(as just now observed, in reference to the supposed conveyance-deed) the writing might have been hyeroglyphic in its structure. The occurrence of the terms writing and book in the Pentateuch, tends no more to prove that alphabetic letters were known in the days of Moses, than the use of one of the same words in the New Testament proves that printed and bound volumes were in circulation in the time of Christ and the first apostles. It is said, that when Jesus went into the synagogue, on a certain occasion, "there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, The spirit of the Lord is upon me," &c.* The book, in this instance, was a roll of parchment; which latter name was applied by the Jews to their scriptural records kept in the temple. Paul uses both terms, in immediate connection with each other, to signify the same thing, 2d Tim. iv. 13: "The cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments."

In short, it is a very difficult matter to find any thing which amounts to a positive proof that Letters were known in the time of Moses. For this reason, some have concluded that he wrote entirely in hyeroglyphics, as the Egyptians are not certainly known to have practised any other mode of expressing their thoughts, and he is said to have been "learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians."t

*Luke, iv. 17, 18. Acts, vii. 22.

Should we regard him as the bona fide writer of the five books, or most of them, in their present arrangement, we could not rationally consider him as the sole author, or even the first narrator in a recorded form, of many of the accounts they contain: because some of them relate to events which transpired centuries before he was born. The book of Genesis, for instance, contains an elliptic sketch of the history of human transactions for about two thousand three hundred and seventy years, according to the lowest estimate: some compute it to have been a much longer period. If Moses really wrote the books bearing his name, he must have collected much of the material from other sources than his own memory. This self-evident particular has led some eminent Theologians to admit that in all probability the originals of many of the early accounts in the Pentateuch were in existence long before Moses, and that he merely combined and placed them in regular order— some of them having been copied, or puzzled out, from old transcripts of hyeroglyphic or other characters, and preserved in the families of Shem, Abraham, and the Hebrew patriarchs. Some conjecture that Adam was a writer, and may have left some inscribed memorials of his time. If I were to undertake giving you an account of all the suppositions of this kind, which have been revelled in, I fear you would be detained in listening, for a length of time considerably beyond patient endur

ance.

After a careful consultation of those published works,

which are considered worthy of the highest confidence by Protestant sects generally, (and some of them even by Roman Catholics) and after somewhat diligently comparing, section by section and paragraph by paragraph, the historical statements and avowed opinions of different writers, the conviction has become seated in my mind, that it is no very easy task-if, under any circumstances, it is possible, which I utterly disbelieveto determine, with any approximation towards certainty, whether Moses was, or was not, the writer of any part of the five books commencing with Genesis and ending with Deuteronomy. During the last year, Prof. Stuart, of Andover, has published an elaborate and in many respects valuable work on the Old Testament, in which he endeavors with all the logic he can summon to his aid to establish a claim for the sole or principal authorship of the Pentateuch, in behalf of Moses. But I find in the book no tangible proof on this point-only inference, over-strained arguing, and ingenious speculation.

That Moses left, as the production of his own hand, some of the materials which compose the books we are considering, seems highly probable. Presumptive evidences, internal and collateral, to substantiate this proba bility, might here be adduced; but I deem it unneces sary to bring them forward-as, after all, each individual will, doubtless, (as he should) make up his own julgment, from the general aspect of the case, as it appears to him. One suggestion, however, I will just state,

which should be allowed due reflection, as it is, perhaps, the principal one connected with the point we are canvassing. It is, to say the least, very reasonable to suppose that Moses would endeavor to leave behind him some records or memorials of the stirring and eventful scenes in which he was the chief actor: and it is therefore, as it seems to me, a legitimate inferential deduction of common-sense reasoning on a doubtful subject, that he was the author, in one form or another, of some portion of that history in which he figures as the grand hero. Farther than this, I am unable to see how we can feel warranted in assuming a very confident tone, respecting his direct participancy in the Pentateuchal writings.

I have spoken of hyeroglyphics: let me say a few words more in regard to them, before proceeding farther in our general inquiries. The merit of their invention is claimed by the Egyptians; and probably with much reason, though historians acknowledge that nothing certain can be learned in relation to this point. Like all language, (which, even in its highest state, is but the suggesting talisman of ideas) they were founded, to some extent, on the principles of nature. An image of a bird, a quadruped, or some inanimate object, was selected to represent some passion or mental characteristic; and there was a great deal of propriety and forcible signification in many of the chosen emblems. The figure of a lion was a symbol of strength, courage and determination: those of a dove and a lamb, the signs

of meekness, innocence and gentleness. The past and the future were represented in contrast by a man having two faces, each gazing in a direction opposite to the other. The idea of eternity-time or existence without beginning and without end-was expressed by the figure of a serpent in the form of a large circle, endeavoring to swallow himself. I have observed this significant emblem on the iron gate which opens into one of the burialenclosures in the neighboring cemetery of Harmony Grove. Within the circular figure you will find the representation of an hour-glass, which I presume (for I have never met with any explanation of it) was designed to set forth the idea of Time embraced within Eternity.

In these or similar characters, Moses might have written; or it is possible that he used the letters of some alphabet. I think it the most warrantable conclusion that his records, left in fragmentary remains, were not collected, arranged and more clearly expressed by translation in a regular, grammatic dialect, until a great while after his death.

This supposition, which (as I shall endeavor to show still further) is very reasonable, removes those discrep ancies, which are so glaring in the books under discussion, when we attempt to consider them, in their existing form, as the direct and sole workmanship of Moses.

It would be natural for the compiling editor, whoever he might be, in re-arranging and re-writing the notes and hyeroglyphic or alphabetical records within his reach, to