A discourse concerning the authority, stile, and perfection of the books of the Old and New-Testament with a continued illustration of several difficult texts of scripture throughout the whole work / by John Edwards.

CHAP. VII.

From the Names of the True God the Gentil•••• had the Names of their False ones; as jo•••• and Jao, from J••hovah and Jah; 〈◊〉〈◊〉 from Adonai, Baal Berith and Sabazius fr•••• Epithets given to the True God. Also, t•••• Pagans giving the Title of Gods to the•••• Kings, is deriv'd from the Sacred Writings. Anchialum in Martial, hath reference to th•• form of Swearing in the Old Testament. The Authors particular resolution of that mistakes word. The use of the word Horns in Pr••∣phane Authors, is borrow'd from the Sacred Stile. Several other words, Phrases, and Forms of Speech, among the Pagans, are taken thence. There are some footsteps and relicks of the Sacred History in the most re∣mote Countries of the World. Objectio•••• against the foregoing Discourse answer'd.

Ninthly. THE Heathens had the Names of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Gods, and the pronunciation of th•••• sometimes, from the Names and Titles of the True God. They seem to have derived something from what the Iews practis'd, concerning the Great Tetragrammaton, which was call'd by them Hashem, the Name emphatically, the Name appro∣priate to God, the unexpressible Name; for the Iews tell us, that this Name which we read Ie••ov••••, was pronounced by the High Priest only, and that but once a year, in the Temple, at the Fe••••

of Propitiation, so that it was not known by the People how it was pronounced. When they met with it in their Bibles, instead of it they read Adonai, or Elohim. Hence a great many Con∣jectures have been about the right pronunciation of this Name. It was read Iave or Iahave by the Samaritans, but this is laid aside, and Mercer and Drusius read it Ieheve. Some think that Iehejeh Erit was the word used at first by the Iews, and that afterwards it was corruptly changed into Ieheveh, the Iod being turned into Vau. The true Punctation of the Proper Name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was anciently Iahavoh, saith thea 1.1 Learned Prefa∣cer to the First Volume of Dr. Lightfoot's Works, but he is not pleased to give any Reason for it. Whether Galatinus was the first that read and pro∣nounced it Iehovah I will not here inquire; but this is certain he had it from the Masorites, ac∣cording to whose Points it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and without question those Hebrew Criticks had it from the best and ancientest Copies. This was the ••irst and truest reading, and some Mens varying from it hath proceeded from their Belief of the Iewish Conceit and Tradition, that their Fore-Fathers knew not how to read or pronounce the Tetra∣grammaton. But though it is true they seldom or never spake it, yet this did not proceed from their ignorance of the right pronunciation of it, but from a Supersti••ious Reverence and Fear of Pro∣phaning that word, by taking it into their Mouths. But the Holy Scripture it self warrants the Pro∣nouncing of this Name, for in Gen. 22. 14. Abra∣••am calls the place where he would have Sacrificed Isaac, Iehovah-jireh: now a Place can't be call'd by

its Name, unless the Name be pronounced. So Gideon built an Altar, and call'd it Iehovah-S••a∣lom, Iudg. 6. 24. Besides, the Iews themselves, as precise and nice as they are in this matter, compound many Proper Names of it, though with some abbreviating of it, as Iehochanan, Iehonathan: whence it is evident that they knew how to pro∣nounce this Name of God, but from the reverend esteem which they had of it they refus'd to do it. The Rabbies foolishly pretend Scripture for this, Isa. 45. 15. Verily thou art a God that hidest thy self, applying these words to the concealing of his Name. And they corrupt another Text to main∣tain this their Superstitious Fancy and Practice, Exod. 3. 15. This is my Name, le gnolam, for ever: they read it legnalem, to be concealed. Now, I say, to this Practice of the Iews, viz. their obscure and uncertain Pronouncing, or ra∣ther their not knowing how to pronounce the Name of the true God, the Heathens seem to re∣fer, when they call him the Vnknown, and the a 1.2 Vncertain God, andb 1.3 the God that is not to be named. Socrates exhorted the Athenians, saith Iustin Martyr, to the knowledge of thec 1.4 Vn∣known God, that is, the God of the Iews. The Inscription on the Altar erected at Athens, To the Vnknown God, shews that they gave the True God that Name, for the Apostle interprets it of Him, Acts 17. 23. Thence that in Lucian,d 1.5 By the Vnknown God in Athens. And Hesychius tells us

that there were a sort of Gods called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Worshipp'd by these Athenians, and the Feasts kept in Honour of these strange Deities were call'd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; especially the Hebrew God was number'd by them among the strange ones; therefore when the Gentiles were speaking of this God of the Iews, they added,a 1.6 whosoever he be: as much as to say, he and his Name are not known. And in imitation of this, perhaps some of the Pagans would have their Gods to be Vnknown.b 1.7 Macrobius Acquaints us particularly concerning the People of Rome, that they would have their God, under whose protection the City was, conceal'd; and he pre∣tends this reason for it, because if the Name of their Tutelar God were known, the Enemy would make use of it, and call him out by their Magick Art. But the true reason might be their fond imitating of the Iews (whom in many other things they were wont to follow:) hence they were not to know the Name of the Tutelar God of Rome; he wasc 1.8 Vnknown, and Vnutterable, as Plutarch testifies.

But as the Iews pretended, out of a supersti∣tious humour, that the Name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was not un∣known to them, when they knew well enough the right pronunciation of it; so the Gentiles, though they called the God of the Iews the Vnknown God▪ and seem'd to be ignorant of his Names, yet it appears that they had some knowledge of them, and that they Intituled their Gods by the Names of the God of the Iews. Which I prove thus; the Tetragrammaton was ••ot unknown to the Chal∣deans, as is clear from 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 36. 15, 18, 20. where

we read that the Idolatrous Rabshakeh (who at that time spake in the Iews Language, v. 13.) knew it, and often pronounc'd it. And this Name of God is found among the Grecians also, though al∣tered and corrupted. Froma 1.9 Macrobius we learn that Iao was the Chief God of all among the Gentiles, for which he quoteth the Oracle of Apollo Clarius.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Know this, that the Supream God of all is Iao.

A most Illustrious Attestation to the Holy Writ, and the Great Name of God contain'd there∣in. Iehovah was corruptly pronounced Iao, and Io was a contract of Iao, as in the Songs and Hymns wherein they Sung Io Paean. This latter word (asb 1.10 one conjectures) is from Panah to look, or behold: and so Io Paean is as much as Iehovah Penoth, Lord look upon us. For it is pro∣bable that Io, Iao, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (for all these were in use) were abreviatures of Iehovah, as Iah among the Iews was an Abridgment of this. Several of thec 1.11 Ancient Fathers are positive that Iehovah was written by the Greeks, who were not well acquainted with the pronunciation of it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Accordingly, saith Porphyrius the Philoso∣pher, cited byd 1.12 Eusebius, Sanconiathon receiv'd the account he gives of the Iews from a Priest of the God 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And it is testified bye 1.13 Diodorus,

that Moses receiv'd his Laws from the God that is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The Mistake arose from the igno∣rance of the Name Iehovah. Whence it appears that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the same with Iah and Iehovah, and that the former is but a mistaken pronunciation of these latter.

I will add that Plato's 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, came from Moses's 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Exod. 3. 14. according to the Septuagint, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I am, according to the Original. And the same Philosopher's Tò 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, answer to Iehovah, which is a Name of Existence.

Nay, that is more remarkable which we meet with ina 1.14 Plutarch, who assirms that the In∣scription on the Temple of Minerva in Egypt was thus, I am all that is, and was, and shall be. Which is a plain reference to God's Name in Exo∣dus. And he speaks of another Inscription of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Temple at Delphos, which he thus applies to the peculiar Essence and Existence of God,

is the compleat Appellation of God: in our an∣swering and speaking to God, we say, Thou art, attributing to him this true, certain, and only Appellation, which agrees to him alone, which is called Being or Existing.

And afterwards he expatiates concerning the uncertain, labile and flux Nature of Man, and all things in Comparison of God, who is most properly said to be, Eternally Existing. This is Ehejeh, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, I am, of which Name of the True God these Gentiles had some notice, and that from the Hebrews, and imitated in the Names that they gave to their false Deities.

Iovis, the old Nominative Case for Iupiter, (as Priscian saith, and so it is used by Ennius and Varro) is borrowed from this Name Iehovah. Iu∣piter is no other than Iovis-piter, or Iovis-Pater, Father Iove, or Iehove, and so answers to Ieho∣vah, who hath the Name of Father given him often in Scripture. And it is likely that heretofore some contracted the word Iehovah, and read or pronounced it Iovah, as the Iews pronounced Iudah for Iehudah. Nay, Iove or Iova, the A∣breviature of Iehovah was perhaps used by Moses himself; which I gather from what Iosephus saith of the Name Written on the High-Priest's Mitre; viz. That it had four Vowels, and consisted of four Vowels alone: This seems to have been Iova, which consists of just so many Vowels, though two of them are used as Consonants, unless you will say they pronounced I and V. as Vowels, thus, Ioua. We may then reasonably believe that the Name of the Heathens God Iovis came from the corrupt pronouncing or contracting the word Ie∣hovah, or (which comes nearer to it) Iehovih, for so you will find it Written in Deut. 3. 24. 9. 26. And that Iovis is of Hebrew Original, and deri∣ved from the Tetragrammaton, is confess'd by Varro, who thought that Iovis was first of all the God of the Iews, asa 1.15 St. Augustin quotes him. And though the Pagans alter'd the Name, and made it sometimes exceed, and at other times come short of four Letters, yet this did not ex∣tinguish the sense and notion among some of them, that the Original Name was a Tetragrammaton, For it is likely that the Pythagoreans 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the

Number Four, by which they used to Swear, (espe∣cially they confirmed the most serious Truths with this Oath) was taken from the Iews Tetragramma∣ton. The Excellenta 1.16 Commentator on Pytha∣goras's Golden Verses, and particularly on this passage in them, talks at large why God is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Quaternarius, so that it seems the Pytha∣goreans applied it to God. Whence ab 1.17 Learned Antiquary of our own concludes, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was Iehovah, and he conceives that Pythagoras (who speaks of it in his Verses) had this Mystery of Quaternity from the Hebrews, who had in great veneration the Tetragrammaton, the Name of God of Four Letters. It was easie for this Philosopher, who convers'd in his Travels (as is acknowledg'd) with Hebrews and Chaldees, to arrive to the know∣ledge of this Name.

Let me suggest this in the next place, that since the Name Iehovah was commonly pronoun∣ced Adonai by the superstitious Iews, it might hence come to pass that this Adonai, with a very small change, gave the Name to one of the Poetick Gods among the Heathens, viz. Adonis. To con∣firm which, add what Hesychius saith, thatc 1.18 A∣donis is as much Lord among the Phaenicians. He mistakes the Phaenicians for the Hebrews here, as is very usual. Whence then can we with greater probability think that Name was given to a Pagan God, than from its being of so near affinity with Adonai, the Name of the True God among the Iews? Again, Baal-Berith, i. e. the Lord of the Covenant, was the Name of a God or Idol of the Phaenicians, Iudg. 8. 33. Which seems to be an

imitation of the Title of the True God, who as soon as the Deluge was pasta 1.19 made a Covenant with Mankind, and after that we find himb 1.20 Co∣venanting with Abraham, and afterwardc 1.21 with the whole People of the Iews: and frequently in Scripture we see he is making a Covenant with his Servants, so that he is the true Baal-Berith, the Lord of the Covenant. The Phaenicians borrowed this out of the Jewish and Sacred Writings, and applied it to one of their Gods: whence it was propagated to other Nations, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Foedera∣tor, the Covenanter, was the Title of Iupiter.

Among the Names which the Gentiles give to their Gods, I may reckon 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Sabazius, (for it is sometimes Latinised) to be one. That this was the Name of iupiter especially, you read in Strabo, Valerius Maximus, Apuleius. That it was a Title also given to Bacchus is witnessed by d 1.22 others. In allusion to this, the word Sabos is often heard in the Orgia, i. e. the Sacred Rites of Liber, ase 1.23 Plutarch acquaints us. And from f 1.24 Aristophanes we learn that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 were words of Acclamation and Rejoycing among the Pagans, at their Great Solemnities, and Festi∣vals. Now this Name seems to be of Hebrew Original, and refers to the Iudaick Sabbath, that Sacred Festival in which God was most solemnly Worshipp'd by that Nation: And this Plutarch was sensible of, viz. That there was an assinity be∣tween 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (before mention'd, the word used in the Gentile Festivities, especially by those that kept the Bacchanalia) and the Iewish Sabbath; only

in this he err'd, not knowing the derivation of the Hebrew word, that he thought this was taken from that, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; as he ex∣presly saith. Or perhaps this Name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which was given to their false Gods, was taken from that of the true one; and Iupiter Sabazius is as much as Iehovah Zabaoth, which both a 1.25 Isaiah andb 1.26 Ieremiah frequently repeat as the proper Name of God: Iehovah Zabaoth, the Lord of Hosts is his Name. Some have thought the word Tzebaoth is placed here by way of Appo∣sition, as if it should be rendred Dominus Sabaoth, and thencec 1.27 Ierom reckons Sabaoth among the Names of God. But questionless this word is in the Plural Number, & in regimine, and so the true rendering is Lord of Sabaoth, i. e. of Hosts. Yea, you will find the Hebrew word retain'd even d 1.28 in the Greek, as if there were something more than ordinarily remarkable in the Hebrew. The Pagans, who got the sound of this word (as very famous among the Hebrews) took it by it self for God's Name, and thence (it is likely) fra∣med the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. This shall suffice in brief for a proof of what I undertook, that the Names of the God of Israel are applied by the Hea∣thens to their Idol-Gods. The Pagans call their Deities by Titles which are given to the True God Iehovah. This makes good what I aim'd at, that the Heathens had these as well as other things from the Sacred Scriptures: and it is certain they could have them from these only; which is a proof of the verity and antiquity of those Holy Writings.

Speaking here of the Heathen-Gods, and their Names as borrowed from Scripture, it may not be impertinent to observe, that even the Title of Gods given by the Pagans to their Kings and Prin∣ces, was derived from the same inspired Writings I grant that it partly proceeded from their sot∣tish Opinion that they were Gods indeed: But it is as true, that it might be derived to Prophane Writers, from the stile of the Holy Ghost in the Old Testament, where Magistrates are called Gods. Thus in Exod. 22. 8. the Gods and the Rulers of the People are Synonimous. Moses was to Aar•••• instead of a God, Ex. 4. 16. i. e. according to the Chaldee and Arabick, a Iudge or Prince. God himself honours the Rulers of the Sanhedrim with the Title of Gods, Ps. 82. 6. I have said ye are Gods. So in Psalm 138. Gods in the 1st verse are Kings of the Earth in the 4th. It might be ob∣serv'd that Elohim and Adonai, the usual Names of God himself, are attributed to Great Men in the Sacred Writings. In short, as God is often called King in Scripture, so Kings are called Gods, and thence the expression is convey'd to the Pagans, and frequently used by them. Among the Eastern People Melech, Moloch, and Malcham, (for these words are indifferently used) signifie both God and King. And perhaps it was in con∣formity or relation to this Notion, that they commonly inserted the Names of their Gods into those of their Princes, though it might be also as a good Omen, or for Honour's sake. From their Gods, I say, Princes compound their Names, as Belshazar, from Bel: Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuza∣radan, and Nebonasser, from nebo an Assyrian God; Evilmerodach, from Merodach a Babylonian God•• and many others. Among the Persians we read

the Name of God was bestow'd on their Empe∣rours: Thus Xerxes was stiled the* 1.29 Persian Iupiter. One of the Antiochus's had the Sirname of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. We shall find likewise that other Nations complied with this Notion. What if I should say that the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, mention'd by Pythagoras in his Golden Verses, are these Terrestrial Gods I am speaking of; viz. Great Princes, Celebrated He∣roes, Wise Rulers, Divine Men, or Earthly Dei∣ties? Plato tells us in his Politicks that a Good King isa 1.30 like some God chosen out from amongst Men. Princes and Commanders are stiled by Homer 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, born and bred of the Gods. But especially among the Romans this sort of Language was common. Rome was no less than Heaven, and the Emperour was God. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is apply'd to the first Caesar byb 1.31 Strabo. The next (viz. Augustus) is called Deus Caesar by Propertius. Edictum Domini Dei{que} nostri, is Martial's Lan∣guage. At Rome the Royal Palace was reputed a Temple: the Mount Palatine was Sacred and Venerable, because the Emperour's Seat was there. c 1.32 The Soveraignty of Magistrates approaches next to the Majesty of Heaven, saith the Grave and Renowned Oratour. And with him agrees the Pithy Moralist, who tells us thatd 1.33 the Peo∣ple are to look upon their Governours under no other Character, than as if the Gods were come down to visit them. We may say here, as the Philosopher in another Case, & hic Dii sunt, there is a kind of Divinity in Rulers, they are

Earthly Numen's, they are Created and visible Deities: And being so stil'd first of all in Scrip∣ture, the Title hath come down to the Pagan World, but hath been infinitely abused.

Having taken notice of several References in Prophane Authors, to express Passages and Usages Recorded in the Old Testament, I will here su∣per-add one which I meet with in Martial's Epi∣grams: And I will the rather insist upon it, be∣cause the place is obscure, and hath yielded mat∣ter of great Controversie among the Learned. The Epigrammatist writes to a Iew, and tells him he will not credit what he saith, though he Swears by the Temple of Iupiter, or of any other Deity: Wherefore he puts him upon Swearing by Anchialus.

a 1.34 Ecce negas, juràsque mihi per templa Tonantis: Non credo; jura, Verpe, per Anchialum.

There have been great disputes about this An∣chialus, some thinking it to be Sardanapalus's Statue crected in Anchiala, a City of Cilicia, and there Worshipp'd: Of this Opinion is Dom. Cal∣derinus: Some taking it for a Man or a Boy, some for a City or Town, and others for a Beast, as Vossius the Elder conceits it refers to the Iews Worshipping an Ass, because 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is Asinus. But he might as well have under∣stood by this word a Horse, or a Man that carries Burthens, for that is the import of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or rather 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Besides, Angarius and Anchia∣lus are too different in sound to be thought to be the same: Wherefore I dismiss this. The rest of the Modern Criticks agree in this, that the

Poet directing this Epigram to a Iew, refers to something in use among that People, and particu∣larly something mention'd in their Bible (for that would make the Jest the more biting, as he imagined) viz. The Form of Swearing by the True God which is used there. But these Authors differ about the Form.a 1.35 Ioseph Scaliger de∣rives it from the Hebrew Fountain 〈◊〉〈◊〉 i. e. si vivit Deus, which was a form of Swear∣ing with the Hebrews: hence, saith he, Martial was mistaken, and thought they swore by An∣cbialus, whereas the Oath was Am chi alah, i. e. If God liveth. Our Learned Farnaby likes this Criticism very well, and hath inserted it into his Notes on this place. But by the leave of so Great a Critick, there is I conceive something faulty in it: For though I am most willing to grant, that there is in this place a reference to the Form of Swearing which was used by the Iews in the Old Testament; yet I am not for∣ward to assent to this interpretation of the word Anchialum, which this Noble Philologist pre∣sents us with, and that for these Reasons; first it is not Am but An that must answer to the begin∣ning of the word Anchialum. However, this may be born with, being an easie change of a Letter. Secondly, there is no such Hebrew Word as am. There is im si, but then it should be Imchialum, not Anchialum. Thirdly, Ala is not an usual word for God among the Iews, because it is an Arabick, not an Hebrew word, and 'twas never made use of in that Nation, and 'tis not once mention'd in the Holy Bible, wherefore I can't be∣lieve they solemnly Swore by it.

For the same Reason I am apt to reject th•••• other solution of this place in Martial, which a verya 1.36 Excellent and Choice Writer hath of∣fered. Anchidlum or Anchialon, saith he, is com∣posed of these three words [An] non, [Cha] vivit (and without the Vowel under it Chi, and perhaps they might vulgarly pronounce it so) and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or [alon] deus: For this (saith he) is an Oath of a Iew who denies the Crime which he is accus'd of, he Swears thus, An chi alon, i. e. Non: vivit deus. But I cannot on due Considera∣tion think that this is a true account of this Passage; for first Alon was not a Name in use (nay perhaps not known) among the Iews. This Author indeed saith it may be gathered out of Plautus, that God's Name was pronounced Alon, but we are not to consider what pronunciation the Name had among other People, i. e. Foreign∣ers, but what was in constant use among the Iewish People: for the Poet refers here to that. Wherefore there being no such Name among them, it could not be used by them in an Oath and consequently it is not here meant, when Mar∣tial is jesting with the Circumcised Poet. And as for the word Eljon, which 'tis true is often used in Scripture, and of which this Alon seems to be a corruption, it is an Epithet rather than a Name of God, and therefore was not (it is likely) put into a Formal Oath. Again, the word an, which this Author makes one of the ingredients of this word which the Poet useth, hath no such lignification as he pretends it hath. Indeed ajin, and the contraction of it in is non, but an hath no other signification but ubi, or quorsum, or quous

〈◊〉〈◊〉 as any Man may satissie himself, by consult∣•••••• the places where it occurs.

But anothera 1.37 Person of infinite Literature (who 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is of Opinion that it is an Oath, and a Iewish 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that is here meant) tells us, that per Anchialum is a corruption of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i. e. ulciseatur is qui vivit in aternum: For we read, saith he, that Chi olam is one of Gods Great Names, Dan. 4. 31. and we read also of Swearing by this Name, Dan. 12. 17. wherefore Martial's Verse should have been written thus,

Non credo: jura, verpe, iperan Chi olam.

〈◊〉〈◊〉 Let him who lives for ever (viz. God) take ••••••geance on me, viz. if I forswear my self. This is a Criticism worthy of so Learned an Antiquary. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 I have something considerable to object against a; as first this iperang which he here brings in is ••••••••ether redundant, for we read not that they ••••••d this word in Swearing, therefore there was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 reason to insert it here, and to make it part of the form of a Iewish Oath. Moreover, Chi∣•••••••• is mistaken for Chi gnolma in Dan. 4. 31. which will not come into the Verse. But chiefly I make bold to dissent from this Worthy Person's Opinion, because I think I have an easier and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to propound.

That which I offer is this, that this word An∣•••••••••• contains in it these three words, an, chi, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 The word an is an abreviature of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, which is an usual Interjection, sometimes translated now, Psal. 118. 25. and sometimes oh, (〈◊〉〈◊〉 exclamatory Syllable,) Ex. 32. 31. yea, in all

or most of the places where we find it, it bear this last signification, or borders very near up•••• it. It is a particle used among the Hebrews 〈◊〉〈◊〉 express the Affections and Emotions of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 (as Mercer hath well observ'd) which are frequent∣ly accompanied with Exclamations. And by en∣quiring into the Texts where 'tis used, it will ap∣pear, that it is also an Interjection of Asseveration and is as much as sanè, profecto, certè. To th•••• purpose it is rightly rendred truly, Ps. 116. 16. wherefore it is no wonder that it is used it Swearing. I find that this Passionate Expletive 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the same signification in the beginning of Word or Sentence with [na] in the end of them whence perhaps the Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and Latin 〈◊〉〈◊〉 (both used in Oaths) are derived. This I have said to shew the fitness of this first word in this place. The two others are Chi and Elohim, which being joined together are the same that [God li∣veth,] which you will find to be the very expre•••• words which are used in the Old Testament whe•• they Swore, as in 1 Sam. 2. 27. 1 Kings 17. 12▪ 18. 10. Chai Elohim, God liveth: but we rende•• it [as God liveth] and perhaps very significantly because an Oath is generally express'd by a defective Speech: some word is left out, and our Tran∣slators supply it. This we are certain of, that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is usual in the Old Testament to Swear by God Life, and in these very terms, The Lord live•••• God liveth. Yea, God himself Swears by his Life Am. 6. 8. As I live, saith the Lord. Thence God in the Old Testament is called the Living God Which Epithet is so commonly given him, and was without doubt so frequently used by the Iews, that it came by that means to be well known to the Gentiles, which I should guess gave rise 〈◊〉〈◊〉

the Greek Name of Iupiter. The Heathens Na∣med him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Living God, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And I am apt to think that from the Nominative 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (which is of the same Original) the Name Deus comes, for 'tis probable that heretofore it was pronounced as one Syllable, and so was as much as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for you see the is turn'd into in the three next Cases, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Therefore even Deus 15 the Living God. But to proceed, God's Life is himself, and there∣fore 'tis no wonder that God's People the Iews Swore by it. Chi Elohim was the constant form of words which they used, and it was taken (as you have heard) out of the Holy Scriptures. So then An chi elohim is no other than Verily, truly the Lord liveth: the word an being presix'd by the Iews to express their affection and concern about the thing which they asserted or denied with a Solemn Oath. Now, when the Iews pronounced this Oath in these words, those that were ignorant of the Tongue, thought it was all but one word or Name. Our Witty Poet who was not skill'd in the He∣brew, was guilty of the same mistake, and put the Iew upon Swearing by Anchialum, which was a misunderstanding of An chi Elohim: which words when they were pronounced fast and indistinctly, seem'd unto those who were not skill'd in the Hebrew Tongue to sound like Anchialum. There∣fore Martial saith, Iura, verpe, per Anchialum, i. e. per an chi Eloim, or with an usual Synalaepha, An ch' Eloim, which likewise is an instance of what I asserted before, that Transpositions, Ab∣breviatures, and Corruptions of words are very usual, and that their right Terminations are laid aside very often. Or, perhaps the Name 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 El (which is also the usual Name of God in the

Old Testament,) is here intended: For that also was used in Oaths, as appears from Iob 27. 2. Chai El. As God liveth. And without doubt it was used by the Iews, as well as Eloah and Elohim, in Swearing: yea, some Hebritians have thought that these words are derived from the Verb Alah juravit, because they are used in Swearing. An chi El, Verily God liveth, was a common form of an Oath, no less than An chi Elohim, and thence the ignorant Hearers among the Pagans thought that the Name of the Iews God was Anchiel, or Anchial: And Martial here having occasion to use it in the Accusative Case, adds the usual ter∣mination to it, and makes it Anchialum. Swear to me, saith he to his Brother Poet, who was a Iew, by a Jewish Oath, Swear by the most So∣lemn and Sacred Oath that you have in use a∣mong you, and that is, (as I have heard) Anchial or Anchiel, which is no other then An chi El, Verily God liveth. With great deference and re∣spect to the judgments of the foresaid Learned Criticks, I propound either of these to be the ••airest and easiest solution of that controverted place of Martial. It is not Chi Alah, nor Chi Alon, nor Chi gnolam, but Chi Elohim, or Chi El (take which you please) that is referr'd to here by the Poet: for these are the very words used in Scripture, and we read that one of them espe∣cially is the express form of Swearing among the Hebrews. Which is the thing I alledged this passage for, viz. To let you see how Pagan Wri∣ters have frequent references to the Book of God, and particularly the Name of the True God, and to the Customs and Usages there spoken of, and thereby do in some measure give testi∣mony to the Truth and Reality of those Wri∣tings.

I would offer to the Learned another Notion in prosecution of the Subject I have been so long upon. I am of the Opinion that from The frequent mention of Horns in the Old Testament, the Heathens borrow'd the like expression, and apply'd it in that very sense in which 'tis used in those Holy Writings. The Hebrew Keren (whence the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Latin Cornu, and the German and English Horn,) signifies Might, Strength, For∣titude, as also Ioy, Safety, Prosperity; whence you read of the Horn of Salvation, 2 Sam. 22. 3. Psal. 18. 2. and the exalting, lifting up, and setting 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Horn, 1 Sam. 2. 1. Ps. 75. 4, 10. Ps. 89. 17. Ps. 112. 9. Lam. 2. 17. Zach. 1. 21. On the con∣trary, cutting off the Horn, signifies debasing, de∣grading, a mournful, unsafe, afflicted Condition, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is clear from Ps. 75, 10. Ier. 48. 25. Lam. 2. 3. And defiling the Horn, is of the same import, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 16. 5. From the signification of the Verb Kuran, we may be partly confirmed in this sense of the Noun Keren, for 'tis said of Moses's Face that it shone, Ex. 34. 29. it was very Bright and Glorious. The vulgar Latin renders it, it was Horn'd, and thence (was said before) Moses is ••sually Pictured with Horns. But we must un∣••••rstand it spoken Metaphorically, viz. of those ••ays or Beams of Light which darted from his face, and which were as 'twere Horns of Light. So in Hab. 3. 4. by Horns is meant Brightness or Light, and it is so expresly interpreted in that rerse. The Radiency, the Splendour of Moses's Face was very great, and is rightly called by the Apostle, the Glory of his Countenance, 2 Cor. 3. 7. So that hence we may gather that the word im∣ports Outward Glory. And as this word Keren signifies more generally Power, Grandeur, Our∣ward

Glory, and Prosperity, so it more particu∣larly denotes Kingly Power, Soveraign Dominiou and Empire, the Greatness and Splendor of Crowned Heads. (Whence, by the way, I propound it as probable, that from the Eastern words Karan and Keren are derived the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Dominus, Imperator, and the Latin Corona.) Thus Horn is applied in 1 Sam. 2. 10. He shall give strength unto his King, and exalt the Horn of his Annointed. And in the Psalms you will find that this word hath particular reference to David as King, Ps. 89. 24. 91. 10. So in Ps. 132. 17. 'tis spoken of him as the Lord's Annointed, and 'tis joyn'd with a Crown in the next verse. In the Book of Da∣niel this Language is very common, in the 7th and 8th Chapters a Horn and Horns signifie Princely Dominion, and the Persons that exercis'd it: and in the latter of these Chapters those two Horn'd Beasts, a Ram, and a Goat, are Representatives of Kings, and Kingdoms. It is in express words said in two places, Horns are Kings, Dan. 7. 24. 8. 7. Now, from this particular stile and idiom of the Ancient Holy Book of the Scriptures, the Heathen Writers learnt to speak after the same manner. Not only in a general way was the word Horn used by some of their Authors, toa 1.38 express Vigour, Spirit, Strength, and Power, but more especially and signally they mak•• use of it to signifie Supream Power and Dignity, such as that of their Gods, and of their Kings. Thusb 1.39 Cor∣niger was the Epithet of Iupiter Hammon, and we may inform our selves from several Writers

that he was commonly pictured with Horns: which had its rise, I conceive, from the like re∣presentation of Great Ones in the Old Testament, as you have heard. I know other Reasons are alledg'd, as that of Servius, who thinks this Iupi∣ter had that Title, and was represented Horned, because of his Winding Oracles, because his An∣swers had as many crooked Turnings as a Ram's Horn. Macrobius, and some others tell us, that this Hammon, was no other than the Sun, whose Beams are Cornute, whose Rays are in the fashion of Horns. If the Moon had been meant, then I confess, the Epithet of Horned had been very Natural: But I don't think, that the Metaphorical Horns of the Sun (which are its Rays) were thought of here by the Antients. Wherefore, I look upon these as mean and trifling Reasons. But the true occasion, if I mistake not, of their describing Iupiter Hammon with Horns, and of representing other Gods, as Pan and Bacchus, after the same manner, was this, that they complied with the Stile of the Sacred Writings, (as was an usual thing with them) which set forth Great Power, Magnificence and Glory, especially Kingly Power and Greatness, by the expression of Horns. This suited well with their Gods, who were Great Folks, and generally Deified Kings. We read, that a Ram and a Goat are Symbols of Regal Strength, in the Prophetick Writings; in imitation of which, it is probable, Iupiter Hammon was worshipp'd in Afsrick, in the shape of an Image which had partly the proportions of a Ram, and partly of a Goat. And from the same Original, (viz. the Holy Scriptures) it was, that Antiently the Pagan Kings and Monarchs were represented and stiled Horned, as we may satisfie our selves from several Authors.

It is well known that Alexander the Great was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, bicornis: of which some give this Reason, because (say they) of the amplitude of his Empire, which was extended to both the extream Horns of the World, East and West. Others say, he would have been thought to be the Son of Iupiter Hammon, who was Cornute, and accordingly they drew Alexander so. And there are other Reasons assign'd bya 1.40 Authors, why this Great Conquerour had the denomina∣tion of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but they seem to be far fetch'd, and not to give us the true and genuine ac∣count of it, which I take to be this, viz. That this Title was derived to the Gentiles from the frequent Language and Phraseology of the Old Testament, which expresses Kingly Power by Horns, and more especially from the Prophecy of Daniel, where the Grecian Monarchy is de∣seribed by a He Goat, an Horn'd Animal, and the first King of that third Monarchy, viz. Alexander the Great, is signified by Keren Chazuth, a No∣table Horn, Dan. 8. 5. a Great and Visible Horn, as the Hebrew word properly signifies: And a∣gain, he is call'd in the same Chapter the Great Horn, v. 21. All Interpreters agree in this, that Alexander the Great is meant here, although they differ in expounding other parts of the Chapter. Hence this Mighty Monarch would in his Pictures and Coins be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, represented as Horn'd, yea, his choice Horse, which he most prized, is known by this Character. And from this Great Man his Successors learnt to stamp their Coine with Horned Images and Impressions. Hence

••lexander is called Dulcarnain, in the Alcoran by Mabomet, which is equivalent to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for that I suppose to be the meaning of that Eastern word: And 'till some others give a better In∣terpretation of Chaucer's [at Dulkernoon] I pre∣sume to say it signifies as much as to be in a ••aze, to be at ones wits end, to be dilemma'd, to be push'd at on one side and the other, as 'twere with a double Horn. So much for that Name given to that Great Monarch, of which many Writers have disputed, and I have made bold to put in among the rest, and to offer my apprehensions concerning that Epithet. I refer it to the Old Testament, which was not unknown to some of the wisest of the Gentiles, who thence borrow'd many Words and Phrases, and more Customs and Practices. Hence Horns came to be significat••ve of Kingly Greatness and Power. Hence it was a Custom among the Persians to wear aa 1.41 Rams Head of Gold for a Diadem. Hence Attila, King of Hunns, was pourtray'd with Horns, as is to be seen in An∣cient Medals. And that Horns were a Badge of Regality and Dominion, is clear from what we read inb 1.42 Valerius Maximus, viz. That when on a sudden Horns were seen to appear on the head of Genitius Cippus, as he was going out at the door, the Response was, that he should be King, if he return'd into the City.

I have now almost finish'd my Task, I mean, so far as it respects the Old Testament. Let me only add this after all, That many things in Homer, Euripides, Sophocles, Theognis, &c. may

not only be reduced to, but seem to be borrow'd from David's Psalms, Solomon's Proverbs, the Book of Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus, (which are but an imitation of these) and other parts, both of the Canonical and Apocriphal Writings. This hath been partly shew'd bya 1.43 some of late, but might be carried on much further. I do not think every Saying that is like another in Scripture, was taken thence. That of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 2. 9. (which he takes from Isai. 64. 4.) Eye hath not seen, nor Ear heard, neither hath it enter'd into the Heart of Man, is very like that passage in Empedocles,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.—

but no Man can think there was any reference to it. I do not say, that Lucretus's

Cedit item retro, de terrâ quod fuit ante, In terras: Et quod missum est Aetheris oris, &c.

was copied out of Solomon, Eccles. 12. 7. Toen, shall the dust return to the Earth as it was; and the Spirit shall return unto God who gave it. I know many Sentences may happen to be alike, yea the same in Sacred and Prophane Writers: The Moral Subject they Treat upon might afford the like matter and words sometimes; but in comparing the Hagiographa, and those Writings, you will find, that that there is more than this; the Genius

of the Stile is the same, the manner of Expression, the forms of Speech, the particular Phrases and proverbial Sayings, which had their first rise among the Hebrews, are the very same. This is excellently shewed by the Learned Hugh Grotius in his Annotations, and it plainly discovers whence the Pagan Writers had those things. Some of the Prophane Poets, borrow'd their strain of Love-Songs and Epithalamiums, from Solomon's Canticle: Especially Theocritus, (asa 1.44 Sanctius hath observed), from whom the rest learnt that way of Verse, hath not a few passages in his Idyllia, expresly taken out of that Sacred Song. And in that Dialogue of Plato, which he entitles Symposium or his Eroticks, there are several things, which you would guess are allusions to Solomon's Love-Dialogue, or Epitha∣lamium. And to heap up several particulars toge∣ther, it was said by Solon in his Discourse with Cra••sus, (as both Herodotus, and Diogenes Laertius report) that theb 1.45 Term of Mans Life, is three∣score years and ten, as if he had had it from the Pen of the Holy Psalmist, Psal. 90. 10. The Acclama∣tion or Shout which was used among the Heathens in War, when there was an occasion of Joy and Thanksgiving, wasc 1.46 〈◊〉〈◊〉; which you may ea∣••ily conceive was a corruption of Allelujah. Some d 1.47 Chapters ande 1.48 Psalms of the Old Testament, are disposed in an Alphabetical Order; which gave rise to that sort of Verses, call'd Acrosticks: Such are the Arguments of Plautus's Comedies, and the

Elogium of Christ, in one of the Sibylls, which you will find also in Tully. This piece of Wit and Fancy, was borrowed from the Holy Writings, which were Endicted by the Sacred Spirit. And here, when I am speaking of the Pagans borrowing from the Hebrews, I might even observe to you, that the very Greek Alpbabet is taken from them; which the Grecians themselves in part confess, for they say they had their Letters from the phani••i∣ans, who were near Neighbours to the Hebrews, and who indeed are usually mistaken for these.

I will add in the last place, that the Old Testa∣ment, hath left some remains of it, in most remoto Countries of the World, as China, India, America, as our Modern Travellers will inform us. In all these parts, there are evident and apparent foot∣steps of the History of the Bible. Mastinius in his History of China acquaints us, that the Chi∣neses have Records concerning the Vniversal Flood, and that there are among that People several Me∣morials of the Old Patriarchs; and accordingly a 1.49 one hath given us a brief account out of him of Cain, Enoch, and Noah. That in India, the footsteps of Mosaick Doctrine remain among the Brachmans, is proved byb 1.50 Huetius. The high∣est Mountain of Zeilan, an Isle in the East-Indies, is call'd by the Inhabitantsc 1.51 Adam's Top, and there is Adam's Cave, where he lamented himself after his Fall. The Ceremony of putting their Hands under one another's Thighs, when they solemnly Swear to one another, of which we read

in Gen. 24. 2. 47. 29. isa 1.52 observ'd among some of the Indians at this day. The Americans, saith ••••osta, have Traditions of the Deluge, and make mention of it in their Discourses: And Huetius ••••eweth, that several Rites and Laws of Moses are observed by them. The Antient Patriarchs left behind them, remembrances of their Actions, even in these places; their Memory is still preserv'd and retained in many Names, Customs, and Practices, that are among them. The Name Ioseph is often found there, and Hallelujah is used in their Songs, asb 1.53 Hornius observes. The People of Peru re∣port, c 1.54 that all their Earth was overwhelm'd with waters, and lay cover'd with them a long time, that Men and Women perished, excepting only a few, that betook themselves to some Vessels of wood, and so preserv'd themselves. Those of Mexico telld 1.55 that there were five Suns hereto∣fore, that gave light to the World, and that the first and oldest of them perished in the waters, and at the same time, the Men that were upon the Earth were drowned, and all things were destroy∣ed. And several other such passages, the Inhabi∣tants of the New-found-Land, received from their Forefathers, some of whom perhaps were Iews, fore 1.56 Manasseh Ben Israel thinks the Ten Tribes who were carried Captive, came into the West-Indies, (as well as into some parts of China and Tartary) and there have left footsteps of old Iudaism. But whether these were Relicks, or only Apeings of it, I will not stand to dispute.

Thus I have abundantly made good, that the Heathens borrowed from Scripture and Inspired Men. Their Priests took their Religious Cere∣monies, yea their very Gods: their Poets took their Fables; their Historians, their more serious Narratives; their Philosophers, their Notions and Opinions; their Common People, their Words and Phrases, their Usages and Customs, from the Writings of the Old Testament, and the Doctrine, Rites, and Practices of the Iews therein Recorded. So that it is evident, that Pagans bear Testimony to the Contents of the Old Testament, and that Prophane Writers attest the Truth and Authority of those Sacred Writings.

If any Object, that I have shewed my self arbi∣trary and lavish, in some of the Derivations of Words, which I have offered, and that there is not sufficient ground for the Etymological part of my Discourse; I bri••fly Answer, I have purposely and industriously all along, taken care to avoid this imputation. For I have sometimes taken notice of, and been ashamed of the great Extra∣vaganc•• of some Writers in this very point. Thus Calepine derives Canis à Canendo, as if Barking and Singing were the same thing.a 1.57 One de∣rives Scribo from 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and labours to make it out. Such an Extravagant Etymologizer is Ave∣narius in his Hebrew Lexicon, who fetches 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from Mashal dominatus est, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from Tsa∣niph, and Scorpio from Gnacrab, which is the He∣brew Name of that Animal. Yea, he deduces Turk from Kedar, by a Metathesis. And Monsieur Bochart is not far behind him, for he is oftentimes

very bold and presuming in his Etymologies, he making it his business to fetch all from the Phaeni∣cian Tongue; which to accomplish, he makes any thing out of any thing. I have not ventured to Etymologize after the rate of these Men (though they are all of them very Learned Heads), but I have with singular care, throughout my whole un∣dertaking, endeavour'd to preserve the Honour of Grammar and Criticism, which so many have vio∣lated; and not to put off the Reader with far fetch'd Derivations of Words and Names, without observing the due Laws of deducing and forming them. I have never presumed to derive one word from another, where there was not a fair Gram∣matical Analogy between them, and some agree∣ment in their sound, and some considerable proba∣bility of their being nearly allied to one another.

In the next place, if any Object, that I have ga∣thered many things from the mere sound and like∣ness of words, which is an uncertain and Arbi∣trary thing, and there is no conclusion to be made thence; I Answer, it is true, the sole Affinity of words is no firm and undeniable Argument of their Origination. The significations of words in different Languages, may sometimes be coincident, yet we are not certain thence of their Deri∣vation. This I am most ready to grant; nay farther, that it is folly to derive one word from another, meerly because of the likeness of them; as if, because the Pentateuch is divided into Para∣shah's, therefore we must derive Parishes from thence, they being such a part of a City or Town set out, as divided and separated from the rest: You may as well derive Montgomery from Gomer, and say it is the Montanous Country where Gomer Lived. Who thinks, that the English word Evil,

comes from the Hebrew, Evil, a Fool? It would be ridiculously quibbling, to fetch the Proverbial Saying, As lean as a Rake, from the Hebrew, Ra•••• tenuis, macer, gracilis fuit; or to make a bad one in English, to have assinity with Abaddon. It would be yet more intolerably ridiculous, and might be look'd upon as a School-Boy's pun, to derive a High-Man, from one of the three Giants call'd Ahiman. Wherefore, I do not contend, that all accidental likenesses in words, are a foundation to ground Etymologies and Derivations upon. I know some are very foolish and trifling here; they find such and such words in different Tongues, agreeing in sound, and thence they infer they are akin, if they can but make out any kind of resem∣blance in their signification. If the Hebrew word bad, (which hath many significations) had one like the English (bad), they would presently say, that this came from that. If Siccus had been of the same signification with Aegrotus, we should have said the English word Sick was thence. If 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 had signified any thing like Caelum, or Aether, we should have derived Skie thence. If 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 had been as much as imperare, gubernare, some would conclude regnum to be derived from it. And* several other words I could instance in, which you shall find in another place. I grant then, that there is a great deal of uncertainty in Etymologies, and we are not to lay any huge stress upon them. But though this be true, yet where we find there is agreat pro∣bability that words are related to one another, where there is good ground for it, we are to take notice of it. Though there be in Goropius B••chan•••• and some others before mention'd, many frivolou•• Etymologies, and fanciful Derivations, yet this hath not made Wise Men disregard the Alliance and

Cognation which are between words, especially be∣tween the Hebrew and other words. Thus it is most probable, that the following Greek, Latin, English, and French ones, are derived from the Hebrew.

Greek, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Myste∣rium. Lat. Uro. Mensura. Gibbosus. Engl. Fig. Dumb. Cable. French, Harasser, and English, Harasse.

From.

Mister, idem. Ur, ignis. Mesurah, idem. Gibben, idem. Fag, ficus. Dum, siluit, ob∣mutuit. Chebel, funis. Haras, diruit, destruxit.

I cannot peremptorily aver, that these are of Hebrew Original, but no Man alive is able posi∣tively to assert the contrary. Yea, there are many words in the Derivation, of which all gene∣rally agree; few or none deny, or so much as doubt, that the Latin Gubernare, and the English 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Govern, are from the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and all of them from the Hebrew Gabar, Gubernavit, vicit: T••••er, from Turris, and both from Tur (Syriak) the same: Camel, and Camelus, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the same: Tornace, to Turn, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and that from Tor, ordo, cursus: Vinum, Wine, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 from Iajin, the same. And it is granted by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Saccus, a Sack, come from the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 (Sak) of the same signification. And 〈◊〉〈◊〉 signifies the same in all Languages, and

therefore it can't be denied that the Moders ones had it from the Learned ones, and that the Ancientest among these, which is the Hebrew, communicated it to the rest. Who questions whe∣ther these English and Latin words come from the Greek? Viz.

Strangulare, to Strangle, Comere, to Comb, Discus, a Dish, Pix, Pitch. Anchora, Anchour, Linum, a Line, Linnen, Chorda, Chord, P••na, Pain▪ Tumba, a Tomb, Hora, an Hqur, Lampas, a Lamp.

from

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

And many other words there are whose derivation is plain and easie, and therefore is most readily acknowledged. There is reason then why we should enquire into the Original of words, and track them to their fountain head. And this is that which I have done in the fore-going Enter∣prize: where there was a great likelyhood that the Greek or Latin were derived from the Hebrew, I took notice of it, and improved it to my purpose. I have not offer'd any thing that

is strain'd and forc'd: The Derivation of those words which I had occasion to look into in this Discourse is very plain and obvious, and such as any unprejudic'd Man will not boggle at, as

Thoth and Bau, Erebus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Python, I••petus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Iphigenia, Belus, Jerombaal, Jobatas, Hamon, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Jovis, Adonis, Anchialum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

From

Tohu and Bohu. Ereb. Pathan. Iaphet, Anakim. Bethel. Iphthigenia, or Iepthi∣genia. Bel, or Baal. Ierubbaal. Ioab. Ham. Iah, and Iehovah. Iehovah. Adonai. An chi Elohim. Allelujah.

I appeal to any Impartial Critick, whether there be not ground for these Derivations. They are Natural, plain, and easie, and the main substantial Radical Letters on both sides are preserv'd: besides, there were always Con∣current Circumstances to determine me to believe this to be the true Origination, as that the Mat∣ter spoken of was alike, that the Gentiles had notice of these things or Persons. from the Iews, and particularly that they had made many of their Gods from F••mous Men, and that those Hebrew Persons, whom we mention'd, were some of the most Famo••s in the whole World, and other things occurred to me of the like na∣ture.

And as for Bacchus and Noachus, or Bacch and Noach, though I am not very earnest in pres∣sing the affinity between them, yet those who consider what a number of words is changed and corrupted by time, will not wonder that some Learned Writers have thought those words to be the same Originally. There are many Greek and Latin words which might be produ∣ced, wherein one or more Letters are put for others, and such alterations are made, that the words have lost their native sound, and s••em to be quite other words. I could render this the more credible, by instancing in many words in our own and other Modern Langua∣ges, which are corrupted in common Discourse, and are much unlike the words from whence they are derived: And yet we readily acknow∣ledge

that they are Corruptions of such and such words. And if there be these alterations in the same Tongue, you may imagine how much more it is in the transferring of words into other Tongues: You may conceive what a change of Letters and Syllables, what Transpo∣sitions, or Contractions, besides the altering of the Terminations, there must be to make an Oriental word become an European one.

That Iphigenia should be as much as Iephthige∣nia, that Iova should be put for Iehovah, that Vulcan should be from Tubal-Cain, and An••hia∣lum from An chi Elohim, is no marvel at all, if you consider how common an Aph••resis and Syncope, i. e. the taking away a Letter or Syl∣lable from the beginning or middle of a word, ••re.

In my reading, and observation, I have met with these in the Eastern Tongues.

Ammon, Hoshea, Iob, Iezer, Iemini, Ram, Dumah, Coniah, Siris, Apis, Belinus, Hamet, Mummy

For

Ben-ammi, Gen. 19. 38. Jehoshua, Numb. 13. 16. Jashub. Gen. 46. 13. Num. 26. 24. Abiezer, Num. 26. 30. Ios. 17. 2. Benjemini, 2 Sam. 20. 1. Aram, 1 Chron. 2. 9. Mat. 1. 3. Edumah, or Edom. Isai. 21. 11. Jeconiah, Ier. 22. 24. Osiris. Serapis. Abelion. Selden de Dis. Syris. Muhamet. Amomum. This being the Herb which they mingle with other Spices for Embalming.

So in the Greek, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is put for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 indo∣lentia: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nomine carens: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 stellio;

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 arena. In the Latin like∣wise, Amarum comes from the Hebrew Marar, or Marah, amarus fuit. Nomen comes from the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Tego from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, fallo from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Syria, from Assyria, (so call'd from Assur the Son of Shem,) Natolia, from Anatolia, (from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the East) the Name which Geographers gave to Asia the Le••s. In Plautus you read of Conia, for Ciconia, Rabo, for arrhabo. And in the Latin Italianized, Puglia, from Apulia, a Country in Italy; Rimini, from Ariminum, a City in the same place. And in the French, per∣haps Galliard, a Dance, is derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 exsultare, and Gallant, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ornare, the first Letter being cut off. In our own Tongue also I have observed many words, of which I have given you an account in the end of this Work,* because I will not stay to interrupt you now. And all this I have done for the sake of the Objectors, to let them see there is good rea∣son for the foregoing attempt, and that it was not unworthy of our Task to regard the sound of words, and to take notice of their likeness to one another, and to observe what Alterations and Corruptions they have undergone, and there∣by to arrive at the first and Ancient signification of them (though it be something difficult to do so, beca••se when words are abbreviated, or o∣therwise alter'd, 'tis not easie to tell what they 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and whence they came;) which thing I hope we have attained in part, in our indeavours to prove that the Heathens borrow'd the Names of their Gods from the Holy Scripture, and that other Pagan words are of the same Original.

Another Objection or Cavil is, that as I have shew'd a great deal of Arbitrariness in words, and in the derivation of them, so I have shew'd no less in the Things and Matters which I have been treating of Many of them are founded on meer imagination, and are altogether precari∣ous. In answer to this, I must needs say, there are some who in this Theme shew themselves too Curious, and Fanciful, they stretch things too far, and what they assert hath no other bot∣tom than their own bold imagination. The Fa∣thers are not altogether to be excus'd in th•••• matter. Those that have impartially perus'd Clement of Alexandria's Stromata, Iustin Martyr's Exhortatory Orations to the Gentiles, Euse∣bius's Evangelical Preparation, and some other Writings of the Ancients, cannot but observe that they are something extravagant in this kind; and they have a conceit that several Ver∣ses in the Poets, and other Passages in the re〈…〉〈…〉 of the Heathen Authors, are taken out of the Bible, where there is little or no ground to be∣lieve any such thing. Some Persons fancy every thing to be borrowed from Scripture, these Men would vouch that the Story of Romulus and Re∣mus's being cast into Tiber in a Basket of Osiers, and Faustulus's finding them, and bringing them to his Wife, who nourish'd them, refers to Mo∣ses's being exposed in an Ark of Bull-rushes, and taken up and Educated by Pharaoh's Daughter. Had Orpheus's going to Hell been after Christ's time, they would have said it referr'd to Christ's Descending into Hell. I am as forward to blame such Men as the Objectors are, and it never entred into my thoughts, that every thing

which hath a Resemblance to what we meet with in Scripture is therefore taken from it. But this must not prejudice ••ober enquiry, and true Improve∣ment of this Notion which I offer. Because some foolishly think that all or most of the passages a∣mong the Poets relate to the Bible, shall we say therefore none were taken thence? Because some things are made out by meer invention and wit, shall we affirm that every thing is so? This is fond and ridiculous. Wherefore, I have been very Cautious in this Subject, and have kept my self within bounds. I have not promiscuously pro∣pounded things, but have used Choice, and pitched on those particulars only which carry some probability and likelyhood with them. Some observing that thea 1.58 Hebrew word used by Moses in Gen. 1. 2. signi••ies to hat••h, as a Bird doth her Eggs by sitting upon them, have thought that the Pagans had thence the notion of the World's being an Egg; and to this purpose some things are offer'd to shew that they had ••uch an apprehension. And to pass by the An∣cients, we are told byb 1.59 Late Writers, that some of the People in the Southern parts of the East-Indies have the same Notion of the Ori∣gine of the World. Thec 1.60 Chinoise say all things were from an Egg: yea, theird 1.61 first Man had the same rise. But why might it not pass for an Egg in a plain Philosophical way,

as at this day there are some Philosophers who tell us that all things are from an Egg, all Living Creatures at least are propagated by Eggs, ye•• Man himself? Thus the World may be thought to be a Great Egg. But I rather think it was from the Oval or Round Figure of the World that they represented it by an Egg: and you must know it was believ'd that this sort of Fi∣gure had some perfection in it, and so on that account they took the more notice of it, and this Spherical shape of the Universe was much admired and Celebrated by them: yea, it was thought to be Sacred and Divine: so that by this means the World came to be a very Worship∣ful Egg. But I cannot satisfie my self that it was said to be so from the fore-cited place of Scrip∣ture, where 'tis said the Spirit of God moved on (or hovered over) the face of the Waters. I do not think that a single word used in a Metapho∣rical way is foundation enough for this Notion. Therefore I have not made use of it in the fore∣going part of my Discourse, but I rather reckon it to be something akin to the fancy of that a 1.62 Ingenuous Writer, who tells us, that the Ge∣neration of Castor and Pollux out of an Egg, was founded on this, that they were Born and brought up in an Upper-Room, according to the import of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which sometimes hath this signification. But, did not this Learned Man mistake 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which indeed car∣ries that sense with it?

Some have thought that the Story of Darius Hystaspis being chosen King of Persia, by the Neighing of his Horse, was grounded in the History of Mord••cai, and the King's Horse which he rode upon, for this Darius they take to be Ahasuerus. But I have omitted this (as well as several others) because it hath little or no foun∣dation. Besides, that they greatly disparage Mordecai by such an application as this, for Da∣rius got the Kingdom of Persia by his trusty Groom Oebares, rather than by his Horse, for he Communicated the Design to him over Night, who took effectual Care to have his Master chosen Emperour the next Day. And chosen he was; a jockey made him a Monarch. I have not had the considence to say thata 1.63 Ho∣mer's 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, refers to the History of b 1.64 Shamgar's Smiting the Philis••ines with an Ox-Goad, (which is in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,) and doing such wonderful Execution with that Weapon: though 'tis the conjecture of no meaner a Man thanc 1.65 Bochart, that that Fable was borrow'd from this real Truth. I have not pretended to a••firm that the Story of Arion, (which Pliny and Ovid relate) viz. That he being cast into the Deep by the Seamen of the Ship wherein he was, struck up with his Harp, and the Dol∣phins presently came about him, and he mounted upon one of their backs, and so escaped; that this Story, I say, was taken from the Hi••••ory of

Ionas; though there is a verya 1.66 considerable Wri∣ter, who makes no question of it, and to advance the belief of it, would have us observe, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies both a Minstrel and a Prophet. If I had inserted into the Parallel of Samson and Her∣cules, that Hercules's Pillars, spoken of by Geo∣graphers, refer to the two Pillars, of the House, which Samson took hold of and pull'd down, it might justly have been objected, that I stretch'd the Parallel too far; and yet I must tell you, that there are no contemptible Authors, (among whom Vossius is one) who have made one, a Reference to the other. I have purposely avoided such far-fetch'd Conceits, and have all along declin'd the suggestions of those Writers, who have let their imaginati∣ons run too high. This I consider'd, that among the Poets especially, there are many things which are the pure product of their Luxuriant Fancy, and have no ground at all in the things them∣selves. It is their way (as I have said before) to insert their own whimsies, to lard True Story with their own wild Conceits and Capricio's, which we must never mind; for they are only Poetick Flourishes, and therefore must not be thought to refer to any real thing. The fixing this on my mind, kept me from running into those Extravagancies, which some have been guilty of, whilst they imagined, that the Poets in all or most of the particulars, with which their Fables are stuffed, allude to so many express

passages in True History. I attended to the main thing in their Writings, which I saw came so near to Scripture; the rest I pass'd by, as meer Poetick Flash and Foolery, and not to be taken notice of. In short, I have always trod where there is some tolerable ground and footing; and I have omitted several particulars which others insist upon, meerly because they have so sandy a bottom. So little Reason have any to blame me for indulging of Fancy, in this present under∣taking, where I have endeavour'd in abundant instances to make it probable, that the Pagans borrowed from the Sacred Writings.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Dr. Bright.
• a 1.2

  Incerti Judaea D••i. Lucan. Ph••rsal. lib. 2. Inc••rtum N••∣••en, Trebel. Pol. in vitâ Claudiani.
• b 1.3

  Inn••mi••atus deus. In vitâ Caligulae.
• c 1.4

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Apolog. 1.
• d 1.5

  N•• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. I•• P••ilopat.
• a 1.6

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Dion. Hist. l. 36.
• b 1.7

  S••tur∣••••. l. 3. ••. 9.
• c 1.8

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Roman. Q••aest.
• a 1.9

  Saturnal. I. 1. c. 18.
• b 1.10

  Rous's Archaelog. Attic. I. 2. c 2.
• c 1.11

  Irenaeus, Clem. Al••xandr. Eusebius, &c.
• d 1.12

  P••aep. Evang. I. 1. c. 5.
• e 1.13

  l. 5. c. 5.
• a 1.14

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. D••••••. & Osiris.
• a 1.15

  Deum Judaeorum Iovem putavit. De Consens. Evans. lib. 1.
• a 1.16

  Hierocl.
• b 1.17

  Selden de Dis. Syr.
• c 1.18

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• a 1.19

  Gen. 9. 9.
• b 1.20

  Gen. 17. 9.
• c 1.21

  Ex. 34. 27.
• d 1.22

  Ari∣stophan. in Avib Diodor. Sic. lib. 36. Lucian. Concil. D••or.
• e 1.23

  Sympos. 4.
• f 1.24

  In Vesp.
• a 1.25

  Ch. 48. v. 2. 51. 15. 54. 5.
• b 1.26

  Chap. 10. 16. 31. 35. 50. 34.
• c 1.27

  Epist. 136. ad Marcellam.
• d 1.28

  Lord of Sabaoth, ••••m. 9. 29. Iam. 5. 4.
• * 1.29

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Dionys. Long. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• a 1.30

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• b 1.31

  Lib. 4.
• c 1.32

  Magistra∣••••m pot••stas proximè adDeorum Immortalium numen accedit ••ro Rabirio.
• d 1.33

  Non alio nomine populus Rectorem 〈…〉〈…〉 quàm si Dii Immortales porestatem visendi sui ••a∣tiant. Senec. de Clement. l. 1.
• a 1.34

  In Verpum. lib. 11. Epigr. 94.
• a 1.35

  De Emendat. Temp. in Prolegom.
• a 1.36

  Petit. Var. Lection. l. 1.
• a 1.37

  Seldeq de ••ur. H••red, Hebr.
• a 1.38

  Tunc pauper cornua sumit. Horat.
• b 1.39

  —S••••••t Corniger illis Iupiter.—••ucan. l. 9.
• a 1.40

  Scaliger de emendat. Temp. Ho••••inger, L'Empereur.
• a 1.41

  Ammian. Marcellin. l. 19.
• b 1.42

  Lib. 5.
• a 1.43

  Mr. Gataker in Anto••in. Dr. Duport in Homer.
• a 1.44

  In Cantic. Solo••.
• b 1.45

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Herodot. l. 1. c. 32. Laert. in Solone.
• c 1.46

  Aeschil. in Prometh.
• d 1.47

  Prov. 31. and the four first Chapters of the Lamentation.
• e 1.48

  Psalms 25. 34, 37, 111, 112, 119, 145.
• a 1.49

  Horn. Arca Noae.
• b 1.50

  Demonst. Evang. Prop. 4.
• c 1.51

  Ursin. Analect. lib. 4.
• a 1.52

  Avenarius in verbo Jarek.
• b 1.53

  De Orig. Americ.
• c 1.54

  Aug. Cara.
• d 1.55

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. Go••••
• e 1.56

  Spes Israelis.
• a 1.57

  Herm. Hugo de Scribendi Origine.
• a 1.58

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Incubare.
• b 1.59

  Abraha. Roger. Janua, &c.
• c 1.60

  M. Mart. Hist. Sinens.
• d 1.61

  Nieuhof. Leg. Bat.
• a 1.62

  Dr. Brown. Vulg. Errors.
• a 1.63

  〈◊〉〈◊〉
• b 1.64

  Iudg. 3. 31.
• c 1.65

  De Sa••r. Animal. pa••s prior. l. 2. c. 39.
• a 1.66

  Huet. Prepar. Evang.