Page images
[ocr errors]

days' journey from Mount Sinai. The boats, however, were all taken by pilgrims, and none could be procured-at least for so long a voyage. He accordingly sent off his camels round the head of the gulf, and crossing himself by water, met them on the Petrean side of the sea.

“I am aware,” says Mr. Stephens, "that there is some dispute as to the precise spot where Moses crossed; but having no time for skepticism on such matters, I began by making up my mind that this was the place, and then looked around to see whether, according to the account given in the Bible, the face of the country and the natural landmarks did not sustain my opinion. I remember I looked up to the head of the gulf, where Suez or Kolsum now stands, and saw that almost to the very head of the gulf there was a high range of mountains which it would be necessary to cross, an undertaking which it would have been physically impossible for 600,000 people, men, women, and children, to accomplish, with a hostile army pursuing them. At Suez, Moses could not have been hemmed in as he was; he could go off into the Syrian desert, or, unless the sea has greatly changed since that time, round the head of the gulf. But here, directly opposite where I sat, was an opening in the mountains, making a clear passage from the desert to the shore of the sea. It is admitted that from the earliest history of the country, there was a caravan route from the Rameseh of the Pharaohs to this spot, and it was perfectly clear to my mind that, if the account be true at all, Moses had taken that route; that it was directly opposite me, between the two mountains, where he had come down with his multitude to the shore, and that it was there he had found himself hemmed in, in the manner described in the Bible, with the sea before him, and the army of Pharaoh in his rear; it was there he had stretched out his hand and divided the waters; and probably on the very spot where I sat the children of Israel had kneeled upon the sands to offer thanks to God for his miraculous interposition. The distance, too, was in confirmation of this opinion. It was about twenty miles across ; the distance which that immense multitude, with their necessary baggage, could have passed in the space of time (a night) mentioned in the Bible. Besides my own judgment and conclusions, I had authority on the spot, in my Bedouin Toualeb, who talked of it with as much certainty as if he had seen it himself; and, by the waning light of the moon, pointed out the metes and bounds according to the tradition received from his fathers.”

Mr. Stephens is here greatly in error, and has placed himself in direct opposition to all authority on the subject. It is quite evident, that since the days of the miracle, the sea has “greatly changed” round the head of the gulf. It is now several feet lower, as appears from the alluvial condition of several bitter lakes in the vicinity. On this topic Niebuhr, who examined the matter with his accustomed learning, acumen, and perseverance, is indisputable authority. But he merely agrees with all the most able writers on this head. The

passage occurred at Suez. The chief arguments sustaining this position are deduced from the ease by which the miracle could have been wrought, on a sea so shaped, by means of a strong wind blowing from the north-east.

Resuming his journey to the southward, our traveller passed safely through a barren and mountainous region, bare of verdure, and destitute of water, in about seven days to Mount Sinai. It is to be regretted, that in his account of a country so little traversed as this peninsula, Mr. Stephens has not entered more into detail. Upon his adventures at the Holy Mountain, which are of great interest, he dwells somewhat at length.

At Akaba he met the Sheik as by agreement. A horse of the best breed of Arabia was provided, and, although suffering from ill health, he proceeded manfully through the desert to Petra and Mount Hor. The difficulties of the route proved to be chiefly those arising from the rapacity of his friend, the Sheik of Akaba, who threw a thousand impediments in his way with the purpose of magnifying the importance of the service rendered, and obtaining, in consequence, the larger allowance of bucksheesh.

The account given of Petra agrees in all important particulars with those rendered by the very few travellers who had previously visited it. With these accounts our readers are sufficiently acquainted. The singular character of the city, its vast antiquity, its utter loss, for more than a thousand years, to the eyes of the civilized world; and, above all, the solemn denunciations of prophecy regarding it, have combined to invest these ruins with an interest beyond that of any others in existence, and to render what has been written concerning them familiar knowledge to nearly every individual who reads.

Leaving Petra, after visiting Mount Hor, Mr. Stephens returned to the valley of El-Ghor, and fell into the caravan route for Gaza, which crosses the valley obliquely. Coming out from the ravine among the mountains to the westward, he here left the road to Gaza, and pushed immediately on to Hebron. This distance (between the Gaza route and Hebron) is, we believe, the only positively new route accomplished by our American tourist. We understand that, in 1826, Messieurs Strangeways and Anson passed over the ground, on the Gaza road from Petra, to the point where it deviates for Hebron. On the part of Mr. Stephens' course, which we have thus designated as new, it is well known that a great public road existed in the later days of the Roman empire, and that several cities were located immediately upon it. Mr. Stephens discovered some ruins, but his state of health, unfortunately, prevented a minute investigation. Those which he encountered are represented as forming rude and shapeless masses ; there were no columns, no blocks of marble, or other large stones, indicating architectural greatness. The Pentinger Tables place Helusa in this immediate vicinity, and, but for the character of the ruins seen, we might have supposed them to be the remnants of that city.

The latter part of our author's second volume is occupied with his journeyings in the Holy Land, and, principally, with an account of his visit to Jerusalem. What relates to the Dead Sea we are induced to consider as, upon the whole, the most interesting, if not the most important portion of his book. It was his original intention to circumnavigate this lake, but the difficulty of procuring a boat proved an obstacle not to be surmounted. He traversed, nevertheless, no little extent of its shores, bathed in it, saw distinctly that the Jordan does mingle with its waters, and that birds floated upon it, and flew over its surface.

But it is time that we conclude. Mr. Stephens passed through Samaria and Galilee, stopping at Nablous, the ancient Sychem ; the burial-place of the patriarch Joseph; and the ruins of Sebaste; crossed the battle-plain of Jezreel ; ascended Mount Tabor; visited Nazareth, the Lake of Genesareth, the cities of Tiberias and Saphet, Mount Carmel, Acre, Sour, and Sidon. At Beyroot he took passage for Alexandria, and thence, finally returned to Europe.

The volumes are written in general with a freedom, a frankness, and an utter absence of pretension, which will secure them the respect and good-will of all parties. The author professes to have compiled his narrative merely from “brief notes and recollections," admitting that he has probably fallen into errors regarding facts and impressions-errors he has been prevented from seeking out and correcting by the urgency of other occupations since his return. We have, therefore, thought it quite as well not to trouble our readers, in this cursory review, with references to parallel travels, now familiar, and whose merits and demerits are sufficiently well understood. We take leave of Mr. Stephens with sentiments of hearty respect. We hope it is not the last time we shall hear from him. He is a traveller with whom we shall like to take other journeys. Equally free from the exaggerated sentimentality of Chateaubriand, or the sublimated, the too French enthusiasm of Lamartine on the one hand, and on the other from the degrading spirit of utilitarianism, which sees in mountains and waterfalls only quarries and manufacturing sites, Mr. Stephens writes like a man of good sense and sound feeling.

Art. VI.-1. Standard Writings, adapted to the use of the

Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States. Volume IV, containing, A Translation of the Epistles of Clement of Rome, Polycarp, and Ignatius, and of the Apology of Justin Martyr : with an Introduction and brief Notes illustrative of the Ecclesiastical History of the first two Centuries. By the Rev. TEMPLE Chevalier, B. D., late Fellow and Tutor of Catherine Hall, Cambridge, Eng. Edited by W. R. Whittingham. New-York: Protestant Episcopal Press. 1834. 12mo. pp. 202.

2. Christian Spectator, Volume Fifth, Number Eight.

We propose to discuss in this article some positions advanced some time ago in the Christian Spectator, as the writer in that journal has come to conclusions concerning the Epistles of IGNATIUS which to us seem wholly unauthorized. We are the more persuaded to do this, as it affords an opportunity to lay before our readers some considerations relative to these epistles which have not been generally attended to; and we have chosen the title of the article in the Spectator as that is one of the latest direct attacks upon their genuineness, and because the article in question has of late been frequently referred to as conclusive. We also place at the head of this article a volume of the Standard Works, as containing the best English translation of these Epistles in the most accessible form, to which we beg to refer our readers as authority for the translations we have generally adopted.

We do not propose to go into an extended examination of all the objections which have ever been urged against these epistles, but to notice only those which, in the opinion of the writer in the Spectator, are important; and to make such

brief replies to them as will enable our readers to form an opinion of their nature and merits. But as there are some things about which we differ, so also there are some things in which we agree. It is agreed, then, that Ignatius was a distinguished man and Christian—that he was Bishop of Antioch-that he was sentenced to death by the Emperor Trajan, and sent to Rome to die—that on his passage he wrote epistles to several churches-and that he died at Rome either A. D. 107 or 116. It is also further agreed that we have two copies of seven epistles purporting to have been written by Ignatius, differing in many essential points ; that the larger of these copies teaches Arianism, and that the shorter teaches the true doctrine of Scripture in regard to the Divinity of Christ ; that Eusebius had the same seven epistles when he wrote his Ecclesiastical History, abont A. D. 324, which we now have; and that they were, probably, the shorter ones. With these points of agreement from which to start, we shall proceed to inquire into the probable genuineness of the epistles attributed to Ignatius.

But before we proceed in the investigation, we ought to notify such of our readers as may not be already aware of the fact, that the dispute concerning these epistles is 'twofold, one touching their genuineness, the other relating to their theology,-questions which are entirely distinct in their nature, but yet are often confounded. Concerning the latter point, the question is whether they teach a Presbyterian or an Episcopal organization of the Church ; and if an Episcopal, whether it be a Congregational or Diocesan Episcopacy. But as these points cannot affect the question of their genuineness, we shall not allude to them any further than the objections urged against them in a historical point of view, in which light only we propose to consider them, shall render it necessary. We therefore approach the subject with the simple historical inquiry: Are the epistles purporting to have been written by Ignatius, the genuine works of that Martyr, or are they the forgeries of a later age?

In answer to this inquiry, the writer in the Spectator replies :—“Upon a fair estimate of the whole evidence for and against them, the preponderance appears fairly to be on the side of their having been a forgery, made about a century

1 The Martyrium Ignatii places his death in the 9th year of Trajan, which corresponds with A. Ď. 107. (sec. 2.) and this date is followed by the writers of the Romish Church ; but Bp. Pearson supposes the date should read in the 19th year of Trajan, and that this was A. D. 116. Diss. de an. Ign. Wake. Apos. Pat, Mosh. Ecc. Hist. in loco.

« PreviousContinue »