certain number be not here put for an uncertain, I should conclude with Le Clerc, that "the five cities, wherein the worship of the one true God was first received, were Heliopolis, which is particularly named in the text, and the four others which are mentioned in Jeremiah, xliv. 1, as the place of the residence of the Jews, Migdol or Magdolum, Tahpanhes or Daphne, Noph or Memphis, and the fourth in the country of Pathros or Thebais, not mentioned by name, perhaps Amon-no or Diospolis. There the Jews chiefly resided at that time and though they were generally very wicked men, and disobedient to the word of the Lord, and upon that account the prophet Jeremiah denounced the heaviest judgments against them, yet some good men might be mingled among them, who might open his prophecies to the Egyptians, and they themselves, when they saw them fulfilled, might embrace the Jewish religion. But this is to be understood not of all the inhabitants of those places, but only of some; which is sufficient to justify the expression of five cities speaking the language of Canaan, and swearing by the Lord of hosts.'"*

Alexander the Great+ transplanted many of the Jews into his new city of Alexandria, and allowed them privileges and immunities equal to those of the Macedonians themselves. Ptolemy Sotert carried more of them into Egypt, who there enjoyed such advantages, that not a few of the other Jews went thither of their own

Si liceret conjicere de nominibus quinque [quatuor] aliarum urbium, dicerem eas esse, quæ memorantur Jeremiæ, cap. XLIV. 2, Migdol (Herodoto Magdolus,) Thachphanches (eidem Daphne,) Noph sive Memphis, et quarta in terra Pathros seu Pathyride, quæ nomine non appellatur, forte Amon-no sive Diospolis. In iis habitarunt Judæi, qui Chaldæorum metu post captam Ierosolimam in Ægyptum migrarant, eoque invitum Jeremiam abduxerant. Quibus, improbis quippe, licet extrema mala iis propheta minetur, potuerunt tamen nonnulli pii admisti esse, qui vaticinia ejus Ægyptiis aperuerint et ipsi, cum ea impleta vidissent, Judaicam religionem amplexi sint. Quod intelligi nolim de incolis omnibus eorum locorum; sed de nonnullis ; quod satis est, ut dicentur quinque urbes lingua Chanahanitide loquuturæ, et per Jehovam juraturæ. [If I might be allowed a conjecture concerning the names of the five [four] other cities, I would say that they were those which are mentioned in Jeremiah, xliv. 2, namely Migdol (called Magdolus by Herodotus,) Thachphanches (the Daphne of the same author,) Noph or Memphis, and the fourth in the country of Pathros or Pathyris, not mentioned by name, and perhaps Amon-no or Diospolis. These cities were inhabited by the Jews, who, after Jerusalem was taken, had, migrated into Egypt, through fear of the Chaldees, and carried Jeremiah along with them against his will. Although the prophet denounces the severest calamities against them generally, on account of their wickedness, yet some good men might, &c. as in the text.]

† Joseph. de Bell. Jud. lib. 2, cap. 18, sect. 7, p. 1098; contra Apion. lib. 2, sect. 4, p. 1364, edit. Hudson.

Joseph. Antiq. lib. 12, cap. 1, p. 508. Hecatæus apud Joseph. contra Apion. lib. 1, sect, 22. p. 1347, edit. Hudson.

accord, the goodness of the country and the liberality of Ptolemy alluring them. Ptolemy Philadelphus* redeemed and released the captive Jews and in his reign, or his father's, the books of Moses were translated into Greek, and afterwards the other parts of the Old Testament. The third Ptolemy,† called Euergetes, having subdued all Syria, did not sacrifice to the gods of Egypt in acknowledgment of his victory; but, coming to Jerusalem, made his oblations to God after the manner of the Jews and the king's example, no doubt would influence many of his subjects. The sixth Ptolemy, called Philometor, and his queen Cleopatra, committed the whole management of the kingdom to two Jews, Onias and Dositheus, who were their chief ministers and generals, and had the principal direction of all affairs both civil and military. This Onias obtained a licence from the king and queen to build a temple for the Jews in Egypt, like that at Jerusalem, alleging for this purpose this very prophecy of Isaiah, that there should be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt:' and the king and queen in their rescript make honourable mention of the law and of the prophet Isaiah, and express a dread of sinning against God. The place chosen for the building of this temple, was in the prefecture of Heliopolis, or the city of the sun,' which place is likewise mentioned in the prophecy. It was built after the model of the temple at Jerusalem, but not so sumptuous and magnificent. He himself was made high-priest; other priests and Levites were appointed for the ministration; and divine service was daily performed there in the same manner as at Jerusalem, and continued as long; for Vespasian, having destroyed the temple at Jerusalem, ordered this also to be demolished.

By these means 'the Lord' must in some degree have been known to Egypt, and the Egyptians must have known the Lord :' and without doubt there must have been many proselytes among them. Among those who came up to the feast of Pentecost, there are particularly mentioned the dwellers in Egypt and in the parts of Lybia about Cyrene, Jews, and proselytes,-Acts ii. 10. Nay, from the instance of Candace's eunuch, Acts viii. 27, we may infer that there were proselytes even beyond Egypt, in Ethiopia. Thus

*Joseph. Antiq. lib. 12, cap. 2, p. 508; Contra Apion. sect. 4, p. 1365, edit. Hudson Hody de Vers. Græc. lib. 2. cap. 2.

+ Joseph. contra Apion. lib. 2, sect. 5, p. 1365, edit. Hudson.

: Joseph. contra Apion. ibid. Antiq. lib. 13, cap. 3, p. 562. De Bell. Jud. lib. 1 cap 1. sect. 1, p 958; lib. 7, cap. 10, sect. 2, p. 1325, edit. Hudson.

were the Jews settled and encouraged in Egypt, insomuch that Philo represents their number as "not less than a hundred my riads,' or ten hundred thousand men. Nor were they less favoured or rewarded for their services by the kings of Syria. Seleucus Nicator made them free of the cities which he built in Asia and the lower Syria, and of Antioch itself, the capital of his kingdom; and granted the same rights and privileges to them as to the Greeks and Macedonians.† Antiochus the Great published several decrees in favour of the Jews, both of those who inhabited Jerusalem, and of those who dwelt in Mesopotamia and Babylonia. Josephus saith that the Jews gained many proselytes at Antioch.§ And thus, by the means of the Jews and proselytes dwelling in Egypt and Syria, Israel, Egypt, and Syria were in some measure united in the same worship. But this was more fully accomplished, when these countries became Christian, and so were made members of the same body in Christ Jesus. And we piously hope and believe, that it will still receive its most perfect completion in the latter days, when Mohammedism shall be rooted out, and Christianity shall again flourish in these countries, when the fulness of the Gentiles shall come in, and all Israel shall be saved.'

IV. But there is a remarkable prophecy of Ezekiel which comprehends in little the fate of Egypt from the days of Nebuchadnezzar to the present. For therein it is foretold, that after the desolation of the land and the captivity of the people by Nebuchadnezzar, it should be a base kingdom; It shall be the basest of the kingdoms, neither shall it exalt itself any more above the nations; for I will diminish them, that they shall no more rule over the nations,'-xxix. 14, 15; and again in the next chapter, ver. 12, 13, I will sell the land into the hand of the wicked, and I will make the land waste, and all that is therein, by the hand of strangers; and there shall be no more a prince of the land of Egypt. Such general prophecies, like general rules, are not to be understood so strictly and absolutely, as if they could not possibly admit of any kind of limitation or exception whatever. It is sufficient if they hold good for the most part, and are confirmed by the experience of many ages, though perhaps not without an exception of a few years. The prophets exhibit a general view of things, without en

* Oủn åæodexoi pupiadwy ixator--In Fiaccum, page 971, edit. Parisien, 1640. [Translated in he text.]

+Joseph Antiq. lib. 12, cap. 3, p. 519, edit. Hudson.

§ De Bell. Jud. lib. 7, cap. 3, sect. 3, p. 1299. edit. Hudson.

+ Joseph. ibid.

tering into the particular exceptions. It was predicted that 'Ca naan should be a servant of servants unto his brethren,'-Gen. ix. 25; and generally his posterity were subjected to the descendants of his brethren: but yet they were not always so; upon some occasions they were superior; and Hannibal and the Carthaginians obtained several victories over the Romans, though they were totally subdued at last. In like manner it was not intended by this prophecy, that Egypt should ever afterwards, in every point of time, but only that it should for much the greater part of time, be 'a base kingdom,' be tributary and subject to strangers. This is the purport and meaning of the prophecy; and the truth of it will best appear by a short deduction of the history of Egypt from that time to this.

Amasis was left king by Nebuchadnezzar; and as he held his crown by the permission and allowance of the Babylonians, there is no room to doubt that he paid them tribute for it. Berosus, the Chaldæan historian, in a fragment preserved by Josephus, speaketh of Nebuchadnezzar's reducing Egypt to his obedience, and afterwards of his settling the affairs of the country, and carrying captives from thence to Babylon.* By his constituting and settling the affairs of Egypt, nothing less could be meant than his appointing the governors, and the tribute that they should pay to him and by carrying some Egyptians captive to Babylon, he plainly intended not only to weaken the country, but also to have them as hostages to secure the obedience of the rest, and the payment of their tribute. If Herodotus hath given no account of these transactions, the reason is evident, according to the observation cited before from Scaliger: the Egyptian priests would not inform him of things which were for the discredit of their nation. However we may, I think, confirm the truth of this assertion even by Hero dotus's own narration. The Persians succeeded in right of the Babylonians; and it appears, by Cyrus's sending for the best physician in Egypt to Amasis, who was obliged to force one from his wife and children; and by Cambyses's demanding the daughter of Amasis, not for a wife, but for a mistress ;+ by these instances, I say, it appears that they considered him as their tributary and subject,

* Και καταςησας τα κατα την Αίγυπτον πραγματα και την λοιπήν χώραν, και της αιχμαλωτες --тwy xatα тny Ai’yuntou i0vwv, x. T. λ. Joseph. Antiq. lib. 10, cap. 11, sect. 1, p. 459, edit. Hudson. [And having settled his affairs in Egypt, and the rest of the country, he conveyed his Egyptian prisoners, &c.]

+ Herod. lib. 3, sect 1, p. 161, edit. Gale.

And indeed no reason can be assigned for the strong resentment of the Persians against Amasis, and their horrid barbarity to his dead body, so probable and satisfactory, as his having revolted and rebelled against them. Herodotus himself mentions the league and alliance, which Amasis made with Croesus, king of Lydia, against Cyrus.*

Upon the ruins of the Babylonian empire, Cyrus erected the Persian. Xenophon hath written the life of this extraordinary man, and he affirms, both in the introduction and near the conclusion of his history, that Cyrus also conquered Egypt, and made it part of his empire; and there is not a more faithful, as well as a more elegant historian than Xenophon. But whether Cyrus did or not, it is universally allowed that his son, Cambyses, did conquer Egypt, and deprived Psammenitus of his crown, to which he had newly succeeded upon the death of his father Amasis.‡ Cambyses purposed to have made Psammenitus administrator of the kingdom. under him, as it was the custom of the Persians to do to the conquered princes; but Psammenitus forming schemes to recover his kingdom, and being convicted thereof, was forced to drink bulls' blood, and thereby put an end to his life. The Egyptians groaned under the yoke near forty years. Then they revolted, towards the latter end of the reign of Darius the son of Hystaspes: § but his son and successor, Xerxes, in the second year of his reign, subdued them again, and reduced them to a worse condition of servitude than they had been in under Darius, and appointed his brother Achæmenes, governor of Egypt. About four and twenty years after this, when the Egyptians heard of the troubles in Persia about the succession to the throne, after the death of Xerxes, they revolted again at the instigation of Ignarus, king of Lybia; and having driven away the Persian tribute-collectors, they constituted Ignarus their king. Six years were employed in reducing them to obedience, and all Egypt submitted again to the king, Artaxerxes Longimanus, except Amyrtæus, who reigned in the fens whither the Persians could not approach to take him: but Ignarus, the author of these evils, was betrayed to the Persians, and was

* Herod. lib. 1, sect. 77, p. 32. edit. Gale.

Xenophon. Cyropæd. lib. 1, p. 2; lib. 8, p. 137, edit. Henr. Steph. 1581.

; Herod. lib. 3, sect. 10—15, p. 164–167, edit. Gale.

Herod. lib. 7, sect 1 et 7, p. 382 et 384, edit. Gale.

Thucydides, lib. 1, sect. 104-110, p. 57-60, edit. Hudson. Diodorus Sic. 5. 11 p. 279, edit. Steph ; p. 54, &c. tam 2 edit. Rhodomani.