religious service mentioned in the history of the Hebrews, and is the first recorded in Genesis, after the worship and sacrifice performed by Noah, when he came forth from the ark.

Abram soon removed from the plain of Moreh southward towards the vale of Siddim, where the valleys of the hilly country, north of the plain of Jericho, offer fine and luxuriant pasturage. Here he pitched his tents, near a mountain, on the east of a place to which, in later days, Jacob gave the name of Bethel; and there he also built an altar to the Supreme God, and worshipped him. But he seems not to have dwelt there long, but continued his wandering in a southward direction. Afterwards a famine occurring in the land of Canaan-probably caused, as scarcity usually is caused in that country, by one or more seasons of excessive drought-Abram, who was then in the southern part of Canaan, resolved to go to Egypt, which was not far distant; as he had heard, as Josephus says, that the Egyptians were in a prosperous state. The same writer also relates, that Abram went to listen to their priests, and to learn what they said concerning the gods; designing either to follow them if they had better views than himself, or otherwise to convert them to his own. We may be assured that Josephus-who entertained such deep reverence for the sacred writings of his nation-would not have added this information to what we get from the version of the Old Testament that has come down to us, had he not had authority for doing so. This is only one of the innumerable instances where the writings of Josephus proves that the version which he followed probably differed greatly from that which we now possess.

Besides proving that the valley of the Nile was already occupied by a civilized and agricultural population, the visit of Abram furnishes us with proof that the king of Egypt felt himself bound to observe certain moral rules, and that probably also the life of the subjects was regulated by established notions of morality. What a long period of time must have elapsed ere a barbarous people could have risen to such ideas, and how much longer still must it have required ere these ideas became so prevalent, that even the prince felt himself bound to conform to them! Hence we may be justified in concluding, that the Egyptians were already an ancient nation in the time of Abram-as is abundantly proved by their monuments.

It appears from what I am about to relate, that Sarai was a beautiful woman-of which Abram became perhaps the more conscious as they approached Egypt, when the fair complexion of his Mesopotamia wife was contrasted with the dusky hue of the Egyptian women. Fearing lest the beauty of his wife should lead the Egyptians to kill him for the sake of obtaining her, he had recourse to a species of deception-to which he persuaded his wife to be an accomplice-that denotes the very reverse of the proper manly spirit of a husband and even if Sarai was his sister, the pretence he made was an unworthy equivocation; but if she was his

niece, then it was a direct falsehood. "Say, I pray thee," said he to Sarai, "that thou art my sister: that good may be done to me for thy sake, and that my soul may live because of thee."*

From what followed we are made aware that Sarai submitted to this prudent but pusillanimous advice.

It soon became evident that Abram had not overrated the effect his wife's beauty would exert; because when the Egyptians saw her they pronounced her beautiful. This opinion of her attractions was confirmed by some of the courtiers, by whom she was afterwards seen, and who appear to have painted the charming stranger in such vivid colors before Pharaoh himself, as to have awakened his desire to possess the object of so much admiration; for we are told that in consequence of the eulogies bestowed upon her she was taken into the palace of the king, who, for her sake, treated Abram well, and presented to him valuable gifts.

The result was, as the sagacious Abram had foreseen, quite different from what it might have been, had he really avowed Sarai to have been his wife. But not intending to veil any man's acts, I do not hesitate to say that Abram bought safety and wealth by means, which the general opinion of civilised nations deem to be unworthy the honor of a man.

It ought to be observed, however, that Josephus says, Pharaoh did not enjoy Sarai, though he adduces no evidence in support of this assertion. Some of the Christian writers who have undertaken to prove what Josephus has thus asserted, have given arguments either too shallow or too ridiculous to deserve serious attention; and I have met with none who has written anything convincing on this subject. It is indeed impossible to bring forward indubitable proofs, yet I will recall some circumstances which go far to prove what I am very much inclined to believe. The Egyptian princes, as we know, were closely watched by the priesthood; and their private, no less than their public life, was subjected to regulations framed by the priests, and for which they claimed divine authority. We know also that these regulations forbade the kings to have private interviews with

* Gen. xii. 13. These words, implying cowardice and meanness, as they indisputably do, have, however, in regard to the person who is said to have spoken them, been frequently excused by priests and historians; and even Milman, who has proved himself a liberal writer in many instances, exculpates Abram in the following words: "He"Abram—says Milman, “ ran the risk, not only of losing his wife, but of being murdered for the sake of so valuable a prize, (meaning Sarai.) He therefore took precautions to make Sarai assume the name of his sister, perhaps hoping that, if sought in legitimate marriage, he might protract the espousals till the famine should permit him to make his escape from the country." Had not Abram allowed Sarai to be conducted to Pharaoh, and had he not received presents for her sake, Mr. Milman's defence would be good, whether she was his sister or not. Blameable as a falsehood always is, there would then, considering the frailty of man, have been some reason to excuse Abram; but his very words, and what subsequently took place, invalidate Mr. Milman's defence, and make Abram liable to severe censure.

their wives but at appointed times. It is therefore very probable that they were subjected to the same limitations in regard to their concubines. It is moreover probable that from the jealous eye with which the Egyptian priests watched all the doings of the king, that he would never have been allowed to take a strange woman, either for a wife or concubine, until the chief priests had been consulted for the purpose, as they would most likely pretend, of ascertaining the will of the gods. It is also reasonable to suppose that Abram was meanwhile not inactive, but that, by means of bribes and persuasions, he attempted to influence the priests to counteract the wishes of the king. This seems very probable from the account given by Josephus; because when the pestilence which is spoken of broke out, and the king consulted the priests, they are said to have told him that Sarai was the wife of Abram-a disclosure they could not have made had they not themselves been thus previously informed by some one, and most likely by Abram himself. It would also be unjust to the fair Sarai, were we not to take it for granted that she, with all the ingenuity usually belonging to women, made every objection she could possibly invent, on purpose to avert, or at least delay, the fatal moment, without exposing her husband to the anger of the mighty monarch. At last, as the Egyptian prince seems to have been a just and even generous man, why is it impossible that Sarai, in her despair, may have frankly told him of her relation to Abram, and appealed to his generosity for protection; and that the king, moved by the tears of beauty, may have hesitated to commit an act, which we know was forbidden by the Egyptian laws? Sarai may have thus been safe, when the pestilence breaking out, the priests imposed upon the king the necessity of returning her without stain to her husband. But though a pestilence may have arisen, as is the case almost every year in Egypt, what an imperfect, nay, unworthy view of God's justice is it, to harbor the idea that this scourge befell the innocent subjects of the king to avert the result the deception which Abram had through fear been led to practice?

Josephus tells us, when Pharaoh was informed of the truth, that he reproached Abram for having concealed it; gave to him a large sum of money, and permitted him to associate with the most learned of the Egyptians; and adds, that Abram so distinguished himself in his conversation with these sages, that his virtue and reputation became widely known.* This circumstance is, however, not mentioned in Genesis. It is there only stated that Pharaoh desired him to take his wife and leave the country, at the same time ordering the people to facilitate his departure.

It has been very judiciously observed, that the impression given by the account of Abram's conduct in Egypt, is widely different from that

*See Antiq. book i. chap. 8.

received in reading of his dealings with the petty sovereigns and states of Canaan. With them Abram appears as with his equals, as will be seen in his intercourse with the kings of Siddim and "the children of Heth," and others. In all these instances we find him receiving great respect, and giving free utterance to his sentiments. But when reproved before Pharaoh, Abram answers not a word; and he accepts, without the least hesitation, the presents of this prince; while, on the other hand, we find him refusing those offered by the king of Sodom, assigning for it this reason: "I will not take anything that is thine, lest thou shouldest say, 'I have made Abram rich.'" Consequently, the idea we receive from Abram's visit to Egypt is, that Lower Egypt was then a flourishing kingdom, ruled by a powerful and magnificent prince, who held slaves as his property-as slaves are enumerated among the gifts he presented to Abram. This account thus confirms the claims of the Egyptians to a high antiquity as a civilized and powerful nation.

From Egypt Abram returned to Canaan, where the scarcity which had driven him thence seems to have ceased. He is described in Genesis as being then rich in silver and gold, thus corroborating the testimony of Josephus, who states that he received of Pharaoh a large amount of money. He retraced his steps through the southern part of Canaan, and at last arrived at the spot north of the plain of Jericho, where he had before pitched his tents, and in the neighborhood of which he had previously built the altar, at which he even now worshipped the Almighty.

But Abram was not alone; he was accompanied by Lot; and as both were rich in cattle, and the pasture proved insufficient, disputes arose between their herdsmen. Abram therefore proposed a separation, and left it to Lot to choose which part of the country he would go to, declaring himself willing to depart in an opposite direction. Lot did as was proposed, and departed into the rich valley of Siddim, then studded with flourishing towns; and Abram went and pitched his tents in the southern plain of Mamre, near the place where afterwards the town of Hebron stood.* Here he also erected an altar to the Almighty.

The fertile district which Lot chose for his dwelling place, appears to have attracted the cupidity of his neighbors; for we are told that several princes-who, as Josephus relates, were Assyrianst-headed, as it appears, by Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, invaded this rich valley, and compelled the chieftains of the several cities to submit to a tribute. It seems also

*Here stands a tereberith-tree, which is held in high honor by all the present inhabitants, especially the Jews, who believe that the tent of Abram was shaded by its boughs.

t Josephus says that the Assyrians then held the dominion of Asia-which is a confirmation of the antiquity of the Assyrian kingdom, and of the statements of Ctesias. See Ant. book i. chap. 9.

It does not appear certain, from the accounts given in Genesis, whether the princes who invaded the valley of Jordan were confederated, or whether they were vassals of

that Chedorlaomer, either as an independent king, or-what is more probable as viceroy of the Assyrian monarch, ruled over the conquests made on this side of the Euphrates; and to him this tribute was for twelve years paid. But in the thirteenth year, some unrecorded circumstances induced the tributary chieftains to withhold the tribute; and with this act, the other districts of Syria-which very likely had been subjected -probably concurred. The year following, Chedorlaomer, and the kings that were with him, undertook a new expedition to suppress and punish those who had hoisted the standard of independence; but as they did not proceed at once against the cities of the vale of Siddim, but went to the countries beyond this plain, and not until their return northward moved against the tribes that inhabited it, we may be justified in drawing the conclusion, that other neighboring districts had also been subjugated by the Assyrians in their former expedition, and had participated in the revolt of the tributary chieftains above alluded to.

Coming from the north, the Assyrians traversed the country east of the Jordan,* overthrowing in their march the gigantic races by which this country seems to have been inhabitated. Continuing their progress southward, along the eastern borders of that river, the invaders conquered the Horerites that dwelt in the caverns and strongholds of Mount Seir. We are not told where they crossed Jordan, but we next find them returning northward, along its western border, reducing the tribes that inhabited the outskirts of the wilderness of Paran, on the south of Canaan-namely, the Amalekites, and those of the Amorites that dwelt on the south-western borders of the vale of Siddim. Arriving at last at that devoted vale, the five chieftains that ruled there went forth to fight them, but the invaders prevailed; and as the soil was of a bituminous nature, and its surface consequently broken into deep pits and fissures, many of the conquered were destroyed by falling into the ravines during their precipitate flight. Those who escaped are said to have taken refuge among the neighboring mountains. The conquerors then proceeded to ravage the cities of the plain. In this they appear to have met with no opposition. After having taken possession of all the moveable property and provisions, they continued their homeward march, carrying with them as captives the women, children, and other people they found in the towns. They do not appear to have exercised any wanton cruelty towards their prisoners, or to have burnt the towns,

Chedorlaomer; but from Josephus it seems as if the princes-of whom Chedorlaomer might have been the foremost-were only Assyrian generals, because he expressly states that every part of the Assyrian army had its own commander, but without applying to those commanders-whose names as given by him are the same as given in Genesis-the epithet of kings.

The River Jordan at this time is supposed by some to have flowed on in a widened stream, beyond the vale of Siddim, to the eastern arm of the Red Sea.