calamitous or dangerous emergency, for the ruler of the state, to offer up, in prevention of the general ruin, the most dearly beloved of his children, as a ransom to avert the divine vengeance.

And

εκάλουν, (τε μονογενώς έτως ετι και νυν καλεμενε παρα τοις Φοινιξι) κινδύνων εκ πολεμε μεγίςων κατειληφότων την χώραν, βασιλικω xoσ μησας σχηματι τον υιον, βωμον τε κατασκευασαμενος κατεθυσεν. Euseb. Præp. Evang. Lib. I. cap. x. p. 40. and Lib. IV. cap. xvi. pp. 156, 157.

It will be remarked here that the word Iopanλ, in this extract of Eusebius, I have written Il in the translation.-This I have done upon the authority of the ablest critics. Grotius, Vossius, and others, arc of opinion, that the transcriber. of Eusebius meeting with x (II) supposed it to be a contraction of the word Iopanλ, (Israel) often abridged thus in the MSS. of the Greek Christian writers, and wrote it at full length as we now find it. This is confirmed by the circumstance of Kronus being elsewhere called Il, as we learn from Eusebius himself, (pp. 36, 37.)-On this see Grotius in Deut. xviii. 10. Vossius de Idol. lib. I. cap. xviii. p. 143. Marsham Can. Chron. p. 79. and Bryant's Observat. on Hist. p. 288. The last named writer says, "Kronus originally esteemed the supreme deity, as is manifest from his being called Il and llus. It was the same name as the El of the Hebrews; and according to St. Jerome was one of the ten names of God. Phænicibus Il, qui Hebræis El, quod est unum de decem nominibus Dei. Damascius, in the life of Isidorus, as it occurs in Photius, mentions that Kronus was worshipped by the people of those parts, under the name of Εl. Φοίνικες και Σύροι τον Κρονον Ηλ, και Βηλ, και Βολαβην επονοpaleo." Observations, &c. p. 289.-It should be observed that the (El) of the Hebrews is written 's (1) in Syriac; and consequently is the Il of the Phenicians : SO that Il and El are without doubt the same name.

they who were devoted for this purpose, were offered mystically. For Kronus truly, whom the Phenicians call Il, and who after his death was translated with divine honours to the star which bears his name, having, whilst he ruled over that people, begotten by a nymph of the country, named Anobret, an only son, thence entitled Jeud, (it being to this day usual with the Phenicians so to denominate an only son,) had, when the nation was endangered from a most perilous war, after dressing up his son in the emblems of royalty, offered him as a sacrifice on an altar specially prepared for the purpose."

On the Phenician rites, and particularly upon their mystical offering here described, the late very learned Mr. Bryant has offered some curious and striking observations, from which I have made the following selection, which I trust will not be unacceptable to the reader.

It should not, however, be dissembled, that Stilling fleet, (after Scaliger and others) is of opinion, that the word might have been written Israel by Eusebius, as we now find it, and that by that Abraham might have been intended. (Orig. Sacr. p. 371.) He has not, however, advanced any thing to place this matter beyond doubt. And the authority of Eusebius himself as already given, with the other references that have been noticed, renders it highly probable that Il was the word as originally written. Vossius also (p. 143) remarks, "Parum credibile est, Phoenices pro Deo summo, hoc est Molocho, sive Saturno, habituros Israelem, parentem gentis vicinæ, maximeque exosæ ; quod satis sacra testatur historia."

After speaking of the sacrifices customary with various nations, especially their human sacrifices, he goes on to say,-" These nations had certainly a notion of a federal and an expiatory sacrifice. It was derived to them by tradition; and though originally founded in truth, yet being by degrees darkened and misapplied, it gave rise to the worst of profanations, and was the source of the basest and most unnatural cruelty. I have shewn at large that human victims were very common among the Phenicians: and Philo Byblius tells us from Sanchoniatho, that in some of their sacrifices there was a particular mystery: they who were devoted for this purpose, were offered mystically: that is, under a mystical representation : and he proceeds to inform us, that it was in consequence of an example which had been set this people by the God Kronus, who in a time of distress offered up his only son to his father Ouranus."*-He observes, that there is something in the account so very extraordinary as to deserve most particular attention; and after quoting the passage from Eusebius, which I have given at full length in page 381, he remarks, that "if nothing more be meant by it, than that a king of the

It is to be noted that Eusebius has given this account of the matter, in a passage different from that, which I have already quoted from him. Λοιμο δε γενομένε, και φθορας, του εαυτε μονογενή υιον Κρονος Ουρανω πατρι ολοκαρποι. Præp. Evang. p. 38.

country sacrificed his son, and that the people afterwards copied his example, it supplies a cruel precedent too blindly followed, but contains nothing in it of a mystery." "When a fact" (he adds)" is supposed to have a mystical reference, there should be something more than a bare imitation. Whatever may have been alluded to under this typical representation, it was, I believe, but imperfectly understood by the Phenicians; and is derived to us still more obscurely, by being transmitted through a *secondary channel."

Our author, having cleared the history from some obscurities and apparent contradictions, proceeds to his final result.—“This is the only instance of any sacrifice in the Gentile world, which is said to be mystical; and it was attended with circumstances which are very extraordinary. Kronus, we find, was the same with El, and Elioun: and he is termed Υψιsos, and Υψρανιος. He is moreover said to have the Elohim for his coadjutors: Σύμμαχοι Ιλε τε Κρονε Ελωειμ ἐπεκλήθησαν.

* Bryant here alludes to the circumstance of our not be ing possessed of Sanchoniatho's history itself, but merely of a fragment of a Greck translation of it by Philo Byblius, handed down to us by Eusebius; who, as well as the translator, appear to have mixed with the original some observations of their own. On this fragment of Sanchoniatho, see Goguet's Orig. of Laws, vel. i. p. 370-384: Banier's Mythology, &c. vol. i. p. 88-102: and particularly Boch. Phaleg. (Opera. tom. i. p. 771-777.)

(Præp. Evang. p. 37.) He had no father to make any offering to; for he was the father of all, and termed Kupios Oupave, by the confession of the author, by whom the account is given. These sacrifices, therefore, had no reference to any thing past, but alluded to a great event to be accomplished afterwards. They were instituted, probably, in consequence of a prophetic tradition, which, I imagine, had been preserved in the family of Esau, and transmitted through his posterity to the people of Canaan. The account is mixed with much extraneous matter, but, divesting it of fable, we may arrive at the truth which is concealed beneath. The mystical sacrifice of the Phenicians had these requisites; that a prince

* This seems a direct contradiction to what has been just before quoted from Eusebius. Bryant, however, explains this by shewing, that, in truth, Ouranus, the father, to whom Kronus is said to have offered up his only son, is the same as El, or Elioun, or Kronus, being only another title for the same person. This also he asserts to be the same with the Hos of the Greeks, and refers to Servius in Virg. Æneid. Lib. I. de Belo Phoenice, "Omnes in illis partibus Solem colunt, qui ipsorum linguâ HEL dicitur." Bryant's Observ. &c. p. 290.-Servius adds to this quotation from him by Bryant what deserves to be noticed : "unde" (ex HEL scil.) Hos. Ergo, additâ digamma, et in fine factâ derivatione a sole, Regi imposuit nomen BELI."-This last formation by the digamma, Vossius however rejects. Belus he says came from Bλ, contracted from Bλ, from which Bλoan and other words. Voss. de Idol. Lib. II. cap. iv. tom. i. pp. 322, 323.-See the whole of that chapter of Vossius.

❝ et