastingly. I can imagine such an one grumbling 
 that human victims die too soon, and that the necessity to eat and drink takes 
 away from the continuous pleasure of an Auto da Fe, but asseverating that in 
 Heaven the victims would live in the fires for everlasting, and the faithful would 
 enjoy the sight of their torment with ever recurring delight. I can credit that such 
 may have been the doctrine of an Inquisitor. I cannot believe, however, that any 
 protestant minister is able to adopt such a doctrine, until he has joined that party 
 of the Apostles who wanted fire to come down from Heaven to consume their adver¬ 
 saries, even as Elias did; and were told by the Saviour that they knew not what 
 spirit they were of. To myself, the idea of carrying hatred into Heaven is awful; 
 and the knowledge that some divines entertain the opinion that the sight of torture 
 is to be one of the pleasures of the blessed fills me with such horror, that I dare not 
 utter in words the sentiments which crowd upon my mind, except to say that the 
 reformed Christianity of to-day demands as much radical amendment as the Romish 
 faith required in days gone by, and still requires. 
 
 83 We are justified in examining all these roots, because “ Tf is interchanged 
 with n and other gutturals.” 
 
564 
 
 Heber] The philologist, in looking over these different 
 meanings and spellings, finds one idea running 
 through all. Fascination, “a kind of magic which 
 was applied to the binding of magical knots” (Gesen.) 
 ‘ Dividing the heavens, as an astrologer.’ ‘ Soaring, 
 or rising upwards,’ and ‘ strength, like that of a 
 bull,’ or ‘ strengthening.’ This seems to point, first, 
 to a god, priest, or man, who assumed to remove 
 impotence by charms; secondly, to one whose power 
 had been originally strong, then weak, and religiously 
 restored. 
 
 As we find the word in conjunction with on, as in 
 Hebron, we incline to the belief that the primary 
 meaning is “ phallic vigour.” 
 
 It closely resembles the word chebar ‘ to be 
 great,’ ‘to he long,’ ‘to multiply,’ ‘to bind together,’ &c. 
 
 Heber is still an English name, and I remember 
 that a Bishop Heber, writing from India, speaks of a 
 Mahratta prince called Alijah, and translates it 
 “ exalted of the Lord.” 
 
 Hebron, (Gen. xiii. 18), the name of a city, and of 
 
 certain men. It signifies “ The strong On,” or “On 
 strengthens.” 
 
 Heifer, T?, and parah, bakar, and eglah. The 
 idolatrous worship of the calves is well known; but 
 we have no intimation whatever of the sex of either 
 Aaron’s calf or Jeroboam’s calves. It is probable 
 that the latter were of both genders. Both the male 
 and female heeve were offered amongst the Jews in 
 sacrifice; but the most sacred of them all was a 
 young cow of a red colour. One of this nature was 
 offered yearly, and its ashes were used for special pur¬ 
 poses (see Numb. xix. 2-9). 
 
 The period of life at which the animal 
 
 was 
 
565 
 
 Heifer] slaughtered was three years of age, a time when its 
 sexual propensities became developed. We have seen 
 that kine were sacred to the celestial mother. Isis 
 was depicted frequently as a milch cow, but she was 
 also represented as a virgin. The red heifer was also 
 to be a virgin. The connection between the Egyptian 
 myth and the sacrifice deserves investigation, and 
 etymology will assist us much. “>?, par, signifies “ a 
 young bull,” “youth and vigorous manhood;” •‘H? 
 signifies “ to break through,” or “to bear offspring,” 
 “a young cow,” “a pit or hole,” or “beauty and 
 splendour,” according to the vowel points; par, 
 has the meaning of “ digging or boring,” also of 
 “ shining brightly,” or “ being glorious,” and of 
 “ ornament, beauty and head-dress; ” and n ^‘s is 
 “ a leafy sapling,” “ a young and tender tree.” 
 
 The idea conveyed in these words is the union of 
 youth, loveliness, sexual vigour and fertility. Every¬ 
 thing which conduced to the latter was held in high 
 esteem. There was and still is a notion amongst 
 Eastern nations, that the flesh of an animal imparts 
 to one who eats it the virtues which the creature pos¬ 
 sessed. The flesh of the beeve, as being both power¬ 
 ful and strongly virile, was supposed to give fertility 
 to those who ate it. The use of beef and fish is 
 enjoined by the Talmud for Jewish husbands on 
 Friday night and for Saturday’s dinner, to enable 
 them fully to enjoy the company of their wives. 
 Mahomet has copied in this respect an ancient 
 custom, for he enjoins upon the faithful that they 
 shall make the Friday {dies Veneris), a day for 
 connubial enjoyment as well as one of public 
 worship. 
 
 But in countries where the ox is much used in 
 
566 
 
 Heifer] agriculture, there was and still is a strong disin¬ 
 clination to slaughter it. This feeling amongst a 
 poor race could only be overcome by a cogent reli¬ 
 gious faith. By teaching the belief that God demands 
 a hull or cow for His service, the priest can insure for 
 himself and the worshippers an occasional supply of 
 beef. Being desirous to have one whose flesh would 
 be most appropriate for the purpose, it was ordained 
 that the animal should have a particular colour. Bed, 
 as symbolising masculine virtue, was the tint selected. 
 In the case of one Jewish sacrifice, the heifer thus 
 chosen was not eaten, but burnt, yet its ashes had a 
 talismanic value, and were used as a sort of charm; 
 and that a large portion of it was generally eaten, 
 both by the people and the priests, we infer from 
 1 Sam. ii. 18-16. 
 
 When once we recognise the fact that beef was 
 used as an aphrodisiac, we can well understand that a 
 feast upon a young cow or bull would be accompanied 
 by dissolute orgies; that they were so, we infer from 
 the verse, “ the people sat down to eat and drink, and 
 rose up to play” (Exod. xxxii. 6). What the nature 
 of the play was we may gather from the words “ that 
 the people were naked, for Aaron had made them 
 so,” &c. (Ibid. ver. 25.) Compare also Deut. xxi. 8-8. 
 We find that many ‘ proper names ’ have been com¬ 
 pounded with ms ; for example, Pharaoh, Peri, 
 Eglah, Eglon. We have some representatives of it 
 yet amongst ourselves, in Farr, Parr, Parson; and in 
 the Greek and Latin the old root is recognised in 
 <pepw and fero. 
 
 There is something so mysterious in the respect 
 paid to the golden calf in the wilderness, ?$>, egel, 
 and by the Israelites under Jeroboam and succeeding 
 
567 
 
 Heifer] kings to the calves in Bethel and in Dan, that 
 the subject deserves a closer examination. 
 
 The first thing which we notice is, that and 
 ^ are respectively feminine and masculine. The 
 use therefore of the latter leads us to infer that 
 the golden calf made by Aaron was of the male sex. 
 The same word describes the calves of Samaria in the 
 books of the Kings. But in Hosea, the feminine noun 
 is employed generally; although in Hosea x. 2, the 
 calves, eglaim, which are to be kissed, are put 
 
 in the masculine. It is therefore a legitimate con¬ 
 clusion to draw, that the calves used in idolatrous 
 worship were sometimes male and sometimes female. 
 
 Of the sanctity of the heifer we have evidence, 
 inasmuch as Abraham is especially ordered, on the 
 occasion of God’s making a covenant with him (Gen. 
 xv. 9), to sacrifice one, of the age of three years, 
 together with a she-goat of the same age. Now 
 Abraham, being a Chaldee, was familiar with the 
 worship of Ishtar. Ishtar and Isis were the same 
 divinity under different names, and the latter was 
 depicted as a heifer, or a young cow. 
 
 In Egypt, the goat, being an emblem of the male 
 creator, was sometimes used in the same manner as 
 was the effigy of Baal-peor, see Herodotus, B. ii. c. 46. 
 As the male representative of the Deity was occa¬ 
 sionally consorted with by women, so the.female was 
 resorted to by males. We have direct evidence of this 
 in Hosea xiii. 2, where we find the coarsely-speaking 
 prophet intimating that the worshippers of idols 
 might go and ‘kiss the calves.’ 84 That such practices 
 existed, we learn with apparent certainty from Levit. 
 xviii., in which the Israelites are commanded not to 
 
 84 For an explanation of this passage, see Hosea, infra . 
 
568 
 
 Heifer] do after the doings in the land of Egypt, and of the 
 land of Canaan (xviii. 8); and when the particulars of 
 the various crimes are given, we find that congress 
 with brutes is one of the things that has been indulged 
 in both by man and woman (xviii. 28-80). The com¬ 
 mand to abstain from this sin is reiterated Levit. xx. 
 15-17, and with such a severe penalty, that it is clear 
 that, whoever gave the law, was aware that such things 
 were done, and that he desired to eradicate the 
 frightful practice. The law is again promulgated in 
 Exod. xxii. 19; and as we have a similar command 
 in Deut. xxvii. 21, there are no less than four distinct 
 repetitions of the order; a sufficient proof of the 
 necessity for making it, inasmuch as no legislator 
 denounces a crime which is to him unknown. 
 
 We conclude, from the preceding considerations, 
 that the practices alluded to were associated in some 
 manner with religious rites, such as particular festivals 
 at the winter solstice, or the vernal equinox; if so, we 
 can well imagine the severity with which such idolatry 
 would be cursed by the more virtuous amongst the 
 Jewish priesthood. We gain some insight into such 
 a feast as we suppose was common, in Exodus xxxii. 
 Therein we are told that Aaron makes a calf, builds 
 an altar, proclaims a feast to the Lord; on the 
 appointed day the people bring offerings of various 
 kinds, sit down to eat and drink, and then rise up to 
 play. That sport was a veritable saturnalia ! 
 
 Now in the preface to the second volume, I shall 
 attempt to show that there is a strong probability 
 that the nation called Israel, i. e., the ten tribes who 
 seceded from Rehoboam, were what may be designated 
 aborigines, and that they thus had amongst them the 
 customs denounced in Levit. xviii.-xxiv. During the 
 
569 
 
 Heifer] reigns of David and Solomon, supported as they 
 were by an army of mercenaries, the religion of the 
 first king who took Jerusalem was, like that of the 
 Norman William of England, the dominant one; all 
 others were suppressed. Though abated, however, 
 the faith was not destroyed, but blazed out at the 
 time of the weak-minded Kehoboam. The worship of 
 the calves was the watchword or rallying cry, by which 
 the long pent up vexation at the new regime, and the 
 hankering after the old feasts, showed themselves. 
 Hence it was, as we may surmise, that the episode in 
 the wilderness was introduced into the Pentateuch by 
 its author; and as the idolatrous practices of Baal- 
 peor were added to the orgies of the calves, we 
 imagine that another episode was introduced, wherein 
 that abomination might be duly reprimanded. Into 
 these points, however, we cannot fully enter at present. 
 
 Hege, or Hegai, WH (Esther ii. 8), Persian ; Aga , “ an 
 eunuch.” 
 
 Helah, n P£i (1 Chron. iv. 5), “ He is sweet, or lovely,” or 
 “ he is smooth, or polished: ” n^n, halah , signifies 
 also “ a sacrificial cake.” 
 
 Helam, (2 Sam. x. 16), “ He is fat, or fleshy,” “ firm, 
 or strong.” 
 
 Helbah, (Judges i. 81), “ Fatness.” 
 
 Helbon, (Ezek. xxvii. 18), “ The fat On,” or “On is 
 fat.” 
 
 Heldai, (1 Chron. xxvii. 15), “ He digs,” or “he lasts 
 enduringly,” or “he moves smoothly and quickly,” 
 or “ my enduring one.” 
 
 Heleb, (2 Sam. xxiii. 29), “ He is fat.” 
 
 Helek, P^ 1 ? (Numb. xxvi. 80), “He is smooth,” also “he 
 creates, or frames.” 
 
 Helem, (1 Chron. vii. 35), “He is fleshy,” also “he 
 
570 
 
 Helem] dreams; ” probably a variant of B??, Halam, = ‘ he 
 is strong.’ 
 
 Heleph, (Josh. xix. 83), “ He glides,” or “he causes 
 conjunction,” “ he unites.” 
 
 Helez, 1^.0 (1 Chron. xi. 37), “ He is firm, manly, or 
 strong.” 
 
 Helkai, (Neh. xii. 15), “ Jah is my lot, or portion,” 
 from R^n, helek, and n J, jah; it is a variant of Hil- 
 
 KIAH. 
 
 Helkath, (Joshua xix. 25), “ The flatterers,” also “ a 
 field, portion, or lot; ” it was a Levitical, or priestly 
 city, and I presume a place resorted to, like Delphi 
 and Dodona. 
 
 Helkath-hazzurim, D v T*srrnjAn (2 Sam. ii. 16), “Field of 
 swords ” (Gesenius). 
 
 Hell. Anglo-Saxon Hell, Danish Hel, German Holle, 
 from Hella, or Hela, ‘ the goddess of death,’ so called 
 from the root helan , 4 to conceal; ’ in Hebrew Shaul, 
 Hades, and Gehenna. There is much interest for 
 the student in the study of this name, and the 
 history of the idea which it embodies. It signifies, 
 primarily, nothing more than the hollow, grave, hole, 
 pit, cavern, or other receptacle which receives the 
 dead. At first no particular attention was paid by 
 the hierarchy to the condition of those who had 
 died. That they were at rest was enough — they 
 had ceased from labour and strife, and there was the 
 end. We are told that during many centuries the 
 Almighty talked personally with men; he conversed 
 face to face with Abraham and Moses, he talked 
 to Adam almost daily, and spoke to Enoch, Noah, 
 Jacob, Joshua, Elijah, Elisha, and many others; 
 yet he never is represented as telling any one of 
 them of the condition of the dead, or even of a 
 
571 
 
 Hell] future state. Hence we naturally conclude— (1) that 
 God did not think it a matter of importance to speak 
 about Hell; or (2) that it did not then exist; or (3) 
 that the alleged conversations never occurred ; or (4) 
 that hierarchies had not then learned the value which 
 the modern idea of Hell has in theological systems. 
 We now proceed to enquire into this subject. 
 
 Where the power of the Priesthood was supreme, 
 whether directly or indirectly, their strong authority 
 in this world sufficed for their ambition ; where they 
 could punish the living man, they did not seek to 
 wreak their vengeance on the dead. But when the 
 hierarchy were no longer able to inflict punishment 
 on the offender during his life, they naturally turned 
 their attention to what they could do with him 
 afterwards. 
 
 It was easy to invent the idea that there was life 
 after death, and that punishments could be inflicted 
 on the disembodied spirit, at the will of an embodied 
 priest. Visions, superhuman voices, oracles, and 
 mysterious writings were as common in days gone 
 by, as winking statues, moving pictures, and radiant 
 virgins are in modern Europe, and were far more 
 powerful in establishing new dogmas, and new objects 
 of sanctity. 
 
 The introduction of the idea of our modern Hell 
 into the religious belief of a race, has marked the 
 decadence of supreme power in the hierarchal class. It 
 is interesting to see how much farther advanced the 
 Hindoos and the Egyptians were in their conceptions 
 of Pandemonium than were the Jews, the very 
 people with whom alone the Almighty was said to 
 have held direct communication, and whose laws and 
 ordinances were dictated by Him, if not written with 
 
572 
 
 Hell] His very hand. We conclude therefrom that the 
 rulers in Hindostan, Egypt, and we may add Etruria, 
 emancipated themselves from visionary terrors wielded 
 by the arm of a priest at a far earlier period than 
 their Western neighbours; e. g., Samuel executed 
 with his own hand a king whom Saul had spared, 
 at a period when the kings of Hindostan permitted 
 no such liberty. 
 
 The philosopher might doubt whether a subject 
 on which the Creator had been silent for some 
 thousands of years could be of very much importance 
 to man, and might wonder that the dissolute Hindoos 
 and the isolated inhabitants of Etruria should know 
 so much more of the topography, nature and history 
 of Hell than those who had possessed, for a score of 
 centuries, writings emanating from the Most High. 
 
 The sage would cease his speculations, however, 
 when he saw that the existence of a place of torment 
 was necessary in every theological system, where the 
 priests were numerous and their systems of divinity 
 opposed to each other. It is the assertion of every 
 hierarch that the Deity whom he serves sends all 
 forms of prosperity to those who worship, love, honour 
 and obey him. But stubborn facts shew that heretics 
 often conquer the faithful, that bad men may be far 
 more wealthy than the devout, and that those who are 
 called the most wicked are frequently the most 
 persistently happy. This being so, the flamen has the 
 option either to change his system of teaching and 
 the doctrines that he enforces, or to supplement 
 them by some new invention. Human nature cannot 
 allow him to do the first, and thus proclaim his late 
 dogmas as being false. To do the second involves 
 nothing more than a new vision or a mysterious dream. 
 
578 
 
 Hell] King David, or Asaph, was puzzled when he saw 
 the wicked in prosperity (Psalm lxxii.), and could not 
 account reasonably for the occurrence. We who have 
 lived since the adoption of the last revelation are far 
 more learned. 
 
 We know all about Pandemonium, its fires, its 
 frozen shores, the dress of its inhabitants, and all the 
 manners and customs of the place; we know the 
 name of its king, and of his prime minister, and of 
 all its bureaucracy; we know who on earth is 
 able to sign the passports required at its gates, and to 
 enforce their delivery; yet it is very possible that our 
 knowledge is quite as vague respecting Hell, as it is 
 about the court of Heaven. Milton, though a sublime 
 poet, never assumed to be a prophet; even St. Paul, 
 who asserted that he knew a man who had been 
 caught up into Heaven, did not tell what he witnessed 
 there; and our Saviour, who, according to St. Peter, 
 went and preached to the condemned spirits in Hell, 
 did not tell us of its locality, nature, or management; 
 all that we know from His lips is that He adopted, 
 when speaking of Hell, the notions which were 
 current amongst the majority of His countrymen at 
 the time, and which were derived exclusively from 
 Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and possibly from 
 Roman sources. 
 
 It was an unfortunate thing for the theologians in 
 ancient times when the promises and threatenings of 
 the hierarch were falsified in this world; it is very 
 fortunate for them that in modern times there is no 
 one to show how similar anathemas are disregarded 
 in the other world, and thus to destroy the priestly 
 influence. As a weapon in the sacerdotal armoury, 
 Hell has wonderful power, but its edge is blunted 
 
574 
 
 Hell] when it strikes upon the armour of calm reason and 
 deliberate thought. 
 
 We see, in comparatively recent times, a notable 
 instance, where the head of a pious community has 
 invented a falsehood to make the decrees of the 
 Almighty square with mundane views. The Pope, as 
 the leader of Christendom, naturally proclaimed that 
 the God he worshipped was the only supreme One, 
 and that His worshippers would be prosperous in this 
 world, and happy in the next. But, unfortunately, 
 there arose another prophet, Mohammed, who said 
 that the Allah who inspired him was the all powerful 
 one, and that He would not brook opposition to His 
 will; and the followers of this Apostle beat down 
 the soldiers of Christ, in every Asiatic or African 
 city, where they contended. The Mahometans subse¬ 
 quently invaded Europe, subdued Christian Spain, 
 then marched northwards into France, where they 
 received their first check; they destroyed the Chris¬ 
 tians in the Mediterranean islands, and ultimately 
 took Constantinople (which rivalled Borne in sanctity), 
 and positively besieged Vienna. Surely, argued the 
 followers of the Pope, the God which you teach us to 
 adore cannot be so strong as He is represented to be 
 or He would not allow our fellow Christians to be 
 beaten down by Mahoun. 
 
 The Pope, in answer to this argument, thought it 
 advisable to invent a kingdom, and the exigencies of 
 the case demanded that it should be so far distant 
 as to preclude any casual adventurer from travelling 
 in search of it. 
 
 Middle Africa was selected for the kingdom’s site, 
 an imaginary Prester John was placed at its head, and 
 the European multitude was told that in that happy 
 
575 
 
 Hell] spot, a Moslem joined the true faith of Jesns in the 
 place of every Christian destroyed by the Turks in 
 the Northern half of the eastern hemisphere, and thus 
 a balance was struck, the southern half just gaining 
 what the north had lost. The Christians of Europe 
 were still farther consoled by the idea that the Pope 
 had consigned the souls of all the Mahometans to 
 certain perdition; and this would doubtless have 
 sufficed for future generations, had not travellers told 
 the faithful that the Christians were consigned ’ by 
 the Moslems to Hell after their death, and endured 
 persecution from them during life. 
 
 When promulgated by authority as an article of 
 faith, Prester John and his kingdom were profoundly 
 believed in, as are, at the present time, all the medi¬ 
 aeval particulars about Hell and its rulers. 
 
 Extended travel has at length exploded the false¬ 
 hood of the Christian kingdom in Africa. The regions 
 of the dead in which the living rule will ever be free 
 from such a catastrophe. As long as there are bodies 
 of men whose interest it is to terrify their fellow 
 mortals into the belief that they possess the “great 
 power of God,” and can open the gates of Heaven or 
 the portals of Hell as easily as the vergers can place 
 the worshippers at a cathedral in a place of honour, 
 or in uncomfortable “ free sittings,” so long such 
 hierarchs may say what they will of their influence 
 in purgatory or Hell, being sure that they never will 
 be confronted with one who has visited the “bourne 
 from which no traveller returns.” 
 
 It is impossible for a thoughtful man of modern 
 times to compose an Essay such as the preceding, 
 without thinking deeply upon the subject of which it 
 treats. Yet as soon as he endeavours to reduce his 
 
576 
 
 Hell] lucubrations into writing, he feels the inadequacy of 
 words to describe the sentiments which fill his mind. 
 They may be briefly indicated thus : Granted there 
 is a Hell, for whom is it intended; for the heterodox? 
 for the vile ? or for the wicked ? If for the first, 
 what man dares to assert that he can judge of what 
 passes through the mind of the Almighty. If priests, 
 and devout worshippers in their own way, could have 
 had the power of deciding about orthodoxy in a.d. 29, 
 our Saviour would have been consigned to Hell, as 
 certainly as Luther, Calvin, and Melancthon have 
 been subsequently ! If Hell be for the vile, there can 
 surely be no quadruped which can escape it, for all 
 are to our ideas vile in their habits ! If again it be 
 reserved for murderers of fathers, mothers, brothers, 
 sisters, friends, or enemies, Hell would be peopled 
 with rats, and a vast variety of other beings, in whom 
 the instinct is implanted to give a speedy death to 
 all those whose failing powers prevent them living 
 by their own exertions ! 
 
 Now the Almighty has instructed all those which 
 we term dumb animals to perform His will, and can 
 we think that man is alone exempt ? When He has 
 taught rats, cats, dogs, fishes, birds, &c., to manage 
 their affairs amongst themselves, surely it is reason¬ 
 able to believe that he has taught man to do the 
 same. We do not believe that there are prophets or 
 priests amongst the conies, or the locusts, yet the 
 first “ make houses in the rocks, and the second go 
 forth by bands ” (Prov. xxx. 26, 27); “ birds in their 
 little nests agree,” but yet the mother will kill and 
 turn one out if she has too many to feed; and the 
 cuckoo’s young one will destroy all the brood of the 
 hedge-sparrow who has hatched it. Everywhere the 
 
577 
 
 Hell] Almighty does that which seemeth best to Him; and 
 surely it is more consonant with the position of man, 
 as a reasonable being, to seek to investigate His 
 works, acknowledging that they are so far above out 
 of his sight that he will never know them fully, than 
 to give credence to visionaries who declare that they 
 are God’s vicegerents. If any one could see a set of 
 ants listening to a big pismire discoursing about the 
 Bank of England or the respective value of consols 
 and green-backs, and another set of ants listening to 
 an emmet who derides all that the former says in 
 consequence of superior knowledge, he would then 
 have some idea of ourselves, who fight for dogmas 
 about which we can know nothing. To the ant and 
 dormouse its winter hole is Hell; to us the grave 
 is the same place; of our real condition beyond it 
 we are absolutely ignorant, however much any one 
 may profess to the contrary. 
 
 These thoughts lead us onwards to the consider¬ 
 ation of the future condition of animals in general. 
 It is quite as reasonable to conclude that horses and 
 rats have a future existence as that worms have. We 
 are told that in Hell there is a worm that never dies. 
 We find, too, that the prophet Zechariah is a witness 
 to an angelic vision, wherein a man is seen riding upon 
 a red horse, which was followed by other horses that 
 were red, speckled or bay, and white: and Zechariah 
 is told by the angel, that these were sent by the Lord 
 to walk to and fro through the earth (ch. i. 8-11). We 
 find additional evidence that horses exist in heaven 
 from the Apocalypse of St. John, wherein the Apostle 
 declares, “ I saw, and behold a white horse ; and he 
 that sat on him had a bow ” (ch. vi. 2); in other 
 places he speaks of a red, a black, and a pale horse 
 
 o o 
 
578 
 
 Hell] (ch. vi. 4-8). Now it is perfectly clear that, if John 
 really saw what he says he did see, horses must exist 
 in heaven, and if so, it is quite as reasonable to con¬ 
 clude that they came from earth as that they were 
 created in the sky. It is equally certain that in the 
 mediaeval representations of Hell there were number¬ 
 less animals introduced, whose business was to tor¬ 
 ture disembodied spirits, which the skill of Romish 
 artists represented as material. There is not a single 
 argument in Butler’s Analogy of Religion , as to the 
 probability of a future life, which does not apply as 
 forcibly to all the lower animals as it does to mankind. 
 The Indian peoples his future paradise with horses 
 and dogs — the Christian adorns his heaven with 
 golden harps and rivers of pure crystal; and the 
 one idea is just as reasonable as the other. 
 
 Now let us for a moment allow that there is a 
 future for lions and lambs, tigers and oxen, wolves 
 and sheep, horses and dogs; we then have to examine 
 the question, Bo the vicious horses and dogs go to 
 hell, and those who take to training kindly go to 
 heaven ? Bo the spaniels and domesticated dogs go 
 to the good place, and the curs and savage mongrels 
 to the bad ? Or can one dog, who has been vexed with 
 another, send him to the bad, whilst he himself takes 
 to the good quarter ? Can the murdered ox or sheep 
 send the fierce lion or tiger to hell, and go itself to 
 heaven ? To put these questions is to answer them. 
 Can we assign any greater power to “ man that is a 
 worm, and the son of man which is a worm ” (Job 
 xxv. 6); even if that man should be as high as Bavid, 
 who himself estimates his worth thus, “ I am a worm, 
 and no man ” (Ps. xxii. 6) ? It is true that we find in 
 the Gospel of St. John (xx. 28), “whose soever sins 
 
579 
 
 Hell] ye remit they are remitted unto them, and whose 
 soever sins ye retain they are retained; ” but no one 
 can understand that these words give to any earthly 
 man jurisdiction either in heaven or hell. 
 
 We thus again come to the conclusion that it 
 would be better for us to acknowledge our ignorance, 
 as regards futurity, and to do our utmost to cultivate 
 the Christian graces, instead of asserting dogmas, 
 and persecuting all those who do not adopt them. 
 
 Helon, PD (Numbers i. 9), “ The standing oak,” also 
 “ strong, powerful.” 
 
 Heman, Sanscrit, “ Mercury, the planet; ” I??, haman, ‘ the 
 Sun’s image,’ ‘ Sun pillar.’ “ In the Phoenician 
 theology l?D, haman , was an epiphet of baal ” 
 (Ffirst). (Compare Hemans.) 
 
 Hemdan, (Hen. xxvi. 86), “ The pleasant one; ” 
 signifies ‘ desire, deliciousness, beauty; ’ 
 hemdath nashim , ‘the best of women,’ was a name of 
 the Persian Artemis; also Nava fa (i. e. the mother); 
 also called meleceth ha-shamaim, or 
 
 ‘ queen of heaven ’ (Jerem. vii. 18); also n .^, thaneth, 
 under which name she was worshipped by the Cartha¬ 
 ginians (Ffirst). In my youth I heard much of types 
 and symbols, and constant endeavours were made to 
 show that everything in the Law foreshadowed some¬ 
 thing in the Gospel. I did not then believe what was 
 told to me, hut am now perfectly convinced that the 
 Virgin with the child of modern Christianity is the 
 same individual as Artemis, Astarte, Isis, Tanith, 
 Milcom, &c. 
 
 Hen, ID (Zech. vi. 14), “ Grace, favour, goodwill.” 
 
 Hena, TO (2 Kings xviii. 84), probably a variant of the 
 Assyrian Anu; surmised by Ffirst to be equivalent to 
 TO, p^va = ‘ low ground.’ 
 
580 
 
 Henadad, "H^n (Ezra iii. 9), “ Grace given; ” possibly 
 “ given by Ann; ” “ Hadad is kindness.” Fiirst. 
 
 Hephee, (Numb. xxvi. 32). We meet here again with 
 the “ heifer,” in sound, and an examination into the 
 connections of the word will probably afford us an 
 insight into some of its mysteries. The root of the 
 word is said by Fiirst to be "i£rn, = “ the young, 
 vigorous, and powerful one,” or “ manly youth,” 
 “ abounding in every manly quality; ” pa/rah, 
 is the feminine form, and this carries us at once to 
 the name Pharaoh, the Hebrew title of the Egyptian 
 Kings. haphar , is “to dig, to work the ground; ” 
 
 pointed as hapher, it signifies “to become red;” as 
 hepher, it signifies “ a well,” or “ digging,” also 
 “ beauty ; ” as haphor , it means “ a hole, hollow, or 
 pit.” These significations would justify the use of 
 the word as an euphemism. The names of one of 
 the kings of Egypt was Pharaoh-hophra; the last 
 name is spelled which may be read as 
 
 ‘the prominent one,’ ‘the leader; ’ = <a prince.’ 
 
 There is another form, with which this is closely 
 associated, viz., h-epher, which signifies ‘ the 
 
 calf, or young animal,’ and which, pointed as hoplier, 
 means ‘ the young gazelle, fawn, or deer.’ 
 
 We conclude, from these considerations, that the 
 word in question is a punning contrivance to indicate 
 “ the virgin mother,” “ a strong man,” or “ the 
 gazelle.” (See Beth-leapheah, and Heifee.) 
 
 Dr. Donaldson calls attention ( Christian Ortho¬ 
 doxy, p. 255, Williams and Norgate, London, 1855,) 
 to the fact, that one Hephee (1 Chron. xi. 36), is 
 designated as the Mecherathite, i.e., as one wielding 
 poLXocipu, a sword; and his general conclusion is that 
 the use of swords was introduced into Judea by the 
 
581 
 
 Hepher] Carians, or Cherethites, who were mercenary 
 soldiers of David; and on this he founds an argu¬ 
 ment to show that the last chapter but one of Genesis 
 must have been written subsequent to the accession 
 of David to the throne, inasmuch as 
 mecherothaihem, the Hebrew form of the Greek 
 word for “ swords,” are put into the hands of two 
 of Jacob’s sons. 
 
 Hephzibah, (2 Kings xxi. 1), “ Pure delight,” or 
 
 “ my delight in her.” 
 
 Heres, (Judges i. 85), “ The Sun,” “he shines,” &c. 
 
 Heresh, (1 Chron. ix. 15), “ He shines, sprouts, or 
 grows.” 
 
 Hermai, were originally “boundary marks,” “heaps of 
 stones,” or “ an upright block.” At first they were 
 emblematic of God; then of God as Hermes. “ The 
 phallus formed an essential part of the symbol, 
 probably because the divinity represented by it was 
 in the earliest times, before the worship of Dionysus 
 was imported from the East, the personification of 
 the reproductive powers of nature ” (Smith’s Diction¬ 
 ary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, s. v. Hermai). 
 These Hermai were placed in front of temples, just 
 as Jachin and Boaz were placed in the porch of that 
 built by Solomon. 
 
 Hermon, (Deut. iii. 8), “ Waste of On; ” is 
 
 ‘ to ban, or curse;’ or “the prominent On;” from 
 ‘ to be high, or prominent.’ 
 
 Hesed, (i Kings iv. 10), “He is ardent,” &c. 
 
 Heshbon, P 2 ?^ (Numb. xxi. 25), “ On makes firm, or 
 defends,” “ stronghold.” (Fiirst). 
 
 Heshmon, (Joshua xv. 27), “On is rich, or fat;” 
 
 from hasham, and P N , on, ‘ On shines, or 
 
 glitters.’ 
 
582 
 
 Heth, (Gen. x. 15), “ Giant,” “ the terrible one.” 
 Khatti is a name for Hittities, Phoenicians of the 
 sea coast and of Cyprus, same as Chittim (Talbot). 
 
 Hethlon, pJjn (Ezek. xlvii. 15), “ On is straight, firm, or 
 strong;” from ?nn, hatlial, and on. (Compare 
 Athlone.) 
 
 Hezeki, 'i?JH (1 Chron. viii. 17), “ Jah is strength, or a 
 strong one ; ” being a variant of the following word, 
 
 Hezekiah, (2 Kings xviii. 1), “ Jah is strength, or a 
 
 strong one.” Hezzaku in Cuneiform is ‘they bound,’ 
 and Talbot thinks that Hezekiah signifies ‘ bound by 
 covenant to Jah.’ 
 
 Hezion, P'jn (1 Kings xv. 18), “On divides, or cleaves;” 
 from hazah , and i^, on. 
 
 Hezir, ‘ijn (l Chron. xxiv. 15), “ The defence,” or “ He 
 surrounds me as with a wall.” 
 
 Hezrax, (2 Sam. xxiii. 85), “ Jah surrounds, or 
 
 protects;” from " l ¥ 1 ?, hazar, and n ', jah, the n being 
 dropped. 
 
 Hezron, P"^n (Josh. xv. 8), “On is lovely;” from 
 hazar, and pK, on. 
 
 Hiddai, (2 Sam. xxiii. 80), is probably a corrected form 
 of T™, hadad, “ He is strong, or powerful.” “Mighty 
 chief” (Furst). 
 
 Hiddekel, (Gen. ii. 14), “ The rapid river ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Hiel, Vfi (1 Kings xvi. 34), “El is life.” The word ’n, hi, 
 signifies “ existence, being, the vital power; ” the 
 nearest English word appears to me to be “ essence.” 
 
 Hilen, frn (1 Chron. vi. 58), probably “ On is strength,” 
 from hail, and P 5 *, on; the word is spelled Holon, 
 Josh. xxi. 15. 
 
 Hilkiah, ^jpSn (2 Kings xviii. 37), “ Jah is my portion.” 
 
 Hillel, (Judges xii. 13). This word deserves investi¬ 
 gating, as it is closely allied with praise, and has 
 
588 
 
 Hillel] remained amongst ourselves till now in “Halle¬ 
 lujah.” 
 
 ^•3 = 4 he is clear, he is bright, he shines,’ also 
 ‘ he sings praises, he wanders about, raves, or is mad.’ 
 
 = 4 splendour,’ brilliancy of light,’ ‘morning 
 star;’ ^C 1 , halal, signifies ‘to be bored through,’ also 
 ‘to turn in-a circle.’ “In Ethiopia, the women, 
 on occasions of public rejoicing, are accustomed 
 to repeat the sounds eUellell-ellellell, whence to 
 make ellell is i. q. ‘ to rejoice.’ ” (See Isenberg, 
 Amhar. Lex., p. 112, G-esen. Lex., Bagster’s edition, 
 
 «. V . &3.) 
 
 After reviewing the ideas which these significa¬ 
 tions convey, we conclude that praises were sung to 
 the restored Sun, Osiris, Tammuz, Adonis, or Atys, 
 after a period of wailing; that the hymns were very 
 frequently chanted by performers, who, having joined 
 hands, whirled round in a circle, according to the 
 course of the sun; and that many of the devotees 
 worked themselves up to such a pitch of excitement 
 as to appear frenzied. We know that Delphic priest¬ 
 esses and dancing dervishes have associated religious 
 or spiritual manifestations with frantic gesticulations; 
 and the close observer may see in modem revivalism, 
 and in the mediaeval dancing mania, a resemblance to 
 the tremendous saltatory feats of David, the king of 
 Israel, before the recovered ark, which made him 
 despicable in the eyes of quondam royalty, but lovely 
 and glorious in the eyes of the servile class. (2 Sam. 
 vi. 14, 16, 20, et seq.) 
 
 Hinnom, (Joshua xv. 8), “Rich,” or “endowed with 
 goods.” 
 
 Hibah, n^n (Gen. xxxviii. 1), “ The noble one,” probably 
 from harah, ‘ he glows, or burns.’ 
 
584 
 
 Hiram, (1 Kings v. 10), probably a word equivalent to 
 liar am, “ he is high.” 
 
 Hittites, 'AH (Gen. xv. 20). Although we have very circum¬ 
 stantial accounts of the Hittites, in the early books 
 of the Old Testament, there is much doubt about 
 the value of the stories. We are told that Heth 
 and Sidon were the sons of Canaan, inhabitants 
 of Palestine, and of that cursed brood which the 
 Hebrews were to destroy; yet David makes a per¬ 
 sonal friend of one (1 Sam. xxvi. 6), and Uriah 
 is one of his chosen warriors. Again, we are told 
 that Solomon loved strange women amongst the Hit¬ 
 tites (1 Kings xi. 1), who are here associated with 
 the Phoenician Zidonians. At a subsequent period 
 we find the Syrians in flight, under the impres¬ 
 sion that the King of Samaria had hired against 
 them the Kings of the Hittites and the Egj 7 ptians 
 (2 Kings vii. 6). Now we cannot conceive that David 
 would be friendly with two “ hewers of wood and 
 drawers of water,” or that Solomon would take a 
 wife, or even a concubine, from the “ pariah ” class; 
 nor can we imagine that the Syrians would be 
 alarmed at the opposition of the kings of a servile 
 class. Consequently we seek elsewhere for the 
 locality of the nation to which the name Hittites or 
 Chittim has been given. Now we learn from the 
 researches of Gesenius that cheth (equivalent to 
 heth), was the name of a certain town in the 
 Island of Cyprus, which was known to the Greeks as 
 K Ittiov, K Itiov, or Kjjtiov, whose inhabitants were of 
 Phoenician origin, and called 'A? and W, chitti and 
 hitti, but apparently so much associated with the 
 Greeks, that they may be regarded in the same 
 light as our own people, wherein French, Germans, 
 
585 
 
 Hittites] Danes, Normans, Celts, Saxons, Welsh, Irish, 
 and Scotch have become blended into English. Now 
 it is most probable that the writers of the early books 
 of the Old Testament, thinking that the Hittites came 
 originally from Phoenicia, endeavoured to show that 
 the Hebrews were the cause of their emigration to 
 Cyprus; but then we must also conclude that the 
 books which treat the Hittites as ‘ Pariahs ’ were 
 written subsequent to the period when they enjoyed 
 the friendship of David and Solomon, and were 
 considered by the Syrians to be formidable, like the 
 Zidonians and Egyptians. 
 
 Hivites, 'Uf 1 (Gen. x. 17), “ Villagers.” 
 
 Hobab, (Numb. x. 29), “ Beloved,” or “ he loves,” “he 
 cherishes.” 
 
 Hobah, 9 5,n (Gen. xiv. 15), “ Jah conceals himself;” from 
 n ?7, habah, and jah, a variant of the name which 
 follows. 
 
 Hobiah, n '95 (Ezra ii. 16), “ Jah hides himself,” or simply 
 * Jehovah hides, covers, or defends.’ 
 
 Hod, Yin (1 Chron. vii. 87), “Majesty, splendour, freshness.” 
 
 Hodaiah. See Hodevah. 
 
 Hodaviah, (1 Chron. v. 24), “ Praise ye Jah ” (Gesen.); 
 
 “Jah is renown ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Hodesh, Bnn (1 Chron. viii. 9), “ The new moon” = Hadath, 
 Hadassah ? The new moon was welcomed by a 
 festival amongst the Jews, as it was amongst the 
 Greeks, Homans, &c. 
 
 Hodevah, ri )7 ;,n (Nehem. vii. 48), the same as Hodiah, ^7*^ 
 (1 Chron. iii. 24), and Hodijah (1 Chron. iv. 19), or 
 “Jah is majesty.” 
 
 Hodshi, (2 Sam. xxiv. 6). This name occurs in con¬ 
 nection with Tahtim, and it is possible that Tahtim 
 Hodshi signifies the land of “the new, bright, or 
 
586 
 
 Hodshi] pure Jah,” from hadash, and jah, the n 
 
 being as usual elided. 
 
 Hoglah, (Numb. xxvi. 88), “A partridge,” possibly an 
 altered form of ^V., eglah, ‘ a calf/ 
 
 Hoham, (Joshua x. 3). It is evident that this word has 
 undergone some alteration ; the most probable suppo¬ 
 sition is that it was E&rn“in^ yahu-h-em, “ Jehovah 
 the mother; ” or it may signify “ she is my mother,” 
 from N-in, h U} an( j em . If the former reading be 
 the correct one, we can understand that the alteration 
 has been made to obliterate the name of Jehovah 
 from the name of a king of Hebron. We subsequently 
 meet the word yahu in Jehu, the king of Israel. 
 The mother referred to is Astarte, or Milcom. 
 
 Holon, jiVn (Joshua xv. 51), “On revolves, or is strong,” 
 from b-in, hul, and fix, on. 
 
 Homan, D ?' in (1 Chron. i. 39), “ Destruction ” ? (Gesenius.) 
 “raging” (Fiirst). Probably = BOPi, hamam , ‘he 
 disturbs, or terrifies; ’ or for hamam, ( he is hot.’ 
 
 Hophni, (1 Samuel i. 3), is interpreted by Gesenius 
 as “fighter,” or “fists,” “pugilist;” by Fiirst, “a 
 strong, powerful person.” It may, however, be an 
 altered form of Hophniah, and signify “ Jah is 
 strong, firm, or powerful;” from I? 1 ?, hapkan , and 
 n ', jah, the n being dropped as usual. 
 
 Hophra, (Jerem. xliv. 30), “ A king of Egypt,” or 
 
 “ Priest of the Sun ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Hophraim, (Joshua xix. 19), “ Two pits ” (Gesenius). 
 
 I think this to be simply a variant of Ephraim, 
 “ the calves.” 
 
 Hor, nin (Numb. xx. 22), “ A mountain.” There is pro¬ 
 bably some connection with Hur, which see. 
 
 Horam, (Joshua x. 33), compare with Hiram. Pro¬ 
 bably haram, 1 he is high,’ or * the high ones.’ 
 
587 
 
 Horeb, ^!> n , and 3 !?i n (Exod. iii. 1), “ He is high, or firm 
 also “ dry and burnt up.” 
 
 Horem, (Joshua xix. 88), “ He is high, or prominent.” 
 
 Hori, '*? n (Gen. xiv. 6), Horites, said to be “ cave dwellers ” 
 (Gesenius). We may consequently compare them 
 with a tribe of Red Indians, to whom the name ‘ the 
 diggers ’ has been given. No reader of the Bible can 
 forget how frequently pits, holes, or caverns were 
 spoken of as hiding places. In such an one as is 
 described in Judges vi. 2, did Josephus hide himself 
 after the capture of Jotopata. The modern philo¬ 
 sopher will also associate in his mind the Horites of 
 mount Seir, with the cave dwellers whose habitations 
 have been recently explored in France, England, and 
 other countries, and are so w T ell described by Sir 
 John Lubbock, in his book on Pre-historic Times 
 (London, 1867). When he remembers too the 
 absence of iron amongst the remains of the cave 
 dwellers, he will remember the condition of the Israel¬ 
 ites at the period of the invasion of Midian (Judges 
 vi.), and during the time of the Philistines, when 
 there were only two metal weapons amongst the 
 Jewish nation (1 Samuel xiii. 19-22). 
 
 Hormah, (Numb. xiv. 45), “ Devoted — to destruction,” 
 “ fortress.” 
 
 Horonaim, (Isaiah xv. 5), “ The two holes,” “ cave 
 
 district, or caverns.” 
 
 Horus, an Egyptian God. The son of Isis = “ Cupid.” 85 
 
 Hosah, n p n (Josh. xix. 26), “ A refuge ; ” “ He is refuge.” 
 
 Hosea, (Hosea i. 1). This word is a variant of 
 
 Hoshaiah, and signifies “ Jah is a deliverer,” from 
 VP'in, hoshah, and jah , the last letters being 
 
 86 Horus = Rising Sun; Re, or Abn = Mid-day Sun; Atin Re, or Atum Re, 
 
 = Setting Sun. Compare Autumn and Authunre in Ireland. 
 
Hosea] dropped in the present name. The word is also 
 Assyrian, and is always used in the sense of saving, 
 delivering, or helping. 
 
 A consideration of the life and writings of this 
 Prophet will come under our notice when we enter 
 upon the subject of prophecy generally (see Pro¬ 
 phets, Prophecy). We may, however, inquire into 
 the character of the individual, and his preachings, 
 in the present article. 
 
 A reference to the opening verses of Hosea and 
 Isaiah informs us that the two were contemporaries ; 
 but the closest examination fails to demonstrate that 
 they were friendly, or familiar with each other, or 
 even knew of each other’s existence. We can readily 
 understand how the courtly Isaiah might be ashamed 
 of consorting with a prophet -whose morals were 
 questionable ; but we cannot so well comprehend how 
 Hosea should not seek to associate himself with 
 another, who was a prophet like himself, and yet high 
 in the monarch’s favour. We recall indeed to mind 
 how a subsequent Prophet speaks, viz., “ Then they 
 that feared the Lord spake often one to another, and 
 the Lord hearkened, and heard it, and a book of 
 remembrance was written before him,” &c., &c. (Mai. 
 iii. 16.) Now the extent of country which the whole 
 of Judaea covered was very small, and the size of 
 Jerusalem was inconsiderable, about two miles and 
 a quarter in circumference inside the walls; it would 
 therefore be almost impossible for one prophet not 
 to know the other. If against this it is urged that 
 Hosea preached to the Israelites, and not to the Jews, 
 the reply is, that under those circumstances nothing 
 could have been known of his prophecies, as he would 
 have been carried away by the king of Assyria, in the 
 
589 
 
 Hosea] reign of Ahaz, whereas we find him prophesying in 
 the time of Hezekiah. We conclude, from these con¬ 
 siderations, that if Isaiah knew Hosea, he considered 
 him as a disreputable acquaintance. That he was so, 
 his own account of himself proves. The ideas which 
 pervade the first chapter are very extraordinary, and 
 the prophecy at the conclusion is still more so. They 
 run thus: “ The land is defiled by whoredoms;” 
 therefore Hosea is to add thereto, that he may have 
 illegitimate children, then call them fancy names, 
 and assure the people that the cognomens were God- 
 given, to intimate that the children of Israel should 
 still be as the sand of the sea, and he united once 
 again with the children of Judah under one head ! 
 
 Now since it is clear that this augury has not 
 yet been fulfilled, and never can be so in the future, 
 inasmuch as the people of Israel, i. e., the ten tribes, 
 have entirely disappeared, we might content ourselves 
 with dismissing Hosea summarily from the list of 
 Prophets. But though satisfied on this point our¬ 
 selves, there are so many who, seduced by those 
 words, ‘ Thus saith the Lord,’ which come so glibly 
 from the mouth of all vaticinators, still believe that 
 the lost families of Israel will be found, and united 
 under one head, it becomes desirable to examine more 
 minutely into the pretensions of the son of Beeri. 
 
 Passing by the incoherence of the second chapter 
 of the book, which seems to contain nothing more 
 than threats as to what the Prophet will do to his 
 foul yet God-given mistress, and rhapsodical phrases 
 of future good, we come to the third, wherein this 
 Prophet gravely informs us that the Lord ordered him 
 to consort with a woman, who was not simply a pros¬ 
 titute, but an adulteress; and the reason alleged for 
 
590 
 
 Hosea] the command, is much the same as that given for 
 the union with “ Gomer, the daughter of Diblaim.” 
 It almost takes our breath away to meet with such 
 a chapter in the Bible, and to find moreover that 
 Anglican divines can be met with, who believe that 
 the prophet in question is altogether superior to a 
 Boman augur, or Cumsean sibyl. Can any one, who 
 believes that God gave the seventh commandment 
 amidst the wondrous phenomena on Mount Sinai, 
 also believe that the same Lord, of whom it had been 
 said, “The strength of Israel will not repent, for He 
 is not a man that He should repent,” ordered a pro¬ 
 phet to commit adultery ? Let us for a moment 
 consider what our estimate would be of a devoted 
 preacher in our own times, who thought the best way 
 to attack abuses was to murder the individuals who 
 were guilty of them. It is true that religious acerbi¬ 
 ties always cause murderous thoughts to arise in the 
 heart. Sometimes they give rise to fierce and bloody 
 wars ; for it is much easier to cleave an unbeliever to 
 the chin, if you are mighty and he is weak, than to 
 upset his arguments ; but in spite of all this, no one, 
 even though he consider himself inspired, is per¬ 
 mitted to rob and to commit homicide in the name of 
 the Almighty. Even the Inquisitors of Spain, who 
 caused the death of so many heretics, were sanctioned 
 by the law of the country, and would not permit any 
 individual to imitate their example. If any one were 
 to do so, he would be condemned to the gibbet or the 
 madhouse ; nor can we doubt the justice of the course. 
 In like manner, when religious zeal is made the 
 ostensible reason for licentiousness, society should 
 stamp with infamy the man who makes the excuse. 
 
 Passing by this consideration without further 
 
591 
 
 Hosea] notice, let us enquire into the Prophet’s idea of the 
 blessings which are, in wrath, to be taken from Israel; 
 they are “ a king, a prince, a sacrifice, an image, an 
 ephod, and teraphim ” (ch. iii. ver. 4). Now of these, 
 the image matzebah, was a pillar, or Hermes, 
 
 whose use was expressly forbidden ; the very name 
 matzebah being used in Levit. xxvi. 1. The ephod 
 was a means of divination in some form, and tera¬ 
 phim were graven or molten images, the very making 
 of which was prohibited in the second commandment. 
 It is clear, then, that Hosea either did not know, or, 
 knowing, did not care for, orders which purported 
 to be the direct commands of God; and yet we con¬ 
 sider him as “ inspired.” 
 
 After reading the third chapter, we are amazed at 
 the beginning of the next, for therein the prophet 
 upbraids the people with want of knowledge of the 
 Almighty, and with committing adultery. Surely 
 such a man should know that practice is better than 
 precept, and that it would be useless for one who 
 lived openly in fornication and adultery to reprove 
 others for such vileness. The incoherence of the 
 fourth chapter is too great for us to understand its 
 purport, but we find, from the verses 13 and 14, that 
 idolatry in the parents is to be punished by whoredom 
 and adultery in the daughters, and that these in 
 their turn are to escape all correction. “ I will not 
 punish your daughters when they commit whoredom, 
 nor your spouses when they commit adultery” (v. 14). 
 We have a somewhat similar metaphor in Jere¬ 
 miah, wherein excess of sensuality is spoken of as a 
 punishment, e. g., “I will make them drunken, 
 that they may rejoice, and sleep a perpetual sleep, 
 and not wake, saith the Lord ” (Jer. li. 39); 
 
592 
 
 Hosea] again repeated at ver. 57, with slightly altered 
 phraseology. 
 
 We do not find anything to arrest our attention 
 strongly in the chapters following those which we 
 have already examined. They form a disconnected 
 rhapsody, in which we find at one time a few such 
 sublime statements as “I desired mercy, and not 
 sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt 
 offerings” (ch. vi. 6); and absurdities like the 
 following: “Israel hath forgotten his Maker, and 
 buildeth temples; and Judah hath multiplied fenced 
 cities; but I will send a fire upon his cities, and it 
 shall devour the palaces thereof” (ch. viii. 14). We 
 find, incidentally, that there were gold and silver 
 idols in Israel, and that the calf was worshipped in 
 Samaria (ch. viii. 4, 5,); that sacrificing flesh and 
 eating it was of no avail (ch. viii. 13); that libations of 
 wine were offered to Jehovah, just as they were to 
 the heathen gods (ch. ix 4). (Compare Numb, xxviii. 
 7.) We notice, moreover, a remarkable utterance, 
 which, though repeatedly quoted by our divines, is 
 never analysed in the pulpit. It is an instance of 
 a false prophecy, and runs thus : “ How shall I give 
 thee up, Ephraim ? how shall I deliver thee, Israel ? 
 how shall I make thee as Admah ? how shall I set 
 thee as Zeboim ? mine heart is turned within me, 
 my repentings are kindled together. I will not 
 execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not 
 return to destroy Ephraim; for I am God, and not 
 man; the Holy One in the midst of thee; and I will 
 not enter into the city” (ch. xi. 8, 9). Remembering 
 the destruction of Samaria and Jerusalem, the perma¬ 
 nent captivity of Ephraim, and the long captivity of 
 Judah, the only place which we can assign to Hosea 
 
593 
 
 Hosea] is that wherein Jeremiah placed him, thus : “ from 
 the prophet even unto the priest, every one dealeth 
 falsely; for they have healed the hurt of the daughter 
 of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace, when 
 there is no peace” (Jerem. viii. 10, 11); or else in 
 the category which Hosea himself gives (ch. ix. 7, 8): 
 “ The days of visitation are come, the days of recom¬ 
 pense are come; Israel shall know it; the prophet 
 
 is a fool, the spiritual man is mad,.the 
 
 prophet is a snare of a fowler in all his ways, and 
 hatred in the house of his God.” 
 
 We now examine a verse which is extremely 
 curious. In the authorised version we find, after 
 the statement that Ephraim’s craftsmen carried on 
 a trade in gold and silver idols, “ they say of them, 
 Let the men that sacrifice kiss the calves ” (Hosea 
 xiii. 2); and a marginal reference to 1 Kings xix. 18 
 recalls to our mind the fact that Baal was kissed 
 by his worshippers. Being puzzled by this quota¬ 
 tion, we searched through the various versions of the 
 Bible, and found that in the Yulgate the passage is 
 rendered—“They say to these, Sacrifice men who 
 adore the calves; ” whilst the Septuagint renders the 
 words—“Sacrifice men, for the calves have come 
 to an end.” In the original it reads—“To these 
 images they say that those who sacrifice men worship 
 the calf.” Whence we infer that Ephraim, having 
 found offerings of quadrupeds fail, resorted to the 
 sacrifice of men. (See Sacrifice.) 
 
 As a specimen of the style of Hosea’s reasoning, 
 we may cite the verse—“ I gave thee a king in mine 
 anger, and took him away in my wrath” (ch. xiii. 11). 
 Now it is perfectly clear, if diametrically opposite 
 things are to be regarded as evidence of one and the 
 
 p p 
 
594 
 
 Hosea] same cause, that any one single occurrence may be 
 taken at pleasure as a proof of God’s love, or of his 
 wrath; and a prophet can see, in the 4 abundance ’ 
 which produces intoxication, a mark of the favour of 
 the Almighty (compare Deut. xiv. 26), or the ven¬ 
 geance of that King who makes the nations drunk in 
 his fury (Jerem. li. 39, 57). 
 
 From a strict examination of the writings of 
 Hosea, we conclude that he has no valid claim to 
 be regarded as a true prophet of Jehovah ; but that 
 he was an earnest fanatic we do not doubt, notwith¬ 
 standing his infirmities. That his language is at 
 times beautiful, and his aspirations after God are 
 emphatic, we readily allow; yet these are not neces¬ 
 sarily characteristics of a prophet. If they were, 
 we must admit such men as Demosthenes and Cicero 
 into the roll. The so-called Orphic Hymns of the 
 Greeks, the Vedas of the Hindoos, the Kitual for the 
 Dead of the ancient Egyptians, the writings of 
 Zoroaster, and the language of Confucius, such as 
 we know them, are all equal, if not superior, to the 
 utterances of such Hebrew prophets as Hosea. The 
 fervent piety, zeal, religious faith, beauty of imagery, 
 love of right, and faithfulness in teaching, which 
 mark the letters apostolic of the Holy See, suffice to 
 stamp the Pope as a messenger of God, if once we 
 allow such things to be the mark of Divine inspi¬ 
 ration. Such a claim we cannot allow, nor can we 
 accord to Hosea a place in our esteem one whit 
 higher than that held by the modern Mahomet. 
 
 Hoshaiah, nwin (Jerem. xlii. 1), 44 Jah the Saviour.” 
 
 Hoshama, (1 Chron. iii. 18), 44 Jehovah, or Jehu, 
 
 hears, shines, or is on high; ” from jahu, and 
 shamah. 
 
595 
 
 Hoshea, (Numb. xiii. 8), “ Jehovah, or Jehu, is help;” 
 from 'I'" 1 ', jahu, and W., shea , the * being elided. 
 
 Hotham, (1 Chron. vii. 82), “ The signet ring.” 
 
 Hothir, (1 Chron. xxv. 4). See Giddalti. 
 
 Hu, Cuneiform, = “ A lord ” (Rawlinson, Journal Royal 
 Asiatic Society , new series, vol. i., p. 202). Hu, or 
 Yu, Babylonian God of the sky, a very ancient God. 
 Compare Jah, Jao, Jupiter, Allah, Hu; Pul was 
 called Huzabad, or “ Hu-given warrior.” Hu, or 
 Huan, was a Druidic name of the Sun (Journal of 
 Royal Asiatic Society , vol. xvi., p. 99). Compare 
 this with the Arabic cry of Allah-hu, and our own 
 Hugh, Hughes, &c. (See Jah.) 
 
 Hukkok, P&n (Josh. xix. 34), “ He decrees, or establishes.” 
 
 Hul, b)n (Genesis x. 84), “ He encircles,” “ brings forth,” 
 “ is strong, or firm,” “he is clear, enlightens,” 
 &c. 
 
 Huldah, (2 Kings xxii. 14), “ She gives birth,” having 
 reference to the Queen of Heaven; from jalad, 
 
 ‘to break through,’ ‘ to give birth.’ 
 
 Humtah, (Joshua xv. 54), “ An enclosure, or fortress.” 
 
 Hupham, DS-in (Numbers xxvi. 39, “ The mother protects ; ” 
 huphah, ‘ she covers, veils, protects,’ and 
 em, ‘ the mother.’ 
 
 Huppah, an( i Huppim (1 Chron. xxiv. 13), “ The pro¬ 
 tectors.” 
 
 Hub (Exod. xvii. 10), or Hurki, a Chaldee name of the 
 Moon, also "tin, hur , ‘ to be white,’ lin, hor , ‘ a hole, 
 or cavern’ (hoar or hoary). The name of a Midian- 
 itish king. (Compare Hoare, Houri, Horus, &c.) 
 
 Hur = ‘ Hurki ’ — 4 Sin ’ — ‘ Moon ’ = * a male 
 God ’ = ‘ Shishaki.’ Shish, in Hamite = ‘ brother.’ 
 Akku, Shemitic = ‘ brother.’ Shesech in Scripture 
 is used for Hur. Hur = Nazar. 
 
596 
 
 HurJ Hur, the city, was called by the Greeks, Kapapw} 
 Kamar = ‘ the moon,’ in Arabic. (Compare Came¬ 
 ron, Cameroons, &c., gammer.) 
 
 The man who bore this name seems to have been 
 introduced to make the male deliverer of Israel a 
 triad, to which Miriam is added to make up “the 
 four.” Nothing is known of him, except that he was 
 constantly associated with Moses and Aaron, the three 
 names together being the ‘ sun,’ ‘ moon,’ and * sky.’ 
 
 Hurai, (1 Chron. xi. 32), “ Jah is shining,” from “tin, 
 hur , and rp, jah, the n being dropped. 
 
 Huri, (1 Chron. v. 14) = “ My noble one,” a variant of 
 Hurai. 
 
 Hushah, (1 Chron. iv. 4), “ Jah is help,” a variant of 
 Hosea. 
 
 Hushai, (2 Sam. xv. 32), “ Jah is help,” being the same 
 as the preceding word, only that in the one the ' is 
 elided, and in the other the n. The man who bore this 
 name was an Archite, or inhabitant of Erech, and we 
 presume a Babylonian; being a particular friend of 
 David, we may conclude that his religion coincided 
 with that of the king; possibly he was instrumental in 
 introducing the name of Jehu, or Jah, to the Psalm¬ 
 ist, for it seems to have been as well, if not better, 
 known in Babylonia and Assyria, than in Palestine. 
 
 Husham, (Gen. xxxvi. 34), probably an altered form of 
 KOKWj Jehushama ; or from !|n ', jehu, and shem, 
 the first signifying “ Jehu is bright,” the latter “ a 
 token of Yah, Y’ho, or Jehu.” 
 
 Hu shim, (i Chron. viii. 8), “ The active ones.” A 
 
 common Eastern name still. 
 
 Huzoth, (Numb. xxii. 39), “ A prophecy.” It is con¬ 
 nected with the word Kirjath, or city, and we should 
 read the whole as ‘ the city of seers,’ being 
 
597 
 
 Huzoth] written instead of nitn, the latter being equivalent 
 to ‘vision, or revelation.’ 
 
 I. The English letter i has many sounds. At the com¬ 
 mencement of a word, and followed by a consonant, 
 we pronounce it as a short ee, into being equal to 
 a rapid utterance of cento ; whenever the initial i is 
 followed by a vowel, it generally receives the sound of 
 G, and we pronounce Jezebel as if the first letter 
 was a soft g. But though the English practice is the 
 most common amongst us, it is not the correct one; 
 the proper sound of i before a vowel being repre¬ 
 sented by y ; for example, we talk of Gakob instead of 
 Yakob, and Games instead of Yames. By adhering 
 to this pernicious custom, we miss much of the 
 knowledge which we should gain if we adopted the 
 more ancient plan. Thus it might happen that an 
 English philologist would imagine that some relation¬ 
 ship existed between George and Jah, because the 
 initial sound in both words is identical; but when 
 he knows that Ge in George comes from the Greek 
 yy], and that Jah represents the Hebrew yah , he 
 
 would not continue in the error. In the following part 
 of the Vocabulary, I and J are treated as the same 
 letters; I being used before a consonant or vowel, 
 and J when before a vowel only. In Hebrew, the letter 
 is represented by the sign which is rendered in our 
 English Bible as I or J according to its position 
 before a vowel or consonant; when before a vowel it 
 should be sounded as Y. The name yod which is given 
 to it signifies ‘ the hand,’ hut its form had nothing in 
 common with that organ. Being a vowel, it is inter¬ 
 changeable with all the others, Ka, ) w, ]}, and some¬ 
 times with n h. 
 
598 
 
 I, Iva, Eva, Iba, Cuneiform, “ A female,” “ any woman,” 
 “ female nature.” This will at once suggest to the 
 reader the idea that the name of Eve, to which 
 reference has already been made, does really signify 
 what we surmised that it did, viz., the havah, or 
 chavach, through which life makes its ingress into, 
 and the being makes its egress from, the mother. 
 
 Jaakobah, (1 Chron. iv. 86), variant of Jacob. 
 
 Jaalam, bbw (Gen. xxxvi. 5), equivalent to ialah , “ The 
 lovely virgin.” (See Jael.) 
 
 Jaani, '35J! (1 Chron. v. 12), “ He hears, or grants; * from 
 
 TO. 
 
 T-2* 
 
 Jaasau, (Ezra x. 87), “ Jehovah makes, or creates.” 
 
 Jaaz, WJ, signifies “he is hard, firm, stiff;” also “he 
 commands, rules, decides; ” and is a word which is 
 combined with ‘El,’ ‘Jah,’ and ‘ Ezer,’ as we shall 
 see in many of the following cognomens. 
 
 Jaazaniah, (Jerem. xxxv. 8), “ Jehovah hears.” 
 
 Jabal, ^ (Gen. iv. 20), “ He rejoices,” or “he flows out; ” 
 also “he is strong, or firm.” Pointed as Jabel, the 
 word signifies 4 to shout in joy, or triumph; ’ as 
 Jobel , it signifies ‘ a he-goat, or ram.’ 
 
 Jabbok, P' 2 ' (Gen. xxxii. 82), “Running, or flowing forth.” 
 
 Jabesh, (Judg. xxi. 8), “Dried up; ” possibly a variant 
 of the following name. 
 
 Jabez, (1 Chron. ii. 55). “Twoverses about the history 
 of Jabez are inserted in 1 Chron. iv. 2, 10, taken 
 from an old source, in which fTO- is derived from 
 ” (Ffirst, sub voce) ; if we adopt this suggestion, 
 Jabez signifies “an image of Jah,” or “Jah formed 
 him,” from and n T \ the n being dropped. This 
 derivation accounts for the saying, that “Jabez was 
 more honourable than his brethren” (1 Chron. iv. 19). 
 
 Jabin, Pi; (Josh. xi. 1), “ The son of Jah (See Jah). This 
 
599 
 
 Jabin] word seems to me to show that Jah was a name of 
 the Almighty amongst the Canaanites. I presume 
 that the real name was J, benjali, and a variant 
 of Benaiah ; but one which has been altered to 
 obliterate the idea that Jah was a name known to the 
 Canaanites. 
 
 Jabneel, (Josh. xt. 11), “ El builds.” A Canaanite 
 town. 
 
 Jabneh, (2 Chron. xxvi. 6), “ He built.” A Philistine 
 town. 
 
 Jachan, (1 Chron. v. 13). This word is usually trans¬ 
 lated afflicting, and taken to be the same as " 1 ?^, 
 acliar; but it is very unlikely that the priest who 
 gave the name could foresee the untimely end of 
 its bearer. It is far more probable that it comes 
 from PV? ‘ a snake charmer; ’ and is similar to 
 Achish, Nahash, Nashon, and other words of serpent 
 origin ; or that it is a variant of Jachin. 
 
 Jachin, I'?? (Gen. xlvi. 10), “ He strengthens”? Jachin 
 signifies ‘to be hot with desire, to have intercourse.’ 
 One of the names of the pillars Solomon erected in 
 the Temple porch was Jachin ; the other was 
 Boaz, which means ‘alacrity, always ready for work.’ 
 Both apparently had a phallic signification, and may 
 be compared to the two phalli, described by Lucian 
 as standing in the vestibule of the temple of the 
 Syrian goddess. 
 
 Jacob, (Gen. xxv. 26). We may investigate this word 
 philologically and historically. By pursuing it care¬ 
 fully, we gather much curious information: 
 akab, signifies ‘ to be high, or hill-shaped,’ 4 to be 
 cunning, and lay snares,’ ‘ to mislead,’ ‘ to be behind, 
 like the heel,’ ‘the rear guard of an army,’ also ‘to 
 be gibbous; ’ iakab, is ‘ to make hollow,’ and ‘ to 
 
600 
 
 Jacob] be deep, as of a pit;’ pointed as iekeb, it signifies 
 ‘ the vat of the wine-press.’ 
 
 When we look to the history of Jacob, we find 
 that he was the twin brother of Esau-Edom ; and he 
 is represented as being born second, his hand grasp¬ 
 ing his brother’s heel. This being a physical impos¬ 
 sibility,— for it is well known to accoucheurs that 
 an “arm presentation” is death to both mother and 
 child, unless the position be altered, as it was in 
 the case of Tamar’s twins (Gen. xXxviii. 28-80),—I 
 presume that some hidden meaning is conveyed in 
 the statement. 
 
 The first indication of what we imagine to be 
 the true signification of the myth (and we may here 
 notice that in every mythos there was a hidden, or 
 ‘esoteric’ meaning, known only to the initiated, as 
 well as one ‘exoteric’ which appeared on the face of 
 the story) is to be found in Gen. xxv. 23, where 
 Rebecca feels the children struggling together within 
 her, and goes to inquire of the Lord, when she 
 is told that two nations are in her womb, &c., 
 and that the elder shall serve the younger. This 
 points to a struggle between Linga^tas and Yonigas, 
 similar to that which has taken place in many 
 ancient nations,—so far as we can judge by their 
 remains, — and which has even taken place in the 
 Christian church, inasmuch as we find the worship 
 of the Virgin gradually superseding that of ‘the Son.’ 
 It would indeed appear to be natural that the dei¬ 
 fication of a male should in every rude state precede 
 that of a female, but the latter follows very closely 
 upon the former, just as Jacob is represented as 
 holding his brother’s heel w T hen he emerged into 
 the world. 
 
601 
 
 Jacob] When we pursue this idea, we find that there are 
 many indications of one of the twins representing the 
 masculine, and of the other typifying the feminine 
 element in creation. 
 
 Esau is represented as being man-like, red, hairy, 
 rough-voiced, a cunning hunter, passionate, and easily 
 beguiled; he was the favourite of his father. Jacob, 
 on the other hand, was a plain smooth man, soft-voiced, 
 living in tents, an adept in cookery, abounding in 
 guile, and the favourite of his mother. Esau’s name, 
 moreover, is as suggestive of the male “ nature,” as 
 Jacob’s is of the female; and the elder was to serve 
 the younger, just as man generally is subservient to 
 woman whilst she is lovely. 
 
 This interpretation receives corroboration from the 
 fact that, when Jacob became “ The Patriarch,” his 
 name was changed from the feminine Jacob to the 
 masculine Israel. 
 
 The historian, telling about 4 the Supplanter,’ 
 leads the reader to suppose that the real signi¬ 
 fication of the name given to Jacob at his birth 
 indicates the existence of an old myth respecting the 
 origin of man and woman, which resembles the Hindoo 
 story of Mahadeva and Sara, and which was modified 
 to suit the sacred narrative. The real meaning of 
 Jacob appears to me to he “the full womb.” 
 
 After the above remarks were in manuscript, I met 
 with “ The Book of Jashar” by the late Dr. Donald¬ 
 son, and in it found a dissertation upon the word 3j?^, 
 akab, which is translated heel in Gen. iii. 15. He 
 adduces Jeremiah xiii. 22, and Nahum iii. 5, and, 
 comparing the words made use of in the original, 
 shows that the heel is an euphemism, as are the feet 
 in Isaiah vii. 20. His exhaustive argument demon- 
 
602 
 
 Jacob] strates that the part intended to by signified by the 
 word is pudenda muliebria. His conclusion is, that the 
 specific part intended is the “antrum; ” my conclusion, 
 ere I saw his work, pointed to the “ uterus,” and 
 practically the two are the same. But the Doctor’s 
 interpretation suits the myth of Esau and Jacob 
 better than mine, for then the twins signify literally 
 the male and female organs, just as we have it in 
 Genesis i. 27, “ male and female ( i . e., zachar , 
 gladium, 4 sword,’ n'kebali, vagina, ‘ sheath ’) 
 
 created he them.” On the other hand, my inter¬ 
 pretation suits the myth of Adam, Eve, and the 
 serpent better than his, for then the interpretation of 
 the sentence, “thou shalt bruise his head, and he 
 shall bruise thy heel,” would be gloriam fascini con- 
 gressio tollit et caput ejus humile facit, sed infligit 
 injuriam moritura mentula, quum impregnationem 
 efficit et uteri per novas menses tumorem profert. 
 Dr. Donaldson, like all other accomplished orientalists, 
 considers that the serpent is the emblem of that 
 desire which is typified in and by the Phallus. 
 
 When once the philologist recognises the proba¬ 
 bility that Esau and Jacob are in reality embodiments 
 of the same idea as Adam and Eve, Mahadeva and 
 Saraiswati, Abraham and Sarah, he will find many 
 circumstances of less importance which make the 
 identification clearer. Though spelled Jacob , 
 
 the word is closely allied to ^P', jacab, which signifies 
 4 hollowed out, a hole, or pit,’ a meaning which closely 
 resembles that expressed by n ?[??, n'kebali , wherein 
 the part which characterises the female is used for 
 * the woman ’ herself. Another alliance of the word 
 is with 2py, akab, ‘to weave,’ ‘cunning,’ ‘to lay wait,’ 
 ‘ to deceive ; ’ also ‘ to be hill-shaped; ’ both of which 
 
603 
 
 Jacob] are feminine attributes. Nor must we forget alto¬ 
 gether that Jacob is described as worshipping a 
 God whom he represents by an erect pillar stone, 
 which recalls to our mind the urgent appeal of Kachel, 
 “ Give me children, or else I die” (Gen. xxx. 1); and 
 the statement (Gen. iii. 16) that the wife shall still 
 desire the company of her husband, notwithstanding 
 the pain she experiences therefrom. 
 
 It remains for us now to investigate the history of 
 Jacob, and consider how far he is deserving a niche 
 in the true chronicle of the past. We find him 
 spoken of as a plain smooth man, dwelling in tents, 
 the favourite of Kebekah, and a tolerable cook, for 
 he makes a mess of pottage which is so tempting, 
 that it suffices to purchase the birthright from his 
 elder brother. We next find him in league with his 
 mother, to cheat old Isaac and his hunter son ; and he 
 succeeds so completely, that his father gives to him 
 the blessing which was intended for Esau. 
 
 It is very difficult to understand the ideas which 
 are associated generally with this benediction in our 
 days. It is assumed that the words of Isaac were 
 prophetic, and that they had some influence over the 
 coming fortunes of his offspring; that he intended 
 Esau to be the chief, but Jacob forestalled him; the 
 whole affair being an illustration of the saying, 
 “ L’ homme propose, Dieu dispose.” We cannot 
 however, believe in the power of a prophet to see the 
 future, and yet be unconscious of a lie enacted in his 
 presence. We are, moreover, familiar with other 
 accounts which record the words of some founder of a 
 race wherein long predictions are given that tally 
 with future events. Such will be recollected by the 
 readers of Virgil; but in all these cases we recognise 
 
604 
 
 Jacob] the hand of a clever author, who puts a speech into 
 the mouth of a mythical individual, and thus des¬ 
 cribes the present as the result of a prophecy in the 
 past. It may be thus with the so-called blessing 
 of Isaac. 
 
 In consequence of this second trick played 
 upon Esau by Jacob, he is advised to fly from his 
 father’s country, and to visit Laban the Syrian. 
 Setting out upon his journey, without any worldly 
 wealth, he sleeps upon the bare ground, and has a 
 dream, in which he sees angels, and a visible appear¬ 
 ance of Jehovah, the latter of whom addresses him 
 and makes him a promise. In consequence of this 
 vision, Jacob makes a vow, that if Jehovah Elohim 
 will keep him safe, &c., then that Jehovah shall be his 
 Elohim. As the appearance of Jehovah was only in 
 a dream, it would scarcely be fair to recall the dictum 
 of the same great Being to Moses, “ there shall no 
 man see Me and live ” (Exod. xxxiii, 20); but, on the 
 other hand, it is clear that if the vision was unreal, 
 so was the promise which it held out. Far more 
 strange is it to find that Jacob is familiar with the 
 name Jehovah. We are assured ostensibly by that 
 very God, that he was not known to Jacob by His 
 name Jehovah (Exod. vi. 3). This episode, then, 
 like the preceding, suggests the belief that the story 
 is the production of a later age, and that the person 
 of Jacob is mythical. It is clear that the notion 
 which the Patriarch had of God was represented by 
 an upright stone, the emblem of Mahadeva. 
 
 We may pass by the account given to us of Laban 
 and his early relationship with Jacob, the birth of the 
 patriarch’s children, the names which they bore, and 
 the contrivances of the herdmaster to increase his 
 
605 
 
 Jacob] flocks and herds, to take np the thread of our dis¬ 
 course when Jacob prepares to lead his family hack 
 again into Judaea. Although he has been in Syria for 
 about thirty years or more, having a Syrian master 
 and Syrian wives and concubines, he still retains his 
 own language, and has so far instructed some of his 
 people therein, that he is able to send an intelligible 
 message to his brother Esau. Of him he feels great 
 fear; but, when left alone, he not only has no terrors 
 at the apparition of a man, but he wrestles with Him 
 all night till the breaking of the day. There is some¬ 
 thing very wonderful in this contest, and its results. 
 The story leads us to infer that God suddenly appeared 
 as a man, and as a man wrestled with another during 
 a night, and yet unsuccessfully; but when the morning 
 approached, this same Being could not dissolve Him¬ 
 self into the same air from which He took His form. 
 Unable to conquer by the ordinary means, He physi¬ 
 cally injures Jacob; yet still the patriarch wrestles, 
 and refuses to let his opponent depart until He blesses 
 him. The other agrees thereto, and changes Jacob’s 
 name to Israel, and gives him a benediction, whose 
 nature we do not know. This Man, Jacob recognises 
 as the Deity in the sentence addressed to Him, “ As a 
 prince hast thou power with God and with men, and 
 hast prevailed; ” which the Yulgate translates, “for if 
 against God thou hast been strong, how much rather 
 shalt thou prevail against men ; ” and the Septuagint, 
 “for thou hast prevailed with God, and shalt be 
 mighty with men ; ” i. e., he had a contest with his 
 brother and overcame him, and then with God and 
 prevailed over Him. 
 
 We are astonished that any people so reverent as 
 the Jews of modern times could really believe this 
 
606 
 
 Jacob] passage in their ancient history to be true ; and, 
 still more, that Christians should believe it literally. 
 That any man can be mightier than his Maker, is a 
 proposition which is intolerable to the philosopher. 
 
 Let us pass by in silence the cruel slaughter of 
 the Hivites, the enslavement of their wives and 
 little ones, and the taking of their cattle, to notice 
 that at this period Jacob still retains his name, not 
 receiving the cognomen of Israel till afterwards (Gen. 
 xxxv. 9,10). This anomaly may arise from the thirty- 
 fifth chapter being a duplicate of the thirty-second; 
 but if it be so, the question still remains, Which 
 has the nearest approach to truth ? We will not 
 linger over the death and burial of Isaac, but pass on 
 to the time of the famine. At that period, Jacob sends 
 his sons to Egypt to buy corn, and they, being unable 
 to talk the language of the country, apply to the 
 superintendent of food through an interpreter (Gen. 
 xlii. 23). After a time Jacob follows, with his whole 
 family, and when he is summoned into Pharaoh’s 
 presence, he appears to be able to converse with the 
 Egyptian king. We do not, however, dwell upon this 
 point, for the next chapter gives us cause for much 
 greater surprise. In that part of it which contains what 
 is said to be the prophetic blessing of the patriarch, 
 we find a Greek w 7 ord introduced, viz., meche- 
 
 rothehem, an Hebraic form of pta^aipa, machaira, for 
 which there is no derivation in any of the Shemitic 
 languages. 86 In the same chapter we find a verse to 
 the effect, “ that the sceptre shall not depart from 
 Judah, nor a law-giver from between his feet, until 
 
 86 There is farther evidence of Greek influence in the story of Jacob, in the 
 fact that Acrisius, king of Argos, is said to have quarrelled in the womb with his 
 brother Proetus, and after some contests, in which the elder brother was at first 
 the strongest, the younger was at length successful in asserting his rights. 
 
607 
 
 Jacob] Shiloh come,” or “ until he come to Shiloh.” Now 
 this involves the idea that the sceptre was in the hands 
 of Judah at the time, for there can be no departure 
 without an arrival. It is clear, therefore, that there 
 is an anachronism here. There is a more conspicuous 
 defect of this kind in the remarks made upon Issa- 
 char, who is spoken of as “a strong ass, crouching 
 down between two burdens; and he saw that rest was 
 good, and the land that it was pleasant, and bowed 
 his shoulder to hear, and became a servant to tri¬ 
 bute.” To speak of the future in the past tense 
 appears nonsensical, and can only be accounted for 
 by the inadvertence of the composer, who describes 
 current history under the guise of prophecy. 
 
 Now throughout the whole history of Jacob we 
 see nothing that demonstrates him to have been what 
 we call a good, or even a pious man; his character 
 shows a mixture of crafty guile and helpless timidity; 
 he is alternately pusillanimous and bold, hopeful and 
 despairing; his conduct to his brother Esau, who 
 held out to him the right hand of fellowship, and 
 desired to be friendly in a fraternal way, is con¬ 
 temptible. All the good that can be said of him is, 
 that he acknowledged Jehovah (Elohim), an adoration 
 which, if we believe Exodus vi. 3, we know to have 
 been impossible. 
 
 My own impression is that Esau or Edom and 
 Jacob are mythic names for ‘ a man ’ and ‘ a woman,’ 
 and that round these historians wove a web of fancy; 
 that ultimately the nature of the cognomen ‘ Jacob ’ 
 was recognised; and that to allow the Jewish people to 
 trace their descent from a male rather than a female, 
 the appellation of Israel was substituted in later 
 productions. There is indeed strong reason to doubt 
 
608 
 
 Jacob] whether the Jewish nation existed as such prior to 
 the time of David, and to believe that none of their 
 writings have an earlier date than his accession to the 
 throne of Jerusalem. But a subject so large as this 
 we must postpone till our next volume. (See Israel.) 
 
 Jada, (1 Chron. ii. 28), “ He is wise,” “ he sees.” This 
 name is almost identical with Mount Ida, on which 
 Paris delivered his judgment. It is almost the same 
 with »8eiv and idea, and closely resembles Ada. 
 
 Jadau, ‘H! (Ezra x. 48), “ A favourite.” 
 
 Jaddau, (Nehem. x. 21), “ He is wise.” 
 
 Jadon, ftaj, for Adon (Nehem. iii. 7), “ The Lord, or the 
 Master.” Possibly Jah-Dan, “ Jah the Judge.” 
 
 Jagur, i-W (Josh. xv. 21), “The rolling one;” from W, 
 agar. (Compare Agur.) 
 
 Jah, or Jehovah, RJ, -I* 1 ' (Exod. xv. 2, &c.), one of the 
 names of the Almighty amongst the Hebrews. As 
 many a sermon is composed to elucidate a single 
 sentence in the Bible, so a single word may suffice 
 for a learned dissertation. It is doubtful whether 
 any name is of more importance than that of n J n !, in 
 the Old Testament. Upon it hang the questions— 
 whether the Pentateuch was the production of a 
 single hand; whether its composition took place at 
 the time usually represented, or at a period subse¬ 
 quent to the coming of David to the throne; whether 
 Jah was a name specially revealed to the Jewish 
 nation, or one adopted by them from another people. 
 Indeed, we may say that upon this mysterious word 
 hinges the whole superstructure which moderns have 
 built upon the absolute truth and inspiration of the 
 Old Testament. 
 
 Deeply impressed as the philosopher must feel with 
 the issues which depend upon his inquiries, he never- 
 
609 
 
 Jah] theless understands that his judgment must depend 
 upon testimony, rather than upon feeling; and that 
 it is safer to trust to the inexorable logic of facts, 
 than to the flimsy web of theory. 
 
 In searching out my evidence, I very naturally 
 turned to those writings which have been left by 
 ancient authors ; but these have been already given 
 to the world so largely by Movers, and other inquirers, 
 and have been so ably condensed by the Bishop of 
 Natal, in his exhaustive work upon the Pentateuch, 
 that it is unnecessary for me to reproduce them here. 
 We therefore turn our attention to other points, 
 which have not yet been so prominently advanced 
 before the public eye. 
 
 Throughout my investigations into the proper 
 names, two facts stood forward with startling promi¬ 
 nence— 1, that there is not a single Egyptian name 
 amongst the Hebrews, before or after the alleged 
 exodus from the land of Pharaoh; and 2, that the 
 use of the name Jah in cognomens comes in like 
 a flood amongst the Hebrews after the return of 
 David from the land of the Philistines and the 
 Phoenicians. It is this second consideration which 
 we have now to discuss. 
 
 To appreciate the full value of this, let us recapi¬ 
 tulate the statements which we have elsewhere made. 
 Proper names, amongst the Shemites in general, 
 were given by a priest. Into them he introduced 
 the name, or one of the characteristic attributes, of 
 the god whom he adored. Hence an examination of 
 cognomens discloses the title or nature of the deity 
 which was popular when the child was born or named. 
 
 Now prior to the time of David almost every Jewish 
 name was compounded with El, Ab, Ach, Shemesh, 
 
610 
 
 Jah] On, Am, Baal, or some word indicating 4 life,’ 4 exist¬ 
 ence,’ 4 brilliancy,’ 4 might,’ 4 strength,’ 4 glory,’ &c. 
 It is almost impossible to find one into whose 
 composition Jah enters. On the contrary, after the 
 period of David’s accession to the kingdom, there are 
 scarcely any cognomens which are not distinguished 
 by the name of Jehovah. 87 The conclusion to be 
 drawn from this fact is inevitable, viz., that the 
 sacred name, which is said to have been revealed to 
 Moses in the burning bush, was really unknown to 
 the Jews in the earlier days of David. It is equally 
 remarkable, but we cannot stay to consider the subject 
 fully now, that the name of Moses was as much 
 unknown to Saul, and to the young David, as was 
 Jehovah. Another fact, of singular importance, is 
 the complete disappearance of the sacred word at the 
 time of our Saviour. Though used by the prophets 
 subsequently to the captivity, we do not find any 
 evidence of its existence in the New Testament; 
 even our Lord Himself either does not know it, or 
 else avoids its use. 
 
 Considering it then as a certain fact that the word 
 Jah, or Jehovah, was introduced into Judea by David 
 and his hierarchy, our next consideration is, whence 
 he obtained it. Ere we attempt to decide, let us con¬ 
 template the character of this king. Of a singularly 
 superstitious character, he was driven from his own 
 country, whilst his mind was still young and ductile, 
 into a land whose religion differed from that of his 
 own. It is improbable that he possessed a copy of the 
 
 I adhere to the current method of spelling this word, although it is not strictly 
 correct. I find, from the History of Israel to the death of Moses, by Heinrich 
 Ewald, edited in English by Professor Eussell Martineau, which appeared whilst 
 this sheet was in the press, that Jahveh or Jahve is the form which is supposed to 
 be nearest to the real pronunciation. 
 
611 
 
 Jah] Pentateuch, even if it then existed, and if he was 
 able to read it. We know, from his behaviour with 
 Achish, that he was timid. There was, therefore, 
 every element in him necessary for the adoption of 
 a new faith. During his absence from Judea he 
 became friendly with Hiram, King of Tyre. 
 
 On his return to Judea, David brought with 
 him Carians of Asia Minor; Cypriotes, probably of 
 Grecian extraction; Giftites, or Philistines, possibly 
 Pelasgians, and Hellenists, or Italians; whilst his 
 bosom friend and counsellor was Hushai, an inhabitant 
 of Erech, and of Babylonian or Assyrian proclivities. 
 
 We therefore examine the names of divinities recog¬ 
 nised by the Greeks, Phoenicians, and Babylonians, 
 to ascertain if there are any names corresponding to 
 Jah. As the true pronunciation of this name is lost, 
 we can but determine the question approximately. 
 Amongst the Greeks we find the word Taw, Iao, which 
 corresponds clearly to the Ju in Jupiter, amongst 
 the Italians, and the’Ta in Iacchus. 88 The name Iao is 
 explained in many ancient passages to be the equiva¬ 
 lent of Helios, Aides, Zeus, Dionysus, Adonis, Attys, 
 Iacchus, and Bacchus, and I see no reason to doubt 
 the value of the quotations adduced by Movers to 
 confirm his views. Now this word Taco may be con¬ 
 sidered as an archaic form of the Greek bao^a/, 
 iaomai, ‘ I heal, or cure.’ It thus becomes the 
 equivalent of the Greek Apollo and the Phoenician 
 Eshmun, and it is associated with Upog, liieros, ‘holy,’ 
 ‘sacred,’ ‘connected with the Gods.’ 
 
 88 It is very probable that Bacchus was at the first spelled with the letter which 
 is equivalent to the Hebrew T v ; this would be read by some as I, and by others as 
 B, which in the Phoenician has the sound of v as well as that of b. 
 
 It is quite possible that Jacchus contains one element of in', or HUT, and 
 Bacchus another; but no dependence can be placed on this etymology. 
 
612 
 
 Jah] Passing from the Greek language, we turn to the 
 Phoenicians, in which name we include all the 
 people living on the western shores of Palestine. 
 Amongst these we find such names as Araunah, 
 Jabin, Uriah, Moriah, Hiram, and Tobiah, which are 
 compounded with some variant of Yho, Iah, Iao, 
 Iu, &c. Still further, we find that David and Solomon 
 worship the same God as the King of Tyre, for Hiram 
 affords great assistance in building a temple to His 
 honour. Again; we find from Mr. Talbot’s transla¬ 
 tion of the Annals of Sennacherib, Journal of Royal 
 Asiatic Society, vol. xix., p. 143, seq., that the name 
 of one of the kings of Sidon was Lulm/j; Zedek iah 
 was King of Ascalon, Padm/i was the name of another 
 Phoenician king; Man iah is another; ~Ritziah and 
 Ub iah are also met with; all of which are apparently 
 compounded with jah, just as Hezek iah, Isa iah, and 
 other Jewish names are. These cognomens may be 
 thus explained:— 
 
 Luliah is equivalent to “Jah moves in a 
 
 circle.” 
 
 Zedekiah is the same name as that of a Jewish 
 king, and signifies “Jah is righteousness.” 
 
 Padiah is equivalent to “ Jah is a re¬ 
 
 deemer.” (Comp. Pedaiah, 2 Kings xxiii. 36.) 
 
 Maniah is equivalent to “ Jah is a per- 
 
 fecter ; ” a name which we may compare with 
 the Hebrew Manoah. 
 
 Kitziah is equivalent to “Jah is a friend.” 
 
 Ubiah is probably equivalent to “Jah 
 
 protects, or covers.” 
 
 Again ; amongst Phoenician proper names we find 
 Abdaios mentioned by Josephus, Antiq. i. 18, Bithias, 
 by Virgil, Mn, i. 38, and Juba, which seems to be a 
 
613 
 
 Jah] corrupted form of yubaal, or “ Jao is Baal.” 
 
 Again, N upoc6va.$, the name of a Numidian, mentioned 
 by Polybius, i. 78, can best be rendered by 
 nary ah, ‘the boy of Jehovah ’ (Gesen., Mon. Phoenica , 
 p. 412). the name of a king of Tyre mentioned 
 
 by Josephus, can best be explained by considering it 
 equivalent to pelaiah, or ‘Jah is distinguished 
 
 and Phamaias, a cognomen of Himilco, is probably 
 the same as phamiah, ‘the hammer of Jah.’ 
 
 Sichzeus, the name of the husband of Dido, and one 
 with which we are more familiar as Zaccheus, is 
 probably the same as zachiah, ‘Jah is pure.’ 
 
 Zaunas, the name of a god in Tyre, is probably 
 equivalent to zuniah, ‘Jah fills, or impregnates;’ 
 all of which appear to have been compounded with a 
 form of Jah. We are also told by Eusebius ( Praep. 
 Evang ., i. 6), that T e6w, Ieuo, was the name of 
 amongst the Phoenicians. (Gesen. Op. Cit.) 
 
 The evidence that a name very similar to Jah, or 
 Ju, or Jao, was used amongst the Syrians, Assyrians, 
 and Babylonians, is very strong. Rawlinson, for 
 example, states ( Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, 
 new series, vol. i., p. 193) that II, or Ilu, is the 
 Shemitic value of a certain sign, for which, he adds, 
 Yaliu is sometimes substituted, as in Hebrew. Again; 
 Talbot, in the Transactions of the Royal Society of 
 Literature, second series, vol. viii., p. 273, gives 
 “Jahu- lulu” as the name of a Syrian king, “ Jahu- 
 biadi ” as a King of Hamath. In both of these 
 the sacred name closely resembles that of Jehu, the 
 King of Israel. Talbot adds, that the word “ Jahu ” 
 is sometimes changed for llu, showing that it means 
 ‘ God ’ in the Syrian language; and the word has even 
 the divine sign prefixed in some inscriptions of Sargon. 
 
614 
 
 Jah] Still farther, he enables ns to identify- Jah with Jahu, 
 by pointing out that the Assyrian way of spelling 
 Hezekiah is Hazak -icilm. Ya-ilu, Sha ya ilu, was the 
 battle-cry of the Assyrians, equivalent to our Hurrah 
 (Talbot ,in Journal of Royal Asiatic Society , vol xix., 
 p. 181). (Compare “ Allah il Allah.”) 
 
 To this testimony we may now add the statement 
 of Fiirst, s. v. •I'" 1 ', with whose Lexicon I only became 
 acquainted after the preceding remarks were penned. 
 “ The very ancient name of God, Ydko, which is 
 preserved only in proper names as an enclitic, written 
 in the Greek Taw, appears, apart from its derivation, 
 to have been an old mystic name of the supreme 
 deity of the Shemites. In an old religion of the 
 Chaldaeans, whose remains are to be found amongst 
 the new Platonists, the highest divinity enthroned 
 above the seven heavens, representing the spiritual 
 light principle, and also conceived of as demiurge, 
 was called Taw, in' (Lydus, De mens , iv. 88, 74, 98 ; 
 Cedrenus, i. p. 296), who was, like the Hebrew Yaho, 
 mysterious and unmentionable (Proclus, in Tim., 
 p. 11), and whose name was communicated only to 
 the initiated (Julian, Or at., in Matrem Deorum, 
 p. 172). The Phoenicians had a supreme god, whose 
 name was triliteral and secret, invented (Sanchon., p. 
 40, ed. Orelli), as is alleged, by the hierophant Istris, 
 the brother of Clma, (i, e., since the origin of the 
 Phoenician people), and he w r as r Taw (Lydus, 1 c, 
 Cedranus, 1 c). This Phoenician Yaho, a knowledge 
 of whom spread farther, represented the Sun god 
 (sol, r/ HA<o£), in a fourfold variety of senses, agreeable 
 to the oracle of Apollo Clarius (Macrobius, Saturn. 
 1. 18); according to an account in Eustathius (see 
 Munter, Religion du Karth, p. 40), he represented 
 
615 
 
 Jah] Baal, whose image was set up in the temple by 
 Manasseh, Suidas, s. v. Mavao-o%, he represented also 
 Dionysus and Adonis. The identification of the ’I«a> 
 of the heathen Semites, with Ydlxo, or Jehovah , of 
 the Hebrews, is already in Tacitus {Hist., v. 5), 
 Plutarch {Syrup. 1, iv., quant. 5, seq.), Julian, &c., 
 Cyril, adv. Jul., which makes it necessary to seek a 
 Shemitic origin alone for the name.” 
 
 Notwithstanding the opinion which Fiirst thus 
 expresses, we may remark that there is great difficulty 
 in finding any valid Semitic explanation of this mys¬ 
 terious word, whilst there is very little difficulty if we 
 refer it to an Aryan or a Sanscrit source. In that 
 language there are two words, Jah and Jaya, which 
 signify ‘ the Almighty; ’ they are sometimes written 
 Jaa and Jaya. It appears under the latter form in 
 the word Jaya- nath. But—and the objection is a 
 strong one—we do not find much evidence of the 
 existence of Vedic influence in ancient Palestine. 
 Consequently, before we can entertain the Sanscrit 
 origin of the name, we must have some show of 
 reason for the belief. Now there are two sources 
 whence the Aryan influence in western Asia might 
 spring, one on land, in the parts where the Semites 
 and Aryans touched, the other where they became 
 acquainted with each other in voyaging, or through the 
 medium of travel generally. We have the testimony 
 of Rawlinson {Journal of Roy. As. Soc., new series, 
 vol. 1, p. 230), that there are proofs of a Vedic or an 
 Aryan influence on the early mythology of Babylon ; 
 and we have evidences from ancient history that many 
 philosophers travelled into distant countries to study 
 their products, their inhabitants, and their religion. 
 The country of India was visited by some Europeans 
 
616 
 
 Jah] in comparatively very ancient times. During the 
 reign of Solomon, it is all but certain that the Phoeni¬ 
 cians were familiar with the route to India. As a 
 voyage lasted three years, it is clear that much of 
 the time of the travellers must have been passed on 
 shore. At every port vast pagodas were to be seen, 
 then as now; and we can readily imagine that inqui¬ 
 ries would he made respecting the god who was 
 adored. Much like king Ahaz (2 Kings xvi. 10), it 
 is probable that some wealthy merchant, attended by 
 his diviner, may have brought from India to Tyre the 
 pattern of a new altar, and the name of a new god, 
 that of the supreme one of India. That Elohim, or 
 the popular deity, had his nomenclature changed, is 
 certain, from the introduction of Nebo into the Assy¬ 
 rian theology. As there is great reason to believe 
 that the name of this divinity was Indian, we may 
 conceive that Jah was equally so. 
 
 It is impossible for any one, at all familiar with 
 the sacred literature of the Hebrews, to pass by the 
 extreme reverence with which the word Jehovah was 
 associated. To such an extent was this carried, and 
 so careful were all w r ho knew it not to divulge it 
 lightly, that the true word, or rather the pronunci¬ 
 ation thereof, is lost. 
 
 It is very probable that the majority of readers 
 consider this veneration for a particular cognomen 
 peculiar to the Jews. There is, however, no doubt 
 that a similar reverence for a name, peculiarly sacred, 
 has obtained in Oriental countries from time im¬ 
 memorial, and still exists among the Hindoos {vide 
 supra, p. 237). Upon this subject, there is a very 
 interesting essay by W. H. Talbot {Transactions of 
 Royal Society of Literature , 2nd series, vol. viii., 
 
617 
 
 Jah] p. 274, seq.), of which the following is a condensa¬ 
 tion. 
 
 That the Greeks believed the language of the Gods 
 to be altogether unlike the speech of men is certain, 
 from the boldness with which Homer makes assertions 
 like these, “ The gods call it Xanthus, but men say 
 Scamander,” and “ Men call it B arista, but the gods 
 the tomb of Myrinna.” This is illustrated by refe¬ 
 rence to an Assyrian inscription, wherein are found 
 the words “ In the language of the gods, Ninev had 
 a divine name; ” this occurs in the reign of Asliu- 
 rakhbal; another inscription of Neriglissar contains 
 the sentence, “ In thy celestial name, which is never 
 pronounced aloud; ” whilst another tablet of Nebu¬ 
 chadnezzar’s has almost the same words, viz., “ In 
 thy divine name, which is not spoken aloud.” 
 
 Now Ninev was not the celestial name, the real 
 one being indicated in the sentence, “At the first he 
 
 was called-in the speech of the gods ” (the dash 
 
 represents a Cuneiform word, which is provisionally 
 rendered Hercules). Two lines after this sentence, 
 which comes in an invocation to the Assyrian gods, 
 the line concerning Ninev occurs, “ Whom men do 
 not call by his real name ; ” and another, which is 
 thus rendered Ninev—“ The king, whom men call not 
 by his royal name, nor by his great title, ‘Chief of a 
 hundred gods,’ and mystically he is the “ Meridian 
 Sun.” In an inscription of Shamas Phul, the king 
 again invokes Ninev, and calls him the Meridian 
 Sun,” and “inspector of all things;” and adds, 
 
 “mystically called-, whose real name they do not 
 
 receive (do not know ?); Arubnaki in the language 
 of the gods.” This name Arubnaki was evidently 
 very holy, and probably very ancient, but other gods 
 
618 
 
 ,Tah] than Ninev claim it. The clearest evidence of the 
 existence of an ineffable name amongst the Assyrians, 
 is the sentence in the first mentioned inscription, 
 “ Ninev, whose divine name by which he is called in 
 the language of the gods no one must lightly pro¬ 
 nounce in vain.” Mr. Talbot then demonstrates 
 that the third commandment in the Jewish decalogue 
 is to be taken literally, and has always been under¬ 
 stood to mean that “ the name ” was never to be 
 pronounced lightly; and he finishes the essay by a 
 reference to the Egyptians, amongst whom it was an 
 injunction, “ Speak not in the name of the great God.” 
 
 It would be easy to multiply passages from the 
 Old Testament to show the vast importance which 
 the Jews assigned to the name of the Almighty ; nay, 
 we can find many in which the Creator Himself is 
 made to appear as if He thought more of His name 
 than of anything else. See, for example, Jerem. 
 xliv. 26: “I have sworn by my great name, that my 
 name shall no more be named in the mouth of any 
 man of Judah in all the land of Egypt; ” and again, 
 Ezek. xx. 9 : “ I wrought for my name’s sake, that 
 it should not be polluted before the heathen,” &c. 
 Now this extreme veneration for the ‘ great name ’ 
 of the Almighty suggests the consideration that 
 the word, whatever it was, could not have been 
 indigenous amongst the Jews, nor a vernacular one 
 amongst other nations. We cannot suppose for an 
 instant that the mystic syllables signified simply 
 “ He is,” “ He exists,” “ He gives life,” or denoted 
 any similar ideas; for in that case the name must 
 necessarily have been profaned daily in ordinary 
 language. We conclude, therefore, that the name 
 was either imported from a foreign country, or was 
 
619 
 
 Jah] compounded of certain initial letters; and thus it 
 would never be necessarily used in ordinary language. 
 We may well illustrate the ancient practice by the 
 modern. Amongst the devout, there is at the present 
 day a great disinclination to use the words God and 
 Jesus Christ, except in prayer and worship, the 
 names being considered too sacred to be used in 
 general conversation; and such expressions as “ the 
 Deity,” “the Creator,” “the Saviour,” “the Lord,” 
 &c., are substituted for them. Even where it is requi¬ 
 site to use the very names in question, they are uttered 
 with bated breath, as being too holy to be uttered in 
 an ordinary tone. In other w T ords, we use our own 
 vernacular circumlocutions, which we do understand, 
 with far less reverence than certain foreign sounds, 
 of whose signification we have but a faint idea; so 
 true is the adage —Omne ignotum pro magnifico. It 
 is probable that the Greeks had equal reverence for 
 the divine names of other nations, for conquerors were 
 especially told by an oracle not to obliterate the titles 
 of the gods of the people whom they vanquished, as 
 the names were of importance in the mysteries. 
 
 If we now closely examine ourselves, we shall 
 readily understand the discontent which would be 
 felt if our spiritual guides attempted to persuade 
 us that the Omnipotent was known amongst the hosts 
 of heaven by an English name. A similar idea has 
 doubtless pervaded all nations who had any concep¬ 
 tion of an Almighty. Hence the power to communi¬ 
 cate to man the appellation by which He passed 
 sufficed to demonstrate that the one who has had 
 direct intercourse with the King on high knew it. 
 The selection, then, of some ineffable name has been 
 an exigence in the foundation of all new religions. 
 
620 
 
 Jah] It is a very remarkable fact, however, that our 
 Saviour, “who was in the bosom of the Father” 
 (John i. 18), never laid any stress upon “the name, 
 the great name, Jehovah ; ” and throughout His 
 ministry spoke of the Almighty as “ my Father,” 
 “ the Father,” or “ Theos.” This leads us to ponder 
 more deeply the ideas conveyed in the ancient 
 theology that the Almighty had a sacred name by 
 which He was known on high. It is clear that 
 there is no necessity for nomenclature in heaven, 
 unless more than one Being exist there. To assign? 
 therefore, a name to the Creator, involves the idea 
 that there are others besides Him. That such an 
 opinion really prevailed amongst the Jews, and 
 others, we recognise by such expressions as the 
 following:— 
 
 “ Who is like unto thee, 0 Lord {Jehovah), 
 amongst the gods?” ( Elohim) — Exod. xv. 11. 
 
 “ Now I know that the Lord {Jehovah) is greater 
 than all gods ” {Elohim) —Exod. xviii. 11. 
 
 “ Among the gods {Elohim) there is none like 
 unto thee, 0 Lord” {Adonai) —Ps. lxviii. 1. 
 
 “For the Lord {El) is a great God {Jehovah), 
 and a great King above all gods ” {Elohim) — 
 Ps. xcv. 8. 
 
 “Worship Him, all ye gods” {Elohim) — Ps. 
 xvii. 7. “Our Lord {Jehovah) is above all gods” 
 {Elohim) —Ps. cxxxv. 5. 
 
 “ Great is our God {Eloah) above all gods ” 
 {Elohim) — 2 Chron. ii. 5. 
 
 “ The Lord {Jehovah) will famish all the gods of 
 the earth ” {Elohim) — Zeph. ii. 11. 
 
 The same idea is very conspicuous in 1 Kings 
 xii. 19 — “I saw Jehovah sitting on His throne, 
 
621 
 
 Jah] and all the host of heaven standing by Him;” and in 
 Job i. 6—“Now there was a day when the sons of 
 Elohim came to present themselves before Jehovah, 
 and Satan came also amongst them.” The cogency 
 of our argument derived from these passages may he 
 seen from the fact, that, in all the ancient versions, 
 these texts have been altered to obliterate the poly¬ 
 theistic idea which they embody. (See Ginsburg on 
 The English Bible in its relation to the ancient and 
 other versions.) 
 
 These, and many other passages, demonstrate that 
 the idea of “ a great name ” was associated with that 
 of the existence of a court above, in every respect 
 similar to one on earth except in its inconceivable 
 vastness; and we are thus brought again by another 
 route to the subject of anthropomorphism. Let us 
 now pause awhile to contemplate the Grecian concep¬ 
 tions of heaven, and those of the philosophic student. 
 In the first there is a powerful king, father of gods 
 and men, Ju-pater, and associated conjugally with him 
 is Ju-no (nj noh, consolation?); they have with them 
 the lords of the sea and land, wisdom, beauty, love, 
 light, darkness, war, and song; they are served by 
 attendant spirits, who fulfil their behests; they have 
 messengers to send to distant quarters, and to men; 
 nay, the anthropomorphism is carried so far that 
 these celestial rulers have passions, just as have men 
 and women upon earth. Change but the names of 
 ‘gods’ for ‘angels,’ suppress the sexual passions, and 
 read Our Father Jah, for The Father Ju, and we 
 then have the Old Testament idea of heaven. 
 
 Contrast this with such conceptions as have been 
 formed by thoughtful minds. With them the Creator 
 is a Being who fills all space, whom the mind of 
 
622 
 
 Jah] man cannot conceive. Pervading all things, there is 
 nothing so large that He cannot treat it as He would 
 the smallest atom. Present alike in the sun and the 
 most distant star, He governs the universe, and at 
 the same time knows when a sparrow falls. Under 
 His power is builded up the most stately mountain, 
 from whose sides, clothed with everlasting snow, flow 
 down mighty rivers, to irrigate and fertilise plains of 
 equal vastness; and from the same power come 
 animalcules of wondrous beauty, too small for man 
 to see. In the attempt to gain a faint idea of such 
 a Being, the understanding is lost in immensity, and 
 gladly turns to repose upon the words of some deep 
 thinker of old — “0 Lord, how manifold are thy 
 works; in wisdom hast thou made them all; the 
 earth is full of thy riches ” (Ps. civ. 24). 
 
 Our attention is now arrested by the consideration 
 if a Being such as the Almighty does really care 
 whether His creatures address Him in Latin, Greek, 
 Hebrew, or English; whether they wear robes of 
 pink, scarlet, green, or white; whether they burn 
 lambs, rams, wax-candles, or incense. To such a 
 Being, is it not better for each to offer up a silent 
 prayer direct, rather than through the intervention of 
 another man ? nay, have we not a warranty for the 
 practice in the words — “The hour cometh, and now 
 is, when the true worshippers shall worship the 
 Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeketh 
 such to worship Him: God is a spirit, and they that 
 worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in 
 truth ” ? (John iv. 23, 24-) 
 
 In writing the preceding article, I have ab¬ 
 stained, as far as possible, from going over again 
 the ground already trodden by the Bishop of Natal 
 
623 
 
 Jah] and those whose opinions he quotes. Although I 
 carefully perused Dr. Colenso’s book on the Penta¬ 
 teuch, I have thought it unnecessary to use it in the 
 present volume, as the task undertaken by me has 
 been wholly independent of any individual writer. 
 Being, as I believe it to he, an independent work, 
 it is corroborative of, rather than dependent upon, 
 such writers as the Reverend Bishop. Moreover, 
 I am too profoundly impressed with the momentous 
 result which follows from the establishment of the 
 fact, that the name of Jehovah only came to he known 
 and used by the Hebrews after the return of David 
 from Phoenicia, to treat the subject lightly. 
 
 This result may be briefly stated as follows. A 
 very large portion of the Old Testament is certainly 
 of no more value than a Hindoo, Greek, or Latin 
 legend ; in other words, the Jewish history, prior to 
 the time of David, is entirely mythical, and its laws 
 and ordinances are wholly of human origin. 
 
 The consequences which flow from this it is 
 almost unnecessary to consider at present; it is 
 perhaps more appropriate that we should leave them 
 until we have laid before the reader the whole of the 
 evidence on which we ground our conclusions. 
 
 In announcing such a result of my labours, I am 
 perfectly conscious that I shall give much pain to 
 many earnest and devout minds, and to many of my 
 personal friends ; I have indeed done much violence 
 to myself. But my aim has been to examine impar¬ 
 tially the claims of our modern churchmen, and the 
 foundation of those claims. I had it very early incul¬ 
 cated into my mind that it was the duty of every 
 Christian to be thankful to any man who convinces 
 him of a fault, and enables him to see himself 
 
624 
 
 Jah] as others see him. In the course of my life I have 
 heard very many sermons and speeches made by 
 missionaries, and have perused very many of their 
 written reports and hooks. In these we see con¬ 
 spicuously a contempt for the absurd belief of 4 the 
 heathen,’ and sneers at the theology of their priests. 
 But I have also heard that “ those who live in glass 
 houses should not throw stones; ” and I know that 
 it is useless to defend an argument unless its 
 foundations are certain. To me, then, it has seemed 
 of the utmost importance to examine into the con¬ 
 dition of our own premises ere we attack those of 
 others. As the whole of our system of theology is 
 based upon the Bible, it appears to be of fundamental 
 importance that the real value of the book should 
 be ascertained. I am profoundly impressed with 
 the belief that no system of religion ought to be 
 based upon fable, and that no priest is deserving of 
 respect who dares not examine closely the foundations 
 of his teaching. True and pure Christianity will 
 survive, even though the Old Testament is grouped 
 with the Apocrypha; and it will not be altogether 
 for the injury of mankind if greater stress is laid 
 upon what a man does, rather than upon the dogmas 
 which he holds. There is a tolerably high authority 
 for the assertion that “ pure religion and undefiled 
 before God and the Father is this, to visit the father¬ 
 less and widows in their affliction, and to keep 
 himself unspotted from the world ” (James i. 27). 
 Such religion all can exercise, even though they 
 think that the Old Testament is not what it pro¬ 
 fesses to be. 
 
 Jahaz, p; (Numb. xxi. 23, Isa. xv. 4), a town of Moab = 
 “ Jah shines ” ? pj, zaah, ‘ to shine,’ ‘ to be fair,’ or 
 
625 
 
 Jahaz] ‘to be proud,’ “a place trodden down” (Fiirst); 
 possibly from W', jctaz, ‘he is hard,’ ‘he is firm,’ 
 ‘he commands, or rules.’ 
 
 Jahaziah, (Ezra x. 15), “ Jah watches over,” of which 
 the two following names are variants. 
 
 Jahaziel, or Jahzeel (1 Chron. xii. 4), “ El watches 
 
 over,” or “ El is firm, or rules.” 
 
 Jahdai, (1 Chron. ii. 47), “Jah directs,” or “Jah is 
 sufficient ” ? 
 
 Jahdiel, (1 Chron. v. 24), “ El makes glad ” ? 
 
 Jahdo, (1 Chron. v. 14), “ He unites.” 
 
 Jahleel, (Gen. xlvi. 14), “ He trusts in El.” 
 
 Jahmai, (1 Chron. vii. 2), “Jah is hot.” 
 
 Jahzeel, (Gen. xlvi. 24), “ El allots.” 
 
 Jahzerah, (1 Chron. ix. 12), “ Jah brings back.” 
 
 Jair, (Numb, xxxii. 41), “Enlightener;” for W, ‘he 
 shines, glitters, blooms, sprouts, flows,’ &c. Jairus 
 was a modern form, in which the Jair is united with 
 V E poo$, Eros . 
 
 Jakeh, (Prov. xxx. 1), “ He fears, is pious, or obe¬ 
 dient.” 
 
 Jakim, B'P' (1 Chron. viii. 19), “He sets up,” from D-1p, which 
 has both the meaning of ‘ standing erect,’ and of 
 ‘ raising seed to.’ 
 
 Jalon, (1 Chron. iv. 17), “He is abiding,” “he is 
 eternal; ” from pp ‘ to abide.’ 
 
 Jamin, t"?:, is a word which signifies “The right hand,” “the 
 bright side,” “ good fortune.” Just as the right- 
 hand is more helpful and useful than the left, so a 
 son of the former would be a complimentary title, 
 while the left, if it -were ever used, would be the 
 reverse. We may take Jamin then to express “ good 
 luck,” or “ good fortune.” 
 
 Jamlech, (1 Chron. iv. 84), “ He shall reign,” or “ He 
 
 R R 
 
626 
 
 Jamlech] is the ruler.” We have Imlach as a surname 
 amongst ourselves. 
 
 Janoah, nfaj (2 Kings xv. 29), “ Rest.” 
 
 Janum, (Joshua xv. 53), “ Sleep ; ” also ‘ flight (of sun).’ 
 Compare Janus , rw,janah, ‘ to oppress by heat.’ 
 
 Japheth, (Gen. v. 32). It is extremely doubtful whether 
 this cognomen has any Shemitic etymon. 
 
 In the ensuing volume we propose to examine 
 into the evidences of Greek influence in the writings 
 of the Old Testament. One of the witnesses which 
 we shall examine is the name Japheth. There is 
 little doubt that this word 0®', japheth , is substan¬ 
 tially the same as japet; and both are Hebraic 
 forms of ’IawsToj, japetos, who in Grecian story was 
 one of the sons of Uranus and Ge (heaven and earth). 
 The Grecian word may be derived from the same root 
 as the Ju in Jupiter; and as the latter signifies Ju , 
 ‘ the father,’ so the former may signify ‘ the active or 
 flying Ju ; ’ from Ju and tt sropoti, whose root is wer, 
 pet, Sanscrit pat, ‘ I fly.’ 
 
 Japhia, (Josh. x. 3), “ He is bright,” “ splendid.” 
 
 Japhlet, (l Chron. vii. 32), “ He frees ” ? 
 
 Japho, te' (Joshua six. 46), “ Beauty ” = = Joppa, or 
 
 “ widely extending,” from n 0?, pathah , “ to spread 
 out; ” also to e seduce, persuade.’ Compare veidco, 
 ‘ to persuade; ’ also Pithom, Python, ‘ a serpent,’ 
 ‘ emblem of desire,’ 4 self erecting.’ 
 
 Jarah, HTjP (1 Chron. ix. 42), “He boils up” = “to glow, 
 to burn, to pour out abundantly.” 
 
 Jared, (Gen. v. 15), probably a varied form of arad , 
 
 ‘ a sprout, or descendant.’ 
 
 Jareziah, (1 Chron. viii. 27), “Jah nourishes,” or 
 
 “ Jah is a home giver.” 
 
 Jareb, BT (Hosea v. 13), “ One fighting an adversary, an 
 
627 
 
 Jareb] enemy; ” a symbol of the warlike Asshur. Compare 
 rahab, for Egypt. It is possible that it is an old 
 Assyrian word; others take Jareb to mean ‘ great,’ 
 ‘ powerful,’ which the Syrian word actually signifies 
 (Fiirst). 
 
 Jarha, VJV\\ = rrv (1 Chron. ii. 34), “ The moon.” The 
 name was borne by an Egyptian. 
 
 Jarib, (1 Chron. iv. 24, xxiv. 17, Nehem. xi. 10), 
 “ One fighting; ” a variant of Joreb ; elsewhere called 
 Jachin (Gen. xlvi. 10, and the marginal reading in 
 1 Chron. iv. 24). 
 
 Jarmuth, row (Josh. x. 8), “ The high ones.” (Compare 
 Yarmouth.) 
 
 Jaroah, nVv (1 Chron. v. 14), “ The moon.” “ Born at the 
 new moon ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Jashar, or Jesher, yfc (2 Sam. i. 18), “ He is straight,” 
 “ upright.” 
 
 Jashobeam, (1 Chron. xi. 11), “Dwelling with the 
 
 mother ” ? or “ dwelling place of the mother,” i. e, 
 Astarte; from jashab, and E*?, em> the V and K 
 being interchanged. Fiirst translates the name “ the 
 people turn home.” 
 
 Jashub, (Numb. xxvi. 34), “ He returns, he comes back 
 again,” referring to the sun, which returns after night. 
 
 Jashubi-lehem, Dr6-'3E>’ (1 chron. iv. 22). There has been 
 great difficulty in finding a satisfactory etymon for this 
 name. Fiirst renders it “ returner home to Lehem,” 
 which seems a preposterous cognomen for a child. 
 It is probable that it denotes “ He returns again to 
 them,” and has, like the last word, reference to the 
 sun, which was supposed by the ancients to depart 
 from the world at night, and to return to it at sunrise. 
 Many appellatives have more distinct reference to the 
 sun than to anything else. 
 
628 
 
 Jasiel, (i Chron. xi. 47), 44 El creates ; ” we see the 
 
 same idea in the word Jahaziah (Ezra x. 15), where 
 Jah creates, instead of El. 
 
 Jathir, (Joshua xv. 48), “A height” (Gesenius); 
 44 extraordinary,” 44 powerful ” (Fiirst). Possibly a 
 contraction of jahtara , which signifies “Jah 
 
 is powerful.” 
 
 Jathniel, (1 Chron. xxvi. 2), 44 El gives.” 
 
 Javan, (Gen. x. 2, Joel iii. 6), a name given to the Ionians, 
 or the Johnians; probably the same as Evan, Ivan, or 
 Huan, 44 the sun; ” 1^, javen, is * to be soft, lax, weak, 
 tender, mild.’ Respecting 1£, Fiirst writes, s. v. “The 
 form of the name is closely connected with the Greek 
 Tcov, Tav, Tavsc, &c., for the basis of all seems to have 
 been T aovsg, with the digamma ’laQovsg. As to the 
 meaning, that of 4 the young ’ has been adopted, 
 opposed to the Tpaixol, the old ; the Greeks them¬ 
 selves relating that the Hellenes were formerly called 
 Tpouxoi. Compare Sanscrit juvan, Zend, jawan, i. e. 
 “ juvenis.” In our own view, these remarks tend to 
 show that “ the young ” is indicative of “ the virgin ,” 
 who is always painted as a lovely girl just budding 
 into womanhood. 
 
 Jaziz, TW (1 Chron. xxvii. 81), “ Brightness, ornament, 
 grace ; ” probably the same as Isis. 
 
 Janus, an Etruscan deity, “the Sun.” 
 
 Jacchus, a name of Bacchus; triN, achaz , 4 to join ; ’ 4 coire’? 
 ^P', 4 to lay snares ’ ? Fiirst tells us, s. v. rp, that 
 Jacchus was the god’s primitive name, and that B 
 was added from some mystic reason. 
 
 Ibhar, “iny (2 Sam. v. 15), 44 He chooses.” 
 
 Ibleam, (Josh. xvii. 11), probably from jabalah, 
 
 and am , 44 The mother (i. e. Astarte) is a power¬ 
 ful one,” the V and K being interchanged. 
 
629 
 
 Ibneiah, (1 Chron. ix. 8), “Jehovah builds up.” 
 
 Ibnijah, H'??' (1 Chron. ix. 8), a variant of the above. 
 
 Ibzan, t-f?*? (Judges xii. 8), “ Splendid, beautiful ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Ichabod, (1 Sam. iv. 21), “Where the glory?” from 
 
 "9| chebed, and ai; possibly a variant of Joche- 
 bed, which see. “Fameless,” explained, 1 Sam. iv. 21, 
 by But this signification is only used by 
 
 the narrator accommodatively, and the proper name 
 has probably been abridged from abi-chabod 
 
 (Fiirst). This derivation would give “ the father, 
 Jah, is thick, or shining,” for the signification of 
 the name. 
 
 Ida, my, Cuneiform, “Age, time, eternity.” 
 
 Idalah, n ?^T. (Josh. xix. 15), “Memorial stone of El” 
 (Fiirst). This etymon is very unsatisfactory, but it 
 is difficult to find one which entirely commends itself 
 to us; possibly it comes from K}\,jeda f or jadah; 
 and n ^, alah , or eljah, and signifies “ he 
 
 worships or praises the strong one, or the God Jah.” 
 Compare Ida and Idalia, in Phrygia and Cyprus. 
 
 Idbash, (1 Chron. iv. 8), “A stout fat one ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Iddo, IT (Ezra viii. 7, v. 1, 1 Chron. xxvii. 21), said to 
 mean “timely, or loving.” The etymology is not 
 satisfactory. Possibly it is contracted from -in'KT or 
 adaijahu or jadahiah, and signifies “ he wor¬ 
 ships Jah.” 
 
 Jeatebai, (1 Chron. vi. 21), “He is firm, or stedfast;” 
 possibly a variant of ' r,3 T., or n ^!, Jethro. 
 
 Jeberechiah, (Isa. viii. 2), “Jah blesses.” 
 
 Jebus, (Judg. xix. 10), etymology doubtful; probably 
 from ‘he shines, or glitters,’ ‘he is high, lofty, 
 or distinguished.’ Possibly a variant of Jabez. 
 
 Jecoliah, (2 Chron. xxvi. 8), “Jehovah shows himself 
 strong.” 
 
630 
 
 Jedaiah, also n'JHJ (1 Chron. iv. 37), “ Jehovah cares, 
 or knows.” 
 
 Jediael, (1 Chron. vii. 6), “ El cares, or knows.” 
 
 Jedidah, (2 Kings xxii. 1), “ Jah is a friend.” 
 
 Jedidiah nnn* (2 Sam. xii. 25), “ The friend of Jah.” 
 
 Jeduthan, kin-ITj (i Chron. ix. 16), “ Praising,” “ The leader 
 of the band ” ? 
 
 Jehiah, nw (1 Chron. xv. 24), “ Jah lives; ” or a variant 
 of Jehovah. The name was borne by a man 
 
 who was one of the door-keepers of the ark in the 
 time of David; and it occurs in a chapter in which 
 the majority of cognomens are compounded with Jah. 
 It very naturally recalls the passage—“ One shall say, 
 I am the Lord’s, and another shall call himself by 
 the name of Jacob, and another shall subscribe with 
 his hand unto the Lord and surname himself by the 
 name of Israel” (Isa. xliv. 5); which shows that 
 venerated names were sometimes adopted by the 
 Jews. 
 
 Jehiel, (2 Chron. xxix. 14), “ El lives.” 
 
 Jehoadah, ™in; (i Chron. viii. 36), “ Jah is lovely.” 
 
 Jehoaddan, (2 Kings xiv. 2), “ Jah is lovely.” “ Yeho 
 is the provider of sexual pleasure ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Jehoahaz, (2 Kings x. 35), “ Jehovah attaches, or 
 
 helps.” 
 
 Jehoash, Bfo’W (2 Kings xi. 21), “ Fire of Jah,” or “ Jah 
 is fire.” 
 
 Jehohanan, (1 Chron. xxvi. 3), “ Jehovah has given.” 
 
 Jehoiachin, (2 Kings xxiv. 6), “ Jehovah establishes.” 
 
 Jehoiada, (2 Sam. viii. 18), “ Jah is lovely, or wise.” 
 
 Jehoiakim, (2 Kings xxiii. 24), “ Jehovah sets up.” 
 
 Jehoiaeib, (1 Chron. ix. 10), “ Jehovah will defend.” 
 
 Jehonadab, (2 Sam. xiii. 15), Jehovah gives freely.” 
 
 Jehoram, D 7’ iri : (1 Kings xxii. 50), “ Jah is high.” 
 
681 
 
 Jehoshaphat, (2 Sam. viii. 10), “ Jehovah judges.” 
 
 Jehosheba, (2 Kings xi. 2), “Jehovah is the heaven,” 
 
 or “ Jah is sevenfold.” 
 
 Jehovah, (Gen. ii. 4). This word may be rendered by 
 “ Yeho is Jah.” (See Jah.) 
 
 Jehozabad, (2 Kings xii. 21), “Jehovah gave,” or 
 
 “ gift of Jehovah.” 
 
 Jehozadak, (1 Chron. vi. 14), “Jah is righteous.” 
 
 Jehu, (1 Kings xvi. 1), a variant of Jah, or “ Jehovah 
 is he.” It is deserving of notice that Jehu, whose 
 name is almost identical with the supreme God 
 amongst the Assyrians and the Israelites, was the 
 one who abolished the worship of Baal in Israel. 
 
 Jehubbah, njn' (1 Chron. vii. 84), “ Jah is purity.” 
 
 Jehuchal, (Jerem. xxxvii. 8), “Jah is powerful.” 
 
 Jehud, “N'T (Josh. xix. 45), “Jah is majesty.” (See Judah.) 
 
 Jehudi, 'T 11 " 1 ' (Jerem. xxxiv. 9), “ Loved by Jah,” or simply 
 “ a Jew.” 
 
 Jekabzeel, (Nehem. xi. 25), “El gathers.” 
 
 Jekameam, (1 Chron. xxiii. 19), “ The Mother gathers; ” 
 being written to obliterate the idea that any 
 Jew could be called after Astarte. 
 
 Jekamiah, n T '?i?' (1 Chron. ii. 41), “Jah gathers.” 
 
 Jekuthiel, (l Chron. iv. 18). Etymology doubtful. 
 
 “ El is Almightiness ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Jemimah, (Job xlii. 14), “ A dove ” (Gesenius); “ the 
 pure ” (Fiirst). Possibly “ the pure virgins.” 
 
 Jemuel, (Gen. xlvi. 10), “El is the beginning” ? from 
 fiEK, amah, ‘head, foundation, beginning.’ “El is 
 splendour ” (Fiirst), from &*. (Compare Ammiel, 
 Ammah.) 
 
 Jephthah, (Judg. xi. 1), “ The beautiful gazelle”? from 
 japheh, * beautiful, good, excellent,’ and 'iKfi, tho, 
 * gazelle; ’ or we may derive it from HBJ, japhe, ‘ beauty,’ 
 
632 
 
 Jephthah] and n ^, tavah, an old word which signifies ‘ to 
 dwell.’ Hence the word might be “the abode of 
 beauty,” a name which would be applicable to him if 
 given by the historian ; or we may derive it from 
 japlii, ‘beauty, brightness,splendour,’ and pathah , 
 
 ‘ to persuade, or seduce (whence nrsriw, e I persuade,’ 
 
 * the goddess of persuasion; ’ and Pithom and Python). 
 
 This derivation w T ould make the word signify “ His 
 beauty seduces.” It is possible that it signifies “Jah is 
 Phthah,” the latter being the name of a god of Egypt. 
 This derivation is the more probable, as we find a 
 variant of the word Pethahiah (Ezra x. 28). It is 
 evident that Fiirst favours the idea, for he translates 
 the word as “a breaker through,” from ‘ caus¬ 
 
 ing to bear,’ viz., Jah is: if it he not already in itself 
 an epithet of the supreme deity, like the Egyptian 
 Phtah , and Phoenician Putaic, from the same stem. 
 If we adopt this idea, we find another evidence of the 
 association between Jah and Mahadeva; for it is clear 
 that “ the breaker through which causes to bear ” is 
 the same as Baal Peor. When we remember that 
 Jephthah was the son of a harlot, or strange woman; 
 that he was also a mighty man of valour, and that he 
 subsequently sacrificed his daughter; we can believe 
 that he bore a coarse name, and had a faith very 
 similar to those who adored the Creator under his 
 mundane emblem. 
 
 Jepthel-el, '^Tina' (Joshua xix. 14) “El, the beautiful 
 gazelle.” “El is a begetter” (Fiirst). 
 
 Jerah, rn* (Gen. x. 26), “ The Moon,” from an old rn* = pr 
 
 * to he yellow.’ 
 
 Jerahmeel, (i Chron. ii. 9), “El is a pitier” (Fiirst). 
 
 Jeremiah, (2 Kings xxiii. 31), “ Jah is high.” 
 
 The prophet Jeremiah, who lived during the last 
 
633 
 
 Jeremiah] days of the Davidic dynasty, and who saw the over¬ 
 throw of Jerusalem, is a character full of interest to 
 the historian. Being a priest, he was familiar with 
 the learning which the office involved, and, being 
 literary, he was able to commit to writing whatsoever 
 he chose. There is strong reason to believe from 
 the style of his writing that he penned the book of 
 Deuteronomy, which is supposed to he the copy 
 of the law found in the temple in the time 
 of Josiah. Whether this supposition be true or 
 false, it is very remarkable that Jeremiah makes 
 more familiar use of the story of Israel in Egypt 
 than any of his predecessors. To select one passage 
 out of many, “ Cursed he the man that obeyeth not 
 the w r ords of this covenant, which I commanded your 
 fathers in the day that I brought them forth out 
 of the land of Egypt, from the iron furnace, saying, 
 Obey my voice, and do them, according to all which 
 I command you : so shall ye be my people, and 
 I will be your God; that I may perform the oath 
 which I have sworn unto your fathers, to give them a 
 land flowing with milk and honey, as it is this day” 
 (Jer. xi. 3-5). Again, like the second Isaiah, who 
 wrote about the end of the Babylonish captivity, he 
 mentions Moses, whose name throughout the Old 
 Testament is almost ignored, except in the Pentateuch, 
 and in the early part of the books of Kings, and 
 amongst those who returned from Chaldsea (see 
 Isaiah lxiii. 11 ; Jer. xv. 1 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 25). 
 
 Not only do we find in the writings of the 
 prophet a reference to the covenant generally, but we 
 see also an allusion to the Sabbath day, as if it 
 had been of recent appointment, and one which 
 had found no favour. “ Thus saith the Lord; 
 
634 
 
 Jeremiah] Take heed to yourselves, and bear no burden on 
 the Sabbath day, nor bring it in by the gates of 
 Jerusalem; neither carry forth a burden out of your 
 houses on the Sabbath day, neither do ye any work, 
 but hallow ye the Sabbath day, as I commanded your 
 fathers. But they obeyed not, neither inclined their 
 ear,” &c. This is followed by other verses, promising 
 permanence to the city and a continuance of the 
 Davidic dynasty if the Sabbath is kept, but lasting 
 destruction if the ordinance be neglected (Jer. xvii. 
 21-27). Here again it is singular that the second 
 Isaiah should be in such close accord with Jeremiah, 
 for we find him declaring, “ Thus saith the Lord unto 
 the eunuchs that keep my Sabbaths, and choose the 
 things that please me, and take hold of my covenant; 
 even unto them will I give in mine house a name 
 better than of sons and of daughters; I will give 
 them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off” 
 (Isa. lvi. 4, 5). (See Sabbath, infra.) 
 
 There is, moreover, a very remarkable resemblance 
 in the style of thought which permeates the books of 
 Deuteronomy and Jeremiah. In the former there 
 is a recitation of the deeds which God has done to 
 show His power, a promulgation of His laws, a 
 denunciation of the gods and practices of the heathen, 
 a stedfast promise of prosperity if those laws are 
 adhered to, and a fierce threatening of wrath if they 
 are neglected. There is precisely the same in the 
 latter; at one time there is an assurance that the 
 Lord will most certainly destroy the city and kingdom, 
 on account of the atrocious wickedness of Manasseh 
 (ch. xv. 1-6); then again Jeremiah assures the people 
 thus: “ Therefore now amend your ways and your 
 doings, and obey the voice of the Lord your God; 
 
685 
 
 Jeremiah] and the Lord will repent Him of the evil that He 
 hath pronounced against you” (ch. xxvi. 18; see also 
 vii. 3-7). In both books too is found the same funda¬ 
 mental idea, that the Jews are especially a chosen race, 
 and that human power will always be weak before 
 them, provided only they are obedient to the priest¬ 
 hood who announce to them the law of Jehovah. 
 There seems to have been a total ignorance of the 
 maxim enunciated by the great Frederick, Que le bon 
 Dieu est toujours au cote des plus gros battaillons ; 
 consequently, when the nation was overpowered by 
 numbers, recourse was had to religious rites, rather 
 than to the ordinary practices of diplomacy. The 
 decadence of Judaea’s power being attributed to the 
 vengeance of the Almighty, it was natural for the 
 people to consider under which of all His names He 
 had been neglected. Under the title of Jehovah, 
 God had been painted to them as sending dreadful 
 plagues upon their fathers in the desert; under His 
 rule they had been subjected to many ruthless 
 conquerors during the times of the Judges; under it, 
 too, the kingdom had been broken up, Jerusalem 
 plundered by the Kings of Egypt; and under it, too, 
 Josiah was destroyed by Necho. On the other hand, 
 the gods of Moah, Ammon, Media, Philistia, Syria, 
 Egypt, Israel, Assyria and Chaldgea had been suc¬ 
 cessful in warfare ; and the chosen of the Lord had 
 been routed by the gods of those very nations which 
 they were told to bear an enduring hatred to. 
 Under these circumstances, the people adopted the 
 plan suggested by the magician to Thalaba, viz., “ If 
 Allah does not save, call on the powers that will.” 
 
 This adoption of the gods, the ritual, and practice 
 of Judah’s most formidable enemies very naturally 
 
636 
 
 Jeremiah] exasperated the prophets of Jehovah, for it was a 
 practical proof that their assertions were not to 
 be trusted, and that piety was not an adequate 
 shield against powerful armies; a dogma the truth 
 of which all history has demonstrated. 
 
 Beyond the constant and almost unvarying denun¬ 
 ciation of God’s wrath against Jerusalem, and vague 
 promises for the future, there is very little to be 
 found in the book Jeremiah except a declaration of 
 his policy, that it was advisable for the nation quietly 
 to submit to the Chaldseans. He assures them that 
 “ the nations that bring their neck under the yoke of 
 the King of Babylon, and serve him, those will I let 
 remain still in their own land, saith the Lord; and 
 they shall till it, and dwell therein ” (Jerem. xxvii. 11). 
 
 We seek in vain throughout Jeremiah for any 
 prophecy, worthy of the name, which has been fulfilled, 
 except indeed in those cases where one has been written 
 after the event. There are, on the other hand, many 
 which are notably incorrect. Let us take, for exam¬ 
 ple, the well-known verses, “ The days come, saith the 
 Lord, that 1 will raise unto David a righteous Branch, 
 and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute 
 judgment and justice in the earth. In his days 
 Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely; 
 and this is his name whereby he shall be called, The 
 Lord our Righteousness ” (ch. xxiii. 5, 6), to which is 
 added (xxxiii. 17, 18), “For thus saith the Lord, David 
 shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the 
 house of Israel; neither shall the priests the Levites 
 want a man before me to offer burnt-offerings, and 
 to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continu¬ 
 ally.” Now it is perfectly clear that this vaticina¬ 
 tion has reference to a temporal Davidic king who 
 
637 
 
 Jeremiah] should restore and keep up the old sacrificial 
 customs, and cannot by any possibility refer to a 
 spiritual king who abolished sacrifices, and in whose 
 time neither Judah nor Israel was safe. We must 
 also add to this so-called prophecy another, which 
 distinctly depicts Jeremiah’s meaning; “ Then shall 
 there enter into the gates of this city kings and 
 princes sitting upon the throne of David, riding in 
 chariots and on horses, they and their princes, the 
 men of Judah, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and 
 this city shall remain for ever. And they shall come 
 from the cities of Judah . . . bringing burnt-offer¬ 
 ings, and sacrifices, and meat-offerings, and incense, 
 and bringing sacrifices of praise unto the house of 
 the Lord” (ch. xvii. 25, seq., and xxii. 4). 
 
 Whatever may be our opinion of Jeremiah as a 
 prophet, in the ordinary sense of the word, we may 
 fairly give him credit for describing those religious 
 practices of the nation — which he specially abhors. 
 Whether these were indigenous with what I would 
 call the “ aborigines ” whom David conquered, or 
 whether they were imported from neighbouring 
 nations, is of little consequence to us, who are 
 seeking the primitive faith which was held by the 
 inhabitants of Canaan generally. By collating these 
 accounts with those which are given by Ezekiel, we 
 shall get a moderately clear insight into the early 
 religion of the Phoenicians. We take them in the 
 order in which they occur. 
 
 “ Saying to a stock (H>, etz—‘ a shortish cylindrical 
 tree stump,’ or anything that is round) Thou art my 
 father ('?K dbi), and to a stone eberi), Thou hast 
 begotten me.” From this we cannot fail to see that 
 Mahadeva, under the form of an upright stone or a 
 
638 
 
 Jeremiah] block of wood, both of which are his emblems, 
 was worshipped as the Creator (ch. ii. 27; compare 
 iii. 2, 6, 9). Again (ii. 34): “ Also in thy skirts is 
 found the blood of the souls of the poor innocents,” 
 which we supplement by — “they sacrificed their sons 
 and their daughters unto devils shedim = ( the 
 powerful ones,’ the plural of Shaddai, one of the 
 names of the Almighty), and shed innocent blood, 
 even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, 
 whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan ; and 
 the land was polluted with blood” (Ps. cvi. 37, 38). 
 Again, “Seest thou not what they do in the cities 
 of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem ? The 
 children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, 
 and the women knead their dough to make cakes 
 cunim, see Buns; Fiirst, s. v . ; and compare 
 
 xovvvs) to the queen of heaven mele - 
 
 chetli ha-shamaiim), and to pour out drink-offerings 
 unto other gods” (ch. vii. 18). This is rendered 
 more fully in ch. xliv. 15, seq . “ Then all the men 
 
 which knew that their wives had burned incense unto 
 other gods, and all the women that stood by, a great 
 multitude, even all the people that dwelt in the land 
 of Egypt, in Pathros, answered Jeremiah saying, As 
 for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the 
 name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. 
 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth out 
 of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the queen of 
 heaven, and to pour out drink-offerings unto her, as 
 we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our 
 'princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of 
 Jerusalem; for then had we plenty of victuals, and 
 were well, and saw no evil. But since we left off to 
 burn incense unto the queen of heaven, and to pour 
 
639 
 
 Jeremiah] out drink-offerings unto her, we have wanted all 
 things, and have been consumed by the sword, and 
 by the famine. And when we burned incense to the 
 queen of heaven, and poured out drink-offerings unto 
 her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour 
 out our drink-offerings unto her without our men 
 an-ish-nu = our husbands or male consorts) ?” 
 This cogent argument of the women, Jeremiah met 
 by one equally powerful, viz., that they were now 
 afflicted because, in paying attention to the lady of 
 heaven, they had neglected the Lord. Without 
 dwelling upon the worthlessness of both allegations, 
 we remark how completely both the women and the 
 Prophet acknowledge that the kings of Judah did 
 worship the celestial virgin. 
 
 Again, we find that astrology was cultivated 
 amongst the Jewish people in the later days of the 
 monarchy, just as it had been amongst the Egyptians 
 from time immemorial. See, for example, the verse, 
 “ And they [the Chaldeans] shall spread them [the 
 hones of the kings, princes, and priests of Judah] 
 before the sun, and the moon, and all the host of 
 heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have 
 served, and after whom they have walked, and whom 
 thay have sought, and whom they have worshipped,” 
 &c. (ch. viii. 2); compare this with Deut. iv. 19, 
 “ And lest thou lift up thine eyes to heaven, and 
 when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the 
 stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest he 
 driven to worship them, and serve them,” &c. A 
 conjunction of texts which, when coupled with the 
 absence of homage to the hosts of heaven during the 
 early times of the monarchy, gives us great reason to 
 associate together the writer of Deuteronomy and 
 
640 
 
 Jeremiah] Jeremiah. That Jeremiah felt strongly about the 
 astrological studies of the heathen is very evident, 
 from his recurring to the subject in the tenth chapter, 
 e. g., “ Be not dismayed at the signs of heaven, 89 for 
 the heavens are dismayed at them” (ch. x. 2). 
 
 Jeremiah then describes an idol: “ One cutteth 
 a tree out of the forest with the axe, they deck it 
 with silver and gold; they fasten it w 7 ith nails and 
 hammers, that it move not; they are upright as the 
 palm tree, but speak not; .... but they are all brut¬ 
 ish and foolish; the stock (H?, etz ) is a doctrine of 
 vanities ” (ch. x. 3-8). It is clear that these idols 
 were nothing more than the rudest form of the 
 phallus, analogous to spfxoci, hermai, of the Greeks 
 (see Ancient Pillar Stones and Cairns , by T. Inman, 
 M. D., pp. 36, Liverpool, Holden, 1867). That this 
 adoration of the sexual emblems was associated with 
 the gross practices current elsewhere, we conclude 
 from the following passage: I have seen thy adulte¬ 
 ries, and thy neighings, the lewdness of thy whore¬ 
 dom, and thine abominations on the hills in the 
 fields ” (ch. xiii. 27 ; compare Isa. lxv. 7, and Ezek. 
 vi. 13). From ch. xiv. 13, 14, we learn that there 
 were a vast number of prophets in Jerusalem, just 
 
 89 We may again take the opportunity thus afforded us to express our belief that 
 astronomy was not cultivated by the Jews until they came into contact with the 
 Babylonians. Throughout the whole of their nomenclature, there is scarcely a 
 single name which seems to demonstrate any knowledge of the heavens, beyond that 
 which every one must possess from his own observation. Hence it has been found 
 unnecessary in the preceding pages to enter upon the subject of theology, as 
 Dupuis has done in his celebrated work, Religi'n Universelle. When the present 
 inquiry was instituted, the Author expected that he would find Sabaeanism, or 
 celestial philosophy, at the base of every difficult problem ; hut as he proceeded, the 
 absence of such presumed science was more and more evident. After a while, a 
 suspicion arose in his mind whether his being unable to find marks of astrology was 
 not a proof that the deductions which he had drawn were wrong; and it was long 
 ere he could form the conclusion enunciated above with any certainty. 
 
641 
 
 Jeremiah] as there were in other cities ; and that divination 
 was a sort of profession. It is clear also that, in the 
 competition for custom, the seers professed to see 
 such visions as were most likely to he pleasant to 
 the popular mind. 
 
 Very shortly afterwards we alight upon a custom 
 common in Jerusalem, which reminds us very 
 strongly of the * wakes,’ that are held by the Irish 
 over their dead. The analogy is all the more curious 
 when we remember the many traces of antiquity in 
 Old Ireland, which tell of Phoenician influence. 
 The custom which we refer to consists in the relatives, 
 friends, and acquaintances of the deceased assembling 
 around his corpse, for one or more nights after the 
 death, and there celebrating a great orgy, eating and 
 drinking, singing and bewailing, recounting the vir¬ 
 tues and applauding the valour of the one who lies 
 before them. In these cases, there are few who do 
 not become the ‘ worse for liquor.’ Compare this 
 now with Jerem. xvi. 6-8: “ Both the great and 
 the small shall die in this land; they shall not be 
 buried, neither shall men lament for them, nor cut 
 themselves, nor make themselves bald for them; 
 neither shall they break bread for them in mourn¬ 
 ing, to comfort them for the dead; neither shall 
 men give them the cup of consolation to drink for 
 their father or for their mother. Thou shalt not also 
 go into the house of feasting, to sit with them to eat 
 and to drink.” In the nineteenth chapter we alight 
 upon a custom which tells us very clearly of the 
 horrible practices then prevalent: “Because they have 
 filled this place with the blood of innocents; they have 
 built also the high places of Baal to burn their sons 
 with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal; therefore,” 
 
 s s 
 
642 
 
 Jekemiah] &c. (ch. xix. 4-6.) But if we are horrified 
 at this custom, still more so are we at the punish¬ 
 ment which the Prophet threatens in retribution. 
 “ I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons and 
 the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat every 
 one the flesh of his friend ” (ch. xix. 9). In other 
 words, the Prophet says — ‘ Because you have mur¬ 
 dered your children from religious motives, you shall 
 he compelled to kill more of them, and to eat them 
 too! ’ It is difficult to understand to which of the 
 two this matter would be most penal, the one who 
 was killed and eaten, or the one who, killing that he 
 might eat, got enough to keep him alive (compare ch. 
 xxxii. 84-40). 
 
 From the thirteenth verse of the same chapter we 
 find that the roofs of houses were a common place 
 from which incense might be offered to the host of 
 heaven, and drink-offerings poured; hence we learn 
 that religious worship was domestic as well as public, 
 and we conclude that there were family prayers then 
 as now, though differently conducted. 
 
 There is in the twenty-sixth chapter a remarkable 
 illustration of the absence of, or else an utter contempt 
 for, “ Extradition Treaties; ” since we find that the 
 Jewish king sends a body of men into the dominion 
 of the King of Egypt, simply to fetch a Hebrew 
 prophet who has sought refuge on the banks of the 
 Nile. It is clear from this that there was no great 
 respect for frontiers in those days. 
 
 We pass by the episode to which we have before 
 referred, wherein Jeremiah and the Hebrew women in 
 Egypt differ in their respective estimates of the value 
 of the offerings to the Queen of heaven, and go for¬ 
 wards to ch. xlviii. 87, in which we have curious 
 
643 
 
 Jeremiah] particulars about certain ceremonies of mourning, 
 e. g., “ For every head shall be bald, and every beard 
 clipped; upon all the hands shall be cuttings, and 
 upon the loins sackcloth;” an extremely inconvenient 
 method of showing one’s grief. No sooner have 
 we written the words, than the recollection starts 
 upon the mind that there was a law which prohibited 
 the adoption of this custom of Moab amongst the 
 Israelites, viz., “Ye shall not make any cuttings in 
 your flesh for the dead” (Lev, xix. 28); and again, 
 Lev. xxi. 5, says, “ They shall not make baldness 
 upon their head, neither shall they shave off the 
 corner of their beard, nor make any cuttings in their 
 flesh.” When a custom and a law are thus stated, 
 the philosopher believes that the law was intended 
 to abrogate the custom, or to prevent its adoption. 
 In either case, we must conclude that the prohibition 
 in Leviticus was made subsequently to the time when 
 the Jews knew that the practices in question existed 
 amongst the Moabites, and this we infer was sub¬ 
 sequent to the time of David and Solomon. 
 
 After this we find no more references to local 
 customs, which are worthy our consideration; but we 
 see that the pen of Jeremiah, like that of Isaiah, has 
 been taken up by a supplemental writer, who lived 
 in a period subsequent to that of the Jeremiah who 
 went to Egypt, very probably after the destruction of 
 Babylon. I must, however, call the attention of the 
 reader to the forty-ninth chapter in the book, in 
 which Jeremiah speaks of the prospective destruction 
 of Edom ; and I would then direct his eye to the 
 twenty-fifth chapter of 2 Chronicles, wherein we find 
 that Amaziah destroyed the Edomites; and lastly, I 
 would invite him to peruse the first chapter of Amos, 
 
644 
 
 Jeremiah] wherein the Edomites are represented as pur¬ 
 chasing the captives of Jerusalem for slaves. As a 
 nation cannot be destroyed and again resuscitated 
 in the course of a few years, we must oppose the 
 testimony of the writer of Chronicles to that of Jere¬ 
 miah and Amos, and as both are partially supported 
 by Joel, we conclude that the book of “ Chronicles ” 
 cannot be depended upon as being historically true. 
 (See Joel.) 
 
 Now throughout the book of Jeremiah, we find 
 that every evil which happens to Judah is caused 
 by her iniquities; these she has adopted from her 
 neighbours; and yet they are the whips which scourge 
 her. This leads us to consider the question, “Is it 
 better to regard tribulation as the consequence of 
 national guilt, or as the result of violating certain laws 
 of nature ? Is it better to adopt the judgment of 
 Jeremiah, or that of the Saviour, given thus; ‘There 
 were present at that season some that told him of the 
 Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their 
 sacrifices. And Jesus answering said unto them, 
 Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above 
 all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things ? 
 I tell you, Nay/ &c. (Luke xiii. 1-3) ” There are 
 few thoughtful minds that cannot readily reply to the 
 question thus propounded. 
 
 Jeremoth, rnD'T. (1 Chron. vii. 8), “ The high ones,” or 
 “ fearing Muth.” (See Jerimoth.) 
 
 Jeribai, (i Chron. xi. 46), “ Jah is a leader in combat,” 
 the n being elided. 
 
 Jericho, (Numb. xxii. 1), This word is spelled ln 'T : 
 (Josh. ii. 1), and (1 Kings xvi. 34). Erom 
 there being three different forms of etymology, we 
 infer that there is something which the Scribes have 
 
645 
 
 Jericho] attempted to conceal. Now we have already found 
 that -I 1 " 1 !, yciho or yahu, was one of the ancient names 
 of the Almighty amongst the Canaanites, and was 
 reproduced amongst the Hebrews as jah, or 
 jehovah. We have also found that the redactors of 
 the Old Testament in Hebrew adopted a variety of 
 plans whereby to obliterate the existence of their 
 own sacred name amongst the heathen around them. 
 We can readily understand their motive, for the 
 occurrence of the title in a Canaanite town 
 would contradict the assertion that the sacred name 
 was first communicated to Moses by God himself; 
 consequently, we conclude that in', Pin', and in all 
 represent -in'. The first element of the word is 
 probably N'V, yare, or irah, which signifies 
 
 “ fearing, or reverencing.” The whole name there¬ 
 fore maybe read as “reverencing Yaho, or Jah, or 
 Jehovah.” This interpretation makes the name of 
 the town accord with the most common plan of 
 nomenclature; and we must add that it is a more 
 probable one than that previously adopted, viz., 
 “fragrant with spices,” or “a fragrant place,” for 
 “ spices ” are not indigenous in Palestine, nor are 
 any towns fragrant. We shall see in the next word 
 that e i } i s US ed instead of Pi', jah, whilst in the 
 ne which follows that we have the very name which 
 we believe to have been borne by the town first 
 conquered by the Jews on their entrance into 
 Palestine. 
 
 Jeriel, V?’ (1 Chron. vii. 2), “Fearing El;” and 
 or “ He reverences El.” 
 
 Jerijah, or (1 Chron. xxvi. 31), “Fearing Jah,” 
 
 or “ He reverences Jah.” (See Jericho.) 
 
 Jerimoth, (1 Chron. vii. 7), probably a variant of 
 
646 
 
 Jerimoth] Jeremoth, “ Fearing Muth, or Mot.” (See p. 
 560, note)* 
 
 Jerioth, TO'T. (1 Chron. ii. 18), “ Curtains ” (Gesenius) ? 
 
 4 shyness, timidity ’ (Fiirst) ; probably altered from 
 the preceding word, the y being used in place of D. 
 We recognise thus, in four consecutive cognomens, 
 four different sacred names, Yaho, El, Jah, and 
 Moth, and the worship of as many forms of God. 
 Jeroboam, (1 Kings xi. 26), “ The mighty mother,” 
 
 from S’V, yareb, and BK, em, the K being used, as it 
 frequently is, instead of y. We are assisted some¬ 
 times, in our search after an etymon, by considering a 
 few coltateral circumstances. Thus, for example, we 
 find that Jeroboam is a native of Eprath, which 
 tells of the worship of the heifer ; and that he was 
 addicted to the worship of the calves we know, inas¬ 
 much as he established it in Israel. His mother’s 
 name, again, is Zeruah, which signifies “ she drops 
 forth,” or “ full-breasted.” When we find the female 
 element to be so marked in the names which are 
 associated with Jeroboam, we conclude that the expla¬ 
 nation of his name, as given above, is the correct one. 
 Jeroham, BPTV (1 Sam. i. 1), “ A beloved, or favoured one ” 
 (Fiirst). 
 
 Jerubbesheth, (2 Sam. xi. 21) ; also Jerubbaal, 
 
 (Judges vi. 82), “ Baal is mighty,” or “ Jerab 
 is Baal, or shame.” 90 
 
 90 It is desirable to notice here the connection of the names Jerubbaal, Jerubbe- 
 sTieth, and Gideon. The last represents the union of Gad, the Phoenician Venus, 
 and On, the masculine deity. If we take Jareb to mean ‘ mighty,’ or equivalent to 
 Asshur, the first name will signify “Baal is mighty,” or “ Baal is the Phallus.” A 
 later writer, who has found this last cognomen under his pen, has, according to the 
 modern custom, been disgusted that the name of Baal should be held by so worthy an 
 Hebrew warrior as the conqueror of the Midianites, and has changed the obnoxious 
 word for besheth, which signifies ‘ shame.’ We have other specimens of this kind of 
 alteration in Ishbosheth and Mephi&osAei7i, names given by the writer in Samuel for 
 
647 
 
 Jeruel, (2 Chron. xx. 16), “God founded,” probably a 
 variant of Jeriel. 
 
 Jerusalem, (Josh. x. 1), “The abode of peace.” 91 
 
 from •IT, iru, and shlam, ‘ place of prosperity.’ 
 We postpone the consideration of this city and its 
 people until our next volume. 
 
 Jerusha, or nK*)T (2 Kings xv. 38), “ Possession, i. e. 
 of Jah,’ (Fiirst). 
 
 Jes, I H S. Higgins, in his Anacalypsis, to which I have 
 already referred, and in his Celtic Druids, gives the 
 following account of this well-known cipher. “ But 
 the most curious of all the monograms of Christ, is 
 that inadvertently adopted by the Protestants from 
 the Romish monks of the dark ages. It is of no great 
 consequence, but it is rather curious. <bPH, pre, or 
 phre, is a word which Martianus Capella, in his hymn 
 to the Sun, tells us was expressed in three letters, 
 making up the number 608. 
 
 “ Salve vera Deum facies, vultusque paternse 
 Octo et sexcentis numeris, cui litera trina 
 Conformet sacrum nomen, cognomen, et Omen .” 92 
 
 Eshbaal and Meribbaal, the son and grandson of Sanl; and Eliada for Beliada, a 
 son of David. We recognise in the words, I think,—1. A heathen or Phoenician 
 name; 2. A narrative made to account for its being possessed by an Israelite; 
 3. That a later writer, who has transmitted the story, has thought it better to mutilate 
 the name, than to perpetuate one which his association with Assyria or Babylon 
 has told him might signify “ the mighty Bel,” or “ Baal is the masculine member.” 
 
 91 There are very many words in Greek compounded with iepo? } sacred , of 
 which TepoiKrayrj/u,, or Jerusalem, was one; all contain the idea of being possessed by, 
 or being the abode of, the Deity. Salom signifies ‘ peace,’ and to the sacred city 
 peace was always promised. The expression, “ abundance of peace so long as the 
 moon endureth ” (Psalm lxxii. 7), is an evidence of the belief that peace was a great 
 earthly blessing. The name in the Cuneiform is read as Ursalimma, ‘the perfect 
 city ’ ? 
 
 92 The whole passage from which this is quoted, is given in Anacalypsis, pp. 
 191, 192, and is thus translated : “ Latium calls thee Sol, because thou alone art in 
 honour, after the Father , the centre of light; and they affirm that thy sacred head 
 bears a golden brightness in twelve rays, because thou formest that number of 
 months and that number of hours. They say that thou guidest four winged steeds, 
 
648 
 
 JesJ 4> = 500 
 
 P = 100 
 H = 8 
 
 608 
 
 “ But the Coptic numerals not corresponding with 
 those of the Greeks, they formed the word Y H S, as 
 an enigmatical name for the sun, or Bacchus, from 
 their numerals, 
 
 T = 400 
 H = 8 
 
 S = 200 
 
 608 
 
 because thou alone rulest the chariot of the elements. For dispelling the darkness? 
 thou revealest the shining heavens. Hence they esteem thee Phoebus, the discoverer 
 of the secrets of the future; or because thou preventest nocturnal crimes. Egypt 
 worships thee as Issean Serapis, and Memphis as Osiris. Thou art worshipped by 
 different rites, as Mithra, Dis, and the cruel Typhon. Thou art also the beautiful 
 Atys, and the fostering son of the bent plough. Thou art the Ammon of arid 
 Libya, and the Adonis of Byblos. Thus, under a varied appellation, the whole 
 world worships thee. Hail, thou true image of the Gods, and of thy Father’s face. 
 Thou whose sacred name, surname , and omen , three letters, make to agree with the 
 number 608. Grant us, O Father, to reach the etlierial intercourse of mind, and 
 to know the starry heaven under this sacred name. May the great and universally 
 adorable Father increase these his favours.” (Martianus, Gapella de Nuptiis 
 Philologies, lib. ii., p. 32). 
 
 I have already remarked how Christ has been identified with the sacred fish 
 under his name ix^s, and thus made to represent a sort of modern Dagon; and 
 whilst this sheet was going through the press, I found, in a very interesting work, 
 entitled Towers and Temples of Ancient Ireland, by Marcus Keane (Hodges, Smith 
 & Co., Dublin, 1867), p. 126, a copy of a small piece of sculpture, from an ancient 
 Irish cross at Kells, in county Meath, wherein seven figures are all bent in devotion 
 before a long narrow upright fish, with a forked tail; thus evidently representing 
 the Yoni. On the same page is also depicted a mermaid, who holds in her hand 
 a book, and who is marked at the lower part of the abdomen with a ring. This, 
 which is copied from a sculpture in the cathedral of Clontarf, county Galway, is 
 almost an exact representation of Dagon, except in sex; or of such figures as are 
 to be seen in Fig. 19, p. 112, and Fig. 96, p. 529. 
 
 Christ has also been identified by St. John with the Greek Ao-yo?, under the form 
 of fcws. He resembles the Egyptian Horus, the Etruscan Janus, and the Latin Sol; 
 in the first verse of the Gospel by that Evangelist, we find them described as 
 equivalent to <ro<j>ia, “the En Soph, the endless, the boundless,” of the Kabbalah. 
 
649 
 
 Jes] “ This is the real origin of our IHS, Jesus 
 Hominum Salvator, mistaken by the Priests of Rome, 
 
 J- 
 
 and copied by ours.” This monogram |_JL_| 1S 
 
 the same kind; it is XH; and X = 600; H = 8, 
 {Celtic Druids, p. 128: London, 1827. Compare 
 also Anacalypsis, pp. 191, 192.) 
 
 For the benefit of those who are not familiar 
 with such matters, I may mention that amongst 
 the Assyrians, Babylonians, Phoenicians, Greeks, 
 Egyptians, Jews and others, letters were used as 
 figures, in addition to their ordinary purpose. The 
 coincidence was occasionally used to determine diffi¬ 
 cult questions, just as certain occurrences in the 
 world are reduced to figures by those who compile 
 lottery books for the people in Rome who desire to 
 find “lucky” numbers. For example, we find in one 
 
 The wrra, nahiru, of the Chaldee, whose origin was “iru, nahar, “ the shining one; ” 
 and min, torah, brother of “tin, tor, ‘an ox,’ or iaurus , ‘the bull; ’ and rPttfon, tushia, 
 which signifies alike “wisdom, aid, counsel,” and also “to make erect.” 
 
 As the Evangelist, and all the other early Christian writers, desired to show 
 that in Him dwelleth “all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (Colos. ii. 9), 
 we cannot he surprised that laier writers endeavoured to show that He was the 
 embodiment of every deity, which had ever been called God or Lord. He was 
 not I)agon, hut if that being had any power, it was only by Him that it came; 
 and He therefore had a right to assume the style and title and attributes of any 
 power which He overcame, just as a warrior is entitled to hear the arms and armour 
 of the vanquished, and to sit on his throne. This idea is prominently put forward 
 by St. Paul, in the words, “having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a 
 show of them openly, triumphing over them in it (or himself) ” (Colos. ii. 15). 
 
 The mingling of Christian doctrine with Pagan practice, which arose from this 
 idea, has come down from the time of St. Paul to our own days. When writing to 
 the Galatians, he says, “ But now after that ye have known God, or rather are 
 known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye 
 desire again to he in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. 
 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain ” (Gal. iv. 9-11). 
 
 If the Apostle were writing to Christian Europe now, his words would he far 
 more weighty, for our Churches teem with symbols drawn from the heathen temples; 
 our priests are robed with vestments resembling those which covered pagan hierarchs; 
 our worship is swelled out with litanies based upon those uttered to Baal; we 
 reiterate our prayers, that we may be heard by our much speaking; we observe days, 
 
650 
 
 Jes] of the Cuneatic inscriptions, that the king determines 
 to build a certain structure, so that the measurement 
 in cubits of its side shall coincide with the number 
 
 of his name. This coincidence 
 
 upon 
 
 in every possible form by Hebrew writers, and pro¬ 
 bably by those of other nations. Amongst the former, 
 the art of interpreting “names” by “numbers,” 
 and “ numbers ” by “ names,” received the name 
 KntMDJ, which is a form of the Greek ypa^otTsict. 
 (See Ginsburg, The Kabbalah , p. 131, London: 
 Longmans, 1865 ; and Goheleth , p. 31; 1861.) 
 
 The illustration of this subject, however, which 
 is most familiar to the English reader, is the very 
 remarkable text, “ Here is wisdom. Let him that hath 
 understanding count the number of the beast; for 
 it is the number of a man; and his number is six 
 
 and months, and years as rigorously as the Greeks and Homans; and dedicate to 
 saints, manufactured for the purpose, the identical days which our idolatrous fore¬ 
 fathers regarded with veneration. We have promoted the Virgin Mary to the place 
 in heaven from which Ishtar was deposed, and with the “ mild sway of the gentle 
 Jesus,” there has been inaugurated a bloody-mindedness on earth, which has culmi¬ 
 nated in human sacrifice; for what were the fires of Smithfield and the Autos da fe 
 of Spain, hut offerings of human beings, made by fire, as an acceptable proof to 
 the Deity of hierarchical orthodoxy, and as a gift to induce him to turn away that 
 fierce wrath which might come upon them, unless they exterminated heretics? 
 He who prayed for his murderers has been represented by brutal fanatics, who 
 showed their zeal by roasting in His name the descendants of those whom their 
 Master had pardoned on the ground of ignorance. Who can read without horror 
 that a Christian “ Bishop, Hinderbach, had the whole Jewish community at Trent 
 burned (1475), in consequence of a base calumny that they had killed for their 
 Passover a Christian boy named Simon.” Certainly, if we had to select into which 
 of two communities we would cast our lot, as being the most approximate to the 
 mind of Christ, we should prefer the reviled, despised, rejected, and persecuted 
 faith of the modern devout Jew, to the intolerant, fanatical, and murderous faith 
 of the Romish Christian, as represented by its fierce priests of Moloch, who show 
 their affinity with Satan by their aptitude in the use of demoniacal flames. We 
 have imported greater ferocity into our scheme of the lower world than the most 
 heathen nation of antiquity; and have exceeded all the fancies of the Hindoo, 
 Etruscan, Greek, and Roman, in the Christian Hell. Oh for some modern Apostle, 
 to denounce us as we deserve ! yet, perchance, if one came, be would gain no more 
 attention that his Master did, when He preached to the priests of Jerusalem. 
 
651 
 
 Jes] hundred three score and six ” (Rev. xiii. 18). The 
 conclusion drawn from this verse is, that the Apostle 
 had in his mind’s eye—but whether prophetic or 
 otherwise none can know—some individual whom 
 he characterised as a beast, and, knowing his name, 
 the number thereof could well be given, without 
 libelling the man. To moderns, however, who know 
 nothing of what was going on in St. John’s thoughts, 
 this number 666 has been the source of the wildest 
 absurdities. Some have attempted to prove that a 
 great warrior’s name contained the number; some 
 that it marked out an heresiarch; and, strangest of 
 all attempts, some in our own times have endeavoured 
 to prove themselves to be designated by the myste¬ 
 rious number. There is indeed one individual, who 
 has endeavoured to make out that my cognomen, like 
 his own, brought me into the category of those, the 
 letters of whose name, when taken as Greek figures, 
 amounted to 666; but as I had no wish to be recog 
 nised as “ a beast,” I opposed the impeachment. 
 
 Jesaiah, (1 Chron. iii. 21), “ Jah the Saviour;” a 
 
 variant of Isaiah. 
 
 Jeshaiah, (1 Chron. iii. 21), “Jah is Salvation;” 
 
 variant of Isaiah. 
 
 Jeshanah, (2 Chron. xiii. 19), “She shines;” from 
 jashan , with n, h, the feminine suffix, having 
 reference to Astarte, or Ishtar. 
 
 Jesharelah, (1 Chron. xxiv. 18), “Right before 
 
 God ” (Gesenius); “ Belonging to Jesharel, or Israel ” 
 (Fiirst). Probably a variant of = ‘El governs.’ 
 
 (See Israel.) 
 
 Jeshebeab, (1 Chron. xxiv. 18), “ The father is 
 
 enthroned.” 
 
 Jesher, (1 Chron. ii. 18), “ He is upright.” 
 
652 
 
 Jeshishai, (1 Chron. v. 14), “ He is very ancient.” 
 
 Jeshohaiah, (1 Chron. iv. 36), “ Jehovah casts 
 
 down.” 
 
 Jeshua, V (1 Chron. xxiv. 11), “ The Saviour.” 
 
 Jeshurun, (Deut. xxxii. 15), “ The good little people ” 
 (Fiirst). 
 
 Jesimiel, (1 Chron. iv. 36), “El creates.” 
 
 Jesse, T?, or (Ruth iv. 17, 1 Chron ii. 13), “ The 
 upright one,” or “my being, stay, support,” possibly 
 “ Jah is existence,” from B?., esh, jah, the n being 
 elided. I feel much diffidence in proposing n ', with 
 elision of either letter as part of an etymon : 1, 
 because the whole word jah is very common in post- 
 Davidic words, and in them is hut rarely shortened; 
 2, because the word jah seems not to have been 
 known or used by the Jews prior to David’s reign. 
 We can understand why the word jah should be 
 obliterated from heathen names, but it is not easy 
 to understand why it should be expunged from the 
 Hebrew cognomens. 
 
 Jether, (Exod. iv. 18), “ He abounds, excels, is 
 
 superior.” 
 
 Jethro, (Exod. iv. 18), “He abounds, excels, is 
 
 superior,” or “he is prominent;” a variant of the 
 preceding. 
 
 Jetheth, (Numb. xxxv. 40), “ The abounding ones,” or 
 “the always ready ones;” or it may be the plural 
 from W, = n-W, = ‘ the self-existent ones.’ 
 
 Jethlah, (Josh. xix. 42), “ The high one.” 
 
 Jetur, (Gen. xxv. 15), “ Protector, or circle” (Fiirst). 
 
 Jeuel, Jeiel, Jehiel, and (1 Chron. ix. 6), 
 
 probably “Jah is El;” -V = in' = ‘ Yho, or Jah;’ 
 thus the word is similar to Joel . It is possible that 
 the words are corrected forms of the T replacing 
 
653 
 
 Jetjel] 1 ; if so, the word signifies “ El is firm,” and “ the 
 strong upright one.” 
 
 Jeus, YW ) (1 Chron. viii. 10), “ He is counsellor.” 
 
 Jeush, (Gen. xxxvi. 5, 14), Jah the collector, or 
 
 gatherer,” a variant of Joash, which see. 
 
 Jew, Jews; jehudi, jehudim (2 Kings xvi. 6). 
 
 We propose in the ensuing volume to institute an 
 inquiry into the most probable origin of the people 
 known to us as Hebrews, Jews, or Israelites, and to 
 trace, as far as can be done, a comparison between 
 them and other nationalities. Our present impres¬ 
 sion is that there is a close resemblance between 
 the origin of Kome and that of Jerusalem; but it is 
 incompatible with our design to enter at length into 
 the subject here. 
 
 Jezebel, (1 Kings xvi. 81). There is much difficulty 
 in explaining this name. Gesenius considers it to 
 mean, “ without cohabitation; ” in which case we 
 presume the signification would he, “ she is a virgin,” 
 the reference being to the Alma Mater, Astarte, Isis, 
 Ceres, &c. Fiirst, on the other hand, considers that 
 it is a contracted form of abi-zebel, and that 
 
 it signifies “ the father enthroned on high; ” zebel 
 being equivalent to meon, and Jezebel similar to 
 Baal-meon. 
 
 But as both of these interpretations are unsatis¬ 
 factory, we shall attempt to find one that is more 
 appropriate. It is clear, from the name having 
 survived to our own day under the form of Isabel, or 
 Isabella, that it expressed both a popular and an 
 enduring idea. Of its Tyrian, or Phoenician, origin 
 we can have no doubt, seeing that it is common 
 amongst those nations where Tyrian or Carthaginian 
 Colonies existed. We therefore turn to the inscrip- 
 
654 
 
 Jezebel] tions which have recently been exhumed at Car¬ 
 thage bv Mr. Davis, and find, amongst a hundred and 
 eighty-nine names therein recorded, that eight are 
 compounds of Azer and Baal, and one in which az is 
 joined to Melcarth. In all these instances the az is 
 spelled TV. We are justified, therefore, in concluding 
 that there is some connection between Azer, or Az 
 Baal, of Carthage, and Jezebel, or Az-Baal, of Zidon; 
 and hence are lead to consider that the royal name 
 was written bvM, azbaal. Now W, az, signifies 
 “ strong, powerful, or impetuous ; ” and W, azah, 
 means “he decides, judges, or rules.” Of the two, 
 we select the former, as being the most probable 
 element in the etymology. Then considering that 
 ^1, bel, is equivalent to baal, we consider that 
 Jezebel signifies “ the strong Baal,” or “ Baal is 
 strong ; ” and having once arrived at this conclusion, 
 we recognise that such a name was particularly 
 appropriate to one who was a devoted worshipper of 
 Baal. 
 
 When w r e examine into her character as it has 
 been handed down to us by her enemies, we find that 
 she had as exalted ideas of the pow T ers of royalty as 
 any other despot, and did not scruple to destroy any 
 one who stood in her own, or in her husband’s way. 
 But even in her tyranny she seems to have been a 
 constitutional monarch, and went through the forms 
 of law when she devised the death of Naboth. Since 
 her time there have been very many Christian kings, 
 eldest sons of the Church even, who have immured 
 their subjects in prison, and allowed them to die there 
 without any form of law whatever. We find more¬ 
 over that Jezebel was as devotedly attached to the 
 faith in which she had been brought up, as our own 
 
655 
 
 Jezebel] Queen Mary was to the old religion, and was as 
 hostile to those who were desirous to examine their 
 own faith, as was our James II. to his Protestant 
 subjects. We cannot in our own history point to the 
 execution of the “prophets of the Lord” (1 Kings 
 xviii. 4); but we can remember the trial of the 
 seven bishops, the burning of the bishops Cranmer, 
 Bidley, and Latimer by Mary, and of Servetus by 
 Calvin. The truth is, that all earnest religionists 
 are more or less intolerant to their opponents. This 
 was eminently the case with Elijah; for when he got 
 the prophets of Baal, a host of four hundred and fifty 
 men, into his power, he mercilessly slew them in cold 
 blood. The historian might fancy that He who could 
 send fire down from heaven to consume a bullock, 
 could equally direct His lightning upon the priests 
 of Baal, had He wished for their destruction; and 
 may be induced to ask whether it is not probable 
 that the whole story resembles a modern monkish 
 legend, such as may be found in the Gesta Roman- 
 orum. Much has been said about the painted face of 
 the widow of Ahab, whose name still passes current 
 for one who uses cosmetics. Any one, however, who 
 will take the trouble to investigate the probable age 
 of the queen dowager at the time, will entertain very 
 little surprise. Supposing that Jezebel was only just 
 marriageable when she joined Ahab, she would be 
 somewhere about sixty at the time of her death; and 
 we well know that it is, and probably ever has been, 
 the custom of elderly females to make themselves as 
 little ugly, or rather as good looking, as possible, 
 when they go into society. So long as Jezebel was 
 with her women she might be content to be dowdy, 
 but when she had to appear before the world she duly 
 
656 
 
 Jezebel] tired her head and painted her face, just as any 
 elderly lady would do to-day. 
 
 Jezer, (Gen. xxvi. 44), “ He fashions (us).” Compare 
 “ Thy hand hath made me and fashioned me ” 
 (Psalm cxix. 73). 
 
 Jeziah, (Exod. x. 25), probably a variant of 
 Jaziah, = “ He is son of Jah.” 
 
 Jeziel, (1 Chron. xii. 8), probably “ He is the son 
 of El.” 
 
 Jezliah, (1 Chron. viii. 18), “ Jah will preserve,” or 
 
 “ Jah is a deliverer” (Fiirst). 
 
 Jezoar, (Gen. xxiii. 8), “ He is white,” i . q ., "inj. 
 
 Jezreel, (Josh. xv. 56), “El fashions,” or “formed 
 
 by El;” ‘to form, frame, or fashion.’ 
 
 Igdaliah, (Jerem. xxxv. 4), “Jah shall make great,” 
 
 or “ Jahu is a great one.” 
 
 Igeal, (Numb. xiii. 7), “ A1 afflicts;” from agah, 
 or ‘ El flees; ’ from age. Under this word Fiirst 
 has — “equivalent to A>6ys\og, 2 Tim. i. 15;” which 
 may mean ‘the sun flies.’ Fiirst also refers to Agee, 
 the Hararite, 2 Sam. xxiii. 15, whose name would 
 read as ‘ the fleeing one.’ 
 
 Jibsam, (1 Chron. vii. 2), “Pleasant” (Gesenius) ; 
 
 “ The lovely one ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Jidlaph, ^1? (Gen. xxii. 22), “ He will drop down, flow, 
 or melt away.” This word has two associations, 
 which assist us in discovering its real signification. 
 On the one hand, we have the metaphor, “He shall 
 pour the water out of his buckets, and his seed shall 
 be in many waters ” (Numb. xxiv. 7), to signify ‘ great 
 masculine potency; ’ and on the other hand we find 
 that Jidlaph is a brother of Bethuel, whose name is 
 interpreted by one of the Talmudists as ‘ the ravisher 
 of virgins.’ We conclude, therefore, that the appella- 
 
657 
 
 Jidlaph] tive in question has a covert reference to the 
 Almighty under the masculine emblem. 
 
 Jim, (Numb, xxxiii. 45), “ Heat.” 
 
 Jimnah, (Gen. xlvi. 17), 41 ‘Brightness,” “prosperity,” 
 “ clearness.” 
 
 I can find no satisfactory etymon for this word in 
 either Gesenius’ or Fiirst’s Lexicons. Taking into 
 consideration that the name was borne by a son of 
 Asher, and that his brothers are Ishua, Isui, Beraiah, 
 and his sister is Serah, we conclude that his name 
 will be in some way allied to theirs. Now if we take 
 for the first element, and for the second, we 
 get jahmena, and by eliding the n jam'na, 
 
 which signifies “ Jah splits, or divides,” wherein he 
 resembles Asher ; or we may consider the word as 
 the imperfect, or future, of ruenci, or mana, 
 in which case the meaning would be, “he splits, or 
 divides; ” the name in either case having reference 
 to Mahadeva. 
 
 Jiphtah, (Josh. xv. 43), variant of Jephthah, which 
 see. 
 
 Ijeabarim, (Numb. xxi. 11), “ Ruinous heaps (or 
 
 cairns?) of Mount Abarim.” 
 
 Ijon, tty (1 Kings xv. 20), “ Circle, or cairn, of On.” 
 
 Ikkesh, &py (2 Sam. xxiii. 26), probably a variant of Achish, 
 which see. 
 
 Ilai, by (1 Chron. xi. 29), “Jah is Most High,” from 
 
 and ; the alterations necessary to obliterate the 
 divine name from a human cognomen, having been 
 adopted as usual by the Sopherim. (Compare Ilion, 
 the name of Troy.) 
 
 Imla, (2 Chron. xviii. 7, 1 Kings xxii. 8), “ He fills up.” 
 
 Immanuel, (Isa. v ii. 14) ? f< El with us.” On a future 
 
 occasion I shall have to call attention to the passage 
 
 T T 
 
658 
 
 Immanuel] in which this word occurs, to show that the 
 language is not prophetic in the sense usually sup¬ 
 posed, hut that it refers simply to the approaching 
 end of that cycle of years, whose successor would be 
 marked by the celestial Virgin giving birth to some 
 conspicuous man, who would be a sort of 4 avatar,’ or 
 incarnation of a portion of the deity, as Cyrus was 
 subsequently considered to be. 
 
 Immer, (1 Chron. ix. 12), “He is high, elevated, 
 directed upward, erect,” &c., for amar . 
 
 Imrah, (1 Chron. vii. 86), “ Jah is elevated,” i.e., 
 
 Imri, '“?*?** (1 Chron. ix. 4), “ Jah is high, or projecting 
 forth,” from and rp, the n being elided. The 
 word is a variant of Amariah, or of Immer , according 
 to the pointing of the word 
 
 Infidelity, Infidels, &c. On Good Friday all pious 
 churchmen pray that God will have mercy upon all 
 Jews, Turks, Infidels, and Heretics; and careful 
 Christian fathers, who give spiritual instruction to 
 their children, explain what is meant by the words 
 mentioned in the Collect. If the son of such a 
 parent is content to believe what is told him, and to 
 retain it as a matter of faith for the rest of his life, 
 he will consider that every one who holds a belief 
 widely different from his own is an infidel. If, on 
 the other hand, he is of a thoughtful and inquiring 
 disposition, he will discover that the very Christians 
 who use the prayer for Turks and Infidels are them¬ 
 selves considered as “Infidels” by the Turks, and 
 designated Giaours and Dogs. It then becomes plain 
 to his mind that the word in question has a relative 
 rather than an absolute signification. 
 
 In consulting the dictionary and the derivation 
 of the word, we find that the strict meaning of 
 
659 
 
 Infidelity] Infidel is one who is not faithful, or who is not 
 in the faith; hence we draw the conclusion that the 
 word is applied to one who has no faith at all, or one 
 who has a faith different from that of him who uses the 
 objectionable epithet. Thus amongst the Mussulmans 
 the Turks are “ the faithful,” and the Franks are 
 “ infidels; ” whilst amongst the Christians, the Caliph 
 is regarded as an infidel, and themselves they regard 
 as the faithful. On farther examination it will he 
 clear to the thoughtful man that, under any cir¬ 
 cumstances, the designation of an individual by the 
 by-word of ‘ infidel ’ must be a matter of opinion. 
 The Turk, the Buddhist, the Brahmin, the Hindoo, 
 the Lama, the Wahabee, the Obeah man of Africa, 
 the Medicine man of America, the Benedictine, the 
 Carmelite, the Dominican, the Jesuit, the Anglican, 
 the Homan, the Wesleyan, the Trinitarian, the Uni¬ 
 tarian, the Baptist, the Quaker,—each believes his 
 own faith to be the correct one, and that all who 
 hold an opposite creed are infidels. Yet they may 
 all be wrong together, and as much infidels in the 
 sight of God as the aborigines of the Andaman 
 islands. It is a question whether holding a degrad¬ 
 ing faith in the Almighty is not worse than having no 
 belief at all. I can well imagine an orthodox divine 
 reproaching a man with infidelity because he refuses 
 to believe in the mission of Moses, and even denies 
 his existence; but I can equally well imagine the 
 withering reply, “ that any one who believed that God 
 was a bungler, and could not perfect his plan of 
 salvation in a second ‘ dispensation ’ until He had 
 seen the failures in the first, must be an infidel of 
 the deepest dye, inasmuch as his god was no better 
 than a man.” 
 
660 
 
 Infidelity] Let us now for a while turn our thoughts to 
 a scene in Palestine. There, in long array, fancy sees 
 the leaders of the current faith, Scribes, Pharisees, 
 Priests, Sadducees, Sinners, Publicans, Fishermen, 
 and even women of doubtful reputation, all being 
 imbued with a certain deference for religion in general, 
 and each having a particular reverence for his own 
 individual faith. Before them, there comes a man 
 apparently like themselves; He preaches a doctrine 
 to the effect that men must be poor in spirit rather 
 than proud, that mourning is preferable to feasting, 
 that meekness is better than pride, that the thirsting 
 after doing right is better than polemically striving 
 to prove oneself to be correct in doctrine, that it is 
 preferable to he merciful rather than to indulge in 
 thoughtless neglect of one’s fellow men, and to be 
 pure in heart rather than perfect in theology. We 
 then hear Him denouncing woe unto certain Scribes, 
 Pharisees and hypocrites; and we follow Him until 
 He is arrested before a blind man, who petitions 
 for a restoration of his sight; the merciful Saviour 
 brings back vision to the sightless orbs, and then 
 we learn that it has been decided by the hier¬ 
 archy, that all who believe in His teaching and 
 power shall be excommunicated. Jesus Christ Him¬ 
 self we thus see was as completely put under a 
 ban by Jewish priests, as were King John of Eng¬ 
 land and the present King of Italy by Christian 
 pontiffs. Our Saviour was considered in His own 
 time an infidel, and a blasphemer, and as such was 
 crucified. 
 
 Going down the stream of time we find that one 
 of our Lord’s followers had a similar judgment passed 
 upon him; for the Jews tell Gallio respecting St. 
 
661 
 
 Infidelity] Paul, that “this fellow persuadeth men to wor¬ 
 ship God contrary to the law.” This Apostle was, 
 to the Jews, equally with his master, an “infidel.” 
 Let us now pause for a moment, and notice the 
 dictum of the Eoman judge — “If it were a matter 
 of wrong, or wicked lewdness, 0 ye Jews, reason 
 would that I should hear with you; but if it be a 
 question of words or names, and of your law, look ye 
 to it; for I will be no judge of such matters ” (Acts 
 xviii. 18-15) — and ask, “May not Christian hierarchs 
 copy his example with advantage?” After a time we 
 see what is the sentence of the chosen race upon such 
 an infidel as St. Paul. “ Away with such a fellow 
 from the earth, for it is not fit that he should live ” 
 (Acts xxii. 22) ; and the general opinion is again 
 enunciated in the words, “ we have found this man a 
 pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition amongst all 
 the Jews,” &c. (Acts xxiv. 5.) Hence we see that 
 both those whom we now respect with veneration, and 
 whom we would gladly imitate if we could, were in 
 their own days considered infidels of the deepest dye, 
 so deep indeed, that Barabbas, a robber, murderer, 
 and ringleader in a riot, was thought a better man 
 than the “ Prince of peace.” 
 
 Facts like these should make the Christian pause 
 ere he scatters broadcast accusations of infidelity. We 
 fear, however, that the followers of the Saviour are but 
 men, and whether they profess the tenets of one sect 
 or another, they will ever find it more easy to revile 
 and persecute those who disagree with them, than to 
 wrestle with them in argument. It always has been 
 far easier to wield the sword than the pen, to decry 
 heresy than to practise good works. We have in 
 our own day met with many whom the orthodox call 
 
662 
 
 Infidelity] infidels ; yet we have never found one of the 
 latter who did not admire and do his best to encou¬ 
 rage that Christian minister, who takes his Master 
 for his model, small differences of opinion being 
 merged in the desire to assist him in doing good, 
 even to the unthankful and the evil. On the other 
 hand, there seems always to be implacable enmity 
 between the so-called infidel, and him who practically 
 says, “I go, sir, and goes not.” Of them, the modern 
 heretic thinks that “they bind heavy burdens, and 
 grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s 
 shoulders, but they themselves will not move them 
 with one of their fingers; for all their works they 
 do to be seen of men; they do much to shut up the 
 kingdom of heaven against men, for they neither go 
 in themselves, neither do they suffer them that would 
 enter to go in; they think much of tithe and ritual, 
 but omit the weightier matters of the law, judgment, 
 mercy, and faith ; they appear outwardly righteous 
 unto men, but within are full of hypocrisy and ini¬ 
 quity ” (Matt, xxiii.) 
 
 It is far from my meaning to say that such a 
 character as is here sketched describes faithfully 
 the majority of the Protestant clergy; but I cannot 
 blind my eyes to the fact that hierarchs are, as a body, 
 more unscrupulous and more unmerciful to those with 
 whom they differ theologically, than are any other 
 professionals towards their opponents. In direct pro* 
 portion to the senselessness and the ferocity of their 
 attacks upon each other, do the leaders of theo¬ 
 logy demonstrate the groundlessness of their faith, 
 and compel thoughtful minds to investigate the 
 causes of such unseemly quarrels. Now it is clear 
 that in direct proportion to the attainment of real 
 
603 
 
 Infidelity] truth, controversy must languish; but truth 
 lies at the bottom of a well, not upon the surface, 
 consequently those who wish to find her must dig 
 deeply. In theology, however, there are many who 
 hold that truth is on the surface, and that they have 
 found her. These do their utmost to deride and 
 persecute those who wish to dig more deeply. 
 
 If, laying aside preconceived notions, all those 
 whose minds are sufficiently logical to test the value 
 of evidence, would join to seek after truth, there 
 would he no bandying of such terms as infidel 
 and bigot, which are so common in Christendom. 
 No later than yesterday, I heard from the pulpit a 
 discourse to the effect that religion was far more 
 severely threatened by infidelity or scepticism than 
 by what is called the ritualistic movement. Whilst 
 listening to the discourse, I could not fail to be struck 
 at the tone which pervaded it throughout. In effect, 
 it laid down the law that religion consists in believing 
 what is told by a minister of the Church of England, 
 and that every desire to make inquiry into his teach¬ 
 ing is presumption and pride, which, as such, are to 
 be carefully shunned. To such a man, every indi¬ 
 vidual is an infidel who challenges his doctrine. 
 
 From the same pulpit we have also heard that 
 the use of reason in things divine is to be depre¬ 
 cated; that the mental powers of man ought only 
 to be exercised upon matters relating to mundane 
 affairs; that nothing is more prejudicial to religion 
 than to place reason on a higher pedestal than faith; 
 and consequently that the free exercise of thought 
 ought to be checked as soon as it becomes occupied 
 with considerations which concern the soul. 
 
 When such contracted ideas are enunciated by 
 
664 
 
 Infidelity] those whose duty it is to teach, the laity may 
 well complain of the dearth of intellect amongst 
 hierarchs, for such an opinion is equivalent to the 
 statement that “ priests ” ought not to examine into 
 theology, and need not study anything else; that 
 their duty is to take things as they find them, and 
 never to inquire into the arguments of those who 
 hold different opinions to their own. These are 
 standard hearers who faint in the day of battle, and 
 are proud of the feat. To any one of reasoning 
 capacity, it will be apparent that, if faith is superior 
 to reason, sincere believers in Buddhism and the 
 Papacy are as pious as any Anglican. 
 
 We have sometimes pondered what such divines 
 as those which we here describe would have said to 
 St. Paul, when he withstood St. Peter to the face, 
 because he was to be blamed; what they would have 
 thought of Him who opposed the high priest under 
 Moses’ law ; or how they would have comported 
 themselves in the times of Luther, Calvin, and 
 Melancthon, when it was necessary to choose between 
 the blind faith of the Roman church, or the enlighten¬ 
 ment of the Reformation. The only conclusion which 
 we have been able to draw in this matter is, that 
 such ministers would have adhered — 1, to the old 
 faith, with all its faults; 2, to the faith authorised 
 by the government, whatever that might be; or, 3, 
 that they might toss up a coin, and decide by the 
 way in which it fell whether it was the will of Provi¬ 
 dence that they should remain in the old groove or 
 enter the new. 
 
 Now when we consider the cause of the anta¬ 
 gonism between those who are called “ infidels,” or 
 “free-thinkers,” and the theologians whom we have 
 
665 
 
 Infidelity] described, we find it in the utter absurdity of 
 some of the dogmas which are taught by the latter, 
 with which men of independent minds are unable to 
 agree. The tendency of the current creeds is to make 
 men intolerant and persecuting. The good which 
 we find done by many Christian men we gladly 
 acknowledge, but we affirm that it proceeds from their 
 setting aside a great part of the Church’s teaching, 
 and adhering closely to that of our Saviour. When 
 once polemics are cast aside, and our ministers 
 confine their preaching to the words and example 
 of Jesus Christ, it is very doubtful whether the 
 w T ord infidelity will ever be heard again in our 
 land. 
 
 But there is still another point, to which the 
 philosopher would call attention. To the question, 
 namely, Whether those governments which have 
 punished infidelity as a crime have not by this very 
 circumstance proclaimed their own belief in the power¬ 
 lessness of the God they worship ? If they believed 
 their deity to be all-powerful, surely they would leave 
 the insurgents against His law to be punished by 
 Himself. We cannot conceive that a monarch would 
 call in the assistance of another power to enable 
 him to chastise his rebellious subject until he had 
 tried in vain to do so himself. Even if he did call 
 in the assistance of another power, we cannot conceive 
 that he would apply to the weakest state in the 
 whole country. Yet some men do believe that the 
 Almighty requires human aid in carrying out His 
 designs. Surely such deserve the name of infidels 
 far more than they, who, believing the Almighty to 
 be omnipotent, leave Him to deal with any rebel 
 according to His own good will. 
 
666 
 
 Inspiration. This word, in theological language, signifies a 
 mysterious something which existed in the persons of 
 those who wrote the Bible, and which compelled them 
 to write that only which was strictly true. It implies, 
 still farther, that the power in question was a portion 
 of the Godhead, and consequently that whatever was 
 written under its influence must he regarded by man 
 as a direct communication from the Almighty. This 
 belief is embodied in the verse—“ All scripture is 
 given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for 
 doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in 
 righteousness” (2 Tim. iii. 16). Now if St. Paul, 
 who thus wrote, were himself infallible, there would 
 he no farther doubt about the plenary inspiration of 
 the Bible, provided only that what he penned was 
 the same as that which we have now. But we know 
 that he was nothing more than a man like ourselves, 
 and brought up with the same reverence for the 
 Jewish writings in the old Bible, as are the children 
 of pious Christians now for both the Old and New 
 Testaments. In St. Paul’s time there was probably 
 not one single devout Hebrew who did not entertain 
 the same belief as did the Apostle in the inspiration 
 of the Old Testament. It is clear that the writer of 
 the Second Epistle of St. Peter had a similar belief 
 when he wrote — “ For the prophecy came not in 
 old time by the will of man, but holy men of God 
 spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost ” 
 (2 Peter i. 21). But if we decline to accept the ipse 
 dixit of one man as a proof of any doctrine, we 
 equally decline to receive the assertion of two, and 
 regard the unity of ideas simply as demonstrating an 
 unity in education. The dictum, “the sun goes round 
 the earth,” was not established truth, although all 
 
667 
 
 Inspiration] Christendom, and the Pope himself, declared 
 that such was the fact. 
 
 But even if, for the sake of argument, we grant 
 both the authenticity and the authority of the verses 
 which we have quoted, we have then to notice, that 
 2 Tim. iii. 16 has had as many different interpreta¬ 
 tions as there are commentators, and that, indeed, the 
 whole of the writings of the Bible have been subjected 
 to the most opposite interpretations. There is scarcely 
 a theological writer who does not differ from every 
 other author about some particular expression in a 
 text. Rival schools of divinity, indeed, have been 
 founded upon the different methods in which the 
 sacred Scriptures are to be expounded; one affirming 
 that everything is to be taken literally, another, that 
 nearly all the language of the Bible is figurative; 
 thus resembling the parables of our Lord. Those, 
 again, who adopt the last idea differ amongst them¬ 
 selves as to the signification of the mystical language. 
 For example, when they read the twenty-fourth chap¬ 
 ter of St. Matthew, the thirteenth of St. Mark, and 
 the twenty-first of St. Luke, and see that, in answer 
 to a question — “What shall be the sign of thy 
 coming, and of the end of the world ? ” a number of 
 portents are described : ‘‘ Immediately after which 
 the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not 
 give her light;” and “the sign of the Son of Man 
 shall appear in heaven ; ” and He “ shall come in the 
 clouds of heaven, with power and great glory,” &c.; 
 adding, “ Verily I say unto you, this generation shall 
 not pass till all these things be fulfilled ” (Matt, 
 xxiv. 34); — some, like the moderns, explain the 
 passage away, by saying that it refers only to the 
 siege of Jerusalem; whilst others, like the ancients, 
 
668 
 
 Inspiration] consider “ that the resurrection has passed 
 already” (2 Tim. ii. 18). 
 
 We cannot imagine any writing to be inspired 
 when the only signification which can rationally be 
 assigned to it is conspicuously falsified by the flux of 
 time. Scholars, and even divines, have long refused 
 to see in the oracular responses of Delphi, and else¬ 
 where, anything of a divine afflatus, in consequence 
 of their incomprehensible or ambiguous wording; 
 and we cannot see why the same style of reasoning 
 does not apply to all those parts of our own Bible 
 which require to be explained away. We shall, 
 however, enter more largely into this subject when 
 we examine into Prophecy generally. 
 
 We presume that no philosophic mind would ever 
 mistake an assertion for a fact, and allow that any 
 individual was theopneustos (the Greek word for 
 “ inspired by God ”), simply because he alleged 
 himself to be so. If we were once to permit such 
 an idea, we should be obliged to consider that the 
 oracles of Delphi, Abae, Dodona, Amphiaraus, Tro- 
 phonius, Branchidae, and Ammon were all divinely 
 inspired; and we should have to put faith in the 
 laws of Egypt and Hindostan, of Numa, Confucius, 
 Zoroaster, Mahomet, and Mormon, as being to the 
 full as much inspired as those of Moses. There is 
 scarcely a civilised nation, indeed, which does not 
 claim a heavenly origin for its religion and polity. 
 Even the Mexicans and Peruvians were said to be 
 taught by children of the sun, who remained in Peru 
 as a special race up to the period of the Spanish 
 invasion. 
 
 Now when various nations have many different 
 creeds, and each has strong faith in that which was 
 
669 
 
 Inspiration] held by his ancestors as being superior to every 
 other, it would be highly unphilosophical in the stu¬ 
 dent, who wishes to examine their respective merits, 
 to assume that one of the faiths is absolutely correct, 
 and then measure the rest thereby. It would be 
 wrong to say that all but one are false, and equally 
 so to allow that all are true. Whilst seeking for 
 some means by which to test the merits of any, the 
 inquirer would notice the plans which are adopted by 
 the hierarchs of opposite creeds, when they come into 
 collision with one another, to prevent the desertion of 
 their votaries, and to recruit their own numbers from 
 the enemy’s ranks. The tactics of such parties may 
 readily be examined at the present day; for the 
 observer can study the proceedings adopted between 
 the High Church and the Low Church in England, 
 between the Unitarians and Trinitarians, between 
 Episcopacy and government by Elders, between an 
 Establishment in Scotland and a Free Church, 
 between Roman Catholics and Protestants, and 
 between all these and Infidels. If the student 
 extends his observations, he will find, in such books 
 as The Life of Henry Martyn, how a Protestant 
 Christian attempts to convert the Mahometan and 
 Hindoo; whilst a study of the missionary records of 
 Papists, Protestants, Baptists, Wesleyans, Moravians, 
 and Unitarians shows him how these respective bodies 
 endeavour to make proselytes, in the dark corners 
 of their own, and in distant, lands. He may also 
 notice the plan of propagandism so successfully 
 carried out by the followers of Mahomet; and he will 
 still farther recall the attempts which have been made 
 by Papists to evangelise Europe, Mexico, and Peru, 
 by fire, sword, bullets, and dragoons. 
 
670 
 
 Inspiration] As a result of the inquiries which the observer 
 has instituted, he will be disposed to class the hier¬ 
 archs into — 1, those who endeavour to persuade their 
 hearers by argument; 2, those who rely mainly upon 
 precept; 8, those who trust chiefly to force, of one kind 
 or another; and 4, those whose requirements are so 
 small that any outward sign suffices to demonstrate “a 
 conversion.” In all these instances the Missionary 
 attacks the faith of those amongst whom he labours; 
 he attempts to point out its absurdity, and thus to 
 destroy its authority. In his letters home, the same 
 individual holds up to execration the theology of the 
 Buddhist, the Brahmin, or the Mahometan; descants 
 upon the flagrant sins which he sees around him, 
 and eulogises his own faith, whose brightest points 
 he expands before his reader; whilst he as carefully 
 conceals the darker parts of his own Scriptures, 
 and the fearful blots which mar the morals of the 
 denizens of his own land. In some of his accounts,— 
 and unfortunately these have multiplied since com¬ 
 mercial enterprise has spread more widely over the 
 seas, — the Missionary rehearses with distress and 
 shame that the conduct of Europeans, who come 
 into contact with his flock, does much to destroy his 
 influence over the heathen, inasmuch as the latter 
 are astute enough to see that, in their dealings with 
 their fellow men, the whites can be as brutal as 
 the yellow-, brown-, red-, or black-skinned races. 
 When we turn our eyes from our own religious 
 wanderers to those of the Moravian Brethren, we 
 see a far different style of report. These are con¬ 
 tented for a while with few manifestations. They 
 treat the savage as a child, and endeavour to make 
 him love, admire, and respect them first, knowing 
 
671 
 
 Inspiration] well that, to a man whose mind is undeveloped, 
 all doctrine about religion is useless. Such seem to 
 take for their guide of action the desire to do good 
 unto all men, so that all may “ take knowledge of 
 them that they have been with Jesus ” (Acts iv. 13). 
 
 Putting on one side now the arbitrament of the 
 sword, as a proof of the value of any faith and of the 
 inspiration of the Scripture, we conclude that the 
 test of the value of any creed is the effect which it 
 produces upon the lives, habits, and customs of its 
 votaries ; and that the reality or otherwise of the 
 claim to inspiration of any Scriptures is their freedom 
 from manifest absurdity, and their uniform inculca¬ 
 tion of peace, goodness, mercy, and individual self- 
 control. 
 
 Passing by the question, whether Christendom is 
 upon the whole superior to Hindostan in personal 
 piety, in the exercise of love towards its neighbours, 
 &c., let us fix our attention upon those writings which 
 are said to be inspired, and examine whether they are 
 free from great inconsistencies, we may even say con¬ 
 tradictions. We find, for example, in “ Genesis,” an 
 account of a talking serpent, and in “ Numbers,” of 
 a speaking jackass ; we find an account of four rivers 
 starting from a single garden, two of which compass 
 two whole lands, as if rivers ran in circles and 
 returned to their sources. The Almighty we are told 
 makes man, animals, and plants, all of which he 
 pronounces very good ; and after He has made them, 
 He rests and is refreshed (Gen. ii. 2, Exod. xxxi. 
 17); but man displeases Him, and then God resolves 
 to destroy man, beasts, creeping thing, and fowls, 
 for it repents Him that He has made them (Gen. vi. 
 5, 7); yet once again the Almighty repents, and He 
 
672 
 
 Inspiration] determines to save a few men, and a pair of 
 every sort of animals, leaving the vegetables only to 
 die; but even here there is room for a farther change 
 of purpose, and the beasts are to he increased to seven 
 pairs instead of one. Surely these statements are 
 inconsistent with the saying in Isaiah xl. 28, “ Hast 
 thou not known ? hast thou not heard, that the ever¬ 
 lasting God, the Lord, the creator of the ends of the 
 earth fainteth not, neither is weary ? there is no 
 searching of his understanding; ” and again, “ I am 
 the Lord, I change not” (Malachi iii. 6). It is 
 morally impossible that both statements can be right; 
 if one is inspired, the other cannot be so. Again, we 
 find the commandment, “ Thou shalt do no murder,” 
 delivered amidst the thunders of Sinai; yet, ere the 
 mountain has ceased to quake, the man who has 
 received this order goes to the camp and says, “ Thus 
 saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his 
 sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to 
 gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his 
 brother, and every man his companion, and every man 
 his neighbour; and the children of Levi did according 
 to the word of Moses, and there fell of the people 
 that day about three thousand men ” (Exod. xxxii. 
 27, 28). Surely it is preposterous to allege that He 
 who said “ Thou shalt do no murder,” ordered within 
 a few hours all the sons of Levi to become assassins. 
 If we assert, as some individuals do, that it is not 
 only pardonable, but that it is a work of merit, to 
 exterminate those who differ from us in religious 
 opinion on any point, we must allow that other differ¬ 
 ences may be punished equally, and a man is as justi¬ 
 fiable for destroying a rival in love or trade, as one in 
 religion. But if it be affirmed that the slaughter of 
 
673 
 
 Inspiration] heretics is pleasing to the Almighty, how can 
 we believe that He is omnipotent enough to work 
 His own will ? If, in the spirit of cavil, the execu¬ 
 tioners believe themselves to be simple instruments 
 in the hand of the Judge on high, how can they 
 refuse to see in the Assyrians, Babylonians, Romans, 
 and Mahometans favourites of the Almighty ? 
 
 Again, we find in numerous passages, and notably 
 in Dent, xxxii. 11, that the Hebrews were the chosen 
 people of the Lord; yet when we analyse their history, 
 there is not one single trait to be found therein which 
 indicates the truth of the assumption, except the bare 
 assertion of their historians. In their early days, by 
 their own shewing, the Jews were an unwarlike race; 
 they are so scill; their forte has ever been in mental 
 vigour rather than in corporeal strife ; princes on the 
 exchange and in literature, they shun the clash of 
 arms. Like the Italians over the Northmen, they 
 had the advantage of being able to write records, 
 which the conquerors were unable to gainsay, not 
 being able to read them. In their later days, the 
 Hebrews have been quite as unfortunate as they were 
 of yore; not one of the promises vouchsafed to them, 
 ostensibly by revelation, and proffering abundance 
 of worldly power, prosperity, &c., has been fulfilled; 
 yet they remain to the present day characterised 
 by literary and administrative abilities, eloquent in 
 the senate, powerful in the commerce of Europe, 
 and all but emperors in the world of music and 
 painting; they have not received that which they were 
 promised, but they have achieved a position such as 
 the prophets, their forefathers, never contemplated 
 nor foresaw. But, apart from the worldly position 
 of the Jews, we learn that God had personal 
 
 u u 
 
674 
 
 Inspiration] communication with Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abra¬ 
 ham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, Samuel, David, 
 Solomon, and many prophets, yet He never told them 
 of a future world ; the information respecting this 
 was reserved for later times. Surely it is absurd 
 to suppose that He, to w T hom one day is as a 
 thousand years, and a thousand years as one day 
 (2 Pet. iii. 8), can change His mind about the impor¬ 
 tance of futurity between the time of Moses and 
 Christ; consequently we must either believe that the 
 idea of rewards and punishments in this world alone 
 is theopneustos, or that the later revelations about 
 Heaven and Hell are inspired. Whichever is the 
 hypothesis selected, it is clear that the two are incon¬ 
 gruous. 
 
 The subject of inspiration may moreover be 
 approached in a different manner to that which we 
 have adopted. The student, desirous of “ proving 
 all things,” may allow, for the sake of argument, 
 that God has inspired some men to speak and write. 
 He has, nevertheless, even then, to investigate — 
 1, who were the men ? and, 2, what means were 
 adopted for keeping their sayings unchanged? Now it 
 has been written — “If the trumpet give an uncertain 
 sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” 
 (1 Cor. xiv. 8); and in like manner we may ask, If 
 “ Versions ” differ about the writers, and about the 
 matter written, how can any one arm himself for the 
 fight? It has been alleged that the same Holy 
 Spirit which inspired the writers was the theo- 
 pneust also of the translators, and consequently 
 that our English version of the Bible is as much 
 “inspired” as was the original. In one sense we 
 may indeed agree with the belief; in another we are 
 
675 
 
 Inspiration] constrained to differ from it, for Ginsburg has 
 unequivocally shown that the Hebrews themselves 
 have tampered with the text of their own book; and 
 those who scruple not to alter a sacred text when 
 found, would not scruple to fabricate one whenever 
 necessary. “ Ye are the children of your fathers, 
 and the deeds of your fathers ye will do.” The 
 fathers fabricated history, and the sons altered their 
 words. (See Joel, infra.) 
 
 Our own inquiries into the stories told of Elijah, 
 Elisha, and Jonah have led us to regard them as 
 pious frauds, or religious tales, composed to magnify 
 the name of Jehovah; and we have come to the 
 conclusion that the writings of Isaiah, Jeremiah, 
 Ezekiel, and Hosea are nothing more than the 
 utterances of earnest men, some of whose minds were 
 partially affected by lunacy, though not to an extreme 
 degree. No scholar who carefully investigates the 
 subject can give any credence to the story of Moses, 
 and the marvels detailed in the Pentateuch and 
 Joshua; unless, indeed, he is one of those illogical 
 theologians, with whom the words “ it may be ” are 
 equivalent to “it is.” 
 
 If then the mass of the Old Testament is recog¬ 
 nised as being the work of human hands and human 
 brains, it necessarily follows that the whole system of 
 divinity which is founded upon it is unsound, and 
 not one whit better or more rational than the religion 
 promulgated by Zoroaster. 
 
 When ideas such as the preceding pass through 
 the mind, — and it is probable that they have so 
 passed through that of every scholarly divine, — they 
 are generally repelled by the questions, How could 
 God tell His will to man except by revealing it? 
 
676 
 
 Inspiration] How can He reveal it except in current lan¬ 
 guage ? These questions then assume the position of 
 arguments, and the deductions run thus. God must 
 have taught man His will—therefore, He has — 
 therefore, the men who received the revelation were 
 exclusively of the Jewish nation ; the revelations 
 made to these men are contained in the Bible, and 
 therefore the Bible is an inspired book, and all others 
 are of no value. We have only to state the argu¬ 
 ment thus to prove its utter worthlessness. 
 
 The thoughtful man, when discontented with a 
 style of reasoning which lands him in the region of 
 absurdity, very naturally investigates all the steps of 
 his argument, and examines whether he has not 
 mistaken an assumption for a fact. With this idea 
 he asks, whether it is absolutely true that God must 
 necessarily reveal His will to man in words? He 
 then remembers that the world which we inhabit is 
 only as it were a speck in the universe; and he sees 
 that man forms but a small item in the mundane 
 creation. The Philosopher believes that everything 
 which the Almighty has made has been framed with 
 a purpose, and that every bird in the air, every fish 
 in the sea, and every living thing upon earth, from 
 the huge mastodon to the tiny rotifer, performs the 
 Divine command, and executes His will. An investi¬ 
 gation into the book of nature tells us that certain 
 animals have certain instincts, whilst others act in a 
 totally different manner. Both the wasp and the bee 
 frame dwellings for their young, but each operates 
 with a different material and on a distinct plan; the 
 titmouse and tailor-bird build nests, yet each adopts 
 a design peculiar to itself. The seagulls lay their eggs 
 on the naked rock, the ostrich deposits hers on the 
 
677 
 
 Inspiration] sand, and the tallegalla places hers in a heap of 
 grass. The crocodile lays abundance of eggs, which 
 the ichneumon seeks out that he may devour; whilst 
 the male alligator reserves his destructive powers for 
 his young offspring after they leave their shells. The 
 lion eats flesh exclusively, even though he lives in the 
 same forest with the ponderous elephant, who feeds 
 on the leaves and houghs of trees; and the deer only 
 eats herbs, although he could readily destroy a lamb. 
 The shark again is voracious, and eats large fishes, 
 whilst the huge whale lives only upon “ squid.” 
 Mice and rats occasionally congregate together, and 
 emigrate in vast herds, destroying everything edible 
 in their passage to the sea or river, in which they 
 destroy themselves ; whilst the swallow, the cuckoo, 
 &c., come and go from our shores without doing us 
 any mischief. In some places locusts are a periodical 
 scourge; whilst in others blight or mildew are the 
 ravagers ; some countries are blasted by prolonged 
 droughts, and others devastated by fearful hurricanes. 
 
 Now it is clear that all animals perform the 
 will of the Creator, and that all the phenomena of 
 nature are subservient to it; yet we know of no 
 revelation amongst the race of tigers, or of prophets 
 amongst wolves. The thoughtful student therefore 
 concludes that the Almighty can influence all creation 
 to do His will without uttering a word. It is He 
 who teaches the squirrel to lay up a winter store, the 
 dormouse to sleep during the winter’s cold, and the 
 seal to make a dwelling wherein her young are safe 
 from the polar bear; what indeed Is pure instinct, but 
 the will of Grod carried out by dumb animals ? 93 
 
 93 By instinct is to be understood, tbe performance of some action, for which it 
 is impossible that tbe animal could find a reason, e.g ., a bird, who has never laid 
 
678 
 
 Inspieation] Now when once we acknowledge that God 
 has taught the lower animals to perform His will, it 
 becomes a matter of interest that we should study 
 their character. Are all, are any, such as our theolo¬ 
 gians tells us that man would he, but for the divine 
 revelation in the Bible which guides him ? Let us 
 ask ourselves, Bo the birds of the air detest their 
 parents ? Bo cows and sheep, lions and tigers, 
 commit murder amongst themselves ? Is adultery 
 common amongst the feathered creation ? does the 
 cock allow it in his seraglio, or the deer permit it 
 amongst the hinds ? Stealing the goods of each other 
 cannot exist amongst the lower animals, where none, 
 or very few, can have private stores; and false witness 
 is equally impossible. Covetousness can only exist in 
 the same sense as when a hungry man may be said to 
 covet a banquet. But the observations of some lovers 
 of natural history inform us that they have witnessed 
 intrigues in an aviary; and amongst pigeons too, 
 close observers tell us that adultery is occasionally 
 witnessed; and whenever it occurs, and is detected, 
 the injured husband punishes fiercely not only the 
 invader of his family, but the erring wife as well. 
 Observers have also witnessed attempts at murder 
 amongst chickens, and deliberate theft amongst crows, 
 ravens, dogs, and other animals; but, in every instance, 
 there has also been noticed an attempt to punish the 
 
 an egg, cannot know why she builds a nest, nor can she know why she sits upon the 
 eggs when once laid; the hen’s young ones have no propensity to go into the water, 
 but can give no reason why they avoid it, any more than can ducklings tell why they 
 seek the pond; this instinct is quite independent of the reasoning power of the 
 lower animals, which is the result of memory, education, and judgment. It is. 
 instinct which makes a hen seem distressed when, after sitting on ducks’ eggs, 
 she sees the young ones go into the lake; it is reason which induces her to look 
 calmly on whilst another such brood does the same; and it is the result of education 
 when she at length leads another brood of ducklings to their proper feeding quarter. 
 
679 
 
 Inspiration] offenders. If indeed we may put any credit in 
 the anecdotes told by some of our naturalists, w T e can 
 believe that amongst crows an individual is arraigned, 
 tried, condemned, and executed by his fellows. 
 
 Again, if we turn our attention to those parts of 
 the human race, to whom, according to our divines, no 
 revelation has ever reached, we do not find man so 
 utterly worthless as the theory of the necessity for an 
 inspired communication from the Almighty would 
 make him. The New Zealander now does not differ 
 from the New Zealander in the time of Captain Cook, 
 except that he is not a cannibal. When first disco¬ 
 vered, the inhabitants of Owhyee were described as a 
 lovable, gentle and winning race, and their land as a 
 paradise; but since the missionaries have preached to 
 them, and the white man has corrupted them, they 
 have become hypocrites of a deep dye. If we turn to 
 Europe, we find that the Etruscans and the Phoeni¬ 
 cians vie in everything with the modern English; 
 and we can nowhere find that Greece and Eome had 
 men more utterly demoralised than many of our own 
 people. London, Vienna, and Paris are as full of 
 crime as was Corinth, Athens, or the home of the 
 Caesars. We may look at the same subject from yet a 
 different point of view, and examine what the crimes 
 are to which human beings are most prone. They 
 are simply adultery, murder or fighting, theft and 
 drunkenness. Offences against theology, the philo¬ 
 sopher does not reckon in this category. When we 
 examine into these misdeeds, we find that they are 
 to a certain extent common amongst brutes. The 
 Almighty has implanted an instinct in the males of 
 many animals, which impels them to fight for their 
 females, and, as a result, the breed is kept up in the 
 
680 
 
 Inspiration] best form for strength, as the weakest sires are 
 killed. Amongst men, on the contrary, contests such 
 as these are forbidden, and, as a result, the constitu¬ 
 tional vigour of the human race declines in direct 
 proportion to its civilisation ; for wherever money buys 
 for the male that which his individual or physical 
 qualities would have been unable to obtain for him in 
 the battle of life, an inheritance of debility or disease 
 is given to the offspring. Again, let us examine the 
 propensity to fight; this exists equally in some 
 animals and amongst men, and is equally punished 
 by both; the rogue elephant is driven from the herd, 
 the rat who is disgusting to his fellows is eaten. If 
 man is quarrelsome, he is sometimes sent to Coventry, 
 and sometimes he is transported. Now the propensity 
 to fight over a bone, over a female, or from simple 
 viciousness, cannot be said to be a sin against God 
 when we meet with it in a dog, nor can we judge 
 differently of it when it occurs in a man. 
 
 Moreover, as the Almighty has given to some 
 animals the power to organise themselves into a sort 
 of society, governed by laws, so He has enabled man 
 to do the like; and we, knowing the viciousness of 
 one, the weakness of another, and the might of a 
 third set amongst ourselves, have contrived a code of 
 laws, by which we attempt to ensure for all as much 
 comfort as is compatible with their well-being. But 
 laws are the result of organisation, and the proposal 
 to organise a system is always due to the influence 
 of an individual. But it very seldom happens that 
 the man who is astute enough to organise, is powerful 
 in thews and sinews. He must, therefore, associate 
 himself with the brute force of a chief, or he must 
 clothe himself with imaginary power. To associate 
 
681 
 
 Inspiration] himself with a chief, as Samuel did with Saul, 
 may prove a false step, if the leader he quarrelsome, 
 or obstinate. It has, therefore, generally been con¬ 
 sidered the safest plan for the organiser to clothe 
 himself with some unseen power. Savages, like dogs 
 and horses, are very timid, and the biggest of them 
 are cowed by the supernatural. The organiser, there¬ 
 fore, has generally resorted to superstitious terrors, 
 and has averred that the laws which he enunciates are 
 of divine origin. But it is the business of such an 
 one to provide for the permanency and dissemination 
 of his code, as well as to prepare it; consequently he 
 seeks out pupils whose minds he can mould to suit 
 his views. To them he gives the necessary instruc¬ 
 tion, and he shows them how they can best utilise 
 the instincts of their fellow men, in favour of order 
 generally, and of their own order in particular. 
 Hence arises the doctrine of inspired law, and its 
 comparative permanence. 
 
 This deduction involves the idea that there are 
 two distinct classes of offences — 1, those against 
 society; 2, those which controvert the reality of the 
 inspiration story of the organiser. To the first none 
 are disposed to be merciful, for all suffer equally from 
 crimes against order. To the second the hierarchy 
 may he lenient, if the offender chooses to atone for 
 his contumely by a money payment, and thus to 
 acknowledge his submission. This is evidently the 
 view taken by the Papal priesthood, which has esta¬ 
 blished a code of mortal and venial sins. In our own 
 church all sins alike are deadly, and heresy and mur¬ 
 der are regarded as equally damnable. If Protestant 
 bishops were as astute as the Papal, they would 
 contrive a plan for the laity to buy off the penalties 
 
682 
 
 Inspiration] incurred for sinning, casually or doctrinally, and 
 they would allow loop-holes, by means of which any 
 of their recalcitrant members might pass unscathed. 
 
 Ere we leave the subject, let us examine it from 
 yet another point of view. The current doctrine of 
 Anglican, Presbyterian, and probably Papal divines, 
 is that the Bible is the inspired word of God. They 
 are compelled to allow that the works of creation 
 are also emanations of His will. Consequently we 
 should infer that the study of His works, as seen in 
 nature, would be that most highly cultivated by 
 theologians. We can scarcely conceive how any one 
 can profess to adore the Creator, and yet studiously 
 withdraw attention from His works. Yet this has 
 been done by divines in the past times, and is done at 
 the present day. It is true that some have cultivated 
 the physical sciences, with a view to establish the 
 truth of the Bible ; hut I have never read any of 
 their works without a painful feeling that there was 
 a suppressio veri. As a rule, however, the theologians 
 of to-day seem to abhor physical science, like the 
 Papists did in the time of Galileo. To them criticism 
 is a snare of the Devil, and the cultivation of geology 
 a preparation for hell. We have heard the British 
 Association denounced as a hot-hed of infidelity, both 
 in England and Scotland, by earnest preachers, who 
 professed to love the Almighty, and to be able to 
 teach the people His ways and works. Such men 
 have, indeed, stereotyped their belief in the saying— 
 ubi tres medici ibi duo athei, which, being interpreted 
 freely, means “ two out of three cultivated minds 
 disbelieve our teaching.” 
 
 Now it is morally impossible that a real “ inspira¬ 
 tion ” can be at variance with the other works of the 
 
683 
 
 Inspiration] Almighty, and if there be a difference, it is 
 certain that a man who professes to be theopneustos 
 is far more likely to he wrong than the whole crea¬ 
 tion. If then any writer asserts that death came 
 into the world only some six thousand years ago, in 
 consequence of two people eating an apple, whilst 
 the rocks tell us that they have existed myriads of 
 years, and we see that they abound with the bodies 
 of defunct animals, it is clear that the author is not 
 to be trusted. Now the philosopher considers that 
 when such difference is shown to exist between the 
 assertions in a book and in nature, it behoves both 
 the divine and the geologist to inquire closely into 
 their respective assertions. This plan is conscien¬ 
 tiously carried out by the physicist, it is systemati¬ 
 cally neglected by the divine. For the theologian 
 it is easier to objurgate a man than to investigate 
 into the truth of an assertion. 
 
 When once it has been recognised that it is 
 advisable to holster up the theory of plenary inspira¬ 
 tion by ecclesiastically tabooing physical science, it 
 follows, as a matter of course, that only those are 
 eligible for the church, who are too weak minded to 
 think for themselves, too indolent to think at all, or 
 who have a conscience sufficiently elastic to enable 
 them to promulgate a doctrine to which they give 
 no credence. 
 
 It is impossible for any one, who is observant of 
 such matters, to doubt that the priests of the Roman 
 church have ever been (except in few conspicuous 
 instances) the most narrow minded of all professional 
 men. Their ranks, we find from a recent trial in a 
 court of law, are mainly recruited in England from 
 the lowest orders of “ middle life.” For a long 
 
684 
 
 Inspiration] period also, in our own church, there has been 
 an adage that the ecclesiastical profession is the best 
 suited for the “ fool of the family,” and the experi¬ 
 ence of existing bishops shows that the position of 
 an Anglican minister of faith is no longer a tempta¬ 
 tion for a man of powerful intellect; an university 
 education is now a means to enable a gentleman to 
 avoid entering into the “establishment,” rather than 
 a stepping stone to such emoluments as it offers; 
 whilst theological colleges have been established to 
 enable “ literates ” (lucus a non lucendo) to enter 
 into our ancient pulpits. 
 
 Hence the doctrine of the plenary inspiration of 
 the Bible had, and still has, a direct tendency to 
 divide the world into bigots and philosophers; per¬ 
 sons who resolve never to think about the most 
 important object for man to contemplate—the works 
 of G-od, and persons who resolve to think over every¬ 
 thing with which they come into contact. The 
 doctrine has, moreover, a tendency to deteriorate 
 steadily the intellectual condition of the clergy, for 
 none dare cultivate their minds when they feel that 
 one subject for thought is closed to them; and whilst 
 the dogma stunts the mental powers of the teachers, 
 it increases the moral slavery of their followers, or it 
 provokes the antagonism of their hearers. When the 
 pulpit is filled by the fool of the family, the congre¬ 
 gation is divided into those who are willing to be led 
 by him, and those who look upon his doctrine in its 
 true light. Such things ought not to be. It is pos¬ 
 sible that this warning from a layman may meet the 
 eye of some ecclesiastical hierarch. If it do, we can 
 only add th^t it is our earnest hope that theology may 
 be cultivated as an exact science, with the Church of 
 
685 
 
 Inspikation] England for a professor; rather than that she 
 should, by her culpable bigotry, ally herself to Rome, 
 and again endeavour to enslave the human mind, 
 until the only individuals permitted to live are those 
 who are greater fools than the biggest one in “the 
 family,” or at any rate who profess themselves to he 
 so. If our clergy would only take for their motto, 
 Magna est veritas, et prcevalebit, they would do far 
 more good to themselves and their flocks, than by 
 continuing to adhere to their present motto, Audi 
 Ecclesiam. In other words, if our divines show that 
 they dare to think, they would do more to convince 
 the gainsayers, than by practically saying, I am Sir 
 Oracle, and when I ope my lips, let no dogs bark. 
 
 But it must still farther be noticed, that one of 
 the necessary accompaniments of insufficient educa¬ 
 tion, in the leaders of religious thought, is the 
 constant tendency in the interpretation of the ‘ word,’ 
 which is said to be inspired, to lean to the animal pro¬ 
 pensities of men rather than to appeal to their better 
 aspirations. Some preachers desire to he real Boa¬ 
 nerges, or sons of thunder, and rouse the passions 
 of their hearers by flaunting before them the zeal of 
 Moses, who ordered the murder of some thousands of 
 his followers, when, being guilty of heresy, they 
 thought more of a figure than of the unseen God ; 
 or they applaud the holy indignation of Samuel, who 
 hewed Agag in pieces before the Lord; and preach 
 from such texts as “ Do not I hate them that' hate 
 thee, and am not I grieved with those that rise up 
 against thee ? Yea, I hate them right sore, even 
 as though they were mine enemies ” (Psalm cxxxix. 
 21, 22 ; Prayer-book version). Others, of a revengeful 
 disposition, quote authoritatively such passages as 
 
686 
 
 Inspiration] “ Happy shall he be that rewardeth thee as 
 thou hast served us. Happy shall he be that taketh 
 and dasheth thy little ones against the stones” 
 (Psalm cxxxvii. 8, 9); or “ God shall wound the head 
 of his enemies, and the hairy scalp of such an one who 
 goeth on still in his trespasses ” (Psalm lxviii. 21). 
 Such an one was John Knox; and such were Peter 
 the hermit, and all the Crusaders; such were Torque- 
 mada and all the Inquisitors ; such were the bigot 
 Spaniards in America and the Low Countries; and 
 such were the Puritans, the Covenanters, and the 
 Royalists; such were the English invaders of Ireland, 
 and such were the savage Irish who opposed them; 
 such even are the majority of modern as well as 
 ancient hierarchs; such probably the class will ever 
 be. The words of Butler describe many of to-day, as 
 truly as they depicted the same race in his own times. 
 
 “ For he was of that stubborn crew 
 Of errant saints, whom all men grant 
 To be the true church militant. 
 
 Such as do build their faith upon 
 The holy text of pike and gun; 
 
 Decide all controversy by 
 Infallible artillery; 
 
 And prove their doctrine orthodox 
 By apostolic blows and knocks; 
 
 Call fire and sword and desolation 
 A godly thorough reformation; 
 
 Which always must be carried on, 
 
 And still be doing, never done ; 
 
 As if religion was intended 
 
 For nothing else but to be mended; ” 
 
 and who 
 
 “ Compound for sins they are inclined to, 
 
 By ^amning those they have no mind to,” &c. 
 
 Hudibras, Canto I., lines 181 , seq. 
 
687 
 
 Inspiration] Some preachers, on the other hand, perhaps 
 fine specimens of their sex, with regular and hand¬ 
 some features, blue eyes, bushy whiskers, brown curly 
 hair, a fine voice, winning manner, and gushing over 
 with love towards every one who is young, beautiful, 
 and charming amongst the gentler sex, prefer to dwell 
 upon such parts of the inspired word as enable 
 them to talk of love. Such an one, not long ago, 
 was preaching in Liverpool, and used the following 
 language, which was taken down in writing by one 
 of my friends : “ Which of you, my beloved, hath 
 said to Him, ‘ Spread Thy skirt over thine handmaid, 
 for thou art a near kinsman ’ ? If any of you have 
 done so, then hath He answered thee in the words 
 of Ezekiel (ch. xvi.): ‘ When I passed by thee, and 
 looked on thee, behold thy time was the time of love, 
 and I spread my skirt over thee and covered thy 
 nakedness; yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into 
 a covenant with thee, and thou becamest Mine.’ ” 
 Such are the popular preachers who get up bazaars, 
 or exhibitions, wherein they can show all the lovely 
 slippers, or other embroidery, which have been worked 
 for them by their devoted hearers. 
 
 Another set of preachers delight to dwell upon 
 such texts as “Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which 
 strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel ” (Matt, xxiii. 
 24), and hang thereupon fierce tirades against Papists, 
 Unitarians, Ritualists, and all who differ from them 
 in creed. Such delight to quote the passage, “ Think 
 not that I am come to send peace on earth ; I came 
 not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set 
 a man at variance against his father, and the daughter 
 against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against 
 her mother-in-law; and a man’s foes shall be they of 
 
688 
 
 Inspiration] his own household ” (Matt. x. 34, 35). Or, if 
 speaking of such rivals as Jesuits, or Ritualists, they 
 gloat over the description, “ having a form of godli¬ 
 ness, but denying the power thereof; of such sort are 
 they that creep into houses and lead captive silly 
 women” (2 Tim. iii. 6). Or, in a fiercer mood, they 
 adopt the language of Isaiah, and say, “ Ye sons of 
 the sorceress, the seed of the adulterer and the whore, 
 are ye not children of transgression, a seed of false¬ 
 hood?” (Is. lvii. 3, 4); or with the language which 
 Matthew puts into the mouth of the Saviour, “ 0 
 generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak 
 good things ? ” (Matt. xii. 34), or “ Ye serpents, ye 
 generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation 
 of hell?” (Matt, xxiii. 33). 
 
 Surely, when we find that the Bible lends itself 
 so readily to the justification of murder in a religious 
 cause, and of adultery as a sacred emblem, and when 
 we find that it contains a selection of such abusive 
 terms as deserve the modern name of “ Billingsgate,” 
 it is justifiable for us to consider it to be the word 
 of man, rather than the inspired outpourings of the 
 Almighty. (See Revelation.) 
 
 Joab, 38^ (1 Sam. xxvi. 6), “ Jo the father.” 
 
 Joah, n ?’ 1 ' (2 Kings xviii. 18), “ Brother to Jo.” 
 
 Joash, (Judg. vi. 11), “ Jo, or Jah, is fire.” 
 
 Job, (Gen. xlvi. 13, Job i. 1), “ The ill-treated one,” 
 from 2'?. 
 
 Jobab, (Gen. x. 29), etymology doubtful; most probably 
 a variant of hobab, which see. 
 
 Jochebed, (Exod. vi. 20), “ Jao is glorious.” This 
 
 name was borne, we are told, by the mother of 
 Moses ; at a time, therefore,— i. e. if we are to believe 
 the testimony of the latter,—that the name Jehovah 
 
689 
 
 Jochebed] was first revealed to him (see Exod. vi. 8) when 
 he was about eighty years old. We must conclude 
 that her cognomen was given to her by some his¬ 
 torian who has overlooked the anachronism. 
 
 Joed, "M' (Nehem. xi. 7), “Jao is duration,’’ or “ Jao is 
 witness.” 
 
 Joel, (1 Sam. viii. 2), “Jao is El.” 
 
 Kespecting the book in the Bible which goes by 
 the name of this prophet, we have very little to say, 
 except that all the vaticinations therein contained 
 resemble those of ancient oracles generally, being- 
 couched in language of which none can divine the 
 meaning; or, if a few here and there are sufficiently 
 clear to be understood, they have been proved by 
 subsequent events to be worthless prophecies. Yet 
 there is an episodical allusion contained in the third 
 chapter, which supplies a missing link in a chain of 
 evidence, upon which we may profitably dwell. We 
 find, in the fourth and following verses, “ What have 
 ye to do with me, 0 Tyre, and Zidon, and all the 
 
 coasts of Palestine ?.Because ye have taken 
 
 my silver and my gold, and have carried into your 
 temples my goodly pleasant things; the children 
 also of Judah and the children of Jerusalem have 
 ye sold unto the Grecians, that ye might remove 
 them far from their border. Behold, I will raise 
 them out of the place whither ye have sold them, 
 and will return your recompense upon your own 
 head; and I will sell your sons and your daughters 
 into the hand of the children of Judah, and they 
 shall sell them to the Sabseans, to a people far off, 
 for Jehovah has spoken it.” 
 
 We supplement the information thus gained, from 
 Amos i. 1 - 15, wherein we learn that Damascus 
 
 x x 
 
690 
 
 Joel] threshed Gilead, and that Gaza, Ashdod, and Tyrus 
 “ delivered up the whole captivity to Edom.” Now 
 in these few verses tw T o things are noteworthy, first, 
 that the Prophet speaks of some conquest of which 
 we have not before heard, and, secondly, that the 
 Grecians javanim , are mentioned for the first 
 
 time in the Bible. 
 
 In pursuing these points, we ascertain from the 
 opening verse of Amos, that he prophesied during the 
 reign of Uzziah, and there is great reason to believe 
 that Joel was contemporary with him, for both equally 
 refer to one particular captivity of Judah and Jeru¬ 
 salem, by the Tyrians, the Philistines, and Syrians. 
 From the joint production of these writers, we learn 
 that the armies of Tyre and Zidon, associated with 
 the Philistines, and probably with Grecian mercena¬ 
 ries and the Syrians, attacked Judah and Jerusalem, 
 and carried away a considerable number into slavery. 
 We can, moreover, come to no other conclusion than 
 that these events happened in the time of Uzziah, or 
 possibly in that of his immediate predecessor. We 
 turn therefore to the history of Amaziah and his 
 son, where, to our amazement, we find that the first 
 completely annihilated the Edomites (2 Chron. xxv. 
 11-14), but that he was subsequently conquered by 
 Joash, King of Israel, who brake down the wall of 
 Judah and Jerusalem, and took all the gold and silver 
 from the house of the Lord, and from the king’s house, 
 and then returned to Samaria. By the same autho¬ 
 rity, we are informed that Uzziah “warred against 
 the Philistines, and brake down the wall of Gath, and 
 the wall of Jabneh, and the wall of Ashdod, and built 
 cities about Ashdod, and among the Philistines; and 
 God helped him against the Philistines, and against 
 
691 
 
 Joel] the Arabians, and against the Mehnnims (Edomites?). 
 And the Ammonites gave gifts to Uzziah, and his 
 name spread abroad to the entering in of Egypt,” 
 &c. (2 Chron. xxvi. 6-9). The writer in the book 
 of Kings says nothing of Uzziah, whom he calls 
 Azariah, except that he built Elath (2 Kings 
 xiv. 22). 
 
 Now it is utterly impossible that the accounts in 
 the writings of Joel and Amos, and those in the so- 
 called historical books, can both be true. If we give 
 credence to the former, and believe that Jerusalem 
 was pillaged by Syrians, Tyrians, Zidonians and 
 Philistines, and that the captives were sold to 
 Grecians and Edomites, we must believe that the 
 writer of the Chronicles has deliberately falsified 
 history, and described a signal defeat as if it had 
 been a glorious conquest effected by the victims. 
 He probably was not the only scribe in those days 
 who acted thus, and assuredly he has had many 
 imitators since. If, on the other hand, we trust the 
 historian, what credence can we give to prophets who 
 bewail the misery of a victorious people, and denounce 
 wrath upon nations who have not sinned ? When we 
 consider how prone all braggarts are to boast, we 
 feel much more disposed to credit Joel and Amos 
 than the historical writers. 94 
 
 The second point which we observe in “Joel” is 
 
 94 Compare 2 Chron. xxviii. 17-19, Isa. xi. 14, Jerem. xxviii. 2, 3, xlix. 7, 20, 
 Ezek. xxv. 12-14, all of which show that Edom was a powerful people to a period 
 long after Amaziah. If we consider that the events recorded as occurring in the 
 time of Ahaz, about eighty years after the reign of Ahaziah, really happened prior 
 to the time of Amos and Joel, we are still more astonished at the account of the 
 Chronicler. It would he incomprehensible how he ever persuaded himself to 
 describe tbe miserable condition of Ahaz, did we not see that the king $ho followed 
 him was Hezekiah, whose glories shone the brighter from contrast with the 
 misfortunes of his predecessor. 
 
692 
 
 Joel] the mention of Grecians, and the fact that some Jews 
 were really sold to that people. As this is the first 
 time in the Jewish history that we find this name 
 introduced, we naturally inquire whether there is any 
 other reference to the nation. Passing by Genesis 
 for a time, we find them first noticed by the second 
 Isaiah, where Javan is spoken of as some distant 
 place, imperfectly known, and in Ezek. xxvii. 18, 
 where it is spoken of as trading with Tyre. In 
 Daniel we find Grecia mentioned as if the writer 
 were familiar with the name. Hence we conclude 
 that the Jews had no intimate knowledge of Javan 
 or the Greeks until a very late period of their 
 history, very probably not until the time that some 
 of the captives sold to the Grecians returned to 
 their home in Judaea. Now it is perfectly clear that 
 if a writer only knows the name of a country, as 
 at one time we knew that of Japan, he cannot 
 name its towns correctly. Consequently we are driven 
 to the conclusion that the writer in Genesis, who 
 described the sons of Javan to be Elishah, Tarshish, 
 Kittim and Dodanim, must have been subsequent 
 to those authors who only knew Javan as we knew 
 Cathay. The knowledge of “Citium” succeeded the 
 knowledge of “Grecia” in the minds of the Jews. 
 When we have recognised these deductions, we 
 naturally conclude that some if not all of the other 
 passages where the “ Chittim,” or inhabitants of 
 Citium, are referred to, are of later date than the 
 prophets Joel and Amos. Thus, for example, we feel 
 obliged to place the story of Balaam at a very late 
 period of the Jewish history, when ships of Chittim 
 were known to exist. This acquaintance seems to have 
 been made in, or shortly before, the time of Jeremiah, 
 
698 
 
 Joel] who is the first to speak of the “ Isles of Chittim ” 
 (Jer. ii. 10). 
 
 Thus we see that the casual mention of the 
 Grecians by Joel proves to be a link in the long 
 chain of circumstantial evidence, which demonstrates 
 that the Old Testament generally is not to be 
 depended upon for absolute truthfulness, and that 
 even its historical books cannot be relied upon as 
 trustworthy. 
 
 Joelah, (1 Chron. xii. 7), “Jao is high,” or “he 
 
 worships Jao; ” from yaho, the n in the word 
 
 being dropped; and alah, ‘ to adore; ’ or 
 
 alah, ‘to be elevated,’ ‘to glow, burn, or shine,’ ‘to 
 be round,’ ‘ to sprout.’ 
 
 Joezer, (I Chron. xii. 6), “Jao is a helper.” 
 
 Joobehah, (Numb, xxxii. 85), “Lofty” (Gesenius); 
 
 “high place” (Fiirst). Possibly “He will gather 
 in,” being the future of gabah. 
 
 Jogli, (Numb, xxxiv. 22), translated “ led into exile ” 
 by Gesenius and Fiirst. This signification being 
 very inappropriate, we seek another, and turn to 
 agal, or eglah, and jah, of which the n is 
 
 dropped, and then discover the meaning to be ‘Jah 
 is a rolling one,’ ‘the calf,’ or ‘the chariot.’ Any of 
 these significations being unbearable to a modern 
 Jew, it is probable that later historians gladly altered 
 it from n4>_W, to 
 
 Joha, (1 Chron. viii. 16), probably one of the forms of 
 Jao (see Jehu) ; “ Yo is living ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Johanan, tjni' (2 Kings xxv. 28), “ Jeho bestows.” 
 
 Joiakim, (Nehem. xii. 10), “ Jao sets up.” 
 
 Joiarib, (Ezra viii. 16), “Yeho is a combatant” 
 
 (Fiirst). 
 
 Jokdeam, (Josh. xv. 56), “The mother is burning;” 
 
694 
 
 Jokdeam] from ^i?J, jakad, ‘ to glow, to burn,’ and m, 
 ‘ mother.’ 
 
 Jokim, (1 Chron. iv. 22), “ Jao sets up.” 
 
 Jokmeam, ?' (1 Kings iv. 12), “ The mother is ever¬ 
 lasting.” 
 
 Jokneam, (Josh. xii. 22), “Possessing the mother.” 
 
 Jokshan, r?i?: (Gen. xxv. 2), “On is enticing, or lays 
 snares ” ? 
 
 Joktan, I9i?j (Gen. x. 25), etymology doubtful; possibly from 
 njfi, tanah, ‘ to adore,’ &c.; NJ9, tene, ‘ a basket; ’ or 
 ^^9, tana , £ to weave, to erect; ’ ako, ‘ the roe¬ 
 buck;’ i. e. “ the roebuck’s basket.” (See Accho, 
 and compare Ashkelon.) 
 
 Joktheel, (Josh. xv. 88), “ Serving El.” 
 
 Jolais, a Carthaginian name, “Iao is strong,” from lais, 
 or W'b, lush , ‘ bold, strong,’ ‘ a lion; ’ and yaho. 
 (See Jah, supra. Compare JEolus.) 
 
 Jonadab, (2 Sam. xiii. 8), “Jao gave,” or “ gift 
 
 of Jao.” 
 
 Jonah, iW (2 Kings xiv. 25), “ A dove.” We have already 
 pointed out that this bird was sacred in the Baby¬ 
 lonian, Assyrian, Hebrew, Greek, and Roman systems 
 of religion, and that it is equally sacred amongst 
 ourselves, at least in words, pictures and sculptures. 
 The reason why it was sacred to Venus is, I think, 
 pretty clear, namely, that its amorous note in spring 
 is a direct invitation to mutual fruition. (Compare 
 Song of Songs ii. 11.) 
 
 Let us now examine the etymology of the word. 
 Taking it for granted that the letters lo may be ren¬ 
 dered by Jao as in preceding names, our next concern 
 is to find out some appropriate signification for the 
 syllable HJ, nah. We find the word n ^, nah, signifies 
 ‘to sit,’ ‘to dwell’ (Greek va/co), ‘a seat,’ ‘a dwelling; 
 
695 
 
 Jonah] also to be ‘lovely, beautiful, or pleasant;’ naah , 
 
 is ‘ to wail,’ or ‘to lament;’ also ‘to collect,’ ‘to 
 come close together; ’ nj, noh, = ‘ lamentation ; ’ 
 n .)?, naveh, signifies ‘inhabiting,’ &c.; 5^, nua, means 
 ‘to move to and fro,’ ‘to wag,’ ‘to shake;’ and 
 noah, signifies ‘ motion.’ We may conclude, 
 I think, that Jao-nah signifies primarily ‘ the abode 
 of Jao.’ If we now test the correctness of this 
 idea, by an appeal to certain scriptural episodes, 
 and to the legendary stories embodied in mediaeval 
 and modern painting and sculpture, we shall find 
 that the dove is supposed to be the special residence 
 of the ‘ Holy Spirit.’ In Matthew iii. 16, Mark 
 i. 10, Luke iii. 22, John i. 82, 33, the dove and 
 the Holy Spirit are spoken of as almost identical. 
 In mediaeval art, the dove is made to impregnate 
 Mary, much in the same fashion as the swan is 
 represented to have fertilised Leda. Doves were a 
 sacred offering in ‘ the temple,’ and we know that 
 they were sold therein. Our Saviour did not object 
 to the bird, but only to its being sold in the holy 
 place. 
 
 Having already referred to the meaning of the 
 dove’s note, “ Coa,” it is scarcely necessary to do 
 more than mention the idea involved in the word 
 nuali, which signifies ‘ moving to and fro,’ or 
 ‘ agitating perpetually,’ as a dove is supposed to do 
 when hovering with her wings. It will suffice if I 
 quote Gesenius respecting his idea of the etymology 
 of Jonah, = “ the dove : ” “ a libidinis ardore qua in 
 proverbium abiit ita dictam censeo” 
 
 If we turn to the prophet who bore this name, 
 we find the materials for an ancient fairy tale: (Jonah, 
 or) The dove is the son of (Amittai) the mother on 
 
696 
 
 Jonah] high, he lives at (Gath Hepher) the village of the 
 cow’s tail, and he is told to go to (Nineveh) the 
 dwelling-place of Ninns, but shirks the duty; pre- 
 fering to go to (Tarshish) the female, or possibly the 
 upright dove, he is swallowed up by (nun) a big fish, 
 and he remains therein for three days and nights 
 (which provokingly reminds us of Jupiter and Alc- 
 mena); and then the huge creature, made for deep 
 water, becomes somehow able to get near enough the 
 land to eject its tenant harmlessly upon the land 
 (which again provokes us, by reminding us of Arion 
 and the dolphin). Then, in some curious fashion, 
 forty days are compressed into two, during which a 
 gourd, another female emblem, rises up to full growth 
 and dies again; and the man, who could rejoice at 
 the destruction of a million fellow creatures, weeps 
 over the loss of a melon. As good a conclusion as 
 many another similar story has. 
 
 We see no more reason to believe the tale to be 
 real, than to believe in the loves of Asmodeus and 
 Sara. (Tobit vi. and vii.) 
 
 A Greek form of Jonah was Jonas, and an inge¬ 
 nious friend has suggested to me that this may be 
 the origin of the celebrated Venus . There is little 
 doubt that Juno and Jonah are closely related. It is 
 curious—and the fact tends to confirm me in my 
 belief of the apocryphal nature of the story — that 
 Jonah is the only name in the Bible derived from 
 the dove, until we come to John, whose feminine 
 attributes are so conspicuous. 
 
 Jonathan, (Judges xviii. 30, 1 Sam. xiv. 16), “ The 
 
 gift of Jao.” 
 
 Joppa, (Josh. xix. 46), “ Beautiful,” “ beauty,” or “ she 
 is lovely.” 
 
697 
 
 Jorah, (Ezra ii. 18). This name was borne by one 
 who returned to Jerusalem from Babylon, and it is 
 probable that it was given to him in that city. From 
 the Cuneatic, we find that ri, re, or ra, was one 
 of the titles of the supreme God, in Assyria and 
 Babylonia; and it is possible that the cognomen 
 Jorah expresses the belief of the priest who gave the 
 name that Jao and Ra were the same deity, under 
 two names. But on reference to the books of Ezra 
 and Nehemiah, we find that the man is represented 
 as having another name, viz. Hariph (Nehem. vii. 
 24). We conclude, therefore, that he had a cogno¬ 
 men of considerable length, one part of which was 
 dropped by several of the writers. The original 
 form was apparently yhoharaph, which signifies 
 
 “ Jah is juicy, vigorous, strong, or proud.” This 
 has then been contracted into •"O’ 1 ', jorah, by one 
 writer; into jorai, by another; and hariph, 
 by a third. 
 
 Jorai, (1 Chron. v. 13), a variant of the above. 
 
 Joram, (1 Kings xxii. 50), “ Jao is high.” 
 
 Jordan, t?}! (Genesis xiii. 10), “Flowing.” (Compare 
 Eridanus.) 
 
 Jorkeam, (1 Chron. ii. 44), “ The pale mother, or the 
 mother is pale; ” “ the moon.” 
 
 Joseph, (Gen. xxx. 24, Psalm lxxxi. 5), “He shall add” 
 (Gesenius). It is possible that the first syllable of 
 this name has reference to Jao, and the second may 
 mean “the bowl, or cup,” 'l?, saph, a name reminding 
 us of a son of the giant in Gath, with a significance 
 recalling to our minds the episode of the cup out of, 
 or by which, Joseph “divined;” or the second word 
 may be saphah, ‘ to open the lips,’ ‘ speech,’ 
 
 which brings Sappho to remembrance; or it may be a 
 
698 
 
 Joseph] variant of shepher (the final r being softened 
 into h), signifying “to be bright, or beautiful,” which 
 makes us think of the statement made, “ that Joseph 
 was a goodly person and well favoured.” As there is 
 little evidence that Jao was a name known in Jacob's 
 time, I incline to the interpretation, “ he will 
 increase.” Fiirst considers it a variant of Josiphiah, 
 and equivalent to “ Jah is an increaser.” 
 
 Joshah, >1^, (1 Chron. iv. 84), “Jao sustains;” ashah, 
 ‘ to sustain, prop, heal, solace.’ 
 
 Joshaviah, (1 Chron. xi. 46), “ Jah raises up.” 
 
 Joshbekashah, (1 Chron. xxv. 4). I find no satis¬ 
 
 factory etymology for this. 
 
 Joshua, (Exod. xvii. !?), “ Jao the helper.” 
 
 Joshia, or (2 Kings xiii. 2), “Jao heals.” 
 
 Josibiah, nyjety (1 Chron. iv. 85), “ Jah raises us.” 
 
 Josiphiah, (Ezra viii. 10), “ Jao will increase.” 
 
 Jotbath, (Numb, xxxiii. 38), “ The waters, or abun¬ 
 
 dant springs ” ? 
 
 Jotham, &nv (Judges ix. 5), “Jao is upright, or perfect.” 
 
 Jozabad, ijji* (1 Chron. xii. 4), “ Jao gives.” 
 
 Jozachar, (2 Kings xii. 21), “Jo, the male, Jo is Maha- 
 deva,” “ Yo is worthy of remembrance” (Fiirst). 
 
 Iphediah, (1 Chron. viii. 25), “Jehovah makes free.” 
 
 Ir, “W (1 Chron. vii. 12), “He is hot, or ardent,” also 
 “ a guard, a watcher, or angel,” “ a city, or tower.” 
 
 Ira, (2 Sam. xx. 26), “ watchful.” 
 
 Irad, (Cen. iv. 18), etymology doubtful. 
 
 Tr am , (Gen. xxxvi. 43). There is great difficulty about 
 the signification of this w^ord. Fiirst renders it 
 “ city district,” which is a very incongruous name 
 for a duke of Edom. It may be rendered “the 
 watcher on high,” from ir, and EJ, Tam; or it 
 may be a variant of Hiram, which would be as 
 
699 
 
 Iram] appropriate a cognomen for a ruler in Edom as for 
 a king of Tyre. Of the two etymologies we prefer 
 the first, as being most in accordance with the two 
 following names. 
 
 Iri, 'TV (1 Chron. vii. 7), “ Jah is a watcher,” equivalent 
 to “Jah is omniscient.” 
 
 Irijah, (Jerem. xxxvii. 18), “Jah is a watchman;” a 
 variant of the preceding word. 
 
 Ir-nahash, (1 Chron. iv. 12), “City of serpents.” 
 
 Irpeel, Wv (Josh, xviii. 27), “ El heals.” 
 
 Irshemesh, (Josh. xix. 41), “ City of the sun.” 
 
 Iru, -W (1 Chron. iv. 15), “Yaho, or Jah, is a watcher;” a 
 variant of Iri. 
 
 Isis, a celebrated Egyptian goddess. In searching through 
 the various religions of remote antiquity, the observer 
 very naturally is arrested by the one wdiich has been 
 the most enduring. The worship of Isis has this 
 character, for it appears to have been extremely long- 
 lived. The goddess was almost coeval with Egypt as 
 a nation, and her fame flowed long upon the stream 
 of time, and broadly around the Mediterranean. A 
 temple dedicated to her was found in Pompeii, when 
 part of that city was exhumed; and her worship was 
 common in Greece at the time when The Golden Ass 
 of Apuleius was written. Without going very deeply 
 into her history, we may say that she was always 
 represented as the spouse, and sometimes as the 
 mother, of Osiris; the two represented the female 
 and the male element in creation. Isis was repre¬ 
 sented by emblems similar to those which were sym¬ 
 bolic of Ishtar. A comparison between Fig. 1, p. 53; 
 Fig. 6, p. 90 ; Figs. 16 and 17, pp. 106, 107 ; Figs. 
 62 and 63, p. 159; Fig. 51, p. 156, and Fig. 2, 
 Plate III., will suffice to demonstrate that Isis was 
 
700 
 
 Isis] . the deified personification of the female organ, the 
 counterpart of Mahadeva; she also had the name of 
 Myrionymous, or in other words her titles were 
 innumerable; she was Neith, Hathor, Moyth and 
 Methyer, or, as we should render it, she was the 
 “ mother of all men.” Isis had a feast dedicated to 
 her honour, as the one who brought forth the New 
 Year; and there is some, though not yet conclusive 
 evidence, that our own Christmas, with its saturnalia, 
 is a Christianised form of the orgies which attended 
 the festival of Isis. She was the Virgin and child of 
 Egypt, and her worship was associated with veneration 
 for the fish. It would be almost impossible to find 
 anything which is a stronger link between the past 
 and present than the figure in Mayer’s Museum, at 
 Liverpool, a copy of which is given on the cover of 
 this book, and also as a frontispiece, and on p. 530. 
 If these again are compared with Fig. 95, p. 497, we 
 shall see that the Koman Catholic faith is in reality 
 a modern form of the ancient worship, in which the 
 physical beauty of woman was adored, and in which 
 the votaries of the goddess were encouraged to pay 
 such homage as human nature most desired. 
 
 Whenever mutual indulgence in the animal pro¬ 
 pensities which exist in man and woman was made a 
 part of religious worship, we can readily understand 
 that the priests who ministered thereto would be 
 unscrupulous in the methods by which they retained 
 influence over their votaries. We have two remark¬ 
 able testimonies to the truth of this—one which 
 the scholar will remember in the Golden Ass, and 
 another that the traveller who has visited the remains 
 of Pompeii will recal to his mind. There, in what 
 remains of the temple of Isis, we see a raised spot on 
 
701 
 
 Isis] which a figure of the goddess stood. The profane 
 had access to its face alone, and could not see either 
 the back or side. The reason why is obvious, for 
 under the statue ran a cavity, into which one of the 
 attendant priests could crawl unseen by any devotee; 
 and behind the drapery of Isis was an aperture, by 
 which could be heard a question propounded to the 
 goddess, and through which the hierarch could utter 
 his oracular response. As there was imposture in 
 some religious communities then, so there is now; 
 and the picture of a virgin who winks with her eyes, 
 and a bottle of blood which liquefies or congeals at 
 pleasure, are in our own days the representatives of 
 the religious imposture of the past. 
 
 Isaac (Gen. xvii. 19), PQ?.', itzchak, signifies “ To laugh, 
 sport, frolic.” (See page 131, supra, and Ishakku, 
 infra.) 
 
 Isaiah, (2 Kings xix. 2), “ Jah is the Saviour.” 
 
 This name was borne by one who has long been 
 considered as chief amongst the prophets of Judah, 
 and as such a representative man. Having been 
 familiar from my earliest years with the theology 
 enunciated from our Protestant pulpits, and having 
 been during that period a close observer, as well as 
 a thoughtful hearer, I have no hesitation in saying 
 that more texts have been drawn from, and more 
 theories built upon, the book of the prophet Isaiah 
 than any other portion of the Old Testament. It 
 is to this book that advocates of the Society for 
 promoting Christianity amongst the Jews most com¬ 
 monly appeal ; and to it the preacher constantly 
 refers when he speaks of Jesus Christ as the Messiah, 
 whose advent was foretold many hundred years ere 
 he came into the world. In my own early years, 
 
702 
 
 Isaiah] when I believed all that was told me, and accepted 
 everything in the sense in which my teachers thought 
 it right to accept it, I can well remember admiring 
 the imagery of the writer, and I revelled in finding 
 significations for his mysterious words. But as age 
 increased, and the powers of thought developed, 
 it became clear that the prophecies, which were so 
 much admired, were really no prophecies at all; that 
 they were not anything more than the vaticinations 
 which are frequently heard in our own Houses of 
 Parliament. There is scarcely a year in which some 
 fervent orator in the House of Commons does not 
 denounce something or other in unmeasured terms; 
 now threatening England with invasion, and its 
 people with annihilation; now prophesying destruction 
 to the National Church, and the impending triumph 
 of the Papacy in Great Britain. The last of such 
 effusions has been to the effect that England’s sun 
 has set, now that she has become more democratic 
 than she was before. In like manner we have seen 
 French and American prophets busy themselves about 
 their neighbours, quite as much as about their own 
 nation; and speedy desolation is foretold to all who 
 offend the national sense of dignity. In like manner 
 we hear from our own pulpits constant denunciations 
 against the sins of England; and divines attribute 
 fever and murrain, cholera and the potatoe-rot, mone¬ 
 tary panics and desolating wars alike to the sins of 
 the people. Some go so far as to select the particular 
 sin for which the scourge is used; and one denounces 
 luxury, another swearing, another Sabbath-breaking, 
 another the free use of thought, another the want of 
 liberality at the bidding of the church, according 
 to the ideas of the preacher. Some of opposite 
 
703 
 
 Isaiah] creeds are more extended in their views; and whilst 
 the Protestant sees the cause of Ireland’s miseries 
 in the existence of Maynooth, the Papist sees it in 
 the existence of a Protestant state church. 
 
 Now in none of these cases does any one, who 
 exercises an independent judgment, trust the orator. 
 The thinker finds that the curses and the blessings 
 of this world come alike to the good and to the bad; 
 that disease and death fall equally upon Jew, Turk, 
 Infidel, Papist, Protestant, and Mormon. But he 
 also finds that the majority of the population in all 
 countries prefer to be led rather than to be leaders; 
 and consequently that he who denounces most fiercely, 
 who scourges our acknowledged vices most con¬ 
 stantly, and who holds out to us in our hours of 
 need the brightest hopes, is certain to have consider¬ 
 able power. Just such an one was Isaiah; but ere 
 we analyse his character and history, we must examine 
 whether the book which bears his name was written 
 by a single individual. 
 
 It would be incompatible with our design to 
 compress into the compass of an article everything that 
 has been advanced respecting the unity of the author¬ 
 ship of “The book of the prophet Isaiah.” We must 
 content ourselves with the expression of our own 
 views, and give a reference to Kitto’s and to Smith’s 
 Cyclopedias of Biblical Literature , and to a very able 
 article in the Revue des deux Mondes, July 1, 1867, 
 pp. 146-179, the last of which will repay perusal. 
 
 There is, we think, very strong evidence to prove 
 that two hands at least have been engaged in the 
 production of the book in question. The first declares 
 that he saw his visions in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, 
 Ahaz, and Hezekiah, an extent which reaches a 
 
704 
 
 Isaiah] period of about one hundred and ten years. If we 
 presume, however, that he did not assume the pro¬ 
 phetic office until the last year of King Uzziah, about 
 758 b. c. (see chap. vi. 1); and if he were then of 
 full age and lived to the end of Hezekiah’s reign, 696 
 b. c., he would have attained the age of about 88. 
 The Talmud tells us that he was killed by Manasseh. 
 The second writer has apparently lived about the time 
 of the rise of the Persian power. The forty-fifth 
 chapter, indeed, seems to have been composed at the 
 very period when Babylon was besieged by Cyrus, 
 who is mentioned by name; and we must imagine 
 that the forty-sixth chapter was penned when Bel and 
 Nebo were the familiar names of the false gods. We 
 will, however, describe the book as we find it. 
 
 The first few chapters record the desolation of the 
 land of Judah and the miseries of Jerusalem; the city 
 had been plundered, and a large portion of its walls 
 destroyed (2 Chron. xxv. 23, 24) by the Israelites, 
 whom we consider to have been the people of the land, 
 originally subjugated by David, though lost by his 
 seed. And though under Uzziah a partial recovery was 
 effected, yet in the time of Ahaz, Syria and Israel 
 combined together, and again threatened the small yet 
 holy city with destruction. To escape from the danger, 
 the services of the King of Assyria were purchased by 
 the Jewish King; and his capital escaped desolation 
 at the cost of the temple treasury. At the same time 
 he saw his ancient enemies, the Israelites, carried 
 away from his neighbourhood, and thus might count 
 on a prolonged peace. After this time Hezekiah, who 
 was tributary to the Assyrians, revolted, and was 
 attacked by an overwhelming force; but, though it 
 desolated Judah, it collapsed during the siege of the 
 
705 
 
 Isaiah] capital. The king has a serious illness, but recovers. 
 After a time certain Babylonian ambassadors arrive, 
 and the monarch gives them a sight of the royal 
 treasury; for this act of ostentation the Prophet 
 reproves the king, and utters a painful augury. So 
 far as we know from his writings, the career of Isaiah 
 ends about this time. 
 
 Now during the whole of this period the utterances 
 of the Prophet resemble closely the utterances of such 
 pulpit politicians as Mr. Beecher, of New York. He 
 recalls point by point the misery of the people, and 
 the losses which they have sustained. With natural 
 vehemence he rebukes his auditors for their sins, 
 forgetting, as such enthusiasts ever do, that if success 
 is a test of orthodoxy, the conquerors must be more 
 friendly with the Almighty than the vanquished. 
 The orator next proceeds to assert his own divine 
 mission, and, in the name of the God who has revealed 
 Himself personally to him, he promises abundance of 
 blessings for the future, provided only that the God 
 whom the prophet adores be adopted as supreme. 
 
 When Jerusalem was surrounded with the armies 
 of Rezin and Pekah, Isaiah (ch. vii. 1), boldly asserts 
 that they will not only be unsuccessful, but that 
 the nation’s enemies shall be signally destroyed. 
 Prophecies such as these were rife in the siege which 
 inaugurated the final destruction of the Holy City as 
 the Jewish capital, but they were vain. The rulers 
 then had no means by which to bring about the ful¬ 
 filment of their auguries. Ahaz, on the contrary, 
 could send gold to the Assyrians, probably also to the 
 Philistines (Isa. ix. 12), and the Prophet, knowing 
 the power of money, was able, not only to marry in 
 comfort, but to name his sons, in confident expecta- 
 
 Y Y 
 
706 
 
 Isaiah] tion that their cognomens would be a standing 
 witness to his astuteness. 
 
 After the signal deliverance of Jerusalem and the 
 establishment of his reputation, Isaiah then proceeds 
 to express his opinion as to the probable fate of other 
 nations—Moab, Damascus, Egypt, and others. Like 
 his successor, Ezekiel, he denounces Tyre, and both 
 are equally unfortunate in the results of the vaticina¬ 
 tion. “ The burden of Babylon ” (ch. xiii.) we must 
 consider an interpolation; for, during the time of 
 Isaiah, that city was not sufficiently powerful to 
 attract attention. Having once gained a reputation 
 for prophetic knowledge, the orator, like Demosthenes 
 in later times, attempted to force his political views 
 upon the ruling powers. The monarch and his 
 ministers considered it judicious to ally themselves 
 with some neighbouring power. Situated as Jerusa¬ 
 lem was, between Egypt and all her foes, her territory 
 was likely to be the battle-field of nations, and the 
 people, unable to cope single-handed with either the 
 Assyrians or the Egyptians, were likely to be destroyed 
 by either. Egypt being the nearest empire, it was 
 natural that help should be sought from her, rather 
 than from distant Nineveh. This Isaiah denounces (ch. 
 xxxi.), and urges as a counter-proposition that Judea 
 should remain neutral, or, as he puts it, that it should 
 trust in the Lord of Hosts (verse 5). To this policy 
 of neutrality, Hezekiah, who appears to have taken 
 Isaiah as his councillor, adheres, when Sennacherib 
 attempts to make an alliance with him (ch. xxxvi. 16), 
 and for a time the plan is successful. We may, 
 however, notice in passing, that the policy is abandoned 
 by the prophet’s successor, Jeremiah, who urges upon 
 Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyrus, Zidon, and Jerusalem 
 
707 
 
 Isaiah] to yield to Nebuchadnezzar, for if they do so he 
 will allow them to remain in their own land (Jerem. 
 xxvii. 1-17). When Isaiah had advanced far into 
 years, and age had increased his power of political 
 observation, he meets with an embassy from Babylon, 
 and hears from them privately the news of their 
 country. From indications of growing strength in 
 Chaldsea, and divided counsels in Assyria, he augurs 
 the rise of Babylonia, and concludes that her monarchs 
 will take the same course as did those of Nineveh; 
 he cannot hope for a second miraculous escape for 
 the Holy City, and thus he boldly propounds the 
 saying that the Babylonians will destroy Jerusalem. 
 Indeed, when once it was attacked by such nations 
 as those dwelling in and about Mesopotamia, there 
 could be no more hope for the continued independence 
 of Judea than there would be for the Belgium of 
 to-day if France or Prussia were to attack her, either 
 singly or united. 
 
 Now throughout the whole of Isaiah’s time, dread 
 of the Israelites, Syrians, and Assyrians was the 
 dominant feeling, but no catastrophe had occurred 
 similar to that which had been brought upon Israel by 
 the gold of Ahaz and of the temple treasury (2 Kings 
 xvi. 7-9, xvii. 1-6)—there had been war, devasta¬ 
 tion, battles, and a siege—but Jerusalem was still 
 an independent city. We omit here the catastrophe 
 which is indicated by Amos and Joel (2 Kings xiv. 
 18,14), because it happened prior to Isaiah’s time, and 
 because, although a great number of Jews were taken 
 captive, a sufficient number were left behind to people 
 the city, which, though greatly injured, was not irre¬ 
 parably destroyed. 90 
 
 96 See Joel, supra, and note 94, p. 691. 
 
708 
 
 Isaiah] We pass from the thirty-ninth to the fortieth 
 chapter of the book, and find that all is changed, 
 there are no more remonstrances, no more denuncia¬ 
 tions, the threatened punishment has fallen, the time 
 of expiation has arrived, and the people who still 
 mourn are to be comforted; Jerusalem has received 
 from the Lord’s hand double for all her sins (ch. xi. 
 2). There is no more mention made of Syria, Egypt, 
 Israel, and Assyria, as nations to be feared. Babylon 
 is the sole power existent, but it is clearly tottering 
 before the growing might of Persia. Under the new 
 dynasty, the captives may hope for deliverance, and 
 now that hope has arisen, it grows amazingly. As a 
 man long bowed down by adversity, and daily longing 
 for relief, is generally extravagant in his expectation 
 when his desire seems near to satisfaction; so he who 
 is called, for want of a better name, the second 
 Isaiah, overflows with exaggerated promises. He 
 scents from afar the coming deliverance, and hails it 
 with satisfaction ; but he finds that his enthusiasm is 
 not universally shared, many are too comfortable in 
 their new homes to face the disagreeableness of 
 removal; to them a home in Babylon, is ‘ a bird in the 
 hand,’ and a house in Jerusalem, unbuilt and desert, 
 is ‘ a bird in the bush.’ To stir up such lethargic 
 minds requires a great effort, and the orator was 
 equal to his work. In the range of language I know 
 no description of a return homewards so vivid, and 
 so exalted, as that of the second Isaiah ; if the 
 language were not oriental, we should call it quixotic, 
 but either term will suffice. Yet we do not find any 
 such character mentioned in the books of Daniel, 
 Ezra, or Nehemiah, since his style is too exalted for 
 us to confound him with Haggai, or Zechariah. 
 
709 
 
 Isaiah] It is unfortunate, perhaps, for modern Christians 
 that there is amongst us a propensity to take in 
 their cold literality the warm effusions of eastern 
 enthusiasts. We thus have identified the hopeful 
 words of a Hebrew captive, telling his views of 
 impending events, with the words of an inspired 
 prophet of about 53 b. c., describing events in what 
 is, to us, two dozen centuries later, a doubtful future. 
 When this error has been corrected, we shall each of 
 us try earnestly to discover the meaning of every 
 portion of the sacred writings, rather than labour to 
 demonstrate that each signifies that which favours 
 our preconceived notions. The task of teaching 
 “ religious ” people to think is almost a hopeless one, 
 yet we do not despair. The judgment of many is 
 sufficiently matured at the present day to distinguish 
 the difference between a mere expression of opinion 
 in plain terms, and in those which are ambiguous, and 
 we may fairly hope that the same power of reason 
 will be extended to the past ages. Isaiah will then be 
 recognised as a close observer, an earnest man, and a 
 hard-headed politician; it will also be ascertained that 
 he had one or more imitators, whose lucubrations 
 have come down to us under the shadow of his name. 
 
 Iscah, (Gen. xi. 29). This word may be taken to 
 signify “He will see,” being the future or imperfect 
 tense of sachah. The name was borne by a 
 
 sister of Lot. 
 
 Ish, Cuneiform, signifies “ The, or an, old man.” 
 
 Ishakku, Cuneiform, “Priests.” This word is interesting, 
 as it suggests a query whether the word Isaac, given 
 to the son of ‘the Father on High’ (Abraham),may not 
 be derived from the Cuneatic word Ishak, “ a priest.” 
 There is some probability in the surmise, for the 
 
710 
 
 Ishakku] names of the twelve patriarchs are in some 
 instances derived from non-Hebraic sources. 
 
 Ishbah, (1 Chron. iv. 17), “Praising” (Gesenius); 96 
 “an appeaser” (Fiirst). More probably “he will call, 
 or praise, or worship,” being the future of n ?^, shabah. 
 
 Ishbak, (Gen. xxv. 2), “Leaving behind ” (Gesenius) ; 96 
 “a free one” (Fiirst); probably “He will set free,” 
 from P?^, shabak. 
 
 Ishbi-benob, (2 Sam. xxi. 16), “His seat is at 
 
 Nob” (Gesenius); 96 “dwelling on the mountain” 
 (Fiirst). I can find no satisfactory etymon for this 
 name. 
 
 Ism, (1 Chron. ii. 81), “The upright one;” “Jah is 
 salvation ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Ishijah, (1 Chron. vii. 8), “ Jah is upright, or lives.” 
 
 96 The etymologies given by Gesenius for the above words, are to me 
 very unsatisfactory. Since there are so many names which begin with ish, it 
 will he well if we make an attempt to discover etymons more consonant with 
 probability. There are —1, The word nitf', iasliah , sometimes read as Jasher, which 
 signifies ‘upright,’ ‘to be or stand erect,’ the equivalent of the Latin esse. 2, the 
 word liP, iesh, which signifies ‘existence.’ 3, ishai , usually written Jesse, 
 signifying ‘a stem, branch, shoot.’ 4, iasha, signifying ‘to be large, ample, 
 broad,’ ‘ to aid, to succour.’ 5, ©N, esh, signifying ‘ fire.’ 6, rtVi)*,isheh, signifying ‘a 
 sacrifice.’ 7, rTON, ishah, signifying ‘ a woman.’ And 8, W, ash, is ‘ a bright constella¬ 
 tion ’ (ursa major). In the margin of Our Bible we are told that the Lord called 
 Adam and Eve, Ish and Isha; but when we have got thus far there is still great 
 difficulty in determining which of the two last, or of the precedent words, we shall 
 select. There is still a farther difficulty in finding the real value of the b 3, in 
 certain of the names. Hence, to get anything like a probable etymon, we are driven 
 to one or more of the letters interchangeable with it. M o, and b 3, are inter¬ 
 changeable; if we try to fit them to 113'©', Ishbah , we find that nottb, ishmah, 
 signifies 1 the ish,’ or ‘ his ish is fat; ’ and Ishmalc is precisely the same, p having 
 been used instead of n, i. e. instead of eh ; and Ishbi-ben-ob would read as Ishmi- 
 ben-ab, “ the son of the father hears,” or possibly “ the son is obedient to the 
 father; ” but as the bi may represent HN3, biah, ‘ entrance,’ or nn3, bahah, ‘ purity,’ 
 or '3, bi, ‘ prayer,’ we may read it as “ the man of purity, or prayer, is the son of 
 the father.” n$3, baah, is ‘to swell up,’ ‘seek for,’ ‘to be swoln up,’ and that 
 might make the word mean, “ the swoln upright one is the son of the father.” 
 These etymons, however, are all of them unsatisfactory. It is, indeed, possible 
 that the initial I, in ish, is simply the sign of the future or imperfect tense of a 
 verb; it is in many words desirable to consider it as such. 
 
711 
 
 Ishma, (1 Chron. iv. 8), “He hears,” or “he will 
 
 shine,” from ; or “he will be high,” from nD0. 
 
 Ishmael, (Gen. xvi. 11), “ El hears, is high, or 
 
 shines,” from VVW. 
 
 Ishmerai, (1 Chron. viii. 18), “ Jah pierces, or presses 
 into ; ” from ™ and n\ 
 
 Ishpan, (1 Chron. viii. 22), “ Son of the erect one;” 
 |Q for | 2 . 
 
 Ishtar, Cuneiform, “ The celestial queen,” or Regina Coeli, 
 and sometimes called Ri, or T sex. ; also “ the pure 
 bright being.” 
 
 Ishua, (Gen. xlvi. 17), “ The erect one.” 
 
 Ismachiah, (1 Chron. xxxi. 18), “Jah props, or keeps 
 
 erect.” 
 
 Ismi-dagon, was an ancestor of Tiglath Pileser, b. c. 1861. 
 Abraham gives, about b. c. 1900, the name of Ish¬ 
 mael, or Ismi-el, to his first son. Here we have 
 Bel-Dagon and El all in apposition with Ismi, or Ish. 
 
 Ispah, (1 Chron. viii. 16), “ The smooth, or shining 
 
 one,” or “the firm strong one.” 
 
 Israel, (Gen. xxxii. 28), is usually said to mean 
 
 “ Contender or Soldier of El.” I doubt this etymo¬ 
 logy strongly. The name was given to one whose 
 name previously had been ^feminine ; it is therefore 
 likely to be significative of some male attribute. Now 
 iasher, signifies 4 to be straight or upright; ’ 
 metaphorically, ‘ to be powerful, as a man, a soldier 
 or prince; ’ and ‘ A1 is upright,’ or ‘ the upright Al,’ 
 would be an appropriate name for a man whose idea 
 of worship is to set up a pillar, and pour oil thereon, 
 this being the ordinary mode of representing Maha- 
 deva, and of paying homage to him by making him 
 sleek and shining. 
 
 We remember that one son of Israel was called 
 
712 
 
 Israel] Asher, another Gad, after a Phoenician goddess, 
 another Keuben, or the sun’s son, and that the latter 
 knew the virtue of the mandrake, a common offering 
 to the pillar, or its priapic representative. In due 
 time, after this feast of mandrakes, and apparently 
 owing his origin to the virtues of the plant, Issachar 
 is born, whose name is significant of the influence of 
 the mandrake upon Jacob. 
 
 We may yet find another etymon for Israel 
 in the hifil of zara (see Sarah, infra), where 
 ¥'?!*?> hizria, signifies ‘to bear seed,’ which, with 
 the addition of el, would signify ‘ El bears seed,’ 
 or ‘El is fruitful.’ 
 
 Issachar, *9^' (Gen. xxx. 18), which comes I think from 
 ®\, ish, ‘ abundance,’ and "9*?, shechar, ‘ strong drink,’ 
 signifies ‘ abundance of hilarity.’ This is one of 
 the words which some of the later redactors have- 
 softened down, and about which they have woven 
 the idea that Issachar means ‘ wages.’ It will be 
 remembered that Keuben found mandrakes in the 
 field, and gave them to his mother. With these she 
 tempted her husband to give her his company, which 
 he had long withheld. If the love-charm was effica¬ 
 cious, we can well imagine that the name was given 
 to celebrate the feast. 
 
 Isui, (Gen. xlvi. 17), “The comforter;” also “deliver¬ 
 ance, welfare, victory,” or “ my helper; ” V s ?', iasha. 
 
 Ithamar, (Exod. vi. 28), is translated by Gesenius, 
 
 “Land of palms,” and by Eiirst, “The father the 
 palm tree,” being a contracted form of The 
 
 more probable etymology, however, is eth, 
 tamar, i. e. ‘ near to the palm tree.’ Compare 
 Ethbaal, ‘living with, or joined to, or near to Baal.’ 
 
 . It will be remembered that the palm tree was one 
 
718 
 
 Ithamar] of the symbols of the Almighty amongst the 
 Phoenicians, and as such appears on the back of the 
 book respecting them which was written by Kenrick. 
 
 Ithiel, (Ps. xxx. 1 ; Neh. xi. 7), * near to, or dwell¬ 
 
 ing with El.’ 
 
 Ithmah, (1 Chron. xi. 46). I find no satisfactory 
 
 etymon for this word as usually spelled. My opinion 
 is that it was originally which signifies ‘ she 
 
 glows.’ The hearer of the name was a Moabite, and 
 possibly a worshipper of the female sun. 
 
 Ithnan, tjn* (Josh. xv. 28), “Given” (Gesenius); “a for¬ 
 tress ” (Fiirst). 
 
 Ithobaal, a Phoenician name, “The upright Baal,” or “ Baal 
 is upright.” 
 
 Ithran, (Gen. xxxvi. 26), “ He is pre-eminent,” or 
 “ abundance.” 
 
 ltt, Cuneiform, signifies “signs, prodigies;” Heb., na, ath. 
 
 Ithream, BjniV (2 Sam. iii. 5), “ The mother is abundance,” 
 
 or “ mother abounding.” 
 
 Ittah-kazin, (Josh. xix. 18), “The judge himself;” 
 
 read n*?, eth, for A?, eth. 
 
 Ittai, V?*? (2 Sam. xv. 19), a variant of which signifies 
 “ existence,” or possibly “ Jah is an essence, or 
 being ; ” from fi'K, ith, and n ', jah , the n being 
 dropped. It is possible that it may have a Greek 
 origin, from Irea, and signify “he is a shield,” or 
 simply “ a shield.” 
 
 lva, the Assyrian “ Prince of the power of the air; ” also 
 
 called Eva, Air, Aer, Our, Ar, Er and Yul ; his 
 emblem was a draped male, carrying a rod, from 
 whence sprung three thunderbolts. Iva and Anu 
 were gods in Babylonia, b. c. 2441. 
 
 Ivah, TO (2 Kings xviii. 84), is the same as “ a circular 
 place, a village.” 
 
714 
 
 Jubal, (G-en. iv. 21), “Yaho is Baal.” It is probable 
 that Ju, Bel, or Bal, is strictly analogous to, and 
 perhaps the ancestor of, the word Evoe, Euoe, chanted 
 in honour of Bacchus. Higgins states, on the 
 authority of Maurice, that the Hindoos use the word 
 Jeve, or Jeue, when singing praises to their gods. 
 We have clearly the same word in Jubilee, which is 
 spelled precisely the same as Jubal, one of 
 
 whose significations is ‘ a ram.’ At the Jubilee, rams’ 
 horns were blown as trumpets, and none can read of 
 this without associating the Jewish worship with that 
 of the nations round about, who used the ram for an 
 emblem of vigour, and its horns as an emblem of 
 perpetual masculine, or creative power. 
 
 Halleluiah is as old as the ancient Egyptians, and 
 the song of Jubilee may be said to date from the 
 most remote antiquity. 
 
 Juchal, (Jerem. xxxviii. 1), “ The voice of Jah; ” Sj, 
 kal, ‘a voice,’or 4 Jah is everything;’ bl, col, ‘ the 
 whole, totality, all.’ 
 
 Judah, (Gen. xxix. 35), is usually said to signify 
 
 ‘ praised,’ an unlikely etymon, for no baby is specially 
 deserving of praise ; and to call an infant by such a 
 title would be equivalent to calling him ‘ he was held 
 in esteem,’ an opinion which could only be formed 
 after the man had lived for some years, and not when 
 his life was commencing. My own impression is that 
 the word is an altered form of jhudad, which 
 
 signifies “ a friend of Yaho, or Jah.” If this surmise 
 be correct, we shall then find that Jacob introduced 
 the names of the following gods of the “ Heathen ” 
 into the cognomens of his children : Ra, Re, or Ri, 
 the Egyptian and Assyrian name for the Sun; Dan, 
 the Phoenician name of the Supreme ; Gad, the 
 
715 
 
 Judah] Tyrian goddess of good-luck; Asher, Mahadeva; 
 Yeho, Canaanite; and possibly Phthah, an Egyptian 
 god. 
 
 Judith, riH-irv (Gen. xxvi. 84), was the name of a wife of 
 Esau, a contemporary probably with her nephew 
 Judah, and apparently having a name derived from 
 the same source. As we derived Judah from •* in ', 
 yahu, and Th dad, the final 1 being converted into n, 
 so we may conclude that Judith is from yahu, 
 and dath. The signification would then be “ The 
 law, decree, appointment, religion, counsel, plan, or 
 purpose of Jah.” 
 
 The individual who bore the name was a Hittite, 
 and whether we conclude that the word Judith is a 
 feminine variant of Judah, or is simply derived from 
 •I*"!', yahu, it is apparent that the early form of the 
 name Jehovah was common to the Jews and to the 
 Hittites. 
 
 Jushab-hesed, (i Chron. iii. 20), “ The abode of 
 
 ardent love;” chesed, ‘ ardent love; ’ ashab, 
 ‘to dwell in, to inhabit.’ 
 
 Juttah, (Josh. xv. 55), “He covers over,” or “he pro¬ 
 tects,” nay. 
 
 Izhar, (Ezra vi. 18), “ Smooth as oil, or shining.” 
 
 Izrahiah, iWW (1 Chron. vii. 3), “ Jah brings to light.” 
 
 Izri (1 Chron. xxv. 11), “ Jah forms, or fashions.” 
 Compare Psalm cxix. 78, “ Thy hands have made me 
 and fashioned me.” 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
PLATE II 
 
 F!G. 1. 
 
 Fig. 3. 
 
 
 \ 
 
 / 
 
 \ 
 
 “7 
 
 \ 
 
 / 
 
 Fig 4 
 
PLATE III. 
 
 
PLATE IV. 
 
INDEX I 
 
 TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE REFERRED TO, EXAMINED, OR 
 EXPLAINED. 
 
 Genesis. Genesis. 
 
 hapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 
 Page 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 Page 
 
 i. 
 
 1 
 
 
 221 
 
 xviii. 
 
 21 
 
 265 
 
 .. 
 
 11 , 12 
 
 
 467 
 
 
 22 
 
 268 
 
 
 26 
 
 . 222 
 
 254 
 
 
 30 
 
 262 
 
 .. 
 
 27 
 
 . 68 , 86 
 
 602 
 
 xix. 
 
 2 , 24 
 
 224 
 
 i. 
 
 2 
 
 
 671 
 
 . . 
 
 5 
 
 293 
 
 ill. 
 
 5 
 
 
 224 
 
 
 29 
 
 222 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 265 
 
 XX. 
 
 3 
 
 . 222 , 458 
 
 
 15 
 
 
 601 
 
 xxi. 
 
 30 
 
 293 
 
 .. 
 
 16 
 
 
 603 
 
 xxiv. 
 
 3 
 
 222 
 
 
 16-18 
 
 
 467 
 
 
 16 
 
 293 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 496 
 
 xxv. 
 
 1 
 
 194 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 222 
 
 
 4 
 
 215 
 
 
 22 
 
 
 255 
 
 
 23 , 25 
 
 600 
 
 iv. 
 
 1 
 
 
 293 
 
 
 26 
 
 132 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 265 
 
 xxvii. 
 
 36 
 
 132 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 200 
 
 xxviii. 
 
 10 
 
 544 
 
 
 19 , 28 
 
 
 200 
 
 XXX. 
 
 1 
 
 60 , 603 
 
 V. 
 
 25 
 
 
 200 
 
 
 14 , 16 
 
 . 337 , 338 
 
 vi. 
 
 5-7 
 
 
 671 
 
 
 37-42 
 
 130 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 266 
 
 xxxi. 
 
 11-24 
 
 458 
 
 viii. 
 
 21 
 
 
 260 
 
 
 30 , 32 
 
 222 
 
 ix. 
 
 13 
 
 
 467 
 
 
 45 
 
 544 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 158 
 
 xxxii. 
 
 24 
 
 . 262 , 449 
 
 X. 
 
 23 
 
 
 96 
 
 .. 
 
 28 
 
 222 
 
 xi. 
 
 31 , 32 
 
 
 41 
 
 XXXV. 
 
 2 
 
 80 , 129 , 222 
 
 xiv. 
 
 1 
 
 
 215 
 
 
 9 
 
 606 
 
 
 2 , 5 
 
 
 60 
 
 
 19 
 
 358 
 
 XY. 
 
 9 
 
 . 405 , 
 
 567 
 
 xxxvi. 
 
 2,4 
 
 200 
 
 xvii. 
 
 1 , 3 , 9 
 
 
 222 
 
 xxxviii. 
 
 28 
 
 600 
 
 
 12 , 13 
 
 
 129 
 
 xlii. 
 
 23 
 
 606 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 545 
 
 xliv. 
 
 5 
 
 550 
 
 
 17 
 
 
 193 
 
 
 
 
 xviii. 
 
 
 
 222 
 
 
 Exodus. 
 
 
 
 2-17 
 
 
 224 
 
 i. 
 
 17 , 20 
 
 222 
 
 
 5-8 
 
 
 245 
 
 ii. 
 
 10 
 
 195 
 
 
 12 
 
 . 193 , 
 
 224 
 
 
 23 , 25 
 
 222 
 
718 
 
 Exodus. 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 iv. 
 
 16 
 
 
 24, 26 
 
 vi. 
 
 2,3 
 
 
 3 
 
 vii. 
 
 1 
 
 
 10, 12 
 
 ix. 
 
 3 
 
 xii. 
 
 12 
 
 XV. 
 
 3 
 
 
 11 
 
 xvii. 
 
 18 
 
 xviii. 
 
 11 
 
 XX. 
 
 2 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 23 
 
 xxi. 
 
 6 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 28 
 
 xxii. 
 
 9 
 
 
 19 
 
 xxiii. 
 
 13, 24,32,33 
 
 xxiv. 
 
 10, 11 
 
 xxv. 
 
 4 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 22 
 
 
 33 
 
 xxviii. 
 
 34 
 
 XXX. 
 
 23 
 
 xxxi. 
 
 17 
 
 xxxii. 
 
 1, 4, 8, 23, 31 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 14 
 
 
 24 
 
 
 27 
 
 xxxiii. 
 
 20 
 
 
 23 
 
 xxxiv. 
 
 15,16,17 
 
 
 Leviticus. 
 
 i. 
 
 14 
 
 V. 
 
 7 
 
 vi. 
 
 3,4 
 
 viii. 
 
 12 
 
 xii. 
 
 6, 8 
 
 Page Chapter 
 178, 179 xiv. 
 
 219, 546 xviii. 
 
 136 
 604 
 
 222 xix. 
 
 136 
 
 261 xx. 
 
 222 xxi. 
 
 259 xxvi. 
 
 227, 620 
 434 
 
 620 i- 
 
 222 
 
 263, 266 iv - 
 
 223 xi. 
 
 223 xii. 
 
 223 
 
 223 xiii. 
 
 181, 223 xiv. 
 
 568 
 
 223 xvi. 
 
 223 
 
 353 xix. 
 
 469 
 
 293 
 
 292 xxii. 
 
 53 xxiv. 
 
 261 xxv. 
 
 254, 671 
 
 223, 568 xxviii. 
 
 566 
 
 263 xxxi. 
 
 266 xxxiii. 
 
 178 
 672 
 604 
 
 261 i* 
 
 223 
 
 ii. 
 
 405 iv. 
 
 405 
 181 
 
 305 v. 
 
 110 vi. 
 
 Leviticus. 
 
 Verse Page 
 
 4 . 353 
 
 . 567, 568 
 
 3 . 568 
 
 23, 30 . 568 
 
 4 . 223 
 
 28 . 643 
 
 15-17 . 568 
 
 5 . 643 
 
 31 . 260 
 
 Numbers. 
 
 6-12 . 236 
 
 50 . 291 
 
 8 . 353 
 
 23 . 261 
 
 6 . 458 
 
 8 . 260 
 
 29 . 240 
 
 3-16, 20 . 263 
 
 28 . 260 
 
 32 . 467 
 
 48 . 178 
 
 2-9 . 564 
 
 6 . 393 
 
 26 . 469 
 
 9-20 . 223 
 
 7 430, 446, 656 
 
 4 . 262 
 
 6, 8 . 211 
 
 3 . 521 
 
 7 . 592 
 
 18 . 523 
 
 4 . 223 
 
 45 . 535 
 
 Deuteronomy. 
 
 27 . 263 
 
 28 . 134 
 
 8 . 214 
 
 22 . 94 
 
 15 . 293 
 
 19 . 639 
 
 28 . 223 
 
 7 . 223 
 
 4 . 226 
 
719 
 
 Deuteronomy. Judges. 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 
 Page 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 Page 
 
 vi. 
 
 14 
 
 
 223 
 
 vi. 
 
 10 
 
 223 
 
 vii. 
 
 3 
 
 
 523 
 
 ix. 
 
 46 
 
 226 
 
 ..4,16, 25 
 
 
 223 
 
 xvi. 
 
 23 
 
 223 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 262, 266 
 
 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 
 503 
 
 
 1 Samuel. 
 
 viii. 
 
 19 
 
 
 223 
 
 i. 
 
 10 
 
 60 
 
 xii. 
 
 2 sea. 
 
 
 223 
 
 ii. 
 
 13 
 
 566 
 
 xiii. 
 
 1-5 
 
 
 461 
 
 
 22 
 
 . 350, 366 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 223 
 
 V. 
 
 6 
 
 261 
 
 xiv. 
 
 26 
 
 
 594 
 
 
 7 
 
 223 
 
 xxL 
 
 3-8 
 
 
 566 
 
 vi. 
 
 8-15 
 
 284 
 
 xxii. 
 
 2-13 
 
 
 181 
 
 ix. 
 
 16 
 
 305 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 53 
 
 X. 
 
 1 
 
 305 
 
 
 15, 17 
 
 
 225 
 
 xiii. 
 
 8,14 
 
 432 
 
 xxiii. 
 
 1 
 
 
 219 
 
 
 14-22 
 
 . 431, 432 
 
 xx vi. 
 
 15 
 
 
 325 
 
 
 19 
 
 587 
 
 xxvii. 
 
 21 
 
 
 568 
 
 XV. 
 
 2,3 
 
 266 
 
 xxviii. 
 
 1 seq. 
 
 
 323 
 
 
 10-23 
 
 432 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 60 
 
 
 29 
 
 266 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 337, 430 
 
 xvi. 
 
 14 
 
 513 
 
 
 14-64 
 
 
 223 
 
 xviii. 
 
 25-27 
 
 . 65 
 
 
 30 
 
 
 55 
 
 xix. 
 
 13 
 
 438 
 
 xxix. 
 
 20 
 
 
 262 
 
 XX. 
 
 31 
 
 433 
 
 xxxii. 
 
 11 
 
 
 465, 673 
 
 xxi. 
 
 1-6 
 
 438 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 260 
 
 
 1-9 
 
 441 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 263 
 
 xxii. 
 
 1, 2 
 
 433 
 
 
 17 
 
 
 223 
 
 xxvi. 
 
 6 
 
 584 
 
 
 26 
 
 
 264 
 
 xxvii. 
 
 1-12 
 
 434 
 
 
 
 
 
 xxviii. 
 
 13 
 
 223 
 
 
 Joshua. 
 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 460 
 
 iv. 
 
 24 
 
 
 261 
 
 xxix. 
 
 8 
 
 434 
 
 Y. 
 
 5 
 
 
 219 
 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 374 
 
 
 2 Samuel. 
 
 XV. 
 
 28 
 
 
 371 
 
 ii. 
 
 8 
 
 133 
 
 
 37 
 
 
 535 
 
 iii. 
 
 27 
 
 435 
 
 xxiv. 
 
 19 
 
 
 263 
 
 iv. 
 
 2 
 
 133 
 
 
 
 
 
 V. 
 
 16 
 
 133 
 
 
 Judges. 
 
 
 
 vi. 
 
 6, 10 
 
 . 439, 536 
 
 ii. 
 
 3-19 
 
 
 223 
 
 
 14-21 
 
 . 158, 288 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 262 
 
 
 22 
 
 . 440, 583 
 
 .. 
 
 15 
 
 
 261 
 
 ix. 
 
 6,10 
 
 133 
 
 iii. 
 
 6 
 
 
 223 
 
 xii. 
 
 31 
 
 435 
 
 , , 
 
 7 
 
 
 307 
 
 xiii. 
 
 21 
 
 . 436 
 
 V. 
 
 8 
 
 
 223 
 
 XV. 
 
 2 
 
 280 
 
 vi. 
 
 2 
 
 
 587 
 
 XX. 
 
 . 10 
 
 , 436 
 
720 
 
 2 Samuel. 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 Page 
 
 xxii. 
 
 16 
 
 259 
 
 xxiv. 
 
 1 
 
 452 
 
 
 5 
 
 534 
 
 
 1 Kings. 
 
 
 ii. 
 
 9 
 
 437 
 
 iii. 
 
 5 
 
 469 
 
 
 14 
 
 441 
 
 iv. 
 
 16 
 
 217 
 
 
 18 
 
 216 
 
 y. 
 
 1 
 
 439 
 
 viii. 
 
 27 
 
 283 
 
 ix. 
 
 26 
 
 214 
 
 xi. 
 
 1 
 
 584 
 
 
 33 
 
 223 
 
 xii. 
 
 19 
 
 620 
 
 xiii. 
 
 1 seq. 
 
 500 
 
 xiv. 
 
 23 
 
 307 
 
 xvi. 
 
 24 
 
 70 
 
 xvii. 
 
 1 
 
 477 
 
 xviii. 
 
 
 478 
 
 
 4 
 
 655 
 
 xix. 
 
 18 
 
 593 
 
 XX. 
 
 
 478 
 
 xxi. 
 
 21, 29 
 
 266 
 
 xxii. 
 
 19 
 
 255, 478 
 
 
 20-23 
 
 265, 451 
 
 
 2 Kings. 
 
 
 i. 
 
 2 
 
 348 
 
 ii. 
 
 9,14 
 
 481 
 
 iv. 
 
 34 
 
 481 
 
 V. 
 
 18 
 
 364 
 
 vi. 
 
 17 
 
 116 
 
 .. 
 
 17-25 
 
 481 
 
 vii. 
 
 6 
 
 584 
 
 X. 
 
 7 
 
 337, 375 
 
 xiii. 
 
 21 
 
 481 
 
 xiv. 
 
 13 
 
 707 
 
 .. 
 
 22 
 
 691 
 
 XY. 
 
 17-19 
 
 179 
 
 xvi. 
 
 10 
 
 616 
 
 .. 
 
 7-9 
 
 707 
 
 xvii. 
 
 1-6 
 
 707 
 
 ,. 
 
 17, 23 
 
 179 
 
 Chapter 
 
 2 Kings. 
 
 Verse 
 
 
 Page 
 
 xvii. 
 
 24, 25 
 
 
 502, 503 
 
 xviii. 
 
 27 
 
 
 133 
 
 XX. 
 
 18 
 
 
 65, 240 
 
 xxi. 
 
 15 
 
 
 262 
 
 xxiii. 
 
 7 
 
 
 309, 490 
 
 xxiii. 
 
 11 
 
 
 359 
 
 
 25 
 
 
 633 
 
 xxiv. 
 
 24 
 
 
 262 
 
 XXV. 
 
 7 
 
 
 267 
 
 i. 
 
 1 Chronicles. 
 
 32 
 
 194 
 
 iv. 
 
 4 
 
 
 358 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 371 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 598 
 
 viii. 
 
 33,34 
 
 
 133 
 
 ix. 
 
 39,40 
 
 
 133 
 
 xiv. 
 
 7 
 
 
 133, 438 
 
 xxi. 
 
 1 
 
 
 452 
 
 ii. 
 
 2 Chronicles. 
 5 
 
 620 
 
 viii. 
 
 6 
 
 
 359 
 
 XXV. 
 
 11-14 
 
 
 690 
 
 
 23 
 
 
 704 
 
 xxvi. 
 
 6-9 
 
 
 691 
 
 xxxii. 
 
 15 
 
 
 225 
 
 xxxvi. 
 
 22, 23 
 
 
 424 
 
 i. 
 
 Ezra. 
 
 1 
 
 
 424 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 560 
 
 iii. 
 
 3, 6 
 
 
 521 
 
 iv. 
 
 3 
 
 
 424 
 
 
 7 
 
 
 371 
 
 
 12 
 
 
 521 
 
 V. 
 
 1,2 
 
 
 521 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 260 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 424 
 
 vi. 
 
 1-5 
 
 
 424 
 
 
 9, 15 
 
 
 521 
 
 The whole Book 
 
 
 519,526 
 
 vii. 
 
 Nehemiah 
 
 24 
 
 
 697 
 
 The whole Book 
 
 
 519, 526 
 
721 
 
 
 Esther 
 
 
 Chapter Verse 
 
 
 iii 
 
 7 
 
 
 vii 
 
 6 
 
 
 viii 
 
 6 
 
 
 ix 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 Job. 
 
 
 i. 
 
 1-7 
 
 . 255. 
 
 .. 
 
 6 
 
 . 250, 
 
 .. 
 
 21 
 
 . 203, 
 
 ii. 
 
 1-7 
 
 250, 265, 
 
 iv. 
 
 9 
 
 
 xiv. 
 
 1 
 
 . 
 
 XXV. 
 
 6 
 
 
 xx vi. 
 
 6 
 
 
 xxviii. 
 
 22 
 
 
 xxxi. 
 
 12 
 
 . 
 
 xxxiii. 
 
 14-16 
 
 
 xli. 
 
 1-34 
 
 
 
 Psalms. 
 
 
 ii. 
 
 4 
 
 . 265, 
 
 vi. 
 
 
 
 vii. 
 
 11 
 
 
 viii. 
 
 3 
 
 
 ix., x., 
 
 xii., xiii., seq. 
 
 
 xiv. 
 
 
 
 xvii. 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 . 305, 
 
 xviii. 
 
 8, 15 
 
 38-41 
 
 
 xxi. 
 
 
 
 xxii. 
 
 6 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 . 259, 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 xxiii., 
 
 xxviii., xxxi. 
 
 
 xxxiii. 
 
 18 
 
 
 xxxiv. 
 
 15 
 
 
 xlvii. 
 
 4 
 
 
 lviii. 
 
 1 
 
 
 lix. 
 
 8 
 
 
 lx. 
 
 7 
 
 
 lxviii. 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 Psalms. 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 
 Page 
 
 lxviii. 
 
 21 
 
 
 686 
 
 lxxii. 
 
 7 
 
 
 647 
 
 lxxiii. 
 
 3 
 
 
 443, 573 
 
 lxxv. 
 
 3, 11 
 
 
 261 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 261 
 
 lxxvii. 
 
 4 
 
 
 362 
 
 . . 
 
 7 
 
 
 647, note 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 261 
 
 lxxviii. 
 
 24, 25 
 
 
 245 
 
 
 45 
 
 
 180, 524 
 
 lxxxi. 
 
 9, 10 
 
 
 226 
 
 lxxxvi. 
 
 4 
 
 
 362 
 
 lxxxviii. 
 
 11 
 
 
 181 
 
 lxxxix. 
 
 10 
 
 
 362 
 
 xciv. 
 
 4 
 
 
 260 
 
 xcv. 
 
 3 
 
 
 620 
 
 
 4 
 
 
 58 
 
 civ. 
 
 24 
 
 
 622 
 
 cvi. 
 
 37, 38 
 
 
 638 
 
 cviii. 
 
 8 
 
 
 259 
 
 cxvi. 
 
 45 
 
 
 266 
 
 cxxvii. 
 
 3 
 
 
 60 
 
 cxxxii. 
 
 11 
 
 
 482 
 
 cxxxv. 
 
 5 
 
 
 620 
 
 cxxxvii. 
 
 8, 9 
 
 
 686 
 
 cxxxviii. 
 
 
 
 524 
 
 cxxxix. 
 
 
 
 95 
 
 
 13,15 
 
 203 
 
 , 467, 560 
 
 . , 
 
 16 
 
 
 239, 235 
 
 
 21 
 
 
 280 
 
 
 Proverbs. 
 
 
 ii. 
 
 6 
 
 
 260 
 
 XV. 
 
 3 
 
 
 260 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 181 
 
 xvi. 
 
 11 
 
 
 430 
 
 xxvii. 
 
 20 
 
 
 180, 181 
 
 XXX. 
 
 15,16 
 
 
 239, 394 
 
 f , 
 
 26 
 
 
 576 
 
 Ecclesiastes. 
 
 y. 3 . 459 
 
 15 203, 468, 560 
 
 Page 
 
 438 
 
 438 
 
 181 
 
 181 
 
 , 451 
 
 265 
 
 621 
 
 , 468 
 
 451 
 
 259 
 
 111 
 
 578 
 
 181 
 
 181 
 
 181 
 
 458 
 
 259 
 
 , 442 
 
 442 
 
 262 
 
 49 
 
 442 
 
 442 
 
 620 
 
 442 
 
 259 
 
 443 
 
 442 
 
 578 
 
 442 
 
 228 
 
 442 
 
 260 
 
 260 
 
 265 
 
 227 
 
 265 
 
 259 
 
 620 
 
 325 
 
 Z Z 
 
Isaiah. 
 
 Song of Solomon. 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 
 Page 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 Page 
 
 ii. 
 
 2-5 
 
 
 373 
 
 lxv. 
 
 5 
 
 259 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 694 
 
 
 7 
 
 640 
 
 iv. 
 
 12 
 
 
 52 
 
 The whole Book 
 
 . 701-709 
 
 vii. 
 
 8 
 
 
 273 
 
 
 
 
 .. 
 
 13 
 
 
 337 
 
 
 Jeremiah. 
 
 viii. 
 
 5 
 
 
 273 
 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 52 
 
 ii. 
 
 2 
 
 265 
 
 
 9-10 
 
 
 144 
 
 
 10 
 
 693 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 27 
 
 638 
 
 
 
 
 
 iii. 
 
 2 
 
 55, 638 
 
 
 Isaiah. 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 638 
 
 i. 
 
 4 
 
 
 262 
 
 vii. 
 
 3-7 
 
 635 
 
 iii. 
 
 16-18 
 
 
 53 
 
 
 18 
 
 378, 579, 638 
 
 
 17 
 
 
 158, 268 
 
 viii. 
 
 2 
 
 639 
 
 V. 
 
 5 
 
 
 52 
 
 
 10 
 
 593 
 
 vi. 
 
 1 
 
 
 704 
 
 X. 
 
 2 
 
 640 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 261 
 
 xi. 
 
 3,5 
 
 633 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 52 
 
 xii. 
 
 8 
 
 263 
 
 vii. 
 
 1 
 
 
 705 
 
 xiii. 
 
 22 
 
 601 
 
 
 20 
 
 74,133, 268, 601 
 
 
 27 
 
 640 
 
 viii. 
 
 19 
 
 
 74, 558 
 
 xiv. 
 
 13 
 
 640 
 
 ix. 
 
 12 
 
 
 705 
 
 XV. 
 
 1 
 
 . 633, 634 
 
 xi. 
 
 2 
 
 
 708 
 
 xvi. 
 
 6, 8 
 
 641 
 
 xii. 
 
 1 
 
 
 262 
 
 xvii. 
 
 21-27 
 
 634 
 
 xiii. 
 
 
 
 706 
 
 
 25 
 
 637 
 
 
 16 
 
 
 55 
 
 xviii. 
 
 8 
 
 266 
 
 xiv. 
 
 12 
 
 
 250 
 
 
 17 
 
 261 
 
 xxxi. 
 
 5 
 
 
 706 
 
 xix. 
 
 4-9 
 
 642 
 
 xxxvi. 
 
 16 
 
 
 706 
 
 xxii. 
 
 4 
 
 637 
 
 xxxviii. 
 
 17 
 
 
 261 
 
 xxiii. 
 
 5,6 
 
 636 
 
 xxxix. 
 
 7 
 
 
 65 
 
 
 25 
 
 458 
 
 xl. 
 
 28 
 
 
 672 
 
 xxiv. 
 
 2 
 
 337 
 
 xliv. 
 
 .. 
 
 
 252 
 
 xxvi. 
 
 
 . 635,642 
 
 xlvi. 
 
 6 
 
 
 226 
 
 xxvii. 
 
 1-17 
 
 707 
 
 xlvii. 
 
 3 
 
 
 267 
 
 
 4, 7 
 
 425 
 
 li. 
 
 1 67,341,415,468,483 
 
 
 11 
 
 636 
 
 
 17 
 
 
 261 
 
 xxxi. 
 
 3 
 
 265 
 
 lvi. 
 
 4, 5 
 
 
 634 
 
 xxxii. 
 
 30 
 
 262 
 
 lvii. 
 
 3,4 
 
 
 688 
 
 .. 
 
 34 
 
 642 
 
 .. 
 
 5 
 
 
 226, 415 
 
 xxxiii. 
 
 17,18 
 
 636 
 
 lix. 
 
 17 
 
 
 259 
 
 xliv. 
 
 15 
 
 638 
 
 lxi. 
 
 8 
 
 
 263 
 
 
 17 
 
 * . 236 
 
 lxiii. 
 
 4 
 
 
 267 
 
 m # 
 
 19 
 
 378 
 
 
 6 
 
 
 259, 268 
 
 . # 
 
 26 
 
 618 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 633 
 
 xlviii. 
 
 37 
 
 642 
 
728 
 
 
 Jebemiah. 
 
 
 
 Daniel. 
 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 Page 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 Page 
 
 li. 
 
 7 
 
 261 
 
 vii. 
 
 25 
 
 428 
 
 
 39 
 
 592, 594 
 
 X. 
 
 3 
 
 428 
 
 
 57 
 
 594 
 
 
 11 
 
 421 
 
 The whole Book 
 
 632-644 
 
 xi. 2, 
 
 , 17,18 
 
 424 
 
 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 428 
 
 
 Lamentations. 
 
 
 .. 
 
 37-39 
 
 225 
 
 i. 
 
 15 
 
 261 
 
 
 38 
 
 208 
 
 iii. 
 
 38 
 
 260 
 
 xii. 
 
 11, 12 
 
 428 
 
 
 
 
 The whole Book 
 
 420-429 
 
 
 Ezekiel. 
 
 
 
 
 
 i. 
 
 16, 20 
 
 143, 507 
 
 
 Hosea. 
 
 
 iii. 
 
 14 
 
 261 
 
 i. 
 
 3 
 
 454 
 
 ,. 
 
 15, 24 
 
 508 
 
 ii. 
 
 3 
 
 158 
 
 iv. 
 
 1-6 
 
 508 
 
 iii. 
 
 13, 16 
 
 350 
 
 V. 
 
 12 
 
 508 
 
 iv. 
 
 13, 16 
 
 350 
 
 vi. 
 
 • . 
 
 509 
 
 ix. 
 
 15 
 
 263 
 
 .. 
 
 13 
 
 640 
 
 xi. 
 
 1 
 
 358 
 
 viii. 
 
 7 
 
 415,509 
 
 xiii. 
 
 2 
 
 567 
 
 ,, 
 
 18 
 
 260 
 
 The whole Book 
 
 587, 594 
 
 ix. 
 
 4 
 
 152 
 
 
 
 
 xi. 
 
 24 
 
 510 
 
 
 Joel. 
 
 
 xii. 
 
 3-19 
 
 510 
 
 i. 
 
 12 
 
 273 
 
 xiv. 
 
 14, 20 
 
 421, 510 
 
 ii. 
 
 18 
 
 263 
 
 xvi. 
 
 8 
 
 265, 687 
 
 iii. 
 
 4 
 
 689 
 
 m 
 
 16 
 
 309 
 
 
 
 
 
 24, 25 
 
 211 
 
 
 Amos. 
 
 
 
 38 
 
 263,687 
 
 i. 
 
 1-15 
 
 689 
 
 XX. 
 
 9 
 
 264,618 
 
 V. 
 
 26 
 
 291 
 
 
 41 
 
 260 
 
 
 
 
 
 48 
 
 511 
 
 
 Jonah. 
 
 
 . . 
 
 49 
 
 233 
 
 iii. 
 
 10 
 
 266 
 
 xxvi., xxvii., xxviii. 
 
 511 
 
 
 
 
 xxvii. 
 
 13 
 
 692 
 
 
 Micah. 
 
 
 xxxii. 
 
 21 
 
 226 
 
 i. 
 
 10 
 
 357 
 
 xxxvi. 
 
 23 
 
 264 
 
 
 
 
 The whole Book 
 
 507-513 
 
 
 Nahum. 
 
 
 
 
 
 i. 
 
 2 
 
 263 
 
 
 Daniel. 
 
 
 iii. 
 
 5 
 
 601 
 
 i. 
 
 4, 6 
 
 421 
 
 
 
 
 ii. 
 
 8,9 
 
 427 
 
 
 Habakkuk. 
 
 
 iv. 
 
 16 
 
 427 
 
 i. 
 
 11 
 
 225 
 
 v. 2, 
 
 11,18 
 
 425 
 
 ii. 
 
 18 
 
 227 
 
 vi. 
 
 1-28 
 
 426 
 
 
 
 
 
 18 
 
 52 
 
 
 Zephaniah. 
 
 
 vii. 
 
 12 
 
 427 
 
 ii. 
 
 11 
 
 620 
 
724 
 
 Zechariah. 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 Page 
 
 i. 
 
 8 
 
 469 
 
 
 8-11 
 
 577 
 
 
 14 
 
 263 
 
 xiii. 
 
 2 
 
 514 
 
 xiv. 
 
 2 
 
 55 
 
 
 Malachi. 
 
 
 i. 
 
 2,3 
 
 263 
 
 iii. 
 
 6 
 
 267, 672 
 
 
 16 
 
 256, 588 
 
 iv. 
 
 5 
 
 31, 220 
 
 
 Apocrypha. 
 
 
 Dobit 
 
 
 514 
 
 vi. vii. 
 
 
 696 
 
 Scclesiasticus . 
 
 203 
 
 Baruch vi. 19 
 
 444 
 
 
 Matthew. 
 
 
 i. 
 
 18-20 
 
 262, 462 
 
 ii. 
 
 15 
 
 358 
 
 iii. 
 
 16 
 
 695 
 
 iv. 
 
 4 
 
 260 
 
 x. 
 
 8 
 
 516 
 
 
 34, 35 
 
 688 
 
 xii. 
 
 34 
 
 688 
 
 xviii. 
 
 10 
 
 116 
 
 xxiii. 
 
 
 662 
 
 
 24 
 
 687 
 
 .. 
 
 33 
 
 688 
 
 xxiv. 
 
 
 667 
 
 
 34 
 
 667 
 
 xxvi. 
 
 53 
 
 116 
 
 xx vii. 
 
 19 
 
 459 
 
 •• 
 
 66 
 
 52 
 
 
 Mark. 
 
 
 i. 
 
 10 
 
 695 
 
 xi. 
 
 13 
 
 250 
 
 xiii. 
 
 .. . 
 
 667 
 
 xvi. 
 
 17 
 
 516 
 
 
 Luke. 
 
 
 i. 11. 
 
 , 22, 63 
 
 462 
 
 
 35 
 
 262 
 
 Luke. 
 
 Chapter 
 
 i. 
 
 Verse 
 
 66 
 
 
 Page 
 
 261 
 
 ii. 
 
 24 
 
 
 110 
 
 
 40-52 
 
 
 251 
 
 iii. 
 
 22 
 
 
 695 
 
 xi. 
 
 15 
 
 
 514 
 
 xiii. 
 
 1-3 
 
 
 644 
 
 xxi. 
 
 John. 
 
 
 667 
 
 i. 
 
 18 
 
 
 261 
 
 
 32, 33 
 
 
 695 
 
 ii. 
 
 14, 16 
 
 
 110, 405 
 
 
 20 
 
 
 521 
 
 iii. 
 
 19-21 
 
 
 448 
 
 iv. 
 
 23 
 
 
 622 
 
 XX. 
 
 23 
 
 
 578 
 
 
 Acts. 
 
 
 
 iv. 
 
 13 
 
 
 671 
 
 vii. 
 
 22 
 
 
 195 
 
 viii. 
 
 10 
 
 
 32 
 
 xii. 
 
 11 
 
 
 261 
 
 xiii. 
 
 22 
 
 
 431 
 
 xvii. 
 
 26 
 
 
 460 
 
 xviii. 
 
 13-15 
 
 
 661 
 
 xix. 
 
 
 
 396 
 
 
 13,14 
 
 
 515 
 
 xxii. 
 
 22 
 
 
 661 
 
 xxiii. 
 
 9 
 
 
 246 
 
 xxiv. 
 
 5 
 
 
 66i 
 
 
 Romans. 
 
 
 
 i. 
 
 26, 27 
 
 
 114 
 
 xii. 
 
 9 
 
 
 267 
 
 xiv. 
 
 18 
 
 
 58 
 
 xvi. 
 
 5 
 
 
 58 
 
 
 1 Corinthians. 
 
 
 ix. 
 
 13 
 
 
 552 
 
 xii. 
 
 4, 5,6 
 
 
 322 
 
 
 9 
 
 
 516 
 
 xiii. 
 
 4 
 
 
 18 
 
 xiv. 
 
 8 
 
 
 674 
 
 
 Galatians. 
 
 
 iv. 
 
 9-11 
 
 
 649 
 
725 
 
 
 Ephesians. 
 
 
 
 1 Peteb. 
 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 Page 
 
 Chapter 
 
 Verse 
 
 Page 
 
 vi. 
 
 12 
 
 250 
 
 iii. 
 
 6 
 
 194 
 
 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 250 
 
 
 COLOSSIANS. 
 
 649 
 
 
 2 Peter. 
 
 
 ii. 
 
 15 
 
 i. 
 
 21 
 
 666 
 
 1 
 
 Thessalonians. 
 
 
 
 Revelations. 
 
 
 V. 
 
 5 
 
 449 
 
 i. 
 
 13 
 
 31 
 
 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 261 
 
 
 2 Timothy. 
 
 
 vi. 
 
 2 
 
 577 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 469 
 
 ii. 
 
 18 
 
 668 
 
 
 8 
 
 181 
 
 iii. 
 
 6 
 
 688 
 
 vii. 
 
 1, 2 
 
 58 
 
 
 16 
 
 666, 667 
 
 ix. 
 
 11 
 
 248 
 
 
 
 
 xii. 
 
 3 
 
 469 
 
 
 Hebrews. 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 249 
 
 i. 
 
 7 
 
 58 
 
 xiii. 
 
 18 
 
 651 
 
 vi. 
 
 13 
 
 482 
 
 xvii. 
 
 3 
 
 469 
 
 ix. 
 
 7 
 
 283 
 
 xix. 
 
 12 
 
 259 
 
 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 58 
 
 
 James. 
 
 
 XX. 
 
 12 
 
 256 
 
 i. 
 
 27 
 
 624 
 
 xxii. 
 
 15 
 
 382 
 
INDEX II. 
 
 HEBREW PROPER NAMES. 
 
 W 
 
 
 Page 
 
 173 
 
 □ibsjaw 
 
 
 Page 
 
 195 
 
 IS* 
 
 
 180 
 
 arras* 
 
 
 184 
 
 aaw 
 
 
 180, 211 
 
 bis* 
 
 
 182 
 
 paaw 
 
 
 181 
 
 rrasmi'a bis* 
 
 
 182 
 
 jbiaw 
 
 
 67, 182 
 
 □'paa bast 
 
 
 182 
 
 'aw 
 
 
 183, 637 
 
 nbinp bas* 
 
 
 182 
 
 bwpW 
 
 
 185 
 
 □;p bas* 
 
 
 182 
 
 F]DW’aW 
 
 
 184 
 
 □'asp bas* 
 
 
 183 
 
 bjapW 
 
 
 186 
 
 D'P'ttjnr bas* 
 
 
 183 
 
 fl'aw 
 
 
 185 
 
 m 
 
 
 190, 468, 637 
 
 si'aw 
 
 t • -: 
 
 
 185 
 
 awn jaw 
 
 
 468 
 
 JT1» 
 
 
 183, 184, 188 
 
 aaaw 
 
 
 188 
 
 HSTTOW 
 
 
 187 
 
 yaw 
 
 
 183 
 
 wn'3« 
 
 
 187 
 
 jsaw 
 
 
 629 
 
 • -: 
 
 
 187 
 
 aaw 
 
 
 55 
 
 banaw 
 
 
 653 
 
 nrnas* 
 
 
 191 
 
 bai'aw 
 
 
 187 
 
 Tnas* 
 
 
 195 
 
 a^'aw 
 
 
 190 
 
 □aaw 
 
 
 191 
 
 btD'aW 
 
 T * -S 
 
 
 190 
 
 was* 
 
 
 206 
 
 □jaw 
 
 
 188 
 
 aaw 
 
 
 206 
 
 bWO'aW 
 
 
 188 
 
 a^aw 
 
 
 206 
 
 ajbp'aw 
 
 
 188 
 
 □Paw 
 
 
 227, 354, 472 
 
 aia'aw 
 
 
 188 
 
 aw 
 
 
 199 
 
 Dtfi'aw 
 
 
 188 
 
 bwaiw 
 
 
 203 
 
 aapw 
 
 
 188 
 
 law 
 
 
 199 
 
 rjDwpw 
 
 
 184, 469 
 
 nast 
 
 
 199 
 
 aw'aw 
 
 
 186 
 
 iaw 
 
 
 629 
 
 fiabspaw 
 
 
 184 
 
 □iaw 
 
 
 469 
 
 !'3W 
 
 
 . 69, 180, 188 
 
 W 
 
 
 204, 549 
 
 DlpW 
 
 
 180, 188 
 
 □nbiw 
 
 
 205 
 
 atf'aw 
 
 
 189 
 
 wPaw 
 
 
 204 
 
 pti'aw 
 
 
 189 
 
 □aw 
 
 
 200, 203, 469 
 
 aro^aa 
 
 
 189 
 
 nmw 
 
 
 203 
 
 nti'aw 
 
 
 188 
 
 ’paw 
 
 
 203 
 
 Dbbti'aw 
 
 
 189 
 
 rrpaw 
 
 
 203 
 
728 
 
 IT T - 
 
 Page 
 
 204 
 
 
 203 
 
 n 
 
 204 
 
 
 205 
 
 
 205 
 
 D|7'3 1t « 
 
 205 
 
 DT3*TM 
 
 205 
 
 "HM 
 
 204, 470 
 
 "HM 
 
 203 
 
 
 205 
 
 Tima 
 
 470 
 
 in« 
 
 207 
 
 rprrst 
 
 136 
 
 «jn« 
 
 207 
 
 nrrw 
 
 472 
 
 rnn» 
 
 210 
 
 nst'bnw 
 
 210 
 
 rn'bnN 
 
 210 
 
 nm'brrN 
 
 210 
 
 ]Yirw 
 
 . 66, 175 
 
 firaj 
 
 176 
 
 
 499 
 
 *jT»n Vim 
 
 507 
 
 
 66 
 
 “n« 
 
 94 
 
 “riN 
 
 94 
 
 »21M 
 
 507 
 
 -fan ni2iM 
 
 318 
 
 rrpiM 
 
 317 
 
 JIM 
 
 197, 198, 199 
 
 INTTM 
 
 207 
 
 ]|nM 
 
 207 
 
 ■nro* 
 
 472 
 
 nin« 
 
 210 
 
 
 212 
 
 ■jnst 
 
 . 32, 207, 212, 628 
 
 in« 
 
 32 
 
 ’THM 
 
 207 
 
 innM 
 
 199 
 
 nnmt 
 
 207 
 
 DlfTM 
 
 212 
 
 roro* 
 
 212 
 
 >n** 
 
 472 
 
 ’HM 
 
 Page 
 
 207 
 
 QM'HM 
 
 208 
 
 >>rpnM 
 
 208 
 
 ■nrrrrM 
 
 • -s 
 
 208 
 
 vn« 
 
 : - 
 
 209 
 
 TirrTN 
 
 v. ■ -: 
 
 208 
 
 
 210 
 
 TiVmt 
 
 208 
 
 niD'n« 
 
 209 
 
 Tjbp'nM 
 
 209 
 
 fn'rTM 
 
 208 
 
 yrn'nM 
 
 208 
 
 |VTM 
 
 208 
 
 
 209 
 
 D»VHM 
 
 209 
 
 Trnp'nM 
 
 210 
 
 "IJP'HM 
 
 208 
 
 DjpnM 
 
 208 
 
 D^nM 
 
 209 
 
 srrnM 
 
 209 
 
 nwnM 
 
 210 
 
 "ittJ’nM 
 
 210 
 
 tefVHM 
 
 210 
 
 ibn« 
 
 210 
 
 
 210 
 
 MnnnM 
 
 199 
 
 ’2DI1M 
 
 207 
 
 “in# 
 
 207 
 
 nn« 
 
 94 
 
 rnnM 
 
 207 
 
 Vnro* 
 
 207 
 
 ttJiiTOnM 
 
 207 
 
 “YtOM 
 
 314 
 
 ni’M 
 
 688 
 
 blVM 
 
 653 
 
 TtaPH 
 
 629 
 
 
 215 
 
 
 . 67,215 
 
 ]iV« 
 
 215, 231 
 
 nib'M 
 
 214, 228 
 
 dVm 
 
 214 
 
 IVn . 
 
 484 
 
 rriV» 
 
 473, 484 
 
729 
 
 nb s w 
 
 Page 
 
 473 
 
 D'Q’« 
 
 484 
 
 
 652 
 
 >rv« 
 
 316 
 
 bSPITN 
 
 713 
 
 ygrvx 
 
 “GH 
 
 712 
 
 195 
 
 
 199 
 
 ■©'pM 
 
 197 
 
 rnpps! 
 
 198 
 
 ba 
 
 214, 549 
 
 »b« 
 
 216, 473 
 
 
 n'ba 
 
 CT’bg 
 
 rp’bN 
 
 •Ytt’bH 
 
 W’bN 
 
 DS’ba 
 
 ip’bN 
 
 bD’ba 
 
 ^nbD’ba 
 
 220 
 473 
 473 
 473, 629 
 214, 225, 226 
 214, 216 
 
 
 . 484 
 
 pb« 
 
 484 
 
 rnb» 
 
 228 
 
 M^b« 
 
 231 
 
 ’nbb» 
 
 228 
 
 natbsi 
 
 484 
 
 )2nb« 
 
 474 
 
 XI 
 
 JT" 
 
 X 
 
 n 
 
 474 
 
 
 475 
 
 nn»’bK 
 
 475 
 
 TT& 
 
 475 
 
 srbsi 
 
 474 
 
 220, 475, 629 
 475 
 475 
 
 474 
 
 475 
 480 
 475 
 475 
 475 
 475 
 480 
 480 
 480 
 
 Ebp'ba 
 
 •viS’bg 
 
 ■j^rba 
 
 n^b« 
 
 iti^ba 
 
 saic’bK 
 
 TTC’bw 
 
 5W’b« 
 
 i^’b« 
 
 5>Q'tt) , b« 
 
 yMj>b« 
 
 ■0QTT)’b« 
 
 Db« 
 
 -ntoba 
 
 D-?pb« 
 
 DS>3b« 
 
 jn3b« 
 
 “»Db« 
 
 n»b« 
 
 rnsba 
 
 >mbw 
 
 wb»b» 
 
 ntosba 
 
 r)b« 
 
 wsb« 
 
 b^Eb« 
 
 Ipsbsi 
 
 nspba 
 
 >ttjpb« 
 
 ibinbw 
 
 npnba 
 
 Jpipba 
 
 D« 
 
 rraa 
 
 on« 
 
 n:?« 
 
 Page 
 
 480 
 
 483 
 
 483 
 
 480 
 
 474 
 
 475 
 
 482 
 
 481 
 
 483 
 475 
 
 482 
 ; 480 
 
 482 
 227 
 231 
 . 227 
 
 229 
 484 
 484 
 484 
 . 473 
 
 473, 474 
 484 
 . 474 
 
 474 
 474 
 230 
 
 166, 286 
 484 
 68, 484 
 
 483 
 
 484 
 484 
 484 
 484 
 231 
 
 232, 235 
 66, 236,239 
 241 
 234 
 239 
 . 72, 232 
 . 72, 232 
 
 AAA 
 
730 
 
 pOM 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 72 
 
 
 
 
 242 
 
 rrspN 
 
 
 
 234 
 
 "M3N 
 
 
 
 658 
 
 
 
 
 72 
 
 
 
 
 658 
 
 rrnpN 
 
 
 
 . 72, 232 
 
 bEnpa 
 
 
 
 241 
 
 »no» 
 
 
 
 234 
 
 i* 
 
 
 
 65 
 
 >0N 
 
 
 
 82 
 
 ETON 
 
 
 
 486 
 
 ’3M 
 
 
 
 82 
 
 «D« 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 TpN 
 
 
 
 312 
 
 TODW 
 
 
 
 312 
 
 1B3p« 
 
 
 
 312 
 
 P)D« 
 
 
 
 184, 301 
 
 «nBD« 
 
 
 
 312 
 
 "IDN 
 
 
 
 312 
 
 prnpN 
 
 
 
 489 
 
 "inpN 
 
 
 . . 
 
 492 
 
 i\dn 
 
 
 
 487 
 
 pE>N 
 
 
 
 272 
 
 y?DN 
 
 
 
 487 
 
 n s p'i dbn 
 
 
 
 487 
 
 npx 
 
 
 
 487 
 
 nnpsi 
 
 
 
 487 
 
 moN 
 
 
 
 488 
 
 as« 
 
 
 
 67 
 
 pp« 
 
 
 
 . 67, 507 
 
 sapN 
 
 
 
 67 
 
 tea 
 
 
 
 317 
 
 37Vb^» 
 
 
 
 317 
 
 "C?N 
 
 
 
 519 
 
 ip« 
 
 
 
 196 
 
 N}N 
 
 
 
 275, 282 
 
 
 
 
 282 
 
 an» 
 
 
 
 275, 489 
 
 bNTlN 
 
 
 
 89 
 
 VwaiH 
 
 
 
 89 
 
 nizna 
 
 
 
 299 
 
 *r« 
 
 
 
 278 
 
 JPlN 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 288 
 
 aa^N 
 
 
 
 282 
 
 TIN 
 
 
 
 280 
 
 p“|N 
 
 
 
 282 
 
 TON 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 TIN 
 
 
 
 298 
 
 rraviN 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 pN 
 
 
 
 283 
 
 H3^» 
 
 
 
 277 
 
 niN 
 
 
 
 276 
 
 
 
 
 276 
 
 bana 
 
 
 
 282 
 
 ’?■?*? 
 
 
 
 282 
 
 NnT^N 
 
 
 
 282 
 
 rn« 
 
 
 
 282 
 
 Tjin'N 
 
 
 
 283 
 
 ’pn« 
 
 
 
 283 
 
 V* 
 
 
 
 489 
 
 ’!PN 
 
 
 
 279 
 
 
 
 
 282 
 
 D^IN 
 
 
 
 276 
 
 ’3pN 
 
 
 
 298 
 
 m 
 
 
 
 276 
 
 fly* 
 
 
 
 298 
 
 pN 
 
 
 
 298 
 
 IpN 
 
 
 
 298 
 
 TCUDB1N 
 
 
 
 298 
 
 yiN 
 
 
 
 465 
 
 NpN 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 TDT1N 
 
 
 
 276 
 
 \D*]N 
 
 
 
 276 
 
 NnpiPnrnN 
 
 
 
 298 
 
 VDN 
 
 
 
 68 
 
 'ivtytix 
 
 
 
 301 
 
 bN"|'pN 
 
 
 
 312 
 
 
 
 
 303 
 
 ]|iPn 
 
 
 
 303, 490 
 
 sja^pN 
 
 
 
 303 
 
 toasjN 
 
 
 
 303, 491 
 
 niia5« 
 
 
 
 68, 304 
 
 7TON 
 
 
 
 480 
 
 •vntfN 
 
 
 
 312 
 
 NQ'ttJN 
 
 
 
 310 
 

 781 
 
 riw 
 
 ■iaauiM 
 
 rfolpN 
 
 napw 
 
 UBtiM 
 
 pbpps* 
 
 “V$N 
 
 rniEK 
 
 nbtfvaft* 
 
 niPa 
 
 biNPiipN 
 
 pntp« 
 
 rrbntps! 
 
 rnnipst 
 
 n« 
 
 b^ana 
 
 'na 
 
 'ana 
 
 m 
 
 nna 
 
 a 
 
 D'baa 
 
 *naa 
 D'ba “\aa 
 rnaa 
 rfnaa 
 naa 
 >in *nb laa 
 *35 
 baa 
 naa 
 anaa 
 ]naa 
 aama 
 -na 
 rrna 
 
 m 
 
 npna 
 
 T&a 
 
 Page 
 
 67 
 
 pna 
 
 . 67,491 
 
 m 
 
 304 
 
 ’HI 
 
 303, 491 
 
 nria 
 
 312 
 
 y-^a 
 
 302, 491 
 
 •via 
 
 310 
 
 rrnVii 
 
 . 67,310 
 
 babn 
 
 . 77, 304 
 
 m 
 
 . 78,307 
 
 aroa 
 
 301 
 
 tywra 
 
 77, 302 
 
 moa 
 
 491 
 
 ' m 
 
 68, 491 
 
 D>:iQa 
 
 491 
 
 
 302 
 
 rrva 
 
 174 
 
 rn 
 
 492 
 
 pa-rva 
 
 316 
 
 b«-n>a 
 
 492 
 
 bsan-rva 
 
 492 
 
 b«a7«"n' , a 
 
 365 ptfmm 
 
 319 
 
 wrrva 
 
 rnavva 
 
 227 
 
 *virn i a 
 
 340 
 
 babrrva 
 
 22, 341 
 
 baiaa'rva 
 
 340 
 
 a^nbaTira 
 
 341 
 
 pw-n\a 
 
 341 
 
 ^n-rva 
 
 341 
 
 bjarrrva 
 
 340 
 
 D^rrn’a 
 
 339 
 
 porn^ 
 
 331 
 
 pn-n^a 
 
 369 
 
 njarrrva 
 
 369 
 
 jWirn'i 
 
 369 
 
 ■janri'a 
 
 369 
 
 nto'^srrva 
 
 340 
 
 nrn'a 
 
 340 
 
 nnarma 
 
 340 
 
 rnaab-rva 
 
 369 
 
 onb-rva 
 
 90, 374 
 
 rns?b'n'a 
 
 Page 
 
 19 
 
 380 
 
 339 
 
 378 
 
 374 
 
 197 
 
 370 
 
 367 
 
 368 
 
 371 
 332 
 347 
 
 347, 367 
 367 
 470 
 
 22 
 
 332, 347 
 349 
 
 351 
 
 352 
 349 
 
 349 
 
 350 
 349, 350 
 
 352 
 
 353 
 
 353 
 
 351 
 
 351 
 
 354 
 
 352 
 349, 354 
 
 351 
 
 354 
 
 354 
 
 355 
 
 354 
 
 355 
 350 
 353 
 
 357 
 
 358 
 355 
 
732 
 
 krtVOTlTa 
 ]irn-rva 
 nar n-n\a 
 rnaano’Ti'a 
 n?o?"n'l 
 
 p»TO 
 
 rnoir'rra 
 
 n3?;n'a 
 
 “IjMJTPjJ 
 
 nn^rrrrva 
 
 «bBTV& 
 
 nirsfrva 
 
 prm 
 
 •voriva 
 
 airn'n’a 
 
 «cvn>a 
 
 l*r™ 
 
 rrB^n’n'a 
 
 ttjprTrva 
 
 menTva 
 
 rntoa 
 
 D>aa 
 
 "oa 
 
 roa 
 
 ra 
 
 ba 
 
 ]TOba 
 
 naba 
 
 & 
 
 *nfc 
 
 nba 
 
 nrta 
 
 }nba 
 
 •«««*$! 
 
 bb| 
 
 nrba 
 
 pj? 
 
 “iswttjba 
 
 nna 
 
 b?*?| 
 
 Page 
 
 359 
 
 359 
 
 359 
 
 359 
 
 359 
 
 351 
 
 349 
 
 349 
 
 351 
 
 349 
 
 361 
 
 361 
 
 361 
 364 
 
 362 
 
 362 
 
 363 
 363 
 
 363 
 
 364 
 340 
 373 
 
 340 
 373 
 369 
 
 341 
 
 331 
 369 
 369 
 369 
 
 332 
 369 
 369 
 344 
 344 
 344 
 331 
 
 331, 369 
 
 333 
 
 334 
 369 
 
 211, 335 
 369 
 
 rnm 
 
 ^rt» |a 
 
 'un 
 nnit || 
 I? 
 
 m i? 
 
 71 
 
 7.| 
 
 wra? 
 
 to 
 
 n TO 
 
 |i?^-7| 
 
 W331 
 
 awaa 
 
 'tar || 
 nniDa 
 ntoa 
 >na 
 ntoa 
 wa 
 bp 
 |n'M bra 
 nna bra 
 la bra 
 nbra 
 ]torj bra 
 nibra 
 aaa) bra 
 ||7 bra 
 "nsm bra 
 |inan bra 
 rTbra 
 rrbra 
 D'bra 
 •pro bra 
 airs bra 
 D’^s bra 
 |iD 2 bra 
 rrtfbti bra 
 nbra 
 
 T-: - 
 
 Page 
 
 335 
 344 
 83, 346 
 344 
 370 
 
 346 
 
 344 
 
 345 
 335 
 378 
 344 
 
 344, 599 
 344 
 
 344 
 
 345 
 
 345 
 370 
 344 
 
 347 
 347 
 347 
 
 346 
 372, 599 
 
 320 
 
 375 
 
 322 
 
 324 
 
 330 
 
 324 
 330 
 
 328 
 
 325 
 325 
 325 
 330 
 330 
 330 
 325 
 
 325 
 
 326 
 
 329 
 
 327 
 
 330 
 
788 
 
 non bfca 
 ]33a 
 N3pa 
 na33a 
 nisi 
 w^a 
 
 n'NP^i 
 
 rnn^a 
 
 ’sa 
 
 bsa 
 
 babsa 
 
 npaa 
 
 12a 
 
 rma 
 
 P«p s a 
 
 rrpapa 
 
 *?_?P* 
 
 ’pa 
 
 j?pa 
 
 "'I 
 
 ^nbaia 
 
 *na 
 
 pMbaipNia 
 
 n«’ia 
 
 iia 
 
 'T* 
 
 nrnia 
 
 nmi 
 
 ’bra 
 
 D’-wna 
 
 na 
 
 nwa 
 
 rrna 
 
 ntf’ia 
 
 n’ia 
 
 baaaa 
 
 naia 
 
 rraia 
 
 3 rraia 
 
 PK 
 
 D3pia 
 
 rail 
 
 Page 
 
 328 
 
 33t3ia 
 
 346 
 
 nia 
 
 330 
 
 nnia 
 
 330 
 
 ’rna 
 
 330 
 
 ■ana 
 
 331 
 
 rratoa 
 
 331 
 
 obipa 
 
 341 
 
 niaipa 
 
 367 
 
 rb 
 
 364 
 
 ifoa 
 
 367 
 
 na 
 
 373 
 
 bsfina 
 
 368 
 
 nb^ina 
 
 374 
 
 rrna 
 
 332 
 
 n'arna 
 
 332 
 
 siurra 
 
 332 
 
 33ia3"na 
 
 375 
 
 
 331 
 
 3 
 
 375 
 
 N3 
 
 197, 335 
 
 b*«>w 
 
 422 
 
 13 
 
 336 
 
 13 
 
 347 
 
 3313 
 
 346 
 
 ’13 
 
 346 
 
 ’23’ia 
 
 337 
 
 D’13 
 
 347 
 
 baa 
 
 370 
 
 3313 
 
 337 
 
 «»aa 
 
 332 
 
 n^ia 
 
 347 
 
 133313 
 
 346 
 
 113 
 
 336 
 
 111 
 
 336, 347 
 
 banii 
 
 347 
 
 -pni? 
 
 336 
 
 13 
 
 346 
 
 1313 
 
 346 
 
 1313 
 
 346 
 
 ’13 
 
 336 
 
 ’13 
 
 336 
 
 bw’ia 
 
 370 
 
 bia 
 
 Page 
 
 370 
 
 347 
 
 347 
 
 347 
 
 370 
 337 
 
 371 
 337 
 337 
 368 
 339 
 364 
 364 
 371 
 339 
 339 
 339 
 
 533 
 
 533 
 
 540 
 
 211 
 
 549 
 
 538 
 533 
 
 550 
 
 539 
 
 539 
 69 
 
 540 
 
 540 
 . 69,540 
 
 539 
 534, 540 
 
 533 
 
 541 
 
 534 
 . 541 
 
 539 
 
 535 
 69, 535 
 
 535 
 
 541 
 

 734 
 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 7i')ia 
 
 
 
 539 
 
 □'ina 
 
 
 537 
 
 '2i)ia 
 
 
 
 541 
 
 1103 
 
 
 548 
 
 ]is?ia 
 
 
 
 69, 541 
 
 ')na 
 
 
 539 
 
 013713 
 
 
 
 541 
 
 bN'boa 
 
 
 537 
 
 □3713 
 
 
 
 541 
 
 103 
 
 
 551 
 
 
 
 
 539 
 
 innoa 
 
 
 539 
 
 71773 
 
 
 
 539 
 
 » 
 
 
 52 
 
 niiia 
 
 
 
 539 
 
 21333.' 
 
 
 539 
 
 crniia 
 
 
 
 539 
 
 nao 
 
 
 548 
 
 3ia 
 
 
 
 549 
 
 finpa 
 
 
 548 
 
 313 
 
 
 
 550 
 
 nrwa, written n373 
 
 548 
 
 )P 
 
 
 
 551 
 
 wa 
 
 
 533 
 
 □;ia 
 
 
 
 539 
 
 117373 
 
 
 533 
 
 bia 
 
 
 
 95 
 
 DPI373 
 
 
 637 
 
 ]bia 
 
 
 
 551 
 
 »13 
 
 
 539 
 
 '313 
 
 
 
 52, 551 
 
 
 
 537 
 
 113 
 
 
 
 52, 551 
 
 'ipaia 
 
 
 548 
 
 *>»3 113 
 
 
 
 551 
 
 7113 
 
 
 62 
 
 □13 
 
 
 
 538 
 
 '113 
 
 
 540 
 
 37.13 
 
 
 
 538 
 
 □'•113 
 
 
 540 
 
 113 
 
 
 
 640 
 
 '013 
 
 
 537 
 
 '113 
 
 
 
 548 
 
 113 
 
 
 540 
 
 '1113 
 
 
 
 539 
 
 11713 
 
 
 69 
 
 □na 
 
 
 
 535 
 
 J1U713 
 
 
 62, 540 
 
 ina 
 
 
 
 536 
 
 111173 
 
 
 540 
 
 n»a 
 
 
 
 540 
 
 □tfia 
 
 
 540 
 
 jino 
 
 
 
 541 
 
 IV* 
 
 
 55i 
 
 'in'a 
 
 
 
 539 
 
 NB1173 
 
 
 548 
 
 )o 
 
 
 
 186, 541 
 
 213 
 
 
 88, 583 
 
 na'a 
 
 
 
 548 
 
 'na 
 
 
 548 
 
 1'3 
 
 
 
 52 
 
 □'na 
 
 
 548 
 
 ^'3 
 
 
 
 540 
 
 IDll'213 
 
 
 538 
 
 373)3 
 
 
 
 542 
 
 ina 
 
 
 540 
 
 )3ba 
 
 
 
 536, 542 
 
 jioi-na 
 
 
 538 
 
 riba 
 
 
 
 548 
 
 
 
 
 nba 
 
 
 
 169 
 
 aai 
 
 
 463 
 
 b')3 
 
 
 
 536 
 
 ini 
 
 
 468 
 
 □')a 
 
 
 
 536 
 
 711131 
 
 
 444 
 
 □ 7)3 
 
 
 
 551 
 
 1'31 
 
 
 444 
 
 5a 
 
 
 
 536 
 
 n)3i 
 
 
 453 
 
 '))a 
 
 
 
 541 
 
 □')l1 
 
 
 454 
 
 137)3 
 
 
 
 542 
 
 n)3i 
 
 
 453 
 
 1^)3 
 
 
 
 542 
 
 71131 
 
 
 420, 444 
 
735 
 
 nan 
 
 ntfan 
 
 fP 
 
 -n 
 
 PI 
 
 axil 
 
 -\yi 
 
 rv\ 
 
 nw 
 
 ptonai 
 
 Tr 
 
 NTH 
 
 anr'? 
 
 p'QH 
 
 rtaaoH 
 
 nan 
 
 •(!&* 
 
 ran 
 
 TH 
 
 rfn 
 
 n’bi 
 
 tt : 
 
 !\n'^ 
 
 $bn 
 
 rt2Qi. 
 
 ptooi 
 
 p 
 
 nri 
 
 nan:n 
 
 bN'a’i 
 
 p: njj 
 b*ww 
 
 nbp^ 
 
 -»P/T. 
 
 -n 
 
 y-m 
 
 Mjm 
 
 Page 
 
 445 
 
 paplTH 
 
 420 
 
 5>TJ 
 
 372, 420, 528 
 
 VW- 
 
 420 
 
 jVafr 
 
 429 
 
 
 445 
 
 m 
 
 463 
 
 68 
 
 n 
 
 463, 464 
 
 ban 
 
 431, 463, 464 
 
 b»an 
 
 430 
 
 nan 
 
 464 
 
 *«n 
 
 420 
 
 ’an 
 
 463 
 
 iS*7 
 
 464 
 
 nan 
 
 455 
 
 □wan 
 
 457 
 
 inn 
 
 455 
 
 ipipn 
 
 455 
 
 JtoTpn 
 
 455 
 
 aniin 
 
 457 
 
 «in 
 
 456 
 
 ncnn 
 
 429 
 
 Tin 
 
 430 
 
 ■aurnn 
 
 446 
 
 Nan 
 
 445 
 
 lin 
 
 445 
 
 nvrin 
 
 445 
 
 rrnan 
 
 455 
 
 ananan 
 
 420 
 
 irian 
 
 455 
 
 nnin 
 
 420 
 
 onan 
 
 420 
 
 aoin 
 
 429 
 
 -nn 
 
 456 
 
 smjin 
 
 420 
 
 s\rnn 
 
 429 
 
 nTaijan 
 
 449 
 
 ■anan 
 
 455 
 
 
 445 
 
 bb’n 
 
 463 
 
 bbn 
 
 429 
 
 aiinabn 
 
 429 
 
 obn 
 
 Page 
 
 420 
 
 429 
 
 429 
 456 
 
 430 
 429, 464 
 
 551 
 
 552 
 552 
 360 
 569 
 569 
 354 
 554 
 554 
 553 
 553 
 
 553 
 
 554 
 582 
 553 
 553 
 553 
 187 
 
 187, 585 
 585 
 585 
 585 
 585 
 
 585 
 686 
 
 586 
 178, 586 
 
 594 
 587, 595 
 
 594 
 
 595 
 345 
 583 
 
 554, 582 
 555 
 569 
 
786 
 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 Dn 
 
 T 
 
 
 
 555 
 
 jinn 
 
 
 69, 564 
 
 ntfnn 
 
 X , -s 
 
 
 
 556 
 
 nan 
 
 
 554 
 
 npbnn 
 
 
 
 556 
 
 aim 
 
 
 554 
 
 "linn 
 
 t 
 
 
 
 72 
 
 nrr 
 
 
 654 
 
 -on 
 
 
 
 555 
 
 ’an 
 
 
 554 
 
 
 
 
 579 
 
 rrnn 
 
 
 554 
 
 nsn 
 
 
 
 583 
 
 man 
 
 
 554 
 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 nbpn 
 
 
 586 
 
 wn 
 
 
 
 579 
 
 nnn 
 
 
 553 
 
 yipn 
 
 
 
 554 
 
 nnn 
 
 
 554 
 
 -in 
 
 
 
 586 
 
 bin 
 
 
 553 
 
 mon 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 '’bin 
 
 
 554 
 
 nnn 
 
 
 
 178 
 
 bpin 
 
 
 582 
 
 nnn 
 
 
 
 586 
 
 iin 
 
 
 553 
 
 TO. 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 iiin 
 
 
 554 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 XDlh 
 
 
 585 
 
 Dpn 
 
 
 
 581 
 
 ntiin 
 
 
 553 
 
 otin 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 niin 
 
 
 585 
 
 TO 
 
 
 
 559 
 
 nm 
 
 
 94, 495, 497, 598 
 
 nisbbsn 
 
 
 
 561 
 
 nn 
 
 
 585 
 
 npnn 
 
 
 
 559 
 
 nbnrr 
 
 
 559 
 
 
 
 
 
 bin 
 
 
 595 
 
 in n'lnrn 
 
 
 
 152 
 
 DDin 
 
 
 595 
 
 
 
 
 
 ppm 
 
 
 595 
 
 21) 
 
 
 
 328 
 
 -nn 
 
 
 595 
 
 nii. 
 
 
 
 71 
 
 nan 
 
 
 596 
 
 n«2T 
 
 
 
 613 
 
 nn 
 
 
 596 
 
 Ji"i3} 
 
 
 
 303 
 
 nnm 
 
 
 584 
 
 B'^T 
 
 
 
 613 
 
 •jnnrn 
 
 
 559 
 
 -DT 
 
 67, 
 
 201, 303, 496, 
 
 602 
 
 rraftn 
 
 
 596 
 
 "ID) 
 
 
 
 71 
 
 ’piTT 
 
 
 596 
 
 ]*np) 
 
 
 
 71 
 
 D’ttnn 
 
 
 596 
 
 
 
 
 
 Dtiton 
 
 
 596 
 
 n 
 
 
 
 551 
 
 -I'nin 
 
 
 595 
 
 «in 
 
 
 
 55 
 
 Dnin 
 
 
 595 
 
 n;nn 
 
 
 
 552 
 
 b«)n 
 
 
 559 
 
 22h 
 
 
 
 585 
 
 iin 
 
 
 561 
 
 "fan 
 
 
 
 583 
 
 
 
 561 
 
 rrirr 
 
 
 552, 
 
 585 
 
 rrm 
 
 
 559 
 
 nnsin 
 
 
 
 552 
 
 ■jinn 
 
 
 582 
 
 pipirr 
 
 
 
 552 
 
 nm 
 
 
 582 
 
 inn 
 
 
 
 69 
 
 ’pm 
 
 
 582 
 
 nirr 
 
 
 552, 563 
 
 vrpm 
 
 T' • t • 
 
 
 . . 582 
 
737 
 
 tthtan 
 
 b'tsn 
 
 Honpn 
 
 V 
 
 b^n 
 
 bn 
 
 jbn 
 
 nvn 
 
 nbpn 
 
 n$an 
 
 ptoan 
 
 abn 
 
 *«n 
 
 abrr 
 
 nabn 
 
 ■pabn 
 
 nnbn 
 
 t: '*. 
 
 pbrr 
 
 ■pbn 
 
 nbn 
 
 nbn 
 
 bnbn 
 
 >; ?n 
 
 Dbn 
 
 fbn 
 
 ybn 
 
 pbn 
 
 ■•pbn 
 
 njpbn 
 
 npbn 
 
 n^rrnp_bn 
 
 □n 
 
 non 
 
 btfran 
 
 bp^n 
 
 b^nn 
 
 jien 
 
 ninn 
 
 parr 
 
 nppn 
 
 Page 
 
 559 
 559 
 559 
 559 
 95, 554 
 582 
 187, 844 
 
 582 
 
 583 
 553 
 553 
 553 
 187 
 569 
 569 
 569 
 
 60, 569 
 595 
 569 
 70 
 586 
 554 
 569 
 554 
 554 
 
 569 
 579 
 
 570 
 570 
 
 569 
 
 570 
 582 
 570 
 570 
 
 24, 239, 555 
 579 
 556 
 556 
 556 
 556 
 556 
 555, 579 
 595 
 
 cpn 
 npn 
 
 It! 
 
 -nan 
 nan 
 '•nan 
 
 bapn 
 
 pin 
 
 bstpan 
 
 W 
 
 b«aan 
 
 vraan, 
 
 Dan 
 
 •jlnan 
 
 npn 
 
 rrTDrr 
 
 nph 
 
 rnpn 
 
 nan 
 
 D>an 
 • \ 
 
 pan 
 
 nr'san 
 
 nan 
 
 □nan 
 
 nisn 
 
 nrnrpiam 
 
 nprrjiisn 
 
 -n« npn 
 
 rnansn 
 
 niaan 
 
 piabbpn 
 
 bawarnsn 
 
 psn 
 
 ■pnpn 
 
 ninsrt 
 
 nrnn"nVt$n 
 
 jsa'nn"»?n 
 
 npn 
 
 onsn 
 
 npaDnsn 
 
 nraisn 
 
 Page 
 
 233 
 
 555 
 
 579 
 
 580 
 81, 557 
 
 485 
 
 557 
 
 557 
 
 557 
 
 557 
 
 557 
 
 557 
 
 557 
 
 557 
 
 557 
 
 557 
 
 581 
 
 553 
 
 587 
 
 559 
 
 595 
 
 595 
 
 586 
 
 581 
 
 580 
 
 586 
 
 561 
 
 561 
 
 561 
 
 559 
 
 559 
 596 
 561 
 
 560 
 582 
 
 70, 582 
 
 561 
 
 560 
 560 
 582 
 
 561 
 561 
 560 
 
 B B B 
 
738 
 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 N&iprr 
 
 
 
 554 
 
 aita 
 
 
 
 190 
 
 Ppn 
 
 
 
 595 
 
 *?aiD 
 
 
 
 190 
 
 aan 
 
 
 
 587 
 
 pTQ 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 N:riaan 
 
 r : - 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 VlD 
 
 
 
 190 
 
 nan 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 nbto 
 
 
 
 190, 430 
 
 naan 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 bbp 
 
 
 
 190 
 
 rrrrnn 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 □bp 
 
 
 
 337 
 
 rpirr 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 nsto 
 
 X T 
 
 
 
 71 
 
 ]ian 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 
 
 
 pan 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 597 
 
 □nan 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 rp 
 
 
 183, 608-624 
 
 rpn 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 
 
 
 628 
 
 □an 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 
 
 
 698 
 
 □an 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 vnsg 
 
 
 
 698 
 
 npan 
 
 
 
 587 
 
 aw 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 pnan 
 
 
 
 70, 581 
 
 n*pN’ 
 
 
 
 698 
 
 Mian 
 
 
 
 248 
 
 nn»' 
 
 ■ITI 
 
 
 
 629 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 dw 
 
 
 
 629 
 
 D'aah 
 
 
 
 587 
 
 ana; 
 
 
 
 628 
 
 acaan 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 rs 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 Dan 
 
 
 
 581 
 
 ba; 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 p]an 
 
 
 
 557 
 
 DS’ba' 
 
 x j : • 
 
 
 
 628 
 
 ©an 
 
 
 
 581 
 
 bwaj 
 
 
 
 599 
 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 nga» 
 
 
 
 599 
 
 □'pan 
 
 
 
 38J, 395 
 
 rroa* 
 
 x • :|* 
 
 
 
 629 
 
 n©an 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 rni\ 
 
 
 
 629 
 
 xawn 
 
 
 
 559 
 
 pi: 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 niaapn 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 sirpaaa» 
 
 
 
 629 
 
 na©n 
 
 
 
 559 
 
 □©a’ 
 
 X S • 
 
 
 
 656 
 
 pa©n 
 
 
 
 . 70, 581 
 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 n*a©n 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 b«r 
 
 
 
 656 
 
 nn©n 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 nnay 
 
 
 
 593 
 
 njaaxfln 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 vrbay 
 
 
 
 656 
 
 awn 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 aw 
 
 
 
 608 
 
 wmton 
 
 
 
 559 
 
 $a» 
 
 
 
 693 
 
 D'ttjn 
 
 
 
 596 
 
 nb«a> 
 
 x-» s • 
 
 
 
 629 
 
 □©n 
 
 
 
 558, 559 
 
 ©aa> 
 
 »t : • 
 
 
 
 629 
 
 piapn 
 
 
 
 581 
 
 nT 
 
 
 
 629 
 
 n:£>©n 
 
 
 
 558 
 
 Yr 
 
 
 
 608, 629 
 
 nn 
 
 
 
 582, 584 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 608 
 
 ’nn 
 
 
 
 584 
 
 PC 
 
 
 
 70, 608 
 
 f>w 
 
 
 
 582 
 
 
 
 
 608 
 
 
 
 
 
 prwv 
 
 
 
 630 
 
789 
 
 Page 
 
 'T 
 
 htt 
 
 rrpv 
 
 rrv 
 
 Vgsw 
 
 pnvr 
 
 *fir. 
 
 ?T 
 
 rw 
 
 -min; 
 
 U^ n ’ 
 
 VTbn’ 
 
 pybn; 
 
 D’p;in’ 
 
 min’ 
 
 •t : 
 
 taw 
 
 ruin’ 
 
 ■jnrn’. 
 
 tapin’ 
 
 Hopin’ 
 
 ^in; 
 
 posin’ 
 
 nnbn’ 
 
 t : 
 
 samn; 
 
 sm5irp 
 
 EDMiin’ 
 
 
 
 608 
 
 naprv 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 V- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 nsrr 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 n«v 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 n»v 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 ■tnw 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 656 
 
 ton’ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 608 
 
 
 
 
 
 680 
 
 188 
 
 nan’ 
 
 631 
 
 TTP 
 
 631 
 
 nn; 
 
 625 
 
 n*nn’ 
 
 631 
 
 w 
 
 608, 614 
 
 
 631 
 
 w 
 
 187 
 
 •jnsiin’ 
 
 630 
 
 irkin’ 
 
 630 
 
 baain’ 
 
 613 
 
 ti n> 
 
 631 
 
 nnTP 
 
 714 
 
 w 
 
 631, 653 
 
 DW, 
 
 653 
 
 nw 
 
 ’ . . 715 
 
 nW 
 
 549, 608, 613, 631 
 
 631 
 
 630 
 
 630 
 
 630 
 
 630 
 730 
 
 631 
 930 
 
 696 
 
 697 
 630 
 
 630 
 
 631 
 
 630 
 
 631 
 698 
 631 
 
 iv 
 
 3lV 
 
 tav 
 
 najV 
 
 «ni' 
 
 ]3ni s 
 
 mv 
 
 SH’i’ 
 
 ftp 
 
 D’p;i’ 
 
 a'nj.V 
 
 naab’ 
 
 TV >»2V 
 nnV 
 ni’ 
 nnV 
 rraitiV 
 mpi’ 
 TtpN’ 
 TOBtiSV 
 Dnv 
 tow 
 
 Page 
 
 657 
 
 624 
 
 625 
 688 
 688 
 630 
 689 
 688 
 688 
 688 
 714 
 698 
 698 
 693 
 693 
 715 
 630 
 630 
 630 
 630 
 638 
 
 tav 
 
 631 
 
 )V 
 
 628 
 
 anaV 
 
 630 
 
 nr’ 
 
 26, 110 
 
 ]nr’ 
 
 696 
 
 ^pi’ 
 
 697 
 
 n’DDi’ 
 
 698 
 
 nb«3)i’ 
 
 693 
 
 nvi’ 
 
 689 
 
 nWV 
 
 693 
 
 ttj«V 
 
 688 
 
 pnW 
 
 693 
 
 79 
 
 697 
 
 697 
 
 697 
 
 698 
 698 
 698 
 631 
 698 
 656 
 
740 
 
 
 rrr 
 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 656 
 
 VP 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 629 
 
 rr 
 
 
 
 
 628 
 
 b^r; 
 
 
 
 652 
 
 n^'br 
 
 
 
 
 656 
 
 yw; 
 
 
 
 653 
 
 rraw 
 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 T«’ 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 rrrnr 
 
 
 
 
 715 
 
 
 
 
 653 
 
 
 
 
 
 656 
 
 WJ 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 ■hit 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 ba’tor’ 
 
 
 
 628 
 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 PPtTP 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 OTnn> 
 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 nnr; 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 b«Tr 
 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 b*nr; 
 
 
 
 630, 652 
 
 b«^rr 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 •vs* 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 nnrr 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 
 
 
 653 
 
 fopm; 
 
 
 
 
 570 
 
 W 
 
 
 
 599 
 
 n*pm; 
 
 
 
 
 582 
 
 nbj>; 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 rntrp 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 ObS’ 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 b^rr 
 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 ’^NTT 
 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 a'pr; 
 
 
 
 599 
 
 rprr 
 
 t • : 
 
 
 
 
 630 
 
 nips>; 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 Wftp 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 rnr; 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 ’on; 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 nnihr; 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 ‘warn’ 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 Ytor; 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 bN’sn; 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 bwpr; 
 
 
 
 628 
 
 nnaip; 
 
 
 
 
 698 
 
 n^Q’ 
 
 
 
 698 
 
 nta’ 
 
 T\ 
 
 
 
 
 715 
 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 •WQJ 
 
 
 
 
 652 
 
 *«d; 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 n’bp; 
 
 
 
 
 629 
 
 s-’p; 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 r?: 
 
 
 
 
 599 
 
 tobp; 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 n’ba; 
 
 
 
 
 629 
 
 ns’ 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 ft 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 nnp’ 
 
 
 
 631 
 
 bfcnn; 
 
 
 
 
 631 
 
 nnp; 
 
 
 
 631 
 
 n»’p; 
 
 
 
 
 631 
 
 bNTTfiD’ 
 
 .. ... 
 
 
 
 632 
 
 re 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 war 
 
 
 
 656, 715 
 
 nto; 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 657 
 
 pnsr 
 
 
 
 701 
 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 ns; 
 
 
 
 656 
 
 nap'. 
 
 
 
 
 657 
 
 -ns; 
 
 
 
 715 
 
 sop’ 
 
 
 
 
 657 
 
 basap; 
 
 
 
 631 
 
 nnp; 
 
 
 
 
 658 
 
 nrnp; 
 
 
 
 693 
 
 nto 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 nnto 
 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 bM'mpj 
 
 
 
 631 
 
 n«’ 
 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 m. 
 
 
 
 694 
 
 nap; 
 
 
 
 
 709 
 
 D’p; 
 
 
 
 625 
 
 wood; 
 
 
 
 
 711 
 
 n;pp_; 
 
 
 
 631 
 
 V.pr; 
 
 
 
 
 598 
 
 Drop; 
 
 . 
 
 
 631 
 
741 
 
 D W! 
 
 □»3)£ 
 
 Mjp; 
 
 I^T 
 
 rr*irfv 
 
 aT 
 
 □sit 
 ncrv; 
 tv 
 
 P? 
 
 •wvv 
 
 nvv 
 
 MtiW, 
 
 rrcivv 
 
 Dfatorv 
 
 ITT 
 
 MTV 
 
 DTfV 
 
 bSipl?!'; 
 
 vnT 
 
 >H’T 
 
 2 ’T 
 
 ' 2 'T 
 
 itt 
 
 vt*v 
 
 in>T 
 
 niiTT 
 
 niV'T 
 
 T ; 
 
 rvmv 
 
 JffVOT 
 
 t s :• 
 
 b«f)T 
 
 nspp; 
 
 Mi’ 
 
 pnto’ 
 
 bwiD’Mi’ 
 
 bWTMi’ 
 
 TD'05©’ 
 
 1SI1M3’ 
 
 abya’aJ’ 
 
 mMi’ 
 
 631 
 
 □nb’iMi; 
 
 694 
 
 ngacfr 
 
 33, 628 
 
 p|Mi’ 
 
 694 
 
 HMip3Mi; 
 
 694 
 
 natoar 
 
 699 
 
 rtMi’ 
 
 626 
 
 
 946 
 
 n#. 
 
 946 
 
 rmiMi’ 
 
 946 
 
 TMi’ 
 
 626 
 
 VVfii’ 
 
 697 
 
 ’Mi’ 
 
 647 
 
 2’MV 
 
 627 
 
 n;Mi’ 
 
 647 
 
 TVMj’ 
 
 647 
 
 ’Mi’Mi'. 
 
 647 
 
 n323IC’ 
 
 632 
 
 «QMi’ 
 
 644 
 
 
 646 
 
 nipMi’. 
 
 632 
 
 H3Mi’ : 
 
 627 
 
 ytii 
 
 645 
 
 ’pMi’ 
 
 627 
 
 rvvto’ 
 
 t : - : 
 
 644 
 
 5\nrpMi’ 
 
 645 
 
 nGMi’ 
 
 645 
 
 •jQMi’. 
 
 645 
 
 TMi’ 
 
 644, 645 
 
 nb«Ti?i; 
 
 646 
 
 ■pMi’ 
 
 79 
 
 627 
 
 632 
 
 699 
 
 697 
 
 201 
 
 701 
 
 652 
 
 711 
 
 712 
 651 
 710 
 710 
 
 TIT 
 
 nbrv 
 
 t : • 
 
 nnn\ 
 
 bjMrv 
 
 W 
 
 tv 
 
 ivv 
 
 pn’ 
 
 dvvv 
 
 nrv 
 
 “D 3 
 
 Page 
 
 627 
 
 627 
 
 710 
 
 698 
 
 55 
 
 480 
 
 627 
 
 711 
 652 
 
 712 
 652 
 
 188, 652 
 627 
 710 
 
 651 
 
 652 
 55 
 
 711 
 
 652 
 
 711 
 
 651 
 
 480 
 
 710 
 651 
 651 
 
 711 
 711 
 
 627,651 
 
 651 
 
 652 
 628 
 652 
 713 
 628 
 713 
 652 
 652 
 713 
 713 
 652 
 
 629 
 
 381 
 
742 
 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 
 381 
 
 pbD3 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 399 
 
 1'33 
 
 
 
 381 
 
 rrtbp:? 
 
 
 
 
 399 
 
 mi¬ 
 
 ni 
 
 r 
 
 
 
 397 
 
 ianrnbp3 
 
 
 
 
 399 
 
 lotfriia 
 
 
 
 397 
 
 w'Bpa 
 
 
 
 
 393 
 
 T m 
 
 
 
 638 
 
 rn'&s 
 
 
 
 
 398 
 
 D'2J3 
 
 
 
 638 
 
 '2iS>»i1“lE)3 
 
 
 
 
 394 
 
 Jti»li3 
 
 
 
 400 
 
 inca 
 
 
 
 
 391 
 
 tt}23 
 
 
 
 417 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 
 391 
 
 
 
 
 417 
 
 rna 
 
 
 
 
 392 
 
 ]W3 
 
 
 
 417 
 
 D'2W13 
 
 
 
 
 398 
 
 □'nstfvjttha 
 
 
 
 417 
 
 0313 
 
 
 
 
 392 
 
 ma 
 
 
 
 417 
 
 ^'0313 
 
 
 
 
 392 
 
 Mlp 
 
 
 
 400 
 
 D13 
 
 
 
 
 353 
 
 aia 
 
 
 
 399 
 
 '013 
 
 
 
 
 392 
 
 nis 
 
 
 
 381 
 
 bpia 
 
 
 
 
 392 
 
 p'3 
 
 
 
 399 
 
 PI 
 
 
 
 
 398 
 
 T9 
 
 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 
 
 418 
 
 D'3 
 
 
 
 162 
 
 «2\p33 
 
 
 
 
 393 
 
 133 
 
 
 
 169 
 
 nis 
 
 
 
 
 398 
 
 lbs 
 
 
 
 382 
 
 D'nis 
 
 
 
 
 398 
 
 rr)3 
 
 
 
 382, 395 
 
 itoa 
 
 
 
 
 394 
 
 '3^5 
 
 
 
 397 
 
 Hto3 
 
 
 
 
 394 
 
 'mbs 
 
 
 
 397 
 
 na 
 
 
 
 
 584 
 
 3«'b3 
 
 
 
 399 
 
 □'ns 
 
 
 
 
 400 
 
 nja 
 
 
 
 67 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 W? 
 
 
 
 67, 399 
 
 rnbnb 
 
 
 
 
 612 
 
 bsba 
 
 
 
 382 
 
 nnb 
 
 
 
 
 358 
 
 bbp 
 
 
 
 397 
 
 'nnb 
 
 
 
 
 358 
 
 ipba 
 
 
 
 399 
 
 Ntob 
 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 BBb3 
 
 
 
 384 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 nos 
 
 
 
 399 
 
 m*a 
 
 
 
 
 612 
 
 np| 
 
 
 
 384 
 
 nrpn 
 
 
 
 
 119 
 
 Dnn3 
 
 
 
 399 
 
 ]iian 
 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 iiJins 
 
 
 
 397 
 
 pQ 
 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 rras 
 
 
 
 384 
 
 rnn 
 
 
 
 
 349 
 
 VP33 
 
 
 
 405 
 
 rmn 
 
 
 
 
 209 
 
 '323 
 
 . 
 
 
 398 
 
 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 2rn_23 
 
 
 
 405 
 
 'O 
 
 
 
 
 289 
 
 »23 
 
 
 
 614 
 
 Dn'niap 
 
 
 
 
 606 
 
 ]»33 
 
 
 
 384 
 
 D'3«bQ 
 
 
 
 
 244 
 
 rwaa 
 
 
 
 397 
 
 D^ntfn robn 
 
 
 
 
 638 
 
 Dil33 
 
 
 
 400 
 
 
 
 
 
 73 
 
 b'p3 
 
 
 
 399 
 
 rnn 
 
 
 
 
 657 
 
748 
 
 ’3£ 
 
 neo 
 
 too 
 
 }top 
 
 top 
 
 top 
 
 yso 
 
 2 or n or to® 
 niso 
 D'to 1 ? 
 rtoo 
 no 
 
 DN3 
 
 »13 
 
 rQ3 
 
 313 
 
 : 
 
 nbaa 
 
 K’M 
 
 213 
 
 213 
 
 ■nro 
 
 ’I'YiO 
 
 nrra 
 
 au 
 
 r 3 
 
 to 
 
 nb 
 
 -nrp 
 
 Min: 
 
 •jtons 
 
 20 
 
 ’ 20 . 
 
 «noo2 
 
 •203 
 
 yy$l 
 
 n ;to 2 : 
 
 nap 
 
 •pn’p 
 
 npp 
 
 Page 
 
 657 
 
 to? 
 
 336 
 
 
 208 
 
 tonto 
 
 70 
 
 
 188 
 
 •qbp-ras 
 
 101 
 
 w«a tost 
 
 208 
 
 
 350 
 
 ■pi» 
 
 591 
 
 nra? 
 
 472 
 
 
 96 
 
 nto? 
 
 209 
 
 O’bto 
 
 238 
 
 }V>32 
 
 125 
 
 
 125 
 
 «Yto 
 
 125 
 
 rfito 
 
 125 
 
 torto 
 
 125 
 
 n’to: 
 
 125 
 
 ps 
 
 188, 235 
 
 «an» 
 
 19 
 
 i3Ht> 
 
 649 
 
 D’n’to 
 
 199, 649 
 
 ’ -jto 
 
 125 
 
 oVto 
 
 . 72, H9 
 
 m 
 
 188 
 
 H3to 
 
 621 
 
 ntoto 
 
 19 
 
 Tto 
 
 498 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 ’ . 125 
 
 ato 
 
 125 
 
 Hto 
 
 650 
 
 Dto 
 
 356, 359, 360 
 
 nbto 
 
 70 
 
 
 613 
 
 to 
 
 , 161, 201, 
 
 360, 496, 602 
 
 
 toato 
 
 biato 
 
 71, 198 
 
 pato 
 
 71 
 
 
 71 
 
 nto 
 
 Page 
 
 468 
 
 182 
 
 182 
 
 182 
 
 468 
 
 182 
 
 468 
 
 469 
 471,566 
 471, 247,567 
 567 
 68, 472 
 
 199 
 
 199, 293, 629 
 204 
 293 
 204 
 
 200 
 204 
 204 
 204 
 204 
 204 
 
 . 72, 205 
 469 
 204 
 199 
 469 
 
 204 
 
 205 
 317 
 317 
 317 
 473 
 
 72, 238 
 518, 654 
 654 
 654 
 
 317 
 
 318 
 318 
 
 69, 318, 538 
 
rryny 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 318 
 
 ■w 
 
 
 
 318 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 317, 538 
 
 arrTO 
 
 
 
 318 
 
 bNTO 
 
 
 
 318 
 
 Mjng 
 
 
 
 318 
 
 Ott 
 
 
 
 318, 538 
 
 rnaiy 
 
 
 
 318, 349 
 
 
 
 
 319 
 
 TO 
 
 
 
 318 
 
 
 
 
 319 
 
 n*? 
 
 
 
 319 
 
 ^rn» 
 
 
 
 317 
 
 »niy 
 
 
 
 526 
 
 bHrro 
 
 
 
 318 
 
 nnw 
 
 
 
 317 
 
 Djynw 
 
 
 
 318 
 
 rrray 
 
 
 
 313 
 
 may 
 
 
 
 313, 315 
 
 may 
 
 
 
 215 
 
 »y 
 
 
 
 213 
 
 byy 
 
 
 
 468 
 
 p^y 
 
 
 
 657 
 
 DO* 
 
 
 
 492 
 
 r» 
 
 
 
 213, 485 
 
 Dni^ir^ 
 
 
 
 657 
 
 D«» 
 
 
 
 657 
 
 
 
 
 657 
 
 ab'y 
 
 
 
 473 
 
 na py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 D’23 py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 *tin py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 *nipn py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 mn py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 "nan py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 “nn py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 D3» 
 
 
 
 72, 485 
 
 mpp py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 p3’3> 
 
 
 
 68 
 
 }py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 D'bay py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 bai py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 xdpt py 
 
 
 
 485 
 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 rriEsn py 
 
 
 
 . 485 
 
 nB\y 
 
 
 
 486 
 
 »EW 
 
 
 
 486 
 
 •vy 
 
 
 
 698 
 
 
 
 
 698 
 
 YW 
 
 
 
 698 
 
 wy 
 
 
 
 699 
 
 nry 
 
 
 
 699 
 
 DW 
 
 
 
 698 
 
 imr-vy 
 
 
 
 699 
 
 tfmh’y 
 
 
 
 699 
 
 may 
 
 Si 
 
 
 
 197 
 
 toy 
 
 
 
 196 
 
 
 
 
 197, 599 
 
 nmy 
 
 
 
 198 
 
 *!» 
 
 
 
 197, 599 
 
 nby 
 
 
 
 184 
 
 mby 
 
 
 
 231 
 
 pby 
 
 
 
 230, 231 
 
 niby 
 
 
 
 231 
 
 mby 
 
 
 
 230 
 
 >by 
 
 
 
 474 
 
 mby 
 
 
 
 230, 231 
 
 
 
 
 230 
 
 nnby 
 
 
 
 229 
 
 paby 
 
 
 
 231 
 
 naby 
 
 
 
 229 
 
 D» 
 
 
 
 239 
 
 nay 
 
 x \ 
 
 
 
 234 
 
 pay 
 
 
 
 236 
 
 Diay 
 
 
 
 241 
 
 pto? 
 
 
 
 239 
 
 •ay 
 
 
 
 344 
 
 bway 
 
 
 
 72, 235 
 
 ■nmay 
 
 
 
 235 
 
 lrpay 
 
 
 
 236 
 
 aipay 
 
 
 
 235 
 
 niapay 
 
 
 
 72, 235 
 
 bay 
 
 
 
 232 
 
 pbay 
 
 
 
 72, 232 
 
 b**way 
 
 
 
 65? 
 
 rrpay 
 
 
 
 233 
 
 iyay 
 
 
 
 232 
 
745 
 
 rnfcft 
 
 Page 
 
 551 
 
 nos 
 
 72 
 
 Dips 
 
 241 
 
 atoos 
 
 282 
 
 'tops 
 
 233 
 
 23S 
 
 242 
 
 n$ 
 
 242, 345 
 
 a«s 
 
 271 
 
 pto» 
 
 999 
 
 nos 
 
 243 
 
 DOS 
 
 270 
 
 OSS 
 
 270 
 
 
 243 
 
 
 244 
 
 p3S 
 
 noas 
 
 244 
 
 244 
 
 ts— s 
 
 p3S 
 
 243 
 
 12S 
 
 270 
 
 
 244 
 
 ninas 
 
 244 
 
 n*nh?s 
 
 bps 
 
 244 
 
 274 
 
 -\D2? 
 
 355, 357, 486 
 
 rnps 
 
 688 
 
 fnps 
 
 488 
 
 V?? 
 
 637, 640 
 
 2SS 
 
 598 
 
 113 |VS» 
 
 519 
 
 dss 
 
 519 
 
 ]inss 
 
 318 
 
 rms 
 
 519 
 
 TT-S 
 
 IpS 
 
 599, 601, 602 
 
 "IftS 
 
 472 
 
 
 213 
 
 ITO 
 
 68, 473 
 
 tops 
 
 657 
 
 ns 
 
 275 
 
 ns 
 
 ’ ... 488 
 
 ins 
 
 275 
 
 nns 
 
 275 
 
 nns 
 
 308 
 
 nSinS 
 
 298 
 
 nS 
 
 490 
 
 DpS 
 
 Page 
 
 282 
 
 m • 
 
 488 
 
 ntons 
 
 298 
 
 TO 
 
 298 
 
 tons 
 
 490 
 
 ntos 
 
 300, 312, 489 
 
 Pantos 
 
 300 
 
 
 itos 
 
 489 
 
 Pantos 
 
 312 
 
 n;tos 
 
 301 
 
 ptos 
 
 490 
 
 natos 
 
 312 
 
 jtos 
 
 302 
 
 putt 
 
 491 
 
 rrjnffis 
 
 rfinntos 
 
 341 
 
 310, 311 
 
 pppnns 
 
 713 
 
 'ns 
 
 315 
 
 nw 
 
 314 
 
 314 
 
 Pns 
 
 314 
 
 'TO 
 
 314 
 
 n'bns 
 
 314 
 
 n 
 
 492 
 
 TO 
 
 492 
 
 ■paB 
 
 70 
 
 ■jins 
 
 70 
 
 n'nns 
 
 612 
 
 
 70 
 
 VJB 
 
 361 
 
 
 ms 
 
 16 
 
 ■jin’B 
 
 70 
 
 n’abs 
 
 613 
 
 OPB 
 
 361 
 
 TOS0 
 
 613 
 
 SpB 
 
 nn b 
 
 361 
 
 580 
 
 nns 
 
 626, 632 
 
 pns 
 
 381 
 
 nton^s 
 
 72 
 
 nn'S 
 
 363 
 
 c c c 
 
746 
 
 |YVS 
 
 its 
 
 ■JVS 
 
 ■vs 
 
 nss 
 
 ]Vps 
 
 }DS 
 
 is 
 
 ^P T 
 
 bip 
 
 vip 
 
 nv 
 
 TP. 
 
 1 ?'!?. 
 
 tf’p 
 
 W? 
 
 ]top T 
 
 ™(7 
 
 ^-P- 
 
 rn£ 
 
 rnp 
 
 n>n 
 
 ON*} D>0 
 T\ 
 
 »*) 
 
 "T\ 
 
 arn 
 on dht 
 on 
 Dii on 
 rn 
 jton 
 on on D'n 
 
 n’nin 
 
 nrn 
 
 rnto 
 
 nip 
 
 
 Page 
 
 
 
 
 Page 
 
 
 71 
 
 nto 
 
 
 
 198 
 
 
 70 
 
 flpte 
 
 
 
 450 
 
 
 70 
 
 ]inbip 
 
 
 
 71 
 
 
 364 
 
 rn\r> 
 
 
 
 131 
 
 
 71 
 
 
 
 
 131 
 
 
 71 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 484 
 
 I’tiXb 
 
 
 
 363, 369 
 
 
 364 
 
 md 
 
 
 
 55, 189, 365 
 
 
 
 byti 
 
 
 
 . 55, 365 
 
 
 211 
 
 
 
 
 189 
 
 . 
 
 393 
 
 nip n$ HTO lid 
 
 
 . 52, 236 
 
 
 393 
 
 dhiP 
 
 
 
 638 
 
 
 77, 111, 405 
 
 "flip 
 
 
 
 189 
 
 
 403 
 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 381 
 
 ’JW’lp 
 
 
 
 71 
 
 
 382 
 
 ftanQ 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 403 
 
 op or 
 
 
 
 241 
 
 
 70 
 
 fnaiti 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 384 
 
 tihid 
 
 
 
 327 
 
 
 384 
 
 rvpid 
 
 
 
 96 
 
 
 400 
 
 ftonti 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 399 
 
 fnaid 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 392 
 
 ]i\Pn\p 
 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 394 
 
 
 
 
 92 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 199 
 
 
 209 
 
 'yd 
 
 
 
 131 
 
 
 191 
 
 n^P 
 
 
 
 364 
 
 
 . ' 132 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 339 
 
 »n 
 
 
 
 104 
 
 
 356 
 
 
 
 
 527 
 
 
 627 
 
 n2NPl 
 
 
 
 527 
 
 
 191 
 
 nan 
 
 
 
 283 
 
 
 241 
 
 rpn 
 
 
 
 632 
 
 
 191 
 
 lin 
 
 
 
 649 
 
 
 276 
 
 n^in 
 
 
 
 649 
 
 , 
 
 70 
 
 ppifrin 
 
 
 
 649 
 
 
 188, 191 
 
 nbn 
 
 
 
 190 
 
 
 130, 242 
 
 'obn 
 
 
 
 337 
 
 
 612 
 
 inn 
 
 
 
 532 
 
 
 276 
 
 n:n 
 
 
 
 24 
 
 
 
 bpn 
 
 
 
 210 
 
 
 131 
 
 r™ 
 
 
 
 164 
 
 
 52 
 
 »in 
 
 - s 
 
 
 
 163 
 
GENERAL INDEX 
 
 A. 
 
 Aar, page 177. 
 
 Aaron, 66, 95. 
 
 his name explained, 175. 
 resembles Hermes, 178. 
 
 Ab, 180. 
 
 Abad, 180. 
 
 Abadan, 180. 
 
 Abaddon, 181, 248. 
 
 Abari, 180. 
 
 Abda, 182. 
 
 Abdeel, 182. 
 
 Abdi, 182. 
 
 Abdiel, 182. 
 
 Abdon, 66, 182. 
 
 Abednego, 182. 
 
 Abel, &g. , 182, 552. 
 
 Abha, 183. 
 
 Abi, 183. 
 
 with compounds, 184. 
 Abimelech, 222. 
 
 Aborigines of Canaan, their wor¬ 
 ship, 637. 
 
 Abraham, a rock, 67. 
 deals in slaves, 129. 
 has a slave wife, 60. 
 his life and character, 192. 
 his migration, 41. 
 his name, 191. 
 the great father, 5. 
 
 Abram, 191, 192. 
 
 Abrech, 195. 
 
 Absalom, 195. 
 
 his rebellion, 436. 
 
 Absurdities in the Bible, 671. 
 Abundance of offspring promised 
 as a blessing, implies vigour, 
 60, 63. 
 
 Accad, page 195. 
 
 Accho, 196. 
 
 Ach, 199. 
 
 a divine epithet, 207. 
 
 Achan, 197. 
 
 recognises a Babylonish gar¬ 
 ment, 134. 
 
 Achaz, 33. 
 
 Achbor, 197. 
 
 Achilles angry at the loss of Bri- 
 seis, 120. 
 
 Achish, 197. 
 
 Achmetha, 199. 
 
 Achor, 197. 
 
 Aehsah, 198. 
 
 Achshaph, 198. 
 
 Achzib, 199. 
 
 Acorn, 157. 
 
 Ad, 199. 
 
 Adad, 199. 
 
 Adadah, 199. 
 
 Adah, 199. 
 
 Adaiah, 200. 
 
 Adalai, 200. 
 
 Adam, a companion of Elohim, 
 254. 
 
 his name, &c., 200. 
 the phallus, 202. 
 
 Adamah, 203. 
 
 Adami, 203, 206. 
 
 Adan, 203. 
 
 Adar, 203. 
 
 Adbeel, 203. 
 
 Addan, 203. 
 
 Addar, 204. 
 
 Addon, 204. 
 
 Ader, 204. 
 
 Adharya, 206. 
 
748 
 
 Adiel, page 204. 
 
 Ahan, page 212. 
 
 Adin, 204. 
 
 Ahana, 212. 
 
 Adina, 204. 
 
 Ahar, 207. 
 
 Adino, 204. 
 
 Aharah, 207. 
 
 Adithaim, 204. 
 
 Ahasai, 207. 
 
 Aditi, 206. 
 
 Ahasbai, 207. 
 
 Aditya, 206. 
 
 Ahasuerus, 207. 
 
 Adlai, 204. 
 
 Ahava, 207. 
 
 Admali. 204. 
 
 Ahaz, 207. 
 
 Admathah, 204. 
 
 Ahaziah, 207. 
 
 Adna, 204. 
 
 Ahban, 207. 
 
 Adnah, 204. 
 
 Aher, 207. 
 
 Adon, 204. 
 
 Ahi, 207. 
 
 Adonibezek, 204. 
 
 Ahiah, 208. 
 
 Adonijah, 205. 
 
 Ahiam, 208. 
 
 Adonikam, 205. 
 
 Ahian, 208. 
 
 Adoniram, 205. 
 
 Ahiezer, 208. 
 
 Adonizedeh, 205. 
 
 Ahihud, 208. 
 
 Adoption of faiths, 294. 
 
 Ahijah, 208. 
 
 of old myths, 294, 340. 
 
 Ahikam, 208. 
 
 Adoraim, 205. 
 
 Ahilud, 208. 
 
 Adrammelech, 205. 
 
 Ahimaaz, 208. 
 
 Adriel, 205. 
 
 Ahiman, 208. 
 
 Adullam, 205. 
 
 Ahimelech, 209. 
 
 Adultery a sacred emblem, 688. 
 
 Ahimoth, 2C9. 
 
 in birds, 678. 
 
 Ahinadab, 209. 
 
 ordained to Hoshea, 589. 
 
 Ahinoam, 202. 
 
 Adummin, 205. 
 
 Ahio, 209. 
 
 iElian quoted, 54. 
 
 Ahira, 209. 
 
 iEnon, 206. 
 
 Ahiram, 209. 
 
 Affinities of names, 13. 
 
 Ahisamach, 210. 
 
 Africa, its people, 37. 
 
 Ahishahar, 210. 
 
 Aga, 206. 
 
 Ahishar, 210. 
 
 Agabus, 206. 
 
 Ahitophel, 210. 
 
 Agag, 206. 
 
 Ahitub, 210. 
 
 Agali, 206. 
 
 Ahlab, 210. 
 
 Agbah, 206. 
 
 Ahlai, 210. 
 
 Agee, 206. 
 
 Ahn, 212. 
 
 Agha, 206. 
 
 Ahohah, 210. 
 
 Agni, 206. 
 
 Aholah, 210. 
 
 Agra, 206. 
 
 Ahron, 180. 
 
 Agur, 206. 
 
 Ahumai, 212. 
 
 Ah, 207, 212. 
 
 Ahura, 212. 
 
 Ahab, 207. 
 
 Ahuzam, 212. 
 
 Ahahel, 207. 
 
 Ahuzzath, 212. 
 
 Aham, 212. 
 
 Ai, 95, 213. 
 
749 
 
 Aijalon, page 67. 
 
 Ailim, 214. 
 
 Ain, 213. 
 
 Ain-shems, 64. 
 
 Airan, 213. 
 
 Air, god of the, 58, 93, 177. 
 Akhi-ummah, 213. 
 
 Akissu, 213. 
 
 Akrabbim, 213. 
 
 Al, usually written El, 213. 
 Alameth, 229. 
 
 Alammalech, 229. 
 
 Alath, 214. 
 
 Alba, 230. 
 
 Aleph, 173, 177, 230. 
 
 Alexander, the false prophet, 47. 
 Aliah, 230. 
 
 Alian, 230. 
 
 Alilat, 231. 
 
 Alitta, 31, 231, 
 
 Allon, 231. 
 
 All powerful, the, 56, 202. 
 
 Alma mater, 159. 
 
 Almighty, 221, 252. 
 
 described as man, 58, 259, 263. 
 opinions respecting, 48. 
 requires human aid ?! 665. 
 talking with man, 57, 222, 
 254, 260. 
 
 venerates his own name, 618. 
 Almodad, 231. 
 
 Almon, 229. 
 
 Almond, a female emblem, 107. 
 Aloth, 231. 
 
 Alpha, 173. 
 
 Altars, 122. 
 
 Alteration in Bible, necessity for, 
 269, 462. 
 
 Alterations of names in Scripture, 
 132,133. 
 
 Alush, 230. 
 
 Alvah, 231. 
 
 Am, 71, 231. 
 
 Amad, 232. 
 
 Amadeus, 73. 
 
 Amadou, virgin of, 159. 
 
 Amah, page 232. 
 
 Amal, 232. 
 
 Amalek, 232. 
 
 smitten from revenge, 267. 
 Amalekites twice destroyed, 434. 
 Amam, 72, 232. 
 
 Amana, 72, 232. 
 
 Amar, 242. 
 
 Amariah, 72, 232. 
 
 Amasa, 232. 
 
 Amasai, 233. 
 
 Amashai, 233. 
 
 Amasiah, 234. 
 
 Amassu, 233. 
 
 Amaziah, 234. 
 
 and the Edomites, 690, 691. 
 Amba, 242. 
 
 Ambassadors from heaven, 257, 
 258. 
 
 Ambhas, 242. 
 
 Ambhoya, 242. 
 
 Ambudhi, 242. 
 
 Amelia, a city older than Borne, 73. 
 Ament, 234. 
 
 America, peopled by one race, 36. 
 
 compared to Assyria, 39. 
 Amh, 242. 
 
 Ami, 242. 
 
 Amishaddai, 235. 
 
 Amisshadai, 72. 
 
 Ammah, 234, 235. 
 
 Ammara, 242. 
 
 Ammiel, 72, 235. 
 
 Ammihud, 235. 
 
 Amminadab, 235. 
 
 Ammizabad, 236. 
 
 Ammon, Amon, 66, 236. 
 
 Amnon, 72, 239. 
 
 Amok, 239. 
 
 Amon, 239. 
 
 Amorite, 72, 240. 
 
 Amos, 241. 
 
 Amos, Joel, and Chronicles, 691. 
 Amoz, 241. 
 
 Amram, 241. 
 
 Amraphel, 241. 
 
750 
 
 Amri, page 242. 
 
 Amulets, 395. 
 
 Amzi, 242. 
 
 Ana, 271. 
 
 Ana-arba-il, 269. 
 
 Anab, 242, 270. 
 
 Anacalypsis quoted, 28, 74, 202, 
 400, 407, 416, 647. 
 Anachronisms in Ezekiel, 510. 
 Anah, 242. 
 
 Anaharath, 243. 
 
 Anaiah, 243. 
 
 Anaitis, 270. 
 
 Anak, 243. 
 
 Anaku, 270. 
 
 Anam, 243. 
 
 Anamim, 243. 
 
 Anand, 270. 
 
 Anani, 244. 
 
 Anas, 271. 
 
 Anasura, 313. 
 
 Anath, 244. 
 
 Anathoth, 244. 
 
 Anchor, emblem, 167. 
 
 Ancient names tell of ancient 
 gods, 5. 
 
 Ancilia at Eome, 163. 
 
 Ancus, 272. 
 
 Andaman islands, 659. 
 
 Andrew, 244. 
 
 St., his cross, 153. 
 
 Andhra, 271. 
 
 Androgynous ideas of the Creator, 
 30, 32, 218, note. 
 
 Anem, 270. 
 
 Aner, 270. 
 
 Anesh, 244. 
 
 Anga, 271. 
 
 Angada, 271. 
 
 Angels, another name for gods, 621. 
 belief in, 116, 244. 
 fallen, 246. 
 names of, 246. 
 salute Christna, 401. 
 their business, 58. 
 
 Anger of God, 262. 
 
 Anglican church anthropomorphic, 
 page 264. 
 
 Anglo-Saxon and Spanish nomen¬ 
 clature contrasted, 9. 
 Angutiya, 271. 
 
 Ani, 270. 
 
 Aniam, 270. 
 
 Anim, 270. 
 
 Animals all obey divine commands, 
 676. 
 
 fear the supernatural, 46. 
 their habits and vices, 678. 
 their power to send each other 
 to hell examined, 578. 
 
 Anj, 271. 
 
 Ahka, 272. 
 
 Ankurah, 272. 
 
 Anna, 28, 81, 251, 270. 
 Annamelech, 243. 
 
 Annaniah, 244. 
 
 Annedotus, 81, 271. 
 
 Anobret, 81, 271. 
 
 Anodaphus, 81. 
 
 Ansa, 272. 
 
 Anthropomorphism, 216, 221, 222, 
 252. 
 
 Antiquity an unsafe guide, 109. 
 of Babylon, 43. 
 of the Aureole, 142. 
 referred to, 37. 
 
 Ants talking politics, 577. 
 
 Anu, 81, 83, 271. 
 
 Anu, an Assyrian God, 64, 76. 
 Anub, 271. 
 
 Anunit, 95, 272. 
 
 Anutagil, 272. 
 
 Aodh, 272. 
 
 Apharsachites, 272. 
 
 Aphek, 272. 
 
 Aphrodisiac meat, 566. 
 
 the fish, 529, 565. 
 
 Aphrodite, 53, 54. 
 
 Apocalypse, 31, 181. 
 
 Apocryphal writings, 6. 
 
 Apollo and Jah, 611. 
 
 Apollyon, 181. 
 
751 
 
 Apple, page 272. 
 
 Eve’s, signification of, 498. 
 Apricot split, an emblem of the 
 Virgin, 528. 
 
 Ar, 176, 275. 
 
 Ar, to plough, 17. 
 
 Ara, 275. 
 
 Arab, 275. 
 
 Arad, 275, 276. 
 
 Aradasha, 276. 
 
 Arah, 276. 
 
 Aram, 276. 
 
 Aran, 276. 
 
 Ararat, 276. 
 
 Aras, 276. 
 
 Araunah, 277. 
 
 Arba, 69, 243, 278, 308. 
 
 Arba-il, 89, 152, 157, 278, 530. 
 
 cross and circle, 143. 
 
 Arbela, 69. 
 
 Arbitrament of the sword, 671. 
 Arbel, 278. 
 
 Archangel and Archbishop, 14. 
 Archangels, 624. 
 
 Archite, 279. 
 
 Ard, 280. 
 
 Ardan, 282.. 
 
 Aredu, 298. 
 
 Areli, 282. 
 
 Argeia, 285. 
 
 Argha, 157, 164, 177. 
 
 Argo, 177. 
 
 Aridai, 282. 
 
 Aridatha, 282. 
 
 Arieh, 282. 
 
 Ariel, 282. 
 
 Arim, 282. 
 
 Arioch, 283. 
 
 Arisai, 283. 
 
 Ark, 164, 166, 167, 177. 
 
 compared with Palladium, &c., 
 439, 440. 
 
 Hindoo, 291. 
 
 history of in David’s time, 439. 
 ideas respecting, 439. 
 meaning of, 283. 
 
 Ark, Noah’s, page 294. 
 
 Arkite, 298. 
 
 Armaita, 122. 
 
 Armenia, 298. 
 
 Armi, 299. 
 
 Armoni, 298. 
 
 Arna, 299. 
 
 Arnan, 298. 
 
 Arnon, 298. 
 
 Arod, 298. 
 
 Arodi, 298. 
 
 Aroer, 298. 
 
 Arpad, 298. 
 
 Arphaxad, 298. 
 
 Arrow, broad, 168. 
 
 form of Hermes, 543. 
 Artaxerxes, 298. 
 
 and the Jews, 522. 
 
 Artemis the best of women, 579. 
 Arthur, speculations on name, 17. 
 Aruboth, 299. 
 
 Arumah, 300. 
 
 Arvad, 300. 
 
 Aryan influence on Shemites, 615. 
 Aryan roots, 17. 
 
 Arza, 300, 
 
 Asa, 300. 
 
 Asahaiah, 301. 
 
 Asahel, 300. 
 
 Asaph, 301. 
 
 Asareel, 301. 
 
 Asarelah, 301. 
 
 Ascalon, 67, 302. 
 
 Asenath, 302. 
 
 Ash, Asha, 302. 
 
 Asha-dur-kali, 313. 
 
 Ashah, 313. 
 
 Ash an, 302. 
 
 Ashar, 313. 
 
 Ashbaal, 302. 
 
 Ashban, 303. 
 
 Ashbea, 303. 
 
 Ashbel, 303. 
 
 Ashcalon, 67, 162. 
 
 Ashchenaz, 304. 
 
 Ashdod, 304. 
 

 Asher, page 304. 
 
 Asberah, 807. 
 
 Ashkelon, 310. 
 
 Ashima, 310. 
 
 Ashnah, 310. 
 
 Ashpenaz, 310. 
 
 Ashtoreth, 310. 
 
 Karnaim, 311. 
 
 Ashur, 311. 
 
 Ashvath, 312. 
 
 Asi, 313. 
 
 Asiel, 312. 
 
 Asmodeus, 247. 
 
 Asnah, 312. 
 
 Asnapper, 312. 
 
 Asparas, 313. 
 
 Aspatha, 312. 
 
 Asriel, 312. 
 
 Assafoetida, 218. 
 
 Assarak, 313. 
 
 Asshur, 77, 312. 
 
 Asshur-akh-iddin, 313. 
 
 Asshur-tzu, 313. 
 
 Assir, 312. 
 
 Association, British, denounced by 
 preachers, 682. 
 
 Assyria, 312. 
 
 Babylonia, Persia, 707, 708. 
 Assyrians, 39. 
 
 trade with Phoenicians, b.c. 
 1000, 137. 
 
 Assyrian grove, 159, 160. 
 
 names borne by Jews, 95. 
 sacred names, 613. 
 triad, Moses, Aaron, and Hur, 
 95, 96. 
 
 triads, 76, 92. 
 winged figure, 162. 
 
 Astarte, 311. 
 
 Astri, 313. 
 
 Astronomy in old times, 29. 
 Asuras, 313. 
 
 Atarah, 313. 
 
 Ataroth, 313. 
 
 Atasura, 313. 
 
 Ater, 314. 
 
 752 
 
 Athach, page 314. 
 Athaiah, 314. 
 
 Athaliah, 314. 
 
 Athlai, 314. 
 
 Athor, 315. 
 
 Atmon, 316. 
 
 Atroth, 315. 
 
 Attai, 315. 
 
 Attalah, 316. 
 
 Attan, 316. 
 
 Attata, 316. 
 
 Aum a sacred name, 237. 
 Aureole, the, 142. 
 
 Ava, 317. 
 
 Avah, 317. 
 
 Avatar referred to, 658. 
 Avatars, 47. 
 
 Aven, 317. 
 
 = On or Anu, 65. 
 Avim, 317. 
 
 Aza, 317. 
 
 Azal, 317. 
 
 Azaliah, 317. 
 
 Azaniah, 317. 
 
 Azar, 319. 
 
 Azareel, 317. 
 
 Azariah, 317. 
 
 Azaz, 317. 
 
 Azazel, 317. 
 
 Azaziah, 318. 
 
 Az-Baal, 654. 
 
 Azbon, 318. 
 
 Azbuk, 318. 
 
 Azekah, 318. 
 
 Azel, 318. 
 
 Azem, 318. 
 
 Azer-Baal, 654. 
 
 Azgad, 318. 
 
 Aziel, 318. 
 
 Azmaveth, 318. 
 
 Azmon, 318. 
 
 Aznoth, 318. 
 
 Azrael, 94. 
 
 Azrikam, 318. 
 
 Azubah, 318. 
 
 Azur, 318. 
 
758 
 
 Azza, page 318. 
 
 Azzan, 319. 
 
 Azzur, 319. 
 
 B 
 
 B, 319. 
 
 Baal and Baalim, 320. 
 
 = Mahadeva, 322. 
 etymology of, 321. 
 Baal-Berith, 322. 
 
 Baal-Gad, 324. 
 
 Baal-Hagor, 325. 
 
 Baal-Hamon, 324. 
 
 Baal-Hanan, 325. 
 
 Baal-Hermon, 324. 
 
 Baal-Meon, 325. 
 
 Baal-Peor, 325. 
 
 Baal-Perazim, 326. 
 
 Baal-Shalisha, 327. 
 
 Baal-Tamar, 328. 
 
 Baal-Zephon, 329. 
 
 Baal and Bosheth, 133. 
 
 Baalah, 330. 
 
 Baaliah, 330. 
 
 Baalidah, 330. 
 
 Baalis, 330. 
 
 Baaloth, 330. 
 
 Baalzebub, 329. 
 
 Baanab, 330. 
 
 Baara, 330. 
 
 Baaseiah, 331. 
 
 Baasha, 331. 
 
 Babel, 331. 
 
 Babil, 337. 
 
 Babius, 338. 
 
 Babylon, 331. 
 
 Babylonia, its orthodoxy, 41. 
 Babylonian customs, 365. 
 
 faith in Palestine, 127. 
 Babylonians believed in genii, &c., 
 117. 
 
 Babylons, two, 244, 
 
 Bacchus, 32, 331. 
 
 his name derived, 16. 
 fig tree sacred to, 527. 
 monogram Christianised, 647. 
 
 Bacha, page 338. 
 
 Back of Almighty, 261. 
 
 Bacon, Lord, on “ex voto,” 517. 
 Bad, 338. 
 
 Badia, 338. 
 
 Badones, 338. 
 
 Batuli, 333. 
 
 Bag, symbolic, 162. 
 
 Bagh, 338. 
 
 a tiger, 16. 
 
 Bagha, 338. 
 
 Baghis, 338. 
 
 Bag or purse, 403. 
 
 Bahurim, 332. 
 
 Bajith, 332. 
 
 Baka, 331. 
 
 Bakbakhar, 332. 
 
 Bakbukiah, 332. 
 
 Bakhar, 338. 
 
 Bala, 339. 
 
 Balaam, 331 
 
 story of, when compiled, 692. 
 Baladam, 331. 
 
 Baladan, 331. 
 
 Balah, 332. 
 
 Balak, 333. 
 
 Ballypur and Ballypooren, 25. 
 Bali, 334, 339. 
 
 Balin, 339. 
 
 Bal-Shamin, 338. 
 
 Bamah, 335. 
 
 Bandh, 339. 
 
 Banditti, David a captain of, 433. 
 Bani, 335. 
 
 Baolath, 330. 
 
 Bar, 335. 
 
 Bara, 336. 
 
 Barabbas, 336. 
 
 preferred to Christ, 661. 
 Barachel, 336. 
 
 Barachias, 336. 
 
 Barak, 336. 
 
 Barb, 339. 
 
 Barbarian names not to be de¬ 
 stroyed, 22. 
 
 Bariah, 336. 
 
 D D D 
 
754 
 
 Barjesus, page 336. 
 
 Barjonah, 336. 
 
 Barkat, 338. 
 
 Barkos, 336. 
 
 Barley-corn, a female emblem, 107. 
 Barmuri, 338. 
 
 Barnabas, 336. 
 
 Barsabas, 337. 
 
 Barta, 339. 
 
 Bartholomew, 337. 
 
 Bartimeus, 337. 
 
 Bartsippa, 338. 
 
 Baruch, 337. 
 
 Barzillai, 337. 
 
 Base metal used by the church as 
 true, 506. 
 
 Bashan, 337. 
 
 Bashemath, 337. 
 
 Basket, 90, 337. 
 
 and Mandragora, 463. 
 
 Bath, 339. 
 
 Bath-rabbim, 339. 
 
 Bath-sheba, 339. 
 
 Bath-shua, 339. 
 
 Battle cry of Assyrians, 614. 
 
 Bavai, 339. 
 
 Beast, and his number, 650. 
 
 Bebai, 339. 
 
 Bebington Church, 144. 
 
 Becher, 340. 
 
 Bechorath, 340. 
 
 Bed, 368. 
 
 Bedad, 340. 
 
 Bedaiah, 340. 
 
 Bedan, 340. 
 
 Beelida, 321. 
 
 Beer, 340. 
 
 Beera, 341. 
 
 Beerah, 341. 
 
 Beerelim, 340. 
 
 Beeri, 341. 
 
 Beerlahairoi, 340. 
 
 Beeroth, 341. 
 
 Beersheba, 340. 
 
 Beeshterah, 341. 
 
 Beeve, flesh of, 565. 
 
 Bel, page 341, 368. 
 is Ashur, 81. 
 
 Merodach, 121. 
 
 Bela, 344. 
 
 Belat, 344. 
 
 Behai, 344. 
 
 Belib, 368. 
 
 Bells, significance of, 53. 
 
 Belni, 368. 
 
 Belrabu, 368. 
 
 Belsar, 368. 
 
 Belshazzar, 344. 
 
 Belteshazzar, 344. 
 
 Beltis, 104. 
 
 Belzuna, 368. 
 
 the moon, 93. 
 
 Ben, 344. 
 
 Benaiah, 344. 
 
 Ben-ammi, 344. 
 
 Benebarah, 344. 
 
 Benediction, how given, 530. 
 
 of Isaac examined, 603. 
 Benejaakan, 344. 
 
 Benhadah, 344. 
 
 Benhail, 344. 
 
 Benhanan, 345. 
 
 Benjamin, 83, 345. 
 
 names in tribe of, 539. 
 tribe of, 162. 
 
 Beninu, 345. 
 
 Benoni, 83, 346. 
 
 Benzoheth, 346. 
 
 Beon, 346. 
 
 Beor, 346. 
 
 Beraiah, 346. 
 
 Berachah, 346. 
 
 Berechiah, 346. 
 
 Bered, 346. 
 
 Beri, 347. 
 
 Beriah, 347. 
 
 Berith, 347. 
 
 Berkhampstead, the name, 23. 
 Berodach, 347. 
 
 Berosus on Cosmogony, 85. 
 Berothai, 347. 
 
 Besai, 347. 
 
755 
 
 Besodeiah, page 347. 
 
 Beth-phage, page 361. 
 
 Besor, 347. 
 
 Beth-rapha, 362. 
 
 Betah, 347. 
 
 Beth-rehob, 362. 
 
 Betal, 543. 
 
 Beth-saida, 363. 
 
 Beten, 347. 
 
 Beth-shan, 363. 
 
 Beth, 347. 
 
 Beth-shemesh, 65, 363. 
 
 Bethabarah, 92, 349. 
 
 Beth-shittah, 363. 
 
 Bethanath, 349. 
 
 Beth-tappuach, 364. 
 
 Bethany, 349. 
 
 Beth-uel, 364. 
 
 Betharam, 347. 
 
 Beth-ulia, 364. 
 
 Beth Arbel, 278. 
 
 Beth-zachariah, 364. 
 
 Beth-arbel, 349. 
 
 Beth-znr, 364. 
 
 Beth-aven, 349. 
 
 Betzal, 364. 
 
 Beth-azmaveth, 349. 
 
 Bezek, 368. 
 
 Beth-baal-meon, 349. 
 
 Bezer, 368. 
 
 Beth-bara, 350. 
 
 Bhaga, 362. 
 
 Beth-birie, 350. 
 
 Bhama, 368. 
 
 Beth-car, 350. 
 
 Bhanda, 368. 
 
 Beth-dagon, 341. 
 
 Bhargava, 368. 
 
 Beth-diblathaim, 351. 
 
 Bhash, 368. 
 
 Beth-eden, 351. 
 
 Bhatu, 368. 
 
 Beth-eked, 351. 
 
 Bhavaja, 368. 
 
 Beth-el, 351. 
 
 Bhavana, 369. 
 
 Beth-emek, 351. 
 
 Bhavani, 53, 83. 
 
 Beth-esda, 352. 
 
 Bible, absurdities of the, 671. 
 
 Beth-ezel, 352. 
 
 accounts of “ ex voto,” 518. 
 
 Beth-gader, 352. 
 
 an expurgated edition wanted, 
 
 Beth-gilgal, 353. 
 
 264. 
 
 Beth-gamnl, 353. 
 
 compared to the laws of Numa 
 
 Beth-hackerem, 353. 
 
 and others, 525. 
 
 Beth-hanan, 354. 
 
 contains what may be called 
 
 Beth-haram, 355. 
 
 Billingsgate, 688. 
 
 Beth-hoglah, 354. 
 
 incongruities in the, 671. 
 
 Beth-horon, 355. 
 
 its claim to inspiration exa¬ 
 
 Beth-jesimoth, 355. 
 
 mined, 666. 
 
 Beth-leaphrah, 355. 
 
 panders to human passions, 
 
 Beth-lebaoth, 357. 
 
 685. 
 
 Beth-lehem, 358. 
 
 the book of persecutors, 686. 
 
 Beth-maacha, 359, 
 
 value to be rigidly examined, 
 
 Beth-marcaboth, 359. 
 
 624. 
 
 Beth-meon, 359. 
 
 Bichri, 369. 
 
 Beth-millo, 359. 
 
 Bidkar, 369. 
 
 Beth-nimrah, 359. 
 
 Bigotry amongst Protestants, 140. 
 
 Beth-palet, 361. 
 
 Bigtha, 369. 
 
 Beth-pazzez, 361. 
 
 Bigthan, 369. 
 
 Beth-peor, 361. 
 
 Bigvai, 369. 
 
756 
 
 Bil, page 371. 
 
 Bil-akh-isu, 371. 
 
 Bilat, 364. 
 
 Bildad, 369, 372. 
 
 Bileam, 369. 
 
 Bilgah, 369. 
 
 Bilgai, 369. 
 
 Bilhah, 369. 
 
 Bilhan, 369. 
 
 Billat, 372. 
 
 “ Billingsgate ” biblical, 688. 
 Billu-ballat, 372. 
 
 Bil-sbamin, 372. 
 
 Bilshan, 369. 
 
 Bimbal, 369. 
 
 Bincbodesch, 370. 
 
 Binea, 370. 
 
 Binnui, 370. 
 
 Birth, new, typified by water, 86. 
 
 phenomena of, 86. 
 
 Birket, 372. 
 
 Birsha, 370. 
 
 Birzavith, 370. 
 
 Bish, 370. 
 
 Bishlam, 371. 
 
 Bishops, trial of seven, 655. 
 
 Bitch, 372. 
 
 Bitgalla, 364. 
 
 Bitgalla-kumta, 365. 
 
 Bithiah, 371. 
 
 Bith-kheira, 372. 
 
 Bit-nitsirti, 365. 
 
 Bit-rab Pul-sar-rabu, 372. 
 Bit-shaggatha, 109. 
 
 Bit-shaggathu, 365. 
 
 Bit-shakuri, 365. 
 
 Bit-tzida, 367. 
 
 Bizjothjah, 371. 
 
 Biztha, 671. 
 
 Black Yenus, 159. 
 
 Blasphemy, question of, 264, 547. 
 in limiting Almighty power, 
 257. 
 
 Blessing by Priest and Pope, 169. 
 Boanerges, 27, 688. 
 
 Boat, mystic, 166. 
 
 Boats, sacred, page 289. 
 
 Boar, sacred to Cristna, 372. 
 
 Boaz, 372. 
 
 and Jachin, 154. 
 
 Bocheru, 373. 
 
 Bochim, 373. 
 
 Bodotria, 373. 
 
 Bohan, 374. 
 
 Bohen, 90. 
 
 Bolitho, 374. 
 
 Bomba, 357. 
 
 Borough, meaning of name, 23. 
 Borsippa, 374. 
 
 Bosheth, note, 646. 
 
 Bosom of Almighty, 261. 
 
 Bow, 374. 
 
 and Arrow, 162. 
 
 „ the weapons of old 
 gods, 417. 
 
 Bower of delight, 354. 
 
 Bowman, celestial, 162. 
 
 Boys consecrated, 73. 
 
 Bozcath, 374. 
 
 Bozez, 374. 
 
 Bozra, 374. 
 
 Brahma, 375. 
 
 Brahman, 375. 
 
 Brahmins and Missionaries, 670. 
 Bramhya, 375. 
 
 Branding, 375. 
 
 Brennus and Brown, 169. 
 
 Briseis and Achilles, 120. 
 
 British Museum conceals Tera- 
 phim, 130. 
 
 Association denounced by 
 preachers, 682. 
 
 Broad Arrow, 168. 
 
 Brown, essay on the name, 11. 
 Budh, 375. 
 
 Budha, 375. 
 
 Buddhi, 375. 
 
 Buddhist signs, 147, 148, 151,152, 
 168. 
 
 Buddhists held up to execration, 
 670. 
 
 Buduel, 375. 
 
757 
 
 Bugs, or terrors, page 484. 
 
 Bukki, 375. 
 
 Bukkiah, 375. 
 
 Buli, 375. 
 
 Bull, 375. 
 
 Bunah, 378. 
 
 Bunaki-beth, 378. 
 
 Bungler, the Almighty described 
 as a, by divines, 659. 
 
 Bunni, 378. 
 
 Buns, their origin and antiquity, 
 378. 
 
 Burrow and Borough compared, 20. 
 Bury St. Edmunds, its name ex¬ 
 amined, 22. 
 
 Butler’s Analogy of Beligion, 578. 
 Butler’s Hudibras quoted, 686. 
 Buz, 380. 
 
 C. 
 
 C, 380. 
 
 Cabbon, 381. 
 
 Cabiri, 381. 
 
 Cabul, 381. 
 
 Cain, 381. 
 
 Cainan, 382. 
 
 Cairn made by Jacob, 130. 
 
 Cakes, 378. 
 
 Cakes of figs, 453. 
 
 Cal, 393. 
 
 Calah, 382. 
 
 Calcol, 382. 
 
 Caleb, 382. 
 
 Calf, 383. 
 
 golden, play before, 566. 
 kissed, 567, 593. 
 sex of, 567. 
 
 Calneh, 384. 
 
 Caluga, the serpent, 401. 
 
 Calves, idea of in Hosea, 593. 
 
 Cam, 393. 
 
 Cama, 384. 
 
 Camon, 384. 
 
 Canaan, 384. 
 
 Canaanites resuscitated, 523. 
 Canneh, 384. 
 
 Canon of Scripture examined and 
 explained, page 384. 
 
 Capella, M., hymn to sun, 647. 
 Caphtor, 291. 
 
 Capricornus and fish, 529. 
 
 Car, 391. 
 
 Carcas, 392. 
 
 Carchemish, 392. 
 
 Careah, 392. 
 
 Carians and David, 611. 
 
 Carmel, 392. 
 
 Carmi, 392. 
 
 Carshena, 393. 
 
 Carthage, 39, 394, 653. 
 Carthagenian inscriptions, 654. 
 Casiphia, 393. 
 
 Casluhim, 393. 
 
 Caspar, 394. 
 
 Catamenia, 161. 
 
 Cathedral towers, 154. 
 
 Catholic Nave, 166. 
 
 Cave dwellers, 587. 
 
 Celestial mother (Sarah), 5. 
 Celestial virgin, 74. 
 
 Celtic Druids quoted, 407. 
 Cepharhammonai, 394. 
 
 Ceres, 85, 167. 
 
 why she carries ears of corn, 
 420. 
 
 Ceylon known to Phoenicians, 39. 
 Chairs in Cathedrals, 309. 
 Chaldasa, 394. 
 
 Chaldaeans, 39, 93. 
 
 more favoured by the Deity 
 than the Hebrews, 247. 
 teach angelic law to Jews, 245. 
 Chaldee Mythology, ancient, 51, 
 244. 
 
 Chaldee faith, 58. 
 
 Chance used as “ The Lord,” 438. 
 Change of text in Bible, note, 55. 
 Change of names, 132, 311. 
 Changes in outlandish names, 10. 
 Charashim, 381, 395. 
 
 Chariot of Sun, 143, 359. 
 Charlatans, religious, 306. 
 
758 
 
 Charms, page 395. 
 
 Chasms, 373. 
 
 Chebar, 397. 
 
 Chedorlaomer, 397. 
 
 Clergy, Protestant, sketched, 662. 
 Chelal, 397. 
 
 Chelluh, 397. 
 
 Chelubia, 397. 
 
 Chemosh, 397. 
 
 Chenaanah, 397. 
 
 Chenani, 398. 
 
 Chephirah, 398. 
 
 Cheran, 398. 
 
 Cherethites, 398. 
 
 Cherith, 398. 
 
 Cherub, 398. 
 
 Chesalon, 399. 
 
 Chesed, 399. 
 
 Chesil, 399. 
 
 Chesulloth, 399. 
 
 Chezib, 399. 
 
 Chidon, 399. 
 
 Chileab, 399. 
 
 Chilion, 67, 399. 
 
 Chilmad, 399. 
 
 Chimera, 248. 
 
 Chimham, 399. 
 
 China, extent of her empire, 37. 
 will not send envoys who do 
 not speak Chinese, 257. 
 Chinese symbol, 168. 
 
 Chinneroth, 400. 
 
 Chisloth Tabor, 399. 
 
 Chittim, 400, 692. 
 
 Chiun, 291, 401. 
 
 Chorashan, 400. 
 
 Chosen race, a, 635. 
 
 Chozeba, 400. 
 
 Christ invested with the attributes 
 of other gods, 648. 
 
 Christ denounced as an infidel, 660. 
 Christendom and Hindostan com¬ 
 pared, 670. 
 
 Christian ideas compared, 56. 
 Christians and Heathens com¬ 
 pared, 679. 
 
 Christna, history of, page 400. 
 is black, 401. 
 is crucified, 402. 
 has his side pierced, 403. 
 Church of England adheres to 
 errors, 506. 
 
 Church of England Ministers 
 aspire to be dictators, 663. 
 Church of England ought to ori¬ 
 ginate a plan for treating 
 religion as an exact science, 
 
 684. 
 
 for the fool of the family, 684. 
 is deteriorating in mind, 684, 
 
 685. 
 
 Church of Rome, its four great 
 gods, 912. 
 
 fend her saints and martyrs, 
 V 139, 140. 
 
 ^courages the growth of 
 nuns, and uses eunuchs, 
 114. 
 
 Churchmen, High, use heathen 
 symbols, 141. 
 
 Chronicles and Joel, 691. 
 Chronicles opposed to Jeremiah, 
 644. 
 
 Cicero and Hosea compared, 594. 
 Cingetorix and other German 
 names mentioned by Cassar, 
 explained, note, 15. 
 
 Ciphers and myths compared, 87. 
 Circles, stone, 352, 425. 
 
 Circular fanes, 352, 542. 
 Circumcision, 128, 129, 193, 545. 
 a sanitary provision, 547. 
 evidence drawn from it, 546. 
 flint knives used, 542. 
 in conversation, 20. 
 
 Joshua is particular, 546. 
 Moses is careless of, 545. 
 
 Cis or Kish, 162. 
 
 Citium, 692. 
 
 Citron, 272. 
 
 Clitoris, 108, 161. 
 
 Cobwebs to be swept, 87. 
 
759 
 
 Cock, the, page 169. 
 
 Cognomens given by priests, 8, 4, 
 609. 
 
 Coheleth quoted, 58, 117, 175. 
 Cohen, 404. 
 
 meaning of the term, 404. 
 Coinage of a country and its re¬ 
 ligion compared, 505. 
 Coincidence and relationship, 24. 
 Colenso quoted, 29, 623. 
 
 Colenso’s work supplemented by 
 that of the author, 628. 
 Colonies, Tyrian or Carthaginian, 
 653. 
 
 Colonising, its progress, 37. 
 Colonists quarrel with aborigines, 
 38. 
 
 Columbus referred to, 35. 
 
 Comb, 404. 
 
 Comforter, the, 537. 
 
 Comets considered portents, 118. 
 Coming of Elias and Christ, 387. 
 Commandment, third, to be taken 
 literally, 618. 
 
 Compounding for sins, 681, 686. 
 Conception, the immaculate, 51. 
 Concha, the, 158. 
 
 Condottieri, David a leader of, 434. 
 Cone sacred to Venus, 148. 
 Confucius and Moses compared, 
 668 . 
 
 Congress with brutes, 567, 568. 
 Coniah, 405. 
 
 Conical stones, 405. 
 
 Conna, a peculiar wafer, 403. 
 Cononiah, 405. 
 
 Consecration of kings respected, 
 434. 
 
 Consecration by oil, 305. 
 Conservative tendencies, 153. 
 Contradictions in Bible, 671. 
 Controversy languishes where all 
 are logical, 663. 
 
 Conversation unpleasant in the 
 East, 59. 
 
 Cooey, the note of the dove, 405. 
 
 Coronation orb, page 153. 
 
 Costume of nun and priest, 165. 
 Court of the Almighty, 562. 
 Covenant, Baal and Jah compared, 
 322, 323. 
 
 Covenanters, 686. 
 
 Cow, why sacred, 54. 
 
 Cow, lioness, and rat, 315. 
 
 Cow’s belly, a sacred aperture in 
 India, 416. 
 
 Coz, 405. 
 
 Creation, account of, 405. 
 
 arranged for three days by one 
 writer, 406. 
 
 associated with darkness, 87. 
 ideas of, 86, 406, 407. 
 myths respecting, 497, 498. 
 phenomena of around us, 677. 
 the mythos examined, 406. 
 Creator, conceptions of, 44. 
 his acts, 676. 
 our idea of, 49, 621. 
 preserver, destroyer, 30. 
 Creeds do not convey definite 
 ideas, 56. 
 
 Crescent, its meaning, 144. 
 Criticism, a snare of the Devil, 
 682. 
 
 Cromwell’s biographers, 388. 
 Cross, 407. 
 
 adopted at Nicaea, 414. 
 chariot wheel, 412. 
 doctrines illustrated by, 414. 
 Etruscan, 409. 
 form of, 414. 
 
 form of Hindoo temples, 408. 
 Higgins’ remarks upon, 407, 
 408, 410, 412. 
 in ancient Cyprus, 409. 
 in Pompeii, 409. 
 
 Minutius Felix upon, 411. 
 
 not essentially Christian, 407. 
 
 Koman, 411. 
 
 the tau, 409. 
 
 used for slaves, 413. 
 
 various forms of, 143, 151, 
 
760 
 
 Cross—various forms of, page 
 
 152, 153,157, 167,168, 410, 
 411, 412. 
 and circle, 143. 
 and trinity and arba-il, 157. 
 as an emblem, 150. 
 
 Crozier, cross, and mitre at Ele- 
 phanta, 401. 
 
 Crucifixion of Cbristna, 402. 
 Cruelty of David, 435. 
 
 Crusaders, bad Christians, 686. 
 Crux ansata, 152, 240. 
 
 Cun, a cake, 403. 
 
 Cunni Diaboli, 114, 415. 
 
 extent of their existence, 415. 
 in use in India now, 416. 
 their relation to the idea of 
 the earth as a mother, 415. 
 Curiosities in Egypt, 39. 
 
 Curse on Serpent explained, 602. 
 Curtain in Assyrian and Jewish 
 temples, 416. 
 what it hides, 416, 417. 
 
 Cush, 417. 
 
 Cusham, 417. 
 
 Cushan-rishathaim, 417. 
 
 Cushi, 417. 
 
 Cuth, 417. 
 
 Cuttings in the flesh, 643. 
 
 Cuvier and the devil, 451. 
 Cynocephali, 383, 417. 
 
 Cypriotes and David, 611. 
 
 Cyprus and the Hittites, 584. 
 Cyrus, 418. 
 
 and the Jews, 520. 
 
 D 
 
 D, 418. 
 
 Dabbasheth, 420. 
 
 Daberah, 420. 
 
 Dacar, 429. 
 
 Dad, 429. 
 
 Dagon, 111, 113, 420. 
 Dainu-kurban, 430. 
 
 Dalah, 430. 
 
 Dalu, 429. 
 
 Dalphon, page 420. 
 
 Damascus, 420. 
 
 Dan, 420. 
 
 Danclesa, phallic scenes in, 65. 
 Dandanni, 430. 
 
 Daniel, 420. 
 
 coupled with Noah and Job, 
 421. 
 
 his ignorance of Ezra and 
 Nehemiah, 526. 
 his prophecies vague, 427. 
 his use of words, * times,’ 
 
 ‘ weeks,’ ‘ days,’ 428. 
 his writings analysed, 422. 
 knows only El and not Jab, 
 
 421. 
 
 seems to be ignorant of Cyrus, 
 423. 
 
 the prophet gives dates to 
 prophecies, 421. 
 
 Danjaan, 429. 
 
 Dannah, 429. 
 
 Dara, 429. 
 
 Darda, 429. 
 
 Dari, 429. 
 
 Darius, 429. 
 
 and the Jews, 521. 
 
 Darkness brooding, 87. 
 
 Darkon, 429. 
 
 Dashon, 430. 
 
 Dathan, 429. 
 
 Davenport Brothers compared with 
 ancient humbugs, 47. 
 
 David, abolishes grossness in re¬ 
 ligion, 306. 
 
 addresses the goddesses, 228. 
 adores the Ark, 439. 
 a leader of condottieri, 434, 
 611. 
 
 a representative man, 431. 
 becomes a bandit, 433. 
 dances before Ark, 158. 
 does not know Moses’ law, 
 
 422. 
 
 = “ beloved,” 430. 
 estimate of his Psalms, 442. 
 
761 
 
 David flies to Achish, page 483. 
 his anger at Nabal, 433. 
 his antecedents, 431. 
 his conduct at Rabbah, 435. 
 his dancing, 535, 536, 583. 
 his marriage, 433. 
 his name analysed, 431. 
 his old age, 437. 
 his private character, 438, 534. 
 his rise, 137. 
 his shield, 119. 
 his style of justice, 435. 
 his temperament, 432, 610. 
 ignores Moses, 610. 
 introduces Jah, 29, 608. 
 is friendly with two Hittites, 
 584. 
 
 respects Nathan, 441. 
 summary of his life, 443. 
 takes Jerusalem, 435. 
 
 Davis, his Carthagenian inscrip¬ 
 tion, 654. 
 
 Dead, feasts for, 641. 
 
 Deborah, 444. 
 
 Debir, 444. 
 
 Decoys in old times, 515. 
 
 Dedan, 445. 
 
 Deductions from premises, 139. 
 
 Deity, definition of word, 118. 
 
 Dekar, 445. 
 
 Delaiah, 445. 
 
 Delilah, 445. 
 
 Delphic priestesses, 583. 
 
 Delta, the, 107, 146. 
 double, 119. 
 
 Deluge, apochryphal, 297. 
 
 Demigods are angels, 245, 621. 
 
 Demon and demoniac possession, 
 446, 513. 
 
 Demons depart at break of day, 449. 
 
 Demoniacal possession, 117, 446, 
 513. 
 
 Demosthenes as good as Hosea, 
 594. 
 
 Denham’s opinion on exorcism, 
 516. 
 
 Denis, St., page 62. 
 
 Deo soli, 413. 
 
 Descent of names, 83. 
 by the ear, 14. 
 
 traced through male line, 120. 
 
 Destruction of Jerusalem the end 
 of the world! 667. 
 
 Deterioration of priestly class a 
 necessary result of the doc¬ 
 trine of plenary inspiration, 
 684. 
 
 Deucalion, 295. 
 
 Deuel, 449. 
 
 Deuteronomy and Jeremiah, 633, 
 634. 
 
 Devatars salute Christna, 401. 
 
 Development of theological sys¬ 
 tems, 51. 
 
 Devil, 94, 450. 
 
 a potent agency, 453. 
 apparent to mankind, 448. 
 Cuvier and the apparition of, 
 451. 
 
 his name examined, 450. 
 his nature considered, 451. 
 leads “ the opposition,” 452. 
 
 Devil’s tail, men taught to wield 
 it, 48. 
 
 Devils are angels, or vice versa ,, 
 according to human judg¬ 
 ment, 118, 245, 621. 
 
 Diana, 167. 
 
 Diana of the Ephesians, 53, 83, 
 104, 105. 
 
 Diblaim, 454. 
 
 Diblath, 453. 
 
 Dibon, 455. 
 
 Dibri, 455. 
 
 Dictators deprecate the use of 
 reason, 663. 
 in “ the Church,” 663. 
 
 Dido, 251, 463. 
 
 Difficulties in study of names, 13, 
 16, 24. 
 
 in the Bible explained away, 
 426. 
 
 E E E 
 
762 
 
 Difficulties — scriptural shelved, 
 page 500„ 
 
 Digger Indians and Horites com¬ 
 pared, 587. 
 
 Diklah, 455. 
 
 Dilean, 455. 
 
 Dimashk, 455. 
 
 Dimishemsi, 455. 
 
 Dimnah, 455. 
 
 Dimon, 455. 
 
 Dimonah, 455. 
 
 Dinah, 455. 
 
 Dinhabah, 456. 
 
 Dionysus, 82, 456. 
 
 Disc, the, or aureole, 142. 
 
 Dishon, 456. 
 
 Dispensation, a second follows a 
 a first, 659. 
 
 Distillation, the process referred 
 to, 217. 
 
 Diversity of names, whence aris¬ 
 ing, 2. 
 
 Dividing a mountain, 588. 
 
 Divine names not to he spoken 
 aloud, 617. 
 
 Divines, Anglican, ideas of about 
 heaven and hell, 562. 
 orthodox, how to decide be¬ 
 tween Peter and Paul, 664. 
 very inexact in their logic, 
 683. 
 
 Division of labour, 258. 
 
 Divorce, by Ezra, 523. 
 
 Dizahab, 457. 
 
 E 
 
 E, 464. 
 
 Eagle, 464. 
 
 Ear endures what the eye will not, 
 255. 
 
 Ears of Almighty, 260. 
 
 Earth, &c., 465. 
 
 mother, 289, 465, 560. 
 once believed to be stationary, 
 666 . 
 
 regarded as mother, 467. 
 
 Ebal, page 468. 
 
 Ebed, 468. 
 
 Ebedmelech, 468. 
 
 Eben, 468. 
 
 Ebenezer, 468. 
 
 Eber, 468. 
 
 Ebiasaph, 469. 
 
 Ebna, 469. 
 
 Ebnu, 469. 
 
 Edad, 473. 
 
 Eden, 469. 
 
 Eder, 469. 
 
 Edom, 469. 
 
 Edom not destroyed in Jeremiah’s 
 time, and yet stated to be 
 destroyed before, 643. 
 
 Edrei, 470. 
 
 Egg, 337. 
 
 its mystical signification, 470. 
 Eglah, 471. 
 
 Eglaim, 472. 
 
 Eglon, 68. 
 
 Egypt, 472. 
 
 Egyptian and Hindoo worship 
 similar, 290. 
 
 names not found amongst 
 Jews, 96, 97,135. 
 religion contained obscenities, 
 88 . 
 
 Egyptians circumcised, 546. 
 
 pour out water after a death, 
 85. 
 
 Ehi, 472. 
 
 Ehud, 472. 
 
 Eker, 472. 
 
 Ekron, 68. 
 
 El and Ilos, 31. 
 
 angels called after him, 246. 
 used for strange deities, 226. 
 El, Elohim, see Al, 213. 
 
 Eladah, 473. 
 
 Elah, 473. 
 
 Elam, 473. 
 
 Elamu, 473. 
 
 Elasha, 473. 
 
 Elath, 473. 
 
763 
 
 Eldaah, page 473. 
 
 Elead, 473. 
 
 Eleadah, 474. 
 
 Elealah, 474. 
 
 Eleasar, 474. 
 
 Eleazar, 474. 
 
 Elel, 474. 
 
 Elephant, 173, 230. 
 
 Elephanta, caves of, 401, 
 
 Eli, 32, 474. 
 
 Eli, Eli, lama, saba«chtham, 32. 
 Eliab, 474. 
 
 Eliada, 474. 
 
 Eliabba, 474. 
 
 Eliakim, 474. 
 
 Eliam, 475. 
 
 Elias, 31. 
 
 Eliasapb, 475. 
 
 Eliasbib, 475. 
 
 Eliatbab, 475. 
 
 Elidad, 475. 
 
 Eliel, 475. 
 
 Elienai, 475. 
 
 Eliezer, 475. 
 
 Elihoreph, 475. 
 
 Elihu, 475. 
 
 Ebjab, 475. 
 
 assumes power to anoint 
 kings, 478. 
 
 destroys soldiers, 479. 
 bis history analysed, 476. 
 bis murders, 655. 
 is unknown to Jehoshapbat, 
 478. 
 
 kills prophets, 478- 
 slaughters 450 men, 655. 
 Elika, 480. 
 
 Elim, 480. 
 
 Elim, plural of El, 227, 
 
 Ebmelecb, 480, 
 
 Elin, 480. 
 
 Elioenai, 480. 
 
 Elipbal, 480. 
 
 Ebpbaleb, 480. 
 
 Elipbalet, 480. 
 
 Elipbaz, 480. 
 
 Elippa, page 166, 
 
 Elisha, 480. 
 
 bis history, 481. 
 bis name analysed, 480. 
 Elisbab, 481. 
 
 Elisbamab, 482. 
 
 Elisbapbat, 482. 
 
 Elisbeba, 482. 
 
 the name analysed, 482. 
 Elisbua, 483. 
 
 Elizabeth, 488. 
 
 the name examined, 19. 
 Elizapban, 483, 
 
 Elizur, 488. 
 
 Elkanab, 483. 
 
 Elkosbi, 484. 
 
 Ellasar, 484. 
 
 Elnaam, 484. 
 
 Elnatban, 484. 
 
 Elobab, 225. 
 
 Elobim = baalim, 225, 
 
 = gods, 224. 
 
 supplanted by Nebo, 616. 
 Elon, 484. 
 
 Elotb, 484. 
 
 Elpaal, 484, 
 
 Eltakab, 484. 
 
 Eltekon, 484. 
 
 Eltolad, 484. 
 
 Eluzai, 484. 
 
 Elzabad, 484. 
 
 Elzfpban, 68, 484. 
 
 Emasculation of prisoners by 
 Egyptians, 65. 
 
 Emblem of life, 152, 
 
 Emblems veil bidden meanings, 
 87, 158, 308. 
 
 Emims, 484. 
 
 Enam, 73, 485, 
 
 En-an, 485. 
 
 Endor, 485. 
 
 En-eglaim, 485. 
 
 En-gannim, 485. 
 
 Engedi, 485. 
 
 England colonised by the Phoeni¬ 
 cians, 40. 
 
Englishman selects his own reli¬ 
 gion, page 258. 
 
 En-haddah, 425. 
 
 En-hakkore, 485. 
 
 En-Harod, 485. 
 
 En-Hazor, 485. 
 
 Enoch, 485. 
 
 Enon, 68. 
 
 Enos, 486. 
 
 Enrogel, 485. 
 
 En-Tappuah, 485. 
 
 Enterprise, European, result of in 
 new lands, 9. 
 
 Epaphroditus, 486. 
 
 Ephah, 486. 
 
 Epher, 486. 
 
 Ephesdammim, 487. 
 
 Ephod, 487. 
 
 Ephraim, 487. 
 
 Ephrath, 488. 
 
 Ephron, 488. 
 
 Epilepsy a sacred disease, 446. 
 Epochs in Jewish story, 127. 
 
 Eran, 488. 
 
 Erech, 489. 
 
 Eri, 490. 
 
 Eros, 489. 
 
 Esarhaddon, 490. 
 
 Esau, 490, 600. 
 
 and Jacob, 88. 
 
 Esbon, 67. 
 
 Esek, 490. 
 
 Eshbaal, 490. 
 
 Eshban, 491. 
 
 Eshcol and On, 67. 
 
 Eshcol, 491. 
 
 Eshean, 491. 
 
 Eshek, 491. 
 
 Eshmun and Jah, 611. 
 
 Eshtaol, 491. 
 
 Eshtemoh, 491. 
 
 Eshton, 68, 491. 
 
 Esther, 492. 
 
 Etam, 492. 
 
 Ethan, 492. 
 
 Ethbaal, 492. 
 
 Ether, page 492. 
 
 Ethnan, 492. 
 
 Ethni, 492. 
 
 Etruscan crosses, 150. 
 
 Etruscans vie with modern Eng¬ 
 lish, 679. 
 
 Eunuchs, 492. 
 
 used in St. Peter’s, 114. 
 Euphemisms prescribed by Babbis, 
 
 133. 
 
 Euphrates, 494. 
 
 its banks colonised, 38. 
 
 Eva, 95. 
 
 Eve, 495. 
 
 Evi, 499. 
 
 Evidence, dissertation on, 499. 
 
 of traffic, 129. 
 
 Evil Merodach, 507. 
 
 Evil spirits, ideas about, 513, 514. 
 Excommunication of the followers 
 of Christ, 660. 
 
 Executioners for God, 673. 
 
 Exodus, condition of Jews at, 133> 
 
 134. 
 
 Exorcism, 513. 
 
 in Greece, 514. 
 
 Exorcisms, 117. 
 
 Extermination of heretics, a godly 
 work! 672. 
 
 the idea involves the belief 
 that God is powerless, 
 673. 
 
 Ex voto, 517. 
 
 Eye is the Yoni, 260. 
 
 of Almighty, 497. 
 
 Ez, 518. 
 
 Ezbai, 507. 
 
 Ezbon, 507. 
 
 Ezekiel, 507. 
 
 uses the tau for a stamp, 152. 
 Ezekiel’s description of Jews, 211, 
 212 . 
 
 writings, 507. 
 
 Ezem, 519. 
 
 Ezer, 519. 
 
 Ezion Gaber, 519. 
 
765 
 
 Ezra, page 519. 
 
 Ezri, 526. 
 
 F. 
 
 F, 526. 
 
 Fables often told pass for truth, 
 249. 
 
 Factories, forts, and settlements, 
 
 10 . 
 
 Fainting in battle, a noble feat! 
 664. 
 
 Faith, a degrading one worse than 
 none, 659. 
 adopted, 294. 
 
 ancient, summarised, 29, 30. 
 each believes his own the best, 
 659. 
 
 in one’s own religion common 
 to all, 6. 
 
 of Abraham and Sarai, 127. 
 overrides other feelings, 566. 
 superior to reason ! 663. 
 the weakness of, shown by 
 ecclesiastical quarrels, 662. 
 Faiths, how to be examined, 669- 
 676. 
 
 Fakir, act of, 219. 
 
 Fallen angels, 180, 247-249. 
 
 False Prophet, story of, 501. 
 Falsification in history, 6. 
 
 of a prophecy, its effects, 667, 
 
 668 . 
 
 Father and the Son superseded by 
 the virgin, 33. 
 of thousands, 80. 
 the, our ideas of, 56. 
 
 Fathers, the, not good guides, 109. 
 Fawn, 355. 
 
 Fear attributed to God, 264. 
 
 Feasts for the dead, 641. 
 
 Fecundity and fish, 529. 
 
 favoured by amulets, 130. 
 Feet, an euphemism, 601. 
 hair of, 133. 
 of Almighty, 261. 
 
 Felix, 528. 
 
 Female creator, 101. 
 
 Female—deity, page 98. 
 her names, 99, 100, 101. 
 singers not allowed at St. 
 
 Peters, 494. 
 sun, 154. 
 
 Females, a special hell for the 
 childless, 59, 60. 
 desire of offspring, 91. 
 
 Fig, its signification, 526. 
 leaf, 274. 
 
 the, a female emblem, 107. 
 tree, episode, 251. 
 
 Finger, its signification, 67, 90. 
 pointed, 161. 
 
 Fire king, the, 491. 
 
 Fish, a deity, 30. 
 and ark, 289. 
 and Buddists, 530. 
 and fecundity, 530. 
 and Isis, with figure, 530. 
 and the triad, 169. 
 an emblem, 420. 
 an emblem of Venus, 531, 565. 
 eaten on Friday by Jews, 530. 
 head, the mitre, 166. 
 its signification, 528, 531. 
 on Friday, 531. 
 sacred to Venus, why, 111, 
 112 . 
 
 the intelligent, 96. 
 
 Fleur de lys, 156. 
 
 its signification, 531. 
 
 Flesh, cuttings in the, 643. 
 
 Flint knives, for castration, 542. 
 
 Flock of sheep, David seems to 
 appeal to, 228. 
 
 Fluidity, 84. 
 
 Food, Anna, 82. 
 of Angels, 245. 
 
 Fool of the family enters the 
 Church, 684. 
 
 Forbes Leslie, his Early Races of 
 Scotland, 543. 
 
 Fountain sealed, 52. 
 
 Four great gods, 69, 89. 
 
 Four, the, 69, 89, 169. 
 
766 
 
 Foutin, St.,Ms business, page 31,62. 
 his chapel at Varailles des¬ 
 cribed, 61. 
 
 France, phallic feasts in, 379. 
 its fleur de lys, 531. 
 its phallic Christian saints, 
 61, 62. 
 
 Frederick the great, his saying 
 about large armies, 635. 
 Freemasons use triangle, 145. 
 Free-thinkers, 664. 
 
 Friday and females, 531. 
 
 and fish, 530, 565. 
 
 Frigidity, a curse, 61, 361. 
 
 Fruit of the body promised to 
 faithful, 60, 
 
 Fiirst on Jah, 614. 
 
 Future condition of animals, 577, 
 578. 
 
 state, 562, 571, 576. 
 world not revealed to ancient 
 Jews, 674, 
 
 G. 
 
 G, 533. 
 
 used for Jin pronunciation, 12. 
 Gaal, 533. 
 
 Gaash, 533. 
 
 Gab, a current word, 534. 
 
 Gabbi, 533. 
 
 Gabriel, 81, 533. 
 
 the angel, 31. 
 
 Gad, 534. 
 
 a friend of David, 535. 
 
 Gaddi, 535. 
 
 Gaddiel, 535. 
 
 Gadi, 535. 
 
 Gaham, 535. 
 
 Gahar, 536. 
 
 Gala days, 186. 
 
 Galah, the word explained, 536. 
 Galal, 536. 
 
 Galgals, 154, 542, 544. 
 
 in India, 544. 
 
 Galilee, 536. 
 
 Galli, 493, 536, 542. 
 
 Gallim, page 536. 
 
 Gallio, his judgment on Paul, 661. 
 Gallus, 169, 536, 537. 
 
 Gamaliel, 537. 
 
 Gammadims, 537. 
 
 Gard, 537. 
 
 Garden, metaphor for virgin, 52. 
 Gareb, 537. 
 
 Garment, Babylonish, 134. 
 
 Garmi, 537. 
 
 Gaspur, 537. 
 
 the same as the Comforter, 
 537. 
 
 Gatam, 537. 
 
 Gath, 68, 538. 
 
 Gath-hepher, 538. 
 
 Gath-rimmon, 538. 
 
 Gauls, 169, 170. 
 
 Gaza, 69, 538. 
 
 Gazez, 538. 
 
 Gazzam, 538. 
 
 Geba, 538. 
 
 Gebal, 539. 
 
 Geber, 539. 
 
 Gebim, 539. 
 
 Gedaliah, 539. 
 
 Geder, 539. 
 
 Gederah, 539. 
 
 Gederoth, 539. 
 
 Gedor, 539. 
 
 Gehazi, 539. 
 
 Gemalli, 539. 
 
 Gemariah, 539. 
 
 Generations, extraordinary dura¬ 
 tion of three, 133. 
 
 Genesis, mystical character of, 
 497. 
 
 Gentiles, 539. 
 
 Genubath, 539. 
 
 Geology denounced by preachers, 
 682. 
 
 Gera, 539. 
 
 Gerar, 193, 540. 
 
 Gerizim, 540. 
 
 Gerizite, 540. 
 
 Gershon, 69, 540. 
 
767 
 
 Gesham, page 540. 
 
 Geshem, 540. 
 
 Geskur, 540. 
 
 Gesta Komanorum referred to, 655. 
 Gesticulations and worship, 583. 
 Gether, 540. 
 
 Geuel, 540. 
 
 Gezer, 540. 
 
 Giah, 540. 
 
 Giaours, dogs and infidels, 658. 
 Gibbar, 540. 
 
 Gibbethon, 541. 
 
 Gibea, 540. 
 
 Gibeah, 540. 
 
 Gibeon, 69, 540. 
 
 ambassadors of, talk with 
 Joshua, 134. 
 
 Giddalti, 541. 
 
 Giddel, 541. 
 
 Gideon, 69, 541. 
 
 Gideoni, 541. 
 
 Gidgad, 541. 
 
 Gidom, 541. 
 
 Gihon, 541. 
 
 Gil, 541. 
 
 Gilalai, 541. 
 
 Gilead, 542. 
 
 Gilgal, 155, 542, 548. 
 
 connected with circumcision, 
 545. 
 
 description of cairns, 543, 544. 
 Forbes Leslie on, 545. 
 still called “ galgals,” 543. 
 Gill and Jack, 33. 
 
 Giloh, 548. 
 
 Gimzo, 548. 
 
 Ginath, 548. 
 
 Ginger, an old god, 51. 
 
 Ginnethon, 548. 
 
 Ginsburg quoted, 52, 55, 58, 60, 
 76, 79, 117, 133, 186, 211, 
 213, 215, 224, 226, 227, 268, 
 277, 354, 543, 650, 675. 
 Girgashite, 548. 
 
 Gispa, 548. 
 
 Gittaim, 548. 
 
 Gittite, page 548. 
 
 Gittites and David, 611. 
 
 Gizrites, 548. 
 
 Goath, 548. 
 
 Gob, 549. 
 
 God, feebleness of purpose attri¬ 
 buted to Him, 672. 
 mother of, 57. 
 one, 549, 553. 
 one, and sub-divided, 56. 
 pourtrayed as having likes and 
 dislikes, 262. 
 
 requires the assistance of men 
 in carrying on His govern¬ 
 ment! 665. 
 
 Sol, or only God, 413. 
 Goddess, 550. 
 
 Goddesses, addressed by David, 
 473. 
 
 the, 228. 
 
 God-given names, 2, 3. 
 
 Gods, 224, 549, 550. 
 
 and angels compared, 621. 
 Assyrian, have wives, 58. 
 images called, 129. 
 language of the, 617. 
 minor, of Assyria, 115,121. 
 sexual, 61, 62. 
 strange, 129. 
 
 God’s promises, 59. 
 
 Gog, 550. 
 
 Gol, 550. 
 
 Golan, 551. 
 
 Goliath, 551. 
 
 Gomer, 551. 
 
 Gomorrah, 551. 
 
 Good luck and women, 114, 308, 
 534. 
 
 Goshen, 551. 
 
 Governments, folly of the, who 
 punish infidelity, 665. 
 Gozan, 551. 
 
 Graven images and word paintings, 
 253. 
 
 Greek gods compared with the 
 Bible God, 262. 
 
768 
 
 Greek influence, page 177. 
 
 Greeks had sacred names, 619. 
 knew language of the gods, 
 617. 
 
 practised exorcism, 514. 
 Green, essay on the name, 10. 
 Greluchon, Saint, a sexual aid, 62. 
 Ground cursed, 467. 
 
 Grove explained, 108, 161. 
 
 the sacred, 90, 106. 
 
 Groves, 807. 
 
 hangings for, 490. 
 
 Growth of nuns encouraged, 114. 
 Gula, 95. 
 
 Guni, 551. 
 
 Gur, 551. 
 
 Gur Baal, 551. 
 
 Guthiber, an old Chaldaean god, 
 51, 54. 
 
 H. 
 
 H, 551. 
 
 Habaiah, 552. 
 
 Habakkuk, 552. 
 
 Habar, 552. 
 
 Habaziniah, 553. 
 
 Habel, 552. 
 
 Habitation of Baal, 350. 
 
 Habits of men and animals com¬ 
 pared, 678. 
 
 Habor, 553. 
 
 Hachilah, 553. 
 
 Hachaliah, 553. 
 
 Hachmoni, 553. 
 
 Hadad, 553. 
 
 signifies one, 553. 
 
 Hadadezer, 553. 
 
 Hadadrimmon, 553. 
 
 Hadashah, 553. 
 
 Hadassah, 553. 
 
 Hadar, 553. 
 
 Hadarezer, 553. 
 
 Hades, 553. 
 
 Hadid, 554. 
 
 Hadlai, 554. 
 
 Hadoram, 554. 
 
 Hadrach, page 554. 
 
 Hagab, 554. 
 
 Hagabah, 554. 
 
 Hagar, 554. 
 
 a slave, 129. 
 
 Hagarenes, 554. 
 
 Haggai, 554. 
 
 Haggiah, 554. 
 
 Haggith, 554. 
 
 Hai, 554. 
 
 Hair of the feet, 133. 
 
 Hairy mount, 489. 
 
 Hakkoz, 554. 
 
 Hakupha, 554. 
 
 Halah, 554. 
 
 Halhul, 554. 
 
 Hah, 554. 
 
 Hallal, 554. 
 
 Halleluiah, 583. 
 
 Halohesh, 555. 
 
 Ham, 23, 555. 
 
 Haman, 555. 
 
 consults “ chance,” 438. 
 Hamath, 555, 613, 
 
 Hamlet, a, what, 24. 
 
 Hamman, 555. 
 
 Hammolecheth, 556. 
 
 Hammon, 556. 
 
 Hamonah, 556. 
 
 Hamor, 556. 
 
 Hampton wick, 23. 
 
 Hamuel, 556. 
 
 Hamul, 556. 
 
 Hamutal, 556. 
 
 Hanameel, 557. 
 
 Hanan, 557. 
 
 Hananeel, 557. 
 
 Hanani, 557. 
 
 Hand, symbolic, 161. 
 
 Hands of Almighty, 261. 
 
 Hanes, 557. 
 
 Hangings for the grove, 309, 490. 
 Hannah, 557. 
 
 her desire for offspring, 60. 
 Hannathon, 557. 
 
 Hanniel, 557. 
 
769 
 
 Hanoch, page 557. 
 
 Hanun, 557. 
 
 Haradah, 557. 
 
 Haran, 557. 
 
 Harbonah, 557. 
 
 Hareph, 557. 
 
 Harhas, 557. 
 
 Harhiah, 557. 
 
 Harim, 557. 
 
 Harnepher, 557. 
 
 Harod, 558. 
 
 Haroeh, 557. 
 
 Harosheth, 558. 
 
 Harry, 275. 
 
 Harsha, 558. 
 
 Harum, 558. 
 
 Harnmaph, 558. 
 
 Haruz, 558. 
 
 Hasadiab, 558. 
 
 Hashabiah, 558. 
 
 Hashbadanah, 558. 
 
 Hashem, 558. 
 
 Hashmonah, 558. 
 
 Hashub, 558. 
 
 Hashubah, 559. 
 
 Hasbum, 559. 
 
 Hasrah, 559. 
 
 Hasupha, 559. 
 
 Hatach, 559. 
 
 Hatath, 559. 
 
 Hatipha, 559. 
 
 Hatita, 559. 
 
 Hatred attributed to God, 262. 
 
 carried into heaven, 562, 568. 
 Hattil, 559. 
 
 Hattush, 559. 
 
 Hauran, 559. 
 
 Havilah, 559. 
 
 Hazael, 559. 
 
 Hazaiah, 559. 
 
 Hazar-addar, 559. 
 
 Hazar-enan, 559. 
 
 Hazar-gaddah, 559. 
 Hazar-haddatah, 560. 
 Hazar-hatticon, 560. 
 Hazar-maveth, 560. 
 
 Hazar-shual, page 560. 
 Hazar-susah, 561. 
 
 Hazazon-tamar, 561. 
 
 Hazelel-poni, 561. 
 
 Hazerim, 561. 
 
 Hazeroth, 561. 
 
 Haziel, 561. 
 
 Hazo, 561. 
 
 Hazor, 561. 
 
 Hazor-hadattah, 561. 
 
 Hea, 85. 
 
 Head of Almighty, 259. 
 
 Heathens and Christians com¬ 
 pared, 679. 
 
 Heaven, Anglican divines’ opinion 
 of, 562. 
 
 and hell, how stocked, 562. 
 ideas respecting it, 561. 
 males frank women into, 547. 
 war in, 249. 
 
 Heber, 568. 
 
 Hebrew idea of angels, 245. 
 
 language resembles the Phoeni¬ 
 cians, 40. 
 
 roots in Canaanite names, 
 128. 
 
 Hebrews, a chosen people, their 
 claim examined, 673. 
 and sacred name, 616. 
 Hebron, 69, 564. 
 
 Heel, the, an euphemism, 601. 
 Hege, 569. 
 
 Heifer, 564. 
 
 analysis of the idea respecting, 
 565. 
 
 Helah, 569. 
 
 Helam, 569. 
 
 Helbah, 569. 
 
 Helbon, 69, 569. 
 
 Heleb, 569. 
 
 Helek, 569. 
 
 Helem, 569. 
 
 Helen caused Trojan war, 120. 
 Heleph, 570. 
 
 Helez, 570. 
 
 Heliopolis, 65. 
 
 FFF 
 
770 
 
 Helkai, page 570. 
 
 Helkath, 570. 
 
 Helkath Hazzurim, 570. 
 
 Hell, 570. 
 
 all opponents of all religions 
 consigned thereto, 575. 
 compared with kingdom of 
 Prester John, 574, 575. 
 did not always exist, 571. 
 for childless women, 59, 60. 
 for the lower animals, 576. 
 ideas respecting, 570. 
 invented by other nations 
 before the Jews, 571. 
 its earthly managers, 575, 576. 
 necessity for, in every theolo¬ 
 gical system, 572. 
 
 Hellenists and David, 611. 
 
 Helon, 70, 579. 
 
 Heman, 579. 
 
 Hemdan, 579. 
 
 Hen, 579. 
 
 Hena, 579. 
 
 Henadad, 580. 
 
 Hepher, 580. 
 
 Hephzibah, 581. 
 
 Hereditary names, first notice of, 
 
 3 . 
 
 and sacred names, 616. • 
 Heres, 581. 
 
 Heresh, 581. 
 
 Heresy, treatment of, 57. 
 
 Heretic, 306. 
 
 Heretics, infidels, and Turks, 658. 
 Hermai, 581. 
 
 Hermes, 543. 
 
 and Aaron compared, 178. 
 Scythicus quoted, 27, 28. 
 Hermon, 70, 581. 
 
 Herodotus on circumcision, 546. 
 
 quoted, 53, 57, 367. 
 
 Hesed, 581. 
 
 Heshbon, 70, 581. 
 
 Heshmon, 581. 
 
 Hesus, 371. 
 
 Heth, 582. 
 
 Hethlon, page 582. 
 
 Hezeki, 582. 
 
 Hezekiah, 582. 
 
 Hezer, 582. 
 
 Hezion, 582. 
 
 Hezrai, 582. 
 
 Hezron, 70, 582. 
 
 Hiddai, 582. 
 
 Hiddekel, 582. 
 
 Hidden meanings, 158. 
 
 Hiel, 582. 
 
 Hierarchs, classified, 670. 
 
 dearth of intellect amongst, 
 664, 683. 
 
 Hierarchy, exigencies of, 258. 
 Higgins on IH S, 647. 
 
 High Churchmen used heathen 
 symbols, 141. 
 
 High places, 154. 
 
 Hilen, 582. 
 
 Hilkiah, 582. 
 
 Hillel, 582. 
 
 Hindoo and Egyptian worship 
 similar, 290. 
 
 and Jewish ceremonial, 291. 
 deities, &c., referred to, 43. 
 gods, 417. 
 
 Hindoos consider water sacred, 85. 
 
 and sacred name, 616. 
 Hindostan and Christendom, 671. 
 Hinnom, 583. 
 
 Hirah, 583. 
 
 Hiram, 95, 584. 
 
 a friend of David, 611. 
 
 Hislop quoted, 244, 378. 
 
 Hislop’s two Babylons, 196. 
 Historian, Jewish, writes Samari¬ 
 tan history, 477. 
 
 History and nrythos, 123. 
 
 falsified, and prejudice, 44. 
 of Abraham, 192. 
 variously written, 535. 
 Hittites, 584. 
 
 who they were, 584. 
 
 Hivites, 585. 
 
 slaughter of, 606. 
 
771 
 
 Hoa, page 76, 85. 
 
 Hobab, 585. 
 
 Hobah, 585. 
 
 Hobiah, 585. 
 
 Hod, 585. 
 
 Hodaiah, 585. 
 
 Hodaviah, 585. 
 
 Hodesb, 585. 
 
 Hodevah, 585. 
 
 Hodsbi, 585. 
 
 Hoglah, 586. 
 
 Hoham, 586. 
 
 Hole and bell, 577. 
 
 see Hell. 
 
 Holon, 586. 
 
 Holy Ghost, the, 56. 
 
 Holy water, Hindoo, 168. 
 
 Homan, 586. 
 
 Homer, 240. 
 
 Hophni, 586, 
 
 Hophra, 586. 
 
 Hophraim, 586. 
 
 Hor, 586. 
 
 Horam, 586. 
 
 Horeb, 587. 
 
 Horem, 587 • 
 
 Hori, 587. 
 
 Horim, 94. 
 
 Hormah, 587. 
 
 Horonaim, 587. 
 
 Horse shoe, its use as a symbol, 
 
 114. 
 
 Horse-hair helps in tricks, 515. 
 Horses in heaven, 577. 
 
 of the sun, 359. 
 
 Horus, 587. 
 
 Hosah, 587. 
 
 Hosea, 554, 587. 
 
 a disreputable character, 589, 
 a whoremaster, 589, 590. 
 analysis of his book, 588, 594. 
 contemporary with Isaiah, 
 588. 
 
 his character summed up, 593. 
 his idea of blessings, 591. 
 reproves adultery, 591. 
 
 Hosea — some of his utterances 
 analysed, page 592. 
 style of reasoning, 593. 
 Hoshea, 454, 595. 
 
 Hotham, 595. 
 
 Houris in paradise, 563. 
 
 Hu, 595. 
 
 Hubishaga, an old Chaldean God, 
 51, 55. 
 
 Hudibras, quotation from, 686. 
 Hukkok, 595. 
 
 Hul, 595. 
 
 Huldah, 595. 
 
 Human aid required by Almighty ! 
 665. 
 
 conceptions of God intoler¬ 
 able, 267. 
 
 judgment on divine writings, 
 387. 
 
 passions attributed to God, 
 262. 
 
 Humtah, 595. 
 
 Hupham, 595. 
 
 Huppah, 595. 
 
 Hur, 595. 
 
 name of moon, 93, 96. 
 
 Hurai, 596. 
 
 Huri, 596. 
 
 Hushah, 596. 
 
 Hushai, 596. 
 
 his nationality, is a friend of 
 David, introduces “ Jah,” 
 &c., 596. 
 
 Husham, 596. 
 
 Hushim, 596. 
 
 Huz, 596. 
 
 I. 
 
 I, Iba, Iva, Eva, 598. 
 
 Ibleam, 628. 
 
 Ibneiah, 629. 
 
 Ibzan, 629. 
 
 Iceland, visited by Phoenicians, 40. 
 Ichabod, 629. 
 
 ’Ix^vs, 113. 
 
 Ida, 629. 
 
772 
 
 Idalah, page 629. 
 
 Idbasli, 629. 
 
 Ideas of heaven and hell, 562. 
 Ideas, oriental, ancient, modern, 
 and western, compared, 19. 
 Ideas respecting the Almighty, 49. 
 Igdaliah, 656. 
 
 Igeal, 656. 
 
 Ignorance attributed to God! 265. 
 Ignorance, our real, as regards 
 futurity, 579. 
 
 I H S, 518, 647. 
 
 Ijeabarim, 657. 
 
 Ijon, 657. 
 
 Ikkesh, 657. 
 
 II is Asher, 81. 
 
 Ilai, 657. 
 
 Ilos, 81, 196. 
 
 Ilus, 85. 
 
 Image in David’s house, 488. 
 Images, 129. 
 
 charmed, 61. 
 
 Imlah, 657. 
 
 Immaculate conception a modern 
 dogma, 51. 
 an old belief, 74. 
 
 Immanuel, 657. 
 
 Immer, 58. 
 
 Immorality compatible with reli¬ 
 gion, 55. 
 
 Impalement, 418. 
 
 Impotence dreaded, 59. 
 
 Impotency of description in man, 
 257. 
 
 Impuissance, masses said for, 62. 
 Imrah, 658. 
 
 Imri, 658. 
 
 Incarnations of the deity, 418. 
 Incompetency in husband, 60. 
 Inconsistencies in Bible, 671. 
 Incubi, 449. 
 
 India known to Phoenicians, 616. 
 traded with Phoenicians, 39. 
 two sets of worshippers, 108, 
 109. 
 
 Infidelity, and St. Paul, 661. 
 
 Infidelity—and Turks, page 658. 
 assigned to Jesus Christ, 660. 
 if punished by law, proves the 
 disbelief of the government 
 in power of God, 665. 
 signification of discussed, 658. 
 
 Infidels apparently made by the 
 absurdity of certain dogmas, 
 665. 
 
 desire to seek out truth, 663. 
 not opposed to good men, 
 662. 
 
 Influence fought for, 57. 
 
 “ Inquiring of the Lord,” meaning 
 of term, 438. 
 
 Inquisitors and Anglican divines 
 compared, 563. 
 
 Inquisitors, 563, 686. 
 
 I N R 1, 113. 
 
 Insanity considered a divine mani¬ 
 festation, 446. 
 modern ideas of, 447. 
 
 Insanity, mistaken for demoniacal 
 possession, 448, 513. 
 in the East, 48. 
 considered demoniacal posses¬ 
 sion, 117. 
 
 Inscriptions, Carthaginian, 654. 
 
 Inspiration, 666. 
 
 arguments for, 500. 
 assumed to exist in every na¬ 
 tion, 668. 
 
 attributes feebleness of pur¬ 
 pose to God, 672. 
 blighting influence of upon 
 the church, 684. 
 claims of investigated, 669. 
 did not tell of heaven or hell 
 to Adam, Moses, &c., 674. 
 does not consist in mere alle¬ 
 gations, 668. 
 
 does not explain the meaning 
 of mysterious utterances, 
 667. 
 
 does not prevent the use of 
 figurative language, 667. 
 
773 
 
 Inspiration—favours religious mur¬ 
 ders and adultery, page 688. 
 favours the animal propensi¬ 
 ties of man, 685. 
 incongruities and absurdities 
 in, 672. 
 
 ought not to oppose the works 
 of creation, 682. 
 its supporters analysed, 670. 
 makes bigots, 683. 
 necessity for, examined, 676. 
 none in falsities, 668. 
 none scruple to explain away 
 evident falsities in, 667. 
 opponents to, and defenders 
 of, 681. 
 
 probable fabrication of books, 
 675. 
 
 prophecies falsified, 673. 
 
 St. Paul and St. Peter upon, 
 
 666 . 
 
 supposed to exist in transla¬ 
 tions, 674. 
 
 the sword does not prove the 
 truth of, 671. 
 
 Instinct and civilisation compared, 
 680. 
 
 and reason, 677. 
 effects of in animals and 
 man, 678, 679. 
 is inspiration, 676. 
 
 Instincts, 676, 677. 
 
 Intelligences, angels, demigods, 
 245. 
 
 Intellect, dearth of amongst hier¬ 
 archs, 664, 683. 
 
 Interchangeable letters, 15. 
 
 Interdicts, 57. 
 
 Intermediate class between God 
 and man, 404. 
 
 Interpretation of Bible modified, 
 how, 48. 
 
 Interpretations of Bible, various, 
 667. 
 
 Intoxication, a proof of divine ap¬ 
 proval and wrath, 594. 
 
 Introduction of name of Jah into 
 Judea, page 138. 
 
 Introduction to vocabulary, 171. 
 Invaders of a country import new 
 names, &c., 21. 
 
 Inverted crescent, 145. 
 
 Io, 209. 
 
 Iphediah, 698. 
 
 Ipse dixit not an authority, 44. 
 Ipsissima verba of scripture unre¬ 
 liable, 525. 
 
 Ir, 698. 
 
 Ira, 698. 
 
 Irad, 698. 
 
 Iram, 698. 
 
 Ireland, wakes in, 641. 
 
 Phoenician influence in, 641. 
 Iri, 699. 
 
 Irijah, 699. 
 
 Irish, 686. 
 
 Ir-nahash, 699. 
 
 Iron and stone age, 542. 
 
 Irpeel, 699. 
 
 Irshemesh, 699. 
 
 Iru, 699. 
 
 Isaac, 194, 701. 
 
 his benediction examined, 603. 
 Isabella, 653. 
 
 Isaiah a representative man, 
 701. 
 
 character summarised, 709. 
 coarse, 133. 
 
 friendly with Hezekiah, 706. 
 he dies, 707. 
 
 his character and writings 
 analysed, 701, 709. 
 his opinions on the position 
 of other nations, 706. 
 his policy successful, 706. 
 knows the power of money, 
 705. 
 
 narrative of the first, 704. 
 resembles Eev. Mr. Beecher, 
 705. 
 
 resembles modern orators, 
 702. 
 
774 
 
 Isaiah—the second, page 708. 
 how differs from the first, 
 708. 
 
 two hands engaged in hook of, 
 708. 
 
 Iscah, 709. 
 
 Isernia, 861. 
 
 Ish, 709. 
 
 Ishakku, 709. 
 
 Ishbah, 710. 
 
 Ishbak, 710. 
 
 Ishbi benob, 710. 
 
 Ishbosheth’s death avenged, 435. 
 Ishi, 710. 
 
 Ishijah, 710. 
 
 Ishma, 710. 
 
 Ishmael, 194, 711. 
 
 Ishmerai, 711. 
 
 Ishpan, 711. 
 
 Ishtar, 101, 711. 
 
 Ishna, 711. 
 
 Isis, 107, 315, 699. 
 
 attended by cynocephali, 417. 
 bears inverted crescent, 145. 
 with Horus, 53, 530. 
 Ishmachia, 711. 
 
 Ismi Dagon, 94, 711. 
 
 Ispah, 711. 
 
 Israel, 711. 
 
 Issachar, 712. 
 
 Ism, 711. 
 
 Italians and David, 611. 
 
 Ithamar, 712. 
 
 Ithiel, 713. 
 
 Ithmah, 713. 
 
 Ithnah, 713. 
 
 Ithobaal, 713. 
 
 Ithran, 713. 
 
 l tt, 713. 
 
 Ithream, 713. 
 
 Ittah-Kazin, 713. 
 
 Ittai, 713. 
 
 l va, 95, 713. 
 
 Ivah, 713. 
 
 Izhar, 715. 
 
 Izrahiah, 715. 
 
 Izri, page 715. 
 
 J. 
 
 J, 597. 
 
 J, proper pronunciation of, 12. 
 Jaakobah, 598. 
 
 Jaalam, 598. 
 
 Jaani, 598. 
 
 Jaasau, 598. 
 
 Jaaz, 598. 
 
 Jaazaniah, 598. 
 
 Jabal, 598. 
 
 Jabbok, 598. 
 
 Jabesh, 598. 
 
 Jabez, 598. 
 
 Jabin, 598. 
 
 Jabneel, 599. 
 
 Jabneh, 599. 
 
 Jacchus, 628. 
 
 Jacchus and Jah, 611. 
 
 Jacchus a name of Dionysus, 32. 
 Jack has his Gill, 33. 
 
 Jachan, 599. 
 
 Jachin, 599. 
 
 Jachin and Boaz, 154, 306. 
 
 Jacob, 599. 
 
 conquers God, 605. 
 his character, 601, 603. 
 his history, 603. 
 his name, 599. 
 in Egypt, 606. 
 
 Jacob’s contrivance for insuring 
 fertility, 130. 
 
 Jada, 608. 
 
 Jadau, 608. 
 
 Jaddau, 608. 
 
 Jadon, 608, 680. 
 
 Jagur, 608. 
 
 Jah, 608. 
 
 a sacred name, 616. 
 amongst Phoenicians, 612. 
 amongst Syrians, Assyrians, 
 and Babylonians, 613. 
 associated with polytheistic 
 ideas, 620, 621. 
 compared with Jupiter, 621. 
 
775 
 
 Jah comes in with a flood after¬ 
 wards, page 610. 
 equivalent to Jehovah, 608. 
 from India, 616. 
 
 Fiirst upon, 614. 
 importance of word, 608. 
 in cognomens, 652. 
 in Greece, 611. 
 is introduced, 188. 
 modern conception of, 621, 
 622. 
 
 Movers and Colenso upon, 609. 
 nature of evidence respecting 
 the word, 609. 
 
 no angels called after him, 
 246. 
 
 not an Hebraic name, 618. 
 not to be named in Egypt, 
 618. 
 
 not used by our Saviour, 620. 
 not used prior to David, 609. 
 probable origin of, 615. 
 results of author’s conclusions, 
 623. 
 
 Talbot upon, 618. 
 
 the king of all gods, 620. 
 
 Jah’s name implies the existence 
 of other gods, 619, 620. 
 Jahaz, 624. 
 
 Jahaziah, 625. 
 
 Jahaziel, 625. 
 
 Jahdai, 625. 
 
 Jahdiel, 625. 
 
 Jahdon, 608. 
 
 Jahleel, 625. 
 
 Jahmai, 625. 
 
 Jahzeel, 625. 
 
 Jahzerah, 625. 
 
 Jair, 625. 
 
 Jakeh, 625. 
 
 Jakim, 625. 
 
 Jalon, 625. 
 
 James and John, 33. 
 
 James II. and Jezebel compared, 
 655. 
 
 James, St., on pure religion, 624. 
 
 Jamieson quoted, page 27. 
 
 Jamin, 625. 
 
 Jamlech, 625. 
 
 Janoah, 626. 
 
 Januarius, the juggle of, 46. 
 Janum, 626. 
 
 Janus, 343, 628, 
 
 Jao, 28, 29, 611. 
 
 Jao and Jah, 611. 
 
 Japheth, 626. 
 
 Japhia, 626. 
 
 Japhlet, 626. 
 
 Japho, 626. 
 
 Jaques, or Jacob, 33. 
 
 Jarah, 626. 
 
 Jareb, 626. 
 
 Jared, 626. 
 
 Jareziah, 626. 
 
 Jarha, 627. 
 
 Jarib, 627. 
 
 Jarmuth, 627. 
 
 Jaroah, 627. 
 
 Jashar, 627. 
 
 Jasher, book of, 601. 
 
 mythos about Jacob, 601, 602. 
 Jashobeam, 627. 
 
 Jashub, 627. 
 
 Jashubi-lehem, 627. 
 
 Jasiel, 628. 
 
 Jathir, 628. 
 
 Jathniel, 628. 
 
 Javan, 628. 
 
 Jaziz, 628. 
 
 Jealousy of God, 262, 263. 
 Jeaterai, 629. 
 
 Jeberechiah, 629. 
 
 Jebus, 629. 
 
 Jecoliah, 629. 
 
 Jedaiah, 630. 
 
 Jedaiel, 630. 
 
 Jedidah, 630. 
 
 Jedidiah, 630. 
 
 Jehiah, 630. 
 
 Jehiel, 630. 
 
 Jehoadah, 630. 
 
 Jehoaddan, 630. 
 
776 
 
 Jehoahaz, page 630. 
 
 Jehoash, 630. 
 
 Jehohanan, 630. 
 
 Jehoiachin, 630. 
 
 Jehoiada, 630. 
 
 Jehoiakim, 630. 
 
 Jehoiarib, 630. 
 
 Jehonadab, 630. 
 
 Jeboram, 630. 
 
 Jebosbapbat, 631. 
 
 Jebosbeba, 631. 
 
 Jebovab’s name not lucky, 635. 
 Jehovah (also see Jab), 631. 
 
 stands before Abrabam, 268. 
 superseded by Elobim in gos¬ 
 pel, 32. 
 
 ‘ vomits ’ tbe people, 268. 
 Jebozabad, 631. 
 
 Jebozadak, 631. 
 
 Jebu, 631. 
 
 Jebubbab, 631. 
 
 Jebucbal, 631. 
 
 Jebud, 631. 
 
 Jebudi, 631. 
 
 Jekabziel, 631. 
 
 Jekameam, 631. 
 
 Jekamiab, 631. 
 
 Jekutbiel, 631. 
 
 Jemimab, 631. 
 
 Jemuel, 631. 
 
 Jepbtbab, 631. 
 
 sacrifices bis daughter, 136. 
 Jeptbel-el, 132. 
 
 Jerab, 632. 
 
 Jerabmeel, 632. 
 
 Jeremiab as a prophet, 636. 
 as an historian, 637. 
 depicts an idol, 640. 
 describes human sacrifices, 
 638, 641. 
 
 does bttle more than denounce 
 wrath, 636. 
 
 bis idea of punishing idolatry 
 by cannibalism, 642. 
 bis name, 632, 634. 
 bis political views, 634, 636. 
 
 Jeremiab — bis reference to tbe 
 Sabbath, page 633. 
 bis time, 633. 
 
 on cuttings of tbe flesh, 643. 
 on extradition treaties, 642. 
 opposed to Chronicles, 644. 
 refers to Queen of Heaven, 
 638. 
 
 refers to “ wakes ” for tbe 
 dead, 641. 
 
 resembles tbe writer of Deu¬ 
 teronomy, 633, 634. 
 tells of bouse roofs as spots 
 for sacrifice, 642. 
 tells that astrology was culti¬ 
 vated, 639. 
 
 tbe leading features of bis 
 writings summarised, 644. 
 tbe second, 643. 
 
 Jerememotb, 644. 
 
 Jeribai, 644. 
 
 Jericho, 644. 
 
 Jeriel, 645. 
 
 Jerijab, 645. 
 
 Jerimoth, 645. 
 
 Jeriotb, 646. 
 
 Jeroboam, 646. 
 
 Jeroboam’s rallying cry, 569. 
 Jerobam, 646. 
 
 Jerrubesbetb, 646. 
 
 Jeruel, 647. 
 
 Jerusalem, 647. 
 
 Jerusba, 647. 
 
 Jes, I H S , 647. 
 
 Jesaiab, 651. 
 
 Jesbaiab, 651. 
 
 Jesbanab, 651. 
 
 Jesbarelab, 651. 
 
 Jesbebeab, 651. 
 
 Jesber, 651. 
 
 Jesbisbai, 652. 
 
 Jesbobaiah, 652. 
 
 Jesbua, 652. 
 
 Jesburun, 652. 
 
 Jesimiel, 652. 
 
 Jesse, 652. 
 
777 
 
 Jesus Christ denounced as an in¬ 
 fidel, page 660. 
 
 invested with names of other 
 Gods, 648. 
 
 Jesus, Isu, Hosi, Hesus, 371. 
 Jether, 652. 
 
 Jetheth, 652. 
 
 Jethlah, 652. 
 
 Jethro, 652. 
 
 Jetur, 652. 
 
 Jeuel, Jeiel, Jehiel, 652. 
 
 Jeush, 653. 
 
 Jew, 653. 
 
 Jewish women desire offspring, 
 91. 
 
 Jews, 653. 
 
 Jews and Mussulmans respect Fri¬ 
 day, 531. 
 
 condition of in Saul’s time, 
 137. 
 
 their claims examined, 673. 
 their first restoration dis¬ 
 cussed, 519. 
 
 Turks, infidels, and heretics, 
 658. 
 
 Jezebel, the name explained, 653. 
 her character, 654. 
 her age at death, 655. 
 
 Jezer, 656. 
 
 Jeziah, 656. 
 
 Jeziel, 656. 
 
 Jezliah, 656. 
 
 Jezoar, 656. 
 
 Jezreel, 656. 
 
 Jibsam, 656. 
 
 Jidlaph, 656. 
 
 Jim, 657. 
 
 Jimnab, 657. 
 
 Jipthah, 657. 
 
 Joab, 688. 
 
 Joab’s murders, 435, 436. 
 
 Joah, 688. 
 
 Joash, 688. 
 
 Job, 688. 
 
 Job, book of, uses the singular 
 form of God, 225. 
 
 Job, book of, period of its being 
 written, page 226. 
 
 Jobab, 688. 
 
 Jochebed, 688. 
 
 Joed, 689. 
 
 Joel, 689. 
 
 Joelah, 693. 
 
 Joezer, 693. 
 
 Jogbehah, 693. 
 
 Jogli, 693. 
 
 Joha, 693. 
 
 Johanan, 693. 
 
 Johannes, 30. 
 
 John, allied to Jonah, 26. 
 
 Prester, 575. 
 
 St., does he tell falsehoods? 
 257. 
 
 St. sees horses in heaven, 
 577. 
 
 the Apostle, depicted with fe¬ 
 minine attributes, 27. 
 the beloved disciple, 33. 
 the name combines the ideas 
 of the sun, the dove, and a 
 loving mother, 28. 
 varieties of spelling, 11, 26. 
 Joiakim, 694. 
 
 Joiarib, 694. 
 
 Jokmeam, 694. 
 
 Jokneam, 694. 
 
 Jokshan, 694. 
 
 Joktan, 694. 
 
 Joktheel, 694. 
 
 Jolais, 694. 
 
 Jonadab, 694. 
 
 Jonah, 694. 
 
 Jonathan, 696. 
 
 Joppa, 696. 
 
 Jorah, 697. 
 
 Jorai, 697. 
 
 Joram, 697. 
 
 Jordan, 697. 
 
 Jorkeam, 697. 
 
 Joseph not an eunuch, a singular 
 thing, 494. 
 name explained, 697. 
 
 G G G 
 
Josephus saw a devil expelled! 
 
 page 515. 
 
 Joshah, 698. 
 
 Joshariah, 698. 
 
 Joshbekashah, 698. 
 
 Joshua son of Nun, 96. 
 
 name explained, 698. 
 
 Josiah, 698. 
 
 condition of Palestine in his 
 time, 504. 
 
 Josibiah, 698. 
 
 Josephiah, 698. 
 
 Jotbath, 698. 
 
 Jotham, 698. 
 
 Jozabad, 698. 
 
 Jozachar, 698. 
 
 Jubal, 714. 
 
 Juchal, 714. 
 
 Judah, 714. 
 
 Judish, 715. 
 
 Juno, 621. 
 
 Jupiter, 176. 
 
 Belus, 342. 
 and Jah, 611. 
 
 Jushab-hesed, 715. 
 
 Justice of David ? 435. 
 
 Jullah, 715. 
 
 K 
 
 Kabbalah places male potencies on 
 the right, 84. 
 
 Kabbalist triads, 76, 77. 
 
 Karnak, Temple of, abounds with 
 Phallic emblems, 65. 
 Keturah and Abraham, 194. 
 Khaldi, name of moon, 93. 
 
 King, a, given in anger, and taken 
 away in wrath, 593. 
 
 Kish, 162. 
 
 Kishon, 70. 
 
 Knox, John, 252, 686. 
 
 L 
 
 Laban, his images, 129. 
 
 Lachmi, 358. 
 
 Lajard quoted, 148, 149, 176, 274. 
 
 Lamb, why chosen, page 391. 
 Language of Abraham, 42, 128. 
 of Caanan, and of Jews, 42. 
 of Gods, 617. 
 of men with God, 622. 
 Lanugo, 161. 
 
 Larsa and Lars,- 92. 
 
 Laughter of God, 265. 
 
 Law, its existence during Judges, 
 156. 
 
 Laws, the result of organisation, 
 680. 
 
 Layard quoted, 24, 26. 
 
 Leaders of Jews have Assyrian 
 names, 95. 
 
 Leaflets of Shamrock, 156. 
 
 Leda and Swan, note, 111. 
 
 Legend of Mahadeva, 123. 
 
 Legs, three, of Isle of Man, 157. 
 Leopard, 359. 
 skin, 356. 
 
 Les parties honteuses, Saints for, 
 62. 
 
 Leslie, Colonel, on Galgals, 154, 
 543. 
 
 Letters and Numbers, 647. 
 
 interchangeable, 14, 15. 
 
 Levita refers to Hermes, 543. 
 Levites ordered to commit murder, 
 672. 
 
 Life a river, 167. 
 
 Likeness between ideas of creation 
 and reproduction, 86. 
 
 Lilies, 156, 531. 
 
 Linga, 163. 
 
 Linga<?itas and Yonigas, 600. 
 
 quarrel, 123. 
 
 Lingua franca, 40. 
 
 Lionesses, cows, and rats, 315. 
 Lions, incompatible with dense 
 populations, 503. 
 
 List of Assyrian gods, 121. 
 Lombards’ sign, 150, 157. 
 
 Lot and his daughters, 128, 192. 
 and Sodomites talk the same 
 tongue, 42. 
 
779 
 
 Lottery and lucky numbers, page 
 649. 
 
 Love and apples, 273. 
 
 attributed to God, 265. 
 
 ..the theme of handsome 
 preachers, 6S7. 
 
 Lower world, Anu, king of the, 84. 
 Lozenges and fleur de lys, 531. 
 Lubbock, Sir John, Pre-historic 
 Times , 587. 
 
 Lucian, and Syrian goddess, 154. 
 describes ark, 287, 292. 
 gives an account of Alexander, 
 
 47. 
 
 Lucky numbers in Rome, 649. 
 Lupanar, or brothel, 211. 
 
 Luz, a name of Ishtar, 108. 
 
 is wife of Nergal, 119. 
 
 Lysons’ book referred to, 171. 
 
 interpretation of a symbol, 
 163. 
 
 remarks by, 23, 114. 
 
 M 
 
 Maachah, 73. 
 
 Macaulay’s New Zealander, 348. 
 Macrobius quoted, 166. 
 
 Mahadeva, 192, 240, 243. 
 
 = Asshur, 78, 79. 
 and Sacti, 69. 
 emblems, 130,155. 
 in Judah, 637, 640. 
 legend of, 123. 
 painted red, 353, 470. 
 
 Mahlon, 70. 
 
 Mahomet and Moses compared, 
 
 668 . 
 
 his ideas of celestial bliss, 216. 
 Mahometans and Missionaries, 669, 
 670. 
 
 Malachi, 257. 
 
 Male and female, note, 68. 
 descent, 120. 
 influence of, 50. 
 
 Maltese cross, 151. 
 
 Mamma and papa contrasted, 103. 
 
 Mamre, page 73. 
 
 Man and woman, 497. 
 
 son of, his feminine attributes, 
 31. 
 
 Mandragora, 463. 
 
 Mandrakes, 337. 
 
 Mania, dancing, 583. 
 
 mistaken for demoniac pos¬ 
 session, 513. 
 
 Maoz, Mauzzim, 208. 
 
 Mars, 208. 
 
 Marriages by money, and by 
 strength of arm, compared, 
 680. 
 
 Martianus Capella, his hymn to 
 the sun, 647. 
 
 Marttand, 154. 
 
 Mary, 55. 
 
 Queen of England and Jezebel 
 compared, 655. 
 
 Masses said for impotence and 
 sterility, 60, 61. 
 
 Master of boat, 164. 
 
 Maternal creator, 73. 
 
 Maturea, birth-place of Christna, 
 401. 
 
 Maut, 560. 
 
 Medals found in the Seine, 144. 
 
 Mediator priests, 176. 
 
 Medical writers, 385. 
 
 Medicine men amongst Red In¬ 
 dians, 1. 
 
 Medinet Haboo, phallic emblems 
 in temple of, 65. 
 
 Mediterranean sea colonised by 
 Phoenicians, 39. 
 
 “ Mediums ” to be distrusted, 258. 
 
 Melchizedek talks the same lan¬ 
 guage as Abraham, 42. 
 
 Melech, a name of great antiquity, 
 
 8 . 
 
 Men, their estimate of themselves, 
 105, 106. 
 
 Menhirs, 544. 
 
 Menses, 161. 
 
 Mephibosheth, 646. 
 
780 
 
 Mercenaries of David, page 611. 
 Merodach, 121. 
 
 Meroe, priests of, order kings to 
 die, 57. 
 
 Mesmeric seance described, 426. 
 Messengers, angels, 244. 
 questioned, 47, 257. 
 to be tested, 258. 
 
 Method adopted in Vocabulary, 
 184. 
 
 author’s of working, 197. 
 Mexican priests claim to be in¬ 
 spired, 668. 
 
 Mexico evangelised by fire and 
 sword, 669. 
 
 Micah has a house of gods, 136. 
 Micaiah, 256. 
 
 Michal personates David with an 
 image, 438. 
 
 Midianite woman, 211. 
 
 Migron, 70. 
 
 Millinery preferred to reality, 88. 
 Milton on angels, 248. 
 
 Ministers, Anglican, are infallible ! 
 663. 
 
 Miracles performed at a distance, 
 139, 140. 
 
 Miriam the virgin with Jewish 
 triad, 91, 95. 
 
 Mirmir an old Chaldaean god, 51, 
 55. 
 
 Missionary reports analysed, 670. 
 Mithra, 122. 
 
 Mitre, crozier, and cross at Ele- 
 phanta, 401. 
 is a fish’s head, 166, 
 
 Mokanna, 88. 
 
 Molly differs from Mary, 104. 
 Moloch, 291. 
 
 Money, 129. 
 
 bore divine emblems, 145. 
 Monkeys, 383. 
 
 sacred to Isis, 417. 
 
 Monogram of Christ, 647. 
 
 Moon’s names, 93. 
 
 Morals in Canaan, 128. 
 
 Moravian plan of missions, page 
 670. 
 
 Mormon and Hindoo ideas com¬ 
 pared, 60. 
 
 laws developing slowly, 51. 
 and Moses compared, 668. 
 Morning dreaded by ghosts, 605. 
 Mosaib, 96. 
 
 Mosaic law not completed, & c., 51. 
 Moses, Aaron and Hur, 95. 
 his mission doubted, 659. 
 and Jeremiah, 633. 
 at the bush, 48. 
 careless of circumcision, 545. 
 compared with Numa, Confu¬ 
 cius, Mahomet and others, 
 668 . 
 
 knows no angel by name, 247. 
 not known to Saul, 610. 
 ordains murder, 672. 
 treats God like a man, 263. 
 M6t, 560. 
 
 Mother, 102, 237, 241. 
 and child, 53, 59. 
 ark an emblem of, 293, 294. 
 earth, 560. 
 of all saints, 80. 
 of God, 57. 
 the divine, 30. 
 
 Motto proposed for Church of 
 England, 685. 
 
 Mount Seir, what, 489. 
 
 Mountain, dividing the, meaning 
 of, 538. 
 
 Mouth of the Almighty, 260. 
 Movers on Jah, 609. 
 
 Mu or Mut, 560. 
 
 Mural crown, 144, 167. 
 
 Murder by Elijah, 478, 479. 
 
 examples of, 478, 654, 655, 
 672. 
 
 for religious differences or¬ 
 dered, 672. 
 
 justified in Bible, 688. 
 Mussulmans and Jews respect 
 Friday, 531. 
 
781 
 
 Mussulmans, the faithful, page 
 659. 
 
 Mylitta, 101. 
 
 Mysteries invented by some, dis¬ 
 covered by others, 87. 
 
 Mystic words, 71. 
 
 Mystification by charlatans, 427. 
 Myth respecting Jacob, 600. 
 Mythical evidence of the, 6. 
 Mythology, Chaldee and Jewish, 
 similarities in, 44. 
 
 Mythos and history, 123. 
 
 Myths respecting creation, 406, 
 498. 
 
 N 
 
 Naaman, 70. 
 
 Naashon, 70. 
 
 Nabhi, 124, 125. 
 
 Nahor, 19. 
 
 Name persistent for a thousand 
 years, 341. 
 
 Names amongst savages, 1. 
 
 amongst the vulgar English, 2. 
 after David, 610. 
 
 Arthur, 17. 
 
 assumption of, note, 27. 
 ttempt to restore pronuncia¬ 
 tion of ancient German 
 ones, 15. 
 
 carried from old to newly dis¬ 
 covered countries, 9. 
 changes in outlandish, 10. 
 compounded with Nebo, 125, 
 126. 
 
 contain allusion to one or 
 more deities, 4. 
 difficulties of the subject, 13. 
 divinities, 611. 
 evidence of defunct races, 10. 
 female and male alike, 4. 
 from the cock, 169. 
 given at, or shortly after birth, 
 J 4. 
 
 given by divine authority, 2, 3. 
 given by historians, 5. 
 
 Barnes given by priests, page 3, 4, 
 600. 
 
 had numbers, 175. 
 
 ^hereditary and Christian, 7. 
 
 t/how selected, 7. 
 imported, twisted, 22. 
 many not always indicative of 
 many persons, 116. 
 many of same deity, 322. 
 new, adopted on taking reli¬ 
 gious vows, 21. 
 of a family composing a sen¬ 
 tence, 541. 
 
 of God used by Jesus, 620. 
 of Israelites modified by the 
 captivity in Babylon, 135. 
 of Moses and Jehovah not 
 known to Saul, 610. 
 of Ninev, 617. 
 
 Omphalos, 18. 
 
 Patriarchal examined, 132. 
 persistency of, 8. 
 
 Phoenician, containing Jah, 
 612. 
 
 phonetic value of, 11. 
 pronunciation varies, 14. 
 puritan, 8. 
 
 Bebecca, 18. 
 
 of the weak tell their story, 9. 
 sacred, 613-616. 
 
 Scriptural, 127, 131, 132, 134, 
 135, 137, 138. 
 strange, in England, 21. 
 those prior to David, 609. 
 
 Napoleon compared with David, 
 436. 
 
 crowns himself, 153. 
 
 Narrow-mindedness of Komish and 
 other priests, the reason of, 
 683, 684. 
 
 Natal, Bishop of, quoted, 28, 29, 
 609. 
 
 Nature, study of, neglected by 
 priests, 682. 
 
 Navel of Yishnu, 124, 163. 
 
 Navis, nave, 164. 
 
782 
 
 Nebo supplants Elohim, page 122, 
 157, 16B, 164, 616. 
 Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams ex¬ 
 amined, 422, 423. 
 
 Nehemiah and Ezra, 519, 524. 
 Nekebah, 67, 161, 602. 
 
 Nergal, 77. 
 
 equivalent to Roman Mars, 
 118, 119. 
 
 Nick, its metaphorical use, 68. 
 Nicknames, 8. 
 
 Nimrod, 356. 
 
 Nin, 77, 119. 
 
 Ninev has a sacred name, 617. 
 Nineveh, 120. 
 
 Noah, a male and female name, 4. 
 Nose of the Almighty, 259. 
 
 Note of the dove, 111. 
 
 Nottingham Christmas cakes, 380. 
 Numa and Moses compared, 668. 
 Numa’s divine laws, 525. 
 
 Number of a beast, 651, 666. 
 of a name, 175. 
 
 Numbers represented by letters, 
 649. 
 
 lucky, 649. 
 
 Numbering of people by David, 
 437. 
 
 Numerous names for one deity, 
 322. 
 
 Nun, 96. 
 
 Assyrian, 97. 
 figured with stole, 165. 
 
 Nuns bear the same name as fish, 
 113. 
 
 Nunneries, 109. 
 
 Nursing mother, 52, 53. 
 
 Nyanza, a name incorporated from 
 Africa, 10. 
 
 O 
 
 Oannes, 30. 
 
 and fish, 529. 
 
 Oaths, 79. 
 
 Obadiah feeds prophets, 477. 
 Obelises, 196. 
 
 Obscenities, divine emblems, page 
 59. 
 
 Obscenity in sacred writings, 269. 
 in edibles, 379. 
 in David’s religion, 440. 
 in the writings of Ezekiel, 511. 
 Obsolete words give a clue to 
 ancient names, 71. 
 
 Odium theologicum, 306, 662. 
 Offences against laws spiritual and 
 temporal, 681. 
 
 Offerings after vows, 517. 
 Offspring, abundance of, 305. 
 
 Oil, holy, 305. 
 
 used as Isernia, 61. 
 
 Old Bogy, 47. 
 
 Old Testament, value of, 623, 
 675. 
 
 Old words valuable, 189. 
 
 Om, Am or Aum, 71. 
 
 a sacred name, 237. 
 
 Omega and Alpha, 174. 
 
 Om mani pannee, 238. 
 Omnipresence of the Creator, 50. 
 Omphalos, the word dissected, 
 18. 
 
 On, 32, 64, 71. 
 
 Oracles in Judaea, 541. 
 
 their value compared, 668. 
 Orb, 142. 
 
 Orcades, 94. 
 
 Orcus, 94. 
 
 Organisation amongst animals and 
 men, 680. 
 
 Orgies, dissolute, before the golden 
 calf, 566. 
 
 Oriental customs referred to, 210. 
 Oromasdes, 122. 
 
 Orthodox divines who wont think, 
 how can they test any new 
 doctrine ? 664. 
 
 individuals challenged as infi¬ 
 dels, 665. 
 
 the Saviour not so, 461. 
 Orthodoxy in gods, 129. 
 
 Os uteri , 163. 
 
783 
 
 Osiris, story of, page 289. 
 
 Our lady of Loretto, 348. 
 
 Ovid’s Art of Love, 288. 
 
 P 
 
 Pacific Ocean, 35. 
 
 Padon, 70. 
 
 Pagan symbols adopted by the 
 Church, 141. 
 
 Paganism and Christianity, 166. 
 Palestine, an imaginary scene in, 
 660. 
 
 names in, 127. 
 
 Palladium of Troy and ark com¬ 
 pared, 439. 
 
 Palm tree, 156, 157. 
 and citron, 272. 
 mystic, 532. 
 
 Pan, equivalent to Danjaan, Esh- 
 mun, Esculapius, Apollo, 
 Elias, and the Sun, 429. 
 Papa and mamma, 103. 
 
 Papal division of sins, 681. 
 
 religion, feminine, and built 
 on Chaldsean basis, 487. 
 Paphian Yenus, a conical stone, 
 468. 
 
 Paradise, ideas of, 562, 578. 
 
 Par an, 70. 
 
 Pariahs and Hivites, 584, 
 
 Passions and Religion, 55. 
 
 human, attributed to God, 262. 
 of men encouraged by Bible, 
 685. 
 
 Patriarchal names examined, 131, 
 132. 
 
 Paul, St., on Scripture, 666. 
 
 reproves Peter, 250. 
 Pawnbroker’s sign, 150, 157. 
 Pelasgi and David, 611. 
 Penninnah, 60. 
 
 Pentateuch and the name Jah, 608. 
 Perenna, 83. 
 
 Periphrasis, 215. 
 
 Persian gods, 122. 
 
 Persistence of ideas, 153. 
 
 Peter, St., on Scripture, page 666. 
 called Bar-jonah, 28. 
 the power of God, 32. 
 
 Peru evangelised by fire and sword, 
 669. 
 
 Peruvian priests claim to be in¬ 
 spired, 668. 
 
 Phallic statues made of fig tree, 
 527. 
 
 Phallus = Mahadeva = Asshur, 
 79. 
 
 and El, 216. 
 
 a Hindoo emblem, 217, 219. 
 care of amongst the Jews, 219. 
 revealed in the mysteries, 221. 
 reverenced by Abraham, 79. 
 worship, 306. 
 
 Phanuel, 82. 
 
 Phens, short for Phoenicians, 33. 
 how they described the Al¬ 
 mighty, 58. 
 
 Phenomena of creation, 677, 678. 
 
 Philistines talk Hebrew, 42. 
 
 Philosophers, Christian, idea of 
 God, 50. 
 
 Phoebus Apollo, 162. 
 
 Phoenician influence in Ireland, 
 641. 
 
 language, 40. 
 
 language allied to the Aryan, 
 43. 
 
 spirit, 24. 
 travel, 38. 
 voyages, 39. 
 
 Phoenicians, history of, 37, 38. 
 traded with India, 616. 
 vie with modern English, 679. 
 
 Phra, 92. 
 
 Physical science a snare of the 
 Devil! 682. 
 
 tabooed by theologians, 683. 
 
 Physician and priest defined, note, 
 47. 
 
 their relations, 60. 
 
 Physicians consulted for impo¬ 
 tence, 62. 
 
784 
 
 Physicist and divine compared, 
 page 68B. 
 
 Piety cannot conquer armies, 636. 
 
 Pillar set up by Jacob, 130. 
 
 Pillars and kings, 305. 
 in temple, 154. 
 of stone in Ark, 293. 
 
 Pine cone, 90. 
 and fig, 527. 
 and testis, 162. 
 
 Pismire on consols, 577. 
 
 Pitbon, 70. 
 
 Plan of salvation has two stages, 
 659. 
 
 Planets supposed to influence fate, 
 118. 
 
 Play, meaning of word, 566. 
 
 Pliny’s description of the earth, 
 466. 
 
 Plural form of God, 217, 218, 223. 
 singulars, 217, 230, 321. 
 
 Pluto, 560. 
 
 Polytheistic ideas associated with 
 Jah, 621. 
 
 Pomegranate, a female organ, 107, 
 528. 
 
 Pompeii, 142. 
 
 Pontiffs treat kings as priests 
 treated Christ, 660. 
 
 Pope blesses with thumb and two 
 fingers, 90, 169. 
 his letters models of piety, 594. 
 
 Popery a progressive system, 51. 
 
 Possession, demoniac, ideas re¬ 
 specting, 513. 
 
 Potipherah, 64. 
 
 Powerlessness of man to describe 
 God, 257. 
 
 Prayer book, anthropomorphic, 
 264. 
 
 Pre, or phre, 647, 
 
 Preachers of various passions, each 
 can feed them from the 
 Bible, 685. 
 
 Predictions made after events, 603. 
 
 Prester John, 575. 
 
 Presumption, another name for 
 thought, page 663. 
 
 Priapic “ ex votos,” 517. 
 
 Priapus, the modem, 62. 
 
 Pricking, metaphorical use of, 
 
 68 . 
 
 Pride and thoughtfulness con¬ 
 founded by Churchmen, 663. 
 
 Priest, figure of, 165. 
 
 Jewish and Christian Pontiff, 
 660. 
 
 of On, 64. 
 
 the word defined, note, 47. 
 
 Priests, ancient, spoke freely, 59. 
 and infidels, 662. 
 and Popes anathematise Kings, 
 57. 
 
 are men, 109. 
 how they attain power, 46. 
 meaning of the name, 404. 
 neglect natural phenomena, 
 682. 
 
 ought not to study theology, 
 and need study nothing else, 
 664. 
 
 take place of physicians, 86. 
 took the place of modern 
 doctors, 60. 
 
 Priesthood, exigencies of, 258. 
 origin of a, 680, 681. 
 
 Priestly ideas of the Creator, 50. 
 
 Prince of the air, 117. 
 
 Principalities and powers, 250. 
 
 Progress of civilisation, 36. 
 
 Prometheus, story of, 468. 
 
 Promises made by various priests, 
 or God and Baal, 323. 
 
 Pronunciation of some letters 
 varies, 14. 
 
 Propagandism, means of effecting 
 it, 669, 670. 
 
 Prophecy, The, note, 48. 
 
 Prophet, beau ideal of, 476. 
 
 the disobedient one, his story 
 examined, 500. 
 
 Prophets after captivity, 387. 
 
785 
 
 Prophets—exasperated when dis¬ 
 believed, page 636. 
 
 Prophetic names given by the 
 historian, 6. 
 
 Prostitution, where sacred, 109, 
 366. 
 
 Protestant clergy, 662. 
 
 their ways when opposed to 
 Mahometans and Hindoos* 
 and to each other, 669. 
 
 Protestants, their unreasonable¬ 
 ness, 140. 
 
 Proto-ChaldaBan gods, 51. 
 
 Psalms of David examined, 442. 
 
 Ptolemy, 337. 
 
 Pudenda of Virgin Mary shown 
 as a relic, 114. 
 
 Pulpit discourses, 663. 
 
 Pun, prophetic, 5. 
 
 Punishment of infidelity, a politi¬ 
 cal blunder, 665. 
 
 Punning contrivance, 429. 
 
 Punon, 70. 
 
 Pure religion defined, 624. 
 
 Puritan names, 8. 
 
 Puritans, 686. 
 
 Purpose, feebleness of, in the 
 Almighty! 671, 672. 
 
 Purse or bag, 403. 
 the scrotum, 162. 
 
 Puseyites and Puritans, 247. 
 
 Pyramid, a sign of Arba-il, 145. 
 
 Pyx, an ark, 167, 292. 
 
 Q 
 
 Quacks in religion and medicine, 
 306. 
 
 Quadriliterals, how formed, note, 
 67. 
 
 Quarrels of hierarchs proclaim 
 their senselessness, 662. 
 
 Queen of heaven, 30. 
 
 Quotation, Latin, from Dom Mar¬ 
 tin’s book, 88. 
 
 R 
 
 Ka, page 80. 
 
 Kabbins alter the text of Scripture, 
 note, 185, 315, 241, 254. 
 Eachel, her desire for offspring, 
 60. 
 
 steals images, 129. 
 
 Eaffaele, 242. 
 
 Rahab talks Hebrew, 42. 
 
 Ram, an euphemism, 429. 
 
 sacred, 66. 
 
 Raphael, 247. 
 
 i and Tobit, 514. 
 
 Rats and Lionesses, 315. 
 Rawlinson, Sir H., on Aryan influ¬ 
 ence, 615. 
 
 referred to, 43, 117, 615. 
 
 Re, or Ra, 81. 
 
 Reason and instinct, 677. 
 
 and faith contrasted, 644. 
 the use of, deprecated by 
 divines, 663. 
 
 Reasoning, style of, adopted by 
 theologians, 500. 
 
 Rebecca, a Chaldee, 41. 
 
 her name examined, 18. 
 
 Red colour, 353, 693. 
 heifer, 469, 565. 
 
 Indians, almost superseded, 
 36. 
 
 Indians, names assumed by, 1. 
 powder, 469. 
 
 Redaction of the Hebrew text, 184, 
 227. 
 
 Regina, 81. 
 
 Rehoboam, 306. 
 
 lost ten tribes, 568. 
 
 Rejoinder of infidel to divine, 659. 
 Relations between Christ, fish and 
 fishermen, 113. 
 
 Religion, according to some divines, 
 consists in believing the 
 preacher, 663. 
 and coinage compared, 505. 
 of early Babylon, 51. 
 pure, defined, 624. 
 
 H H H 
 
786 
 
 Religious, definition of the word, 
 page 47. 
 
 rites and dissolute orgies, 566. 
 
 Remembrance, book of, 256. 
 
 Renovation of life, 81. 
 
 Repentance of God, 266. 
 
 Residence of Almighty, 561. 
 
 Restoration of Jews after Babylon 
 discussed, 519. 
 
 Resurrection passed already, 668. 
 
 Resuscitation of Ganaanites, 528. 
 
 Revelation, idea of, examined, 675. 
 of God as fire, 128. 
 
 Revelations to Moses, Mahomet, 
 and Mormon elders, 51. 
 
 Revenge of God, 266. 
 
 Revision of Scripture desirable, 
 269, 391. 
 
 Revolts under David’s rule, 138, 
 436. 
 
 Rhea, 81. 
 
 Rhoderick Dhu and David com¬ 
 pared, 433. 
 
 Right hand, 345. 
 
 Rimmon, 70, 157, 164, 528. 
 
 Ring money of Africa and Ireland, 
 note, 39, 145. 
 
 Rites, feasts and orgies, 566, 568. 
 
 Ritualism and infidelity, 663. 
 
 Rocky mountains a barrier, 37. 
 
 Roman Catholic faith like the 
 Phen, 58, 59. 
 
 Roman church, a heathen reper¬ 
 tory, 74. 
 
 Roman church orders her mem¬ 
 bers to eat fish on Venus’ 
 day, 113, 528, 531. 
 
 Rome, lottery at, 649. 
 
 Romish priests, their low origin, 
 683. 
 
 Roots of words, Aryan, and Shemi- 
 tic, 17. 
 
 Royalist, 686. 
 
 Royalty descends in male line, 120. 
 
 Russia, extent of the race, 36, 37. 
 
 S 
 
 Sabbath day and Jeremiah, page 
 684. 
 
 Sacred and profane authors com¬ 
 pared, 6. 
 
 both open to the same criti¬ 
 cism, 6. 
 
 murders, 655, 672. 
 names, 71, 237, 617. 
 names imported, 618, 619. 
 rites and sexual ideas, 61. 
 Sacredness of fish, 528. 
 
 Sacrifice, human, 128, 136. 
 men for calves, 593. 
 why flesh selected for, 565, 
 566. 
 
 Sacti, 69, 159. 
 sign of, 168. 
 
 Sadducees are conservatives, 247. 
 considered angels a modern 
 invention, 246. 
 high churchmen, 117. 
 
 Saint James of Compostella, 348. 
 Saint Patrick, 153, 357. 
 
 Saints in Italy and France for 
 cure of barrenness, 61. 
 lunatics canonised as, 513. 
 sexual, 62. 
 
 Salmon, 71. 
 
 Sambo and Cushi equivalent words, 
 417. 
 
 Samson, 70. 
 
 Samuel’s circuits, 155, 542. 
 
 rise, 136. 
 
 San, the sun, 92. 
 
 Sanchoniathon on cosmogony, 85. 
 Sanctuary, 55. 
 
 Sanscrit origin of Jah, 615. 
 
 Sara and Abram, 192. 
 
 = Sheruha, 128. 
 
 Sarah and Abraham, 5. 
 the hole of a pit, 67. 
 the palm tree, 533. 
 
 Saraiswati, 159. 
 
 her quarrel with Mahadeva, 
 123. 
 
Sardanapalus, page 96. 
 
 called the intelligent fish, 30. 
 Satan, 56, 450, 453. 
 
 and God converse, 255. 
 
 Saturn and Jupiter, 249. 
 
 Saul, 137, 423, 434. 
 
 his history in brief, 431, 432. 
 Savages cowed by the super¬ 
 natural, 1, 681. 
 
 Saviour gains knowledge by asking 
 questions, 251. 
 of the world, 537. 
 the, was not orthodox, 461, 
 660. 
 
 with feminine attributes, 113. 
 would be thought heretical 
 now, 390. 
 
 Saviour’s, the, teaching, 665. 
 Scarlet colour mystical, 469. 
 
 Scene in Palestine, imaginary, 660. 
 Sceva and his seven sons, 515. 
 Schools of Prophets, 2. 
 
 Scotland, early races of, 543. 
 Scratch, Old, 47. 
 
 Scriptures, their inspiration ex¬ 
 amined, 666. 
 
 Scrotum, 162. 
 
 Seance, mesmeric, described, 426. 
 Seances, Davenports’, 47. 
 
 Seat, modern symbolic, 165, 166. 
 Secession of tribes under Jero¬ 
 boam, 138. 
 
 Second Assyrian triad, 92. 
 
 sight in Scotland, 48. 
 
 Seine, curious medals found in, 
 144. 
 
 Seir, Mount, mystic meaning, 489. 
 Sephiroth, 77. 
 
 Serpent, emblem of desire, 497, 
 498, 602. 
 
 life and water, 86. 
 
 Settlements of invaders, their in¬ 
 fluence, 10. 
 
 Sets of history, 44, 444. 
 
 of names, hereditary and 
 Christian, 7. 
 
 Sexes, their relative value, page 
 113. 
 
 Sexual rites sacred,^61. 
 
 saints in France, 62. 
 
 Shaddai, 52. 
 
 Shaga, 365. 
 
 Shagal an offensive word, note, 55. 
 Shakespeare, uncertainty of ety¬ 
 mology of, 14. 
 
 Shala, or Tala, a minor god, 118. 
 Shamas, 92. 
 
 Shame, sense of, scanty, 130. 
 Shammah, 96. 
 
 Shamrock, 154, 156. 
 
 Shape of fig, 527. 
 
 Sheen, 92. 
 
 Shell, 159. 
 
 Shemesh, 92. 
 
 Shemitic races, names amongst, 4. 
 Sheshbazzar leads the Jews from 
 Babylon, 520. 
 
 Shicron, 70. 
 
 Shields sacred, 114, 115, 163. 
 Solomon’s, 163. 
 
 Templars’, 164. 
 
 Shihon, 71. 
 
 Shimon, 70. 
 
 Shimron, 70. 
 
 Shimson, 70. 
 
 Ship, sacred, 166, 290. 
 
 Shomeron, 70. 
 
 Shushan, 70. 
 
 Sibyls and Pythonesses, 48. 
 
 Sidon, 39, 71. 
 
 Signification of names in Bible is 
 not reliable, 132. 
 
 Sihon, 71. 
 
 Simeon, 70. 
 
 Similarity in sound, dissimilarity 
 in meaning, 15, 16. 
 
 Sin, 93. 
 
 Singers, female, replaced in St. 
 
 Peter’s by eunuchs, 494. 
 Singular name of God rare, except 
 in Job, 225, 226. 
 plurals, 217,219,227, 321,520. 
 
788 
 
 Sins, mortal and venial, page 681. 
 Sion, 70. 
 
 Sippara, 92. 
 
 Sistrum of Isis, 108, 159,164, 527. 
 Slave trade, 129. 
 
 Slaughter by kings, queens, and 
 prophets, 655. 
 
 Sodomite, 55. 
 
 Sodomites, 78, 494. 
 
 Solidity, 84. 
 
 Solomon, a friend of Hiram, 154. 
 compared with Louis XIV., 
 585. 
 
 his character differently 
 painted, 535. 
 had two names, 3. 
 married Hittites, 584. 
 seal, 146. 
 shields, 163. 
 trades with India, 616. 
 Somnauth, gates of, 146. 
 
 Son, the, our ideas of, 56. 
 
 Song of Solomon, 52, 273. 
 Soothsayers resemble priests, 404. 
 Soter Kosmou, 537. 
 
 Sound guides us in spelling names, 
 14. 
 
 Spaniards, 686. 
 
 give sacred names to new 
 places, 9. 
 
 practice of the conquering, 21. 
 their discoveries, 36. 
 
 Speech, dying, of David, 437. 
 Spelling altered by Eabbins, 184. 
 
 not to be trusted, 14. 
 
 Spirit, the, 56. 
 
 Spirits discredited by Sadducees, 
 246. 
 
 evil ideas respecting, 513. 
 in prison, 250. 
 
 Spiritual power, how transmitted, 
 48. 
 
 instruction for wielding it, 48. 
 Spiritualists, modern, 47. 
 Spirituous, meaning of the word, 
 527. 
 
 Spots, symbolical, page 356, 360. 
 Spotted robe, 346, 852. 
 
 Spouses for the gods, 58. 
 
 Squier, Mr., referred to, 36. 
 
 Sri Iantra, 147. 
 
 Stag metaphorical, 196. 
 Standard-bearers proud of fainting 
 in battle, 664. 
 
 Statue of Christna black, 401. 
 Sterile wives, how treated, 60. 
 
 women take priapic wine, 
 305. 
 
 Stigmata in Christna, 402. 
 
 Stocks of trees emblematic, 637. 
 Stole, the, 165. 
 
 Stone age in Judea, 587. 
 and iron age, 542. 
 upright, indicates the Creator, 
 468. 
 
 Stonehenge, 352. 
 
 Stones, conical, sacred, 148, 149. 
 standing, 196. 
 upright Hermai, 581. 
 used for circnmcision, 542. 
 Stories about creation, 406, 498. 
 childish, told by priests, 51. 
 of the Bible, 675. 
 
 Strange names in England, 21. 
 Strength in the male commands a 
 consort, when, 679, G80. 
 Study of nature neglected by hier¬ 
 archs, 682. 
 
 Sublimation, the process referred 
 to, 217. 
 
 Succubi, 449. 
 
 Sun, apostrophised, 50. 
 
 feminine and masculine, 144. 
 Martianus Capella’s hymn to> 
 647. 
 
 some of his names, 31. 
 Supernatural power, given by 
 parents, 48. 
 
 assumed by fanatics or luna¬ 
 tics, 48. 
 
 the fear of, 46, 681. 
 
 Supreme wisdom, 29. 
 
789 
 
 Suppressio veri in writings of 
 “ divines,” page 682. 
 
 Swasti, the, 151. 
 
 Swedenborg, a religious mono¬ 
 maniac, 48, 447. 
 
 Swine, herd of, story apocryphal, 
 516. 
 
 Sword easier to wield than pen, 
 661. 
 
 Swords used by Jacob’s sons, 606. 
 when introduced into Judea, 
 581. 
 
 Sydenham, 885. 
 
 Symbol of Bull explained, 376. 
 Symbolic worship of Ishtar, 89, 
 90. 
 
 Symbols, 141. 
 
 of Arba-il, 157, 167. 
 their duration, 158. 
 
 Syrian goddess, 154. 
 
 Syrians talk the Jewish language, 
 605. 
 
 T. 
 
 Tabeal, 229. 
 
 Tactics of opposing priests, 669. 
 Taeldeh, 168. 
 
 Tail of Old Scratch, 47. 
 
 Talbot on names, 613, 617. 
 Talismans, 396. 
 
 Tamar and Amnon, 436. 
 Tappuach, 272. 
 
 Tau, the, a symbol, 152. 
 
 Templars’ shields symbolical, 115. 
 Temple, rebuilt, 521. 
 
 why not built by David, 441. 
 Ten tribes aborigines, 568, 569. 
 Tent or brothel, 211. 
 
 Terah emigrates by land, 41. 
 Teraphim, 129, 130. 
 
 used by David, 438. 
 
 Terrors = bugs, 484. 
 
 Testament, Old, Ezra’s share in, 
 525. 
 
 many hands employed in, 521. 
 of human origin, 675. 
 
 Testament, Old, value of, page 623, 
 624. 
 
 Testis and pine cone, 162. 
 
 Text, ancient, varied, 174, 184. 
 redaction of Hebrew, 184, 227. 
 
 Thaiaba, advice of magician to, 
 635. 
 
 Theology based on the Bible, 624. 
 systems of, not completed at 
 once, 50, 531. 
 
 Theologians, how would they have 
 decided between popery and 
 protestantism ? 664. 
 their style of reasoning, 500. 
 think that truth is superficial, 
 663. 
 
 Theological leaders quarrel, 662. 
 word painters, 254. 
 
 Theophrastus and fish, 529. 
 
 Theopneustos, what, 668. 
 
 Thickets necessary for lions, 501. 
 
 Thigh, the word an euphemism, 
 note, 79. 
 
 Thimble riggers and exorcists com¬ 
 pared, 515. 
 
 Third commandment to be taken 
 literally, 618. 
 
 Thor’s Hammer, 151. 
 
 Thought not to be allowed in 
 things divine! 663. 
 
 Three legs of man, 157. 
 
 Throne in heaven, 255. 
 
 Thrusting out the tongue, 430. 
 
 Thumb, an emblem, 90. 
 
 Thus saith the Lord, the phrase 
 examined, 455. 
 
 Tigris, a place of settlement, 38. 
 
 Time and times, meaning of word, 
 428. 
 
 deified, 55. 
 
 destroys all things, 465. 
 
 Titles of Churches and of saints, 
 348. 
 
 Tithes paid by Abraham, 128. 
 
 Tobit, book of, referred to, 6, 514. 
 drives a demon away, 514. 
 
790 
 
 Tolmen, page 327, 544. 
 
 Ton, 23. 
 
 Tongue thrust out, 430. 
 
 Torch, an emblem, 346. 
 
 Torquemada, 686. 
 
 and Anglican divines com¬ 
 pared, 562. 
 
 Toss up a coin, to decide judg¬ 
 ment, 664. 
 
 Towers and temples in Ireland, 
 648. 
 
 Trees, certain, sacred, 526. 
 
 Triad, second Assyrian, 92. 
 the nature of, 218. 
 
 Triads in divinity, 76. 
 
 Triangle, a symbol, 145. 
 
 Tribulation, a consequence of 
 guilt ? 644. 
 
 Tricks of Jacob, 604. 
 
 Trident of Siva, 168. 
 
 Triliterals become quadriliterals, 
 how, 67. 
 
 Trinity a myth, 532. 
 and cross, 152. 
 and fleur de lys, 156, 531. 
 and shamrock, 154, 156. 
 and triangle, 145. 
 associated with female ele¬ 
 ment, 76, 89. 
 
 Chaldee, 58. 
 divisions of, 90. 
 in modern Europe, 91. 
 in Eome and England, 92. 
 the perfect form of Mahadeva, 
 89. 
 
 Triple idea of Creator, its origin, 
 89. 
 
 Trojan war caused by a woman, 
 
 120 . 
 
 Truth lies at the bottom of a well, 
 663. 
 
 Turks, infidels, and heretics, 658. 
 
 Turtle doves, 128. 
 
 Typhon, 71, 248, 279, 289. 
 
 Tyre, an ancient city, 39. 
 prophecies about, 511. 
 
 U, Y. 
 
 U and V, their relative sounds, 
 page 12. 
 
 Ubi tres medici ibi duo atheif 
 682. 
 
 Uniformity in divine story, how 
 attained, 48. 
 
 Universal maker, 50. 
 
 Unseen, dread of the, common to 
 all, 2. 
 
 Ur, 94. 
 
 Ur of the Chaldees, 41. 
 
 Utica and Carthage, 39. 
 
 Uzziah, 74. 
 
 Valiancy quoted, 28. 
 
 Value of evidence, past and pre¬ 
 sent, 454, 499. 
 
 Variations in ancient texts, 174. 
 
 Variety of crosses, 151, 157. 
 
 Vayu, 122. 
 
 Venus, 161. 
 
 and apple, 273. 
 fish sacred to, 529. 
 mysteries of, and ark, 288. 
 Urania, 53, 54. 
 
 worshipped as black stone, 
 107, 148. 
 
 Verbal inspiration of scripture, 
 425. 
 
 Versions of the Bible, 186, 674. 
 
 Vespasian sees a devil expelled, 
 515. 
 
 Vesta, temple of, 415. 
 
 Vicegerents of God, 577. 
 
 Vices of lower animals and men 
 compared, 678. 
 
 Vice a sacred tree, 526. 
 
 Vineyards, 353. 
 
 Virgil writes predictions after 
 events, 603. 
 
 Virgil’s idea of the incarnation, 
 418. 
 
 Virgin, assumes the place of Jesus, 
 113. 
 
 and child, 99, 100. 
 
 and child very ancient, 579. 
 
791 
 
 Virgin — more charming than 
 matron, page 104. 
 of Amadou, 159. 
 practical worship of, 309, 531. 
 represented by mural crown, 
 144. 
 
 the, 52, 57. 
 
 the celestial, 33, 59, 74, 100. 
 Virginity, care for, 53. 
 
 state of, shunned by Jews, 91. 
 Vishnu’s navel, 124, 163. 
 
 Vision, any may be depicted, 253. 
 Visions are all real, 257. 
 
 their value, 48, 457, 463. 
 
 Vital, a Hindoo God, 334, 543. 
 Vocabulary, 173. 
 
 Votaries of the Linga and the 
 Yoni, 114. 
 
 Vul, 93, 94. 
 
 Vulcan nourished by Cynocephali, 
 418. 
 
 Vulgate, the, quoted, 211. 
 
 W. 
 
 Wafer shaped peculiarly, 403. 
 Wakes in Judea, 641. 
 
 War in heaven, 249. 
 
 Wars of Jupiter and the Titans, 
 249. 
 
 Water, holy, 168. 
 
 in connection with intra-ute- 
 rine life, 86. 
 
 poured out after a death, 85. 
 the part it plays in Cosmo¬ 
 gony, 85. 
 
 Wax candles, use of, 444. 
 
 Weeks, meaning of the term, 428. 
 Wheel, the, as an emblem, 143. 
 Wick, 23. 
 
 Wine and oil, 305. 
 
 for sterile women, 305. 
 houses, 353. 
 press, meaning of, 538. 
 Wilford, Captain, 123. 
 
 Witchcraft still believed in, 117. 
 Wittoba, 402. 
 
 Woolf, Dr., supposed to have been 
 insane by Mussulmans, page 
 446. 
 
 Woman passes night with Jupiter 
 Belus, 342. 
 
 Women and good fortune, 308. 
 angels or demons, 114. 
 how estimated, 106. 
 the cause of war, 120. 
 
 Word painting and sculpture, 253. 
 the, 444. 
 
 the, various expositions of, 49. 
 Words, and numbers, 647. 
 old, 71. 
 
 old, help to discover modern, 
 note, 189. 
 
 Works of the Almighty, 29. 
 
 World, future, not revealed to 
 Abraham and Jews, 674. 
 Worms said to exist in hell, 578. 
 Worship of calves, the rallying 
 cry of Jeroboam, 569. 
 of El, coarse, &c., 217. 
 of the Virgin, 59. 
 of woman, 59. 
 on roofs of houses, 642. 
 sexual and sacred, 62. 
 shields used in, 163. 
 
 Wrestler, God as a, 262, 449, 605. 
 
 X. 
 
 X, the form of a particular cross, 
 
 110 . 
 
 Xavier, St. Francis, 140. 
 
 Y. 
 
 Yahu, a sacred name amongst 
 Assyrians, 613. 
 an element in Jericho, 645. 
 Yon, the sound analysed, 27. 
 
 Yoni, adored by Harpocrates, 497. 
 and sistrum, 159. 
 identical with Eve, the mother 
 of all living, 496. 
 in Assyria, 160, 165. 
 on Buddhist cross, 151. 
 
Yoni—the, page 26, 89, 106, 145. 
 Yonigas and Linga^itas, 123, 600. 
 
 Z. 
 
 Zacharias, meaning of, 31. 
 Zechariah sees celestial horses, 
 577. 
 
 Zephron, page 71. 
 
 Ziphion, 71. 
 
 Zippor, 96. 
 
 Zipporah, 96. 
 
 circumcises her son, 542. 
 Zoroaster and Moses compared, 
 668 . 
 
 LIYEKPOOL: 
 
 PRINTED BY DAVID MARPLES.