brought on the author, who did not entirely escape criticism by his concealment, a torrent of censure which might hare rendered life uncomfortable. It was Sir William Drummond's object to take the parts of the Old Testament commonly commented on by divines as purely historical, and prove them to be allegories. Perhaps the following extract contains a greater portion of the meaning which the author had in view, than any other of similar brevity: " When we consider the general prevalence of Tsabaism among the neighbouring nations, we shall wonder less at the proneness of the Hebrews to fall into this species of idolatry. Neither shall we be surprised at the anxious efforts of their lawgiver to persuade and convince them of the vanity of the superstitions, when we recollect, that, though he could command the elements, and give new laws to nature, he could not impose fetters on the free will of others. With such n power as this he was by no means invested; for the Almighty, in offering to the Hebrews the clearest proofs of his existence, by no means constrained their belief. It cannot be doubted, that by any act of power, God might have coerced submission, and have commanded conviction; but had there been no choice, there could have been no merit in the acceptance of his law.
"Since then Jehovah did not compel the people to acknowledge his existence, by fettering their free will, it was natural for his servant Moses to represent, by types and by symbols, the errors of the Gentile nations; and it is in no manner surprising, that the past, the existing, and the future situation of the Hebrews, as well as the religious, moral, and political state of their neighbours, should be alluded to in symbolical language by an historian, who was also a teacher and a prophet.
"Above all things, however, it is evident, that the establishment of the true religion was the great object of the divine legation of Moses. To attain this purpose, it was not enough that he performed the most surprising miracles. His countrymen acknowledged the existence of Jehovah; but with him they reckoned, and were but too willing to adore other gods. Is it then surprising, that the false notions of religion entertained by the Gentiles should be pointed out in the writings of Moses, and that their religious systems should be there made to appear what they really are—the astronomical systems of scientific idolaters?" To institute a critical investigation of the points discussed in such a book as the Œdipus, would require more learned investigation than is expected to be met with in a casual memoir. But with deference, we believe, a mere ordinary reader may take it on him to say, that Sir William has run riot on the dangerous and enticing ground of philology. It will be difficult to convince ordinary minds that the book of Joshua allegorically represents the reform of the calendar, or that the name Joshua is a type of the sun in the sign of the Ram; and when he fiends the twelve labours of Hercules, and the twelve tribes of Israel identified with the twelve signs of the zodiac, one feels regret that he did not improve the analogy by the addition of the twelve Caesars. It was with some truth that D'Oyly, in his "Remarks on Sir William Drummond's Œdipus Judaicus," thus characterized the species of philology in which Sir William indulged: "It is in the nature of things impossible to disprove any proposed method of deducing the etymology of a word, however absurd, fanciful, and strained it may appear to every considerate mind. We may give reasons for rejecting it as highly improbable, and for receiving another, perhaps as drawn from a far more obvious source; but this is all that we can do; if any person should persevere in maintaining that his own is the best derivation, the question must be left to the judgment of others : it is impossible to prove that he is wrong. In some old monkish histories, the word Britain is derived from Brutus, a supposed descendant of Æneas: now, we may
