be asked equally respecting Egypt or Edom. And how could we reply to this challenge? Shall we

travellers, was now a flourishing town, to which additions were daily making in houses and inhabitants The walls of Tyre, in the state in which I saw them, were a very recent and insignificant work; but in parts might be discerned the remains of a wall of older date

The

houses were of stone, and some of them had very handsome upper apartments, commanding an extensive prospect. At this time houses and warehouses were building on the strand to the north, facing the basin . . Pococke, who saw the flourishing state of Tyre even in 1737, not knowing how to reconcile it with the words of Ezekiel xxvi. 14, and xxviii. 19, says that the prophecy must be understood of the ancient city on the continent. He adds, 'It is a place where they export great quantities of corn, and Malta itself is supplied from this place.'-Vol. ii. p. 88, fol. Surely a port which supplies Malta must be a populous and thriving one! I know that evidence contrary to this may be brought from the relations of other travellers, and I believe that the particular bias of a person's mind has much to do with the colouring he gives to objects. It would be well if commentators on prophecy would consider that Antioch, Ascalon, Berytus, Cesarea, Decapolis, Emessa, Famagusta, Gebayl, Heliopolis or Balbec, Laodicea, Palmyra or Tadmûr, and other cities, the rivals in commerce and luxury of Tyre, will be found fallen from their flourishing greatness, many of them lower than it; and yet against the greater part of them there is no denunciation at all in the prophetic writings. On the other hand, we read (Isaiah xvii. 1), 'Behold Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap'; yet in spite of its doom, so emphatically predicted, Damascus has flourished from that time until now. "The editor of the Monthly Review for November, 1822,

boldly deny facts, and argue against realities; or shall we speak the truth, and say that these places have not yet received their final blow, that their prosperity will revive for a short moment, that their judgment is reserved for the coming of the day of the Lord-the hour when He will forgive and bless Israel?

Nor, because we say that Babylon can only be finally destroyed at the time and under the circumstances specified in the Scripture, and that its desolation must not be one tittle less than that predicted,

looking at the account of Tyre given by Mr. Buckingham, whose travels he is reviewing, and who states that he saw 800 substantial houses, containing full 5,000 inhabitants, is staggered at the assertion, and confronts with it the testimony of Maundrell, Bruce, Joliffe, and some others But, perhaps, a means for settling his doubts may be found, when he is told that the houses of Tyre were equally good with those at Jaffa and Acre, two neighbouring towns, which have not fallen under the prophet's interdict, and that therefore no manifestation of the divine wrath can be said to have descended more on it than on the two others Tyre has two ports. The inner seemed to have been formed by two moles, enclosing a basin perhaps 250 yards

across

The out port or road is considered as one of the best along the coast of Syria. It is formed by a broken ledge of rocks running north from the peninsula. Were the intervals between the rocks filled up, so as to make a continued breakwater, a capacious and nearly a safe port might be formed." (Extract from Travels of Lady Hester Stanhope, &c., narrated by her Physician, vol. iii. p. 196.)

do we therefore undervalue the lesson taught by the premonitory blow. Nor do we, because we maintain Babylon means Babylon, thereby object to other countries or cities being regarded as Babylon, if the moral features and habits of Babylon be found attaching to them. Jerusalem may, spiritually, be called Sodom and Egypt, when the characteristic sins of Sodom and of Egypt are found in her. But this does not cause Sodom to be other than Sodom, nor Egypt to cease to be Egypt. Because we say that human evil will yet find a point of centralization in the land of Shinar and in Babylon, we do not on that account refuse to see the responsibilities of Babylon, wherever Babylon's lineaments are found. Application of Scripture is most legitimate when its primary sense has first been determined by careful and accurate interpretation. If interpretation, however, has not first definitely fixed the primary meaning, our applications must be not only vague and indefinite, but seeing that they are not guided by the great substantive facts of revelation, they must necessarily be fanciful and erroneous. Ascertained facts may lead us to principles, but principles can never antecedently determine facts.

BRIEF HISTORY OF THE GRADUAL

DECLENSION OF BABYLON.

BEFORE we proceed to consider further the evidence of Scripture, it may be desirable to give a brief abstract of the history of Babylon's fall. It will show how gradual that fall was; and that there is evidence of its having been inhabited by a few, even during the period of its lowest degradation.

About the year 541 B.C. it was taken by Cyrus, and Belshazzar was slain. The Scripture records Belshazzar's death only. Herodotus speaks of the capture, but makes no mention of any massacre. It is certain that under Cyrus, whose uncle Cyaxares (called in Scripture Darius the Mede) was made governor, Babylon continued to flourish.

The first great blow it received was when it revolted from the Persians some years after. It was recaptured about the year B.C. 516, after a siege of twenty months, by Darius Hystaspes, who punished the inhabitants severely, destroyed about 3,000 of the principal citizens, and the outer walls.

Some years after, Xerxes went to Babylon and plundered the celebrated Temple of Belus, which

former conquerors had respected. The Babylonians were irritated, attempted a revolt-failed-and were punished by the utter destruction of their great temple, which Xerxes caused to be levelled.

Nevertheless, in the time of Alexander the Great, Babylon continued strong enough to have attempted resistance against him, if it had seen fit to do so. But, on the contrary, it opened its gates willingly to him and to his army. "When Alexander left Arbela," says Arrian, " he hasted straight to Babylon, and when he came nigh to the city he drew up his whole army in order of battle; but the Babylonians having notice of his approach, threw open their gates, and in vast multitudes, with their priests and chief men, went out to meet him, offering him great gifts, besides delivering the city, the tower, and the royal treasure into his hands. Alexander, entering the city, commanded the Babylonians to rebuild the temples which Xerxes had destroyed, and especially the temple of Belus, whom the Babylonians worshipped as their chief god. He consulted the Chaldeans in this city about the restoration of the temples, and whatever they advised he performed; and in particular by their advice he offered sacrifice to Belus."

This extract most clearly shows that Babylon was a place of considerable importance during the whole period of the Persian dynasty. It was not, therefore, suddenly destroyed either by Cyrus or any

*The battle of Arbela was B.C. 331.