{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_49140/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_49140","id":"gutenberg_49140","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/49140","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - American","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Slavery","Slavery -- United States"],"text":"Transcriber\u2019s Note:\n\nMinor errors in punctuation and formatting have been silently corrected.\nPlease see the transcriber\u2019s note at the end of this text for details\nregarding the handling of any textual issues encountered during its\npreparation.\n\nPlease consult the end notes, as well, for the approach used in the\nrendering of Arabic, Greek, Coptic, Hebrew and Syriac text.\n\nThis version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects.\nItalics are delimited with the \u2018_\u2019 character as _italic_. Bold font is\ndelimited by the \u2018=\u2019 character. Superscripted and subscripted characters\nare shown as \u2018^2\u2019 and \u2018_{2}\u2019 respectively. The rendering of certain\ncharacters in classical languages may not display correctly in your\nreader. Alignment in tables may also be compromised.\n\n                          STUDIES ON SLAVERY,\n                            In Easy Lessons.\n\n            COMPILED INTO EIGHT STUDIES, AND SUBDIVIDED INTO\n                   SHORT LESSONS FOR THE CONVENIENCE\n                              OF READERS.\n\n                           BY JOHN FLETCHER,\n\n                             OF LOUISIANA.\n\n                             --------------\n\n                            FIFTH THOUSAND.\n\n                                NATCHEZ:\n                      PUBLISHED BY JACKSON WARNER.\n\n         CHARLESTON: McCARTER & ALLEN.\u2014NEW ORLEANS: JOHN BALL.\n                PHILADELPHIA: THOMAS, COWPERTHWAIT & CO.\n                                 1852.\n\n                        -----------------------\n\n       ENTERED according to Act of Congress, in the year 1851, by\n                            JACKSON WARNER,\n sin the Clerk\u2019s Office of the District Court of the Southern District\n                            of Mississippi.\n\n                       PRINTED BY SMITH & PETERS,\n       Franklin Buildings, Sixth Street below Arch, Philadelphia.\n\n                             --------------\n\n\n\n\n                          PUBLISHER\u2019S PREFACE.\n\n\nThis is a legitimate topic of general interest, and it assumes a\npreponderating importance to the people of the Southern American States,\nwhen the fact is taken into consideration that a general league against\nthe institution of African slavery has been entered into and consummated\nbetween most of the civilized nations of the earth, and public opinion\nin many of the sister States of our own National Union has taken the\nsame direction. The result is, to have arraigned the slaveholding States\nbefore the mighty bar of public opinion, on the charge of holding, as\nproperty, more than ten hundred millions of dollars\u2019 worth of what does\nnot belong to them, which is and never can be the property of man; and\nthis charge embraces, within its scope, the crimes of theft, robbery,\nrapine, and cruelty.\n\nThe time has come when the South must enter her plea of defence, not\nbecause the accusers are foreign nations, of which it may justly be\nsaid, before their charges are entertained, \u201cPhysician, heal thyself,\u201d\nbut because our accusers are among our own brethren, bound to us by\nfreedom\u2019s holiest associations and religion\u2019s most sacred ties.\n\nThe author of the \u201cStudies on Slavery\u201d has the double advantage of a\nfull comprehension of the subject both in its Northern and Southern\naspect. Born and educated in the former, and qualified by a long\nresidence in the latter section of our Union, he is amply qualified to\nweigh the prejudices, the teachings, and the arguments of the one,\nagainst the facts, the justifications, the religious and political\nsanctions of the other.\n\nMr. Fletcher has not only marshalled into his line of impregnable\ndefence the mandates and sanctions of the Sacred Writings concerning the\nslave institutions, but he has drawn powerful auxiliaries from the\nsources of ancient history. His exegesis of biblical passages, in the\noriginal languages in which they were communicated by inspiration to the\nworld, shows his sound scholarship, as well as his reverence of the\nliteral sense and specific meaning of God\u2019s holy and unimpeachable\nstandard and rule of life and action.\n\nThe author has also analyzed the fountain of Moral Philosophy, and\ndetected the bitter waters of error so industriously infused by the\neloquent and magical pens of such writers as Dr. Samuel Johnson, Dr.\nPaley, Dr. Channing, Dr. Wayland, Mr. Barnes, and others. He has\nconfined himself to the moral and ethical bearings of the question,\nscarcely touching upon its political aspects,\u2014a course calculated to\nrender the book far more useful to the dispassionate seekers after\ntruth, who may belong to different political sects.\n\nNeither time nor labour has been spared in the authorship of the work;\nand it is believed that, while it is written with candour and calmness,\nit will be received by the people of the North as well as of the South\nas a sincere and enlightened endeavour to seek for truth, and thus allay\nthe tumultuous and disorganizing fanaticism of those who have not had\nopportunity to study the subject, and are incapable of acting upon it\nwith understanding and true decision.\n\n\n\n\n                                PROEMIAL\n\n\nPhilosophy knows no obligation that binds one man to another without an\nequivalent. If one man could be subjected to another, who is not bound\nto render any thing in return, it would be subversive to good morals and\npolitical justice. Such a relation cannot exist, only so far as to reach\nthe immediate death of the subjected. But it has been the error of some\ngood men to suppose that slavery presented such a case. It has been\ntheir misfortune also to receive the following succedaneums as axioms in\nthe search for truth:\u2014\n\n  \u201cAll men are born equal.\u201d\n\n  \u201cThe rights of men are inalienable.\u201d\n\n  \u201cNo man has power to alienate a natural right.\u201d\n\n  \u201cNo man can become property.\u201d\n\n  \u201cNo man can own property in another.\u201d\n\n  \u201cThe conscience is a distinct mental faculty.\u201d\n\n  \u201cThe conscience infallibly distinguishes between right and wrong.\u201d\n\n  \u201cNo man is under any obligation to obey any law when his conscience\n  dictates it to be wrong.\u201d\n\n  \u201cThe conscience empowers any man to nullify any law; because the\n  conscience is a part and parcel of the Divine mind.\u201d\n\n  \u201cSlavery is wholly founded on force.\u201d\n\n  \u201cSlavery originates in the power of the strong over the weak.\u201d\n\n  \u201cSlavery disqualifies a man to fulfil the great object of his being.\u201d\n\n  \u201cThe doctrines of the Bible forbid slavery.\u201d\n\n  \u201cThere is no word, either in the Old or the New Testament, which\n  expresses the idea of slave or slavery.\u201d\n\n  \u201cSlavery places its subjects beyond moral and legal obligation:\n  therefore, it can never be a legal or moral relation.\u201d\n\n  \u201cSlavery is inconsistent with the moral nature of man.\u201d\n\n  \u201cTo hold in slavery is inconsistent with the present state of morals\n  and religion.\u201d\n\n  \u201cSlavery is contrary to the will of God.\u201d\n\n  \u201cNo man can hold a slave, and be a Christian.\u201d\n\nAverments of this order are quite numerous. Fanatics receive them; and\nsome others do not distinguish them from truths.\n\nAt any age, and in any country, where such errors are generally adopted,\nand become the rules of political action, morals and religion are always\nin commotion, and in danger of shipwreck: for, although, where man has\nonly approached so far towards civilization that even the enlightened\ncan merely perceive them as rudimental, yet the great principles that\ninfluence human life, morality and religion, are, everywhere, and always\nhave been the same.\n\n\n\n\n                        -----------------------\n\n                           TABLE OF CONTENTS.\n\n\n                                STUDY I.\n\nLESSON I.\u2014Wayland\u2019s definition of moral law, page 7 to 8; sin the\n    antecedent of slavery, 9; the abuse of slavery a sin, 10.\n\nLESSON II.\u2014Wayland on the elements of consciousness, 10 to 11; the\n    degeneracy of races, and slavery as the scriptural means of\n    reclamation, 12; object of punishment, 13.\n\nLESSON III.\u2014Wayland on conscience as a distinct faculty, 14, 15;\n    Channing, Barnes, and abolitionists generally on the same, 16, 17,\n    18.\n\nLESSON IV.\u2014Wayland on conscience as an independent faculty derived from\n    Shaftesbury, Hutchinson, and Reid, 18; combated by Archbishop\n    Seeker, 19; argument that conscience is neither a distinct faculty\n    nor infallible, 20 to 23.\n\nLESSON V.\u2014Wayland\u2019s doctrine, that slavery sacrifices the slave\u2019s\n    eternal happiness to the master\u2019s temporal, refuted, 23 to 25; the\n    master\u2019s interest and the slave\u2019s moral improvement identical, 26,\n    27.\n\nLESSON VI.\u2014Wayland\u2019s argument, that slavery is at variance with the laws\n    of God, examined, 27; its connection with productive labour and\n    national wealth considered, 28 to 32; Sismondi\u2019s theory of labour\n    and capital, 32; Wayland on slavery as impoverishing soil refuted,\n    33, 34.\n\nLESSON VII.\u2014Wayland\u2019s doctrine, that the moral principles of the Bible\n    are opposed to slavery, refuted, 34, 35; Secker\u2019s authority, 36;\n    Wayland on slavery as a prohibition of gospel privileges and\n    matrimony controverted, 37 to 40; Luther and Melancthon quoted, 39;\n    African practice in regard to matrimony, 40; interest of masters to\n    promote permanent marriages among their slaves, 40 to 42.\n\nLESSON VIII.\u2014Wayland, Paley, Channing, and Barnes on the opinion that\n    the sacred writers abstained from condemning slavery on motives of\n    policy, 43 to 47.\n\nLESSON IX.\u2014Wayland\u2019s doubts, caused by Prof. Taylor, 47 to 50; Wayland\u2019s\n    assertion, that the inculcation of the duties of slaves is no\n    sanction of slavery, combated, 51, 52.\n\nLESSON X.\u2014Wayland\u2019s assertion, that Scripture is opposed to slavery,\n    contrasted with the declarations of the Bible, 53; slavery a\n    desirable and ardently sought condition under certain\n    circumstances\u2014historical proofs, 54 to 57.\n\nLESSON XI.\u2014Dr. Paley on slavery and the laws of nature, 57 to 61.\n\nLESSON XII.\u2014Paley on cruelty as an argument against slavery, 62;\n    Lander\u2019s testimony respecting native cruelty in Africa, 63; Paley\u2019s\n    slander on Jesus Christ and Paul and Peter repelled, 65 to 67.\n\nLESSON XIII.\u2014Slavery in ancient Britain, 67; Dr. Samuel Johnson\u2019s\n    argument against negro slavery analyzed, and overthrown by arguments\n    drawn from the laws of nations and the laws of God, 68 to 82.\n\n\n                               STUDY II.\n\nLESSON I.\u2014Relation of guardian and ward a Divine institution, 83 to 85.\n\nLESSON II.\u2014Slavery a Divine institution, and the reason why, 85 to 88.\n\nLESSON III.\u2014Slavery the school of adversity to reclaim wicked nations\n    and individuals\u2014Scripture proofs, 89 to 91.\n\nLESSON IV.\u2014Albert Barnes on the slavery of the Israelites in Egypt\n    refuted, 92 to 96; his attempt by human reason to determine the will\n    of God, 97 to 99.\n\nLESSON V.\u2014Barnes\u2019s examination of the Scripture argument on slavery, and\n    the scriptural account of slavery in the days of Abraham,\n    contrasted, 99 to 109.\n\nLESSON VI.\u2014The smiles of God on the institution of slavery proved from\n    the argument of Barnes against it, 110; ratio of slaves to whites,\n    and the relative increase in the United States, 111, 112.\n\nLESSON VII.\u2014The interest of the master and the direct laws of God\n    against the abuses of slavery coincident, 113, 114; Barnes\u2019s cure\n    for slavery, 115.\n\nLESSON VIII.\u2014Barnes\u2019s denial that Christ ever came in contact with\n    slavery compared with scriptural assertions, 116 to 119.\n\nLESSON IX.\u2014The admission of Barnes in regard to slaves escaping to the\n    Hebrew country, 119; his assertion, that the Hebrews were not a\n    nation of slaveholders, overthrown by Scripture testimony, 120, 121.\n\nLESSON X.\u2014Distribution by the Hebrews of captives taken in battle, 122,\n    123; Greek custom in regard to captives made in war, 124;\n    proof-texts from the Bible, 125.\n\nLESSON XI.\u2014The claim of Barnes to identity with the African race, 126;\n    his views on Paul\u2019s injunction to sympathize with those in bonds\n    controverted, 127, 128.\n\nLESSON XII.\u2014Legend of Antioch, Margarita, and the Roman Pr\u00e6fect Olybius,\n    128 to 133; song of the slaves, 131, 132; letter of Olybius to the\n    Emperor Probus, manufactured from the language of Mr. Barnes, 133 to\n    135.\n\nLESSON #XIII.\u2014Barnes\u2019s admissions of the existence of Hebrew and Roman\n    slavery, 136, 137.\n\nLESSON XIV.\u2014The denial of Barnes that slavery cannot be defended by\n    Bible arguments, 138; its influence on agriculture, commerce, arts,\n    and the African slave himself considered, _idem_; Sedgjo, the\n    African slave in Louisiana, 139, 140; the Periplus of Hanno, 140,\n    141; the testimony of the Landers on the depravity of native\n    Africans, 142 to 144; the Landers made slaves, 145; various\n    historical authorities on African and Moorish slavery, 145 to 155.\n\nLESSON XV.\u2014Authorities to prove African degradation continued, 155 to\n    158; slavery subservient to the religious conversion of African\n    slaves, 159, 160.\n\nLESSON XVI.\u2014Paul\u2019s exhortations to slaves considered, 161, 162; God\u2019s\n    sentence of four hundred years of slavery upon the Hebrews, 163.\n\nLESSON XVII.\u2014The assertion of Barnes, that a slave bought with money had\n    compensation commanded to be paid him by Scripture, controverted,\n    163, 164; Barnes\u2019s declaration of the cunning of the Apostles in not\n    condemning slavery, 165, 166.\n\nLESSON XVIII.\u2014Argument that the injunctions of the Bible upon God\u2019s\n    ancient people are in force and equally binding upon Christians now,\n    (Christians are the heirs of Abraham,) 160 to 169.\n\nLESSON XIX.\u2014Authorities quoted by Barnes, 169; numerous quotations from\n    Barnes on slavery, 170 to 174.\n\nLESSON XX.\u2014Wayland\u2019s assertion, that, if the New Testament authorized\n    slavery, it would be the greatest of curses, adopted by Barnes, 174\n    to 176.\n\n\n                               STUDY III.\n\nLESSON I.\u2014Works of Rev. Dr. Channing\u2014his opinion that the worst errors\n    may arise from religious tendencies, 177, 178.\n\nLESSON II.\u2014Channing\u2019s seven arguments, that a man cannot be held as\n    property, examined, 178, 179; his doctrine of conscience and\n    indestructible rights, 180 to 182.\n\nLESSON III.\u2014Examination of Channing\u2019s seven arguments continued, 183 to\n    188.\n\nLESSON IV.\u2014That slavery, disease, and death are necessary effects of sin\n    proved by the chapter of curses, (Deut. xxviii.,) 188 to 193;\n    Channing\u2019s standard of feeling or sense of duty controverted, 194,\n    195.\n\nLESSON V.\u2014Channing\u2019s theory of man\u2019s rights and his consciousness\n    examined, 195, 196; argument that slavery is the best condition for\n    the African race, 197 to 200; criticism on Channing\u2019s use of the\n    words nature, conscience, law of nature, &c., 200 to 204.\n\nLESSON VI.\u2014Channing\u2019s position, that the debasement of African slavery\n    arises from the enslavement of the race in America, controverted,\n    204 to 206; its influence on the master race, 206, 207.\n\nLESSON VII.\u2014Channing\u2019s views of slavery, as conducive to licentiousness\n    and unrestrained cohabitation between masters and female slaves,\n    examined, 207 to 211; his views of the quality and brotherhood of\n    the races, 212 to 214.\n\nLESSON VIII.\u2014Channing on the relative productiveness of free and slave\n    labour, 215; his opinion that the admission of slave territory was\n    just cause for the dissolution of the Union, 217, 218; his deference\n    to the opinion of Europe, 218; labour and capital, the political\n    influence of slavery, 219 to 221.\n\nLESSON IX.\u2014Channing\u2019s views of the scriptural argument in favour of\n    slavery overthrown, by a parallel between slavery and polygamy, 222\n    to 230.\n\nLESSON X.\u2014Channing adopting and endorsing Paley\u2019s slander on the\n    integrity of Paul, 230 to 232.\n\nLESSON XI.\u2014Channing\u2019s plan of emancipation and inflammatory counsels to\n    the free States, 232 to 235.\n\nLESSON XII.\u2014The zeal of abolitionism not according to knowledge, 235,\n    236; Channing\u2019s opinion that the negro is one of the best races of\n    the human family, 237; Channing on West India emancipation and\n    Southern character, 237 to 239.\n\nLESSON XIII.\u2014Sympathy for those suffering punishment from God, for sin,\n    considered, 239 to 241; the deterioration of sin the inevitable\n    cause of slavery, 241 to 243.\n\nLESSON XIV.\u2014God\u2019s government of the universe, and his declaration of the\n    right of man\u2019s property in man, 243 to 246; God\u2019s blessing on the\n    slave-owners, 247, 248.\n\nLESSON XV.\u2014Ham\u2019s intermarriage with the race of Cain the cause of his\n    doom and that of his seed to perpetual servitude, 248 to 250; God\n    never entails a curse without sufficient cause, 250, 251; the mark\n    on Cain, 252 to 255.\n\n                               STUDY IV.\n\nLESSON I.\u2014Extracts from Bower, 256; the Treuga Dei, 257, 258; Bishop\n    England quoted on the action and records of the Church, 259, 260.\n\nLESSON II.\u2014Establishment of Christianity by law, by Constantine, and the\n    rise of Mohammedanism, 261, 262; the schism of the Greek Church,\n    263, 264.\n\nLESSON III.\u2014Nature swarming with life, and life merging in distress and\n    death, 264, 265; sin the cause of slavery, and the latter as a\n    protection, 266, 267; slavery in China, 269.\n\nLESSON IV.\u2014Liberty of less value than life, 270; the Divine grant to\n    hold slaves, 271.\n\nLESSON V.\u2014Early church acts and documents approving and providing for\n    slavery, 272; the canons and the constitutions of the apostles, 272\n    to 274; constitution of Antoninus Pius respecting cruelty to slaves,\n    275; canons of the Council of Nice and the first appearance of\n    abolitionism in the world, 276, 277; St. Basil\u2019s canonical writings,\n    278.\n\nLESSON VI.\u2014The invasion of Attila and the Pontiff Leo\u2019s successful\n    intercession, 279, 280; Nero\u2019s African slaves, and the white slaves\n    of the Roman Empire, 281.\n\nLESSON VII.\u2014Church rescripts for the freedom of slaves, and St.\n    Augustin\u2019s mode of manumission in Africa, 282, 283; Pope Leo\u2019s\n    letters, forbidding slaves to enter the priesthood, and protecting\n    the rights of masters, 284, 285; barbarian cruelty to slaves\n    ameliorated by Christianity, 286, 287; canons of the Council of\n    Agdle on slavery, 288; modes of becoming slaves, 289, 290.\n\nLESSON VIII.\u2014Muratori on the manumission of slaves in Rome, 291;\n    colonial and conditional slaves, 292; arming of slaves in defence of\n    Rome and the glutting of the slave-markets of the world, 293; canons\n    of the Fourth Council of Orleans, 294, 295; ditto Fifth Council of\n    Orleans, 296 to 299.\n\nLESSON IX.\u2014Bishop England\u2019s account of slavery in England and Ireland in\n    remote ages, 299, 300; Pope Pelagius and the canons of the Third\n    Councils of Paris and Braga, 301, 302; articles of the Third Council\n    of Toledo, 302, 303.\n\nLESSON X.\u2014The venerable Bede\u2019s account of the slave-trade of England,\n    A.D. 577, 304 to 306; Pope Gregory\u2019s purchase of British youth, 306,\n    307; Gregory\u2019s pastoral admonitions and epistles, 308 to 311.\n\nLESSON XI.\u2014Constantine\u2019s edict that none but Christians could hold\n    slaves, 212, 213; Gregory\u2019s letter to the Pr\u00e6fect of Sicily, 313 to\n    315; canons of the Fourth Councils of Orleans and Macon, 315, 316;\n    Gregory to the Bishop of Luna, and the laws of the empire on\n    slavery, 317, 318.\n\nLESSON XII.\u2014Gregory to the Bishop of Naples, 319, 320; the same to the\n    Bishop of Catania, 321.\n\nLESSON XIII.\u2014Justinian\u2019s law to protect debtors against slavery, 323;\n    Gregory\u2019s letters about a Syrian deeply in debt, 322; his letter of\n    emancipation to Montana and Thomas, 324, 325; Justinian\u2019s law of\n    marriage between slaves and persons on different estates, 327, 328;\n    Gregory\u2019s letter on the same subject, 329; his letter to the Bishop\n    of Syracuse on the same, 330, 331.\n\nLESSON XIV.\u2014Gregory\u2019s deed of gift conveying the slave boy Acorimus to\n    Theodore the counsellor, 331, 332; his letter about a slave to the\n    Proctor Bonitus, 333: his document to reclaim runaway slaves, 333,\n    334; his various letters concerning slaves and the purchase of\n    Barbary slaves, 334 to 336.\n\nLESSON XV.\u2014Canons of the Councils of Toledo and Saragossa, 336 to 339;\n    laws of Ina, king of the West Saxons, and the judgments of Withred,\n    340 to 343.\n\nLESSON XVI.\u2014The canons of Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury, King\n    Pepin, Council of Bavaria, Pope Adrian and Charlemagne, 343 to 349;\n    canon of the Council of Frankfort, 349, 350.\n\nLESSON XVII.\u2014Laws of Charlemagne on slavery, 350 to 353; canons of the\n    Council of Aix-la-Chapelle, 353; capitulary of the Emperor\n    Lotharius, 353 to 355.\n\nLESSON XVIII.\u2014Unconnected facts bearing on ancient slavery; prostitutes\n    made slaves; Sclavonian bondage; persecution of the Knights\n    Templars, 355 to 360.\n\nLESSON XIX.\u2014Derivation of the word _war_; Divine authority for wars, 361\n    to 365; the church claiming the right to declare offensive war under\n    two circumstances, 365; bull of Pope Gregory XI. against the\n    Florentines, 366, 367; Papal bulls against the Venitians and Henry\n    VIII. of England, 367 to 369; the American colonies at New Haven\n    decreeing the Indian tribes to slavery, 369, 370.\n\nLESSON XX.\u2014Ancient piracy and pirates, 370, 371; rise of the Vandals,\n    Goths, Huns, and Tartars, 372; the Northmen, 373 to 379.\n\nLESSON XXI.\u2014Condition of slavery in Europe, 379 to 381.\n\nLESSON XXII.\u2014Origin of the Sclavonians, 381; the descent of the Arabs\n    and Moors, 383, 384.\n\nLESSON XXIII.\u2014Africans generally slaves in their native country, 384;\n    African slavery to the Shemitic races foretold by prophecy, 385,\n    386; sketch of the life, doctrines, and conquests of Mohammed and\n    his successors, 386 to 390.\n\nLESSON XXIV.\u2014Slavery introduced into the world as a mercy in favour of\n    life, 390; duty and interest combine to incite the master to promote\n    religion and good morals in the slave, 391; slavery commanded by\n    reason and the laws of nature, 392.\n\n\n                                STUDY V.\n\nLESSON I.\u2014Faith and observance of facts in the moral world the true\n    modes of learning God\u2019s will, 393.\n\nLESSON II.\u2014The works of creation proofs of the Creator, 394 to 398.\n\nLESSON III.\u2014The question of the admission of evil into the economy of\n    God\u2019s government on earth, and a denial that all men are born\n    equals, 398, 399; the five races of the human family, and the moral\n    necessity of command in some and subordination in others, 399 to\n    402.\n\nLESSON IV.\u2014Intellect correspondent to organization, 403; inquiry into\n    the nature of instinct by various philosophers, 403 to 405;\n    inexorable inequality of human condition in this world and the next,\n    406 to 408.\n\nLESSON V.\u2014The moral duty of loving our species defined, 409.\n\nLESSON VI.\u2014Men not equal physically, religiously, mentally, morally, or\n    politically, 410.\n\nLESSON VII.\u2014Justice and the rules of Christianity identical and\n    inseparable, 411, 412.\n\nLESSON VIII.-The golden rule considered in relation to slavery, 413 to\n    416.\n\nLESSON IX.\u2014The unchangeableness of God, and human misery caused by a\n    general rebellion against his laws, 417 to 420.\n\nLESSON X.\u2014Christianity incompatible with savage life, 420, 421.\n\nLESSON XI.\u2014Gradation in intellect and condition no impediment to\n    Christianity, 421.\n\nLESSON XII.\u2014Christianity and slavery not antagonistic, 422.\n\nLESSON XIII.\u2014Christian humility inculcated, 423.\n\nLESSON XIV.\u2014The radiance of Christian hope equalizes all variety of\n    condition, 423, 424; sketch of the slave\u2019s prospect of immortal\n    happiness, 426 to 428.\n\nLESSON XV.\u2014The feebleness of finite conceptions of infinity, 428, 429;\n    hope for the submissive, 430, 431; the requirement of God that the\n    strong should protect the weak, 432.\n\n\n                               STUDY VI.\n\nLESSON I.\u2014Nature of sin; the primal transgression, 433, 434.\n\nLESSON II.\u2014The occupation and doom of Cain, 435, 436.\n\nLESSON III.\u2014The mark upon Cain, Mohammedan traditions, 437, 438;\n    proof-texts from Scripture, 439, 440.\n\nLESSON IV.\u2014The punishment of Cain did not lead him to reformation, 440;\n    Asiatic hyperbole in description, 441, 442.\n\nLESSON V.\u2014The cause of Cain\u2019s degradation renewed upon Canaan, and his\n    masters named, 442, 443.\n\nLESSON VI.\u2014Proofs that the descendants of Ham inherited the curse of\n    Cain, and were black, as also were the Canaanites whom God\u2019s chosen\n    people either exterminated or enslaved, 443 to 447.\n\nLESSON VII.\u2014The negro lineage of Ham established, 447 to 451.\n\nLESSON VIII.\u2014Signification of the name \u201cNaamah\u201d in Hebrew and Arabic,\n    451 to 455.\n\nLESSON IX.\u2014Variations in different languages of the names of Cain and\n    Naamah, also of other remarkable words, 456 to 458.\n\nLESSON X.\u2014The names and derivatives of the words Cain and Naamah found\n    only among the descendants of Ham, 459 to 464.\n\nLESSON XI.\u2014Proofs scriptural and historical that the descendants of Ham\n    were black, 464 to 470.\n\nLESSON XII.\u2014Biblical proofs that the Canaanites were black, 471 to 473.\n\nLESSON XIII.\u2014Scriptural testimony respecting the colour of the races of\n    the human family, 473 to 477.\n\nLESSON XIV.\u2014Jewish wars against the Ethiopian race; the Philistines\n    black, 478, 479; the origin of these wars the animosity between the\n    Shemitic and Hamitic races, 480; difference in the structure of the\n    bones and the hair between the antagonist races, 481; intermarriage\n    with the Hamitic by the Shemitic race a cause of God\u2019s anger, 482;\n    the dispersion of the Canaanites by the Jewish conquest of\n    Palestine, 482.\n\nLESSON XV.\u2014Derivation and train of thought connected with the word Ham\n    in the Shemitic languages, 483 to 487; the Hebrew personal pronoun,\n    488 to 491; origin of the word Ethiopian, 493 to 495.\n\nLESSON XVI.\u2014Hebrew, Syriac, Greek, and Coptic derivations of the word\n    Ham, 495 to 502.\n\nLESSON XVII.\u2014Exegesis of the thirty-third chapter of Ecclesiasticus, 502\n    to 503; the providence of God manifested in placing deteriorated\n    races under the control of races less debased, 504, 505.\n\n\n                               STUDY VII.\n\nLESSON I.\u2014Critical examination into the meaning of the Greek word\n    \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_, as used both by the sacred and classical\n    writers, 506.\n\nLESSON II.\u2014Abolition denunciation of the Bible, 507, 508; tendency to\n    mystery in the human mind; the God of Abraham and Moses, who gave\n    command how to treat slaves, to be trustingly worshipped, 508, 509.\n\nLESSON III.\u2014The meaning of \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 as used by the Greek poets, 510;\n    Valckenaerus on the phonetic relation of Greek words to their\n    derivative, 511 to 514; the argument that \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 could not have\n    meant an unconditional slave, refuted, 515, 516.\n\nLESSON IV.\u2014Extracts from Grecian historians, philosophers, and poets,\n    showing the classical sense in which they used the word \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 and\n    its derivatives, 516 to 536.\n\nLESSON V.\u2014The use of the word \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 by Thucydides, Herodotus, and\n    Xenophon, 536 to 546.\n\nLESSON VI.\u2014Extracts from Xenophon continued, 546 to 549.\n\nLESSON VII.\u2014Extracts from Xenophon\u2019s Cyrop\u00e6dia, 549 to 554.\n\nLESSON VIII.\u2014Extracts from Herodotus of Halicarnassus, 554 to 558.\n\nLESSON IX.\u2014The Scriptural use of the word \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, 559 to 561.\n\nLESSON X.\u2014Scriptural extracts continued, 562 to 564.\n\nLESSON XI.\u2014The Greek word signifying _slave-stealers_ in 1 Tim. i. 5 to\n    11, 564 to 566; quotation from Xenophon in proof, 566; the appeal of\n    Mr. Barnes to the Dutch, 567; Greek words from _freeman_ and\n    _slave_, 568.\n\nLESSON XII.\u2014Paul on slave stealing, 569 to 572.\n\nLESSON XIII.\u2014Reasons for Paul\u2019s instructions to Timothy and to Christian\n    slaves respecting slave-stealing and the duties of the servile\n    condition, 572 to 575.\n\nLESSON XIV.\u2014The use of the word \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 by Jesus Christ, 576, 577.\n\nLESSON XV.\u2014Use of the word \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 by Paul, Peter, Matthew, Mark, Luke,\n    and John, 578 to 581.\n\nLESSON XVI.\u2014Origin of the English word _servant_ and its derivatives,\n    581; its use by the sacred writers and Grecian scholars, 582 to 585.\n\n\n                              STUDY VIII.\n\nLESSON I.\u2014Hebrew orthography of the word by which we mean _slave_, 586\n    to 588; the corresponding word in the Arabic, Chaldaic, and Syriac\n    languages, 588 to 590.\n\nLESSON II.\u2014Tendency of the Shemitic languages to the rhetorical figure\n    prosopop\u0153ia, 590 to 594.\n\nLESSON III.\u2014Examples of the Hebrew word meaning _slave_, both as a noun\n    and a verb, 595 to 601.\n\nLESSON IV.\u2014Refutation of the assertion that the root of the Hebrew word\n    meaning _slave_ is also used in a sense signifying _worship_, 602 to\n    607.\n\nLESSON V.\u2014Further quotations from the sacred writers, showing the\n    meaning attached to the Hebrew word signifying _slave_ in the Old\n    Testament, 607 to 609.\n\nLESSON VI.\u2014Quotations from the sacred authors of the use of the Hebrew\n    verb signifying _to slave_, or _to be slaves_ to, 610, 611; identity\n    of welfare and interest between the slave and his master, 612, 613.\n\nLESSON VII.\u2014The two distinct eras in the Hebrew language; its\n    approximation to the Chaldaic and Persian in the second era, 613 to\n    615.\n\nLESSON VIII.\u2014Meaning attached to the Hebrew word signifying _slave_ by\n    Ezra, Nehemiah, Jeremiah, and other prophets, 616 to 618.\n\nLESSON IX.\u2014The use of the Hebrew word meaning slave in the book of\n    Genesis, and extract from the Rev. J.B. Stratton\u2019s letter to the\n    author on the same, 618 to 620; the word _Eden_ in the Arabic, 620,\n    621; the Hebrew word meaning _tilleth_, 622.\n\nLESSON X.\u2014The laws of Moses in Deuteronomy respecting slavery, 623.\n\nLESSON XI.\u2014The Hebrew use of the word meaning _slaves_ in Samuel, and\n    many other books of the Bible, 624 to 627.\n\nLESSON XII.\u2014Declension of the Hebrew noun meaning _slave_, and the\n    conjugation and paradigms of the Hebrew verb signifying _to slave_,\n    628 to 637.\n\n                  ------------------------------------\n\n\n\n\n                          STUDIES ON SLAVERY.\n\n\n\n\n                  ------------------------------------\n\n                                Study I.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON I.\n\n  \u201c_The Elements of Moral Science: By_ FRANCIS WAYLAND, D.D., _President\n    of Brown University, and Professor of Moral Philosophy. Fortieth\n    Thousand. Boston, 1849._\u201d Pp. 396.\n\nTHIS author informs us that he has been many years preparing the work,\nwith a view to furnish his pupils with a text-book free from the errors\nof Paley. Like Paley, whom he evidently wishes to supersede, he has\ndevoted a portion of his strength to the abolition of slavery. We\npropose to look into the book with an eye to that subject alone.\nPresident Wayland says:\n\nP. 24. \u201cMoral Law is a form of expression denoting an order of sequence\nestablished between the moral quality of actions and their results.\u201d\n\nPp. 25, 26. \u201cAn order of sequence established, supposes, of necessity,\nan Establisher. Hence Moral Philosophy, as well as every other science,\nproceeds upon the supposition of the existence of a Universal Cause, the\nCreator of all things, who has made every thing as it is, and who has\nsubjected all things to the relations which they sustain. And hence, as\nall relations, whether moral or physical, are the result of his\nenactment, an order of sequence once discovered in morals, is just as\ninviolable as an order of sequence in physics.\n\n\u201cSuch being the fact, it is evident that the moral laws of God can never\nbe varied by the institutions of man, any more than the physical laws.\nThe results which God has connected with actions will inevitably occur,\nall the created power in the universe to the contrary notwithstanding.\n\n\u201cYet men have always flattered themselves with the hope that they could\nviolate the moral law and escape the consequences which God has\nestablished. The reason is obvious. In physics, the consequent follows\nthe antecedent, often immediately, and most commonly after a stated and\nwell-known interval. In morals, the result is frequently long delayed;\nthe time of its occurrence is always uncertain:\u2014Hence, \u2018because the\nsentence against an evil work is not _speedily_ executed, therefore the\nhearts of the sons of men are fully set in them to do evil.\u2019 But time,\nwhether long or short, has neither _power_ nor _tendency_ to change the\norder of an established sequence. The time required for vegetation, in\ndifferent orders of plants, may vary; but, yet, wheat will always\nproduce wheat, and an acorn will always produce an oak. That such is the\ncase in morals, a heathen poet has taught us. \u2018_Raro, antecedentum\nscelestum deseruit pede p\u0153na claudo_.\u2019 HOR. lib. iii. car. 2.\n\n\u201cA higher authority has admonished us, \u2018Be not deceived; God is not\nmocked; whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he reap.\u2019 It is also to be\nremembered, that, in morals as well as in physics, the harvest is always\nmore abundant than the seed from which it springs.\u201d\n\nTo this doctrine we yield the highest approval.\n\nThe first obvious deduction from the lesson here advanced is, that the\nlaws of God, as once revealed to man, never lose their high moral\nqualities nor their divine character, at any subsequent age of the\nworld. The law, which God delivered to Moses from Mount Sinai,\nauthorizing his chosen people to buy slaves, and hold them as an\ninheritance for their children after them, is, therefore, the law of God\nnow. The action of the law may be suspended at a particular time or\nplace, from a change of contingencies,\u2014yet the law stands unaffected.\n\nWe hope no one doubts the accuracy of the doctrine thus fairly stated in\nthese \u201cElements.\u201d But we shall see how fatal it is to some portions of\nthe author\u2019s positions concerning slavery. And we propose to show how\nthis doctrine, as connected with slavery, has been, and is elucidated in\nscripture. The twenty-eighth chapter of Deuteronomy shows that the\nfruits of wickedness are all manner of curses, finally terminating in\nslavery or death.\n\nHere, slavery, as a threatened punishment, distinctly looks back to a\ncourse of wickedness for its antecedent. The same idea is spread through\nthe whole Scriptures: \u201cWhosoever committeth sin, is the _servant_ of\nsin.\u201d _John_ viii. 34. \u201cI am carnal, sold under sin.\u201d _Rom._ vii. 14.\n\u201cBehold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves.\u201d _Isa._ 1. 1. See,\nalso, _Jer._ xiii. 22.\n\nThe biblical scholar will recollect a multitude of instances where this\ndoctrine is clearly advanced, recognising sin as the antecedent of\nslavery.\n\nAbraham was obedient to the voice of God. His conduct was the antecedent\nand the consequent was, God heaped upon him many blessings and among\nthem, riches in various things,\u2014\u201c_male and female slaves_,\u201d some of whom\nwere \u201c_born in his house_,\u201d and some \u201c_bought with his money_;\u201d and God\nmade a covenant with him, granting him, and his seed after him, the land\nof Canaan for an everlasting possession.\n\nBut this gift, as is the continuance of all other blessings, was\naccompanied with a condition, which is well explained in _Genesis_,\nxviii. 19: \u201cFor I know him, that he will command his children and _his\nhousehold_ after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do\njustice and judgment; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he\nhath spoken of him.\u201d\n\nScholars will concede the fact that \u201c_his household_\u201d is a term by which\nhis slaves are particularly included, over whom his government was\nextended; and, without its proper maintenance, the covenant so far on\nhis part would be broken.\n\nFrom the wording of the covenant it is evident that Abraham had slaves\nbefore the covenant was made, since it embraced regulations concerning\nslaves, but, in no instance, hints that the existence of slavery was\nadverse to the law of God, or that the holding of slaves, as slaves, was\ncontrary to his will. The deduction is, that slavery exists in the world\nby Divine appointment; and that the act of owning slaves is in\nconformity with the moral law.\n\nThe doctrine, that sin is the antecedent of slavery, is further\nelucidated and made still more manifest by the recognition of the\ninstitution by the biblical writers, where they place sin and slavery in\nopposition to holiness and freedom:\u2014thus, figuratively, making\nrighteousness the antecedent of freedom. \u201cStand fast, therefore, in the\nliberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again\nwith the yoke of bondage.\u201d _Gal._ v. 1. \u201cAnd ye shall know the truth,\nand the truth shall make you free.\u201d _John_ iii. 32.\n\nThe abuse of slavery, like the abuse of any thing else, is doubtless a\ngreat sin. Of the blessings God bestows on man, there is perhaps no one\nhe does not abuse; and while we examine the laws of God, as presenting\nto the mind the vast field of cause and effect,\u2014of antecedent and\nconsequent,\u2014we may be led to a reflection on the necessity of a\nconformity thereto, lest a long continuance of such abuses shall become\nthe antecedent to future calamities and woes, either to ourselves or\nposterity; woes and calamities prefigured by those nations and tribes\nalready under the infliction of slavery, as a just punishment of sin.\n\nThus far, we thank the Rev. Dr. Wayland for this fair _expos\u00e9_ of his\nviews of the moral law of God; and if he will apply them now to the\ninstitution of slavery,\u2014if he will unfetter his intellect from the\nmanacles imposed on it by a defective education on that subject, and cut\nhimself loose from the prejudices that his associations have gathered\naround him, we may yet have occasion to rejoice over him as one once an\nestray from the fold of truth, but now returned, \u201csitting in his right\nmind and clothed.\u201d And will not Mr. Fuller and Professor Taylor rejoice\nwith us!\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON II.\n\nIn those \u201cElements of Moral Science,\u201d we find the following, p. 29:\n\n\u201cFrom what has been said, it may be seen that there exists, in the\nactions of men, an element which does not exist in the actions of brutes\n* * * * * * We can operate upon brutes only by fear of punishment, and\nhope of reward. We can operate upon man, not only in this manner, but\nalso by an appeal to his consciousness of right and wrong; and by such\nmeans as may improve his moral nature. Hence, all modes of punishment,\nwhich treat men as we treat brutes, are as unphilosophical as they are\nthoughtless, cruel, and vindictive. Such are those systems of criminal\njurisprudence which have in view nothing more than the infliction of\npain upon the offender.\u201d\n\nIt was unnecessary to inform us that man possesses higher mental\nendowments than the brute. But the main object of the author in the\nforegoing paragraph is his deduction; that, because we can operate on\nman by an appeal to his consciousness of right and wrong, therefore any\nother mode of governing him is wrong. This _consequent_ we fail to\nperceive. We also fail in the perception that his postulate is\nuniversally true: which we think should have been proved before he can\nclaim assent to the deduction. If this our view be correct, we beg the\nreverend author to reflect how far he may have made himself obnoxious to\nthe charge of sophistry!\n\nIf President Wayland intends, by the clause,\u2014\u201cand by such means as may\nimprove his moral nature,\u201d\u2014to include _corporeal punishment_, then his\nmind was unprepared to grapple with the subject; for, in that case, the\nwhole paragraph is obscure, without object, and senseless. We most\nreadily agree that to govern man by appeals to his consciousness of\nright and wrong is highly proper where the mind is so well cultivated\nthat no other government is required.\n\nBut, however unhappy may be the reflection, too large a proportion of\nthe human family will not fall within that class. How often do we see\namong men, otherwise having some claim to be classed with the\nintelligent, those of acknowledged bad habits; habits which directly\nforce the sufferer downward to poverty, disgrace, disease, imbecility,\nand death,\u2014on whom argument addressed to their \u201cconsciousness of right\nand wrong,\u201d \u201cis water spilled on the ground.\u201d\n\nChildren, whose ancestors have, for ages, ranked among the highly\ncultivated of the earth,\u2014each generation surpassing its predecessor in\nknowledge, in science, and religion,\u2014have been found to degenerate,\noftener than otherwise, when trained solely by arguments addressed to\ntheir reason, and unaccompanied by physical compulsion.\n\nWhat then are we to expect from man in a savage state, whose ancestors\nhave been degenerating from generation to generation, through untold\nages,\u2014him, who has scarcely a feeling in common with civilized man,\nexcept such as is common to the mere animal,\u2014him, whom deteriorating\ncauses have reduced to the lowest grade above the brute?\n\nDomberger spent twelve years in passing through the central parts of\nAfrica, from north to south. He found the negroes, in a large district\nof country, in a state of total brutality. Their habits were those only\nof the wild brutes. They had no fixed residences. They lay down wherever\nthey might be when disposed to sleep. They were not more gregarious than\nthe wild goats. So far as he could discover, they had not a language\neven, by which to hold intercourse with each other. They possessed no\npower by which they were enabled to exhibit moral degradation, any more\nthan the wild beasts.\n\nHanno, the Carthaginian navigator, in his Periplus, eight hundred years\nbefore the birth of Christ, gives a similar account of a race he calls\nG\u00e6tuli.\n\nIt is possible that man, in these extreme cases, where there is very\nlittle to unlearn, might sooner be regenerated, elevated to\ncivilization, physical and mental power, than in other cases where there\nmay be far more proof of mental capacity, but where the worst of\nintellectual and physical habits have stained soul and body with,\nperhaps, a more indelible degradation.\n\nIt would be a curious experiment, and add much to our knowledge of the\nraces of man, to ascertain how many generations, under the most\nfavourable treatment, it would require to produce an equal to Moses, or\na David, a Newton, or the learned Dr. Wayland himself, (if such be\npossible,) from these specimens of man presented before us! And we now\ninquire, what course of treatment will you propose, as the most\npractical, to elevate such a race to civilization?\n\nIt appears to us God has decided that slavery is the most effectual.\n\n\u201cTherefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no\nknowledge.\u201d _Isa._ v. 13. \u201cAnd they forsook the Lord, and served Baal\nand Ashteroth. And the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel, and he\ndelivered them into the hands of the spoilers that spoiled them, and he\n_sold_ them into the hands of their enemies round about.\u201d _Judg._ ii.\n13, 14. See also, iii. 6\u20138. \u201cIf his children forsake my law and walk not\nin my judgments: if they break my statutes, and keep not my\ncommandments: then will I visit their transgressions with the rod and\ntheir iniquity with stripes.\u201d _Ps._ lxxxviii. 30\u201332. \u201cHe that troubleth\nhis own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool shall be the servant\n(\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, _slave_) to the wise of heart.\u201d _Prov._ ii. 29. \u201cAnd her\ndaughters shall go into captivity. Thus will I execute judgments in\nEgypt: and they shall know that I _am_ the Lord.\u201d _Ezek._ xxx. 18. _See\nalso the preceding part of the chapter._\n\nIt is highly probable that among savage tribes, punishment and the\ninfliction of pain are often applied with no higher view than to torture\nthe object of displeasure. But to us it seems remarkably unfortunate, in\na student of moral and civil jurisprudence, to suggest that legal\npunishment, among civilized men, is ever awarded or ordered with any\nsuch feeling. If our education has given us a correct view of the\nsubject, the man who inflicts pain even on the brute, solely on the\naccount of such a feeling, instantly, so far as it is known, sinks to\nthe grade of a savage; and much more explicitly when the object of\nrevenge is his fellow man. On the contrary, when \u201cthe offender\u201d has\ngiven unquestionable evidence of a depravity too deeply seated for any\nhope of regeneration, and the law orders his death, it selects that mode\nof execution which inflicts the least suffering, and which shall have\nalso the greatest probable influence to deter others who may be downward\nbound in the road of moral deterioration. There never has been a code of\nlaws among civilized nations, where the object of punishment was to\ninflict pain on the implicated; only so far as was thought necessary to\ninfluence a change of action for the better. The object of punishment\ninvariably has been the improvement of society.\n\nIf the Rev. Dr. Wayland had been teaching legislation to savages, or,\nperhaps, their immediate descendants, his remarks, to which we allude,\nmight have been in place. But may we inquire to what cause are _we_\nindebted for them?\n\nPermit us to inquire of the Doctor, where now are to be found the\n\u201csystems of criminal jurisprudence\u201d to which he alludes? Does he imagine\nthat such system has some _likeness_ to the government of the civilized\nman over his slave? Or, in their government, does he propose to abolish\ncorporeal punishment, because he may think that will destroy the\ninstitution itself? For \u201ca servant (\u05e2\u05b8\u0591\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _abed_, _a slave_) though he\nunderstand, he will not answer.\u201d _Prov._ xxix. 19.\n\nWe cannot pass over the paragraph we have quoted, without expressing the\nmost bitter regret to learn from Dr. Wayland\u2019s own words, that he\nrecognises the fact, without giving it reproval, that \u201cwe\u201d punish\n\u201cbrutes\u201d with no other view than to inflict pain. To _us_, such an idea\nis most repugnant and awful! And we hope\u2014we pray Him who alone hath\npower to drag up from the deep darkness of degradation, that the minds\nof such men may be placed under the controlling influence of a rule that\nwill compel to a higher sense of what is proper, and to a more clear\nperception of what is truth!\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON III.\n\nThe learned Doctor says:\n\nP. 49. \u201cBy conscience, or moral sense, is meant that faculty by which we\ndiscern the moral quality of actions, and by which we are capable of\ncertain affections in respect to this quality.\n\n\u201cBy _faculty_ is meant _any particular part_ of our constitution, by\nwhich we become affected by the various qualities and relations of\nbeings around us?\u201d * * * \u201cNow, that we do actually observe a moral\nquality in the actions of men, must, I think, be admitted. Every human\nbeing is conscious, that, from childhood, he has observed it.\u201d * * * * *\n\nP. 50. \u201cThe question would then seem reduced to this: Do we perceive\nthis quality of actions by a single faculty, or by a combination of\nfaculties? I think it must be evident from what has been already stated,\nthat this is, in its nature, simple and ultimate, and _distinct from\nevery other notion_.\n\n\u201cNow, if this be the case, it seems self-evident that we must have a\n_distinct_ and _separate faculty_, to make us acquainted with the\nexistence of this _distinct_ and _separate quality_.\u201d\n\nAnd for proof, he adds: \u201cThis is the case in respect to all other\ndistinct qualities: it is, surely, reasonable to suppose, that it would\nbe the case in this.\u201d\n\nWhat! have we a distinct faculty by which we determine one thing to be\nred, and another distinct faculty by which we discover a thing to be\nblack; another distinct faculty by which we judge a thing to be a cube,\nand another distinct faculty by which we determine it to be a triangle?\nHave we one distinct faculty by which we find a melon, and another by\nwhich we find a gourd? What! one distinct faculty by which we determine\na professor of moral philosophy to be a correct teacher, and another by\nwhich we discover him to be a visionary?\n\nThis faculty of _moral sense_ puts us in mind of Dr. Testy\u2019s description\nof the peculiar and distinct particles upon the tongue, which render a\nman a liar, a lunatic, or a linguist; a treacher, a tattler, or a\nteacher, and so on. His theory is that every mental and moral quality of\na man has its distinct particle, or little pimple, upon the tongue,\nwhereby the quality is developed; or, by the aid of which the man is\nenabled to make the quality manifest. Long practice in examining the\ntongues of sick people enabled him, he says, to make the discovery. We\nshould like to know what acuminated elevation of the cuticle of the\ntongue represented \u201cconscience or moral sense,\u201d as a separate and\ndistinct faculty!\n\nWhy does he not at once borrow support from the extravagancies of\nphrenology, and assert, according to the notions of its teachers, that,\nsince the brain is divided into distinct organs for the exercise of each\ndistinct faculty, therefore there must be a distinct faculty for the\nconception of each idea? There is surely an evident relation between\nthis theory of the author and the doctrines of Gall; nor will the world\nfail to associate it with the phantasies of Mesmer.\n\nBut we ask the author and his pupils to apply to this theory the truism\nof Professor Dodd: \u201cIt is, at all times, a sufficient refutation of what\npurports to be a statement of facts, to show that the only kind of\nevidence by which the facts could possibly be sustained, does not\nexist.\u201d\n\nThe theory by which the Doctor arrives at the conclusion that we possess\na separate and distinct faculty for the perception of each separate and\ndistinct quality, assimilates to that of a certain quack, who asserted\nthat the human stomach was _mapped_ off, like Gall\u2019s cranium, into\ndistinct organs of digestion; one solely for beef-steak, one for\nmutton-chops, and another for plum-pudding!\n\nIt is a great point with certain of the higher class of abolition\nwriters to establish the doctrine that man possesses a distinct mental\npower, which they call _conscience_, or _moral sense_, by which he is\nenabled to discover, of himself, and without the aid of study, teaching,\nor even inspiration, what is right and what is wrong.\n\nThe practice is, the child is taught by them that slavery is very\nwicked; that no slaveholder can be a good man; and much of such matter.\nBooks are put into the hands of the schoolboy and the youth, inculcating\nsimilar lessons, fraught with lamentation and sympathy for the imaginary\nwoes of the slave, and hatred and disgust towards the master; and when\nmaturer years are his, he is asked if he does not feel that slavery is\nvery wicked; and the professors of moral philosophy then inform him that\nhe feels so because he possesses \u201ca distinct mental faculty\u201d\u2014distinct\nfrom the judgment\u2014which teaches those who cultivate it, infallibly, all\nthat is right and wrong; that this conscience, or moral sense, is more\nto be relied on than the Bible\u2014than the ancient inspirations of God!\n\nHence, Channing says:\n\n\u201cThat same inward principle, which teaches a man what he is bound to do\nto others, teaches equally, and at the same instant, what others are\nbound to do to him.\u201d * * * \u201cHis _conscience_, in revealing the moral\nlaw, does not reveal a law for himself only, but speaks as a universal\nlegislator.\u201d * * * \u201cThere is no deeper principle in human nature than\nthe consciousness of right.\u201d Vol. ii. p. 33.\n\nAnd Barnes, on Slavery, says:\n\nP. 381. \u201cIf the Bible could be shown to defend and countenance slavery\nas a good institution, it would make thousands of infidels; for there\nare multitudes of minds that will see more clearly that slavery is\nagainst all the laws which God has written on the human soul, than they\nwould see, that a book, sanctioning such a system, had evidence of\nDivine origin.\u201d\n\nAnd this same author makes Dr. Wayland say:\n\nP. 310. \u201cWell may we ask, in the words of Dr. Wayland, (pp. 83, 84,)\nwhether there was ever such a moral superstructure raised on such a\nfoundation? The doctrine of purgatory from a verse of Maccabees; the\ndoctrine of papacy from the saying of Christ to Peter; the establishment\nof the Inquisition from the obligation to extend the knowledge of\nreligious truth, all seem nothing to it. If the religion of Christ\nallows such a license from such precepts as these, the New Testament\nwould be the greatest curse that ever was inflicted on our race.\u201d\n\nThis book, as quoted by Barnes, we have not seen.\n\nSuch is the doctrine of these theologians, growing out of the\npossession, as they imagine, of this _distinct moral faculty_,\ninfallibly teaching them the truth touching the moral quality of the\nactions of men. And what is its effect upon their scarcely more wicked\npupils? One of them, in a late speech in Congress, says:\n\n\u201cSir, I must express the most energetic dissent from those who would\njustify modern slavery from the Levitical law. My _reason_ and\n_conscience_ revolt from those interpretations which\n\n              Torture the hallowed pages of the Bible,\n              To sanction crime, and robbery, and blood,\n              And, in oppression\u2019s hateful service, libel\n              \u2018Both man and God!\u2019\u201d\n\nThe ignorant fanaticism, so proudly buoyant even in repose upon its\nill-digested reason,\u2014here so flippantly uttered,\u2014to us bespeaks a\ndangerous man, (as far as he may have capacity,) in whatever station he\nmay be found. The most hateful idolatry has never presented to the world\na stronger proof of a distorted imagination giving vent to the rankest\nfalsehood. It is to be deeply regretted that such intellects are ever\npermitted to have any influence upon the minds of the young. We deem it\nwould be a fearful inquiry, to examine how far the strange\nassassinations, lately so common at the North, have been the direct\nresult of that mental training of which we here see an example. We fear\ntoo little is thought of the quick transition from this erroneous\ntheology to the darkened paths of man when enlightened alone by his own\ndepraved heart.\n\nThe saying is true, however awful: He who rejects or dispels the plain\nmeaning of the Bible, rejects our God, and is an idolater; and God alone\ncan give bound to his wicked conceptions.\n\nThe foregoing extracts show us a specimen of the arguments and\nconclusions emanating from the doctrine that the conscience is a\ndistinct mental power, and that it infallibly teaches what is right\nbefore God. We deem it quite objectionable\u2014quite erroneous!\n\nWe present the proposition: The judgment is as singly employed in the\ndecision of what is right and wrong, as it is in the conclusion that all\nthe parts of a thing constitute the whole of it. True, the judgment,\nwhen in the exercise of determining what is right and wrong in regard to\nour own acts, has been named _conscience_. But it remains for that class\nof philosophers, who argue that man possesses a faculty of\n_clairvoyance_, to establish that man has also a sister faculty, which\nthey call _conscience_, or _moral sense_; and that it exists as an\nindependent mental power, distinct from judgment.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nMost men live without reflection. They think of nothing but the objects\nof sense, of pressing want, and the means of relief. The wonderful works\nof nature create no wonder. A mine of sea-shells on the Andes excites no\nsurprise. Of the analogies or dissimilarities between things, or their\nessential relations, the mind takes no notice. Even their intellectual\npowers exist almost without their cognisance. Their mental faculties are\nlittle improved or cultivated; and, as they are forced to the Gazetteer\nfor the description of some distant locality, so they would be to their\nlogic, before they could speak of their own mental functions.\n\nThe teaching of this doctrine, untrue as it is, may, therefore, be very\nharmful; as ill-informed individuals often form a very erroneous\njudgment about right and wrong, and, under the influence of its\nteachings, may come to think and believe that their conclusion\nconcerning right and wrong is the product of their infallible guide, the\n_conscience_, or _moral sense_, and therefore past all doubt and beyond\nquestion; that their minds are under the influence and control of a\n_new_ and _spiritually higher law_ than the law of the land, or even the\nmoral law as laid down in the Bible, when not in unison with their\nfeelings. And we venture to prophesy, in case this doctrine shall gain\ngeneral credence, that such will be the rocks on which multitudes will\nfounder; for simple and ill-informed people may thus be led, and\ndoubtless are, to do very wicked and mischievous acts, under the\ninfluence of this belief\u2014a belief of their possessing this power, which\nno one ever did possess, unless inspired.\n\n\u201cThere is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are\nthe ways of death.\u201d _Prov._ xvi. 25.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThus we see there is a class of theologians, who, in hot pursuit of\nabolitionism, seem ready to sacrifice their Bible and its religion to\nthe establishment of such principles as they deem wholly contradictory\nto, and incompatible with, the existence of slavery; and it is hence\nthat they attempt to teach that man possesses an intuitive sense of its\nwrong. But shall we not be forced, with regret, to acknowledge, that\nthere are quacks in divinity as well as in physic?\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IV.\n\nWe do not charge Dr. Wayland with being the author of this new doctrine\nthat man possesses an independent and distinct power, faculty, or sense,\nby the exercise of which he perceives right and wrong, or, in other\nwords, the moral quality of the actions of men, and upon which\nperception he may rest with safety, as to its accuracy and truthfulness;\nfor the same doctrine has been suggested by greater men than Dr.\nWayland, long ago. Lord Shaftesbury, Dr. Hutchinson, and Dr. Reid have\nlaid the foundation; the latter of whom says, (p. 242,) \u201cThe testimony\nof our moral faculty, like that of the external senses, is the testimony\nof nature, and we have the same reason to rely upon it.\u201c Again: \u201cAs we\nrely upon the clear and distinct testimony of our eyes, concerning the\nfigures and colours of bodies about us, we have the same reason, with\nsecurity, to rely upon the clear and unbiassed testimony of our\nconscience with regard to what we ought or ought not to do.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nSuch sentiments may seem to some to be deducible from an indistinct and\nindefinite reference to our judgment after the understanding has been\nimproved by moral culture, when such judgment, by a mere looseness of\nlanguage, is sometimes described as if the writers confounded it with\nthe state of mind and moral perfectibility produced by the reception of\nthe Holy Ghost. Thus, Archbishop Secker, in his Fourth Lecture on the\nCatechism, says:\n\n\u201cHow shall all persons know what they are taught to believe is really\ntrue?\n\n\u201c_Answer._ The greater part of it, when it is once duly proposed to\nthem, they may perceive to be so by the light of their own reason and\nconscience.\u201d\n\nNow it is evident that the bishop\u2019s answer is predicated upon the\nsupposition that the understanding has been cultivated in conformity to\nthe principles of moral truth.\n\nBut, from such hasty, perhaps thoughtless, snatches of speculation,\noccasionally found in some few of the older metaphysical writers, our\nauthor and his co-associates in this belief have drawn their materials,\nremodelled the parts, and reared, even as to heaven, a lofty structure\nupon a doubtful, tottering base, bringing untold social and political\nevils upon society, and spiritual death, in its fall, to all who shelter\nunder it. But for the good of the world, in opposition to such a\ndoctrine, truth has erected her column of solid masonry, against which\nthe fanaticism and sophistry of these builders can only, like successive\ndrops of water, carry down the walls some useless portions of the\ncement.\n\nWe repeat, how tottering must be the argument founded upon analogy where\nthere is no relation! We all agree that the senses make truthful\nrepresentations: all see, smell, and taste alike; vinegar will be sour\nto the savage, as well as the savant. But is their judgment the same\nabout the moral qualities of actions? What says this moral sense, this\nconscience, in the savage, who is taught to steal from his friend and\ntorture his enemy? Does the reverend doctor think his moral sense will\ndictate the same conclusion? What right has he, then, to say, it is the\nvoice of nature\u2014of God? Does he fail to perceive that the moral quality\nof actions is distinguished by man in conformity to his experience, his\ntraining, his education?\n\nWe see that men often differ about the moral quality of an action. It\nmight be that no two men would have the same idea about the moral\nquality of a particular action. Would the conscience, this moral sense,\nor faculty, in such case, be right in each one? If not, who is to\ndetermine which is right and which is wrong? And further, of what use to\nman can be this distinct, independent, and unchangeably truthful power,\nwhich, nevertheless, brings him no certainty? But has the mind of man\never found out that God has overdone, or unnecessarily done, any thing?\nWill these theorists reflect, that, in case God had seen fit to bestow\nsuch a sense on man, inspiration would have been useless, and the Bible\nnot wanted? And the condition of man upon the earth would be wholly\nstationary instead of progressive. And permit us to inquire, whether\nthis notion of theirs is the reason why some of these theorists speak so\nrashly, we might say blasphemously, of that sacred volume, upon the\ncondition which they dictate?\n\nThe truth is, we have no such infallible guide. The idea of right and\nwrong, either theologically or physically considered, is always fixed\nthrough an exertion of the powers of the understanding. We have no\ninstinctive power reaching the case. Our judgment, our feelings are\noften unstable, irregular, and sometimes antagonistic. In abstruse\ncases, very often we cannot even satisfy ourselves what is right and\nwill it be said that we do not often fail to see the object, design, and\nlaw of God touching a case?\n\nOn every decision on a question of right or wrong, a train of mental\naction is called into operation, comparing the ideas already in the mind\nwith the facts of the case under review, and noting the similarity of\nthese facts to our idea of right, or whether the facts conform to our\nidea of wrong. This decision we call judgment: but when the decision\nreaches to the question of right or wrong, touching our own conduct\nonly, logicians have agreed to call it conscience; not a distinct action\nfrom judgment\u2014much less a distinct faculty; and by no means carrying\nwith it more proof of accuracy and correctness than is our judgment\nabout any other matter, where the ideas and facts are equally manifest\nand accurately presented.\n\nThere is another consideration which to us gives proof that the\nconscience or moral sense is not an independent faculty of the mind, nor\nto be relied on at all as infallible. Many of us have noticed the\nchanges that imperceptibly come over our moral feelings, and judgment of\nright and wrong, conscience or moral sense, through the influences of\nassociation and habit. Our affluent neighbour, who manifests to others\nmany virtues and some follies, our mind, by association and habit,\nregards as a perfect model of human greatness and perfection. Thus a\ncorrupt government soon surveys a corrupt people; and a somewhat\nlicentious, but talented and accomplished clergyman, soon finds his\nhearers in fashion. Nor is it unfrequent, that which should stigmatize a\nfather is beheld with admiration by the son. Thus wealth, to most, is\ndesirable, but its desirability has been created by association; we\nrecollect the objects it enables us to command, often the objects of our\nprincipal pursuit. The quality the mind associates with these\ngratifications, it eventually associates with that which procures them.\nThus, we perceive, the mind is able to form a moral estimate upon\nconsiderations wholly artificial, which could never happen in case the\nmoral sense was independent, and a distinct faculty teaching us\ninfallible truth.\n\nBut how are we to account for the fact that some of the finest\nintellects, as well as the most learned men, have fallen into this most\ndangerous error? It should be a subject of deep thought!\n\nWe discover, in some men of the highest order of intellects, the power\nof arriving, as it were instantaneously, at a conclusion, giving it the\nappearance of being intuitive, rather than the result of what would be,\nwhen analyzed, a long chain of reasoning. Thus, the instant and happy\nthought often springing to the mind when in some sudden or unforeseen\ndifficulty. The nice and instant perception, often displayed by medical\nmen, of the condition of the patient, is an example; and hence the\nastonishing accuracy of judgment, sometimes noticed in the military\ncommander, from a mere glance of the eye.\n\nIn such cases the mind is often not conscious of any mental action; and\nothers, who observe these facts, are led, sometimes, to confound what,\nin such cases, is a deductive judgment, with intuitiveness. The\njudgment, thus formed without any perceptible succession of thought, is\nmerely the result of acquirement from long experience and habits of\nactive ratiocination. Some few instances of this unconscious and rapid\nthought have been exemplified by mathematicians, when the calculator\ncould give no account how he arrived at the conclusion. Will any one\nclaim that they abstract their answers from the most abstruse\npropositions intuitively, or by instinct, or by any new and distinct\nfaculty of the mind? This habit of mind is as applicable to morals as to\nany thing else. But in mathematics the data are everywhere the same;\nwhereas in morals the data are as different among men as are their\nconditions of life; because our ideas of right and wrong, existing in\nthe mind before the judgment is formed on the case to be considered,\nwere introduced by the aid of the senses, through the medium of\nexperience and education; and it is, therefore, quite obvious that the\nidea of right in one man may be quite like the idea of wrong in another.\n\nBut it remains to show the fallacy of the argument by which Dr. Wayland\narrives at his conclusion. Let us examine the paragraph quoted, and sift\nfrom verbiage the naked points of the argument:\n\n\u201cWe do actually observe a moral quality in the actions of men.\u201d\n\n\u201cDo we perceive this quality of actions by a single faculty, or a\ncombination of faculties? This notion\u201d (the perception of the moral\nquality of an action) \u201cis, in its nature, simple and ultimate, and\ndistinct from every other notion.\u201d\n\n\u201cWe have a distinct faculty to make us acquainted with the existence of\nall other distinct qualities.\u201d \u201cTherefore, it is self-evident that this\nis a separate and distinct faculty.\u201d\n\nThe syllogism is defective because the idea of right or wrong is not\nsimple nor ultimate, but complex, and ever subject to change from the\ninfluence of any new light presented to the mind. Nor is it true that we\npossess a distinct faculty to make us acquainted with each distinct\nquality; for, if so, the mind would be merely a very large bundle of\nfaculties; and we should neither possess nor stand in need of any\nreasoning powers whatever, because the naked truth about every thing\nwould always stand revealed before us by these faculties; which, we\nthink, is not the fact.\n\nIn syllogistic argument, the first principles must be something that\ncannot be otherwise\u2014unalterable\u2014an eternal truth; \u201cbecause these\nqualities cannot belong to the conclusion unless they belong to the\npremises, which are its causes.\u201d\n\nThe syllogism will then stand thus:\n\nIt is not true our notion, or idea, of the moral quality of an action\n\u201cis simple and ultimate, and distinct from any other idea or notion:\u201d\n\nIt is not true that we have a distinct faculty to make us acquainted\nwith the existence of all other distinct qualities:\n\nTherefore, it is not true, nor self-evident, that we perceive the moral\nqualities of an action, or that we have the idea or notion of it, by the\naid of a single distinct and separate faculty.\n\nThe \u201cnotion\u201d advanced by Dr. Wayland, on this subject, appears to us so\nstrange, that it would be difficult to conceive it to have been issued\nor promulgated by a schoolman, did we not know how often men, led by\npassion, some by prejudice, argue from false premises to which they take\nno heed, or, from a want of information, honestly mistake for truths.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON V.\n\nP. 206. \u201cIt\u201d (slavery) \u201csupposes that the Creator intended one human\nbeing to govern the physical, intellectual, and moral actions of as many\nother human beings as, by purchase, he can bring within his physical\npower, and that one human being may thus acquire a right to sacrifice\nthe happiness of any number of other human beings, for the purpose of\npromoting his own.\u201d\n\nThis proposition is almost a total error. Slavery supposes the Creator\nintended that the interest of the master in the slave who, by becoming\nhis slave, becomes his property, should secure to the slave that\nprotection and government which the slave is too degenerate to supply to\nhimself; and that such protection and government are necessary to the\nhappiness and well-being of the slave, without which he either remains\nstationary or degenerates in his moral, mental, and physical condition.\n\nP. 207. \u201cIt\u201d (slavery) \u201crenders the eternal happiness of the one party\nsubservient to the temporal happiness of the other.\u201d\n\nThis is equally untrue. Slavery subjects one party to the command of\nanother who is expected to feel it a duty to so \u201ccommand his household\u201d\nthat \u201cthey shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment.\u201d\n\nThis is the voice of God on the subject, as heretofore quoted. The\nlearned Dr. Wayland is evidently wholly unacquainted with the spirit and\nintention, and, we may add, origin of the institution of slavery; yet he\nhas, doubtless, been studying some of its abuses.\n\nBut suppose a man to study nothing of Christianity but its abuses, and\nfrom these alone undertake to describe what he conceives to be its\nresults, its character, and suppositions; he doubtless would make what\nDr. Wayland would very justly call a distorted representation; and\nperhaps, he might safely use a harsher phrase. But would such a\nrepresentation be productive of any good in the world? It might do much\nmischief by spreading, broadcast, its errors and misrepresentations; a\nmost delicious food for the morbid appetite of the ignorant and fanatic\ninfidel! Yes, infidelity has its fanatics as well as abolitionism!\n\n\u201cObey them that have rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they\nwatch for your souls as they that must give account, that they may do it\nwith joy and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.\u201d _Heb._\nxiii. 17.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nP. 207. \u201cIf argument were necessary to show that such a system as this\nmust be at variance with the ordinance of God, it might easily be drawn\nfrom the effects which it produces, both upon morals and national\nwealth.\u201d\n\nThe author, in this instance, as he has in many others, designs to\nproduce an effect on the mind of his reader from what he does not say,\nas well as from what he does say. We acknowledge this mode to be quite\nnoncommittal, while, on the minds of some, it may be very skilfully used\nto produce an impression. But we confess ourselves ignorant of any\nlogical rule by which it is entitled to produce any on us. The mode of\nspeech used is intended to produce the impression that the proposition\nis someway self-evident, and therefore stands in no need of proof or\nargument. But how the proposition, that slavery is \u201cat variance with the\nordinances of God\u201d is self-evident, and needs no proof nor argument, we\nhave not the \u201cmoral sense\u201d or \u201cfaculty\u201d to discover. But as Dr. Wayland\nproposes, nevertheless, to prove its truth by its effects on morals and\nwealth, let us listen to the evidence.\n\n_Idem._ \u201cIts effects must be disastrous upon the morals of both parties.\nBy presenting objects on whom passion may be satiated without resistance\nand without redress, it tends to cultivate in the master, pride, anger,\ncruelty, selfishness, and licentiousness. By accustoming the slave to\nsubject his moral principles to the will of another, it tends to abolish\nin him all moral distinctions; and thus fosters in him lying, deceit,\nhypocrisy, dishonesty, and a willingness to yield himself up to the\nappetites of his master.\u201d\n\nThis is his proof that slavery is \u201cat variance with the ordinances of\nGod,\u201d as he has drawn it from its effect on morals;\u2014in which we think\nhim singularly unfortunate. He asks us to receive, as proof of the truth\nof the proposition, a combination of propositions all requiring proof of\ntheir truth, but of the truth of which he offers no proof.\n\nThis view of the state of the argument, we imagine, would be sufficient\nto condemn it in all well-schooled minds; but, nevertheless, we propose\nto show that which he offers as proof is not true; and even if true, is\nno proof of the truth of the proposition he endeavours to sustain.\n\nIn regard to the master, the effect complained of may or may not exist,\nas may be the fact whether the master is or is not capable of\nadministering the charge and government of slaves wisely for himself and\nthem. But these abuses, when found to exist, are no proof of the moral\nimpropriety of the institution; for, if so, the abuses of a thing are\nproof that the thing itself is evil. There are many abuses of\ngovernment: is government, therefore, at variance with the ordinances of\nGod? The same of matrimony; and is it, therefore, to be set aside? Some\nmen make an abusive use of their education, and, in consequence, would\nhave been more valuable members of society in a state of comparative\nignorance: are our universities, therefore, to be abolished? Money has\nbeen said to be \u201cthe root of all evil;\u201d it, to some extent, is the\nrepresentative of wealth and power; the possession of either of which\nmay, in some individuals, sometimes apparently enable the possessor \u201cto\ncultivate pride, anger, cruelty, selfishness, and licentiousness.\u201d The\nsame may be said of power of any kind. But has not Dr. Wayland learned\nthat there are cases where the effect would be and is entirely the\nreverse?\u2014where power, wealth, or even the possession of slaves, produces\nin the possessor a greater degree of humility, placidity or mildness,\nsympathy or charity for others, and orderly conduct in himself? Does the\nreverend moral philosopher make so low an estimate of the value of\ncivilization\u2014of the influence of Christianity\u2014as not to admit the\ncapability of enjoying a blessing without abusing it?\n\nIf Dr. Wayland\u2019s argument be founded on truth, it will be easy to show\nthat any system of things must be at variance with the ordinances of God\nwhich permit the possession of either power or wealth: consequently, in\nsuch case, we must and should all go back to the savage state. We ask\nthis learned standard author to read the history of Abraham and Isaac,\nand inform us whether slavery produced the effect on them which he\nsupposes to be an entailment of the institution; for the effect must be\nproved to be an unchangeable, a universal and unavoidable consequence,\nbefore it can receive the character of evidence in the case to which he\napplies it.\n\nBut Dr. Wayland thinks that slavery \u201ctends to abolish all moral\ndistinctions in the slave\u201d\u2014\u201cfosters in him lying, deceit, hypocrisy,\ndishonesty, and a willingness to yield himself up to minister to the\nappetites of his master;\u201d and, therefore, \u201cis at variance with the\nordinances of God.\u201d\n\nIf the doctor had seen the native African and slave in the wild, frantic\njoy of his savage worship, tendered to his chief idol-god, the\nimbodiment of concupiscence; if he had seen all the power of the\nChristian master centered to effect the eradication of this heathen\nbelief, and the habits it engendered; had he witnessed the anxiety of\nthe master for the substitution of the precepts of Christianity; if he\nhad seen the untiring efforts of the masters, sometimes for several\ngenerations, before this great object could be accomplished, and the\nabsolute necessity of its accomplishment before the labour of the slave\ncould ordinarily become to him an article of full and desirable\nprofit,\u2014he would probably never have written the paragraph we have\nquoted!\n\nBut since, in the honest, we may perhaps say the amiable, simplicity of\nhis mind, he has composed this lesson for his pupil, which, like the\nearly dew in imperceptible showers on the tender blade, becomes the\ndaily nutriment of his juvenile mind and the habitual aliment of its\nmaturity, we deem it necessary to make one further brief remark in proof\nof its entire inadequacy to the task assigned it in his argument, as a\nparticular and special, and of its total untruthfulness as a general and\ncomprehensive, maxim in morals.\n\nOur experience is, that the crimes here named, when detected in the\nslave, are punished, and, if necessary, with severity, if for no other\nreason, because they render the slave less valuable to his master. The\nmaster wishes to find in his slave one on whom he can rely with\ncertainty; in whom there is no dissonance of interest from his own, and\nwhose honesty and obedience are past doubt. The qualities which are the\nexact opposite of the crimes imputed are, therefore, sedulously\ncultivated in the slave,\u2014and truly, very often, with small success. But\nwe are surprised at the doctrine which proclaims a system of government\nthat ever punishes and looks with displeasure on \u201clying, deceit,\nhypocrisy, and dishonesty,\u201d to be the very thing to foster and nourish\nthose vices! When such is proved to be the fact, we shall regard it as a\nnew discovery in morals.\n\nAs to the last clause of what he has adduced as proof of his\nproposition, we say that any one who is in the employ, or even the\ncompany, of another, either as a friend, wife, child, or hireling, as\nwell as slave, may manifest a growing willingness to minister to the\nappetites of such person; and such inclination, or willingness, will\noperate to the benefit or injury of those so influenced, in proportion\nas such appetite is good or bad, or tends to good or evil: but this\ninfluence, whether tending to benefit or injury, is not an exclusive\nincident of slavery, and, therefore, cannot with any propriety, be\nquoted either for or against it: for, everywhere, \u201cevil communications\ncorrupt good manners.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON VI.\n\nDr. Wayland informs us that slavery is at variance with the ordinances\nof God, because it diminishes the amount of national wealth. If the\ndiminishing of national wealth be proof of the variance from the\nordinances of God, then it will follow that whatever will increase such\nwealth must be in conformity to such ordinances,\u2014a position which we\nthink no one will attempt to maintain. But let us notice the evidence he\nadduces to prove that slavery diminishes national wealth. His first\nproof is, that slavery does not \u201cimpose on all the necessity of labour;\u201d\nbut that it \u201crestricts the number of labourers\u2014that is, of producers\u2014by\nrendering labour disgraceful.\u201d\n\nNow this is surely a proposition which requires to be proved itself\nbefore it can be received as a proof of an antecedent proposition; and\nPresident Wayland seems to have perceived that, under the general term,\n\u201clabourers,\u201d it would be incapable of proof; and, therefore, he informs\nus that by labourers he means producers. The logicians will agree that\nthere is a disjointedness in this proposition (very common in this\nauthor) to which exception might be taken; but we suppose Dr. Wayland\nmeans that slavery decreases the number of those whose labour is\nemployed in the production of the articles or products of agriculture;\nfor we do not presume he means that the labours of the law, physic,\ndivinity, the mechanic arts, commerce, politics or war, are rendered\ndisgraceful by slavery, but agriculture alone; and that, therefore, it\nis at variance with the ordinances of God, because it thus diminishes\nthe amount of national wealth. If this is not his meaning, we confess\nourselves unable to find any meaning in it.\n\nWe know of no surer method to test its truth or falsehood than for the\nSlave States to compare their number of agricultural producers with\nthose of the Free States, having relation to the entire population. The\nresult will be found wholly adverse to the reverend moralist\u2019s position.\nIn fact, so great is the disproportion between the numbers of\nagricultural labourers in the Slave States, compared to those in the\nFree, that the articles of their produce often fall down to prices\nruinous to the agriculturist, which very seldom, or never, happens in\nthe Free States. Let Dr. Wayland study the statistics touching this\npoint, and he will find himself in error.\n\nBut the proposition of President Wayland includes this minor\nproposition: That the increase of agricultural products, to the greatest\npossible extent, increases national wealth. We are very far from\ndiscovering the truth of this; because the increase of a production,\nbeyond utility and demand, can add nothing to the value of the\nproduction, since value depends upon utility and demand. If this\nposition be true, which we think very few at this day will dispute, it\nis quite obvious that President Wayland, and even Adam Smith, (from whom\nwe suppose the former has received this notion,) are quite mistaken when\nthey predicate the amount of labour to be the sole measure, or, in fact,\nthe amount of wealth; since that position must render the amount of\nlabour and the amount of wealth terms of convertible significance,\nwhich, in fact, is seldom the case. Such, then, being the state of the\nargument, Dr. Wayland\u2019s proposition is, in effect: That the production\nof the articles of agriculture, to an extent beyond any demand or value,\nis in conformity to the ordinances of God; and, therefore, their\nproduction, to any less extent, is at variance with those ordinances,\nbecause the first increases and the latter decreases national wealth. We\nshall leave these contradictions for the consideration of the professor\nof moral philosophy and his pupils.\n\nThe second witness Dr. Wayland introduces to prove the truth of his\nproposition, that slavery lessens the amount of national wealth, is that\nslavery takes from the labourer the natural stimulus to labour,\u2014the\ndesire of individual benefit,\u2014and substitutes the fear of punishment:\nAnd for the third and last, that slavery removes from both parties the\ndisposition and motive to frugality; by which means national wealth is\ndiminished.\n\nIf national wealth be the desideratum, in order not to be at variance\nwith the ordinances of God, it matters not whether the contributors to\nit did so contribute through the selfish view of personal aggrandizement\nand a desire of elevation above their fellows, or whether they did so to\nrelieve themselves from some stigma or personal infliction that a\nrefusal might be expected to fasten upon them. The motive in both cases\nis the same\u2014a desire to benefit themselves. Thus Dr. Wayland, therefore,\nmakes a distinction where, in reality, there is no difference.\n\nBut again, if the amount of labour be the criterion of the amount of\nnational wealth, as he seems to suppose, it can make no difference, in a\nnational point of view, whether A and B squander the result of their\nlabours into the possession of C and D, or retain it themselves because\nthe change of possession in no way destroys the thing possessed. It\nmight be gathered, from this part of Dr. Wayland\u2019s argument, that the\ngreatest misers would be the most efficient builders of national wealth,\nand, therefore, most in accordance with the ordinances of God.\n\nWe are somewhat at loss to perceive the precise idea the author affixes\nto the term \u201cnational wealth.\u201d Whether this be his or our fault, we\nleave for others to decide.\n\nHas it ever occurred to the reverend author to estimate the wealth of a\nnation by the moral, physical, and individual welfare of the population?\n\nBut we cannot attempt, or undertake, to expose, nor explain, all the\nfalse reasoning, distorted views, and prejudiced conclusions found\nheaped up, in heterogeneous confusion, by the abolition writers. The\ndissection of mental putridity is as unwelcome a task as that of the\nanimal carcass in a state of decomposition.\n\nIf we cast our eyes over the surface of human life, we notice that\nwealth and power usually travel hand in hand but that wealth is\ndistributed unequally, varied from the lofty possessions of royal power\ndown to the most scanty pittance of poverty and want;\u2014yet leaving a vast\nmajority in possession of nothing save life, and their right to the use\nof the elements of nature. It is with these lower classes we have the\nmost to do. The wants of these, most generally, are physical: indeed, we\nsometimes find them only on a level with the brute. Thus, the African\nmountaineer is prone and content to feed on the decaying remains of what\nhe may find, and wanders, like the hyena, upon the trail of what he\nhopes to find his prey; while the savage islanders of the distant seas\nare satisfied with what the ocean heaves on shore. We notice that these\nwants are increased by climate; hence, the native of the extreme north,\ncontent with his flitch of blubber, yet robs the bear of his hide for a\nblanket. These wants we also find enlarged by the least contact with\ncivilization. Hence we see the African, on the western coast of his\ncontinent, garnished out with the gewgaws of Europe, and the Indian of\nour own clime with the trinkets of trade. And thus we may notice that,\nas civilization and capital increase in any country, new objects of\ndesire, new individual wants increase in proportion. Hence, the\nfarm-house now exhibits its carpet, whereas Queen Elizabeth was content\nwith straw!\n\nAll these wants require some action, on the part of those who desire\ntheir gratification, to continue their supply, or it must cease;\nbecause, as a general rule, the product of individual labour must bound\nthe supply of individual wants, in all cases where the individual\npossesses no capital which yields an additional revenue.\n\nBut a large portion of those in savage life produce nothing; so, also, a\nportion from civilized society seem ever disposed to break through the\nrules of civilization, to retrograde as to morals, and subsist by trick\nor some dishonesty. They produce nothing, and are, therefore, a total\ndrawback on the welfare of others. We find, also, another portion, the\nproduct of whose labour is inadequate to the supply of their individual\nwants, and who are without capital to supply the deficiency. Such must\ndie, or resort to charity; or retrograde, and live by their wits. Good\nmen, in all ages, have striven to obviate these evils. The Levitical law\ndid so by permitting the unfortunate man to sell himself, as a slave,\nfor six years, or for life, as he might choose, under the state of the\ncase; or, in case he did not so choose to sell himself, but became\nindebted beyond his means, the law forced his sale, and also that of his\nwhole family. Although, to some, this law may look harsh, yet its\nspirit, intention, and effect were in favour of the general good, of\nmorals, and of life. Yet it was slavery; and we take liberty here to\nsay, although some may not be prepared to receive it, that such ever\nwas, is now, and ever will be the spirit, intention, and effect of\nslavery, when not disfigured by its abuse.\n\nWe have in vain looked through these \u201cElements\u201d for some proposal of the\nauthor to meet such cases as those of savages, and of those degenerating\nand deteriorating poor, in all countries, known to be so from the fact\nthat they ever strive to live by their wits. And here we may remark that\nit is evident the system of alms-giving must terminate when the\ncapitalists shall find the amount of alms beyond their surplus revenue;\nand no one will deny that the whole system has a direct tendency towards\na general bankruptcy. We therefore ask Dr. Wayland to make a proposal\nthat shall be a permanent and effectual remedy in the cases under\nconsideration.\n\nNow, very few will say, but that if society can find out some humane\nplan by which beggars and thieves can be forced, if force be necessary,\nto yield a product of labour equal to the supply of their necessary\nwants, the ordinances of God will not sanction the act.\n\nFrom imperfection, perhaps, in the organization of society, we not only\nsee individuals branching off, and taking a downward road, but also, in\nall old countries, from the very stimulus of nature, a constant tendency\nto such an increase of population as lessens the value of labour by\noverstocking the demand, whereby its product becomes less than is\nrequired for the supply of individual wants. The consequences resulting\nfrom these facts, so ruinous to individual morals and happiness, often\nbecome national evils and the causes of national deterioration. But,\nunder the Levitical law, and in all countries with similar provisions,\nthe effect has been, and ever will be, a division of such population\ninto a separate caste,\u2014not national deterioration.\n\nWith a view to remedy the evils to which we have invited the attention\nof the Rev. Dr. Wayland, Sismondi, book vii. chap. 9, has proposed, that\ninasmuch, as he says, the low wages of the labouring poor redound wholly\nto the pecuniary benefit of the capitalists who employ them, those\ncapitalists shall be charged by law with their support, when wages\nbecome too low to supply the necessary wants of the labourer; at the\nsame time bestowing power on the capitalists to prevent all marriages\nwhen the labourer can give no evidence of a prospect of increased means\nof subsistence, satisfactory to the capitalist, that he will not be\nburdened with the support of the offspring. We are, by no means, the\nadvocates of Sismondi\u2019s proposed arrangement. But if the labourers,\nsince in some sense they may be considered freemen, give their consent\nto it, we do not perceive that it would be \u201cat variance with the\nordinances of God.\u201d\n\nThe author of these \u201cElements\u201d and Sismondi, we believe, differed\nlittle, if any, on the subject of the abolition of slavery touching the\nnegro race. Will he say, the proposal of that philosopher to benefit the\ncondition of the labouring poor, if carried into effect as suggested,\nwould be \u201cat variance with the ordinances of God?\u201d Yet, all the world\nperceive that it is a mere modification of slavery, containing\nconditions more obnoxious to human nature than appertains to any\ncondition of slavery now known beyond the African shores.\n\nMan has ever been found to advance in moral improvement civilization,\nand a stable and healthy increase of population, only in proportion as\nthey have been taught to supply their necessary wants by the products of\nindividual labour. This is what first distinguishes civilized from\nsavage life. The savage relies wholly upon the elements, the casualties\nthat bring him advantage, and the spontaneous productions of nature. The\nidea of supplying his wants through the products of labour never enters\nthe mind. And will it be denied that, even in civilized countries, they\nwho solely rely upon begging, trick, and dishonesty, for their support,\nare always found to be deteriorating, both in morals and in their\nphysical ability, rapidly receding from all the characteristics of\ncivilization, in the direction towards savage life. Indeed, a tendency\nto move in the same direction is often perceptible among those who only\npartially supply the wants of civilized support by the product of\nindividual labour, and rely upon their wits for the remainder, thus, to\nsome extent, becoming the plunderers of society. We would have been\nhappy to have found the causes why these things are so, as well as to\nhave found the remedy, in \u201cThe Elements of Moral Science.\u201d\n\nBut let us contemplate, for a moment, a certain class of freemen, the\nlazaroni of Italy, who exist, merely, upon one small dish of macaroni,\ndaily issued to them from the Hospital of St. Lazarus. We are all\nfamiliar with the condition of these people. Let us compare theirs with\nwhat would be the condition of the beggars and thieves of some other\ncountries, were they placed under the control of some salutary power,\nwhereby their necessary wants would be supplied by the product of their\nindividual labour. We need not ask which condition is most \u201cat variance\nwith the ordinances of God!\u201d\n\nDr. Wayland has retained, for his last witness, the old trite charge\nthat slavery impoverishes the soil; that, therefore, it constantly\n\u201cmigrates from the old to new regions,\u201d \u201cwhere alone the accumulated\nmanure of centuries\u201d can \u201csustain a system at variance with the laws of\nnature.\u201d \u201cHence,\u201d he says, \u201cslavery in this country is acknowledged to\nhave impoverished many of our most valuable districts.\u201d\n\nWe are not aware how far Dr. Wayland has founded this statement upon\nfacts drawn from his own observation. Has he done so at all; or has he,\ncarelessly and without reflection, adopted it from the assertions of\nothers notoriously destitute of ability to form an opinion with\naccuracy, or else too deeply prejudiced to give their opinion any value?\nDoes he wish us to infer that the plough and the hoe, in the hands of a\nslave, communicate some peculiar poison to the soil; and by reason of\nwhich \u201cthe ground shall not henceforth yield her strength?\u201d Will he\nplease explain how the effect of which he complains is produced? If he\nfinds it merely in the mode of cultivation, we then inquire whether the\nsame mode would not produce the same effect, even if the plough and hoe\nwere held by freemen? If so, then it is evident that \u201cthe impoverishment\nof many of our most valuable districts\u201d is not the result of slavery,\nbut of a bad mode of cultivation. Or, will the doctor contend that if\nthose valuable districts had been cultivated by free hired men, the\nevils from negligence in the labourer would be remedied? \u201cHe that is a\nhireling fleeth, because he is a hireling, and careth not for the\nsheep.\u201d _John_ x. 13.\n\nDr. Wayland will not deny that the \u201cheathen round about,\u201d of whom the\nJews were permitted to buy slaves, were a slave-holding people; but we\nhave no account that their country was impoverished thereby. The\nCanaanites, whom the Israelites drove out from Palestine, were\nslaveholders; yet the country was represented as very fertile, even to\n\u201coverflowing with milk and honey.\u201d The Danites found \u201cLaish very good,\u201d\n_Judg._ xviii. 9. And the children of Judah \u201cfound fat pasture and good\u201d\nabout Gedar. 1 _Chron._ iv. 40. \u201c_For they of Ham had dwelt there of\nold!_\u201d\n\nFor many centuries, slavery extended over every part of Europe, yet\nhistory gives us no account of the ruin of the soil. In Greece and Rome,\nthe numbers of slaves were extended to millions beyond any number these\nStates possess; but their historians failed to discover their\ndestructive influence on the fertility of those countries.\n\nBefore the impoverishment of the soil can, with any force, be adduced as\nproof against slavery, it must be proved to be a necessary consequence;\nwhich, we apprehend, will be a difficult labour, since the sluggishness\nand the idleness of the Canaanites, and of the nations round about, left\ntheir country overflowing with milk and honey, abounding in fat pastures\nand good, notwithstanding their population were, to a large extent,\nslaves,\u2014since, also, the servile cultivation of the soil in Greece and\nRome did not impoverish it; and since slavery, which everywhere abounded\nin Europe, never produced that effect.\n\nIf Dr. Wayland will discover the legitimate cause of this impoverishment\nof the soil in the Slave States, and teach the planters a better mode of\ncultivation, we doubt not he will receive their thanks, and deserve well\nof his country, as a public benefactor.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VII.\n\nDr. Wayland says:\n\nP. 209. \u201cThe moral precepts of the Bible are diametrically opposed to\nslavery.\u201d\n\nP. 210. \u201cThe moral principles of the gospel are directly subversive of\nthe principles of slavery.\u201d * * * \u201cIf the gospel be diametrically\nopposed to the _principles_ of slavery, it must be opposed to the\n_practice_ of slavery; and, therefore, were the principles of the gospel\nfully adopted, slavery could not exist.\u201d\n\nDr. Wayland having conceived himself to possess a distinct faculty,\nwhich reveals to him, with unerring truthfulness, whatever is right and\nall that is wrong, may be expected to consider himself fully able to\ndecide, in his own way, what instruction God intended to convey to us,\non the subject of slavery, through the books of Divine revelation; yet,\nwe cannot but imagine that St. Paul would be somewhat astonished, if\npresented with the doctor\u2019s decision for his approval, and that he would\ncry out:\n\n\u201cWho art thou that judgest another man\u2019s servant? To his own master, he\nstandeth, or falleth: yea, he will be holden up; for God is able to make\nhim stand.\u201d\n\nBut although we cannot boast of possessing this unerring moral guide,\nwhich, of late years, seems to be so common a possession among that\nclass who ardently desire us to believe that they have monopolized all\nthe knowledge of God\u2019s will on the subject of slavery, yet we may\nventure a remark on the logical accuracy of Dr. Wayland\u2019s argument.\n\nIt seems to be a postulate in his mind that the gospel is diametrically\nopposed to, and subversive of, the principles of slavery. We do not\ncomplain of this syllogistic mode; but we do complain, as we have done\nbefore, that his postulate is not an axiom, a self-evident truth, or\nmade equal thereto by the open and clear declarations of Christ or his\napostles. This defect cannot be remedied by ever so many suppositions,\nnor by deductions therefrom. Nor will those of a different faith from\nDr. Wayland, on the subject of \u201cconscience,\u201d or \u201cmoral sense,\u201d be\nsatisfied to receive the declarations of this his \u201cdistinct faculty\u201d as\nthe fixed decrees of eternal truth. His assertions and arguments may be\nvery convincing to those who think they possess this distinct faculty,\nespecially if their education and prejudices tend to the same\nconclusion.\n\nBut if what President Wayland says about slavery be true, then to hold\nslaves is a most heinous sin; and he who does so, and never repents, can\nnever visit Paul in heaven. He necessarily is placed on a parallel with\nthe thief and robber; and Dr. Channing has been bold enough to say so.\n\nBut has Paul ever hinted to us any such thing as that the holding of\nslaves is a sin? Yet he gives us instruction on the subject and\nrelations of slavery. What excuse had St. Paul for not telling us what\nthe Rev. Dr. Wayland now tells us, if what he has told us be true? And\nif it be true, what are we to think of Paul\u2019s verity, when he asserts\nthat he has \u201cnot shunned to declare all the counsel of God?\u201d\n\nDid Jesus Christ ever hint such an idea as Dr. Wayland\u2019s? What are we to\nunderstand, when he addresses God, the Father, and says, \u201cI have given\nunto them the words thou gavest me, and they have received them?\u201d What\nare we to deduce from his remark on a slaveholder, and who notified him\nof that fact, when he says to his disciples, \u201cVerily I say unto you, I\nhave not found so great faith, no, not in Israel?\u201d What impression was\nthis remark calculated to produce on the minds of the disciples? Does\nDr. Wayland found his assertion on _Luke_ xvii. 7\u201310? or does he agree\nwith Paley that Christ privately condemned slavery to the apostles, and\nthat they kept such condemnation secret to themselves, to prevent\nopposition to the introduction of Christianity, and left the most wicked\nsin of slave-holding to be found out by a mere innuendo? Or does Dr.\nWayland claim, through the aid of his distinct moral faculty infallibly\nteaching him the truth, to have received some new light on the subject\nof slavery, which the FATHER deemed not prudent to be intrusted to the\nSON, and, therefore, now more lucid and authoritative than what was\nrevealed to the apostles?\n\nThe Archbishop Secker has made a remark which appears to us conclusive,\nand also exactly to fit the case. In his Fifth Lecture on the Catechism,\nhe says:\u2014\n\n\u201cSupposing the Scripture a true revelation, so far as it goes; how shall\nwe know, if it be a full and complete one too, in all things necessary?\nI answer: Since our Saviour had the Spirit without measure, and the\nwriters of Scripture had as large a measure of it as their commission to\ninstruct the world required, it is impossible that, in so many\ndiscourses concerning the terms of salvation as the New Testament\ncontains, they should all have omitted any _one thing_ necessary to the\ngreat end which they had in view. And what was not necessary when the\nScripture was completed, cannot have become so since. For the faith was,\nonce for all, \u2018delivered to the saints,\u2019 _Jude_ 3; and \u2018other foundation\ncan no man lay,\u2019 1 _Cor._ iii. 11, than what was laid then. The sacred\npenmen themselves could teach no other doctrine than Christ appointed\nthem; and he hath appointed no one since to make addition to it.\u201d\n\nBut it may be proper to take some further notice how the author of these\n\u201cElements\u201d attempts to prove the truth of the proposition that \u201cthe\nmoral precepts of the Bible are diametrically opposed to slavery.\u201d He\nsays, \u201cGod can make known to us his will, either directly or\nindirectly.\u201d\n\nHe may, in express terms, command or forbid a thing; this will be\ndirectly;\u2014or he may command certain duties, or impose certain\nobligations, with which some certain course of conduct is inconsistent;\nin which case the inconsistent course of conduct will be indirectly\nforbidden.\n\nWe have not followed Dr. Wayland\u2019s exact words, because we found them\nsomewhat confused, and rather ambiguous. We prefer to have the case\nclearly stated, and we then accept the terms, and repeat the question,\n\u201cHas God imposed obligations on man which are inconsistent with the\nexistence of domestic slavery?\u201d\n\nIn proof that he has, Dr. Wayland presents the Christian duty \u201cto preach\nthe gospel to all nations and men, without respect to circumstances or\ncondition.\u201d We agree that such is our duty, so far as we may have the\npower; and it appears to us strange how that duty can interfere with the\nexistence of slavery, because the practical fact is, slavery brings\nhundreds of thousands of negroes into a condition whereby the duty may\nbe performed, and many thereby do come to some knowledge of the gospel,\nwho would, otherwise, have none.\n\nEvery Christian slaveholder feels it to be his duty. Is it denied that\nthis duty is ever performed?\n\nBut if it is incompatible with the institution of slavery for the slave\nto be taught Christianity, then Christianity and slavery can never\nco-exist in the same person. Therefore, Dr. Wayland must prove that no\nslave can be a Christian, before this argument can have weight.\n\nThe man who owns a slave has a trust; he who has a child has one also.\nIn both cases the trustee may do as he did who \u201cdug in the earth and hid\nhis lord\u2019s money.\u201d We cheerfully deliver them up to the lash of Dr.\nWayland.\n\nThe author of the \u201cElements of Moral Science\u201d next presents the marriage\ncontract, and seems desirous to have us suppose that its obligations are\nincompatible with slavery. His words are\u2014\n\n\u201cHe has taught us that the conjugal relation is established by himself;\nthat husband and wife are joined together by God; and that man may not\nput them asunder. The marriage contract is a contract for life, and is\ndissoluble only for one cause, that of conjugal infidelity. Any system\nthat interferes with this contract, and claims to make it any thing else\nthan what God has made it, is in violation of his law.\u201d\n\nThis proposition is bad; it is too verbose to be either definite or\ncorrect. There are many things that will interfere with the provisions\nof this proposition, and yet not be in violation of the laws of God.\nSuppose one of President Wayland\u2019s pupils has married a wife, and yet\ncommits a crime. He is arrested, and the president is his judge. When\nabout to pronounce sentence of imprisonment for life, the pupil reads to\nhis judge the foregoing paragraph, and argues that he cannot receive\nsuch sentence, because it will interfere with the marriage contract,\nand, therefore, be in violation of the laws of God.\n\nWe trust some will deem this a sufficient refutation of the proposition.\n\nBut if we take the proposition as its author has left it, we have yet to\nlearn that any slaveholder will object to it; although it may be he will\ndiffer with them on the subject of what constitutes Christian marriage,\namong pagan negroes or their pagan descendants.\n\nWill the reverend moralist determine that a promiscuous intercourse is\nthe conjugal relation established by God himself; that such is the\nmarriage contract which no man may put asunder? Will he decide that an\nattempt to regulate the conduct of men, bond or free, who manifest such\na state of morals, is in violation of the laws of God? Who are his\npupils, when he shall say that an attempt to enforce the laws of God, in\npractice among men, is a violation of them?\n\nSo far as our experience goes, masters universally manifest a desire to\nhave their negroes marry, and to live with their wives and children, in\nconformity to Christian rules. And one reason, if no other, is very\nobvious. The master wishes to secure the peace and tranquillity of his\nhousehold. And we take this occasion to inform Dr. Wayland and his\ncoadjutors, that a very large proportion of the punishments that are\nawarded slaves are for violations of what, perhaps, he may call the\nmarriage contract, so anxious is the master to inculcate the obligations\nof marriage among them.\n\nIt is true, some slaves of a higher order of physical and moral\nimprovement, influenced by the habits and customs of their masters,\nhabituate themselves to a cohabitation with one companion for life; and,\nin all such cases, the master invariably gives countenance to their\nwishes; indeed, in some instances, masters have deemed them worthy of\nhaving their wishes sanctioned and solemnized by the ceremonies of the\nchurch ritual. And in all such cases, superior consideration and\nadvantages are always bestowed, not only in reward of their merit, but\nas an encouragement for others.\n\nThe African negro has no idea of marriage as a sacred ordinance of God.\nMany of the tribes worship a_Fetish_, which is a personification of\ntheir gross notions of procreation; but it inculcates no idea like that\nof marriage; and we have known the posterity of that people, four or\nfive generations removed from the African native, as firmly attached to\nthose strange habits as if they had been constitutional. Negroes, who\nhave only arrived to such a state of mental and moral development, would\nfind it somewhat difficult to comprehend what the Christian church\nimplied by the marriage covenant! Therefore, where there was no reason\nto believe that its duties were understood, or that their habits and\nconduct would be influenced by it any longer than until they should take\nsome new notion, a ceremony of any high order has been thought to do\ninjury. A rule, often broken, ceases to be venerated. And we feel quite\nsure that some Christians would deem it quite improper to permit those\nto join in any sacred ceremony which neither their physical nor mental\ndevelopment would permit them to comprehend or obey, whether freemen or\nslaves.\n\nIn the articles drawn up at Ratisbon by Melancthon, we find, Article 16,\n_De Sacram. Matrimo._:\n\n\u201cThe sacrament of matrimony belongs only to Christians. It is a holy and\nconstant union of one single man with one single woman, confirmed by the\nblessing and consecration of Jesus Christ.\u201d\n\nAnd St. Paul says, _Eph._ v. 32, of matrimony: \u201cThis is a great mystery:\nbut I speak concerning Christ and the Church.\u201d\n\nWe know not whether the author of the \u201cElements\u201d believes, with\nMelancthon, that matrimony is a Christian sacrament or not. We believe\nthe majority of modern Protestants do not so consider it, although\nLuther says, _De Matrimonio_:\n\n\u201cMatrimony is called a sacrament, because it is the type of a very noble\nand very holy thing. Hence the married ought to consider and respect the\ndignity of this sacrament.\u201d\n\nQuestion:\u2014Would Melancthon, or Luther, or the author of these\n\u201cElements,\u201d consent to perform the marriage ceremony, joining, in the\nholy bonds of matrimony, two negroes, who neither understood the\nChristian duties it imposed, and of whom it was well known that they\nwould not regard the contract as binding any longer than their fancy or\npassions might dictate. A Christian sacrament is not only a sign of\nChristian grace, but the seal of its insurance to us, and the instrument\nof the Holy Ghost, whereby faith is conferred, as a Divine gift, upon\nthe soul. We feel it a Christian duty to \u201cnot give that which is holy to\ndogs,\u201d nor \u201ccast pearls before swine.\u201d Is Dr. Wayland of the same\nopinion?\n\nIt may be well to advise our author of some facts in proof of what state\nof connubial feelings exist among African negroes. We quote from Lander,\nvol. i. p. 312:\n\n\u201cThe manners of the Africans are hostile to the interests and\nadvancement of women.\u201d\n\nP. 328. \u201cA man is at liberty to return his wife to her parents, at any\ntime, without adducing any reason for his dislike.\u201d * * * \u201cThe children,\nif any, the mother is by no means permitted to take along with her; but\nthey are left behind with the father, who delivers them over to the care\nof other women.\u201d\n\nP. 158. \u201cA man thinks as little of taking a wife as of cutting an ear of\ncorn; affection is altogether out of the question.\u201d\n\nVol. ii. p. 208. \u201cAfricans, generally speaking, betray the most perfect\nindifference on losing their liberty, or in being deprived of their\nrelations; while love of country is, seemingly, as great a stranger to\ntheir breasts as social tenderness and domestic affection.\u201d\n\nWe quote from the Christian Observer, vol. xix. p. 890: \u201cMr. Johnson was\nappointed to the care of Regent\u2019s Town, June, 1816. * * * Natives of\ntwenty-two different nations were there collected together: * * * none\nof them had learned to live in a state of marriage.\u201d\n\nProofs of this trait in the African character may be accumulated; and a\nvery determined disposition to live in a state of promiscuous\nintercourse is often noticeable, in their descendants, for many\ngenerations, notwithstanding the master endeavours to restrain it by\ncorporeal punishment. But yet, under this state of facts, our laws\nforbid the separation of children from mothers, under ages stipulated by\nlaw.\n\nIt is the interest of the master to have his slaves orderly\u2014to possess\nthem of some interest which will have a tendency to that result. Their\nquiet settlement in families has been thought to be among the most\nprobable and influential inducements to insure the desired effect, and\nto produce a moral influence on them. Besides this interest of the\nmaster, his education on the subject of marriage must be allowed to have\na strong influence on his mind to favour and foster in his slaves a\nconnection which his own judgment teaches him must be important to their\nhappiness and his own tranquillity, to say nothing of his duty as a\nChristian. Indeed, we never heard of a master who did not feel a strong\ndesire, a pride, to see his slaves in good condition, contented and\nhappy; and we venture to assert, that no man, who entertained a proper\nregard for his own character, would consent to sell a family of slaves,\nseparately, to different individuals, when the slaves themselves\nmanifested good conduct, and a habit, or desire, to live together in\nconformity to the rules of civilized life. Even a casual cohabitation is\noften caught at by the master, and sanctioned, as permanent, if he can\ndo so in accordance with the conduct and feelings of the negroes\nthemselves.\n\nThat the owners of slaves have sometimes abused the power they\npossessed, and outraged the feelings of humanity in this behalf, is\ndoubtless a fact. Nor do we wish to excuse such conduct, by saying that\nproud and wealthy parents sometimes outrage the feelings of common sense\nand of their own children in a somewhat similar way. These are abuses\nthat can be, and should be corrected; and we are happy to inform Dr.\nWayland that we have lived to see many abuses corrected, and hope that\nmany more corrections may follow in their train. But we assure him that\nthe wholesale denunciations of men who, in fact, know but little about\nthe subjects of their distress, may produce great injury to the objects\nof their sympathies, but no possible benefit. And let us now, with the\nbest feeling, inform Dr. Wayland, and his co-agitators, of one result of\nhis and their actions in this matter. We assert what we know.\n\nThirty years ago, we occasionally had schools for negro children; nor\nwas it uncommon for masters to send their favourite young slaves to\nthese schools; nor did such acts excite attention or alarm; and, at the\nsame time, any missionary had free access to that class of our\npopulation. But when we found, with astonishment, that our country was\nflooded with abolition prints, deeply laden with the most abusive\nfalsehoods, with the obvious design to excite rebellion among the\nslaves, and to spread assassination and bloodshed through the land;\u2014when\nwe found these transient missionaries, mentally too insignificant to\nforesee the result of their conduct, or wholly careless of the\nconsequences, preaching the same doctrines;\u2014these little schools and the\nmouths of these missionaries were closed. And great was the cry. Dr.\nWayland knows whereabout lies the wickedness of these our acts! Let him\nand his coadjutors well understand that these results, whether for the\nbenefit or injury of the slave, have been brought about by the work of\ntheir hands.\n\nIf these transient missionaries were the only persons who had power to\nteach the gospel to the slave, who has deprived the slaves of the\ngospel?\n\nIf these suggestions are true, will not Dr. Wayland look back upon his\nlabours with dissatisfaction? Does he behold their effects with joy? Has\nhe thrown one ray of light into the mental darkness of benighted Africa?\nHas he removed one pain from the moral disease of her benighted\nchildren? If so perfectly adverse have been his toils, will he expect us\nto countenance his school, sanction his morality, or venerate his\ntheology? A very small portion of poison makes the feast fatal!\n\nDoes he complain because some freemen lower themselves down to this\npromiscuous intercourse with the negro? We are dumb; we deliver them up\nto his lash! Or does he complain because we do not marry them ourselves?\nWe surely have yet to learn, because we decline such marriages, and a\ndeteriorated posterity, that, therefore, we interfere with the\ninstitution of marriage, or make it something which God did not. We had\nthought that the laws of God all looked towards a state of physical,\nintellectual, and moral improvement and that such an amalgamation as\nwould necessarily leave a more deteriorated race in our stead, would be\nsin, and would be punished, if in no other way, yet still by the very\nfact of such degradation. Or does Dr. Wayland deny that the negro is an\ninferior race of man to the white? If the slave and master were of the\nsame race, as they once were in all parts of Europe, intermarriage\nbetween them would blot out the institution, as it has done there. In\nsuch case, his argument might have some force.\n\nUnder the Spanish law, a master might marry his female slave, or he\nmight suffer any freeman to marry her; but the marriage, in either case,\nwas emancipation to her. The wife was no longer a slave; and so by the\nLevitical law. See _Deut._ xxi. 14.\n\nThe laws of the Slave States of our Union forbid amalgamation with the\nnegro race; consequently such a marriage would be a nullity, and the\noffspring take the condition of the mother.\n\nThe object of this law is to prevent the deterioration of the white\nrace.\n\nThus we have seen that all the practical facts relating to the influence\nof the slavery of the Africans among us, touching the subject of\nmarriage, as to them, are in opposition to what Dr. Wayland seems to\nsuppose. In short, the slavery of the negroes in these States has a\nconstantly continued tendency to change\u2014to enforce an improvement of the\nmorals of the African\u2014to an approximation of the habits of Christian\nlife.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VIII.\n\nIt is conceded by Dr. Wayland, that the Scriptures do not directly\nforbid or condemn slavery. In search of a path over this morass of\ndifficulty, he says that the Scripture goes upon the \u201cfair ground of\nteaching moral principles\u201d \u201cdirectly subversive of the principles of\nslavery;\u201d and quotes the golden rule in proof; and thus comes to the\nconclusion that, \u201cif the gospel be diametrically opposed to the\n_principle_ of slavery, it must be opposed to the _practice_ of\nslavery.\u201d In excuse for this mode being pursued by the Author of our\nreligion, he says\u2014\n\nP. 212. \u201cIn this manner alone could its object, a universal moral\nrevolution, have been accomplished. For, if it had forbidden the _evil_,\ninstead of subverting the _principle_,\u2014if it had proclaimed the\nunlawfulness of slavery and taught slaves to _resist_ the oppression of\ntheir masters,\u2014it would instantly have arrayed the two parties in deadly\nhostility, through the civilized world; its announcement would have been\nthe signal of servile war; and the very name of the Christian religion\nwould have been forgotten amidst the agitations of universal bloodshed.\u201d\n\nWe have heretofore attempted to show that this doctrine is extremely\ngross error;\u2014its very assertion goes to the extinction, the denial of\nthe divinity of Jesus Christ and his religion. And we deeply lament that\nthis was not one of the errors of Paley which Dr. Wayland has seen fit\nto expunge from his book. (_See his Preface._)\n\nPaley says, third book, part ii. chap. 3\u2014\u201cSlavery was a part of the\ncivil constitution of most countries, when Christianity first appeared;\nyet no passage is to be found in the Christian Scriptures by which it is\ncondemned or prohibited. This is true, for Christianity, soliciting\nadmission into all nations of the world, abstained, as behooved it, from\nintermeddling with the civil institutions of any. But does it follow,\nfrom the silence of Scripture concerning them, that all the civil\ninstitutions which then prevailed were right? Or that the bad should not\nbe exchanged for better?\u201d\n\n\u201cBesides this, the discharging the slaves from all obligation to obey\ntheir masters, which is the consequence of pronouncing slavery to be\nunlawful, would have had no better effect than to let loose one half of\nmankind upon the other. Slaves would have been tempted to embrace a\nreligion which asserted their right to freedom; masters would hardly\nhave been persuaded to consent to claims founded on such authority; the\nmost calamitous of all contests, a _bellum servile_, might probably have\nensued, to the reproach, if not the extinction, of the Christian name.\u201d\n\nIn these thoughtless remarks of Paley, abolition writers seem to have\nfound a mine of argument, from which they have dug until they deemed\nthemselves wealthy.\n\nChanning, vol. ii. p. 101, says\u2014\n\n\u201cSlavery, in the age of the apostle, had so penetrated society, was so\nintimately interwoven with it, and the materials of servile war were so\nabundant, that a religion preaching freedom to the slave would have\nshaken the social fabric to its foundation, and would have armed against\nitself the whole power of the state. Paul did not then assail the\ninstitution. He satisfied himself with spreading principles, which,\nhowever slowly, could not but work its dissolution.\u201d\n\nThis author, thus having satisfied himself with a display which the\ngreater portion of his readers deem original, commences, p. 103, and\nquotes from \u201cThe Elements of Moral Science,\u201d p. 212:\n\n\u201cThis very course, which the gospel takes on this subject, seems to have\nbeen the only one that could have been taken in order to effect the\nuniversal abolition of slavery. The gospel was designed, not for one\nrace or for one time, but for all races and for all times. It looked,\nnot at the abolition of this form of evil for that age alone, but for\nits universal abolition. Hence, the important object of its author was\nto gain it a lodgment in every part of the known world:\u201d and concludes\nwith our quotation from the author.\n\nDr. Barnes \u201cfights more shy;\u201d he sees \u201cthe trap.\u201d The Biblical Repertory\nhas unveiled to his view the awful abyss to which this doctrine\nnecessarily leaps. Yet the abyss must be passed; the facts, the doctrine\nof Paley, and the gulf, must be got over, in some way, or abolition\ndoctrines must be given up. For thirty pages, like a candle-fly, he\ncoquets around the light of this doctrine, until he gathers courage, and\nfinally falls into it under the plea of \u201cexpediency.\u201d He quotes\nWayland\u2019s Letters to Fuller, p. 73, which says\u2014\n\n\u201cThis form of expediency\u2014the inculcating of a fundamental truth, rather\nthan of the duty which springs immediately out of it, seems to me\n_innocent_. I go further: in some cases, it may be really demanded,\u201d &c.\n\n\u201cAnd a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to\ninherit eternal life.\u201d _Luke_ xviii. 18.\n\nThis man was rich\u2014probably had slaves. Was it _inexpedient_ for the Son\nof God to have plainly told him of its wickedness? Was not the occasion\nquite appropriate, if such had been the Saviour\u2019s view?\n\nWhen the keeper of the prison said to Paul and Silas, \u201cSirs, what shall\nI do to be saved?\u201d was it _inexpedient_ in them to have mentioned _this\nsin_?\n\nWhen the subject of slavery was mentioned in Corinthians, Ephesians,\nColossians, in Timothy, Titus, and Peter, was it still _inexpedient_?\nAnd in the case of Philemon, \u201cthe dearly beloved and fellow-labourer,\u201d\nwhen Paul was pleading for the runaway slave, in what did the\n_inexpediency_ consist? When the centurion applied to the Son of God,\nand _boasted that he owned slaves_, can we bring forward this paltry\nexcuse?\n\nThis doctrine of Paley has been so commonly quoted, let us be excused\nfor presenting a remark from the \u201cEssays,\u201d reprinted from the Princeton\nReview, second series, p. 283:\n\n\u201cIt is not by argument that the abolitionists have produced the present\nunhappy excitement. Argument has not been the character of their\npublications. Denunciations of slave-holding as man-stealing, robbery,\npiracy, and worse than murder; consequently vituperation of slaveholders\nas knowingly guilty of the worst of crimes; passionate appeals to the\nfeelings of the inhabitants of the Northern States; gross exaggerations\nof the moral and physical condition of the slaves, have formed the\nstaple of their addresses to the public.\u201d\n\nP. 286. \u201cUnmixed good or evil, however, in such a world as ours, is a\nrare thing. Though the course pursued by the abolitionists has produced\na great preponderance of mischief, it may incidentally occasion no\nlittle good. It has rendered it incumbent on every man to endeavour to\nobtain, and, as far as he can, to communicate, definite opinions and\ncorrect principles on the whole subject. * * * The subject of slavery is\nno longer one on which men are allowed to be of no mind at all. * * *\nThe public mind is effectually aroused from a state of indifference and\nit is the duty of all to seek the truth, _and to speak in kindness, but\nwith decision_. * * * We recognise no authoritative rule of truth and\nduty but the word of God. * * * Men are too nearly upon a par as to\ntheir powers of reasoning, and ability to discover truth, to make the\nconclusions of one mind an authoritative rule for others.\u201d * * *\n\nThe subject for consideration is: If the abolitionists are right in\ninsisting that slave-holding is one of the greatest of all sins,\u2014that it\nshould be immediately and universally abandoned, as a condition of\nchurch communion, or of admission into heaven,\u2014how comes it that Christ\nand his apostles did not pursue this sin _in plain and determined\nopposition_? How comes it that the teachings of the abolitionists, on\nthe subject of slavery, are so extremely different from those of Jesus\nChrist and his apostles? The mind is forced to the conclusion that, if\nthe abolitionists are right, Jesus Christ and his apostles are wrong! We\nagree that, if slave-holding is a sin, it should at once be abandoned.\nThe whole subject is resolved to one single question: _Is slave-holding,\nin itself, a crime before God?_\n\nThe abolitionists say that it is; we assert that it is not; and we look\nto the conduct of Christ and his apostles to justify our position. Did\nthey shut their eyes to the enormities of a great offence against God\nand man? Did they temporize with a heinous evil, because it was common\nand popular? Did they abstain from even exhorting masters to emancipate\ntheir slaves, though an imperative duty, from fear of consequences? Was\nslavery more deeply rooted than idolatry? or more deeply interwoven with\nthe civil institutions? more thoroughly penetrated through every thing\nhuman\u2014their prejudices, literature, hopes, and happiness? Was its\ndenunciation, if a sin, attended with consequences more to be dreaded\nthan death by torture, wild beasts, the crucifix, the fagot, and the\nflame? Did the apostles admit drunkards, liars, fornicators, adulterers,\nthieves, robbers, murderers, and idolaters to the Christian communion,\nand call them \u201cdearly beloved and fellow-labourers?\u201d Did the Son of God\never intimate of any such unrepentant man, that he had \u201cnot found so\ngreat faith, no, not in Israel?\u201d\n\nWhat are we then to think of the intellect of that man who shall affirm\nthat Jesus Christ and his apostles classed the slave-holder with the\nworst of these characters? Yea, what can such a man think of himself?\nDid the apostles counsel thieves and robbers how they should advisedly\nconduct themselves in the practice of these crimes? Were those who had\nbeen _robbed_ carefully gathered up and sent back to some known\n_robber_, to be _robbed_ again? And, on such occasion, did any of the\napostles address such _robber_ in the language of affection, saying, \u201cI\nthank my God, making mention of thee always in my prayers, hearing of\nthy love and faith, which thou hast towards the Lord Jesus and toward\nall saints?\u201d\n\nNo one in his senses will deny that the Scriptures condemn injustice,\ncruelty, oppression, and violence, whether exhibited in the conduct of\nthe master towards his slave or any other person:\u2014crime being the same,\nwhether committed in the relation of master and slave, husband and wife,\nor the monarch and his subjects. It may so happen that great crimes are\ncommitted by persons in these relations. But what is the argument worth\nwhich asserts _it is very wicked to be a schoolmaster_, because some\nschoolmaster whipped his pupil too much, or another not enough, or a\nthird, in an angry, wicked state of mind, has put one to death?\n\nWho has ever asserted that marriage was not a Divine institution,\nbecause some in that state live very unhappily together, and others have\nconspired against the happiness or life of those whom the institution\nmade it their duty to protect?\n\nDr. Wayland\u2019s proposition, when analyzed and freed from verbiage, is\nthis: the teaching of moral principles, subversive of the abuse of a\nthing, is proof that the teacher is opposed to the thing itself! and, if\ntrue, we say, is as applicable to every other institution among men, as\nto slavery.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IX.\n\nDr. Wayland says, p. 213\u2014\n\n\u201cIt is important to remember that two grounds of moral obligation are\ndistinctly recognised in the gospel. The first is our duty to man as\nman, that is, on the ground of the relation which men sustain to each\nother; the second is our duty to man as a creature of God, that is, on\nthe ground of the relation which we all sustain to God. On this latter\nground, many things become our duty which would not be so on the former.\nIt is on this ground that we are commanded to return good for evil, to\npray for them that despitefully use us, and, when we are smitten on one\ncheek, to turn also the other. To act thus is our duty, not because our\nfellow-man has a right to claim this course of conduct from us, but\nbecause such conduct in us will be well-pleasing to God. And when God\nprescribes the course of conduct which will be well-pleasing to him, he\nby no means acknowledges the right of abuse in the injurious person, but\nexpressly declares, \u2018Vengeance is mine and I will repay it, saith the\nLord!\u2019 Now, it is to be observed, that it is precisely upon this latter\nground that the slave is commanded to obey _his_ master. It is never\nurged, like the duty of obedience to parents, _because it is right_; but\nbecause the cultivation of meekness and forbearance under injury will be\nwell-pleasing unto God. Thus servants are commanded to be obedient to\ntheir own masters, \u2018in singleness of heart, as unto Christ; doing the\nwill of God from the heart, with good-will doing service, as to the\nLord, and not to man.\u2019 _Eph._ v. 5\u20137.\n\n\u201cServants are commanded to count their masters worthy of all honour,\nthat the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. 1 _Tim._ vi.1.\nThat they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.\n_Titus_ iii. 9.\n\n\u201cThe manner in which the duty of servants or slaves is inculcated,\ntherefore, affords no ground for the assertion that the gospel\nauthorizes one man to hold another in bondage, any more than the command\nto honour the king, when that king was Nero, authorized the tyranny of\nthe emperor; or the command to turn the other cheek when one was\nsmitten, justifies the infliction of violence by an injurious man.\u201d\n\nAdded to the foregoing, we find the following note:\n\n\u201cI have retained the above paragraph, though I confess that the remarks\nof Professor Taylor, of the Union Theological Seminary of Virginia, have\nled me seriously to doubt whether the distinction, to which it alludes,\nis sustained by the New Testament.\u201d\n\nWhy then did he retain it?\n\nIn his preface to the fourth edition, which is inserted in the present,\nafter expressing his acknowledgments for the criticisms with which\ngentlemen have favoured him, he says\u2014\n\n\u201cWhere I have been convinced of error, I have altered the text. Where I\nhave only _doubted_, I have suffered it to remain; as it seemed\nprofitless merely to exchange one _doubtful_ opinion for another.\u201d\n\nWe beg to know what _doubtful opinion_ would have been introduced by the\ndeletion of this, which he acknowledges to be doubtful? Why did he not\ngo to the Bible, and inquire of Jesus Christ and the apostles for advice\nin such a case? \u201cAnd immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and\ncaught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst\nthou doubt?\u201d _Matt._ xiv. 31.\n\nIn _Matt._ xxi. 21, we find that the doubting mind is destitute of\nChristian power; and the same in _Mark_ xi. 23. Jesus, speaking to his\ndisciples, says to them, _Luke_ xii. 29, \u201cNeither be ye of a doubtful\nmind.\u201d Does any one imagine that Luke would have left any thing in his\nbook that he thought doubtful? But we find in _Rom._ xiv. 1, \u201cHim that\nis weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.\u201d This\nsurely needs no comment. The poison of doubt is rejected in 1 _Tim._ ii.\n8; and the apostle in _Rom._ xiv. 23, says, \u201cAnd he that doubteth is\ndamned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith, for whatsoever is not\nof faith is sin.\u201d How awful is the condition of him who shall attempt to\npreach a doctrine, and that an important one too, as the doctrine of the\nBible, of which he doubts! A doctrine in which he can have no faith! Who\nshall say it would not be a palpable attempt to change the meaning and\nalter the sense of the Scripture from its true interpretation?\n\n\u201cYe shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye\ndiminish aught from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord\nyour God, which I command you.\u201d _Deut._ iv. 2.\n\n\u201cBut there be some that trouble you, and pervert the gospel of Christ.\nBut though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you\nthan that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we\nsaid before, so say we now again, if any man preach any other gospel\nunto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.\u201d _Gal._ 1.\n7\u20139.\n\n\u201cI Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the\nchurches. * * * For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of\nthe prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto those things, God\nshall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book; and if any\nman shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God\nshall take away his part out or the book of life.\u201d _Rev._ xxii. 16\u201319.\n\n\u201cEvery word of God is pure. * * * Add not unto his words, lest he\nreprove thee, and thou be found a liar.\u201d _Prov._ xxx. 5\u20136.\n\nWe have not seen the remarks of Professor Taylor; but we can easily\nimagine that a professor of theology, free from the delirium of\nabolitionism, would not have found it a difficult labour to prove that\nthe main point of the author\u2019s argument was contradicted by Scripture,\nand that even he himself attempted to sustain it only by assumption. We\nregret that President Wayland has not given us Professor Taylor\u2019s\nremarks that made him \u201cdoubt.\u201d We, however, will venture our \u201cremark\u201d\nthat the author\u2019s assertion, \u201cthe inculcation of the duty of slaves\naffords no evidence that the Scriptures countenance slavery, more than\nthe command to honour the king authorized the tyranny of Nero,\u201d is a\ncomparison where there is no parallel. Dr. Wayland must first make it\nappear that all kings, or chief magistrates, are, necessarily, wicked\ntyrants, like Nero; and that the wicked tyranny is a part and parcel of\nthe thing to be honoured, before his parallel between slavery and\nmonarchy can be drawn; and since, then, the deduction will be useless,\nwe suppose he will not make the attempt.\n\nThe parallel that might have been sustained is this: The inculcation of\nthe duty of slaves to obey their masters does not authorize masters to\nabuse their power over their slaves, any more than the command to honour\nthe king authorized the tyranny of Nero;\u2014from which the deductions are,\nthat masters have a right to command their slaves as things in their\npeculiar relation, and not as things having a different relation. The\nmaster has no right to command a slave, as if the slave stood in the\nrelation of a horse; nor even a horse, as if the horse stood in the\nrelation of a piece of timber: so the king has no right to govern his\nsubjects as if they were idiots or brutes, but as enlightened free-men,\nif such be their condition.\n\nThe object of the government is the happiness no more of the governor\nthan of the governed. This principle, so profusely illustrated in\nScripture, it would seem the abolitionists run to shipwreck, in every\napproach they make towards it.\n\nThere are a class of abolition writers who never fail to compare St.\nPaul\u2019s instruction, to live in obedience to the civil authority, (making\nno exception even when the worst of monarchs are in power,) with his\ninstruction to slaves to obey their masters; and then say that no\nargument is to be drawn from the latter in favour of slavery, any more\nthan there is from the former in favour of the wickedness of the Emperor\nNero. To some, this position may look quite imposing; while others will\nassociate it with the false position of a wicked, unprincipled lawyer,\nwho is ambitious only to gain his case, and cares not by what falsehood,\nor by what means. But it is truly mortifying to see such an argument\npresented, and attempted to be sustained, by any one who pretends to be\nan honest man, and a disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ. And we cannot\nbut reflect that such an one must be in one of three predicaments;\neither in that of the lawyer, or his understanding must be so obtuse he\ncannot reason, or so crazed by fanaticism as to be equally stultified in\nintellect. Yet these men present this argument, or position, with an air\nwhich displays the utmost confidence of their having obtained a victory,\nand of their having established for themselves a lofty intellectual\ncharacter.\n\nJesus Christ and his apostles everywhere reprimanded and condemned\ncrime, outrage, and oppression, whether to superiors, equals, or\ninferiors. Yet these qualities of action must take their character from\nthe facts of the case. The parent will feel it his duty to compel, by\nforce, his froward child to do right; yet the same action directed to\nhis neighbour, or equal, may be manifestly wrong, or even sinful. The\ncrimes of monarchs and the crimes of masters are everywhere condemned,\nas well as the crimes of all other men. Yet to be a monarch or a master\nis nowhere condemned, _per se_, as a sinful condition of itself.\n\nAll history agrees that Nero was a wicked, bad prince; he was wicked and\nbad because his acts were wicked and bad; not because he was a prince or\nan emperor. Slaves are ordered to be obedient to their masters. Is there\nany one so crazy as therefore to suppose that the master has a right to\noverwork, starve, murder, or otherwise misuse his slave? We are all\ncommanded to be obedient to the civil power. Does this give the chief\nruler the right to practise the wickedness of Nero?\n\nIs there any proof that Philemon murdered, or was recklessly cruel to\nhis slaves? What justice is there in comparing his character as only on\nan equality with that of Nero? Was Nero, with all his sins, admitted\ninto the church of Christ? Where is the parallel between him and the\n\u201cbeloved\u201d of the apostle?\n\nWe feel authorized to affirm that St. Paul would have rejected from the\nchurch a slaveholder, who murdered, starved, or otherwise maltreated his\nslaves, because these crimes would have been proof of his want of the\nChristian character. The same evidence of wicked conduct would have\nexcluded any other man, even the emperor, from the church; yet, since\nslaveholders, who had not been guilty of such enormities, were admitted\nto the church, and distinguished as \u201cbeloved,\u201d this fact becomes proof\nthat slaveholding is no evidence of a sinful character. So monarchs and\nemperors, who gave proof of the possession of the Christian character,\nwere always admissible to the Christian church. This fact also becomes\ndemonstration, that being a monarch or an emperor gave no proofs of a\nsinful character.\n\nWill Dr. Wayland undertake to prove that the admission of Constantine to\nthe Christian church gave any license to the wicked murders and hateful\nhypocrisy of the Emperor Phocas? Or will he venture to extend his\nargument, and say that the command of marital and filial obedience\nproves nothing in their favour; since we are commanded to yield a like\nobedience to the king, although that king be the wicked Phocas? The fact\nis, the mere character of chief-magistrate, of husband, of parent or\nslaveholder, is quite distinct from the character which their acts may\nseverally heap upon them. It is, therefore, quite possible for us to\nreverence and obey the king, yet hold in contempt the person who fills\nthe throne.\n\nCivil government, the relations of parent and child, husband and wife,\nand slavery itself, are all ordinances of Divine wisdom, instituted for\nthe benefit of man, under the condition of his fallen state. But because\nthese relations are in accordance with the ordinances of God, it by no\nmeans follows that the abuses of them are so.\n\nSuppose those who wish to abolish the institution of marriage should\npresent the same argument in their behalf which Dr. Wayland has in this\ncase, it will surely be just as legitimate in the one as the other. But\nwill not Dr. Wayland readily say that there is no parallel between the\nparticular relations compared? We doubt not, he would consider it too\nstupid to even require refutation.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON X.\n\nOur author says, as before quoted\u2014\n\nP. 209. \u201cThat the precepts of the Bible are diametrically opposed to\nslavery.\u201d\n\nIn proof, he offers one precept:\n\n\u201cThou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, and All things whatsoever ye\nwould that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them.\u201d\n\nUpon which he says, for argument\u2014\n\n\u201c1. The application of these precepts is universal. Our neighbour is\nevery one whom we may benefit. The obligation respects all things\nwhatsoever. The precept, then, manifestly extends to men as men, or men\nin every condition; and if to all things whatsoever, certainly to a\nthing so important as the right of personal liberty.\n\n\u201c2. Again, by this precept it is made our duty to cherish a tender and\ndelicate respect for the right the meanest individual possesses over the\nmeans of happiness bestowed on him by God, as we cherish for our own\nright over our own means of happiness, or as we desire any other\nindividual to cherish for it. Now, were this precept obeyed, it is\nmanifest that slavery could not in fact exist for a single instant. The\nprinciple of the precept is absolutely subversive of the principle of\nslavery. That of the one is the entire equality of right; that of the\nother, the entire absorption of the rights of one in the rights of the\nother.\u201d\n\nWe propose to make no comment upon these arguments. We cannot do battle\nagainst phantoms. But we shall take this golden rule, which we most\ndevoutly reverence, and show that it inculcates slavery, upon a\nstatement of facts.\n\nThe 28th chapter of Deuteronomy contains the revelations of blessings\nand curses promised the Jews, and, we may add, all mankind, for\nobedience to the laws of God, and for disobedience to the same. At the\n68th verse, they were told that they should again be sent to Egypt; or\nthat they should be exposed for sale; or that they should expose\nthemselves for sale, as the passage may be read, and that no man should\nbuy them; or that there should not be buyers enough to give them the\nbenefit even of being slaves, whereby they could be assured of\nprotection and sustenance. This was most signally verified at the time\nJerusalem was sacked by Titus; and not only in Egypt, but in many other\nplaces, thousands of the Hebrew captives were exposed for sale as\nslaves. But thousands of them, thus exposed, died of starvation, because\npurchasers could not be found for them. The Romans, considered them too\nstubborn, too degraded, to be worthy of being slaves to them, refused to\nbuy them. Their numbers, compared to the numbers of their purchasers,\nwere so great that the price became merely nominal; and thousands were\nsuffered to die, because purchasers could not be had at any price. Their\ndeath was the consequence.\n\nNow let us apply the truly golden rule or precept, relied upon by Dr.\nWayland in support of abolitionism. Would it teach to buy these slaves,\nor not?\n\nThe same incident happened once again to all the Jews, who were freemen\nin Spain, during the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella, when 800,000 Jews\nwere driven from that kingdom in one day; vast multitudes of whom\nfamished to death because, although anxious to do so, they could not\nfind for themselves even a master! Let us ask, what would the precept\nteach in this case?\n\nNor has such a peculiar relation of facts been confined to the Jews\nalone. In 1376, the Florentines, then a travelling, trading, or\ncommercial people, but in many instances quite forgetful of the rules of\nChristian honesty, became exceedingly obnoxious to their neighbours,\nespecially to the subjects of the church of Rome. To many of them,\nmurder and robbery became a mere pastime. From individuals the moral\npoison was communicated to their government. The church was despoiled of\nher patrimony, her subjects of their homes. The church remonstrated\nuntil patience was exhausted, when Gregory XI. issued his papal bull,\ndelivering each individual of that nation, in all parts of the earth,\nwho did not instantly make reparation, up to pillage, slavery, or death.\n\nLet us notice how Walsingham witnessed this matter in England, where a\nlarge portion of the traders were of that people, all liable, if\nfreemen, to be put to death by any one who might choose to inflict the\npunishment; and their effects were legally escheated to whomsoever might\nseize them. Slavery was their only remedy. The Anglo-Saxon Normans, the\nnatives of the realm, had not yet, as a people, sufficiently emerged\nfrom the poverty and darkness of the times to give them protection.\nThis, to us so strange a relation between the church and civil\ngovernment, in regard to the Florentines, produced an action on the part\nof the king by which he became their personal master. Thus they became\nslaves, not of the crown, but of the individual who sat upon the throne.\nDid he act in conformity to this precept or not?\n\nJohn and Richard Lander were sent by the \u201cLondon African Association\u201d to\nexplore some parts of Africa. On the 24th of March, 1830, they were only\none half day\u2019s travel from the seacoast, at which point they say, vol.\ni. p. 58:\n\n\u201cMeantime the rainy season is fast approaching, as is sufficiently\nannounced by repeated showers and occasional tornadoes; and, what makes\nus still more desirous to leave this abominable place, is the fact, as\nwe have been told, that a sacrifice of no less than three hundred human\nbeings, of both sexes and all ages, is about to take place. We often\nhear the cries of these poor creatures; and the heart sickens with\nhorror at the bare contemplation of such a scene as awaits us, should we\nremain here much longer.\u201d\n\nIt is to be regretted that since the abolition of the slave-trade in\nAfrica, slaves have become of little value in that country. That the\nAfricans in many places have returned to sacrifice and cannibalism, is\nalso true, and a cause of deep sorrow to the philanthropist; but,\nconsidering the state and condition of these savages, there is no\nalternative;\u2014the slave there, if he cannot be sold, is at all times\nliable to be put to death.\n\nSuppose you buy, and then turn them loose there; they will again and\ninstantly be the subjects of slavery; and even there, slavery is some\nprotection, for, so long as the savage master chooses or is able to keep\nhis slave alive, he is more sure of the usual means of living. But, let\nus present this state of facts to the Christian, and ask him to apply\nthe golden rule; and, in case the slave-trade with Africa had not now\nbeen abolished, what would he deem it his duty to do for the practical\nand lasting benefit of these poor victims, whom the sympathy of the\nworld has thus consigned to sacrifice and death?\n\nThe people of the Slave States have determined not to countenance\namalgamation with the slave race; they have determined not to set the\nslaves free, because they have previously resolved that they will not,\ncannot live under the government of the negro. In full view of these\nevils, they have resolved that they will not suffer the presence of that\nrace in their community, on terms of political or social equality. They\nhave, therefore, further resolved, in furtherance of its prevention, to\noppose it while life shall last.\n\nNow, Dr. Wayland says\u2014\n\nP. 215. \u201cThe slaves were brought here without their own consent; they\nhave been continued in their present state of degradation without their\nown consent, and they are not responsible for the consequences. If a man\nhave done injustice to his neighbour, and have also placed impediments\nin the way of remedying that injustice, he is as much under obligations\nto remove the impediments in the way of justice as he is to do justice.\u201d\n\nThe ancestors of our slaves were brought from beyond sea by the people\nof Old England, and by the people of New England, and particularly by\nthe people of Rhode Island, among the descendants of whom the reverend\ndoctor resides. The ancestors of these slaves were sold to our ancestors\nfor money, and guaranteed, by them, to be slaves for life, and their\ndescendants after them, as they said, both by the laws of God and man.\nWhether this was false, whether they were stolen and cruelly torn from\ntheir homes, the reverend doctor has better means of determining than\nwe. We may sell, we will not free them.\n\nUnder this statement of facts, let the reverend doctor apply the golden\nrule and his own argument to himself. Let him then buy, and set them\nfree in Rhode Island; or send them to Africa, if their ancestors \u201cwere\nunlawfully torn from thence.\u201d\n\n\u201cWo unto you, scribes and pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the\ntombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, and\nsay, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we should not have been\npartakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore, ye be\nwitness unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them that killed\nthe prophets.\u201d _Matt._ xxiii. 29, 30, 31.\n\n\u201cFor they bind heavy burdens, and grievous to be borne, and lay them on\nmen\u2019s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of\ntheir fingers.\u201d _Idem._ 4.\n\nWithin the last year, our sympathies have been excited by an account now\npublished to the world, of an African chieftain and slaveholder, who,\nduring the year previous, finding himself cut off from a market on the\nWestern coast, in consequence of the abolition of the slave-trade with\nEurope and America,\u2014the trade with Arabia, Egypt, and the Barbary States\nnot being sufficient to drain off the surplus number,\u2014put to death three\nthousand!\n\nThe blood of these massacred negroes now cries from the ground unto Dr.\nWayland and his disciples\u2014\n\n\u201cApply, oh, apply to bleeding Africa the doctrine of the golden rule,\nand relieve us, poor African slaves, from starvation, massacre, and\ndeath. Come, oh, come; buy us, that we may be your slaves, and have some\nchance to learn that religion under which you prosper. Then \u2018we shall\nbuild up the old wastes\u2019\u2014\u2018raise up the former desolations,\u2019 and \u2018repair\nthe waste cities, the desolations of many generations.\u2019 \u2018And strangers\nshall stand and feed your flocks, and the sons of the alien shall be\nyour ploughmen, and your vine-dressers.\u2019 \u2018Then ye shall be named the\npriests of the Lord; men shall call you the ministers of our God.'\u201d\n_Isa._ lxi. 4, 5, 6.\n\nWe shall here close our remarks on the Rev. Dr. Wayland\u2019s book; and\nhowever feeble they may be, yet we can conscientiously say, we have no\n\u201c_doubt_\u201d about the truth of our doctrine.\n\n\u201cForever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven. Thy faithfulness is\nunto all generations; thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.\nThey continue, this day, according to thine ordinances; for all are thy\nservants,\u201d (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b6\u05bd\u05d9\u05da\u05b8 _ebedeka_, _slaves_.) cxix. 89, 90, 91.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XI.\n\nAmong those who have advocated views adverse to those of our present\nstudy, we are compelled to notice Dr. Paley, as one of the most\ninfluential, the most dignified, and the most learned. He defines\nslavery to be \u201can obligation to labour for the benefit of the master,\nwithout the contract or consent of the servant.\u201d He says \u201cthat this\nobligation may arise, consistently with the laws of nature, from three\ncauses: 1st, from crimes; 2d, from captivity; and 3d, from debt.\u201d He\nsays that, \u201cin the first case, the continuance of the slavery, as of any\nother punishment, ought to be proportionate to the crime. In the second\nand third cases, it ought to cease as soon as the demand of the injured\nnation or private creditor is satisfied.\u201d He was among the first to\noppose the African slave-trade. He says, \u201cBecause, when the slaves were\nbrought to the African slave-market, no questions were asked as to the\norigin of the vendors\u2019 titles: Because the natives were incited to war\nfor the sake of supplying the market with slaves: Because the slaves\nwere torn away from their parents, wives, children, and friends, homes,\ncompanions, country, fields, and flocks, and their accommodation on\nshipboard not better than that provided for brutes: Because the system\nof laws by which they are governed is merciless and cruel, and is\nexercised, especially by their English masters, with rigour and\nbrutality.\u201d\n\nBut he thinks the American Revolution, which had just then happened,\nwill have a tendency to accelerate the fall of this most abominable\ntyranny, and indulges in the reflection whether, in the providence of\nGod, the British legislature, which had so long assisted and supported\nit, was fit to have rule over so extensive an empire as the North\nAmerican colonies.\n\nDr. Paley says that slavery was a part of the civil constitution of most\ncountries when Christianity appeared; and that no passage is found in\nthe Christian Scriptures by which it is condemned or prohibited. But he\nthinks the reason to be, because \u201cChristianity, soliciting admission\ninto all nations of the world, abstained, as behooved it, from\nintermeddling with the civil institutions of any; but,\u201d says he, \u201cdoes\nit follow from the silence of Scripture concerning them, that all the\ncivil institutions that then prevailed were right? or, that the bad\nshould not be exchanged for better? Besides,\u201d he says, \u201cthe discharging\nthe slaves from all obligations to their masters would have had no\nbetter effect than to let loose one half of mankind upon the other.\nBesides,\u201d he thinks \u201cit would have produced a servile war, which would\nhave ended in the reproach and extinction of the Christian name.\u201d\n\nDr. Paley thinks that the emancipation of slaves should be carried on\nvery gradually, by provision of law, under the protection of government;\nand that Christianity should operate as an alterative, in which way, he\nthinks, it has extinguished the Greek and Roman slavery, and also the\nfeudal tyranny; and he trusts, \u201cas Christianity advances in the world,\nit will banish what remains of this odious institution.\u201d\n\nIn some of his other writings, Dr. Paley suggests that Great Britain, by\nway of atoning for the wrongs she has done Africa, ought to transport\nfrom America free negroes, the descendants of slaves, and give them\nlocation in various parts of Africa, to serve as models for the\ncivilization of that country.\n\nDr. Paley\u2019s Treatise on Moral and Political Philosophy, from which the\nforegoing synopsis is taken, was published to the world in 1785; but it\nhad been delivered in lectures, almost _verbatim_, before the University\nof Cambridge, several years previous; and it is now a class-book in\nalmost every high literary institution where the English language is\nspoken. It is, therefore, a work of high authority and great influence.\n\nBut we think his definition of the term slavery is not correct. Let us\nrepeat it: \u201cAn obligation to labour for the benefit of the master,\nwithout the contract or consent of the servant.\u201d\n\nMany, who purchase slaves to be retained in their own families, first\nexamine and consult with the slave, and tell him\u2014\u201cMy business is thus; I\nfeed and clothe thus; are you willing that I should buy you? For I will\nbuy no slave who is not willing.\u201d\n\nTo this, it is usual for the slave to say, \u201cYes, master! and I hope you\nwill buy me. I will be a good slave. You shall have no fault to find\nwith me, or my work.\u201d\n\nBy all the claims of morality, here is a contract and consent, and the\nstatute might make it legal. But who will say that the condition of\nslavery is altered thereby? But, says one, this supposition does not\nreach the case, because all the obligations and conditions of slavery\npreviously existed; and, therefore, the \u201ccontract\u201d and \u201cconsent\u201d here\nonly amounted to a contract and consent to change masters.\n\nSuppose then, from poverty or misfortune, or some peculiar affection of\nthe mind, a freeman should solicit to place himself in the condition of\nslavery to one in whom he had sufficient confidence, (and we have known\nsuch a case,)\u2014a freeman anxiously applying to his more fortunate friend\nto enter into such an engagement for life; suppose the law had\nsanctioned such voluntary slavery, and, when entered into, made it\nobligatory, binding, and final for ever. There would be nothing in such\nlaw contrary to the general powers of legislation, however impolitic it\nmight be; and such a law did once exist among the Jews.\n\n\u201cAnd if a sojourner or a stranger wax rich by thee, and thy brother that\ndwelleth by him wax poor, and sell himself unto the stranger or\nsojourner by thee, or to the stock of the stranger\u2019s family; after that\nhe is sold, he may be redeemed again; and one of his brethren may redeem\nhim. Either his uncle or his uncle\u2019s son may redeem him, or any that is\nnigh of kin unto his family may redeem him; or, if he be able, he may\nredeem himself: * * * and if he be not redeemed in one of these\nyears,\u2014then he shall go out in the year of Jubilee, both he and his\nchildren with him.\u201d _Lev._ xxv. 47\u201354. \u201cNow these are the judgments\nwhich ye shall set before them. If ye buy an Hebrew servant, six years\nshall he serve, and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If\nhe came in by himself, he shall go out by himself; if he were married,\nthen his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a\nwife, and she have borne him sons or daughters, the wife and her\nchildren shall be her master\u2019s, and he shall go out by himself; and if\nthe servant shall plainly say, \u2018I love my master, my wife, and my\nchildren; I will not go out free,\u2019\u2014then his master shall bring him unto\nthe judges; he shall bring him unto the door, or unto the door-post, and\nhis master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall serve\nhim for ever.\u201d _Ex._ xxi. 1\u20136.\n\nIt is clear, then, that \u201cto contract and consent,\u201d or the reverse, is no\npart of the qualities of slavery. Erase, then, that portion of Dr.\nPaley\u2019s definition as surplusage; it will then read, \u201can obligation to\nlabour for the benefit of the master.\u201d\n\nNow, there can be no obligation to do a thing where there is no possible\npower to do it; and more especially, if there is no contract. But it\ndoes not unfrequently occur, that a slave, from its infancy, old age,\nidiocy, delirium, disease, or other infirmity, has no power to labour\nfor the benefit of the master; and the want of such ability may be\nobviously as permanent as life, so as to exclude the idea of any\nprospective benefit. Yet the law compels the master to supply food,\nclothes, medicine, pay taxes on, and every way suitably protect such\nslave, greatly to the disadvantage of the master. Or, a case might be,\nfor it is presumable, that the master, from some obliqueness of\nunderstanding, might not wish some slave, even in good health, to labour\nat all, but would prefer, at great expense, to maintain such slave in\nluxury and idleness, clothed in purple and fine linen, and faring\nsumptuously every day: surely, such slave, would be under no obligation\nto labour for the benefit of the master, when, to do so, would be acting\ncontrary to his will and command. Yet none of these circumstances make\nthe slave a freeman, or alter at all the essentials of slavery.\n\nThe slave, then, may or may not be under obligation to labour for the\nbenefit of the master. Therefore, the \u201cobligation to labour for the\nbenefit of the master\u201d is surplusage also, and may be erased. So the\nentire definition is erased\u2014not a word left!\n\nThe fact is, Dr. Paley took some of the most common incidents\naccompanying the thing for the thing itself; and he would have been just\nas logically correct had he said, that \u201cslavery was to be a hearty\nfeeder on fat pork,\u201d because slaves feed heartily on that article. In\nhis definition Dr. Paley has embraced none of the essentials of slavery.\n\nWe propose to notice the passage\u2014\u201cThis obligation may arise,\nconsistently with the laws of nature, from three causes: 1st, from\ncrime; 2d, from captivity; 3d, from debt.\u201d\n\nThe first consideration is, what he means by \u201cobligation.\u201d In its usual\nacceptation, the term means something that has grown out of a previous\ncondition, as the obligations of marriage did not, nor could they exist\nuntil the marriage was had. If he only means that the \u201cobligations\u201d of\nslavery arise, &c., then he has told us nothing of the arising of\nslavery itself. But as he has used the word in the singular number, and\ngiven it three progenitors, we may suppose, that, by some figure of\nrhetoric, not usual in works of this kind, he has used the consequent\nfor the cause. In that case, the sentence should read, \u201cSlavery may\narise, consistently with the laws of nature, from three causes,\u201d &c.;\nwhich is what we suppose the doctor really meant.\n\nThe next inquiry is, what did Dr. Paley mean by \u201cthe laws of nature?\u201d\nPermit us to suffer him to answer this inquiry himself.\n\nIn the twenty-fourth chapter of his \u201cNatural Theology,\u201d a work of great\nmerit, he says\u2014\n\n\u201cThe wisdom of the Deity, as testified in the works of creation,\nsurpasses all idea we have of wisdom drawn from the highest intellectual\noperations of the highest class of intelligent beings with whom we are\nacquainted. * * * The degree of knowledge and power requisite for the\nformation of created nature cannot, with respect to us, be distinguished\nfrom infinite. The Divine omnipresence stands in natural theology upon\nthis foundation. In every part and place of the universe, with which we\nare acquainted, we perceive the exertion of a power which we believe\nmediately or immediately to proceed from the Deity. For instance, in\nwhat part or point of space, that has ever been explored, do we not\ndiscover attraction? In what regions do we not discover light? In what\naccessible portion of our globe do we not meet with gravitation,\nmagnetism, electricity? together with the properties, also, and powers\nof organized substances, of vegetable or animated, nature? Nay, further\nwe may ask, what kingdom is there of nature, what corner of space, in\nwhich there is any thing that can be examined by us, where we do not\nfall upon contrivance and design? The only reflection, perhaps, which\narises in our minds from this view of the world around us, is that the\nlaws of nature everywhere prevail; that they are uniform and universal.\nBut what do we mean by the laws of nature? or by any law? Effects are\nproduced by power, not by law; a law cannot execute itself; a law refers\nto an agent.\u201d\n\nBy the \u201claws of nature,\u201d then, Dr. Paley clearly means the laws of God.\n\nNow be pleased to look at the close of Dr. Paley\u2019s remarks on slavery,\nwhere he trusts that, \u201cas Christianity advances in the world, it will\nbanish what remains of that odious institution.\u201d How happens it that an\ninstitution which arises consistently with the laws of God should be\nodious to him, unless the laws of God and Dr. Paley are at variance on\nthis subject?\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XII.\n\nIt will be recollected, that Dr. Paley has presented a number of facts,\ndisplaying acts of oppression and cruelty, as arguments against the\nAfrican slave-trade. These facts are arranged and used in place as\narguments against the institution of slavery itself; and the verbose\nopponents of this institution have always so understood it, and so used\nthis class of facts. It is this circumstance that calls for our present\nview of these facts, rather than any necessity the facts themselves\nimpose of proving their exaggeration or imaginary existence; and\ndoubtless, in many cases, most heartless enormities were committed. But\nwhat do they all prove? Truly, that some men engaged in the traffic were\nexceedingly wicked men.\n\nSuch men would fashion the traffic to suit themselves, and would,\ndoubtless, make their business an exceedingly wicked one. But none of\nthe enormities named, or that could be named, constituted a necessary\npart of the institution of slavery, or necessarily emanated from it.\nWhat enormities have wicked men sometimes committed in the\ntransportation of emigrants from Germany and Ireland? Wicked men,\nintrusted with power, have, at least sometimes, been found to abuse it.\nIs it any argument against the institution of marriage, because some\nwomen have made their husbands support and educate children not their\nown? Or, because some men murder, treat with cruelty, or make their\nwives totally miserable and wretched? None of these things were any part\nof the institution of marriage, but the reverse of it. Apply this view\nalso to the institution of Christianity, for nothing has been more\nabused. Already, under its very banners, as it were, have been committed\nmore enormities than would probably attend that of slavery through all\ntime. Yet the institution of Christianity has not been even soiled\nthereby; but its character and usefulness have become brighter and more\nvisible. In proportion to the importance of a thing is its liability to\nabuse. A worthless thing is not worth a counterfeit.\n\nWe have before us the testimony of travellers in regard to the\nindifference felt by the Africans on being sold as slaves; of their\npalpable want of love and affection for their country, their relatives,\nand even for their wives and children. Nor should we forget that a large\nportion of this race are born slaves to the chieftains, whose wars with\neach other are mere excursions of robbery and theft.\n\nLander, vol. i. p. 107, speaking of Jenna, says\u2014\n\n\u201cIt must not be imagined that because the people of this country are\nalmost perpetually engaged in conflicts with their neighbours, the\nslaughter of human beings is therefore very great. They pursue war, as\nit is called, partly as an amusement, or to _keep their hands in it_;\nand partly to benefit themselves by the capture of slaves.\u201d\n\nOne decrepit old woman was the victim of a hundred engagements, at Cape\nLa Hoo, during a three years\u2019 war. Lander describes those who claim to\nbe free, as _the war men of the path_, who are robbers. He says, p. 145,\n\u201cthey subsist solely by pillage and rapine.\u201d\n\nSuch is the condition of the poor free negro in Africa. The chieftain\noften, it is true, has goats, sheep, fields of corn and rice; but we\nmistake when we suppose that the slaves, the surplus of whom were\nformerly sent to market, were the proprietors of such property. At\nKatunqua, p. 179, Lander describes the food to be \u201csuch as lizards,\nrats, locusts, and caterpillars, which the natives roast, grill, bake,\nand boil.\u201d No people feed on such vermin who possess fields and flocks.\n\nWe can form some notion of their companionship, from p. 110: \u201cIt is the\ncustom here, when the governor dies, for two of his favourite wives to\nquit the world on the same day;\u201d but in this case they ran and hid\nthemselves. Also, p. 182: \u201cThis morning a young man visited us, with a\ncountenance so rueful, and spoke in a tone so low and melancholy, that\nwe were desirous to learn what evil had befallen him. The cause of it\nwas soon explained by his informing us that he would be doomed to die,\nwith two companions, as soon as the governor\u2019s dissolution should take\nplace.\u201d\n\nThere is little or no discrepancy among travellers in their descriptions\nof the Africans. Their state of society must have been well known to\nPaley; yet Paley gives us a picture of their state of society from\nimagination, founded upon that state of society with which his pupils\nwere conversant: \u201cBecause the slaves were torn away from their parents,\nwives, children, and friends, homes, companions, country, fields, and\nflocks.\u201d\n\nIf the picture drawn by Paley were the lone consideration addressed to\nour commiseration in the argument against slavery as a Divine\ninstitution of mercy, we should, perhaps, be at some loss to determine\nwhat amount was due from us to the African slave, who had thus been\n_torn from the danger of being put to death_!\u2014_thus torn from his fields\nof lizards and locusts, and flocks of caterpillars!_\n\nBut what shall we think of an argument, founded on relations in England,\nbut applied to Africa, where no such relations exist?\n\nIt is a rule to hesitate as to the truthfulness of all that is stated,\nwhen the witness is discovered to be under the influence of a prejudice\nso deeply seated as to mislead the mind, and especially when we discover\na portion of the stated facts to be either not true or misapplied.\n\nThe reasons assigned by Dr. Paley why the Christian Scriptures did not\nprohibit and condemn slavery, we deem also quite erroneous:\u2014\u201cFor\nChristianity, soliciting admission into all nations of the world,\nabstained, as behooved it, from intermeddling with the civil\ninstitutions of any;\u201d and then asks, with an air of triumph, \u201cBut does\nit follow from the silence of Scripture concerning them, that all the\ncivil institutions that prevailed were right? or that the bad should not\nbe exchanged for better?\u201d\n\nWe wish to call particular attention to this passage, for, even after\nhaving examined the books of the Greek philosophers, we are constrained\nto say we have never seen a more beautiful sophism.\n\nIs it a fact, then, that Jesus Christ and his apostles did compromise\nand compound with sin, as Dr. Paley thinks it behooved them, and with\nthe design to avoid opposition to the introduction of Christianity?\n\nSay, thou humble follower of the lowly Jesus, art thou ready to lay down\nthy life for Him who could truckle to sin\u2014to a gross, an abominable sin,\nwhich alone would destroy the purity of his character and the divinity\nof his doctrine? In all love, we pray Him who holds your very breath in\nhis hand, to cause you to tremble, before you shall say that Jesus\nChrist was a liar, and his apostles perjured!\n\n\u201cI am the true vine; and my Father is the husbandman * * * as the Father\nhath loved me, so have I loved you; continue ye in my love. Greater love\nhath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye\nare my friends if ye do whatsoever I command you. Henceforth I call you\nnot _servants_, for the _servant_ knoweth not what his Lord doeth; but I\nhave called you friends; for ALL THINGS that I have heard of my Father,\nI have made known unto you.\u201d _John_ xv. 1, 9, 13, 15.\n\n\u201cAnd when they were come to him, he said unto them; ye know, from the\nfirst day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you,\nat all seasons, serving the Lord with all humility of mind, and with\nmany tears and temptations, which befell me by the lying in wait of the\nJews. And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you; but have\nshowed you, and have taught you publicly and from house to house.\nWherefore, I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood\nof all men. For I have not shunned to declare unto you ALL THE COUNSEL\nOF GOD.\u201d _Acts_ xx.\n\nHad St. Paul foreseen the attack upon his character, made by Dr. Paley,\nseventeen hundred and eighty-five years after, and that upon his Master\nand their religion, he need not have altered his language to have\nrepelled the slander.\n\n\u201cSimon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have\nobtained like precious faith with us, through the righteousness of God\nand of our Saviour Jesus Christ: grace and peace be multiplied unto you,\nthrough the knowledge of God and of Jesus Christ our Lord, according as\nhis divine power hath given unto us ALL THINGS THAT PERTAIN UNTO LIFE\nAND GODLINESS, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory\nand virtue.\u201d 2 _Pet._ i. 1, 2, 3.\n\nAnd what says this holy man,\u2014what says this same Peter, touching the\nsubject of Dr. Paley\u2019s remarks?\n\n\u201cServants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the\ngood and gentle, but also to the froward, * * * for hereunto were ye\ncalled.\u201d 1 _Pet._ ii. 18\u201321.\n\nPermit us to inquire whether the language of Jesus Christ himself, of\nSt. Paul and St. Peter, does not, in a strong degree, contradict the\nsupposition of Dr. Paley? And let us inquire whether it is probable that\na class of men, devoted to the promulgation of a doctrine which ran so\ncounter to many of the civil institutions, customs, habits, and\nreligions then in the world, as to have subjected them to death, would\nhave secretly kept back a part of their creed, when, to have made it\nknown, could not have increased their danger; and, especially, as by the\ncreed itself, such keeping back would have insured to them the eternal\npunishment hereafter?\n\n\u201cNow we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which\nis of God: that we might know the things that are freely given to us of\nGod; which things we also speak, not in the words which man\u2019s wisdom\nteacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth.\u201d 1 _Cor._ ii. 12, 13. \u201cAnd\nJesus came and spake unto them, saying all power is given unto me in\nheaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing\nthem in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,\nteaching them to observe ALL THINGS whatsoever I have commanded you; and\nlo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.\u201d _Matt._\nxxviii. 18\u201320. \u201cAnd now, O Father, glorify thou me, with thine own self,\nwith the glory which I had with thee before the world was. I have\nmanifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world.\nNow they have known ALL THINGS whatsoever thou hast given me of thee:\nfor I have given unto them the WORDS which thou gavest me, and they have\nreceived them, and have known surely that I came out from thee.\u201d _John_\nxvii. 5\u20138.\n\nIt is not possible that we could have had greater evidence that the\nwhole counsel of God, illustrating the Christian duty, was delivered to\nthe apostles, and through them, to the world. Besides, the very\npresumption of the incompleteness of the instruction undermines the\ndivinity of the doctrine.\n\nThere is, perhaps, no one who does not feel pain, sometimes almost\nunspeakable, when we see a great man leaning upon the staff of error,\nespecially when such error is palpable, gross, and calamitous in its\ntendency and effects.\n\nBut, cheering as the early ray of hope, and welcome as the rest-giving\nwitness of a covenant, will be the proof that human weakness still had\npower to wade from out the miry labyrinth of error\u2014to stand upon the\nrock from whence even human eyes might behold some few glimpses of the\nrising effulgence of truth.\n\nWe have some evidence that Dr. Paley did, at a later period of his life,\nadopt a more consistent view of the Christian Scriptures, touching the\nsubject of this inquiry. In his \u201cHor\u00e6 Paulin\u00e6,\u201d a work of exceeding\ngreat merit, on the subject of Paul\u2019s letter to the Corinthian church,\nhe enumerates and classifies the subjects of Paul\u2019s instruction, among\nwhich slavery is conspicuously mentioned, and then says\u2014\u201cThat though\nthey\u201d (the subjects) \u201cbe exactly agreeable to the circumstances of the\npersons to whom the letter was written, nothing, I believe, but the\nexistence and reality of the circumstances\u201d (subjects) \u201ccould have\nsuggested them to the writer\u2019s thought.\u201d\n\nIn all Christian love and charity, we are constrained to believe that he\nhad discovered his error; and that, had his life been spared longer, he,\nwith diligence and anxiety, would have expunged from his works charges\nso reflecting on himself, and contrary to the character of the God of\nour hope.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIII.\n\nSlavery existed in Britain when history commenced the records of that\nisland. It was there found in a state and condition predicated upon the\nsame causes by which its existence is now continued and perpetuated in\nAfrica. But as early as the year 692\u20133 A.D., the Witna-Gemot, convoked\nby Ina, began to manifest a more elevated condition of the Britons.\nWithout abolishing slavery, they regulated its government, ameliorated\nthe old practice of death or slavery being the universal award of\nconquest; by submission and baptism the captive was acknowledged to\nmerit some consideration; life, and, in some cases, property were\nprotected against the rapacity of the conqueror; the child was secured\nagainst the mere avarice of the savage parent, and heavy punishment was\nannounced against him who should sell his countryman, whether\nmalefactor, slave, or not, to any foreign master.\n\nHe who has the curiosity to notice the steps by which the Britons\nemerged from savage life, in connection with their condition of slavery,\nmay do well to examine the works of William of Malmsbury, Simeon of\nDurham, Bede, Alcuin, Wilkins, Huntingdon, Hoveden, Lingard, and Wilton.\nBut he will not find the statutes of the monarchies succeeding Ina free\nfrom these enactments until he shall come down near the fourteenth\ncentury. Thus, generations passed away before these statutes came to be\nregarded with general respect. National regeneration has ever been thus\nslow. Thus, savage life has ever put to death the captive; while we find\nthat slavery, among such tribes, has ever been introduced as a merciful\nprovision in its stead, and is surely a proof of one step towards a more\nelevated state of moral improvement. But in the case of Britain and the\nwhole of Europe, the slave was of the same original stock with the\nmaster; he, therefore, presented no physical impediment to amalgamation,\nby which has been brought about whatever of equality now exists among\ntheir descendants.\n\nBut in the close of this study, we propose to take some notice of the\narguments of another most distinguished writer in favour of the\nabolition of slavery, as it now affects the African race.\n\nIn 1777, the celebrated Dr. Samuel Johnson wrote his argument in favour\nof the freedom of the negro slave who accompanied his master from\nJamaica to Scotland, and who there brought suit in the Court of Sessions\nfor his freedom. This argument has been deemed by so many to be\nunanswerable, and ever since that time so generally used as a _seed\nargument_ in the propagation of abolition doctrines, that we feel it\nworthy of notice and examination.\n\nJohnson was a bitter opponent of negro slavery; yet, strange, he ever\nadvocated the justice of reducing the American colonies and the West\nIndia Islands to the most abject condition of political slavery to the\nBritish crown. This system is fully advocated, and garnished by his\nsarcasm and ridicule, in his famous work, entitled \u201cTaxation no\nTyranny.\u201d \u201cHow is it,\u201d says he, \u201cthat we hear the loudest yelps for\nliberty among the drivers of negroes.\u201d\n\nNot long after he wrote _this_ argument, on the occasion of a\ndinner-party at Dilly\u2019s, he said, \u201cI am willing to love all mankind,\n_except an American_;\u201d whereupon, adds his biographer, \u201che breathed out\nthreatenings and slaughter, calling them rascals, robbers, pirates, and\nexclaiming, he\u2019d burn and destroy them.\u201d\n\nSome knowledge of a man\u2019s peculiar notions relevant to a subject will\noften aid the mind in a proper estimate of the value of his opinion and\njudgment concerning correlative matters. His biographer says\u2014\n\n\u201cI record Dr. Johnson\u2019s argument fairly upon this particular case;\u201d * *\n* \u201cbut I beg leave to enter my most solemn protest against his general\ndoctrine with respect to the slave-trade; for I will most resolutely say\nthat his unfavourable notion of it was owing to prejudice, and imperfect\nor false information. The wild and dangerous attempt, which has for some\ntime been persisted in, to obtain an act of the legislature to abolish\nso very important and necessary a branch of commercial interest, must\nhave been crushed at once, had not the insignificance of the zealots who\nvainly took the lead in it, made the vast body of the planters,\nmerchants, and others, whose immense properties are involved in the\ntrade, reasonably enough suppose that there would be no danger. The\nencouragement which the attempt has received excites my wonder and\nindignation; and though some men of superior abilities have supported\nit, whether from a love of temporary popularity when prosperous, or a\nlove of general mischief when desperate, my opinion is unshaken. To\nabolish a _status_, which in all ages God has sanctioned and man has\ncontinued, would not only be robbery to an innumerable class of\nfellow-subjects, but it would be extreme cruelty to African savages, a\nportion of whom it saves from massacre or intolerable bondage in their\nown country, and introduces into a much happier state of life.\u201d\n_Boswell\u2019s Life of Johnson_, vol. ii. pp. 132, 133.\n\nOn the same page, the biographer adds\u2014\n\n\u201cHis violent prejudices against our West-Indian and American settlers,\nappeared whenever there was an opportunity.\u201d * * * \u201cUpon an occasion,\nwhen in company with several very grave men at Oxford, his toast was:\n\u2018Here\u2019s to the next insurrection of the negroes in the West Indies!\u2019 I,\nwith all due deference, thought that he discovered a zeal without\nknowledge.\u201d\n\nThis was surely bold in Boswell!\n\nSince the culmination of the great British lexicographer, it has been\nunusual to hear a whisper in question of his high moral accuracy, of his\nsingularly nice mental training, or the perspicuous and lofty display of\nthese qualities in all his works. Even at this day, such a whisper may\nbe proof of temerity. But truth is of higher import than the fear of\nindividual rebuke, or of our literary faith that any one hero in the\nwalks of erudition heretofore went down to the tomb without one mental\nor classical imperfection.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nArgument in favour of a negro claiming his liberty, referred to in\n_Boswell\u2019s Life of Johnson_, p. 132.\n\n\u201cIt must be agreed that in most ages many countries have had part of\ntheir inhabitants in a state of slavery; yet it may be doubted whether\nslavery can ever be supposed the natural condition of man. It is\nimpossible not to conceive that men in their original state were equal;\nand very difficult to imagine how one would be subjected to another but\nby violent compulsion. An individual may, indeed, forfeit his liberty by\na crime; but he cannot by that crime forfeit the liberty of his\nchildren. What is true of a criminal seems true likewise of a captive. A\nman may accept life from a conquering enemy on condition of perpetual\nservitude; but it is very doubtful whether he can entail that servitude\non his descendants; for no man can stipulate without commission for\nanother. The condition which he himself accepts, his son or grandson\nwould have rejected. If we should admit, what perhaps may with more\nreason be denied, that there are certain relations between man and man\nwhich may make slavery necessary and just, yet it can never be proved\nthat he who is now suing for his freedom ever stood in any of those\nrelations. He is certainly subject by no law, but that of violence, to\nhis present master, who pretends no claim to his obedience but that he\nbought him from a merchant of slaves, whose right to sell him never was\nexamined. It is said that according to the constitutions of Jamaica he\nwas legally enslaved; these constitutions are merely positive, and\napparently injurious to the rights of mankind, because whoever is\nexposed to sale is condemned to slavery without appeal, by whatever\nfraud or violence he might have originally been brought into the\nmerchant\u2019s power. In our own time, princes have been sold, by wretches\nto whose care they were intrusted, that they might have an European\neducation; but when once they were brought to a market in the\nplantations, little would avail either their dignity or their wrongs.\nThe laws of Jamaica afford a negro no redress. His colour is considered\nas a sufficient testimony against him. It is to be lamented that moral\nright should ever give way to political convenience. But if temptations\nof interest are sometimes too strong for human virtue, let us at least\nretain a virtue where there is no temptation to quit it. In the present\ncase there is apparent right on one side, and no convenience on the\nother. Inhabitants of this island can neither gain riches nor power by\ntaking away the liberty of any part of the human species. The sum of the\nargument is this: No man is by nature the property of another. The\ndefendant is, therefore, by nature, free. The rights of nature must be\nsome way forfeited before they can be justly taken away. That the\ndefendant has, by any act, forfeited the rights of nature, we require to\nbe proved; and if no proof of such forfeiture can be given, we doubt not\nbut the justice of the court will declare him free.\u201d\n\nThe author of this production has artfully surrounded his subject with\nsuch a plausibility of concessive proposals, doubtful suggestions,\nindefinite words and propositions, as will require a sifting of his\nideas into a more distinct view. And we fear some will find his argument\nthus vague and indeterminate; the mind will pass it by, as one of those\nlearned masterpieces of logic, so distant from the eye of our common\njudgment, that they will sooner yield their assent than endure the\nlabour of examination.\n\nThe first suggestion we would offer on the subject of this production is\nits total inapplicability to the case. The negro was held a slave in\nJamaica. The inquiry was not, whether he was so held in obedience to the\nBritish law regulating the institution of slavery in Jamaica. The only\nquestion was, whether a slave in Jamaica, or elsewhere, who had by any\nmeans found his way into Scotland, was or was not free by operation of\nlaw. Not a word is directed to that point. And the court of session must\nhave regarded its introduction before them as an argument in the case,\nas idle and as useless as would have been a page from his Rasselas. The\nBritish government established negro slavery by law in all her colonies,\nbut made no provision by which the slave, when once found on the shores\nof England, could be taken thence again into slavery.\n\nThe object, no doubt, was wholly to prevent their introduction there, in\nfavour to her own labouring poor. The British monarchy retained the\nwhole subject of slavery under its own control. The colonies had no\nvoice in the matter. They had no political right to say that the slave,\nthus imposed on them, should, after he had found his way into any part\nof the British Isles, be reclaimed, and their right of property in him\nrestored. Their political condition differed widely from the condition\nof these United States at the formation of this republic.\n\nThey, as colonial dependants, had no power to dictate protection to\ntheir own rights, or to insist on a compromise of conflicting interests\nto be established by law.\n\nDr. Johnson\u2019s argument is exclusively directed against the political and\nmoral propriety of the institution of slavery as a state or condition of\nman anywhere, instead of the true question at issue. The argument, taken\nas a whole, is, therefore, a sophism, of the order which dialecticians\ncall \u201c_ignoratio elenchi_;\u201d a dodging of the question; a substitution of\nsomething for the question which is not; a practice common among the\npert pleaders of the day\u2014sometimes, doubtless, without their own\nperception of the fact. In regard to him who uses this sophism to effect\nthe issue, the conclusion is inevitable,\u2014he is either dishonest or he is\nignorant of his subject. And when we come to examine this celebrated\nproduction as an argument against the moral propriety of the existence\nof the institution of slavery in the world, we shall find every pillar\npresented for its foundation a mere sophism, now quite distinctly, and\nagain more feebly enunciated, as if with a more timid tongue, and left\nto inquiry, adorned by festoons of doubt and supposition.\n\nWe shall requote some portions, with a view to their more particular\nconsideration. And, first, \u201cYet it may be doubted whether slavery can\never be supposed the natural condition of man.\u201d This clause, when put in\nthe crucible, reads, \u201cYet slavery can never exist in conformity to the\nlaw of God.\u201d Whoever doubts this to be the sense, we ask him to suppose\nwhat the sense is! The author did not choose these few words to express\nthe proposition, because the law of God _could_ readily be produced in\ncontradiction: \u201c_Whosoever committeth sin is the servant_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n_doulos_, SLAVE) _of sin_.\u201d Besides, then, he loses the benefit of the\nsophism,\u2014the substitution of the condition of man in his fallen state,\nthrough the ambiguity of the word \u201cnatural,\u201d for the condition of the\nfirst man, fresh from the hand of the Creator. This sophism is one of\ngreat art and covertness; so much so, that it takes its character rather\nfrom its effect on the mind than from its language; and we therefore\ndesire him who reads, to notice the whole chain of thought passing in\nthe author\u2019s mind,\u2014lest he forget how our present state is the subject\nof contemplation offered as data, when, on the word \u201cnatural,\u201d as if it\nwere a potter\u2019s wheel, our _original condition_ is turned to the front,\na postulate, from which we are left to compare and conclude.\n\nThe doctrine of the Bible is, that slavery is the consequence of sin. If\n\u201cnatural\u201d be taken to mean the quality of a state of perfect holiness\nand purity, then slavery cannot be the natural condition of man; no\n_doubts_ are required in the case. But if \u201cnatural\u201d is used to express\nthe quality of our condition under sin, sinking us under the curse of\nthe law, then the propriety of its use will not be \u201cdoubtful,\u201d when\napplied to slavery, because it is a consequent of the quality of the\ncondition. \u201cCursed is every one that continueth not in all things which\nare written in the book of the law to do them.\u201d The proposition, as thus\nexplained, we think of no value in the argument; but, as left by the\nauthor, obscure, its real meaning and intent not obviously perceived nor\neasily detected, and he may have thought it logical and sound.\n\n\u201cIt is impossible not to conceive that men, in their original state,\nwere equal.\u201d\n\nHere is another sophism, which the learned call _petitio principii_,\nintroduced without the least disguise,\u2014the assumption of a proposition\nwithout proof, which, upon examination, is not true. If the author mean,\nby \u201coriginal state,\u201d the state of man in paradise, we have no method of\nexamining facts, except by a comparison of Adam with Eve, who was placed\nin subjection. And if we may be permitted to examine the state of holy\nbeings more elevated than was man,\u2014\u201cFor thou hast made him a little\nlower than the angels,\u201d\u2014then, by analogy, we shall find it possible to\nconceive that men, in the original state, were not equal, since even the\nangels, who do the commands of God, are described as those \u201cthat excel\nin strength.\u201d\n\nBut if Dr. Johnson mean the state of man after the fall, then Cain was\ntold by God himself, that, if he did well, he should have rule over\nAbel.\n\n\u201cAnd very difficult to imagine how one would be subjected to another,\nbut by violent compulsion.\u201d The object of this singular remark is to\nenforce the proposition, That slavery is incompatible with the law of\nGod, which is not true.\n\n\u201cAnd if the servant shall plainly say, \u2018I love my master * * * I will\nnot go out free:\u2019 then his master shall bring him * * * and he shall\nserve (be a slave to) him for ever.\u201d\n\nBut if it shall be said the value of the passage quoted resides in the\nterm \u201cviolent compulsion;\u201d that \u201cviolent compulsion,\u201d sufficient to make\na man a slave, is incompatible with the law of God, then it will have no\nweight in the argument, because the \u201cviolent compulsion\u201d used may be in\nconformity to the law of God. \u201cAnd I will cause thee to serve (be a\nslave) to thine enemies in the land which thou knowest not.\u201d\n\n\u201cAn individual may indeed forfeit his liberty by crime, but he cannot\nforfeit the liberty of his children.\u201d\n\nThis, as a proposition, presents a sophism of the order _non causa pro\ncausa_, in reverse. We all agree a man may forfeit his liberty by crime;\nbut how are we to deduce from this fact that the liberty of the child\ncannot be affected by the same crime? The truth is, the crime that\ndeprives a parent of liberty, may, or may not, deprive the child. The\nframework of this sophism is quite subtle; it implies the sophism, \u201c_a\ndicto secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter_,\u201d to have full effect on the\nmind. Because, in truth, the crime that deprives the parent of liberty\ndoes not invariably involve the liberty of the child, we are, therefore,\nasked to assent to the proposition that it never does. But, perhaps, an\nanalysis of the proposition before us may be more plain to some, when we\nremark, what is true in all such compound sophisms, that the proposition\ncontaining it is divisible into two distinct propositions.\n\nIn this case, the first one is true,\u2014the second not. If, by crime, a man\nforfeits his life, he forfeits his liberty. If he is put to death\nprevious to a condition of paternity, its prospect is cut off with him.\nThose beings who, otherwise, might have been his descendants, will never\nexist. Hence rude nations, from such analogy, in case of very high\ncrimes, destroyed, with the parent, all his existing descendants.\nAncient history is full of such examples. The principle is the same as\nthe more modern attaint, and is founded, if in no higher law, in the\ncommon sense of mankind; for, when the statute establishing attaints is\nrepealed, the public mind and the descendant both feel that the attaint\nessentially exists, even without law to enforce it. Who does not\nperceive that the descendants of certain traitors are effectually\nattainted at the present day, even among the most enlightened nations.\nHe who denies that the crime of the parent can affect the liberty of the\nchild, must also deny that the character of the parent can affect him; a\nfact that almost universally exists, and which every one knows.\n\n\u201cLet his children be continually vagabonds and beg; * * * let his\nposterity be cut off; * * * let the iniquities of his fathers be\nremembered with the Lord.\u201d\n\nThis doctrine was recognised and practised by the church, even in\nEngland, in the more early ages. Let one instance suffice. About the\nyear 560, Mauricus, a Christian king of Wales, committed perjury and\nmurdered Cynetus,\u2014whereupon, Odouceus, Bishop of Llandaff, in full\nsynod, pronounced excommunication, and cursed, for ever, him and all his\noffspring. See Milton\u2019s \u0395\u0399\u039a\u039f\u039d\u039f\u039a\u039b\u0391\u03a3\u03a4\u0397\u03a3, cap. 28.\n\nThis principle actively exists in the physical world. The parent\ncontracts some loathsome disease\u2014the offspring are physically\ndeteriorated thereby. He whose moral and physical degradation are such\nthat slavery to him is a blessing, with few exceptions, will find his\ndescendants fit only for that condition. The children of parents whose\nconduct in life fostered some mental peculiarity, are quite likely, with\ngreater or less intensity, to exhibit traces of the same. \u201cThe parents\nhave eaten sour grapes, and the children\u2019s teeth are set on edge.\u201d The\nlaw is not repealed by the mantle of love, which, in mercy, the Saviour\nhas spread over the world, any more than forgiveness blots out the fact\nof a crime. The hope of happiness hereafter alleviates present\nsuffering, but, in no sense, annihilates a cause which has previously\nexisted.\n\n\u201cA man may accept life from a conquering enemy on condition of perpetual\nservitude; but it is very doubtful whether he can entail that servitude\non his descendants; for no man can stipulate, without commission, for\nanother.\u201d\n\nAll that is presented as argument here, is founded upon the proposition,\nthat no man can stipulate for his descendants, whether unborn or not.\n\nIf what we have before said be true, little need be said on the subject\nof this paragraph. For we have already seen that the conduct of the\nancestor, to an indefinite extent, both physically influences and\nmorally binds the condition of the offspring. It is comparatively but a\nfew ages since, over the entire world, the parent had full power, by\nlaw, to put his children to death for crime, or to sell them into\nslavery for causes of which he was the judge. And it may be remarked,\nthat such is the present law among, perhaps, all the tribes who furnish\nfrom their own race slaves for the rest of the world. It is not\nnecessary here to show why a people, who find such laws necessary to\ntheir welfare, also find slavery a blessing to them.\n\nCivilization has ameliorated these, to us, harsh features of parental\nauthority; yet, to-day, the world can scarcely produce a case where the\ncondition of the child has not been greatly affected by the\nstipulations, the conduct, the influences of the parent, wholly beyond\nits control. The relation of parent has ever been found a sufficient\ncommission to bind these results to the condition of the offspring.\n\n\u201cBut our fathers dealt proudly, and hardened their necks, and hearkened\nnot to thy commandments, and refused to obey; * * * and in their\nrebellion appointed a captain to return to their bondage.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe condition which he (the captive) accepts, his son or grandson would\nhave rejected.\u201d\n\nThis, at most, is supposititious, and, as an argument, we think,\nextremely weak; because it implies, either that the acceptance of the\nparent was not the result of necessity, and the wisest choice between\nevils, or that the rejection, by the son, was the fruit of extravagant\npretension.\n\n\u201cHe that is extravagant will quickly become poor, and poverty will\nenforce dependence and invite corruption.\u201d * * * \u201cI have avoided that\nempyrical morality that cures one vice by the means of another.\u201d\n_Johnson\u2019s Rambler._\n\n\u201cIf we should admit, what perhaps with more reason may be denied, that\nthere are certain relations between man and man, which may make slavery\nnecessary and just, yet it can never be proved, that he, who is suing\nfor his freedom, ever stood in any of these relations.\u201d\n\nWe cannot pretend to know what were the particular facts in relation to\nthe slavery of the individual then in Scotland. It is not, however,\npretended that the facts in relation to this slave were not the facts in\nrelation to all others. No suggestion of any illegality as to his\nslavery in Jamaica is made, other than the broad ground of the\nillegality of slavery itself. This is quite evident from what follows:\n\n\u201cHe is certainly subject, by no law but that of violence, to his present\nmaster, who pretends no claim to his obedience, but that he bought him\nfrom a merchant of slaves, whose right to sell him was never examined.\u201d\n\nIn the passage under consideration, we are confined wholly to negro\nslavery; and had Dr. Johnson been serious in admitting that slavery,\nunder \u201ccertain relations,\u201d was \u201cnecessary and just,\u201d he would have\nyielded his case; because, then, the slave in hand would have been\nplaced in the category of proving that he did not exist under these\nrelations. Johnson well knew that slavery existed in Jamaica by the\nsanction of the British Parliament, and he manifests his contempt for\nit, by the assertion that the slave was held only by the law of force.\nHe was, therefore, not reaching for the freedom of that particular\nslave, but for the subversion of slavery as a condition of man.\n\nThe author has heretofore signified a willingness to admit the\nlawfulness of slavery, when induced by \u201ccrime or captivity;\u201d but now\ndenies the validity of such admission, because the relations of \u201ccrime\nand captivity\u201d can never be proved. The apparent object of his admission\nwas merely to rally us, by his liberality, to the admission that these\nrelations could never be proved; and we admit they never can be in the\nway he provides; and he therefore announces the demonstration of the\nproposition, that slavery can never be just, because \u201cthese relations,\u201d\nwhich alone make it so, can never be established. But what are the\nreasons? They are the very causes which render the Africans obnoxious to\nthe condition of slavery\u2014the degraded, deteriorated, and savage state of\nthat people. The negro slave, in his transit from the interior of\nAfrica, is often sold many times, by one master and chieftain to\nanother, before he reaches the western coast, whence he was transferred\nby the slave factors to the English colonies. No memory of these facts,\nor of the slave\u2019s origin, is preserved or attempted. Under these\ncircumstances, though each individual of these slaves induced the\ncondition by \u201ccrime or captivity,\u201d such fact could never be established\nin the English colony. To attempt proof there of any fact touching the\ncase, would be as idle and futile as to attempt such proof in regard to\nthe biography of a baboon. Besides, the truth is, a very large portion\nof these slaves were born slaves in Africa, inheriting their condition\nfrom a slave ancestry of unknown ages, and recognised to be slaves by\nthe laws and customs of the various tribes there, and sent to market as\na surplus commodity, in accordance to the laws and usages among them,\nenforced from time immemorial.\n\nSo far as we have knowledge of the various families of man, we believe\nit to have ever been the practice for one nation to receive the national\nacts of another as facts fixed, and not subject to further investigation\nor alteration by a foreign people, especially when none but the people\nmaking the decision were affected by it. Johnson surely must have agreed\nto such a practice, because an opposite course, so far as carried into\naction, would have involved every nation in universal war and endless\nbloodshed. Besides, the right to usurp such control would involve the\nright to enslave, and can only exist when the degeneracy of a nation has\nbecome too great a nuisance to be longer tolerated with safety by the\npeople annoyed: self-protection will then warrant the right.\n\nIf England makes it lawful for her subjects to buy slaves in Africa and\nhold them in Jamaica, then her subjects may lawfully hold there such as\nare decided by the laws of Africa to be slaves. But the author of the\nargument, with all this before him, having dictated what alone shall\nmake a man a slave, would propose to set up a new tribunal contrary to\nall international law\u2014contrary to the peace of the world\u2014and, finally,\nas to the object to which it is to be applied, forever abortive:\nwherefore his argument in effect is, because \u201cthese relations,\u201d which he\nadmits would justly make a man a slave, cannot be proved, therefore what\nhe admits to be true is not true; and puts us in mind of the sophism:\n\u201cIf, when a man speaks truth, he says he lies, he lies; but he lies when\nhe speaks the truth; therefore, by speaking the truth, he lies!\u201d which\nwe think about as relevant to the question.\n\nIn his conclusion, Dr. Johnson frankly acknowledges the position we have\nassigned him:\u2014\n\n\u201cThe sum of the argument is this: No man is, by nature, the property of\nanother. The defendant, therefore, is free by nature. The rights of\nnature must be someway forfeited before they can be justly taken away.\u201d\n\nThere are, in our language, but few words of which we make such loose\nand indefinite use as we do of the word \u201cnature,\u201d and its variously\nmodified forms. It would elucidate what we wish to bring to mind\nconcerning the use of this word, to select some verbose author, of a\nfanatical habit of thought, or enough so to favour a negligence as to\nthe clearness of the ideas expressed by the terms at his command, and\ncompare the varied meanings which his application of the word will most\nclearly indicate. We do not accuse Dr. Johnson of any want of astute\nlearning, but we wish to present an excuse for explaining that, by his\nuse of the phrases, \u201cmen by nature\u201d\u2014\u201cby nature free\u201d\u2014\u201cthe rights of\nnature,\u201d he means, _the rights established by the laws of God_. He uses\nthose phrases as synonyms of the Creator, of his providence influencing\nthe condition of man, or the adaptations bestowed on him. The laws of\nnature are the laws of God. And we are bold to say, no discreet writer\nuses the words differently. As a sample of its legitimate use, we quote\n\u201cMilton to Hortlib on Education:\u201d\u2014\n\n\u201cNot to mention the learned correspondence which you hold in foreign\nparts, and the extraordinary pains and diligence which you have used in\nthis matter, both here and beyond the seas; either by the definite will\nof God so ruling, or the peculiar sway of _nature_, which also is God\u2019s\nworking,\u201d &c.\n\nWe all agree that God has made the world, and all things therein, and\nthat he established laws for its government, and also for the government\nof every thing in it. Now we must all agree that it was an act of great\ncondescension, love, and mercy, if God did come down from his throne in\nheaven, and, from his own mouth instruct a few of the lost men then in\nthe world, his chosen people, what were some of his laws, such as were\nnecessary for them to know and to be governed by, that they might, to\nthe greatest possible extent, live happily in this world, and enjoy\neternal life hereafter. Do you believe he did so? You either believe he\ndid, or you believe the Bible is a fable. If you believe he did, then we\nrefer you to _Ex._ xx. and xxi., and to _Lev._ xxv., for what he did\nthen reveal, as his law, on the subject of slavery; not that other\nimportant revelations were not made concerning this subject, which we\nshall have occasion to notice in the course of these studies.\n\nIf we believe the Bible to be a true book, then we must believe that God\ndid make these revelations to Moses. Among them, one law permitted the\nIsraelites to buy, and inherit, and to hold slaves. And Dr. Wayland, the\nauthor of \u201cThe Elements of Moral Science,\u201d agrees that what was the law\nof God must ever remain to be so.\n\nIt will follow then, if the laws of God authorize slavery, that a man\n_by nature may be the property of another_, because, whatever you may\nthink the laws of nature to be, yet they can have no validity in\nopposition to the laws of God. If it shall be said that Jesus Christ\nrepealed the law as delivered to Moses, then we answer: He says he came\nnot to destroy, but to fulfil the law and that he fully completed his\nmission. He had no commission to repeal the law: therefore he had no\npower to do so.\n\nThis portion of Dr. Johnson\u2019s argument is consonant with the notions of\nthe advocates of the \u201chigher law\u201d doctrine, who persist that slavery is\na sin, because they think it is.\n\nBut if the law permitted slavery, then to hold, cannot be a sin, because\nGod \u201cframeth not mischief by a law.\u201d See _Ps._ xciv. 20. \u201cWo unto them\nthat decree unrighteous decrees.\u201d _Isa._ x. 1. If the law authorizing\nthe Jews to hold slaves was unrighteous, then God pronounces the wo upon\nhimself, which is gross contradiction.\n\nBut the law is \u201cpure, holy, and just;\u201d therefore a law permitting sin\nmust be against itself\u2014which cannot be; for, in such case, the law\nrecoils against itself, and destroys its own end and character.\n\nBut again: \u201cThe end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart,\nand of a good conscience, and faith unfeigned.\u201d 1 _Tim._ i. 5. Now it is\nnot charity to permit that which cannot be done with a pure heart,\nbecause then conscience and faith are both deceived.\n\nAgain: The law \u201cbeareth not the sword in vain, but to be a terror to\nevil works, for he (the instrument executing the law) is the minister of\nGod, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.\u201d\n\nIf slavery, or to hold slaves, be sin, then also the law granting the\nlicense to do so destroys the very object which it was enacted to\nsustain. But again: If the law allows sin, then it is in covenant with\nsin and the law itself, therefore, must be sin.\n\nIn short, the doctrine is pure infidelity. It is destructive to the\nobject of law, and blasphemous to God. What are we to think of him who\nholds that God descended in the majesty of his power upon Sinai, and\nthere, from the bottomless treasures of his wisdom and purity,\ncommanding man to wash his garment of every pollution, opened to\nhim\u2014what? Why, an unclean system of morals, stained by a most unholy\nimpurity; but which he is nevertheless to practise to the damning of his\nsoul! Atheism, thou art indeed a maniac!\n\nIn the course of these studies, we shall attempt to show that man is not\nfree in the unlimited sense with which the word is here used. Absolute\nfreedom is incompatible with a state of accountability. Say, if you\nchoose, Adam was free in paradise to eat the apple, to commit sin, yet\nwe find his freedom was bounded by an accountability beyond his power to\ngive satisfactory answer: hence the consequent, a change of state, a\ncircumscribing of what you may call his freedom. This, in common\nparlance, we call punishment; yet our idea of punishment is inadequate\nto express the full idea; because God cannot be supposed to delight in\npunishment, or to be satisfied with punishment, in accordance with our\nnarrow views. Such would be inconsistent with the combination of his\nattributes\u2014a Being so constituted of all power, that each power is\npredominant, even love and mercy. Thus the law of God clothes the effect\nin mercy and positive good, inversely to the virulence of the cause, or\nin direct proportion to its propriety. Thus, righteousness, as a cause,\nexalteth a nation; but sin is a reproach to any people. Thus the law of\nGod places the sinner under the government of shame, infamy, contempt,\nas schoolmasters to lead him back to virtue; and it may be observed that\nthe schoolmaster is more forcing in his government in proportion to the\nvirulence of vice, down to the various grades of subjection and slavery,\nand until the poison becomes so great that even death is a blessing.\n\nBut if the mind cannot perceive that the chastenings of the Lord are\nblessings, let it regard them as lessons. The parent, from the\nwaywardness of the child, perceives that it will fall from a precipice,\nand binds it with a cord to circumscribe its walk. True, such are poor\nfigures to outline a higher Providence!\n\nThe Being who created, surely had power to appoint the government. Can\nthe thing created remain in the condition in which it is placed, except\nby obedience to the law established for its government? Disobedience\nmust change the condition of the thing and bring it under new\nrestraints\u2014a lessening of the boundaries of freedom. The whole\nprovidence of God to man is upon this plan, and is abundantly\nillustrated, in the holy books, by precept and example. These restraints\nfollow quick on the footsteps of disobedience, until the law\u2014the Spirit\nshall no longer strive for reformation, but say, \u201cCut it down; why\ncumbereth it the ground?\u201d\n\nIs this a too melancholy view? Let us, then, look at obedience and its\nconsequents, and turn the eye from this downward path of mental and\nphysical degradation, pain, misery, want, slavery, and death, to the\nbright prospect of a more elevated state of progressive improvement,\nsecured to us as a consequent, a reward of obedience; the physical\npowers improving, the mental elevating, and all our faculties becoming\ninstruments of greater truthfulness, until our condition shall be so\nelevated that the Creator shall say, \u201cCome ye and sit at my right hand!\u201d\n\nThe assertion, that \u201cno man is by nature the property of another,\u201d\nflatters our vanity and tumefies our pride, but is, nevertheless,\nuntrue. We are all absolutely the property of Him who made, and who\nsustains his right to dispose of us; and does so in conformity to his\nlaw. Thus, qualifiedly, we are the property of the great family of man,\nand are under obligations of duty to all; more pressingly to the\nnational community of which we compose a part, and so on down to the\ndistinct family of which we are a member. It is upon this principle that\nFleta says, (book i, chap. 17,) \u201cHe that has a companion has a master.\u201d\nSee also the same in Bracton, book i. chap. 16.\n\nIf, by the laws of God, other men could have no property in us, the laws\nof civil government could have no right to control us. But if the civil\ngovernment, by the laws of God, has the right to govern and control us,\nso far as is for the benefit of ourselves and the community, then it\nwill follow, that when our benefit will be enhanced, and that of the\ncommunity, by our subjection to slavery, either temporary or perpetual,\nthe laws of God, in mercy, will authorize such subjection. Or, if the\nstate of our degradation be such that our continuance upon the earth be\nan evil past all remedy, then the laws of God will authorize the civil\nlaw to decree our exit.\n\nThe providence of God to man is practical. He never deals in the silly\nabstractions of foolish philosophers. He spends no time in experimenting\nby eristic syllogisms. He deals alone in his own power, which nowhere\never ceases to act, although wholly beyond our comprehension. Man may\nlong for a full view of the Almighty, yet we are destined here to\nperceive but the \u201chinder parts\u201d of his presence\u2014the effect of his power,\nnot Him! Let us worship; and, for our guidance, be content with the\npillar of cloud by day and of fire by night!\n\nIn conclusion: Should the author of \u201cThe Elements of Moral Science\u201d\nexamine this argument of the great dialectician of the past century,\nwith his acknowledged logical acumen, free from the prejudices of his\nlocality, now so abundantly displayed in that portion of his work to\nwhich we object, we would suggest the propriety of his applying the\ndiscoveries he may make to emendations in his succeeding thousands.\n\n\n\n\n                  ------------------------------------\n\n                               Study II.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON I.\n\nAs far as men are able to comprehend Jehovah, the wisest, in all ages,\nhave deduced the fact, that God acts; yet, as an essential Being, he is\nbeyond being acted upon.\n\nThat which is manifested by the character of his acts is called his\nattributes; that is, the thing or quality which we attribute to him as a\nportion or quality of his essence.\n\nThus among his attributes, are said to be power, wisdom, truth, justice,\nlove, and mercy. His action is always found to be in conformity and\naccordance to these attributes. This state of conformity, this certainty\nof unison of action, is called truth. \u201cThy word is truth.\u201d _John_ xvii.\n7.\n\nA system of laws, permanently established for the production of some\nobject, we call an institution.\n\nLaw is the history of how things are influenced by one another; yet the\nmind should never disconnect such influence from the attributes of\nJehovah; and hence Burke very properly says, \u201cLaw is beneficence acting\nby rule.\u201d \u201cThe law of the Lord is perfect.\u201d _Ps._ xix. 7. The deduction\nfollows that the laws of God are well adapted, and intended to benefit\nall those who are suitably related under them.\n\nBy relation we mean the connection between things,\u2014what one thing is in\nregard to the influence of another. And hence it also follows that, in\ncase the relation is in utter want of a conformity to the attributes of\nJehovah, the actor in the relation becomes an opponent, and, so far,\njoins issue with God himself. The laws fitting the case operate, and his\nposition is consumed, as it were, by the breath of the Almighty.\n\nBut yet an institution may be a righteous one, may exist in conformity\nto the laws of God, and particular cases of a relation, seeming to us to\nemanate from it, be quite the reverse. For example, the institution of\nmarriage may be righteous, may exist in conformity to the laws of God;\nyet cases of the relation of husband and wife may be a very wicked\nrelation.\n\nIndividuals in a relation to each other under an institution are\nsupposed to bear such comparison to each other as will permit the laws\nof God, influencing the relation, to be beneficial to them; and when\nsuch comparative qualities are not the most suitable, or are more or\nless unsuitable for the relation, the benefits intended by the relation\nmust be proportionably diminished. If wholly unsuitable, then it is\nfound that the conservative influences of the same laws operate in the\ndirection to cause the relation to cease between them.\n\nIf a supposed male and female are each distinctly clothed with qualities\nwholly unsuited to each other in the relation emanating from the\ninstitution of marriage, then, in that case, the relation will be sinful\nbetween them; and the repulsion, the necessary consequence of a total\nunsuitableness, will be in constant action in the direction of sweeping\nit away.\n\nWill it be new in morals to say that it is consistent with the\nordinances of Jehovah to bring things into that relation to each other\nby which they will be mutually benefited?\n\nAs an exemplification of the doctrine, we cite the institution of\nguardianship\u2014guardian and ward; both words derived from the same Saxon\nroot, _weardian_, which implies one who protects and one who is\nprotected.\n\nThe institution itself presupposes power in the one and weakness in the\nother, a want of equality between the parties. And it may be here\nremarked, that, the greater the inequality, the greater the prospect of\nbenefit growing out of the relation, especially to the weaker party. But\nwhen the weak, ignorant, or wayward youth is the guardian, and the\npowerful and wise man is the ward, then the relation will be sinful, and\nthe repulsion necessarily emanating from the relation must quickly\nterminate it. No possible benefit could accrue from such a case\u2014nothing\nbut evil. The conservative influence of God\u2019s providence must,\ntherefore, suddenly bring it to a close.\n\nWill the assertion be odious to the ear of truth, that the laws of God\npresent the same class of conservative influences in the moral world\nthat is every day discovered in the physical?\u2014that the thing manifestly\nuseless, from which no benefit can accrue, but from which a constant\ninjury emanates, shall be cut away, nor longer \u201ccumber the ground?\u201d Or,\nwhere a less degree of enormity and sin have centered, it may be placed\nunder influences of guidance, and controlled into the path of\nregeneration and comparative usefulness? Surely, if we detach from\nJehovah these high attributes, we lessen his character.\n\nWhen we enter into the inquiry, whether an institution, or the relation\nemanating from it in a particular case, be sinful or not, it seems\nobvious that the inquiry must reach the object of the institution and\nits tendencies, and take into consideration how far they, and the\nrelations created by it, coincide with the laws of God.\n\nThe relation of master and slave, and the institution of slavery itself,\nin the inquiry whether such relation or institution is right or wrong,\njust or unjust, righteous or sinful, must be subjected to a like\nexamination,\u2014applying the same rules applicable to any other relation or\ninstitution,\u2014before we can determine whether or not it exists in\nconformity to the laws of God.\n\nBut human reason is truly but of small compass; and the mercy of God has\nvouchsafed to man the aids of faith and inspiration. \u201cAll scripture is\ngiven by inspiration of God.\u201d 2 _Tim._ iii. 16.\n\nThese are important aids in the examination of all moral subjects,\nwithout which we may be \u201cever learning and never able to come to the\nknowledge of the truth.\u201d 2 _Tim._ iii. 7.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON II.\n\nIf it be true that slavery is of divine origin, that its design is to\nprevent so great an accumulation of sin as would, of necessity, force\nits subjects down to destruction and death, and to restore those who are\nignorantly, heedlessly, and habitually rushing on their own moral and\nphysical ruin, by the renovating influence of divine power, to such a\nstate of moral rectitude as may be required of the recipients of divine\ngrace;\u2014then we should expect to find, in the history of this\ninstitution, of its effects, both moral and physical, upon its subjects,\nsome manifestations of such tendencies; some general evidences that,\nthrough this ordinance, God has ever blessed its subjects and their\nposterity with an ameliorated condition, progressive in the direction of\nhis great and final purpose. Let us examine that fact.\n\nIn the government of the world, God has as unchangeably fixed his laws\nproducing moral influences, as he has those which relate to material\nobjects. When we discover some cause, which, under similar\ncircumstances, always produces a similar result, we need not hesitate to\nconsider such discovery as the revelation of his will, his law touching\nits action and the effects produced; and by comparing the general\ntendency of the effect produced with the previously revealed laws and\nwill of God in relation to a particular matter, we are permitted to form\nsome conclusion whether the cause producing the effect exists and acts\nin conformity with his general providence towards the matter or subject\nin question. If so, we may readily conclude that such cause is of his\nappointment, and that it exists and acts agreeably to his will.\n\nBut one of the previously revealed laws of God is, that he ever wills\nthe happiness, not the misery, of his creatures. \u201cSay unto them, As I\nlive, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked;\nbut that the wicked should turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye\nfrom your evil ways, for why will you die, O house of Israel!\u201d _Ezek._\nxxxiii. 11. And we may form some conclusion of a man, a class of people,\nor a nation, from their condition produced by the general result of\ntheir conduct, whether their conduct has been in general conformity with\nthe laws of God. If the general result of the conduct of the thief,\ngambler, tippler, and drunkard,\u2014of him who lives by trickery and\ndeception, is an accumulation of weight of character among men, a\ndisplay of useful industry, independence, and wealth among his\nassociates; if himself and family are thereby made visibly more healthy,\nhappy, and wise,\u2014if by these practices he and his family become patterns\nof piety and of all noble virtues, he may hope; but if the contrary of\nall these is the final result, we may safely condemn.\n\nAnother of the laws of God is, \u201cThine own wickedness shall correct thee,\nand thy backslidings shall reprove thee.\u201d _Jer._ ii. 19. When the\ncharacters just named become so great a nuisance that the strong arm of\nthe law of the land takes away their liberty, places a master over them,\nin fact reducing them to slavery; forces and compels them to habits of\nuseful industry, and, in a length of time, makes of them useful and good\nmen,\u2014then this law is exemplified and also the fact is proved, that\nslavery, thus induced, is attended with and does produce an ameliorated\ncondition as to the morals, and probably as to the intellectual and\nphysical power, of its subjects. This law was also exemplified in the\nfamily of Jacob. God, in the order of his providence, had determined and\nmade a covenant with Abraham, to wit: \u201cIn the same day the Lord made a\ncovenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from\nthe land of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates.\u201d _Gen._ xv.\n18. This was to be brought about through the family of Jacob. \u201cAnd God\nAlmighty bless thee, and make thee fruitful and multiply thee, that thou\nmayest be a multitude of people, and give the blessing of Abraham to\nthee, and to thy seed with thee, that thou mayest inherit the land\nwherein thou art a stranger, which God gave unto Abraham.\u201d _Gen._\nxxviii. 3, 4.\n\nThere are left us enough traces of the conduct of the family of Jacob,\nwhereby we may know the fact that they, although living in the midst of\nthe promised land, had become incorrigibly wicked and licentious. Judah,\nwho seems to have ranked as the head of the family, notwithstanding the\nimpressive lesson in the case of Esau, took to himself a Canaanitish\nwife, and his eldest sons became so desperately wicked that, in the\nlanguage of Scripture, God slew them. Even the salt of slavery could not\nsave them. Of Shelah, we have no further account than that he went into\nslavery in Egypt. Instead of nurturing up his family with propriety and\nprudence, Judah seems to have idled away his time with his friend the\nAdullamite, hunting up the harlots of the country. Reuben committed\nincest; he went up to his father\u2019s bed. Simeon and Levi, instigated by\nfeelings of revenge in the case of the Hivites, pursued such a course of\ndeception, moral fraud, and murder, leading on the rest of their\nbrethren to such acts of theft and robbery, that Jacob was constrained\nto say, \u201cYe have troubled me, to make me stink among the inhabitants of\nthe land.\u201d _Gen._ xxxiv. 30. Jacob found his children so lost to good\nmorals, so sunken in heathenism and idolatry, that, hoping that a change\nof abode might also produce a change of conduct, he was impelled to\ncommand them, saying, \u201cPut away the strange gods that are among you, and\nbe clean, and change your garments, and let us arise and go to Bethel,\nand I will make there an altar unto God.\u201d _Gen._ xxxv. 2, 3.\n\nAnd let us take occasion here to notice the long-suffering and\nloving-kindness of the Lord; for, no sooner had they taken this\nresolution, than Jehovah, to encourage and make them steadfast in this\nnew attempt in the paths of virtue, again appeared to Jacob:\n\n\u201cAnd God said unto him, I am God Almighty; a nation, and a company of\nnations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins. And the\nland which I gave to Abraham and to Isaac, to thee I will give it, and\nto thy seed after thee will I give the land.\u201d _Gen._ xxxv. 11, 12.\n\n\u201cBut the sow that was washed has returned to her wallowing in the mire.\u201d\n2 _Pet._ ii. 22.\n\nAnd what is the next prominent state of moral standing in which we find\nthis family? The young and unsuspecting Joseph brought unto his father\ntheir evil report, and hence their revenge. \u201cAnd when they saw him afar\noff, even before he came near unto them, they conspired against him to\nslay him. * * * And they sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites for twenty\npieces of silver.\u201d _Gen._ xxxvii. 2, and xviii. 28. And against the deed\nof fratricide there was but one dissenting voice and he, whose voice it\nwas, dared not boldly to oppose them. He had not the moral courage to\ncontend. Sometimes, in the conduct of men, there may be a single act\nthat gives stronger proof of deep, condemning depravity, than a whole\nlife otherwise spent in wanton, wilful wickedness and sensual sin. Their\nbetrayal of the confidence of an innocent and confiding brother, who\nneither had the will nor the power to injure them, whose only wish was\ntheir welfare, bespeaks a degradation of guilt, a deep and abiding\nhypocrisy of soul before God and man, and a general readiness to the\ncommission of crimes of so dark a dye, that, it would seem to moral\nview, no oblations of the good, nor even the prayers of the just, could\nwash and wipe away the stain. During the history of all time, has God\never chosen such wretches to become the founders of an empire\u2014his own\npeculiar, chosen people? On the contrary, has not his will, as expressed\nby revelation, and by the acts of his providence, for ever been the\nreverse of such a supposition? The laws of God are unchangeable: at all\ntimes and among all people, the premises being the same, their operation\nhas been and will ever be the same.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON III.\n\n\u201cLet favour be showed to the wicked, yet will he not learn\nrighteousness; in the land of uprightness will he deal unjustly, and\nwill not behold the majesty of the Lord.\u201d _Isa._ xxvi. 10.\n\n\u201cHis own iniquities shall take the wicked himself, and he shall be\nholden by the cords of his sins.\u201d _Prov._ v. 22.\n\n\u201cBut it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of\nthe Lord thy God, to observe to do all his commandments, and his\nstatutes, which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall\ncome upon thee, and overtake thee:\n\n\u201cCursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the\nfield; cursed shalt thou be in thy basket and thy store; cursed shall be\nthe fruit of thy body and the fruit of thy land; the increase of thy\nloins, and the flocks of thy sheep. Cursed shalt thou be when thou\ncomest in; and cursed shalt thou be when thou goest out. The Lord shall\nsend upon thee cursing, vexation and rebuke in all thou settest thy hand\nunto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly;\nbecause of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken me.\nAnd the Lord shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, the way\nwhereof I spake unto thee. Thou shalt see it no more again; and there ye\nshall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen (\u05dc\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05bd\u05d9\u05dd _la ebedim, for\nslaves_) and bondwomen (\u05d5\u05b0\u05dc\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05d4\u05ad\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea _ve lisheppahoth, and for female\nslaves_), and no man shall buy you.\u201d (That is, they should be\nworthless.) _Deut._ xxviii. 15\u201368.\n\nSuch, then, are the unchangeable laws of God touching man\u2019s disobedience\nand non-conformity; and, in this instance of their application, have\nbeen seen fulfilled, with wonder and astonishment, by the whole world.\n\nConsistent with the laws of God and the providence of Jehovah, there was\nno other way to make any thing out of the wicked family of Jacob; no\nother means to fulfil his promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, except\nto prepare them in the school of adversity; to reduce them under the\nsevere hand of a master; to place them in slavery, until, by its\ncompulsive operation tending to their mental, moral, and physical\nimprovement, they would become fitted to enjoy the blessing promised\ntheir fathers. \u201cCompel them to come in, that my house may be filled.\u201d\n_Luke_ xiv.\n\n\u201cAnd when the sun was going down a deep sleep fell upon Abraham, and a\nhorror of great darkness fell upon him; and He (the Lord) said unto\nAbram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a strange\nland that is not theirs, and shall _serve_ (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05ad\u05d5\u05bc\u05dd _va ebadum,\nshall be slaves to_) them; and they shall afflict them four hundred\nyears.\u201d _Gen._ xv. 12, 13.\n\nGod foresaw what condition the wicked family of Jacob would force\nthemselves into; nor is it a matter of surprise that it filled the mind\nof Abram with horror.\n\nGod never acts contrary to his own laws. The Israelites, in slavery four\nhundred years under hard and cruel masters, kept closely bound to severe\nlabour, and all the attendants of slavery, had no time to run into\ndeeper sins. The humility of their condition and distinction of race\nwould be some preventive to amalgamation, and a preservative to their\npurity of blood; and would lead them also to contemplate and worship the\nGod of Abraham. And let it ever be remembered that the worship of God is\nthe very highway to intellectual, moral, and physical improvement,\nhowever slow, under the circumstances, was their progress.\n\nLet us take the family of Jacob, at the time of the selling of Joseph,\nand, from what their conduct had been and then was, form some conjecture\nof what would have been the providence of God, touching their race, at\nthe close of the then coming four hundred years, had not the Divine Mind\nseen fit to send them into slavery. Does it require much intellectual\nlabour to set forth their ultimate condition? Would not the result have\nbeen their total annihilation by the action of the surrounding tribes;\nor their equally certain national extinction by their amalgamation with\nthem? If, by the providence of God, as manifested among men through all\ntime, one of these conditions must have attached to them, then will it\nfollow that, to them, slavery was their salvation,\u2014under the\ncircumstances of the case, the only thing that could preserve them from\ndeath and extinction on earth.\n\nUnder such view of the facts, and the salvatory influence of the\ninstitution, slavery will be hailed by the good, pious, and\ngodly-minded, as an emanation from the Divine Mind, portraying a\nfatherly care, and a watchful mercy to a fallen world, on a parallel\nwith the general benevolence of that Deity who comprehended his own\nwork, and the welfare of his creatures.\n\nThe slavery of the Israelites in Egypt for the term of four hundred\nyears was a sentence pronounced against them by Jehovah himself, who had\npreviously promised them great worldly blessings, preceded by the\npromise of his own spiritual forbearance, of his own holy mercy, as the\nultimate design of his providence towards them. And we now ask him, who\ndenies that the design of this term of slavery was to ameliorate and\nsuitably prepare that wicked race for the reception and enjoyment of the\npromises made, to extricate himself from the difficulties in which such\ndenial will involve the subject. We are aware that there are a class of\nmen so holy in their own sight, that, from what they say, one might\njudge they felt capable of dictating to Jehovah rules for his conduct,\nand that they spurn in him all that which their view does not\ncomprehend. Do such forget, when they stretch forth their hand,\nimagining God to be that which suits them, but which he is not, that\nthey make an idol, and are as much idolaters as they would be had they\nsubstituted wood and stone? Such, God will judge. We have no hope our\nfeeble voice will be heard where the mind is thus established upon the\npresumption of moral purity\u2014we might say divine foresight. But, by a\nmore humble class, we claim to be heard, that, as mortal men, reasoning\nby the light it hath pleased God to give, we may take counsel together\nin the review of his providences, as vouchsafed to man, and, by his\nblessing be enabled to see enough to justify the ways of the Almighty\nagainst the slanders of his and our enemy.\n\nThe theological student will notice the fact of the holy books abounding\nwith the doctrine that the chastenings of the Lord operate the moral,\nmental, and physical improvement of the chastised; and that such\nchastenings are ever administered for that purpose, and upon those whose\nsins call it down upon them. \u201cMy son, despise not the chastenings of the\nLord; neither be weary of correction: for those whom the Lord loveth he\ncorrecteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.\u201d _Prov._\niii. 11, 12. \u201cThus saith the Lord, where is the bill of thy mother\u2019s\ndivorcement, whom I have put away? Or which of my creditors is it to\nwhom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold\nyourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away.\u201d _Isa._\nl. 1.\n\nThe garden of the sluggard produces weeds and want. We know a man of\nwhom it may be said, he is inoffensive; but he is thriftless, indolent,\nand therefore miserable. He has never learned those virtues that would\nmake him respectable or happy.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IV.\n\n  \u201c_Barnes on Slavery. An Inquiry into the Scriptural Views of\n    Slavery._\u201d By ALBERT BARNES. _Philadelphia_, 1846.\n\nIn his fourth chapter, on the slavery of the Israelites in Egypt, Rev.\nMr. Barnes says\u2014\n\n\u201cThe will of God may often be learned from the events of his providence.\nFrom his dealings with an individual, a class of men or a nation, we may\nascertain whether the course which has been pursued was agreeable to his\nwill. It is not, indeed, always safe to argue that, because calamities\ncome upon an individual, they are sent as a punishment on account of any\npeculiarly aggravated sin, or that these calamities prove that he is a\ngreater sinner than others;\u2014but when a certain course of conduct\n_always_ tends to certain results\u2014when there are laws in operation in\nthe moral world as fixed as in the natural world\u2014and when there are,\nuniformly, either direct or indirect interpositions of Providence in\nregard to any existing institutions, it is not unsafe to infer from\nthese what is the Divine will. It is not unsafe, for illustration, to\nargue, from the uniform effects of intemperance, in regard to the will\nof God. These effects occur in every age of the world, in reference to\nevery class of men. There are no exceptions in favour of kings or\nphilosophers; of the inhabitants of any particular climate or region of\ncountry; of either sex, or of any age. The poverty and babbling, and\nredness of eyes, and disease, engendered by intemperance, may be\nregarded without danger of error, as expressive of the will of God in\nreference to that habit. They show that there has been a violation of a\ngreat law of our nature, ordained for our good, and that such a\nviolation must always incur the frown of the great Governor of the\nworld. The revelation of the mind of God, in such a case, is not less\nclear than were the annunciations of his will on Sinai.\n\n\u201cThe same is true in regard to cities and nations. We need be in as\nlittle danger, in general, in arguing from what occurs to them, as in\nthe case of an individual. There is now no doubt among men why the old\nworld was destroyed by a flood; why Sodom and Gomorrah were consumed;\nwhy Tyre, Nineveh, Babylon, and Jerusalem were overthrown. If a certain\ncourse of conduct, long pursued and in a great variety of circumstances,\nleads uniformly to health, happiness, and property, we are in little\ndanger of inferring that it is in accordance with the will of God. If it\nlead to poverty and tears, we are in as little danger of error in\ninferring that it is a violation of some great law which God has\nordained for the good of man. If an institution among men is always\nfollowed by certain results; if we find them in all climes, and under\nall forms of government, and in every stage of society, it is not unsafe\nto draw an inference from these facts on the question whether God\nregards the institution as a good one, and one which he designs shall be\nperpetuated for the good of society.\n\n\u201cIt would be easy to make an application of these undeniable principles\nto the subject of slavery. The inquiry would be, whether, in certain\nresults, always found to accompany slavery, and now developing\nthemselves in our own country, there are no clear indications of what is\nthe will of God.\u201d\n\nWe subscribe to the doctrine that God often reveals his will concerning\na thing by the acts of his providence affecting it. But we contend that\nGod has extended the field of Christian vision by a more direct\nrevelation, and by the gift of faith; and that the mind which can\nneither hear the revelation, nor feel the faith, is merely the mind of a\nphilosopher, not of a Christian: he may be a believer in a God, but not\nin the Saviour of the world.\n\nThe direction contained in the foregoing quotation, by which we are to\ndiscriminate what are the will and law of God, may be considered, when\npresented by the mere teacher of abolition, among the most artful,\nbecause among the most insidious, specimens of abolition logic. It is\nartful, because, to the unschooled, it presents all that may seem\nnecessary in the foundation of a sound system of theology; and, further,\nbecause every bias of the human heart is predisposed to receive it as an\nentire platform of doctrine. It is insidious and dangerous, because,\nalthough the mind acquiesces in its _truth_, yet it is _false_ when\nproposed as the lone and full foundation of religious belief. On such\nsecret and hidden rocks, infidelity has ever established her _lights_,\nher _beacons_ to the benighted voyager; and, in their surrounding seas,\nthe shallops of hell have for ever been the most successful wreckers, in\ngathering up multitudes of the lost, to be established as faithful\nsubjects of the kingdom of darkness.\n\nThe religious fanatical theorists of this order of abolition writers\nhave further only to establish their doctrine about the \u201cconscience,\u201d\n\u201cinward light,\u201d or \u201cmoral sense,\u201d\u2014that it is a distinct mental power,\ninfallibly teaching what is right, intuitively spreading all truth\nbefore them,\u2014and they will then succeed to qualify man, a being fit to\ngovern the universe, and successfully carry on a war against God!\n\nThe man thus prepared, if an abolitionist, reasons: \u201cMy conscience or\nmoral sense teaches me infallible truth; therefore, my conscience is\nabove all law, or is a \u2018higher law\u2019 than the law of the land. My\nconscience, feelings, and sympathies all teach me that slavery is wrong.\nThus I have been educated. My conscience or moral sense teaches me what\nare the laws of God, without _possible mistake_; and according to their\nteaching, slavery is forbidden.\u201d\n\nIn short, he thinks so; and, therefore, it is so. He \u201cis wiser in his\nown conceit than seven men that can render a reason.\u201d\n\nBut we proceed to notice how the doctrine of the author most distinctly\nagrees with the precepts of infidelity.\n\n\u201cThe deist derives his religion by inference from what he supposes\ndiscoverable of the will and attributes of God, from nature, and the\ncourse of the Divine government.\u201d_Watson\u2019s Theo. Inst._ vol. ii. p. 542.\nThis learned theologian differs widely from Mr. Barnes. When treating of\nslavery, Watson frankly admits that we are indebted to direct revelation\nfor our knowledge on the subject.\n\nIn page 556, he says\u2014\n\n\u201cGovernment in masters, as well as in fathers, is an appointment of God,\nthough differing in circumstances; and it is therefore to be honoured.\n\u2018Let as many servants as are under the yoke, count their own masters\nworthy of all honour;\u2019 a direction which enjoins both respectful\nthoughts and humility and propriety of external demeanour towards them.\n_Obedience_ to their commands in all things lawful is next enforced;\nwhich obedience is to be grounded on principle, on \u2018singleness of heart\nas unto Christ;\u2019 thus serving a master with the same sincerity, the same\ndesire to do the appointed work well, as is required of us by Christ.\nThis service is also to be _cheerful_, and not wrung out merely by a\nsense of duty; \u2018not with eye-service as men-pleasers;\u2019 not having\nrespect simply to the approbation of the master, but \u2018as the servant of\nChrist,\u2019 making profession of his religion, \u2018doing the will of God,\u2019 in\nthis branch of duty, \u2018from the heart,\u2019 with alacrity and good feeling.\nThe duties of servants, stated in these brief precepts, might easily be\nshown to comprehend every particular which can be justly required of\npersons in this station; and the whole is enforced by a sanction which\ncould have no place but in a revelation from God,\u2014\u2018Knowing that\nwhatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the\nLord, whether he be bond or free.\u2019 _Eph._ vi. 5. In other words, even\nthe common duties of servants, when faithfully, cheerfully, and piously\nperformed, are by Christianity made rewardable actions: \u2018Of the Lord ye\nshall receive a reward.\u2019\n\n\u201cThe duties of servants and masters are, however, strictly reciprocal.\nHence, the apostle continues his injunctions as to the right discharge\nof these relations, by saying, immediately after he had prescribed the\nconduct of servants, \u2018And ye masters, do the _same things_ unto them;\u2019\nthat is, act towards them upon the same equitable, conscientious, and\nbenevolent principles as you exact from them. He then grounds his rules,\nas to masters, upon the great and influential principle, \u2018knowing that\nyour Master is in heaven;\u2019 that you are under authority, and are\naccountable to him for your conduct to your servants. Thus masters are\nput under the eye of God, who not only maintains their authority, when\nproperly exercised, by making their servants accountable for any\ncontempt of it, and for every other failure of duty, but holds the\nmaster also himself responsible for its just and mild exercise. A solemn\nand religious aspect is thus at once given to a relation which by many\nis considered as one merely of interest.\u201d\n\n\u201cAll the distinctions of good and evil refer to some principle above\nourselves; for, were there no Supreme Governor and Judge to reward and\npunish, the very notions of good and evil would vanish away.\u201d _Ellis on\nDivine Things._\n\nThe qualities good and evil can only exist in the mind as they are\nmeasured by a supreme law. \u201cIf we deny the existence of a Divine law\nobligatory on men, we must deny that the world is under Divine\ngovernment, for a government without rule or law is a solecism.\u201d\n_Watson\u2019s Theo. Inst._ vol. i. p. 8.\n\nDivine laws must be the subject of revelation. The law of a visible\npower cannot be known without some indications, much less the will of an\ninvisible power, and that, too, of an order of existence so far above\nour own that even its mode is beyond our comprehension. Very true, the\nprovidence of God towards any particular course of conduct may be taken\nas the revelation of his will thus far, but, by no means, preclude the\nnecessity of a more direct revelation, until man shall be able to boast\nthat he comprehends the entire works of Jehovah.\n\nThe difference between the Christian and the mere theist is, while the\nlatter admits that a revelation of the will of God is or has been made\nby significant actions, he contends _that_ is a _sufficient revelation_\nof the laws of God for the guidance of man. \u201cThey who never heard of any\nexternal revelation, yet if they knew from the nature of things what is\nfit for them to do, they know all that God can or will require of them.\u201d\n_Christianity as Old as Creation_, p. 233.\n\n\u201cBy employing our reason to collect the will of God from the fund of our\nnature, physical and moral, we may acquire not only a particular\nknowledge of those laws, which are deducible from them, but a general\nknowledge of the manner in which God is pleased to exercise his supreme\npowers in this system.\u201d _Bolingbroke\u2019s Works_, vol. v. p. 100.\n\n\u201cBut they who believe the holy Scriptures contain a revelation of God\u2019s\nwill, do not deny that indications of his will have been made by\n_actions_; but they contend that they are in themselves imperfect and\ninsufficient, and that they were not designed to supersede a direct\nrevelation. They also hold, that a direct communication of the Divine\nwill was made to the progenitors of the human race, which received\nadditions at subsequent periods, and that the whole was at length\nembraced in the book called, by way of eminence, the Bible.\u201d _Watson\u2019s\nTheo. Inst._ vol. i. p. 10.\n\nFaith \u201cis the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not\nseen.\u201d _Heb._ xi. 1.\n\nAs an instance of revelation, we present _Lev._ xxv. 1, and 44, 45, 46.\n\n\u201cAnd the Lord spake unto Moses in Mount Sinai, saying: Both thy bondmen\nand bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are\nround about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.\u201d\n\n\u201cMoreover, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you,\nof them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which\nthey begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.\u201d\n\n\u201cAnd ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you,\nto inherit them for a possession, they shall be your bondmen for ever;\nbut over your brethren, the children of Israel, ye shall not rule over\none another with rigour.\u201d\n\nHere is direct revelation, and faith gives us evidence of the truth of\nits being of Divine origin.\n\nMr. Barnes proposes, by human reason, without the aid of revelation and\nfaith, to determine what is the will of God on the subject of slavery;\nand it suggests the inquiry, How extensive must be the intellectual\npower of him who can reason with God? \u201cFor he is not a man, as I am,\nthat I should answer him, and we should come together in judgment;\nneither is any daysman betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us\nboth.\u201d _Job_ ix. 32, 33.\n\nWe frankly acknowledge, that, in the investigation of this subject, we\nshall consider the Divine authority of those writings, which are\nreceived by Christians as a revelation of infallible truth, as so\nestablished; and, with all simplicity of mind, examine their contents,\nand collect from them the information they profess to contain, and\nconcerning which information it had become necessary that the world\nshould be experimentally instructed.\n\nBut the passage quoted from Mr. Barnes gives us a stronger suspicion of\nhis want of orthodoxy and Christian principle from its connection with\nwhat he says, page 310:\n\n\u201cIf the religion of Christ allows such a license\u201d (to hold slaves) \u201cfrom\nsuch precepts as these, the New Testament would be the greatest curse\never inflicted on our race.\u201d\n\nThe fact is, little can be known of God or his law except by faith and\nrevelation. Beings whose mental powers are not infinite can never arrive\nat a knowledge of all things, nor can we know any thing fully, only in\nproportion as we comprehend the laws influencing it. In conformity to\nthe present limited state of our knowledge, we can only say, that we\narrive at some little, by three distinct means: the senses open the door\nto a superficial perception of things; the mental powers to their\nfurther examination; while faith gives us a view of the superintending\ncontrol of One Almighty God.\n\nIn the proportion our senses are defective, our mental powers deficient,\nand our faith inactive or awry,\u2014our knowledge will be scanty. The result\nof all knowledge is the perception of truth. Under the head of the\nmental powers, philosophers tell us our knowledge is acquired by three\nmethods: intuition, demonstration, and analogy. By intuition they mean\nwhen the mind perceives a _certainty_ in a proposition where the\nrelation is obvious, as it is obvious that the whole is greater than a\npart; and such propositions they call axioms.\n\nWhen the relation of things is not thus obvious, that is, when the\nproposition involves the _determination_ of the relation between two or\nmore things whose relations are not intuitively perceived, the mind may\nsometimes come to a certainty, concerning the relation, by the\ninterposition of a chain of axioms; that is, of propositions where the\nrelations are intuitively perceived. This is called demonstration.\n\nIn all such cases, the mind would perceive the relation, and come to a\ncertainty intuitively, if adequately cultivated and enlarged; or, in\nother words, all propositions that now, to us, require demonstration,\nwould, to such a cultivation, become mere axioms: consequently, now,\nwhere one man sees a mere axiom, another requires demonstration.\n\nBut the great mass of our ideas are too imperfect or too complicated to\nadmit of intuitive conclusions; consequently, as to them, we can never\narrive at demonstration. Here we substitute facts; and reason, that, as\nheretofore one certain fact has accompanied another certain fact, so it\nwill be hereafter. This is what the philosophers call analogy. Analogy\nis thus founded on experience, and is, therefore, far less perfect than\nintuition or demonstration. That gravitation will always continue is\nanalogical; we do not know it intuitively; nor can we demonstrate it.\nAnalogical propositions are, therefore, to us mere probabilities.\n\nBut our knowledge has cognizance of ideas only. These ideas we\nsubstitute for the things they represent, in which there is a liability\nto err. Thus a compound idea is an assemblage of the properties of a\nthing, and may be incomplete and inadequate; wholly different from any\nquality in the thing itself. What is our idea of spirit, colour, joy?\nYet we may conceive an intelligence so extended as to admit that even\nanalogical problems should become intuitive: with God every thing is\nintuitively known. But even intuitive propositions sometimes reach\nbeyond our comprehension. Example\u2014a line of infinite length can have no\nend: therefore, the half of an infinite line would be a line also of\ninfinite length. But all lines of infinite length are of equal length;\ntherefore, the half of an infinite line is equal to the whole. Such\nfallacies prove that human reason is quite limited and liable to err:\nand hence the importance of faith in God, in the steadfastness of his\nlaws, and the certainty of their operations. \u201cAnd Jesus answering said\nunto them, have faith in God.\u201d _Mark_ xi. 22. \u201cAnd when they were come,\nand had gathered the church together, they rehearsed all that God had\ndone with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the\nGentiles.\u201d _Acts_ xiv. 27. \u201cSo, then, faith cometh by hearing, and\nhearing by the word of God.\u201d _Romans_ x. 17. That is, by revelation.\n\u201cNow faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things\nnot seen.\u201d _Heb._ xi. 1. \u201cBut without faith it is impossible to please\nGod; for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is\nthe rewarder of them that diligently seek him.\u201d _Heb._ xi. 6. \u201cEven so\nfaith, if it hath not works, is dead.\u201d _James_ ii. 17. \u201cAnd he said, I\nwill hide my face from them, I will see what their end _shall be_; for\nthey _are_ a very froward generation, children in whom there is no\nfaith.\u201d _Deut._ xxxii. 20. To which add _Romans_ xii. 3.\n\nThese passages seem to imply an unchangeable reliance on faith and\nrevelation for all knowledge of God, his laws, and our peace hereafter;\nand we do feel the most heartfelt regret to see those who claim to be\nreligious teachers, laying the foundation for the most gross infidelity.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON V.\n\nOn page 6, Mr. Barnes says\u2014\n\n\u201cThe work\u201d (his own) \u201cwhich is now submitted to the public, is limited\nto an examination of the Scripture argument on the subject of slavery.\u201d\n\nNow, if it shall appear that his exertion has universally been to gloss\nover the Scripture, or strain it into some meaning favourable to\nabolition, and adverse to its rational and obvious interpretation, the\nmind will be forced to the conclusion, that his real object has been to\nhide the \u201cScripture argument,\u201d and to limit his researches by what he\nmay deem to be sound reason and philosophy; and let it be remembered\nthat such has been the constant practice or every infidel writer, who\nhas ever attempted to reconcile his own peculiar theories to the\nteachings of the holy books.\n\n\u201cAnd Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother\u2019s son, and all their\nsubstance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in\nHaran and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the\nland of Canaan they came.\u201d _Gen._ xii. 5.\n\n\u201cAnd he entreated Abram well for her sake: and he had sheep, and\nhe-asses, and men-servants (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _va abadim, male slaves_), and\nmaid-servants (\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05d7\u05b9\u05ea _vu shephahoth, female slaves_), and she-asses\nand camels.\u201d xii. 16. \u201cBut Abram said unto Sarai, Behold thy maid\n(\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05e4\u05b0\u05d7\u05b8\u05d4\u05b5\u05da\u05b0 _shiphhathek, female slave_) is in thy hand; do unto her as\nit pleaseth thee. And when Sarai dealt hardly by her, she fled from her\nface. And the angel of the Lord found her by a fountain of water in the\nwilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur. And he said, Hagar,\nSarai\u2019s maid (\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05e4\u05b0\u05d7\u05b7\u05a5\u05ea _shiphhath, female slave_), whence camest thou\nand whither wilt thou go? And she said, I flee from the face of my\nmistress Sarai; and the angel of the Lord said unto her, Return to thy\nmistress and submit thyself unto her hands.\u201d _Gen._ xvi. 6\u20139.\n\n\u201cAnd God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant.\u201d * * * \u201cThis is\nmy covenant.\u201d * * * \u201cAnd he that is eight days old shall be circumcised\namong you, every man-child in your generations, he that is born in the\nhouse, or _bought with money_ of any stranger which is not of thy seed.\nHe that is born in thy house, and he that is _bought with thy money_\nmust needs be circumcised; and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an\neverlasting covenant.\u201d _Gen._ xvii. 9, 10, 12, 13. \u201cAnd all the men of\nhis house, born in the house, and _bought with money_ of the stranger,\nwere circumcised with him.\u201d _Ver._ 27.\n\n\u201cAnd Abimelech took sheep and oxen, and men-servants (\u05d5\u05b7\u05a5\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _va\nabadim, male slaves_), and women-servants (\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05d7\u05b9\u0594\u05ea _vu shephhahoth,\nfemale slaves_), and gave them unto Abraham.\u201d _Gen._ xx. 14.\n\n\u201cWherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out the bond-woman, and her son.\nFor the son of this bond-woman shall not be heir with my son, even with\nIsaac. And God said unto Abraham, let it not be grievous in thy sight,\nbecause of the lad, and because of thy bond-woman.\u201d * * * \u201cAnd also of\nthe son of the bond-woman I will make a nation, because he is of thy\nseed.\u201d _Gen._ xxi. 10, 12, 13.\n\n\u201cFor it is written that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bond-maid,\nthe other by a free-woman. But he who was of the bond-woman was after\nthe flesh, but he of the free-woman was by promise; nevertheless, what\nsaith the scripture? Cast out the bond-woman and her son, for the son of\nthe bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman.\u201d _Gal._\niv. 22, 23, 30.\n\n\u201cAnd he said, I am Abraham\u2019s servant (\u05e2\u05b6\u05a5\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed, male slave_), and\nthe Lord hath blessed my master greatly, and he is become great and he\nhath given him flocks and herds, and silver and gold, and man-servants\n(\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05ad\u05d9\u05b4\u05b4\u05dd _va abadim, and male slaves_), and maid-servants\n(\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05d7\u05b9\u0594\u05ea _vu shephahoth, and female slaves_), and camels and asses.\u201d\n_Gen._ xxiv. 34, 35.\n\n\u201cAnd the man waxed great, and went forward, and grew until he became\nvery great. For he had possession of flocks, and possession of herds,\nand great store of servants (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05bb\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u0596\u05d4\u05bc _va abudda, of slaves_), and\nthe Philistines envied him.\u201d _Gen._ xxvi. 13, 14.\n\n\u201cAnd the man (Jacob) increased exceedingly, and he had much cattle, and\nmaid-servants (\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05d7\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea _vu shephahoth, and female slaves_,) and\nmen-servants (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _va abadim, and male slaves_), and camels and\nasses.\u201d _Gen._ xxx. 43.\n\n\u201cAnd I have oxen and asses, flocks, and men-servants (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b6\u05a3\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ve ebed,\nand male slaves_), and women-servants (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05e4\u05b0\u05d7\u05b8\u0591\u05d4 _ve shiphha, and\nfemale slaves_). And I have sent to tell my lord that I may find grace\nin thy sight.\u201d _Gen._ xxxii. 5.\n\nLet us now notice how Mr. Barnes treats the records here quoted. He\nsays, page 70\u2014\n\n\u201cSome of the servants held by the patriarchs were \u2018bought with money.\u2019\nMuch reliance is laid on this by the advocates of slavery, in justifying\nthe purchase, and consequently, as they seem to reason, the _sale_ of\nslaves now; and it is, therefore, of importance, to inquire, how far the\nfact stated is a justification of slavery as it exists at present. But\none instance occurs, in the case of the patriarchs, where it is said\nthat servants were \u2018bought with money.\u2019 This is the case of Abraham,\n_Gen._ xvii. 12, 13. \u2018And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised\namong you, every man-child in your generations; he that is born in the\nhouse, or _bought with money of any stranger_, which is not of thy seed;\nhe that is born in thy house, and _he that is bought with thy money_,\nmust needs be circumcised.\u2019 Compare verses 23, 27. This is the only\ninstance in which there is mention of the fact that any one of the\npatriarchs had persons in their employment who were bought with money.\nThe only other case which occurs at that period of the world is that of\nthe sale of Joseph, first to the Ishmaelites, and then to the\nEgyptians\u2014a case which, it is believed, has too close a resemblance to\nslavery as it exists in our own country, ever to be referred to with\nmuch satisfaction by the advocates of the system. In the case, moreover,\nof Abraham, it should be remembered that it is the record of a mere\n_fact_. There is no command to buy servants or to sell them, or to hold\nthem as property\u2014any more than there was a command to the brethren of\nJoseph to enter in to a negotiation for the sale of their brother. Nor\nis there any approbation expressed of the fact that they were bought;\nunless the command given to Abraham to affix to them the seal of the\ncovenant, and to recognise them as brethren in the faith which he held,\nshould be construed as such evidence of approval.\n\n\u201cThe inquiry then presents itself, whether _the fact that they were\nbought_ determines any thing with certainty in regard to the nature of\nthe servitude, or to the propriety of slavery as practised now. The\nHebrew, in the passages referred to in Genesis, is \u2018the born in thy\nhouse, and _the purchase of silver_,\u2019 \u05de\u05b4\u05e7\u05b0\u05e0\u05b7\u05d4\u05be\u05db\u05b6\u05bc\u05e1\u05b6\u05e3\u2014 _mi knath\nkeseph_\u2014not incorrectly rendered, \u2018those bought with money.\u2019 The verb\n\u05e7\u05b8\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4 _k\u00e2n\u00e2_, from which the noun here is derived, and which is commonly\nused in the Scriptures when the purchase of slaves is referred to, means\n_to set upright_ or _erect_, to _found_ or _create_. _Gen._ xiv. 19, 22.\n_Deut._ xxxii. 6; _to get for oneself_, _to gain_ or _acquire_. _Prov._\niv. 7, xv. 32; to _obtain_, _Gen._ iv. 1; and _to buy_, or _purchase_,\n_Gen._ xxv. 10; xlvii. 22. In this latter sense it is often used, and\nwith the same latitude of signification as the word _buy_ or _purchase_\nis with us. It is most commonly rendered by the words _buy_ and\n_purchase_ in the Scriptures. See _Gen._ xxv. 10; xlvii. 22; xlix. 30;\n1. 13; _Josh._ xxiv. 32; 2 _Sam._ xii. 3; _Ps._ lxxviii. 54; _Deut._\nxxxii. 6; _Lev._ xxvii. 24, and very often elsewhere. It is applied to\nthe purchase of fields, of cattle, of men, and of every thing which was\nor could be regarded as property. As there is express mention of\n_silver_ or _money_ in the passage before us respecting the servants of\nAbraham, there is no doubt that the expression means that he paid a\nprice for a part of his servants. A part of them were \u2018born in his\nhouse;\u2019 a part had been \u2018bought with money\u2019 from \u2018strangers,\u2019 or were\nforeigners.\n\n\u201cBut still, this use of the word in itself determines nothing in regard\nto the tenure by which they were held, or the nature of the servitude to\nwhich they were subjected. It does not prove that they were regarded as\n_property_ in the sense in which a slave is now regarded as a chattel;\nnor does it demonstrate that the one who was bought ceased to be\nregarded altogether _as a man_; or that it was regarded as right to sell\nhim again. The fact that he was to be circumcised as one of the family\nof Abraham, certainly does not look as if he ceased to be regarded _as a\nman_.\n\n\u201cThe word rendered _buy_ or _purchase_ in the Scriptures, is applied to\nso many kinds of purchases, that no safe argument can be founded on its\nuse in regard to the kind of servitude which existed in the time of\nAbraham. A reference to a few cases where this word is used, will show\nthat nothing is determined by it respecting the tenure by which the\nthing purchased was held. (1.) It is used in the common sense of the\nword _purchase_ as applied to inanimate things, where the property would\nbe absolute. _Gen._ xlii. 2, 7; xliii. 20; xlvii. 19; xxx. 19. (2.) It\nis applied to the purchase of _cattle_, where the property may be\nsupposed to be _as_ absolute. See _Gen._ xlvi. 22, 24; iv. 20; _Job_\nxxxvi. 33; _Deut._ iii. 19; _and often_, (3.) God is represented as\nhaving _bought_ his people; that is, as having ransomed them with a\nprice, or purchased them to himself. _Deut._ xxxii. 6: \u2018Is he not thy\nFather that hath _bought_ thee?\u2019 \u05e7\u05b8\u05bc\u05e0\u05b6\u05da\u05b8\u2014_k\u00e2n\u0115kh\u00e2_, thy purchaser.\n_Exod._ xv. 16: \u2018By the greatness of thine arm they shall be still as a\nstone, till thy people pass over; till the people pass over which thou\nhast _purchased_,\u2019 \u05e7\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05d4\u05b8,_k\u00e2nith\u00e2_. See _Ps._ lxxiv. 2. Compare _Isa._\nxliii. 3: \u2018I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.\u2019 But\nthough the word _purchase_ is used in relation to the redemption of the\npeople of God, the very word which is used respecting the servants of\nAbraham, no one will maintain that they were held as _slaves_, or\nregarded as _property_. Who can tell but what Abraham purchased his\nservants in some such way, by redeeming them from galling captivity? May\nthey not have been prisoners in war, to whom he did an inestimable\nservice in rescuing them from a condition of grievous and hopeless\nbondage? May they not have been _slaves_ in the strict and proper sense,\nand may not his act of purchasing them have been, in fact, a species of\nemancipation in a way similar to that in which God emancipates his\npeople from the galling servitude of sin? The mere act of paying _a\nprice_ for them no more implies that he continued to hold them as\nslaves, than it does now when a man purchases his wife or child who have\nbeen held as slaves, or than the fact that God has redeemed his people\nby a price, implies that he regards them as slaves. (4.) Among the\nHebrews a man might sell himself, and this transaction on the part of\nhim to whom he sold himself would be represented by the word _bought_.\nThus, in _Lev._ xxv. 47, 48: \u2018And if a sojourner or a stranger wax rich\nby thee, and thy brother that dwelleth by him wax poor, and _sell\nhimself_ unto the stranger or sojourner by thee, or to the stock of the\nstranger\u2019s family, after that he is sold, he may be redeemed again.\u2019\nThis transaction is represented as a _purchase_. Ver. 50: \u2018And he shall\nreckon with him that _bought_ him, (Heb. _his purchaser_, \u05e7\u05b9\u05e0\u05b5\u05d4\u05d5\u05bc\n_konaih\u016b_), from the year that he was sold unto the year of jubilee,\u2019\n&c. This was a mere purchase of _time_ or _service_. It gave no right to\nsell the man again, or to retain him in any event beyond a certain\nperiod, or to retain him _at all_, if his friends chose to interpose and\nredeem him. It gave no right of property in the _man_, any more than the\npurchase of the unexpired time of an apprentice, or the \u2018purchase\u2019 of\nthe poor in the State of Connecticut does. In no proper sense of the\nword could this be called _slavery_. (5.) The word _buy_ or _purchase_\nwas sometimes applied to the manner in which a _wife_ was procured. Thus\nBoaz is represented as saying that he had _bought_ Ruth. \u2018Moreover, Ruth\nthe Moabitess, the wife of Mahlon, have I _purchased_ (\u05e7\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05d4\u05b4\u05d9\n_k\u00e2nithi_) to be my wife.\u2019 Here the word applied to the manner in which\nAbraham became possessed of his servants, is applied to the manner in\nwhich a wife was procured. So Hosea says, (ch. iii. 2,) \u2018So I _bought_\nher to me (another word, however, being used in the Hebrew, \u05db\u05b8\u05bc\u05e8\u05b8\u05d4\n_k\u00e2r\u00e2_) for fifteen pieces of silver, and for an homer of barley, and an\nhalf homer of barley.\u2019 Jacob purchased his wives, Leah and Rachel, not\nindeed by the payment of money, but by labour. _Gen._ xxix. 15\u201323. That\nthe practice of _purchasing_ a wife, or paying a _dowry_ for her, was\ncommon, is apparent from _Exod._ xxii. 17; 1 _Sam._ xviii. 25. Compare\n_Judg._ i. 12, 13. Yet it will not be maintained that the wife among the\nHebrews, was in any proper sense a _slave_, or that she was regarded as\nsubject to the laws which regulate property, or that the husband had a\nright to sell her again. In a large sense, indeed, she was regarded, as\nthe conductors of the Princeton Repertory (1836, p. 293) allege, as the\nwife is now, as the _property_ of her husband; that is, she was _his_ to\nthe exclusion of the claim of any other man; but she was his as his\n_wife_, not as his _slave_. (6.) The word \u2018_bought_\u2019 occurs in a\ntransaction between Joseph and the people of Egypt in such a way as\nfarther to explain its meaning. When, during the famine, the money of\nthe Egyptians had failed, and Joseph had purchased all the land, the\npeople proposed to become his servants. When the contract was closed,\nJoseph said to them, \u2018Behold, I have _bought_ you \u2014\u05e7\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u05a8\u05d9\u05d4\u05b4\u05d9\u2014 and your\nland for Pharaoh.\u2019 _Gen._ xlvii. 23. The nature of this contract is\nimmediately specified. They were to be regarded as labouring for\nPharaoh. The land belonged to him, and Joseph furnished the people seed,\nor \u2018stocked the land,\u2019 and they were to cultivate it on shares for\nPharaoh. The fifth part was to be his, and the other four parts were to\nbe theirs. There was a claim on them for _labour_, but it does not\nappear that the claim extended farther. No farmers who now work land on\nshares would be willing to have their condition described as one of\n_slavery_.\n\n\u201cThe conclusion which we reach from this examination of the words _buy_\nand _bought_ as applied to the case of Abraham is, that the use of the\nword determines nothing in regard to the tenure by which his servants\nwere held. They may have been purchased from those who had taken them as\ncaptives in war, and the purchase may have been regarded by themselves\nas a species of redemption, or a most desirable rescue from the fate\nwhich usually attends such captives\u2014perchance from death. The property\nwhich it was understood that he had in them may have been merely\nproperty in their _time_, and not in their persons; or the purchase may\nhave amounted in fact to every thing that is desirable in emancipation;\nand, from any thing implied in the _word_, their subsequent service in\nthe family of Abraham may have been entirely voluntary. It is a very\nmaterial circumstance, also, that _there is not the slightest evidence\nthat either Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob ever sold a slave, or offered one\nfor sale, or regarded them as liable to be sold_. There is no evidence\nthat their servants even descended as a part of an inheritance from\nfather to son. So far, indeed, as the accounts in the Scriptures go, it\nwould be impossible to _prove_ that they would not have been at liberty\nat any time to leave their masters, if they had chosen to do so. The\npassage, therefore, which says that Abraham had \u2018servants _bought_ with\nmoney,\u2019 cannot be adduced to justify slavery as it exists now\u2014even if\nthis were all that we know about it. But (4.) servitude in the days of\nAbraham must have existed in a very mild form, and have had features\nwhich slavery by no means has now. Almost the only transaction which is\nmentioned in regard to the servants of Abraham, is one which could never\noccur in the slave-holding parts of our country. A marauding expedition\nof petty kings came from the north and east, and laid waste the country\naround the vale of Siddim, near to which Abraham lived, and, among other\nspoils of battle, they carried away Lot and his possessions. Abraham, it\nis said, then \u2018armed his trained servants, born in his own house, three\nhundred and eighteen, and pursued them unto Dan,\u2019 and rescued the family\nof Lot and his goods. _Gen._ xiv. This narrative is one that must for\never show that servitude, as it existed in the family of Abraham, was a\nvery different thing from what it is in the United States. The number\nwas large, and it does not appear that any persons but his servants\naccompanied Abraham. They all were armed. They were led off on a distant\nexpedition, where there could have been no power in Abraham to preserve\nhis life, if they had chosen to rise up against him, and no power to\nrecover them, if they had chosen to set themselves free. Yet he felt\nhimself entirely safe when accompanied with this band of armed men, and\nwhen far away from his family and his home. What must have been the\nnature of servitude, where the master was willing to arm such a company,\nto put himself entirely at their disposal, and lead them off to a\ndistant land?\n\n\u201cCompare this with the condition of things in the United States. Here,\nit is regarded as essential to the security of the life of the master\nthat slaves shall never be intrusted with arms. \u2018A slave is not allowed\nto keep or carry a weapon.\u2019[A] \u2018He cannot go from the tenement of his\nmaster, or other person with whom he lives, without a pass, or something\nto show that he is proceeding by authority from his master, employer, or\noverseer.\u2019[B] \u2018For keeping or carrying a gun, or powder, or _shot_, or\n_club_, or _other weapon whatsoever_, offensive or defensive, a slave\nincurs, for each offence, thirty-nine lashes, by order of a justice of\nthe peace;\u2019[C] and in North Carolina and Tennessee, twenty lashes, by\nthe nearest constable, _without_ a conviction by the justice.[D] Here,\nthere is every precaution from laws, and from the dread of the most\nfearful kind of punishment, against the escape of slaves. Here, there is\na constant apprehension that they may rise against their masters, and\nevery security is taken against their organization and combination.\nHere, there is probably not a single master who would, if he owned three\nhundred slaves, _dare_ to put arms in their hands, and lead them off on\nan expedition against a foe. If the uniform precautions and care at the\nSouth against arming the slaves, or allowing them to become acquainted\nwith their own strength, be any expression of the nature of the system,\nslavery in the United States is a very different thing from servitude in\nthe time of Abraham; and it does not prove that in the species of\nservitude existing here it is right to refer to the case of Abraham, and\nto say that it is \u2018_a good patriarchal system_.\u2019 Let the cases be made\nparallel before the names of the patriarchs are called in to justify the\nsystem. But\u2014\n\n\u201c(5.) What _real_ support would it furnish to the system, even if it\nwere true that the cases were wholly parallel? How far would it go to\ndemonstrate that _God_ regards it as a good system, and one that is to\nbe perpetuated, in order that society may reach its highest possible\nelevation? Who would undertake to vindicate all the conduct of the\npatriarchs, or to maintain that all which they practised was in\naccordance with the will of God? They practised concubinage and\npolygamy. Is it therefore certain that this was the highest and purest\nstate of society, and that it was a state which God designed should be\nperpetuated? Abraham and Isaac were guilty of falsehood and deception,\n(_Gen._ xx. 2, _seq._; xxvi. 7;) Jacob secured the birthright by a\ncollusive fraud between him and his mother, (_Gen._ xxvii.) and obtained\nno small part of his property by cunning, (_Gen._ xxx. 36\u201343,) and Noah\nwas drunk with wine, (_Gen._ ix. 21;) and these things are recorded\nmerely _as facts_, without any decided expression of disapprobation; but\nis it therefore to be inferred that they had the approbation of God, and\nthat they are to be practised still, in order to secure the highest\ncondition of society?\n\n\u201cTake the single case of polygamy. Admitting that the patriarchs held\nslaves, the argument in favour of polygamy, from their conduct, would\nbe, in all its main features, the same as that which I suggested, in the\ncommencement of this chapter, as employed in favour of slavery. The\nargument would be this:\u2014That they were good men, the \u2018friends of God,\u2019\nand that what such men practised freely cannot be wrong; that God\npermitted this; that he nowhere forbade it; that he did not record his\ndisapprobation of the practice; and that whatever God permitted in such\ncircumstances, without expressing his disapprobation, must be regarded\nas in itself a good thing, and as desirable to be perpetuated, in order\nthat society may reach the highest point of elevation. It is perfectly\nclear that, so far as the conduct of the patriarchs goes, it would be\njust as easy to construct an argument in favour of polygamy as in favour\nof slavery\u2014even on the supposition that slavery existed then essentially\nas it does now. But it is not probable that polygamy would be defended\nnow as a good institution, and as one that has the approbation of God,\neven by those who defend the domestic institutions of the South.' The\ntruth is, that the patriarchs were good men in their generation, and,\nconsidering their circumstances, were men eminent for piety. But they\nwere imperfect men; they lived in the infancy of the world; they had\ncomparatively little light on the subjects of morals and religion; and\nit is a very feeble argument which maintains that a thing is _right,\nbecause any one or all of the patriarchs practised it_.\n\n\u201cBut after all, what _real_ sanction did God ever give either to\npolygamy or to servitude, as it was practised in the time of the\npatriarchs? Did he command either? Did he ever express approbation of\neither? Is there an instance in which either is mentioned with a\nsentiment of approval? The mere _record_ of actual occurrences, even if\nthere is no declared disapprobation of them, proves nothing as to the\nDivine estimate of what is recorded. There is a _record_ of the \u2018_sale_\u2019\nof Joseph into servitude, first to the Ishmaelites, and then to\nPotiphar. There is no expression of disapprobation. There is no\nexclamation of surprise or astonishment, as if a deed of enormous\nwickedness were done, when brothers sold their own brother into hopeless\ncaptivity. _This_ was done also by those who were subsequently reckoned\namong the \u2018patriarchs,\u2019 and some of whom at the time were probably pious\nmen. Will it be inferred that God approved this transaction; that he\nmeant to smile on the act, when brothers sell their own brothers into\nhopeless bondage? Will this record be adduced to justify kidnapping, or\nthe acts of parents in barbarous lands, who, forgetful of all the laws\nof their nature, sell their own children? Will the record that the\nIshmaelites took the youthful Joseph into a distant land, and sold him\nthere as a slave, be referred to as furnishing evidence that God\napproves the conduct of those who kidnap the unoffending inhabitants of\nAfrica, or _buy_ them there, and carry them across the deep, to be sold\ninto hopeless bondage! Why then should the fact that there is a _record_\nthat the patriarchs held servants, or bought them, without any expressed\ndisapprobation of the deed, be adduced as evidence that God regards\nslavery as a good institution, and intends that it shall be perpetuated\nunder the influence of his religion, as conducing to the highest good of\nsociety? The truth is, that the mere record of a _fact_, even without\nany sentiment of approbation or disapprobation, is no evidence of the\nviews of him who makes it. Are we to infer that Herodotus approved of\nall that he saw or heard of in his travels, and of which he made a\nrecord? Are we to suppose that Tacitus and Livy approved of all the\ndeeds the memory of which they have transmitted for the instruction of\nfuture ages? Are we to maintain that Gibbon and Hume believed that all\nwhich they have recorded was adapted to promote the good of mankind?\nShall the biographer of Nero, and Caligula, and Richard III., and\nAlexander VI., and C\u00e6sar Borgia be held responsible for approving of all\nthat these men did, or of commending their example to the imitation of\nmankind? Sad would be the office of an historian were he to be thus\njudged. Why then shall we infer that _God_ approved of all that the\npatriarchs did, even when there is no formal approbation expressed; or\ninfer, because such transactions have been _recorded_, that _therefore_\nthey are right in his sight?\u201d\n\n-----\n\nFootnote A:\n\n  Rev. Cod. Virg. vol. i. p. 453, sections 83, 84.\n\nFootnote B:\n\n  Ibid. vol. i. p. 422, section 6. See Paulding on Slavery, p. 146.\n\nFootnote C:\n\n  2 Litt. and Smi. 1150; 2 Missouri Laws, 741, section 4.\n\nFootnote D:\n\n  Haywood\u2019s Manual, 521; Stroud on the Laws relating to Slavery, p. 102.\n\n-----\n\nDoes the mind hesitate as to the design of this laboured and lengthy\nargument? That its object is to do away, to destroy the scriptural force\nof the facts stated in these records? Does not this argument\nsubstantially deny that Abraham had slaves bought with money? And even\nif he did have them, then that it was just as wicked at that time as he\nthinks it to be now? Or, if he shall thus far fail, then to bring down\nthe characters of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to a level with Nero,\nCaligula, Richard III., and C\u00e6sar Borgia? And the holy books themselves\nto the standard of Herodotus, Tacitus, and Livy; and inure our mind to\ncompare them with the writings of Hume and Gibbon?\n\nThe writer who lessens our veneration for the characters of the ancient\nworshippers of Jehovah; who, as by a system of special pleading,\nattempts to overspread the simple announcements of the holy books with\ndoubt and uncertainty, however conscientious he may be in these labours\nof his hand, while he assumes a most awful responsibility to God, must\never call down upon himself the universal and determined opposition of\nthe intelligent and good among men.\n\nThe more secret, the more adroit the application of the poison, the more\nintensely wicked is the hand that presents it.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON VI.\n\nMr. Barnes has devoted twenty-four pages of his book to the slavery of\nthe Hebrews in Egypt, wherein we find no instance that his _test_ is\napplied with either fairness of deduction or logical accuracy. Indeed,\nso far as our limited capacity can trace his application to the _test_,\nhe has made but two points:\n\nI. After repeated judgments upon the Egyptians, for hesitating to set\nthe Hebrews free, God, in his providence, effected their deliverance\nfrom slavery. Therefore, we are to infer the indignation of God against\nthe institution of slavery. What were the facts of the case? On account\nof their sins rendering them unfit for the blessings promised their\nfathers, God imposed on them slavery four hundred years,\u2014at the\nexpiration of which time he delivered them from it. When a free negro\nbecomes a public nuisance, the court will give judgment that he shall be\nsold to be a slave five years. The term having expired, if the purchaser\nholds on, and refuses to let him go, the same court will interfere, set\nhim free, and impose heavy penalties on the master. Does the case show\nthat the court feels indignation against the institution of slavery? We\nthink it proves exactly the opposite!\n\nIf the four hundred years of slavery operated to fit the Hebrews for the\nreception of the blessing; if the five years of slavery re-fitted the\nnegro for the rational enjoyment of liberty, we think the providence of\nGod places the institution of slavery in a valuable point of light.\n\nII. In this review of the slavery of the Israelites in Egypt, Mr. Barnes\nhas noticed the fact of their rapid increase, to the extent of their\nbecoming dangerous to the Egyptian government; and he has compared it\nwith the more rapid increase of the slaves over the whites in the Slave\nStates; and suggests a similar danger to the government of the United\nStates,\u2014adding, that such increase \u201ccan be arrested by nothing but\nemancipation.\u201d Now all this may be true; but in what light does it show\nforth the institution of slavery? Does Mr. Barnes really mean to say,\nwhat is the fact, that the condition of slavery is so well adapted to\nthe negro race, that, by it, their comforts, peace of mind, and general\nhappiness are made so certain and well-secured to them, that they\nincrease rapidly? And that, as they are a race of people whom we do not\ndesire to bear rule over us, or become more numerous than they now are,\nit would be good policy, and he desires, to set them free, in order that\nthey may be deprived of their present comforts, peace of mind, and\nhappiness, with the view to lessen their increase, and waste them away?\nIf such really be his view, we may regard it as an extraordinary\ninstance of his Christian counsel, and form some idea of what he would\nbe as a slave-holder. But the same increase of the slaves happened in\nEgypt in a different age, and in reference to a different class of men;\nnor could any exertion correct it. We may apply the _test_, and safely\ninfer, THAT GOD SMILES ON THE INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY.\n\nThere is, in this chapter on the slavery of the Hebrews, an allusion\nmade to the States of Ohio and Kentucky, (see page 102;) the one\nrepresented as \u201cadorned with smiling villages, and cottages, and\nchurches, and the aspect of neatness, thrift, and order;\u201d and that the\nother wears \u201cthe aspect of ignorance, irreligion, neglect, and\ndesolation;\u201d and that the reason of the difference is, because \u201cGod\nsmiles upon the free State, and frowns upon the one where slavery\nexists.\u201d\n\nWe do not deem it necessary to question or even examine the correctness\nof the view of Kentucky, as presented to us by Mr. Barnes: so far as the\nargument is concerned, we will take it as established. If the\ninstitution of slavery is of Divine origin, or if we are to form a\nnotion of the will of God respecting it from his providences affecting\nthe institution, we must keep our eye upon the subject of slavery, not\nupon those otherwise conditioned. We must look to the slave in Kentucky,\nand compare his conditions there with his conditions in a state of\nfreedom; and Mr. Barnes has furnished us with data, proving that in\nKentucky the slaves are in a rapid state of propagation and increase.\n\nPage 95, he says\u2014\u201cThe whites were to the slaves\u2014\n\n                                      In 1790.        In 1840.\n\n          North Carolina,            2.80 to 1       1.97 to 1\n          South Carolina,           1.31 \u201d   1        79 \u201d   1\n          Georgia,                  1.76 \u201d   1      1.44 \u201d   1\n          Tennessee,               13.35 \u201d   1      3.49 \u201d   1\n          Kentucky,                 5.16 \u201d   1      3.23 \u201d   1\n\n\u201cFrom this it is apparent that, in spite of all the oppressions and\ncruelties of slavery, of all the sales that are effected, of all the\nremovals to Liberia, and of all the removals by the escape of the\nslaves, there is a regular gain of the slave population over the free in\nthe slave-holding States. No oppression prevents it here more than it\ndid in Egypt, and there can be no doubt whatever that, unless slavery\nshall be arrested in some way, the increase is so certain that the\nperiod is not far distant when, in all the Slave States, the free whites\nwill be far in the minority. At the first census, taken in 1790, in\nevery Slave State there was a very large majority of whites. At the last\ncensus, in 1840, the slaves out-numbered the whites in South Carolina,\nMississippi, and Louisiana. The tendency of this, from causes which it\nwould be easy to state, can be arrested by nothing but emancipation.\u201d\n\nBut Mr. Barnes does not state what those causes are; and will he\nacknowledge that they really are what we have before stated? So far as\nthese facts teach any thing, it is that God smiles on the institution of\nslavery. Let it be true, as Mr. Barnes says it is, that Ohio exhibits a\nstate of prosperity, and Kentucky a state of \u201c_desolation_,\u201d\u2014the\nlegitimate deduction is, that those, having the direction and government\nof affairs in Ohio are wiser and more intelligent than those of the same\nclass in Kentucky. We shall leave all further view of the matter to Mr.\nBarnes and the people of Kentucky.\n\nThe four hundred years of slavery in Egypt were not a sentence on the\nHebrews for the especial benefit of the Egyptians, but for that of the\nHebrews themselves. The court did not sentence the free negro, who had\nbecome a nuisance, to five years of slavery, for the especial benefit of\nthe purchaser, but for the prospect of amelioration in the negro\nhimself. The races of Ham were not made subject to slavery for the\nespecial benefit of Shem and Japheth; but because, in such slavery,\ntheir condition would be more elevated, and better, than in a state of\nfreedom. The slave-owner may be very wicked, and God may destroy him for\nhis wickedness, and yet his merciful designs, by the institution of\nslavery, not be affected thereby. An eastern monarch, determined to\ndestroy his minister, sent him a present of a thousand slaves and a\nhundred elephants. The minister dared not refuse the present; but not\nbeing able profitably to employ them, was ruined. But the condition of\nthe slave and the elephant was not injured. The poor-house was not made\nfor the especial benefit of its keeper, but for its subjects.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VII.\n\nThe benefit of the slave-owner depends on a different principle, upon\nthe wisdom, propriety, and prudence with which he governs and manages\nhis slaves. If he neglect their morals, suffering them to become idle,\nrunaways, dissolute, thieves, robbers, and committers of crime, he is\nmade, to some extent, responsible; or if he neglect to supply suitable\nclothing, food, and medicine, attention in sickness, and all other\nnecessary protection, he is liable to great loss; his profit may be\ngreatly diminished; or, if he abuse his slave with untoward cruelty, he\nmay render him less fit for labour,\u2014may destroy him altogether; or the\nlaw may set in, and compel the slave to be sold to a less cruel master.\n_The interest of the master has become protection to the slave_; and\nthis principle holds good in all countries, in all ages, and among all\nmen. But it is yet said, that there are men who most outrageously abuse,\nand sometimes kill their slaves. Very true and because some men do the\nsame to their wives, is it any argument against marriage? It proves that\nthere are men who are not fit to be slave-owners. And what is the\nprovidence of God, as generally manifested, in these cases? That such\nhusband does not enjoy the full blessing designed by the institution of\nmarriage; or such marriage is, in some way, shortly set aside. That such\nslave-owner does not enjoy the full benefit a different course would\ninsure to him; or, in some way, he is made to cease being a slave-owner.\nSuch instances are most direct and powerful manifestations against the\nabuses,\u2014not of the institution itself.\n\nBut God has not left his displeasure of the abuses of slavery to be\nfound out by our poor, dim, mortal eyes; by our weak view of his\nmanifestations. He made direct laws on the subject.\n\n\u201cBut the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God; _in it_ thou\nshalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy\n_man-servant_ (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 _abeddeka_, _male slave_,) nor thy\n_maid-servant_ (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05d0\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05bd\u05ea\u05b6\u05da\u05b8 _va amatheka_, _nor thy female slave_), nor\nthy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates.\u201d _Exod._ xx. 10.\n\n\u201cBut the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou\nshalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy\nman-servant (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8\u05c4 _ve abeddeka_, _male slave_), nor thy\nmaid-servant (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05d0\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05d7\u05b6\u05da\u05b8 _va amatheka_, _female slave_), nor thine ox,\nnor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within\nthy gates; that thy man-servant (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 _abeddeka_, _male slave_) and\nthy maid-servant (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05d0\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05bd\u05ea\u05b6\u05da\u05b8 _va amatheka_, _female slave_) may rest\nas well as thou.\u201d _Deut._ v. 14.\n\nBut we find laws correcting abuses of quite a different nature; abuses\nthat grow out of the perverse nature of man towards his fellow-man of\nequal grade, touching their mutual rights in property:\n\n\u201cThou shalt not covet thy neighbour\u2019s house, thou shalt not covet thy\nneighbour\u2019s wife, nor his _man-servant_ (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u05a4\u05d5\u05b9 _ve abeddo_, _male\nslave_), nor his _maid-servant_ (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05d0\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05ea\u05d5\u05b9 _va amatho_, _female\nslave_), nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy\nneighbour\u2019s.\u201d _Exod._ xx. 17.\n\n\u201cNeither shalt thou desire thy neighbour\u2019s wife, neither shalt thou\ncovet thy neighbour\u2019s house, his field, or his _man-servant_\n(\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u05a4\u05d5\u05b9 _ve abeddo_, _male slave_), or his _maid-servant_:\n(\u05d5\u05b7\u05d0\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05ea\u05d5\u05b9 _va amatho_, _female slave_), his ox, or his ass, or any\nthing that is thy neighbour\u2019s.\u201d _Deut._ v. 21\u2014the 18th of the Hebrew\ntext.\n\nIt does appear to us that these statutes speak volumes\u2014portraying the\nprovidences of God, and his design in regard to the institutions of\nslavery. The word covet, as here used, as well as its original, implies\nthat action of the mind which reaches to the possession of the thing\nourselves, and to the depriving of our neighbour, without a glimpse at\nthe idea of payment, reciprocity, or compromise; consequently, it is the\nexact action of mind, which, when cultivated into physical display,\nmakes a man a thief. The command forbids that the mind shall be thus\nexercised, for the command only reaches to the exercise of the mind; an\nexercise, which, from the very nature of it, must for ever draw us\ndeeper into crime. It is a command that well comes to us from Jehovah\ndirect, because it is a command that man could never enforce: the\nindividual, and Jehovah alone, can only and surely tell when it is\nbroken. But it may be broken in various ways; it may be broken by\nwriting books persuading others that it is no crime, that it is even\npraiseworthy, by any other course of conduct, to weaken the tenure of\nthe proprietor in the property named.\n\n                \u201cBut fools do sometimes fearless tread,\n                Where angels dare not even look!\u201d\n\nWe hold the doctrine good that, whenever we find that the providence of\nGod frowns upon the abuse of a thing, such abuse is contrary to his law.\nSo, also, the doctrine is indisputably true that all laws, all\nprovidences against the abuse of a thing, necessarily become laws and\nprovidences for the protection of the thing itself; consequently, it\nalways follows that they contemplate protection.\n\nMr. Barnes compares the slavery of the Hebrews in Egypt to the condition\nof slavery in the United States, and complains of the harsh treatment of\nthe slaves in the latter country. See p. 92:\n\n\u201cPreventing the slaves from being taught to read and write; prohibiting,\nas far as possible, all knowledge among themselves of their own numbers\nand strength; forbidding all assemblages, even for worship, where there\nmight be danger of their becoming acquainted with their own strength,\nand of forming plans for freedom; enacting laws of excessive severity\nagainst those who run away from their masters; appointing severe and\ndisgraceful punishments, either with or without the process of law, for\nthose who are suspected of a design to inform the slaves that they are\nmen and that they have the rights of human beings; and solemnly\nprohibiting the use of arms among the slaves, designed to prevent their\nrising upon their masters, or \u2018joining themselves to an enemy to fight\nagainst their masters,\u2019 and \u2018getting up out of the land.\u2019\u201d\n\nWe did suppose from this passage that Mr. Barnes might desire us to lie\ndown, and _let the slaves kill or make slaves of us_. But he has\npresented us with his cure for all these wrongs on pages 383, 384. He\nsays\u2014\n\n\u201cNow here, I am persuaded, is a wise model for all other denominations\nof Christian men, and the true idea of all successful efforts for the\nremoval of this great evil from the land. Let all the evangelical\ndenominations but follow the simple example of the Quakers in this\ncountry, and slavery would soon come to an end. There is not power of\nnumbers and influence out of the church to sustain it. Let every\ndenomination in the land _detach itself_ from all connection with\nslavery, without saying a word against others; let the time come when,\nin all the mighty denominations of Christians, it can be assured that\nthe evil has ceased _with them_ FOR EVER; and let the voice, from each\ndenomination, be lifted up in kind, but firm and solemn, testimony\nagainst the system; with no \u2018mealy\u2019 words; with no attempt at apology;\nwith no wish to blink it; with no effort to throw the sacred shield of\nreligion over so great an evil; and the work is done. There is no public\nsentiment in this land, there could be none created, that would resist\nthe power of such testimony. There is no power _out_ of the church that\ncould sustain slavery an hour, if it were not sustained in it. Not a\nblow need be struck. Not an unkind word need be uttered. No man\u2019s motive\nneed be impugned. No man\u2019s proper rights invaded. All that is needful is\nfor each Christian man, and every Christian church, to stand up in the\nsacred majesty of such a solemn testimony; to free themselves from all\nconnection with the evil, and utter a calm and deliberate voice to the\nworld; and THE WORK WILL BE DONE!\u201d\n\nThis looks very much like converting the church into an instrument of\npolitical power. We might indulge in severe remarks. We might quote some\nvery cogent and rebuking passages of Scripture; but, since we believe\nthat where the spirit of Christ is, he will be there also, we do not\ndeem it necessary.\n\nFrom the very considerable labour evidently bestowed in the preparation\nof the _test_, apparently to be applied in his reasoning on this\nsubject, a feeling of disappointment rests upon the mind when we\ndiscover how little use Mr. Barnes has made of it.\n\nWe have given a view of Mr. Barnes\u2019s peroration; his complaints; the\nwrongs that excite his sympathy; and his final conclusion of the whole\nmatter. We have attempted to reason by the same rule he has adopted,\nand, so far as he has chosen to apply it, leave it to others to judge\nwhether it is not most fatal to the cause he advocates.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VIII.\n\nWe are told that book-making, among some, has become a trade. That some\nmen write books to order, to suit the market; that there is no knowing\nwhat may be an author\u2019s principles, or whether he has any at all, by\nwhat may be in his book.\n\nThe principal object of such a writer must be his money\u2014his pay: if in\ngreat haste to get it in possession, he may be expected sometimes to be\ncareless; and unless very talented and experienced in the subject on\nwhich he writes, to record contradictions.\n\nPage 83, Mr. Barnes says\u2014\u201cThe Hebrews were not essentially distinguished\nfrom the Egyptians, as the Africans are from their masters in this land,\nby colour.\u201d But he continues, pages 86 and 87\u2014\u201cThey (the Hebrews) were a\n_foreign_ race, as the African race is with us. They were not Egyptians,\nany more than the nations of Congo are Americans. They were not of the\nchildren of Ham. They were of another family; they differed from the\nEgyptians, by whom they were held in bondage, as certainly as the\nAfrican does from the Caucasian or the Malay divisions of the great\nfamily of man.\u201d\n\nIn page 228, on another subject, he says\u2014\u201cIf, therefore, it be true that\nslavery did not prevail in Judea; that there is no evidence that the\nHebrews engaged in the traffic, and that the prophets felt themselves at\nliberty to denounce the system as contrary to the spirit of the Mosaic\ninstitutions, these FACTS will furnish an important explanation of some\nthings in regard to the subject in the New Testament, and will prepare\nus to enter on the inquiry how it was regarded by the Saviour; for if\nslavery did not exist in Palestine in his time: if he never came in\ncontact with it, it will not be fair to infer that he was not opposed to\nit, because he did not often refer to it, and expressly denounce it.\u201d\n\nThis is in strict conformity with the following:\n\nPage 242. \u201cThere is no conclusive evidence that he ever came in contact\nwith slavery at all. * * * There is no proof which I have seen referred\nto from any contemporary writer, that it existed in Judea in his time at\nall; and there is no evidence from the New Testament that he ever came\nin contact with it.\u201d\n\nAlso, page 244. \u201cThere is not the slightest proof that the Saviour ever\ncame in contact with slavery at all, either in public or in private\nlife.\u201d\n\nAlso, page 249. \u201cWe have seen above, that there is no evidence that when\nthe Saviour appeared, slavery in any form existed in Judea, and\nconsequently there is no proof that he ever encountered it.\u201d\n\nPermit us to compare these statements with _Matt._ viii. 5\u201314:\n\n\u201cAnd when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a\ncenturion, beseeching him, (verse 6,) and saying, Lord, my _servant_,\n&c. (Verse 9,) For I am a man of authority, having soldiers under me;\nand I say to this man go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he\ncometh, and to my SERVANT (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1ff3, _slave_), Do this, and he doeth it,\u201d\n&c.\n\nAlso, _Luke_ vii. 2\u201310. \u201cAnd a certain centurion\u2019s _servant_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n_slave_) was sick,\u201d &c. * * * \u201cbeseeching him that he would come and\nheal his _servant_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _slave_.)\u201d (Verse 10,) \u201cAnd they that were\nsent, returning to the house, found the _servant_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _slave_)\nwhole that had been sick.\u201d\n\nSo also, _Luke_ xix. 12\u201316. (Verse 13,) \u201cAnd he called his ten\n_servants_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, _slaves_),\u201d &c. Also _John_ viii. 33\u201336: \u201cAnd they\nanswered him, we be Abraham\u2019s seed, and were never _in bondage_\n(\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, _in slavery_) to any man; how sayest thou, Ye shall be\nmade free?\u201d (Verse 34,) \u201cJesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto\nyou, whoever committeth sin is the servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _slave_) of sin.\u201d\n(Verse 35,) \u201cAnd the servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _slave_) abideth not in the house\nfor ever, but the Son abideth ever. If the Son therefore make you free,\nyou shall be free indeed.\u201d\n\nPermit us also to compare them with the following, Mr. Barnes\u2019s _own\nstatements_. See page 250: \u201cAll that the argument does require, whatever\nconclusion we may reach as to the manner in which the apostles treated\nthe subject, is, the admission of the _fact_, that slavery _everywhere_\nabounded; that it existed in forms of great severity and cruelty; that\nit involved all the essential claims that are now made by masters to the\nservices or persons of slaves; that it was protected by civil laws; that\nthe master had the right of transferring his slaves by sale, donation,\nor testament; that in general he had every right which was supposed to\nbe necessary to perpetuate the system; and that it was impossible that\nthe early preachers of Christianity should not encounter this system,\nand be constrained to adopt principles in regard to the proper treatment\nof it.\u201d\n\nAnd, again, page 251: \u201cIt is fair that the advocates of the system\nshould have all the advantage which can be derived from the fact, that\nthe apostles found it in its most odious forms, and in such\ncircumstances as to make it proper that they should regard, and treat it\nas an evil, if Christianity regards it as such at all.\u201d\n\nAnd, again, pages 259, 260: \u201cI am persuaded that nothing can be gained\nto the cause of anti-slavery by attempting to deny that the apostles\nfound slavery in existence in the regions where they founded churches,\nand that those sustaining the relation of master and slave were admitted\nto the churches, if they gave real evidence of regeneration, and were\nregarded by the apostles as entitled to the common participation of the\nprivileges of Christianity.\u201d\n\nBut there are other errors in this \u201cScriptural View of Slavery,\u201d page\n245:\n\n\u201cHe (the Saviour) never uttered a word _in favour_ of slavery, * * * not\neven a _hint_ can be found, in all he said, on which a man * * * who\nmeant to keep one already in his possession, could rely to sustain his\ncourse.\u201d\n\nWe ask that this assertion of Mr. Barnes shall be compared with _Luke_\nxvii. 7\u201311:\n\n\u201cBut which of you having a servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _slave_) ploughing, or\nfeeding cattle, will say unto him, by and by, when he has come from the\nfield, Go, sit down to meat? And will not rather say unto him, Make\nready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself and serve me, till I have\neaten and drunken, and afterward thou shalt eat and drink? Doth he thank\nthat servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u1ff3, _slave_) because he did the things that were\ncommanded him? I trow not.\u201d \u201cSo likewise ye, when ye shall have done all\nthose things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants;\nwe have done that which was our duty to do.\u201d\n\nAnd, again, Mr. Barnes says: \u201cThe nations of Palestine were devoted to\ndestruction, not to servitude.\u201d See page 118.\n\nCompare this with the following, from page 156: \u201cThere were particular\nreasons operating for subjecting the nations around Palestine to\nservitude, which do not exist now. They were _doomed_ to servitude for\n_sins_.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IX.\n\n_Deut._ xxiii. 9. \u201cWhen the host goeth forth against thine enemies, then\nkeep thee from every wicked thing\u201d\u2014directions what to do, or what not to\ndo, in time of war, being continued, the 15th and 16th verses read thus:\n\n\u201cThou shalt not deliver up to his master the servant (_slave_) which is\nescaped unto thee.\u201d * * * \u201cHe shall dwell with thee, _even_ among you in\nthat place which he shall choose in one of thy gates where it liketh him\nbest; thou shalt not oppress him.\u201d\n\nThis passage is quoted by Mr. Barnes, upon which he says, page 140\u2014\n\n\u201cI am willing to admit that the command _probably_ relates only to the\nslaves which escaped to the country of the Hebrews from surrounding\nnations; and that in form it did not contemplate the runaway slaves of\nthe Hebrews in their own land.\u201d\n\nPray, then, for what purpose does he speak as follows?\n\n\u201cA seventh essential and fundamental feature of the Hebrew slavery was,\nthat the runaway slave was not to be restored to his master; on this\npoint the law was absolute.\u201d\n\nAnd to sustain this assertion, he quotes this same passage from\nDeuteronomy, and, commenting thereon, says, pages 140, 141\u2014\u201cThis solemn\nand fundamental enactment would involve the following results or\neffects. (1.) No laws could ever be enacted in the Hebrew commonwealth\nby which a runaway slave could be restored to his master. No revolution\nof the government, and no change of policy, could ever modify this\nprinciple of the constitution. (2.) No magistrate could on any pretence\ndeliver up a runaway slave.\u201d\n\nThen, again, page 190:\n\n\u201cSlaves of the United States are to be restored to their masters, if\nthey endeavour to escape. We find among the fundamental principles of\nthe Mosaic laws a provision that the slave was _never_ to be restored,\nif he attempted to do thus. He was to find in the land of Judea an\nasylum. The power and authority of the commonwealth were pledged for his\nprotection.\u201d\n\nAnd yet, again, page 226:\n\n\u201cAs one of the results of this inquiry, it is apparent that the Hebrews\nwere not a nation of slaveholders.\u201d\n\nWe present these passages to shows Mr. Barnes\u2019s mode of argument. But\nlet us examine, for a moment, the indications of the holy books on the\nsubject of runaway slaves. When David had protected the flocks of Nabal,\nupon the mountains of Carmel, on a holiday, he sent his young men, to\nask a present, as some compensation for the same.\n\n\u201cAnd Nabal answered David\u2019s servants, and said, Who is David? and who is\nthe son of Jesse? There be many servants ( _abadim_, _slaves_) nowadays\nthat break away every man from his master. Shall I then take my bread,\nand my water, and my flesh that I have killed for my shearers, and give\n_it_ unto men, whom I know not whence they be?\u201d 1 _Sam._ xxv. 10, 11.\n\nWe think the indications are that for slaves to run away was a common\noccurrence, and that it was immoral to give them countenance or\nprotection and Nabal, pretending that David might be one of that class,\nexcused himself from bestowing the present on that account.\n\n\u201cAnd it came to pass at the end of three years, that two of the servants\n(\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _abadim_, _slaves_) of Shemei ran away unto Achish, son of\nMaachah king of Gath; and they told Shemei, saying, Behold thy servants\n(\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b6\u05d9\u05da\u05b8, _abadeka_, _slaves_) _be_ in Gath. And Shemei arose and\nsaddled his ass, and went to Gath to Achish to seek his servants\n(\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u0591\u05d9\u05d5 _abadav_, _slaves_); and Shemei went and brought his servants\n(\u05e2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05d9\u05d5 _abadav_, _slaves_) from Gath.\u201d 1 _Kings_, ii. 39, 40.\n\nIf it can be said that Jehovah has views and wishes, then it may he\nsaid, that the views and wishes of Jehovah on the subject of runaway\nslaves must, at all times, be the same. \u201cIn him there is no\nvariableness, nor shadow of turning.\u201d\n\n\u201cAnd she had a _hand-maid_ (\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05e4\u05b0\u05d7\u05b7\u05d4 _shiphehah_, _female slave_), an\nEgyptian (\u05de\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05e8\u05b4\u05d9\u05ea _mitserith_, _Egyptian_, _a descendant of Misraim,\nthe second son of Ham_), whose name was Hagar.\u201d _Gen._ xvi. 1.\n\nUpon a feud between her and her mistress, her mistress dealt hardly by\nher, and she ran away: \u201cAnd the angel of the Lord found her by a\nfountain of water in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to\nShur.\u201d (8th verse,) \u201cAnd he said, Hagar, Sarai\u2019s maid, whence comest\nthou? and whither wilt thou go? And she said, I flee from the face of my\nmistress Sarai.\u201d (The angel did not say to her, \u201cHere is a shilling; get\ninto Canada as soon as possible!\u201d) \u201cAnd the angel of the Lord said unto\nher, Return to thy mistress and submit thyself under her hands.\u201d _Gen._\nxvi. 7\u20139.\n\nOn page 117, Mr. Barnes says\u2014\n\n\u201cIn the laws of Moses, there is but one way mentioned by which a\nforeigner could be made a slave; that is, by purchase. _Lev._ xxv. 44.\nAnd it is remarkable that the Hebrews were not permitted to make slaves\nof the captives taken in war.\u201d\n\nLet us compare this assertion, made by Mr. Barnes, with the 31st of\nNumbers:\n\n\u201cAnd the Lord spake unto Moses saying, Avenge the children of Israel of\nthe Midianites. * * * (Verse 9,) And the children of Israel took all the\nwomen of Midian captives, and their little ones. * * * (Verse 11,) And\nthey took all the spoils and all the prey, both of men and of beasts.\n(Verse 12,) And they brought the captives and the prey unto Moses and\nEleazar the priest. * * * (Verse 25,) And the Lord spake unto Moses,\nsaying, Take the sum of the prey that was taken, both of man and beast.\n* * * (Verse 27,) And divide the prey into two parts, between them that\ntook the war upon them, who went out to battle, and between all the\ncongregation. * * * (Verse 28,) And levy a tribute unto the Lord of the\nmen of war which went out to battle, one soul of five hundred, both of\nthe persons and of the beeves. * * * (Verse 30,) And of the children of\nIsrael\u2019s half, thou shalt take one portion of fifty of the persons, &c.\n* * * (Verse 32,) And the booty, being the rest of the prey, which the\nmen of war had, was * * * sheep. (Verse 35,) And thirty-two thousand\npersons in all. * * * (Verse 36,) And the half which was the portion of\nthem that went out to war, was, &c. * * * sheep, &c. (Verse 40,) \u201cAnd\nthe persons were sixteen thousand, of which the Lord\u2019s tribute was\nthirty and two persons. (Verse 42) And the children of Israel\u2019s half\nwhich Moses divided from the men that warred * * * was, &c. * * * sheep,\n&c. * * * (Verse 46,) and sixteen thousand persons. (Verse 47,) Even of\nthe children of Israel\u2019s half, Moses took one portion of fifty, both of\nman and of beast, and gave them unto the Levites which kept the charge\nof the tabernacle of the Lord, as the Lord commanded Moses.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON X.\n\nIn ancient times, all persons conquered in battle were liable to be put\nto death by the national laws then existing. If the conqueror suffered\nthe captive to escape death, imposing on him only the cutting off his\nthumbs, hands, or ears; or, without these personal deformations,\nsubjecting him to slavery, as was often the case, especially when the\ncaptive was of low grade,\u2014it was ever regarded as an act of mercy in the\nconqueror.\n\nIn the 17th verse of the thirty-first chapter of Numbers, Moses\ncommanded that \u201cevery male among the little ones, and every woman who\nhad known a man,\u201d should be killed, even after they had been taken to\nthe Israelitish camp; and that none should be reserved for slaves,\nexcept female children, of whom, it appears, there were thirty-two\nthousand. The booty taken in this war, was distributed by Moses, in\nconformity to the especial direction of God himself, as follows:\u2014(Verse\n25,) \u201cAnd the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, (verse 26,) Take the sum of\nthe prey that was taken, _both_ of man and of beast, thou, and Eleazar\nthe priest, and the chief fathers of the congregation, (verse 28,) and\nlevy a tribute unto the Lord of the men of war which went out to battle:\none soul of five hundred, _both_ of the PERSONS, and of the beeves, and\nof the asses, and of the sheep: (verse 29,) Take it of their half, and\ngive it unto Eleazar the priest, _for_ a heave-offering of the Lord.\n(Verse 30,) And of the children of Israel\u2019s half, thou shalt take one\nportion of fifty of the PERSONS, of the beeves, of the asses, and of the\nflocks, of all manner of beasts, and give them to the Levites which keep\nthe charge of the tabernacle of the Lord. (Verse 31,) And Moses and\nEleazar did as the Lord commanded Moses.\u201d\n\nHoubigant, in his commentary upon this chapter, has given us the\nfollowing\n\n         _Table of the distribution of the booty of this war_:\n\n Sheep     675,000 { To the Soldiers   337,500 To the Lord           675\n                   { \u201d    People       337,500 \u201d   Levites         6,750\n Beeves     72,000 { \u201d    Soldiers      36,000 \u201d   Lord               72\n                   { \u201d    People        36,000 \u201d   Levites           720\n Asses      61,000 { \u201d    Soldiers      30,500 \u201d   Lord               61\n                   { \u201d    People        30,500 \u201d   Levites           610\n Persons    32,000 { \u201d    Soldiers      16,000 \u201d   Lord               32\n                   { \u201d    People        16,000 \u201d   Levites           320\n\nThis table has been adopted by Dr. Adam Clark in his Commentary, to\nwhich he adds\u2014\n\n\u201cIn this table the booty is equally divided between the people and the\nsoldiers; a five-hundredth part being given to the Lord, and a fiftieth\npart to the Levites.\u201d And this learned divine, in his commentary on the\n28th verse, says\u2014\u201cAnd levy a tribute unto the Lord, one soul of five\nhundred, &c. * * * The _persons_ to be employed in the Lord\u2019s service,\nunder the Levites: the _cattle_ either for sacrifice or for the use of\nthe Levites. (Verse 30.) Some monsters have supposed that _one_ out of\nevery _five hundred_ of the captives was offered in sacrifice to the\nLord! But this is abominable. When God chose to have the life of a man,\nhe took it in the way of _justice_, as in the case of the Midianites\nabove; but never in the way of _sacrifice_.\u201d\n\nIn the 29th verse, we learn that the Lord\u2019s portion was to be given to\nEleazar the priest, \u201cfor a heave-offering of the Lord.\u201d The word\n_heave-offering_ is rendered from the word \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e8\u05a5\u05d5\u05d5\u05bc\u05de\u05b7\u0596\u05ea _ter\u016bmath_, from\nthe root \u05e8\u05d5\u05bc\u05dd _r\u016bm_, which means a lifting up, exalting, elevation of\nrank, while the form here used means a gift, a contribution, associated\nwith the idea of being lifted up, exalted, elevated to a higher\ncondition. Hence, when the priest presented a heave-offering, he moved\nhis censer upwards, in a perpendicular line, with the view to intimate\nthe elevating tendency resulting from the relation of the person\noffering, the thing offered, and the one to whom it is offered; whereas,\nin a wave-offering, he moved his censer in a horizontal line, intimating\na relation of steadfastness and unchangeability. Because the cross is\nrepresented by perpendicular and horizontal lines, some early\ncommentators have imagined that the heave and wave-offerings were\ntypical of the cross of Christ. The word \u201cheave,\u201d as here used, is\npurely Saxon; _heafan_, to lift, to raise, to move upward. We may well\nsay _to heave up_; but it is bad Saxon to say _heave down_. From this\nsame Saxon word comes our word _heaven_, on account of the notion of its\nlofty location, and the elevating influence of the acts of him who shall\nreach it; each act which makes us nearer heaven may not inappropriately\nbe considered a heave-offering to the Lord. The corollary is, that if\nGod had regarded the making these children slaves a sin,\u2014since sin\nalways deteriorates and degrades, the reverse of elevation or lifting\nup,\u2014he never could have ordered any of them to be given to him as a\n_heave-offering_.\n\nWe trust to establish the point that the enslavement of such people as\nwe find the African hordes now to be, to those who have a more correct\nknowledge of God and his laws,\u2014of those most wicked Midianites, to those\nto whom God had most especially revealed himself,\u2014must, so long as the\nlaws of God operate, have an elevating influence upon those so enslaved.\nThus we shall perceive that the Hebrew word translated into our old\nSaxon _heave-offering_ was the most appropriate, and significant of the\nfacts of the case, that could be expressed by language.\n\nOur received version of this chapter, which is a good translation of the\noriginal, contains no word by which we directly express the idea of\nslavery: so is it in the original. But we trust the readers of either\nwill not be found so awry as not to perceive that the idea and facts are\nas fully and substantially developed as though those terms were used in\neach.\n\nIn the most of languages, an idea, and facts in relation to it, may be\nand are often expressed without the use of the name of the idea, and\nsometimes of the facts. The Greek is well deemed a most particular and\ndefinite language. In Thucydides, liber vii. caput 87, this sentence\noccurs: \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd \u0391\u03b8\u1f74\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03a3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03bb\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f24 \u1f38\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b9\u03c9\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03ad\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf. Here, there is no word expressing\nthe idea of slavery. Literally, it is: \u201cThen, except the Athenians, and\nsome of the Sicilians or Italians, who had engaged in the war, all\nothers were sold.\u201d Yet Dr. Smith, the rector of Holy Trinity Church, in\nChester, England, who lived at an age beyond the reach of prejudice or\nargument on the subject of slavery, (he was born in 1711,) has correctly\ntranslated the passage thus: \u201cBut, after this term, all but the\nAthenians, and such of the Sicilians and Italians as had joined with\nthem in the invasion, were sold out for slaves.\u201d _Smith\u2019s Thucyd._ p.\n285.\n\nAnd permit us further to inquire how the assertion of Mr. Barnes, page\n117, that, \u201cin the laws of Moses there is but _one_ way mentioned by\nwhich a foreigner could be made a slave; that is, by purchase, _Lev._\nxxv. 44; and it is remarkable that the Hebrews were not permitted to\nmake slaves of the captives taken in the war\u201d\u2014will compare with _Deut._\nxx. 10\u201316:\n\n\u201cAnd when thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then\nproclaim peace unto it.\u201d * * * \u201cAnd it shall be, if it make answer of\npeace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, _that_ all the people\n_that_ is found therein, shall be tributaries unto thee, and _shall\nserve thee_\u201d (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 _va abaduka_, _shall be slaves to thee_).\n\u201cAnd if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee,\nthen thou shalt besiege it.\u201d \u201cAnd when the hand of thy God hath\ndelivered it into thy hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with\nthe edge of the sword.\u201d \u201cBut the women, and the little ones, and the\ncattle, and all that is within the city, _even_ all the spoil thereof,\nshalt thou take unto thyself and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine\nenemies, which the Lord thy God hath given thee.\u201d \u201cThus shalt thou do\nunto all the cities _which are_ very far off from thee, which _are_ not\nof the cities of those nations.\u201d\n\nIt is evident that the captives here allowed to be made were to be\nslaves, from what follows on the same subject, in the same book, xxi.\n10\u201315: When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord\nthy God hath delivered them into thy hands, and thou hast taken them\ncaptive, and seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a\ndesire unto her, that thou wouldst have her to thy wife: then thou shalt\nbring her home to thy house, and she shall shave her head and pare her\nnails: and she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and\nshall remain in thy house, and bewail her father and her mother a full\nmonth: and after that, thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband,\nand she shall be thy wife. And it shall be, if thou have no delight in\nher, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not\nsell her at all for money: thou shalt not make merchandise of her,\nbecause thou hast humbled her.\u201d\n\nThus the fact is proved, that if he had not thus made her his wife, she\nwould have been his slave and an article of merchandise.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XI.\n\nIn the introductory part of Mr. Barnes\u2019s book, he makes some remarks in\nthe nature of an apology for his undertaking to examine the subject of\nslavery. Page 20, he says\u2014\n\n\u201cBelonging to the same _race_ with those who are held in bondage. We\nhave a right, _nay_, we are bound to express the sympathies of\nbrotherhood, and \u2018to remember those who are in bonds as bound with\nthem.\u2019\u201d\n\nWe were not aware of any fact relating to Mr. Barnes\u2019s descent; nor did\nwe before know from what race he was descended.\n\nWe were truly much surprised at this avowal, and endeavoured to imagine\nthat he had used the word in some general and indefinite sense, as some\ndo when they say animal _race_, and human _race_. But on examining his\nuse of the word, page 20: \u201cHow is a foreign _race_, with so different a\ncomplexion, and in reference to which, so deep-seated prejudices and\naversions exist, in every part of the land, to be disposed of if they\nbecome free?\u201d\u2014and page 27: \u201cAnd the struggles which gave liberty to\nmillions of the Anglo-saxon _race_ did not loosen one rivet from the\nfetter of an African;\u201d page 83: \u201cThe Hebrews were not essentially\ndistinguished from the Egyptians, as the Africans are from their masters\nin this land, by colour;\u201d and page 86: \u201cThey were a foreign _race_, as\nthe African _race_ is with us;\u201d and page 96: \u201cThere are in the United\nStates now, according to the census of 1840, 2,486,465 of a foreign\n_race_ held in bondage;\u201d and page 97: \u201cIt would have been as just for\nthe Egyptians to retain the Hebrews in bondage as it is for white\nAmericans to retain the African race;\u201d\u2014we were forced to conclude that\nthe author understood his language and its meaning.\n\nSuch, then, being the fact, we cannot find it in our heart to blame him\nfor \u201cexpressing the sympathies of brotherhood.\u201d But we feel disposed\nwith kindness to relieve his mind from the burthen of such portion of\nsympathy for those of his _race_ who are in slavery, as he may conceive\nto be a duty imposed by the injunction, \u201cRemember those who are in bond,\nas bound with them.\u201d We will quote the passage, _Heb._ xiii. 3:\n\u201cRemember them that are in bonds, as bound with them.\u201d It is translated\nfrom the Greek\u2014 \u039c\u03b9\u03bc\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03b5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, _Mimn\u0113sic\u0115sthe\nt\u014dn d\u0115smi\u014dn h\u014ds sund\u0115d\u0115m\u0115noi_. The words translated \u201cbonds,\u201d \u201cbound\nwith,\u201d &c. are derived from the root \u03b4\u03ad\u03c9, _deo_, and signifies to bind,\nto bring together, to chain, to fetter, to hinder, to restrain, &c.,\nwhich meaning falls into all its derivations. When one was accused of\nsome offence, and was, on that account, restrained, so that he might be\nsurely had at a trial for the same, such restraint would be expressed,\nas the case required, by some of its derivations. Hence we have \u03b4\u03ad\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2,\n_d\u0115sis_, the act of binding; \u03b4\u03ad\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1, _desma_, a bond, a chain; \u03b4\u03ad\u03c3\u03bc\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2,\n_desmios_, chained, fettered, imprisoned, &c.; \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2, _desmos_, a bond,\nchain, knots, cords, cables; \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03cc\u03c9, _desm\u014f\u014d_, to enchain, to imprison;\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c6\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03be, _desmophulax_, a jailer, &c.\n\nThe word is used, differently varied, in _Matt._ xvi. 19; xviii. 18;\n_Acts_ viii. 23; xx. 23; xxiii. 21; xxvi. 29; _Rom._ vii. 2; 1 _Cor._\nvii. 39; _Eph._ iv. 3; _Philip._ i. 16; _Col._ iv. 18; 2 _Tim._ ii. 9;\n_Philem._ 10; _Heb._ x. 34; xi. 36; and never used, in any sense\nwhatever, to express any condition of slavery. St. Paul was under the\n_restraint_ of the law upon a charge of heresy. All the Christians of\nhis day were very liable to like danger. His only meaning was that all\nsuch should be remembered, as though they themselves were suffering a\nlike misfortune. Suppose he had expressed the idea more diffusely and\nsaid, \u201cRemember all Christians who, for teaching Christ crucified, are\npersecuted on the charge of teaching a false religion, as though you\nyourselves were persecuted with them.\u201d\n\nSuch was the fact. Surely no one, by any course of rational deduction,\ncould construe it into an injunction to remember or do any thing else,\nin regard to slavery or its subjects, unless upon the condition that the\nslave was, by some means, under restraint upon a similar charge. St.\nPaul was never married; cannot be said to have looked with very ardent\neyes upon the institution of marriage; by many is thought to have been\nunfavourably disposed towards it. We have among us, to this day, some\nwho pretend that they think it a great evil, are its bitter enemies, and\ngive evidence that, if in their power, they would totally abolish it.\nSuppose such a man should say that, because he belonged to the same\n_race_ with those who were bound in the bonds of wedlock, it was his\nprivilege to express the sympathies of brotherhood, and expostulate\nagainst that evil institution; nay, that he was enjoined by St. Paul to\ndo so, in this passage, \u201cRemember those who are in bonds, as bound with\nthem,\u201d\u2014what would be the value of this appeal to St. Paul? But the very\nword he uses, in the passage quoted, is also used, almost invariably, in\nthe gospels, to express the restraint imposed by matrimony; yet it is\nnever used to express any condition, or quality, or station, in regard\nto slavery.\n\nThe naked, unadorned proposition presented by Dr. Barnes is, that,\nbecause St. Paul enjoined the Hebrew Christians to sympathize with, to\nremember all those who were labouring under persecution on the account\nof their faith in Christ, they were also bound to remember, to\nsympathize with the slaves, on the account of their being in slavery, as\nthough they were slaves themselves. We feel that such argument must ever\nbe abortive.\n\nFrom the delicacy of Dr. Barnes\u2019s situation, as \u201cbelonging to the same\n_race_ with those held in bondage,\u201d we feel it a duty to treat the\nposition with great forbearance. Had it come from one of the more\nfavoured race of Shem, or the still more lofty _race_ of Japheth, we\nshould have felt it an equal duty to have animadverted with some\nseverity.\n\nIt would have appeared like a design to impose on those ignorant of the\noriginal; and might have put us in mind of the cunning huckster, with\nhis basket of addled eggs,\u2014although unexpectedly broken in the act of\ntheir delivery to the hungry traveller; yet the incident was remembered\nby the recorder of propriety.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XII.\n\nAntioch is said to have been the birthplace of St. Margaret,\u2014of which\nthere are many legends, to one of which we allude. It brings to mind\nsome early views of Christianity; besides, at her time, a large portion\nof the population of Antioch were slaves, and are alluded to in the\nlegend.\n\nShe was the daughter of the priest of Apollo, and was herself a\npriestess to the same god. She is said to have lived in the time and\nunder the authority of the Pr\u00e6fect Olybius, who became devoted to her\nmental and personal accomplishments and very great beauty. He is said to\nhave sought her in marriage, and, after great labour and exertion, to\nhave brought about such a state of affairs as to insure her approval and\nconsent. But, although thus the affianced bride of Olybius, by some\nmeans she had held intercommunion with the private teachers of\nChristianity, and was converted to its faith; a fact known only to her\nand them.\n\nUpon such a state of things, arrives from Probus, Rome\u2019s imperial lord,\nVopiscus, charged to admonish the pr\u00e6fect how fame bore tidings of the\nfrequent apostasy from the true religion of the gods, and the increase\nof the unholy faith of the Galileans at Antioch; and that the laws were\nmade to be executed upon the godless, whose wicked and incestuous rites\noffend the thousand deities of Rome.\n\nOlybius well knows that the least faltering on his part would probably\nbe followed by his being shown the mandate for Vopiscus to supersede him\nin the government; for which he determines to not give him the least\npretence: hence he orders the immediate arrest of all suspected;\nconvenes his council in the halls of justice, and announces thus his\nviews:\n\n          \u201cHear me, ye priests on earth, ye gods in heaven!\n          By Vesta, and her virgin-guarded fires;\n          By Mars, the sire and guardian god of Rome;\n          By Antioch\u2019s bright Apollo; by the throne\n          Of him whose thunder shakes the vaulted skies;\n          And that dread oath I add, that binds the immortals,\n          The unblessed waters of Tartarean Styx;\n          Last, by the avenger of despised vows,\n          The inevitable, serpent-haired Eumenides,\n          Olybius swears, thus mounting on the throne\n          Of justice, to exhaust heaven\u2019s wrath on all\n          That have cast off their fathers\u2019 gods for rites\n          New and unholy. From my heart, I blot\n          Partial affection and the love of kindred;\n          Even if my father\u2019s blood flowed in their veins,\n          I would obey the emperor and the gods!\u201d\n\n                                                      MILLMAN.\n\n* * * The prisoners are ushered in, heard, and ordered to death; among\nwhom a female veiled, as if Ph\u0153bus-chosen!\n\n            \u201cWhat! dare they rend our dedicated maids,\n            Even from our altars? Haste! withdraw the veil,\n            In which her guilty face is shrouded close.\n            Ha! their magic mocks my sight! I seem to see\n            What cannot be\u2014\u2014Margarita!\n            Answer, if thou art she!\u201d\n\nHis mind was agonized at the thoughts of her position: silently, to\nhimself, he says\u2014\n\n             \u201c\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014This pale and false Vopiscus\n             Hath from great Probus wrung his easy mandate;\n             Him Asia owns her pr\u00e6fect, if Olybius\n             Obey not this fell edict.\u201d * * *\n\nMuch art and great argument were privately used to produce her\nrecantation; to which she calmly answers\u2014\n\n                  \u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u201cWho disown their Lord\n                  On earth, will He disown in heaven!\u201d\n\n* * * Sent to the arena; the torture and execution of the prisoners\nproceed, according to the order of their arraignment. The populace\nbecome enraged, and loudly demand the blood of the apostate priestess;\nwhile the pr\u00e6fect, in his palace, digests a plan to _surely_ save her\nlife. The high-priest of Apollo, her father, in his robes of office and\nwith his official attendants, must boldly enter the arena, and offer\npardon, in the name of his god, to any one who utters the cabalistic\nword signifying \u201cI RECANT;\u201d must hastily apply to each in person; at\nMargarita, one instructed must imitate her voice; instantly the priest\nis to throw the mantle of the god upon her; and the attendants, by\nforce, to carry her to the palace of Olybius, where, instead of her\nexecution, her marriage with Olybius is to take place.\n\nThe procession of priests (of whom none but her father, and her sister\nin disguise as a proxy for the act of recantation, knew the secret) are\nurged instantly to action: \u201cFor,\u201d says Olybius, \u201cmy very soul is\nfamished in every moment of delay!\u201d\n\nThe procession moves in all pomp and splendour, with a view to produce\nan alterative effect on the mind of the maddened populace. Its approach\nto the arena is proclaimed by a sentinel there; on hearing which,\nMargarita falls at the feet of the _headsman_, and successfully implores\ninstant death, that her father may be spared the misery of witnessing\nit. She breathes a prayer in forgiveness of Olybius, and receives the\nstroke of death as the procession enters. The father rages, demands\ntorture to make the Christians say how they enthralled her: a Christian\nteacher explains, as with \u201ca still, small voice;\u201d the priests of Apollo\nlisten!\n\nRage and excitement had reached the utmost bound. There was a pause, as\nthe recess between two raging storms. The stillness reached even the\npalace, and reason did feel as if\n\n         \u201cThere was darkness over all the land. Olybius, then:\u2014\n         What means this deathlike stillness? Not a sound\n         Or murmur, from yon countless multitudes;\n         A pale, contagious horror seems to creep\n         Even to our palace. Men gaze mutely round,\n         As in their neighbour\u2019s face to read a secret\n         They dare not speak themselves:\n         Even thus, along his vast domains of silence,\n         Dark Pluto gazes, when the sullen spirits\n         Speak only with fixed look and voiceless motion.\n         'Tis misery! Speak; Olybius orders; speak to me,\n         Nor let mine own voice, like an evil omen,\n         Load this hot air unanswered.\u201d\n\nA messenger announces the death of Margarita; Olybius rushes to kill\nhim; but, recovering self-command\u2014\n\n              \u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u201cOh, I\u2019m sick\n              Of this accursed pomp: I will not use\n              Its privilege of revenge. Fatal trappings\n              Of proud authority! That * * * * *\n              * * * shine and burn into the very entrails!\n              Supremacy!! the great prerogative\n              Of being blasted by superior misery!\u201d\n\nA second messenger announces that\n\n           \u201cThe enchantress Margarita, by her death,\n           Hath wrought upon the changeful populace.\n           That they cry loudly on the Christian\u2019s God:\n           Emboldened multitudes, from every quarter,\n           Throng forth, and in the face of day proclaim\n           Their lawless faith. They have taken up the body,\n           And hither, as in proud ovation, bear it,\n           With clamour and with song. All Antioch crowds\n           Applauding round them.\u201d\n\nWe are favoured only with the song of the slaves, who, upon that\nholiday, intermingled in the throng about the palace of Olybius, to\nwhich the body of Margarita has been borne; by which we may perceive how\nChristianity has elevated them above thoughts of their condition:\n\n                          SONG OF THE SLAVES.\n\n        Sing to the Lord! Oh, let us shout his praise!\n        More lofty p\u00e6ans let our masters raise.\n            Midst clouds of golden light, a pathway clear,\n        With soaring soul, these martyred saints have trod\n        To Him, the only true Almighty God!\n            Earth\u2019s tumults wild and pagan darkness drear,\n        To bonds of peace and songs of joy give way:\n        Behold! we bring you light\u2014one everlasting day!\n\n        Sing to the Lord! No more shall frantic Sibyl\u2019s yell,\n        Watchful Augurs, or those of magic spell,\n            No, not Isis, nor yet Apollo\u2019s throne,\n        No, nor even Death, with Lethean bands,\n        Shall longer bind the soul; before us stands\n            Him of the Cross of Calvary:\u2014His groan\n        Of death burst forth from its eternal womb,\n        While angel spirits shout, and open wide the tomb!\n\n        Sing to the Lord! The Temple\u2019s veil is rent!\n        From Moab\u2019s plains, the Slave, an outcast, sent\n            From this cold world shall, soaring, fly to heaven,\n        From depths of Darkness, Night, and Orcus dread.\n        Each spirit woke at the Eternal\u2019s tread\n            On the head of Death! a promise given\n        To all Earth\u2019s houseless, homeless, and forlorn,\n        Before the Ages were\u2014or His Eldest Son was born!\n\n        Sing to the Lord! Lo! while God\u2019s rebels rave,\n        He plunges down, and renovates the slave\u2014\n            Vengeance and love at once bestowed on man.\n        See! crushed is Baal\u2019s, proud Moloch\u2019s temple falls;\n        Shout to the Lord! No more shall blood-stained walls,\n            Nor mountain grove, nor all the gods of Ham,\n        Dispel a Saviour\u2019s love! Correction\u2019s rod\n        Hath won the world,\u2014for Heaven and Thee, O God!\n\nIt is one of the providences of Jehovah, that the very wretched forget\ntheir wrath, and the broken in spirit their violence. And it may be well\nfor those who examine moral conduct by the evidences of the providences\nof God, to notice how wrath conduces to wretchedness, and violence to a\nbreaking down of the spirit.\n\nOlybius was by no means prepared to adopt the humiliating doctrines of\nthe new faith; but he perceived it to be well adapted to the condition\nof those in the extremely low walks of life. By it the slave was taught\nto become \u201cthe freeman of the Lord,\u201d and the wretched, destitute, and\nmiserable, to become \u201cheirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ.\u201d These\ndoctrines, and the whole system, being founded upon the pillars of\nHumility, Faith, Hope, and Charity, were an arrangement to make the most\nhumble as happy as the most exalted; as to happiness and hopes of\nheaven, it made all men equal; nor is it surprising that the low classes\nmore readily become its converts.\n\nOlybius may have seen some beautiful features in this system; but his\nphilosophy forbid his faith. He calmly decided that it was a\nsuperstition too low to combat\u2014worthy only of contempt. But he perceived\nthat the blood of a hundred made a thousand Christians, and was\nconvinced the only remedy was to improve and elevate the mind,\u2014to imbue\nit with deep religious feeling and principle, a reverence and veneration\nfor the gods.\n\nHe deeply felt the wound inflicted by the presence of Vopiscus, and\nwould gladly have proved to the emperor that change of government,\neither as to ruler or its general system, could not affect the condition\nof this new doctrine. But he had no knowledge of the Christian\u2019s God,\nnor of his attributes as a distinct Being; and hence, although he may be\nregarded as a most deadly enemy, yet, since the providences of Jehovah,\nthrough the mild light of the gospel, begin to develop themselves to the\nhuman understanding, we may deem his report to the emperor, on the\nChristian superstition, to be ONE OF ITS MOST UNDYING PANEGYRICS; as an\nextract from which, we may well imagine, he wrote thus:\u2014\n\n                    _Olybius to the Emperor Probus._\n\n* * * \u201cGreat reforms on moral subjects do not occur, except under the\ninfluence of religious principle. Political revolutions and changes of\npolicy and administration do indeed occur from other causes, and secure\nthe ends which are desired. But, on subjects pertaining to right and\nwrong; on those questions where the rights of an inferior and\ndown-trodden class are concerned, we can look for little advance, except\nfrom the operation of religious principle.\n\n\u201cUnless the inferior classes have power to assert their rights by arms,\nthose rights will be conceded only by the operations of conscience and\nthe principles of religion. There is no great wrong in any community\nwhich we can hope to rectify by new considerations of policy, or by a\nmere revolution. The relations of _Christianity_ are not reached by\npolitical revolutions, or by changes of policy or administration.\n\n\u201cPolitical revolutions occur in a higher region, and the condition of\nthe _Christian_ is no more affected by a mere change of government, than\nthat of the vapours of a low, marshy vale is affected by the tempest and\nstorm in the higher regions of the air. The storm sweeps along the\nApennines, the lightnings play, and the thunders utter their voice, but\nthe malaria of the Campagna is unaffected, and the pestilence breathes\ndesolation there still. So it is with Christianity. Political\nrevolutions occur in higher places, but the malaria of _Christianity_\nremains settled down on the low plains of life, and not even the surface\nof the pestilential vapour is agitated by all the storms and tempests of\npolitical changes; it remains the same deadly, pervading pestilence\nstill. Under all the forms of despotism; in the government of\naristocracy, or an oligarchy; under the administration of a pure\ndemocracy, or the forms of a republican government; and in all the\nchanges from one to the other, _Christianity_ remains still the same.\nWhether the _prince_ is hurled from the throne, or rides into power on\nthe tempest of revolution, the down-trodden Christian is the same\nstill:\u2014and it makes no difference to him whether the _prince_ wears a\ncrown, or appears in a plain, republican garb,\u2014'whether C\u00e6sar is on the\nthrone, or slain in the senate-house.'\u201d\n\nIn these imputed sentiments of Olybius, the indications of the will of\nJehovah, in establishing and protecting the _institutions_ of\n_Christianity_, by his providences towards it, is vividly portrayed to\nthe Christian eye. Jehovah would not suffer \u201cthe gates of hell to\nprevail against it.\u201d Of the very materials intended by its enemies for\nits destruction, he made them build its throne.\n\nThe scene, by which we have introduced this imaginary report of Olybius\nto the emperor, has been merely to remove from the mind any bias tending\nto a partial conception of the indications of the will of God, as\nevinced by his providences therein described, that we may more readily\ndiscover the fact, that, instead of showing Christianity to be worthy\nonly of contempt, Olybius did pronounce its eulogium.\n\nChange the words _Christian_ and _Christianity_ into _slave_ and\n_slavery_; _prince_ into _master_, and it then is what Mr. Barnes did\nsay, and has said, (pages 25, 26, 27,) word for word, about the\ninstitution of slavery; and, as if desirous to portray the providences\nof God towards it down to the present time, continuously says. See pages\n27 and 28\u2014\n\n\u201cSlavery among the Romans remained substantially the same under the\nTarquins, the consuls, and the C\u00e6sars; when the tribunes gained the\nascendency, and when the patricians crushed them to the earth. It lived\nin Europe when the northern hordes poured down on the Roman Empire; and\nwhen the caliphs set up the standard of Islam in the Peninsula. It lived\nin all the revolutions of the Middle Ages,\u2014alike, when spiritual\ndespotism swayed its sceptre over the nations, and when they began to\nemerge into freedom. In the British realms, it has lived in the time of\nthe Stuarts, under the Protectorate, and for a long time under the\nadministration of the house of Hanover. With some temporary\ninterruptions, it lived in the provinces of France through the\nrevolution. It lived through our own glorious Revolution; and the\nstruggles which gave liberty to millions of the Anglo-Saxon race did not\nloosen one rivet from the fetters of an African, nor was there a slave\nwho was any nearer to the enjoyment of freedom after the surrender of\nYorktown, than when Patrick Henry taught the notes of liberty to echo\nalong the hills and vales of Virginia. So in all changes of political\nadministration in our own land, the condition of the slave remains\nunaffected. Alike whether the Federalists or Republicans have the rule;\nwhether the star of the Whig or the Democrat is in the ascendant; the\ncondition of the slave is still the same. The p\u00e6ans of victory, when the\nhero of New Orleans was raised to the presidential chair, or when the\nhero of Tippecanoe was inaugurated, conveyed no * * * intimation of a\nchange to the slave; nor had he any more hope, nor was his condition any\nmore affected, when the one gave place to his successor, or the other\nwas borne to the grave. And so it is now. In all the fierce contests for\nrule in the land; in the questions about changes in the administration,\nthere are nearly three millions of our fellow-beings, who have no\ninterest in these contests and questions, and whose condition will be\naffected no more, whatever the result may be, than the vapour that lies\nin the valley is by the changes from sunshine to storm on the summits of\nthe Alps or the Andes.\u201d\n\nThis may be all true, but what is the indication of God\u2019s will, as\ntaught by these, his providences towards it? \u201cAnd now I say unto you\nrefrain from these men, and let them alone; for if this counsel or this\nwork be of men, it will come to nought; but if it be of God, ye cannot\noverthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.\u201d _Acts_\nv. 38, 39.\n\n\n                             --------------\n\n                              LESSON XIII.\n\nThus, it has pleased God, at an early age of the world, to reveal to the\nmind of man this mode of learning his will by the indications of\nProvidence.\n\nBut Mr. Barnes has given us further data, whereby we may be enabled to\nexamine more deeply into the indications of God\u2019s will touching the\ninstitution of slavery, by reference to his providences concerning it,\ngrowing out of the universality and ancientness of the institution.\nThus, page 112, he says\u2014\u201cThat slavery had an existence when Moses\nundertook the task of legislating for the Hebrews, there can be no\ndoubt. We have seen that servitude of some kind prevailed among the\npatriarchs; that the traffic in slaves was carried on between the\nMidianites and the Egyptians, * * * and that it existed among the\nEgyptians. It was undoubtedly practised by all the surrounding nations,\nfor history does not point us to a time when slavery did not exist. * *\n* There is even evidence that slavery was practised by the Hebrews\nthemselves, when in a state of bondage and that though they were as a\nnation \u2018bondmen to Pharaoh,\u2019 yet they had servants in their families who\nhad been \u2018bought with money.\u2019 * * * At the very time that the law was\ngiven respecting the observance of the passover, and before the exode\nfrom Egypt, this statute appears among others: \u2018This is the ordinance of\nthe passover: there shall no stranger eat thereof: but every\nman-servant, _that is bought for money_, when thou hast circumcised him,\nthen shall he eat thereof.\u2019 It is clear, from this, that the institution\nwas always in existence, and that Moses did not originate it.\u201d Again,\npage 117: \u201cA Hebrew might be sold to his brethren if he had been\ndetected in the act of theft, and had no means of making restitution\naccording to the provisions of the law. _Exod._ xxii. 3. \u2018He shall make\nfull restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his\ntheft.\u2019\u201d \u201cThis is in accordance with the common legal maxim, _Luat in\ncorpore, qui non habet in aere_. The same law prevailed among the\nEgyptians, and among the Greeks also till the time of Solon. * * * By\nthe laws of the twelve tables, the same thing was enacted at Rome. A\nnative-born Hebrew might be a servant in a single case in virtue of his\nbirth. If the master had given to a Hebrew, whom he had purchased, a\nwife, and she had borne him children; the children were to remain in\nservitude.\u201d See _Exod._ xxi. 4. Again, page 250: \u201cIt is unnecessary to\nenter into proof that slavery abounded in the Roman Empire, or that the\nconditions of servitude were very severe and oppressive. This is\nconceded on all hands.\u201d And page 251: \u201cSlavery existed generally\nthroughout the Roman Empire was very great.\u201d * * * Page 252: \u201cOf course,\naccording to this, the number of slaves could not have been less than\nsixty millions in the Roman Empire, at about the time when the apostles\nwent forth to preach the gospel.\u201d And again, page 253: \u201cThe slave-trade\nin Africa is as old as history reaches back. Among the ruling nations of\nthe north coast, the Egyptians, Cyrenians, and Carthaginians, slavery\nwas not only established, but they imported whole armies of slaves,\npartly for home use, and partly, at least by the Carthaginians, to be\nshipped for foreign markets.\u201d\n\n\u201cThey were chiefly drawn from the interior, where kidnapping was just as\nmuch carried on then as now. Black male and female slaves were even an\narticle of luxury, not only among the above-named nations, but in Greece\nand Italy.\u201d\n\nMr. Barnes has quoted and adopted the foregoing, and many other\npassages, from the Biblical Repository. (See Bib. Rep. pp. 413, 414.)\nAnd again, page 259 of Barnes: * * * \u201cAnd it is a rare thing, perhaps a\nthing that never has occurred, that slavery did not prevail in a country\nwhich furnished slaves for another country.\u201d\n\nMany of the foregoing statements are facts as well established as _any_\npart of history. But these truths, honestly admitted by Mr. Barnes, are\npregnant with important considerations touching the institution of\nslavery and the providence of God towards it.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIV.\n\nMr. Barnes says, page 381\u2014\n\n\u201cIf slavery is to be defended, it is not to be by arguments drawn from\nthe Bible, but by arguments drawn from its happy influences on\nagriculture, commerce, and the arts; * * * on its elevating the black\nman, and making him more intelligent and happy than he would be in his\nown land; on its whole benevolent bearing on the welfare of the slave,\nin this world and the world to come.\u201d\n\nIt must give every good man the deepest grief to discover this growing\ndisposition among religious teachers to thrust aside the teachings of\nthe Bible, and to place in its stead the worldly advantages and personal\nconsiderations of individual benefit. What shall we think of the\nreligious feeling and orthodoxy of him who places \u201cagriculture,\ncommerce, and the arts\u201d in higher authority than the books of Divine\nrevelation. Thus, this teacher says, \u201cIf the Bible teaches slavery, then\nthe Bible is the greatest curse that could happen to _our race_;\u201d yet\nallows, that if slavery shall have a beneficial and happy influence on\n\u201cagriculture, commerce, and the arts,\u201d it may be sustained and defended.\nSuch is the obvious deduction from the proposition! Mistaken man! But,\nsince we say that slavery is most triumphantly sustained and defended by\nthe Bible, let us take a view of it agreeably to Mr. Barnes\u2019s direction.\nSo far as we have means, it may be well to examine the negro in his\nnative ranges.\n\nAbout thirty years ago, we had a knowledge of an African slave, the\nproperty of Mr. Bookter, of St. Helena Parish, La. Sedgjo was apparently\nabout sixty years of age\u2014was esteemed to be unusually intelligent for an\nAfrican. We propose to give the substance of his narrative, without\nregard to his language or manner. For a length of time we made it an\nobject to draw out his knowledge and notions; and on the subject of the\nDeity, his idea was that the power which made him was _procreation_; and\nthat, as far as regarded his existence, he needed not to care for any\nother god. This deity was to be worshipped by whatever act would\nrepresent him as _procreator_. It need not be remarked that this worship\nwas the extreme of indecency; but the more the act of worship was\nwounding to the feelings or sense of delicacy, the more acceptable it\nwas to the god. The displays of this worship could not well be\ndescribed.\n\nSedgjo\u2019s account put us in mind of Maachah, the mother of Asa. In this\nworship, it was not uncommon to kill, roast, and eat young children,\nwith the view to propitiate the god, and make its parents prolific. So\nalso the first-born of a mother was sometimes killed and eaten, in\nthankfulness to the god for making them the instruments of its\n_procreation_. The king was the owner and master of the whole tribe. He\nmight kill and do what else he pleased with them. The whole tribe was\nessentially his slaves. But he usually made use of them as a sort of\nsoldiers. Those who were put to death at feasts and sacrifices were\ngenerally persons captured from other tribes. Persons captured were also\nslaves, might be killed and eaten on days of sacrifice, or sold and\ncarried away to unknown countries. If one was killed in battle, and fell\ninto the hands of those who slew him, they feasted on him at night. If\nthey captured one alive who had done the tribe great injury, a day was\nset apart for all the tribe to revenge themselves and feast on him. The\nfeet and palms of the hands were the most delicious parts. When the king\nor master died, some of his favourite wives and other slaves were put to\ndeath, so that he yet should have their company and services. The king\nand the men of the tribe seldom cultivated the land; but the women and\ncaptured slaves are the cultivators. They never whip a slave, but strike\nhim with a club; sometimes break his bones or kill him: if they kill\nhim, they eat him.\n\nSedgjo belonged to the king\u2019s family; sometimes commanded as head man;\nconsequently, had he not been sold, would have been killed and eaten.\nThe idea of being killed and eaten was not very dreadful to him; he had\nrather be eaten by men than to have the flies eat him.\n\nHe once thought white men bought slaves to eat, as they did goats. When\nhe first saw the white man, he was afraid of his red lips; he thought\nthey were raw flesh and sore. It was more frightful to be eaten by red\nthan by black lips.\n\nOn shipboard, many try to starve, or jump into the sea, to keep\nthemselves from being eaten by the red-lips. Did they but know what was\nwanted of them, the most would be glad to come. He cannot tell how long\nhe was on the way to the ships, nor did he know where he was going;\nthinks he was sold many times before he got there; never saw the white\nman till he was near the sea; all the latter part of his journey to the\ncoast the people did not kill or eat their slaves, but sold them. Their\nclothing is a small cloth about the loins. The king and some others have\na large cloth about the shoulders. Many are entirely naked all their\nlives. Sedgjo has no wish to go back; has better clothing here than the\nkings have there; if he does more work, he has more meat. If he is\nwhipped here, he is struck with a club there. There, always afraid of\nbeing killed; jumped like a deer, if, out of the village, he saw or met\na stranger; is very glad he came here; here he is afraid of nobody.\n\nSuch is the substance of what came from the negro\u2019s own lips. It was\nimpossible to learn from him his distinct nation or tribe. Mr. Bookter\nthought him an Eboe, which was probably a mistake.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe Periplus, or voyage of Hanno, was made 570 years before the\nChristian era. Its account was written in Punic, and deposited in the\ntemple of Moloch, at Carthage. It was afterwards translated into Greek;\nand thence into English, by Dr. Faulkner, a sketch of which may be found\nin the \u201cPh\u0153nix of Rare Fragments,\u201d from which we quote, pp. 208\u2013210:\n\n\u201cBeyond the Lixiti\u00e6 dwell the inhospitable Ethiopians, who pasture a\nwild country, intersected by large mountains, from which they say the\nriver Lixus flows. In the neighbourhood of the mountains lived the\n\u2018Troglodyt\u00e6,\u2019 (people who burrowed in the earth,) men of various\nappearance, whom the Lixiti\u00e6 described as swifter in running than\nhorses. * * * Thence we proceeded towards the east the course of a day,\n* * * from which proceeding a day\u2019s sail, we came to the extremity of\nthe lake, that was overhung by large mountains, inhabited by savage men\nclothed in skins of wild beasts, who drove us away by throwing stones,\nand hindered us from landing. * * * Thence we sailed towards the south\ntwelve days, * * * the whole of which is inhabited by Ethiopians, who\nwould not wait our approach, but fled from us. Their language was not\nintelligible, even to the Lixiti\u00e6 who were with us. * * * When we had\nlanded, we could discover nothing in the daytime except trees; in the\nnight we saw many fires burning, and heard the sound of pipes, cymbals,\ndrums, and confused shouts. We were then afraid, and our diviners\nordered us to abandon the island; * * * at the bottom of which lay an\nisland like the other, having a lake, and in this lake another island,\nfull of savage people, the greater part of whom were women, whose bodies\nwere hairy, and whom our interpreters called _Gorill\u00e6_. Though we\npursued the men, we could not seize any of them; all fled from us,\nescaping over the precipices, and defending themselves with stones.\nThree women were however taken; but they attacked their conductors with\ntheir teeth and hands, and could not be prevailed on to accompany us.\nHaving killed them, we flayed them, and brought their skins with us to\nCarthage.\u201d\n\nSee also King Humpsal\u2019s History of African Settlements, translated from\nthe Punic books, by Sallust and into English by H. Stewart, page 221:\n\n\u201cThe G\u00e6tuli and the Libyans, as it appears, were the first nations that\npeopled Africa; a rude and savage race, subsisting partly on the flesh\nof wild beasts, and partly, like cattle, on the herbs of the field.\nAmong these tribes social intercourse was unknown; and they were utter\nstrangers to laws, or to civil government; wandering during the day from\nplace to place, as inclination prompted; at night, wherever chance\nconducted them they took up their transient habitation.\u201d See page 224,\nsame book: \u201cAt the back of Numidia, the G\u00e6tuli are reported to inhabit,\na savage tribe, of which a part only made use of huts; while the rest,\nless civilized, lead a roving life, without restraint or fixed\nhabitation. Beyond the G\u00e6tuli is the country of the Ethiopians.\u201d\n\nIn _Judg._ iii. 7, 8, we have as follows: \u201cAnd the children of Israel\ndid evil in the sight of the Lord, and forgot the Lord their God. * * *\nTherefore the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel, and he sold them\ninto the hand of _Chusan Rishathaim_,\" (\u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05df \u05e8\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e2\u05b2\u05ea\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05dd) which,\nmeans the \u201c_wicked Ethiopians_.\u201d Let us notice its similarity of\nsentiment with a record in hieroglyphics, in the temple of Karnac, where\n_Cush_ is used as the general term to mean the negro tribes: thus,\n\u201c_Kush_, _barbarian_, _perverse race_;\u201d and there inscribed over the\nfigures of negro captives, two thousand years before our Christian era.\nSee Gliddon\u2019s Lectures, page 42.\n\nWe quote from Horne\u2019s \u201cIntroduction to the Study of the Scriptures,\u201d\nthus: \u201cIt is a notorious fact that these latter\u201d (the Canaanites) \u201cwere\nan abominably wicked people.\u201d\n\n\u201cIt is needless to enter into any proof of the depraved state of their\nmorals; they were a wicked people in the time of Abraham; and even then\nwere devoted to destruction by God. But their iniquity was not yet full.\nIn the time of Moses, they were idolaters; sacrificers of their own\ncrying and smiling infants; devourers of human flesh; addicted to\nunnatural lusts; immersed in the filthiness of all manner of vice.\u201d See\n_Christian Observer_ of 1819, p. 732.\n\nBut let us look at the negro tribes in more modern days. We quote from\nLander, p. 58: \u201cWhat makes us more desirous to leave this abominable\nplace, is the fact (as we have been told) that a sacrifice of no less\nthan _three hundred_ human beings, of both sexes and all ages, is\nshortly to take place. We often hear the cries of many of these poor\nwretches; and the heart sickens with horror at the bare contemplation of\nsuch a scene as awaits us should we remain here much longer.\u201d\n\nAnd page 74: \u201cWe have longed to discover a solitary virtue lingering\namong the natives of this place, (Badagry,) but as yet our search has\nbeen ineffectual.\u201d\n\nAnd page 77: \u201cWe have met with nothing but selfishness and rapacity,\nfrom the chief to the meanest of his people. The religion of Badagry is\nMohammedanism, and the worst species of paganism; that which sanctions\nand enjoins the sacrifice of human beings, and other abominable\npractices, and the worship of imaginary demons and fiends.\u201d\n\nPage 110: \u201cIt is the custom here, when a governor dies, for two of his\nfavourite wives to quit the world on the same day, in order that he may\nhave a little pleasant, social company in a future state.\u201d\n\nPage 111: \u201cThe reason of our not meeting with a better reception at\nLoatoo, when we slept there, was the want of a chief to that town, the\nlast having followed the old governor to the eternal shades, for he was\nhis slave. Widows are burned in India, just as they are poisoned or\n_clubbed_ here; but in the former country, I believe no male victims are\ndestroyed on such occasions.\u201d\n\n\u201cAt Paoya, (page 124,) several chiefs in the road have asked us the\nreason why the Portuguese do not purchase as many slaves as formerly;\nand make very sad complaints of the stagnation in this branch of\ntraffic.\u201d\n\nPage 158: \u201cAt Leograda, a man thinks as little of taking a wife as\ncutting an ear of corn. Affection is altogether out of the question.\u201d\n\nPage 160: \u201cAt Eitcho, it will scarcely be believed, that not less than\none hundred and sixty governors of towns and villages between this place\nand the seacoast, all belonging to Yariba, have died from natural\ncauses, or have been slain in war, since I was last here; and that of\nthe inhabited places through which we have passed, not more than a\nhalf-dozen chiefs are alive at this moment, who received and entertained\nme on my return to Badagry, three years ago.\u201d\n\nPage 176: \u201cThey seem to have no social tenderness; very few of those\namiable private virtues which would win our affection, and none of those\npublic qualities that claim respect or command admiration. Their love of\ncountry is not strong enough in their bosoms to incite them to defend it\nagainst the irregular incursions of a despicable foe. * * * Regardless\nof the past as reckless of the future; the present alone influences\ntheir actions. In this respect they approach nearer to the brute\ncreation than perhaps any other people on the face of the globe.\u201d\n\nPage 181: \u201cIn so large a place as this, where two-thirds of the\npopulation are slaves.\u201d * * *\n\nPage 192: \u201cThe cause of it was soon explained by his informing us that\nhe would be doomed to die with two companions, (slaves,) as soon as\ntheir governor\u2019s dissolution should take place.\u201d\n\nPage 227: \u201cIn the forenoon we passed near a spot where our guides\ninformed us a party of Falatahs, a short time ago, murdered twenty of\ntheir slaves, because they had not food sufficient,\u201d &c.\n\nPage 232: \u201cAt Coobly, he would rather have given us a boy (slave)\ninstead of the horse.\u201d\n\nPage 233: \u201cMonday, June 14th.\u2014The governor\u2019s old wife returned from\nBoossa this morning, whither she had gone in quest of three female\nslaves who had fled from her about a fortnight since. She has brought\nher fugitives back with her, and they are now confined in irons.\u201d\n\nPage 272: \u201cBoth these days the men have been entering the city; and they\nhave brought with them only between forty and fifty slaves.\u201d\n\nPage 278: \u201cThe chief benefits resulting to Bello from the success of the\nrebels, were a half-yearly tribute, which the magia agreed to pay him in\nslaves.\u201d\n\nPage 282: \u201cAt Yaooris.\u2014And many thousands of his men, fearing no law,\nand having no ostensible employment, are scattered over the face of the\nwhole country. They commit all sorts of crimes; they plunder, they burn,\nthey destroy, and even murder, and are not accountable to any earthly\ntribunal for their actions.\u201d\n\nPage 312: \u201cAt Boossa.\u2014The manners of the Africans too, are hostile to\nthe interest and advancement of woman, and she is very rarely placed on\nan equality with her husband.\u201d\n\nPage 228: \u201cA man is at liberty to return his wife to her parents at any\ntime, and without adducing any reason.\u201d\n\nPage 345: \u201cThe Sheikh of Bornou has recently issued a proclamation, that\nno slaves from the interior countries are to be sent for sale farther\nwest than Wowow,\u2014so that none will be sent in future from thence to the\nseaside. The greatest and most profitable market for slaves is said to\nbe at Timbuctoo, whither their owners at present transport them to sell\nto the Arabs, who take them over the deserts of Tahara and Libya to sell\nin the Barbary States. An Arab has informed us that many of his\ncountrymen trade as far as Turkey, in Europe, with their slaves, where\nthey dispose of them for two hundred and fifty dollars each. * * *\nPerhaps it would be speaking within compass to say that four-fifths of\nthe whole population of this country, (the Eboe,) likewise every other\nhereabouts, are slaves.\u201d\n\nVol. ii. page 208: \u201cIt may appear strange that I should dwell so long on\nthis subject, for it seems quite natural that every one, even the most\nthoughtless barbarian, would feel at least some slight emotion on being\nexiled from his native land and enslaved; but so far is this from being\nthe case, that Africans, generally speaking, betray the most perfect\nindifference on losing their liberty and being deprived of their\nrelatives; while love of country is seemingly as great a stranger to\ntheir breasts as social tenderness and domestic affection. We have seen\nmany thousands of slaves; some of them more intelligent than others; but\nthe poor little fat woman whom I have mentioned,\u2014the associate of beasts\nand wallowing in filth,\u2014whose countenance would seem to indicate only\nlistnessness, stupidity, and perhaps idiotism, without the smallest\nsymptom of intelligence\u2014she alone has shown any thing like regret on\ngazing on her native land for the last time.\u201d\n\nPage 218: \u201cIt has been told us by many that the Eboe people are\nconfirmned Anthropophagi; and this opinion is more prevalent among the\ntribes bordering on that kingdom than with the nations of more remote\ndistricts.\u201d\n\nWe shall close our extracts from Lander\u2019s work, by the following,\nshowing that the Africans made slaves of the two Landers themselves.\n\nPage 225: \u201cThe king then said, with a serious countenance, that there\nwas no necessity for further discussion respecting the white men, (the\ntwo brothers Lander,) his mind was already made up on the subject; and\nfor the first time, he briefly explained himself, to this effect: That\ncircumstances having thrown us in the way of his subjects, by the laws\nand usages of the country he was not only entitled to our own persons,\nbut had equal rights to those of our attendants. That he should take no\nfurther advantage of his good fortune than by exchanging us for as much\nEnglish goods as would amount in value to twenty slaves.\u201d\n\nThe following we transcribe from Stedman\u2019s Narrative, vol. ii. page 267:\n\u201cI should not forget to mention that the Gingo negroes are supposed to\nbe Anthropophagi, or cannibals, like the Caribbee Indians, instigated by\nhabitual and implacable revenge. Among the rebels of this tribe, after\nthe taking of Boucore, some pots were found on the fire, with human\nflesh, which one of the officers had the curiosity to taste; and\ndeclared that it was not inferior to some kinds of beef or pork. I have\nsince been informed, by a Mr. Vaugils, an American, who, having\ntravelled a great number of miles inland in Africa, at last came to a\nplace where human arms, legs, and thighs hung upon wooden shambles, and\nwere exposed to sale like butcher\u2019s meat. And Captain John Keen,\nformerly of the Dolphin, but late of the Vianbana schooner, in the\nSierra Leone Company\u2019s service, positively assured me that, a few years\nsince, when he was on the coast of Africa, in the brig Fame, from\nBristol, Mr. Samuel Briggs, owner, trading for wool, ivory, and\ngold-dust, a Captain Dunningen, with the whole crew belonging to the\nNassau schooner, were cut in pieces, salted, and eaten by the negroes of\nGreat Drewin.\u201d\n\nBut this is nothing to what is related, on good authority, respecting\nthe Giagas, a race of cannibals who are said to have overrun a great\npart of Africa. These monsters, it is said, are descended from the Agows\nand Galia, who dwell in the southern extremity of Abyssinia, near the\nsources of the Nile. Impelled by necessity or the love of plunder, they\nleft their original settlements, and extended their ravages through the\nheart of Africa, till they were stopped by the Western Ocean. They\nseized on the kingdom of Benguela, laying to the south of Angola; and in\nthis situation they were found by the Romish missionaries, and by our\ncountryman, Andrew Battel, whose adventures may be found in Purchas\u2019s\nPilgrim. Both he, and the Capuchin Cavozzi, who resided long among them\nand converted several of them to Christianity, gave such an account of\ntheir manners as is enough to chill the blood with horror. We shall\nspare our readers the horrid detail, only observing that human flesh is\none of their delicacies, and that they devour it, not from a spirit of\nrevenge, or from any want of other food, but as the most agreeable\ndainty. Some of their commanders, when they went on an expedition,\ncarried numbers of young women along with them, some of whom were slain\nalmost every day, to gratify this unnatural appetite.\u201d See Modern\nUniversal History, vol. xvi. p. 321; also Anzito; also Edin. Encyc. vol.\nii. p. 185.\n\nIn continuation of this subject, permit us to take a view of these\ntribes, at a time just before the slave-trade commenced among them with\nChristian nations. The Portuguese were first to attempt to colonize\nportions of Africa, with the double view of extending commerce and of\nspreading the Christian faith. They commenced a settlement of that kind\nin the regions of Congo, as early as 1578; shortly after which, the\nAngolas, an adjoining nation, being at war with each other, one party\napplied to Congo and the Portuguese for aid, which was lent them. Soon a\nbattle took place, in which 120,000 of the Angolas and Giagas were\nslain. See Lopez\u2019s Hist. of Congo.\n\nAbout the same time, we find in _Dappus de l'Afrique_, the following\ndata:\n\n\u201cThe natives of Angola are tall and strong but, like the rest of the\nEthiopians, they are so very lazy and indolent, that although their soil\nis admirably adapted to the raising of cattle and the production of\ngrain, they allow both to be destroyed by the wild beasts with which the\ncountry abounds. The advantages which they enjoy from climate and soil\nare thus neglected. * * * We are told that the people in some of the\nidolatrous provinces still feed on human flesh, and prefer it to all\nother; so that a dead slave gives a higher price in market than a living\none. The cannibals are in all probability descended from the barbarous\nrace of the Giagas, by whom the greater part of the eastern and\nsouth-eastern provinces were peopled. One most inhuman custom still\nprevails in this part of the kingdom, and that is, the sacrificing of a\nnumber of human victims at the burial of their dead, in testimony of the\nrespect in which their memory is held. The number of these unhappy\nvictims is therefore always in proportion to the rank and wealth of the\ndeceased; and their bodies are afterwards piled up in a heap upon their\ntombs. * * * This prince (Angola Chilvagni) became a great warrior,\nenlarged the Angolic dominions, and died much regretted; and was\nsucceeded by his son, Dambi Angola. Unlike his father, he is described\nas a monster of cruelty, and, happily for his subjects, his reign was of\nshort duration. Nevertheless, he was buried with great magnificence;\nand, according to the barbarous custom of the country, a mound was\nerected over his grave, filled with the bones of human victims, who had\nbeen sacrificed to his manes.\u201d\n\n\u201cHe was succeeded by Ngola Chilvagni, a warlike and cruel prince, who\ncarried his victorious arms within a few leagues of Loando. * * *\nIntoxicated with success, he fancied himself a God, and claimed divine\nhonours. * * * Ngingha was elected his successor, a prince of so cruel a\ndisposition that all his subjects wished his death; which, happily for\nthem, soon arrived. Nevertheless, he was buried with the usual pomp,\nwith the usual number of sacrifices. His son and successor, Bandi\nAngola, discovered a disposition still more cruel than his father\u2019s. * *\n* To counteract these and other idolatrous rites, and to soften that\nbarbarity of manners which so generally prevailed, the Portuguese, when\nthey established themselves in the country, (1578,) were at great pains\nto introduce the invaluable blessings of Christianity. * * * so that\nfrom the year 1580 to 1590, we are informed, no less a number than\n20,000 were converted and publicly professed Christianity.\u201d * *\n\n\u201cHer remains were no sooner deposited beside her sisters, in the church\nwhich she had built, than Mona Zingha declared his abhorrence to\nChristianity, and revived the horrid Giagan rites. Five women, of the\nfirst rank, were by his orders buried in the queen\u2019s grave, and upwards\nof forty persons of distinction were next sacrificed. * * * He wrote the\nviceroy at Loando, that he had abjured the Christian religion, which he\nsaid he had formerly embraced merely out of respect * * * to his queen,\nand that he now returned to the ancient sect of the Giagas. That there\nmight remain no doubt of his sincerity in that declaration, he followed\nit with the sacrifice of a great number of victims, in honour of their\nbloody and idolatrous rites, with the destruction of all Christian\nchurches and chapels, and with the persecution of the Christians in all\nparts of his kingdom.\u201d\n\nAnd we may here remark that even the nations of the coast could never be\npersuaded to abolish human sacrifice, nor to the introduction of\nChristianity, to any extent, until after the introduction of the\nslave-trade with christian nations. See also Osborn\u2019s Collection of\nTravels, vol. ii. p. 537; Mod. Universal Hist. vol. 43; and Edin. Encyc.\nvol. ii. pp. 107, 109, 110, 113.\n\nOver two hundred years ago, and during the reign of Charles I. of\nEngland, Sir Thomas Herbert, (not Lord Edward Herbert, who wrote a\ndeistical book, entitled, \u201cTruth,\u201d) a gentleman of most elevated\nconnection, and a scholar devoted to science and general literature,\nwith a mind adorned by poetry and influenced by the strongest impulses\nof human sympathy; and one, of whom Lord Fairfax said,\n\n                 \u201cHe travelled, not with lucre sotted,\n                 But went for knowledge\u2014and he got it!\u201d\n\nThis author, in his Tour in Africa, writes thus: \u201cThe inhabitants here\nalong the Golden coast of Guinea, and Benin, bounded with Tombotu,\n(Timbuctoo,) Gualata, and Mellis, and watered by the great river Niger,\nbut, especially in the Mediterranean (inland) parts, know no God, nor\nare at all willing to be instructed by nature\u2014\u201cScire nihil\njucundissimum.\u201d Howbeit the Divel, who will not want his ceremonie, has\ninfused prodigious idolatry into their hearts, enough to relish his\npallet, and aggrandize their tortures, where he gets power to fry their\nsouls, as the raging sun has scorched their cole-black carcasses. * * *\nThose countries are full of black-skinned wretches, rich in earth, as\nabounding with the best minerals and with elephants, but miserable in\nDemonomy. * * * Let one character serve for all. For colour they\nresemble chimney-sweepers; unlike them in this, they are of no\nprofession, except rapine and villany make one; for here, _Demonis omnia\nplena_. * * * But in Loango and the Anziqui the people are little other\nthan divels incarnate; not satisfied with nature\u2019s treasures, as gold,\nprecious stones, flesh in variety, and the like; the destruction of men\nand women neighbouring them, whose dead carcasses they devour with a\nvulture relish and appetite; whom if they miss, they serve their friends\nsuch scurvy sauce, butchering them, and thinking they excuse all in a\ncompliment that they know no better way to express love than in making\ntwo bodies in one, by an inseparable union; yea, some, as some report,\nproffering themselves to the shambles, accordingly are disjointed and\nset to sale upon the stalls. * * * The natives of Africa being\npropagated from Cham, both in their visages and natures, seem to inherit\nhis malediction. * * * They are very brutes. A dog was of that value\nhere that twenty salvages (slaves) have been exchanged for one of them;\nbut of late years the exchange here made for negroes, to transport into\nthe Cariba isles and continent of America, is become a considerable\ntrade.\u201d\n\nIt will be remembered how great have been the exertions of the British\nGovernment to abolish totally the slave-trade in Africa. A great number\nof slave ships were captured, and the negroes found on board sent to\nSierra Leone. Strong hopes were entertained that \u201c_poor, suffering\nAfrica_\u201d was about to be civilized.\n\nWe quote from the Hibernian Auxiliary Missionary Report, Christian\nObserver, 1820, pages 888 and 889:\n\n\u201cThe slave-trade, which like the (fabled) upas, blasts all that is\nwholesome in its vicinity, has, in one important instance, been here\noverruled for good. It has been made the means of assembling on one\nspot, and that on a Christian soil, individuals from almost every nation\nof the western coast of Africa. It has been made the means of\nintroducing to civilization and religion many hundreds from the interior\nof that vast continent, who had never seen the face of a white man, nor\nheard the name of Jesus. And it will be made the means under God of\nsending to the nations beyond the Niger and the Zaire, native\nmissionaries who will preach the Redeemer in the utmost parts of the\ncountry, and enable their countrymen to hear in their own tongue the\nwonderful works of God. European avarice and native profligacy leave no\npart of Africa unexplored for victims; and these slaves, rescued by our\ncruisers, and landed on the shores of our colony, are received by our\nmissionaries and placed in their schools.\u201d\n\nThe sympathies of the world were excited on this subject, and every\ncivilized heart cried _amen_, in union with the impulsive feelings of\nthis Hibernian Report.\n\nBut let us remember to inquire a little into the facts, and examine\nwhether these hopes were well or ill founded. We quote from vol. xix. of\nthe Christian Observer, page 890:\n\n\u201cMr. Johnson was appointed to the care of Regent\u2019s Town, in the month of\nJune, 1816. On looking narrowly into the actual condition of the people\nintrusted to his care, he felt great discouragement. Natives of\ntwenty-two different nations were there collected together. A\nconsiderable number of them had been but recently liberated from the\nholds of slave-vessels. They were greatly prejudiced against one\nanother, and in a state of continual hostility, with no common medium of\nintercourse but a little broken English. When clothing was given to\nthem, they would sell it, or throw it away: it was difficult to induce\nthem to put it on; and it was not found practicable to introduce it\namong them, until led to it by the example of Mr. Johnson\u2019s\nservant-girl. None of them, on their first arrival, seemed to live in a\nstate of marriage; some of them were soon afterwards married by the late\nMr. Butscher; but all the blessings of the marriage state and of female\npurity appeared to be quite unknown. * * * Superstition, in various\nforms, tyrannized over their minds; many devil\u2019s houses sprang up, and\nall placed their security in wearing gregrees. Scarcely any desire of\nimprovement was discernable. * * * Some, who wished to cultivate the\nsoil, were deterred from doing so by the fear of being plundered of the\nproduce. Some would live in the woods, apart from society; and others\nsubsisted by thieving and plunder: they would steal poultry and pigs\nfrom any who possessed them, and would eat them raw; and not a few of\nthem, particularly of the Eboe nation, the most savage of them all,\nwould prefer any kind of refuse meat to the rations which they received\nfrom Government.\u201d\n\nDoubtless Mr. Johnson and his successors have done all that good men\ncould do, even under the protection of the British Government; but have\nthey, in the least, affected the slave-trade of Africa, otherwise than\nto divert its direction, or have they diminished it to any observable\nextent? True, its course has been changed, and its enormities thereby\nincreased tenfold. Instead of its subjects being brought under the\nregenerating influences of Christianity, they are sacrificed at the\nshrine of friends at home, or sent among pagans or Mohammedans! Let the\nChristian philosopher think of these things.\n\nWhile we recollect the proclamation of the Emperor of Bourno, let us\nlook at the slave-trade as now carried on with the Barbary States, the\nArab tribes, and Egypt and Asia, as well as Turkey in Europe. We quote\nfrom \u201cBurckhart\u2019s Travels in Nubia,\u201d as reported in the Christian\nObserver, vol. xix. p. 459:\n\n\u201cThe author had a most favourable opportunity of collecting intelligence\nand making observations on this subject, (slavery,) as connected with\nthe northeastern parts of Africa by travelling with companies of slaves\nand slave-merchants through the deserts of Nubia. * * * The chief mart\nin the Nubian mountains, for the Egyptian and the Arabian slave-trade,\nis Shendy. * * * To this emporium, slaves are brought from various parts\nof the interior, and particularly from the idolatrous * * * tribes in\nthe vicinity of Darfour, Bozgho, and Dar Saley.\u201d\n\nOur traveller calculated the number sold annually in the market of\nShendy at five thousand. \u201cFar the larger part of these slaves are under\nthe age of fifteen.\u201d\n\nSee page 460: \u201cFew slaves are imported into Egypt without changing\nmasters several times. * * * A slave, for example, purchased at Fertit,\nis transferred at least six times before he arrives at Cairo. These\nrapid changes, as might be expected, are productive of great hardship to\nthe unfortunate individuals, especially in the toilsome journey across\nthe deserts. Burckhart saw on sale at Shendy, many children of four or\nfive years old, _without their parents_. * * * Burckhart has entered\ninto the details of cruelties of another kind, practised on the slaves\nto raise their pecuniary value. The particulars are not suitable for a\nwork of miscellaneous perusal. * * * The great mart, however, for the\nsupply of European and Asiatic Turkey with the kind of slaves required\nas guardians for the harem, Mr. Burckhart informs us, is not at Shendy,\nbut at a village near Siout, in Upper Egypt, _inhabited chiefly by\nChristians_.\u201d (Abyssinians, we suppose.)\n\nThe mode of marching slaves is described as follows: \u201cOn the journey,\nthey are tied to a long pole, one end of which is tied to a camel\u2019s\nsaddle, and the other, which is forked, is passed on each side of the\nslave\u2019s neck, and tied behind with a strong cord, so as to prevent him\ndrawing out his head: in addition to this, his right hand is also\nfastened to the pole, at a short distance from the head, thus leaving\nonly his legs and left arm at liberty. In this manner he marches the\nwhole day behind the camel: at night he is taken from the pole and put\nin irons. While on the route to Souakim, I saw several slaves carried\nalong in this way. Their owners were afraid of their escaping, or of\nbecoming themselves the objects of their vengeance; and in this manner\nthey would continue to be confined until sold to a master, who,\nintending to keep them, would endeavour to attach them to his person. In\ngeneral, the traders seem greatly to dread the effects of sudden\nresentment in their slaves; and if a grown-up boy is to be whipped, his\nmaster first puts him in irons.\u201d\n\nPage 333: \u201cFemales with children on their backs follow the caravans on\nfoot; and if a camel breaks down, the owner generally loads his slaves\nwith the packages; and if a boy in the evening can only obtain a little\nbutter with his _dhourra_ bread, and some grease every two or three days\nto smear his body and hair, he is contented, and never complains of\nfatigue. Another cause which induces the merchants to treat the slaves\nwell (?) is their anxiety to dissipate the horror which the negroes all\nentertain of Egypt and the white people. It is a common opinion in the\nblack slave countries that the Ouleder Rif, or children of Rif, as the\nEgyptians are there called, devour the slaves, who are transported\nthither for that purpose: of course, the traders do every thing in their\npower to destroy this belief; but, notwithstanding all their endeavours,\nit is never eradicated from the mind of the slaves.\u201d\n\nPage 462: \u201cThe manners of the people of Souakim are the same as those I\nhave already described in the interior, and I have reason to believe\nthat they are common to the whole of eastern Africa, including\nAbyssinia, where the character of the inhabitants, as drawn by Bruce,\nseems little different from that of these Nubians. I regret that I am\ncompelled to represent all the nations of Africa which I have yet seen,\nin so bad a light.\u201d\n\nWe next quote from the Family Magazine, 1836, page 439, as follows:\n\u201cMany of the Dayaks have a rough, scaly scurf on their skin, like the\nJacong of the Malay Peninsula. * * * The female slaves of this race,\nwhich are found among the Malays, have no appearance of it. * * * With\nregard to their funeral ceremonies, the corpse * * * remains in the\nhouse till the son, the father, or the next of blood, can procure or\npurchase a slave, who is beheaded at the time the corpse is burned, in\norder that he may become the _slave_ of the deceased in the next world.\n* * * Nobody can be permitted to marry till he can present a human head\nof some other tribe to his proposed bride. * * * The head-hunter\nproceeds in the most cautious manner to the vicinity of the villages of\nanother tribe, and lies in ambush till he can surprise some heedless,\nunsuspecting wretch, who is instantly decapitated. * * * When the hunter\nreturns, the whole village is filled with joy, and old and young, men\nand women, hurry out to meet him, and conduct him, with the sound of\nbrazen cymbals, dancing, in long lines, to the house of the female he\nadmires, whose family likewise come out to greet him with dances, and\nprovide him with a seat, and give him meat and drink. He holds the\nbloody head still in his hand, and puts part of the food into his mouth,\nafter which the females of the family receive the head from him, which\nthey hang up to the ceiling over the door. If a man\u2019s wife die, he is\nnot permitted to make proposals of marriage to another till he has\nprocured another head of a different tribe. The heads they procure in\nthis manner, they preserve with great care, and sometimes consult in\ndivination. The religious opinions connected with this practice are by\nno means correctly understood: some assert they believe that every\nperson whom a man kills in this world becomes his _slave_ in the next. *\n* * The practice of stealing heads causes frequent wars among the tribes\nof the Idean. Many persons never can obtain a head; in which case they\nare generally despised by the warriors and the women. To such a height\nis it carried, however, that a person who has obtained eleven heads has\nbeen seen, and at the same time he pointed out his son who, a young lad,\nhad procured three.\u201d\n\nJames Edward Alexander, H.L.S., during the years 1836 and 1837, made an\nexcursion from the Cape of Good Hope into the interior of South Africa\nand the countries of the Namaquas, Boschmans, and Hill Damaras, under\nthe auspices of Her Majesty\u2019s Government and the Royal Geographical\nSociety, which has been published in two volumes; from which we extract,\nvol. i. page 126: \u201cI was anxious to ascertain the extent of knowledge\namong the tribe (Damaras) with which I now dwelt; to learn what they\nknew of themselves, and of men and things in general; but I must say\nthat they positively know nothing beyond tracing game and breaking in\njack-oxen. They did not know one year from another; they only knew that\nat certain times the trees and flowers bloom, and then rain was\nexpected. As to their own age, they knew no more what it was than\nidiots. Some even had no names. Of numbers, of course, they were nearly\nor quite ignorant; few could count above five; and he was a clever\nfellow who could count his ten fingers. Above all they had not the least\nidea of God or of a future state. They were, literally like the beasts\nwhich perish.\u201d\n\nPage 163, 164, and 165: \u201cAt Chubeeches the people were very poor. * * *\nStanding in need of a shepherd, I observed here two or three fine little\nDamara boys, as black as ebony. * * * I said to the old woman to whom\nSaul belonged, \u2018You have two boys, and they are starving; you have\nnothing to give them.\u2019 \u2018This is true,\u2019 she replied. \u2018Will you part with\nSaul?\u2019 said I; \u2018I want a shepherd, and the boy wants to go with me.\u2019\n\u2018You will find him too cunning,\u2019 returned the old dame. \u2018I want a clever\nfellow,\u2019 said I. \u2018Very well,\u2019 she replied; \u2018give me four cotton\nhandkerchiefs and he is yours.\u2019 \u2018Suppose,\u2019 said I, \u2018you take two\nhandkerchiefs and two strings of glass beads?\u2019 \u2018Yes! that will do;\u2019 and\nso the bargain was closed; and thus a good specimen of Damara flesh and\nblood was bought for the value of about four shillings. * * * I told him\nto go and bring his skins; on which he informed me that he had none,\nsaving what he stood in\u2014and that was his own sable hide, with the\naddition of the usual strap of leather around his waist, from which hung\na piece of jackal\u2019s skin in front. Constant exposure to the vicissitudes\nof the weather, without clothes, hardens the skin of the body like that\nof the face; and still it is difficult to sleep at nights without proper\ncovering. In cold weather, the poor creatures of Namaqua Land, who may\nhave no karosses, sit cowering over a fire all night, and merely doze\nwith their heads on their knees.\u201d\n\nVol. ii. page 23: \u201cCan any state of society be considered more low and\nbrutal than that in which promiscuous intercourse is viewed with the\nmost perfect indifference; where it is not only practised, but spoken of\nwithout any shame or compunction? Some rave about the glorious liberty\nof the savage state, and about the innocence of the children of nature,\nand say that it is chiefly by the white men that they become corrupt.\nThe Boschmans of Ababres had never seen white men before; they were far\nremoved from the influence of the Europeans.\u201d\n\nVol. i. page 102: \u201cNotwithstanding that some people maintain that there\nis no nation on earth without religion in some form, however faintly it\nmay be traced in their minds, yet, after much diligent inquiry, I could\nnot discover the slightest feeling of devotion towards a higher and\ninvisible power among the Hill Damaras.\u201d\n\nIn Mohammedan countries, the most unfavourable portions of the slave\u2019s\nexistence, as such, is while in the hands of the geeleb, or\nslave-merchant, and until he is sold to one who designs to keep him\npermanently. In the first instance, if negroes, they suffer much in the\njourney from the place of purchase to that of sale. For instance, it has\nbeen known, in the journey from Sennaar and Darfour to the slave-mart at\nCairo, or even the intermediate one at Siout, the loss in a slave\ncaravan, of men, women, camels, and horses, amounted to not less than\n4000. The circumstances of the mart itself scarcely appear in a more\nfavourable aspect than those of the journey,\u2014whether we regard the\nmiserable beings, as in the market at Cairo, crowded together in\nenclosures like the sheep-pens in Smithfield market, amid the abominable\nstench and uncleanness which result from their confinement; whether, as\nat another great mart at Muscat, we perceive the dealer walking to and\nfro, with a stick in his hand, between two lots of ill-clothed boy and\ngirls, whom he is offering for sale, proclaiming aloud, as he passes,\nthe price fixed on each; or else leading his string of slaves through\nthe narrow and dirty streets, and calling out their prices as he\nexhibits them in this ambulatory auction. * * * The slaves, variously\nexhibited, usually appear quite indifferent to the process, or only show\nan anxiety to be sold, from knowing that as slaves, finally purchased,\ntheir condition will be much ameliorated. * * * How little slavery is\ndreaded is also shown by the fact that even _Mohammedan parents or\nrelatives_ are, in cases of emergency, ready enough to offer their\nchildren for sale. During the famine which a few years since drove the\npeople of Mosul to Bengal, one could not pass the streets without being\nannoyed by the solicitations of parents to purchase their boys and girls\nfor the merest trifle; and even in Koordistan, where no constraining\nmotive appeared to exist, we have been sounded as to our willingness to\npurchase young members of the family. Europeans in the East are scarcely\nconsidered amenable to any general rules, but Christians generally are\nnot allowed to possess any other than negro slaves.\u201d _London Penny Mag._\n1834, pp. 243, 244; also, _Sketches of Persia_, and _Johnson\u2019s Journey\nfrom India_.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XV.\n\nQuotations from books of authority, portraying the universal state of\ndegradation of the African hordes, may be made to an unlimited extent.\nOur object has been to present some idea of what the negro is in his own\ncountry, when beyond the influence of American slavery. We will now\nadvance some views of him and his race, as they present themselves _in_\nthis American slavery. And here let us premise that the population of\nthe African tribes is estimated at 50,000,000, 40,000,000 of whom are\ndeemed to be slaves, that the wars among them are not so much wars to\nmake freemen slaves, as they are to appropriate the slaves of one owner\nto the rightful ownership of another, according to their notions of law\nand their customs of right. Among them, conquest always subjects to\nslavery. When slaves take a captive, he is the property of their master.\nSlavery exists there according to their laws and customs; and there is\nno evidence, nor in fact is it probable, that even the slave-trade with\nAmerica has ever increased the extent or degree of slavery in Africa.\n\nWe quote from a truly able and sympathetic writer, J. Morier\u2019s \u201cSecond\nJourney through Persia,\u201d as reported in the Christian Observer, vol.\nxvi. page 808:\n\n\u201cDuring the time we were at the Brazils, the slave-trade was in full\nvigour, and a visit to the slave-market impressed us more with the\niniquity of this traffic than any other thing that could be said or\nwritten on the subject. On each side of the street where the market was\nheld, were large rooms in which the negroes were kept; and during the\nday, they were seen in melancholy groups, waiting to be delivered from\nthe hands of the trader, whose dreadful economy might be traced in their\npersons, which at that time were little better than skeletons. If such\nwere their state on shore, with the advantage of air and space, what\nmust have been their condition on board the ship that brought them\nhither? It is not unfrequent that slaves escape to the woods, where they\nare almost as frequently retaken. When this is the case, they have an\niron collar put about their necks, with a long hooked arm extending from\nit, to impede their progress through the woods, in case they should\nabscond a second time. Yet amid all this misery, it was pleasing to\nobserve the many negroes who frequented the churches, and to see them,\nin form and profession, at least making a part of a Christian\ncongregation.\u201d\n\nMr. Morier\u2019s statement may bear testimony to abuses of slavery; but it\ncertainly bears testimony to another thing more important to the slave.\n\u201cThe fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.\u201d _Prov._ ix. 10.\n\nAnd we here beg leave to remark that we shall, in all instances, draw\nour proofs from the enemies of the institution. We quote from Berbick\u2019s\nNotes on America, page 20, and reported in vol. xvi. of the Christian\nObserver, published in London, May 10th, page 109:\n\n\u201cI saw two female slaves and their children sold by auction in the\nstreet; an incident of common occurrence here, though horrifying to\nmyself and many other strangers. I could hardly bear to see them handled\nand examined like cattle; and when I heard their sobs and saw the _big\ntears_ rolling down their cheeks at the thought of being separated, I\ncould not refrain from weeping with them.\u201d\n\nThis may have been very cruel in the white man; but who has ever heard\nof a negro in Africa displaying such a strength of tenderness and\nfeeling of sympathy as here manifested? And how are we to account for it\nin this instance, if not by the regenerating influence of a few\ngenerations in American and Christian slavery? However slow the action,\nthe condition of the mental faculties was improved and the moral\ncondition ameliorated. But in the same page, he says\u2014\n\n\u201cA traveller told me that he saw, a few weeks ago, one hundred and\ntwenty sold by auction in the streets of Richmond, and that they filled\nthe air with their lamentations.\u201d\n\nThe case of the women was not solitary, and doubtless we shall find such\nproof of an improved state of the affections quite common. But this good\nman continuously pursues the subject:\n\n\u201cIt has also been confidently alleged, that the condition of slaves in\nVirginia, under the mild treatment they are said to experience, is\npreferable to that of our English labourers. I know and lament the\ndegrading state of dependent poverty to which the latter have been\ngradually reduced by the operation of laws originally designed for their\ncomfort and protection. I know also that many slaves pass their lives in\ncomparative ease, and seem to be unconscious of their bonds, and that\nthe _most wretched_ of our paupers might even envy the allotment of the\n_happy_ negro.\u201d\n\nWe will now quote from Lieutenant Francis Hall, of the British Light\nDragoons. In his Travels in Canada and the United States, published in\nLondon, 1818, pages 357 to 360, he says\u2014\n\n\u201cI took the boat this morning, and crossed the ferry over to Portsmouth,\nthe small town which I told you was opposite to this place, (Norfolk.)\nIt was court-day, and a large crowd of people was gathered about the\ndoor of the court-house. I had hardly got upon the steps to look in,\nwhen my ears were assailed by the voice of singing, and turning round to\nobserve from what quarter it came, I saw a group of about thirty\nnegroes, of different sizes and ages, following a rough-looking white\nman, who sat carelessly lolling in his sulkey. They had just turned\nround the corner, and were coming up the main street, to pass by the\nspot where I stood, on their way out of town. As they came nearer, I saw\nsome of them loaded with chains to prevent their escape, while others\nhad hold of each other\u2019s hands, strongly grasped, as if to support\nthemselves in their affliction. I particularly noticed a poor mother,\nwith an infant, as she walked along, while two small children had hold\nof her apron on either side, almost running, to keep up with the rest.\nThey came along singing a little wild hymn, of sweet and mournful\nmelody, flying, by Divine instinct of the heart, to the consolations of\nreligion, the last refuge of the unhappy, to support them in their\ndistress.\u201d\n\nWe have no knowledge of Lieutenant Hall\u2019s powers of deduction, nor of\nwhat he thought this _story_ proved. But it will surely give us new\nviews of Africa, if he will travel there, and find such a scene there,\namong the many slaves he may _now_ see naked, tied to poles, and leaving\ntheir country for ever. The world has been flooded with stories of this\ndescription, some of which prove the abuses of slavery, but all of them\nprove some amelioration, both mentally and physically, in the condition\nof the slave here, when compared with the condition of the African at\nhome, whether bond or free.\n\nMr. Barnes has admitted one into his book, pages 136, 137, and 138,\nwhich adds strength to our position: its length excludes a copy. We\nquote again from the Christian Observer, vol. xv. p. 541: \u201cMissions of\nthe United Brethren at Surinam.\u201d\u2014Mr. Campbell writes: \u201cOn the\nplantations and at Sommelsdyk there was a great desire among the negroes\nto hear the gospel, which finds entrance into many of their hearts. * *\n* At Paramaribo, the negro congregation consisted, at the close of 1813,\nof 550.\u201d \u201cOn the 30th of August, 1814, the same missionary writes that\nthe word of God among the negroes in Paramaribo continues to increase,\nand we have great reason to rejoice and take courage when we see marked\nproofs of the Divine blessing upon our feeble ministry.\u201d See page 542.\n\u201cAntigua.\u201d\u2014\u201cA letter from this island, dated, Grace Hill, Jan. 14th,\n1814. * * * The congregation of Christian negroes at this place\nconsisted, at the close of 1813, of 2087 persons.\u201d Again, page 543:\n\u201cSome poor negroes, who, although they sigh under the pressure of\nslavery and various hardships, or ailments of body, seek consolation and\nrefreshment from the meritorious passion of Jesus, are enabled, with\ntears of joy, to lay hold on these words of Scripture: \u2018I reckon that\nthe sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with\nthe glory which shall be revealed in us.\u2019\u201d Again, p. 554: \u201cJamaica.\u201d\u2014Mr.\nLang, the missionary, writes thus, on the 5th February, 1814: \u201cIt\npleases the Lord still to bless our labours with success, so as to\nencourage us to believe that he has thoughts of peace regarding the\nnegroes in Jamaica also, and will visit them yet more generally with his\nsalvation,\u201d &c. Page 546: \u201cDanish Islands.\u2014The number of Christian\nnegroes belonging to the different missions in the Danish Islands, was,\nat the end of 1813, as follows:\n\n                   At Friedensthal, St. Croix   5,100\n                    \u201d Friedensberg      \u201d       2,396\n                    \u201d New Hernhutt, St. Thomas    949\n                    \u201d Nisky               \u201d     1,304\n                    \u201d Bethany, St. Jan            474\n                    \u201d Emmaus        \u201d             952\n                                                  \u2014\u2014\u2014\n                      Total                    11,175\n\n\u201c_St. Kitts._\u2014On the 10th August, 1814, the missionaries write that they\nhave lately had several very pleasing instances of negroes departing\nthis life in reliance on the merits of the Saviour, with great joy and\nthe sure and steadfast hope of everlasting life.\u201d\n\nAmong us it seems to be but little known what have been the providences\nof God towards the slaves of the West Indies. The following sketch is\ntaken from the Report of the Moravian Missionaries, as found in the\nChristian Observer, vol. xvi. page 64:\n\n_Missions to the Slaves in the_\n\n DANISH ISLANDS.        When begun.     No. of                   No. of\n                                        Settlements.      Missionaries.\n\n  St. Thomas          }                 2                             }\n\n  St. Croix           } 1732            3                          } 32\n\n  St. Jan.            }                 2                             }\n\n BRITISH ISLANDS.\n\n  Jamaica               1754            4                            10\n\n  Antigua             { 1756            3 }                          16\n\n                      { 1817            1 }\n\n  St. Kitts             1775            1                             4\n\n  Barbadoes.            1738            3                            11\n\n SOUTH AMERICA        }\n\n   generally.         } 1765            1                             4\n\n                                        \u2014\u2014                           \u2014\u2014\n\n                                        20                           77\n\nThe Dutch took possession of the Cape of Good Hope in 1650. Slaves from\nvarious parts of Africa, Mozambique, and the Malay Islands were\nintroduced; we have no means of knowing to what extent. Somerville found\nthe city of Cape Town to contain 1145 houses, 5500 white and free people\nof colour, and 10,000 slaves. In all of the years 1736\u20131792, and 1818,\nthe Moravians established 27 missionaries to the blacks. But they, nor\nno other people, have ever been able to produce any considerable effect\nthere, or elsewhere, upon the natives, except upon such as were in\nslavery among a Christian people. The sound of the gospel had no charms\nfor the wild, roving savage.\n\nBut, as reported in the Christian Observer, vol. xiv. page 830, Campbell\nsays\u2014\u201cIn the colony of the Cape of Good Hope, considerable efforts have\nbeen made of late, particularly by Sir John Cradock, aided by the zeal\nof the colonial chaplain, the Rev. Mr. Jones, to diffuse the blessings\nof Christian instruction, not only among the slaves, but among all\nclasses. * * * Several of the negroes read the New Testament tolerably\nwell, and repeat questions from Walls\u2019s Catechism: on the Lord\u2019s day\nthey were well-dressed, and attended church.\u201d But, page 829, same vol.:\n\u201cAt Cape Town, Mohammedanism is much on the increase. The free\nMohammedans are strenuous in their efforts to make proselytes among the\nslaves,\u201d &c.\n\nWe have endeavoured to show that the providences of God towards the\nAfrican races in slavery to Christian nations, tend to their deliverance\nfrom idolatry, and to their restoration to an acceptable worship of the\ntrue God. And may we not inquire whether the introduction to this\nworship was not foretold by the prophets? \u201cThus saith the Lord, The\nlabour of Egypt, and merchandise of Ethiopia and of the Sabeans, men of\nstature, shall come over unto thee, and they shall be thine: they shall\ncome after thee; in chains they shall come over, and they shall fall\ndown unto thee, they shall make supplication unto thee, saying,\n_Surely_, God is in thee; and _there_ is none else, there _is_ no God\u201d\n_beside_. Isa. xlv. 14.\n\n\u201cFrom beyond the rivers of Ethiopia, my suppliants, even the daughters\nof my dispersed, shall bring mine offering.\u201d\n\n\u201cI will also leave in the midst of thee an afflicted and poor people,\nand they shall trust in the name of the Lord.\u201d _Zeph._ iii. 10, 12.\n\nThe progress of the Christian religion among the slaves of the United\nStates is known to the world, and needs no mention here. No such\naccounts have ever come from the African tribes at any period of time.\nThese indications of the providence of God seem to show that he smiles\nupon the institution of African slavery in all Christian lands, and\n\u201cthat its tendencies are to elevate the black man, and make him more\nintelligent and happy than he would be in his own land, and that it has\na benevolent bearing on the welfare of the slave in this world and the\nworld to come.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XVI.\n\nOur limits will not permit an extended accumulation of the testimony\nshowing the degenerate condition of the African hordes, nor of those\nfacts showing the ameliorating effect of American slavery upon that race\nof mankind. A large volume would not contain more than an abstract. This\neffect is obvious to any one acquainted with the race; while the deep\ndegradation of the races from which they have descended has caused some\n_philosophers_ to adopt the opinion that they are not of a common origin\nwith the white races of the earth. But we present the doctrine that\nsin\u2014that any want of conformity to the laws of God touching our health\nand happiness, our physical and mental improvement and condition, has a\ndirect tendency to deteriorate the animal man, and that a general\nabandonment and disregard of such laws, through a long series of\ngenerations, will be sufficient to account for the lowest degradation\nfound to exist. We believe there is truth in the saying, \u201cThe fathers\nhave eaten sour grapes, and the children\u2019s teeth are set on edge;\u201d that,\nwhen the progenitors for a series of ages manifest some particular\nquality or tendency of action, the same may be found, even in an\nincreased degree, in their descendants; and that this principle holds\ntrue to some extent through the whole animal world. Further, that such\nprogressive tendency to some particular mental or physical condition may\nbe obviated, and its action reversed, by a sufficient controlling\ninfluence or force.\n\nAnd if it shall be found that there may be truth in this position, we\nmight submit the inquiry: If God in his wisdom foresaw that the family\nof Jacob would become so degraded, in one generation, that it would\nrequire the counteracting influence of four hundred years of slavery to\nplace them in a condition fit to receive and enjoy the blessings\npromised their fathers; how long will it require a similar state of\ncontrol to produce a like renovation among the descendants of Ham, the\ndegraded Africans? But we think, so far as the inquiry can interest us,\nit has been answered by St. Paul: \u201cLet as many servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9,\n_douloi_, _slaves_) as are under the yoke, count their own masters\nworthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not\nblasphemed. And they that have believing masters, let them not despise\nthem because they are brethren; but rather do _them_ service\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03ad\u03c4\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, _be slaves to them_,) because they are faithful and\nbeloved partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort. If any\nman teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even to the\nwords of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according\nto godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions\nand strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil\nsurmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute\nof the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw\nthyself. But godliness, with contentment, is great gain, for we brought\nnothing into this world, and it is certain that we can carry nothing\nout; and having food and raiment, let us be therewith content. But they\nthat will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many\nfoolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.\nFor the love of money is the root of all evil; which while some covet\nafter, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through\nwith many sorrows. But thou, O man of God! flee these things; and follow\nafter righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. Fight\nthe good fight of faith; lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art\nalso called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.\nI give thee charge, in the sight of God who quickeneth all things, and\nbefore Jesus Christ, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good\nconfession, that thou keep this commandment (\u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd, _an order_, _a\ncommand_, _a precept_, _a charge_, _injunction_) _without spot_\n(\u1f04\u03c3\u03c0\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _free from stain_, _spotless_, _faultless_), unrebukable\n(\u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03c0\u03af\u03bb\u03b7\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, _of whom no hold can be taken_, _not to be attacked_,\n_irreprehensible_), until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ.\u201d 1\n_Tim._ vi. 1\u201314.\n\nThus St. Paul has told us how long this doctrine shall be taught; that\nit shall be taught free from any alteration, change; free from any\nstain, pure and spotless; and that his manner of teaching it shall be\nplain, simple, open, and bold; so that there could be no hold taken of\nhim; and the doctrines, instructions, counsels and commands here given\nwere to be so taught, until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.\n\nBut Mr. Barnes says, page 194\u2014\n\n\u201cIf we may draw an inference also from this case, (the Hebrews in\nEgypt,) in regard to the manner in which God would have such a people\n(slaves in America) restored to freedom, it would be in favour of\nimmediate emancipation.\u201d\n\nGod himself sentenced the Hebrews to slavery for four hundred years.\n\u201cAnd when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and lo,\na horror of great darkness fell upon him. And he said unto Abram, Know\nof a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not\ntheirs, and shall serve (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\u05dd _va \u00e6badum_, _shall be slaves to_,\n_or shall slave themselves to_) them, and they shall afflict them four\nhundred years.\u201d _Gen._ xv. 12, 13. At the expiration of which time he\ndelivered them from it. An instance drawn from their case can be\nlegitimately applied only to one where the term of servitude has been\ndetermined.\n\nGod made no attempt to liberate the Hebrews until the expiration of the\nterm allotted them for servitude. Mr. Barnes evidently applies his\ninference to the abolition of the institution generally, and thus places\nhimself in opposition to St. Paul. But our mind has come to the decision\nthat the apostle is the higher authority. And the inquiry is also left\nupon the mind, whether, in the matter of his whole book, Mr. Barnes has\nnot \u201crun before he was sent;\u201d whereby he may have subjected himself to\nthe mortification of again seeing, in his own case, the counsels of\nAchitophel turned into foolishness.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XVII.\n\nMr. Barnes has quoted some few passages of Scripture to which he applies\na meaning we deem erroneous; but we attach no blame to him on this\naccount; because our English version itself, of the passages referred\nto, has a tendency to lead to an inadequate conception of the idea\nconveyed by the original. The doctor says, page 128\u2014\u201cThat even the\nservant that was _bought_ was to have compensation for his labour; and\nthere are some general principles laid down, which, if applied, would\nlead to that: thus, _Jer._ xxii. 13, 'Wo unto him that buildeth his\nhouse by unrighteousness, and his chambers by wrong; that uses his\nneighbour\u2019s _service_ without wages, and giveth him not for his work.'\u201d\nHe quotes this same passage for the same purpose, pp. 353 and 360, and\nseems to regard it as a secure pillar, and on which he founds his\ndoctrines. The words, \u201c_that_ useth his neighbour\u2019s service without\nwages, and giveth him not for his work,\u201d are translated from\n\n                  \u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u0591\u05d8 \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e8\u05b5\u05e2\u05b5\u05a8\u05d4\u05d5\u05bc\u0599 \u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05a3\u05d3 \u05d7\u05b4\u05e0\u05b8\u05bc\u0594\u05dd \u05d5\u05bc\u05e4\u05b9\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05dc\u0596\u05d5\u05b9 \u05dc\u05b9\u05bd\u05d0 \u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\u05be\u05dc\u05bd\u05d5\u05b9\u05c3\n\nThe passage admits of two additional readings, thus: _Who shall judge\nfor a neighbour as to his slave undeservedly no wages, no gifts_; or,\n_Who shall have adjudged as to his neighbour that he shall slave\nhimself, undeservedly or gratuitously, without wages or reward_. The\nmeaning is: _Who shall corruptly judge that his neighbour shall not\nreceive wages or compensation for the services of his slave_; or, that\nthe neighbour himself shall so slave himself to another without wages or\ncompensation. The word \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _a slave_ is often used as a verb, to\nexpress such action as would be that of a slave.\n\nOn page 67, Mr. Barnes says\u2014\u201cThe word, \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, _andrapodist\u0115s_,\noccurs once, 1 _Tim._ i. 10, with the most marked disapprobation of the\nthing denoted by it. \u2018The law is made for murderers of fathers,\nmurderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for\n_man-stealers_, for liars,\u2019 &c.\u201d\n\nThe truth is, that the word \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, is the peculiar word to\ndenote slavery, and is so used in the New Testament and everywhere else;\nbut this word also means _slave_, &c., and is never used disconnected\nfrom the idea of slavery, but carries with it the idea of some change,\nas to _place_, _condition_, _possession_, or _ownership_. We shall\nnotice how some men are striving to change the Greek, as to the meaning\nof the word \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, because, unless they do so, the New\nTestament is strongly against them. However, of the word used in 1 Tim.\ni. 10, \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2, _andrapodistais_, it is true, that it is used\n\u201cwith the most marked disapprobation of the thing denoted by it;\u201d and it\nis just as true that the thing denoted by it is _the stealing and\nenticing away other men\u2019s slaves_! _Slave-stealers_ is its only and\nlegitimate meaning in the place used. Had St. Paul intended to express\nthe idea, _men-stealers_, he would have used the word \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2,\n_anthropokleptais_; which would have expressed the very thing wanted by\nMr. Barnes. We shall examine these words in another portion of our\nstudy. But Mr. Barnes does not appear to be aware why it was that St.\nPaul instructed Timothy that the law was made for _slave-stealers_: for\nwhose benefit we will explain; and by which explanation he will learn\nthat the abolitionists commenced their labours during the days of the\napostles. From some of the relations of Christianity, not well\nunderstood by the Gentile churches, the idea was entertained by some\nthat the operation of Christianity abolished the bonds of matrimony\nbetween a believing and an unbelieving party; that it abolished the\nauthority of an unbelieving parent over a believing child; that it\nabolished slavery in case the slave was converted to the faith, and\nespecially if the master belonged to the household of God. On these\nsubjects and others, the Corinthian church addressed St. Paul for\ninstruction and advice. It is to be regretted that their letter has not\ncome down to us; but, we can gather what it contained, from the answer\nof St. Paul: \u201cNow concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me.\u201d 1\n_Cor._ vii. 1.\n\nTouching the subject before us, see his answer in the 20th to the 25th\nverse; and the same subject continued in _Eph._ vi. 5\u201310; also _Col._\niii. 22\u201325; he found it necessary to instruct Titus on this subject: see\n_Tit._ ii. 9\u201315, and, finally, as in the passage before us, and also vi.\n1\u201315. St. Peter also found it necessary to correct the errors of these\nabolitionists, and to give them instruction on this subject. 1 _Pet._\nii. 18\u201325.\n\nHad St. Paul regarded slavery as an evil, he certainly had no excuse for\nnot denouncing it. Nor do we know of any of the early fathers of the\nchurch that did so. St. Ignatius, in his second epistle to Polycarp,\nsays\u2014\u201cOverlook not the men and maid _servants_. Let them be the more\nsubject to the glory of God, that they may obtain from him a better\nliberty. Let them not desire to be set _free_ at public cost, that they\nbe not slaves to their own lusts.\u201d See also, _General Epistle of\nBarnabas_, xiv. 15: \u201cThou shalt not be bitter in thy commands towards\nany of thy servants that trust in God, lest thou chance not to fear him\nwho is over both; because he came not to call any with respect to\npersons, but whomsoever the Spirit prepared.\u201d\n\nSuch is the construction of the human mind, and of human language, that\nwhenever a thing is made a subject of remark, or merely brought to mind,\nit, of necessity, must be so, in one of three positions: either a thing\nto be commended; to be reprehended; or as a thing of total indifference.\nA glaring sin and gross evil could not have been a thing of indifference\nto Jesus Christ and his apostles. They, therefore, cannot be supposed to\nhave acted honestly in not condemning a sin, when by them mentioned, or\nbrought to mind. It is a supposition too gross for refutation!\n\nBut it is conceded by Mr. Barnes, page 260, that \u201cthe apostles did not\nopenly denounce slavery as an evil, or require that those who were held\nin bondage should be at once emancipated. * * * These things seem to me\nto lie on the face of the New Testament; and whatever argument they may\nfurnish to the advocates of slavery in disposing of these facts, it\nseems plain that the facts themselves cannot be denied.\u201d\n\nThe facts, then, must stand in commendation and approval. They cannot be\ngot rid of by arguing ever so ingeniously, that Jesus Christ and his\napostles were cunning; that they acted with prudence; that they\ndexterously taught it to be an evil by implication; or that they acted\nwith deep-seated and far-reaching expediency; nor by any other\nsubterfuge by which the enemies of God are striving to mould his essence\nand character into an idol to suit themselves.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                             LESSON XVIII.\n\n\u201cIf, however, it should be conceded that this passage (_Lev._ xxv. 45,\n46) means that the heathen might be subjected to perpetual bondage, and\nthat the intention was not that they should be released in the year of\njubilee, still it will not follow that this is a justification of\nperpetual slavery as it exists in the United States. For, even on that\nsupposition, the concession was one made to _them_, not to any other\npeople.\u201d _Barnes_, p. 156.\n\nThis is not the first time the abolitionists have presented this\nproposition, and seem to deem it insurmountable. Therefore, it may merit\na few words of inquiry.\n\nIs it contended that God ever grants or denies, or, in other words,\nacts, except in conformity with some universal rule or law of his\nprovidence and government? For, to suppose otherwise, must involve the\nconsideration of an inferior and capricious being. If God, on any\noccasion, permitted slavery, then it is deducible from the\nunchangeableness of God and his laws, that he always permits it, when\nall the circumstances and conditions shall be found to exist as they\nwere when he did so permit it. The Jews, as a nation, were God\u2019s people;\nhis worshippers, his church. \u201cAnd ye shall be unto me a kingdom of\npriests, and a holy nation.\u201d _Exod._ xix. 6. \u201cFor thou art a holy people\nunto the Lord thy God: The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special\npeople unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the\nearth.\u201d _Deut._ vii. 6.\n\nBut, in the order of God\u2019s providence, other people were to be the\nrecipients of the grace of God also: \u201cAnd it shall come to pass in the\nlast days, that the mountain of the Lord\u2019s house shall be established in\nthe top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills: all\nnations shall flow unto it.\u201d _Isa._ ii. 2.\n\n\u201cSing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion; for lo, I come, and I will dwell\nin the midst of thee, saith the Lord. And many nations shall be joined\nto the Lord in that day, and shall be my people.\u201d _Zech._ ii. 10, 11.\n\nThis is in strict conformity with the promise of Jehovah to Isaac: \u201cAnd\nin thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.\u201d _Gen._ xxvi.\n4.\n\nThe time of this great enlargement of the church of God was the advent\nof the Saviour. The Christian church succeeded as heirs of all the\npromises, benefits, and free grace of the ancient church and people of\nGod;\u2014in fact, became heirs of Abraham;\u2014\u201cAnd the father of circumcision\nto them, who are not of the circumcision only, but who walk in the steps\nof that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet\nuncircumcised. For the promise that he should be the heir of the world\nwas not to Abraham, or to his seed through the law, but through the\nrighteousness of faith.\u201d * * * \u201cTherefore it is of faith, that it might\nbe by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not\nto that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith\nof Abraham, who is the father of us all, (as it is written, I have made\nthee the father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God,\nwho quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not, as\nthough they were.\u201d _Romans_ iv. 11, 12, 16, 17.\n\n\u201cTherefore remember, that ye being in times past Gentiles in the flesh,\nwho are called uncircumcision by that which is called the circumcision\nin the flesh made by hands;\n\n\u201cThat at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the\ncommonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenant of promise,\nhaving no hope, and without God in the world.\n\n\u201cBut now in Christ Jesus, ye who sometime were afar off, are made nigh\nby the blood of Christ; for he is our peace, who hath made both one; and\nhath broken down the middle wall of partition between us.\u201d _Eph._ ii.\n11, 12, 13, 14.\n\n\u201cKnow ye, therefore, that they which are of faith, the same are children\nof Abraham. And the scripture foreseeing that God would justify the\nheathen by faith, preached before the gospel to Abraham, saying, In thee\nshall all nations be blessed.\u201d _Gal._ iii. 7, 8.\n\nAnd wherefore Peter very properly describes the Gentile church of Christ\nby similar language applied to the Jews, the chosen people of God to\nwhom the promises of the law were made: \u201cBut ye are a chosen generation,\na royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should\nshow forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into\nhis marvellous light; which in time past were not a people, but are now\na people of God; which had not obtained mercy, but have now obtained\nmercy.\u201d 1 _Peter_ ii. 9, 10.\n\nThe theological student will recollect many more very pertinent proofs\nof the heirship of the Christian church to the chosen people of God.\n\u201cThink not I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I come not to\ndestroy the law, but to fulfil.\u201d _Matt._ v. 17.\n\nSo far then as the Gentile nations have become Christianized, have\nbecome the followers of Christ, so far they have, through faith, become\nthe peculiar people of God, and heirs and children of Abraham; and, as\nheirs, succeeded to all things resulting from the providence and grace\nof God to his peculiar people.\n\nThe broad and universal principle concerning slavery is, that a want of\nknowledge of the true God, a want of conformity to his law, have a\nconstantly deteriorating effect, whereas, on the contrary, a knowledge\nof Jehovah and a conduct in conformity to his law, (since the fallen\nstate of man renders him unable to comply with the law) the application\nof God\u2019s grace, and free forgiveness through faith and repentance, shall\nhave the redeeming effect of a full compliance with the law. As the one\nposition is deteriorating, forcing as it were downward to destruction\nand death,\u2014the other is as constantly elevating towards all perfection\nand life eternal.\n\nThus the mercy of God is manifested to the degraded and heathen nations,\nby substantially placing them under a protection and guidance, which,\nhowever slow may be the progress, must of necessity have an elevating\ninfluence on thousands, in proportion as they, with heart-felt\nwillingness, yield themselves to it. \u201cOh, that men would praise the Lord\nfor his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men!\nFor he satisfieth the longing soul, and filleth the hungry soul with\ngoodness. Such as sit in darkness and the shadow of death, being bound\nin affliction and iron; because they rebelled against the words of God,\nand contemned the counsels of the Most High: therefore, he brought down\ntheir heart with labour; they fell down, there was none to help. Then\nthey cried unto the Lord in their trouble, and he raised them out of\ntheir distresses. He brought them out of darkness and the shadow of\ndeath, and brake their bands in sunder. Oh, that men would praise the\nLord for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of\nmen.\u201d _Psa._ cvii. 8\u201315.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn conclusion, we may remark, that under this view of the law, the\nannouncements of holy writ, so far as they regard the subject under\nconsideration, are as applicable to the Christian people of the present\nday as they at any time were to the Hebrews themselves.\n\n\u201cThus saith the Lord, The labour of Egypt, and merchandise of Ethiopia,\nand of the Sabeans, men of stature, shall come over unto thee, and they\nshall be thine: they shall come after thee; in chains they shall come\nover, and they shall fall down unto thee, they shall make supplication\nunto thee, _saying_, Surely God is in thee; and there is none else,\n_there_ is no God\u201d _beside_. _Isa._ xlv. 14.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIX.\n\nMr. Barnes has referred to Vatalbus, Rabbi Solomon, Abenezra Joh. Casp.\nMi\u00e9gius, Constitutiones Servi Hebr\u00e6i, Ugolin, Maimonides, Michaelis,\nJohn\u2019s Arch\u00e6ology, Selden de Uxore Hebraica, and some other books which\nare not at hand, in support of his doctrine, and the points on which he\npredicates it. We did not doubt the accuracy of these references and\nquotations; but, page 149, we find the following in his book: \u201cIt would\nappear from Josephus, that on the year of jubilee _all_ slaves were set\nat liberty;\u201d and he refers to \u201cAntiquities,\u201d vol. ii. chap. xii. sec. 3,\nwhich, so far as it refers to slavery, reads thus: \u201cAccordingly I enjoin\nthee to make no more delays, but to make haste to Egypt, and to travel\nnight and day, and not to draw out the time, and to make the slavery of\nthe Hebrews and their sufferings to last the longer.\u201d\n\nWe do not see how the passage warrants the assertion of Mr. Barnes, and\napprehended some mistake, such as a young lawyer, willing to appear very\nlearned, might make, by affixing to his brief a long list of\nauthorities, merely from an examination of his index.\n\nBut the sentence here quoted from Mr. Barnes, containing the proposition\nthat Josephus said, in his Antiquities, vol. ii. chap. xii sec. 3, that\nall slaves were set at liberty in the year of jubilee, is consecutively\nfollowed in his book, thus: \u201cThe fiftieth year is called by the Hebrews\nthe _jubilee_, wherein debtors are freed from their debts, and slaves\nare set at liberty.\u201d And this sentence is marked as quoted from\nJosephus, and as though it was the exact passage to be found in the\nplace just before referred to. The fact is, this sentence is _nearly_ a\n_part_ of what may be found in book iii. chap. xii. sec. 3 of\nAntiquities, thus: \u201cAnd that fiftieth year is called by the Hebrews the\njubilee wherein debtors are freed from their debts, and slaves are set\nat liberty; which slaves became such, though they were of the same\nstock, by transgressing some of those laws whose punishment was not\ncapital, but they were punished by this method of slavery.\u201d\n\nSuppose the mistake to be in the number of the book, still, does the\npassage, as fully quoted, give any authority for the assertion of Mr.\nBarnes? Thus the mind is led to inquire what credit is to be given to\nthese references?\n\nBut we hasten to give a few extracts illustrative of Mr. Barnes\u2019s\nthought and argument. He says, p. 126\u2014\n\n\u201cConsidering the universal prevalence of slavery when the gospel was\npreached, it is not probable that any considerable number would be\nfound, who were masters and servants in the sense of a voluntary\nservitude on the part of the latter.\u201d He says\u2014\n\nPage 273: \u201cThe permanency of the institution (slavery) can derive no\nsupport from what they (the apostles) said on the subject, and in no\nmanner depends on it.\u201d\n\nPage 300: \u201cIt is only the antagonistic fanaticism of a fragment of the\nSouth, which maintains the doctrine that slavery is, in itself, a good\nthing, and ought to be perpetuated. It cannot by possibility be\nperpetuated.\u201d\n\nPage 301: \u201c_The South, therefore, has to choose between emancipation, by\nthe silent and holy influence of the gospel, securing the elevation of\nthe slaves to the stature and character of freemen_, or to abide the\nissue of a long continued conflict against the laws of God.\u201d\n\nPage 306: \u201cAnd if a Christian master at the present time * * * should be\ntroubled in his conscience in regard to his right to hold slaves, there\nis no part of the apostolic writings to which he could turn to allay his\nfeelings or calm his scruples.\u201d\n\nPage 311: \u201cNow this undeniable fact, that the right of the master over\nthe person and services of the slave, is never recognised at all in the\nNew Testament.\u201d\n\nPage 312: \u201cWhatever distinction of complexion there may be, it is the\ndoctrine of the Bible that all belong to one and the same great family,\nand that, in the most important matters pertaining to their existence,\nthey are on a level.\u201d\n\nPage 315: \u201cUp to the time when its truths (the gospel\u2019s) were made\nknown, the great mass of mankind had no scruples about its propriety;\nthey regarded one portion of the race as inferior to the other, and as\nborn to be slaves. Christianity disclosed the great truth that all men\nwere on a level; that all were equal.\u201d\n\nPage 317: \u201cIf a man should in fact render to his slaves \u2018that which is\njust and equal;\u2019 would he not restore them to freedom? Would any thing\nshort of this be _all_ that is just and equal?\u201d\n\nPage 322: \u201cNo man has a right to _assume_ that when the word \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n_doulos_, occurs in the New Testament, it means a _slave_.\u201d\n\nPage 331: \u201cNo argument in favour of slavery can be derived from the\ninjunctions addressed by the apostles to the slaves themselves.\u201d\n\nPage 340: \u201cFrom the arguments thus far presented in regard to the\nrelations of Christianity to slavery, it seems fair to draw the\nconclusion, that the Christian religion lends no _sanction_ to slavery.\u201d\n\nPage 341: \u201cThe Saviour and his apostles inculcated such views of man as\n_amount_ to a prohibition of slavery.\u201d Page 345: \u201cHe (Jesus Christ) was\nnot a Jew, except by the accident of his birth, but he was a _man_; in\nhis human form there was as distinct a relation to the African * * * as\nthere was to the Caucasian.\u201d\n\nWe have understood that one popular clergyman at the North (an\nabolitionist) has gone so far as to say that Jesus Christ was a _negro_!\nTo what folly and extravagance will not wickedness subject its slaves!\n\nMr. Barnes says, page 375\u2014\u201cThese considerations seem to me to be\nconclusive proof that Christianity was _not_ designed to extend and\nperpetuate slavery; but that the spirit of the Christian religion would\nremove it from the world, _because it is an evil, and displeasing to\nGod_.\u201d\n\nTo all of which, worthy of answer, it may be well to apply the sentiment\nwhich he attributes to Dr. Fuller, that the New Testament is not silent\non the subject of slavery; that it recognises the relation; that it\ncommands slaves to obey their masters, and gives reasons why they should\ndo so. And it may be steadily affirmed, if slavery be a sin, that such\ncommands and counsels are not only a _suppressio veri_, but a _suggestio\nfalsi_; not only a suppression of the truth, but a suggestion of what is\nfalse!\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nIf it shall be said that God merely sanctioned or permitted slavery in\nthe time of the patriarchs, who will say that he did not enjoin it in\nthe time of Moses? A repeal of this injunction demanded a countervailing\nrevelation of no equivocal character, clear and decided, without the\nadmission of a doubt.\n\n\u201cAnd God spake unto Moses in Mount Sinai, saying, * * * But thy bond-men\nand bond-maids which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are\nround about you; of them shall ye buy bond-men and bond-maids. Moreover,\nof the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them\nshall ye buy and of their families, which they beget in your land; and\nthey shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance,\nfor your children after you, to inherit them for a possession: they\nshall be your bond-men for ever.\u201d _Lev._ xxv. 1, 44, 45, 46.\n\nMr. Barnes has adduced no proof that this law was ever repealed; nor do\nthe holy books contain any evidence of such repeal; yet he has denied\nthe existence of slavery in Judea, at the time of the advent of the\nSaviour. See pp. 228, 242, 244, and 249, before quoted, and, we trust,\nsufficiently refuted. But we now add, that at the time Jesus Christ and\nhis apostles were on the earth, Judea was a province of Rome. Now, since\nit was clear that slavery was inculcated by the Hebrew laws, unless it\nwas forbidden by the Roman, we could not come to the conclusion that\nslavery did not exist in Judea at their time, even if Jesus Christ and\nhis apostles had never alluded to it.\n\nBut,\u2014see _Matt._ xxvi. 51: \u201cBehold, one of them which were with Jesus\nstretched out his hand and drew his sword and struck the servant\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _doulon_, _slave_) of the high-priest,\u201d then some suitable but\ndifferent word would have been used, as in the following: \u201cAnd the\nservants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, _slaves_) and officers (\u1f31\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9,\n_hup\u0113retai_, _attendants_, _persons who aid_, _assistants_) stood\nthere,\u201d _John_ xviii. 18; proving the fact that both slaves and other\nattendants were present, and that the _slave_ was named distinctly from\nsuch other attendants. There can be no doubt about these facts; and in\nproof that slavery was not forbidden by the Roman laws, we quote from\nMr. Barnes, page 251: \u201cIn Italy, it was computed that there were three\nslaves to one freeman; and in this part of the empire alone, their\nnumbers amounted to more than twenty millions.\u201d\n\nPage 252: * * * \u201cThe number of slaves could not have been less than\nsixty millions in the Roman Empire, at about the time the apostles went\nforth to preach the gospel.\u201d\n\nPage 254: * * * \u201cThe following places are mentioned, either as _emporia_\nfor slaves or countries from which they were procured: Delos, Phrygia,\nand Cappadocia, Panticap\u00e6um, Diascurias, and Phanagoria on the Euxine or\nBlack Sea; Alexandria and Cadiz; Corsica, Sardinia, and Britain; Africa\nand Thrace.\u201d\n\nAnd does it astonish us that in these dark ages of human degradation,\nBritain helped to supply Rome with slaves? It should be remembered that\nconquest gave the right in ancient days to enslave all barbarous and\ndeeply degraded nations; and it might be inquired whether such principle\nwas not alluded to by the prophet: \u201cShall the prey be taken from the\nmighty, or the lawful captive delivered.\u201d _Isa._ xlix. 24. History will\ninform us that all these nations were of the lowest order. St. Jerome,\nin his writings against Jovinian, informs us what were the morals of\nBritain. He says\u2014\u201cWhy should I refer to other nations, when I myself,\nwhen a youth in Gaul, have seen the Atticotti, a British tribe, eating\nhuman flesh? Should they find shepherds tending their herds of swine or\ncattle, and flocks of sheep in the woods, they are wont to cut off the\nfleshy parts of the men, and the breasts of the women, which are\nesteemed the most delicious food.\u201d\n\nWho then is to say that Britain is not now indebted for her high state\nof intellectual improvement to the pike, bludgeon, and sword of the\nRoman, Dane, Saxon, and Norman? And can we say that the hand of God was\nnot in this? The same providences and principles that have ever applied\nto degraded Africa apply to all degraded nations, and even to individual\nmen. \u201cWhosoever committeth sin is the servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_,\n_slave_) of sin.\u201d\n\nAnd it may be said that nations and individuals thus enslave themselves.\n\u201cBehold, for your iniquities ye have sold yourselves.\u201d _Isa._ l. 1.\nThese principles may be seen every day operating among the most degraded\nof even the most enlightened nations. The history of the present day\ninforms us of the deep degradation of the African tribes; and that even\nin their own country the great mass are slaves. Consistently with the\nlaws of God, they could not be otherwise; and even slavery among\nthemselves, subject to sacrifice and death as we have seen it, is yet\nbetter for them than a state of freedom. We have seen how the free\nhordes roam like the brutes, making that place home where night overtook\nthem. Suppose such to be cannibals, of which we have proof, it might so\nhappen, that, in one day, one half of their number would be destroyed by\nthemselves. Therefore, as distressing as slavery must be among them, yet\nit is far preferable to their dejected condition of freedom.\n\nWe know of no one who pretends to believe that the masses of the African\ntribes have increased in number since the commencement of our era;\nwhereas, a few scattering individuals, brought into slavery, within the\nlast few generations, in these States, have increased to near four\nmillions; nearly one-twelfth of the number of the entire population of\nAfrica. However wicked may be the Christian master, how much more is\nslavery to be desired by the negro than any condition among these pagan\nhordes! We, therefore, do not deem it presumptuous to say, that so\ndegraded is the condition of the African in his own land, that it has\nbeen elevated in proportion as it has been affected by the slave-trade,\nand more especially with Christian nations. The first tendencies towards\ncivilization, and whatever dawning of mental development there may be\nnow noticed among the African tribes, are traceable alone to that\nsource. And the Christian philosopher might well inquire whether, in the\nprovidence of God, its existence, from the time of Noah to the present,\nhas not been the saving principle which has alone preserved the tribes\nof Ham from the condition of Sodom and Gomorrah, and other nations long\nsince wasted away.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XX.\n\nMr. Barnes has quoted and adopted the following passage from President\nWayland, page 310: \u201cIf the religion of Christ allows such a license (to\nhold slaves) from such precepts as these, the New Testament would be the\ngreatest curse that ever was inflicted on _our race_.\u201d On the account of\nthe avowal of Dr. Barnes as to _his race_, heretofore noticed, we feel a\ndegree of gladness that the above passage is not original with him: we\nshould expect to find in him a sympathy on this subject, unpleasant to\nencounter, because legitimately acting on his mind. A man may be a\nphilosopher or a Christian, yet the ties of nature, the sympathies of\nkindred are not abated.\n\nWe are informed that heretofore, written arguments in favour of\nabolitionism by Dr. Wayland and against it by Dr. Fuller, have been\npublished. We have not seen the work; but are told that the\nabolitionists claim victory for Dr. Wayland, and that the opponents also\nclaim it for Dr. Fuller; and from the foregoing passage as quoted, we\nconclude that Dr. Wayland found himself, at least, in _straits_ on the\nsubject. If such be the fact, it may account why the abolitionists\nthought Dr. Barnes\u2019s present work necessary. But, however these things\nmay be, the passage from Dr. Wayland is a volume of deep instruction,\nannouncing the feelings and theological consistency, we might say\nfanaticism, of, we hope, but a few extraordinary men, now appearing in\nour land; men, we doubt not, conscientious in their opinion that God\ndesigns the government of the world to be in strict conformity with\nhuman reason, and who cannot, therefore, pray in the spirit of the Son:\n\u201cFather, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless, not\nmy will, but thine, be done.\u201d _Luke_ xxii. 42. \u201cIf any man have not the\nspirit of Christ, he is none of his.\u201d _Rom._ viii. 9.\n\nIn the book before us, the author falls into one error, common to every\nwriter on his side of the question: That slavery is the cause of the\ndegradation of the Africans and the slaves generally. We maintain that\nthe converse is the true state of the case. Another error is the\nsubstitution of what may be abuses of slavery for the institution\nitself. This author, like most of the abolition writers of whom we have\nany knowledge, evinces an inability to enter into an impartial\nconsideration of the subject, from his deep and overshadowing prejudices\nagainst it. Indeed, the whole work, from page to page, carries proof of\na previous determination to condemn, not less obvious than in the\ninstance of the judge who, in summing up a case, said\u2014\u201cIt is true, in\nthis case, the accused has proved himself innocent; but, since a guilty\nman might prove himself so, and since I myself have always been of the\nopinion that he was guilty, it will be the safest to condemn.\u201d\n\nThe style of the work before us is always diffuse and declamatory,\nsometimes elevated, but often cumbrous; still his language bears the\nimpress of classical learning and a cultivated mind; but there is in the\nwork a want of conciseness; it abounds in contradictory positions and a\nfrequent inconclusiveness of deduction, which make it obnoxious to a\ncharge of carelessness. But may we not account for these defects by the\nurgent solicitude of his readers?\n\nThe morbid appetite of the Northern abolitionists was probably hungry\nfor the work. Having no wish to _oppose_ his pecuniary views, we refrain\nfrom further extracts, lest we should infringe his copyright. Nor did we\nat all contemplate a classical review of the work. The book contains\nabout 400 pages. If it could be condensed, like a pot of new-brewed and\nfoaming, into potable beer, to a fourth of that size, it might well\nclaim such attention; and from the specimens of ability displayed, if it\nwere proved that the doctor has suffered his zeal to run ahead of the\ntruth in regard to his _race_, we should judge him fully competent to\nthe task of such improvement.\n\n\n\n\n                  ------------------------------------\n\n                               Study III.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON I.\n\n  \u201c_The Works of William Ellery Channing, D.D.,\u201d in six volumes. Tenth\n    Edition. Boston, 1849._\n\nThese volumes include essays, sermons, and lectures on various subjects.\nThe style is easy, flowing, and persuasive; the language is generally\nclear, often elevated, sometimes sublime. Few can read the book and not\nfeel the evidence, whatever may be the error of his doctrine, that the\nauthor added to his literary eminence a purity of intention. Such a work\nmust always make a deep impression on the reader. It is this fact that\nprompts the present essay. It may be said of Channing what Channing said\nof Fenelon:\n\n\u201cHe needs to be read with caution, as do all who write from their own\ndeeply excited minds. He needs to be received with deductions and\nexplanations. * * * We fear that the very excellencies of Fenelon may\nshield his errors. Admiration prepares the mind for belief; and the\nmoral and religious sensibility of the reader may lay him open to\nimpressions which, while they leave his purity unstained, may engender\ncauseless solicitude.\u201d Vol. i. p. 185.\n\nDr. Channing\u2019s sympathies for every appearance of human suffering, for\nevery grade of human imperfection, gave a peculiar phasis, perhaps most\namiable to his intellect, religion, and writings. He sought perfection\nfor himself\u2014he was ardent to behold it universal. Heaven must for ever\nbe the home of such a spirit. But the scenes of earth gave agitation and\ngrief. Limited, in his earthly associations, to the habits of the North,\nthe very purity of his heart led him to attack what he deemed the most\nwicked sin of the South. His politics were formed upon the model of his\nmind. Religion spread before him her golden wing, and science aided in\nthe elevation of his view.\n\nBut, O thou Being, God Eternal! why not this earth made heaven? Why thy\nmost perfect work imperfection? Why thy child, clothed with holiness or\nshod with the gospel, run truant to thy law, thy providence and\ngovernment?\n\nBut, lo, we are not of thy council. We were not called when the\nfoundations of eternity were laid. We are, truly, all very small beings.\nOur virtues, even purity, may lead in error. May not our best intentions\nlead down to wo?\n\n\u201cIt is a fact worthy of serious thought, and full of solemn instruction,\nthat many of the worst errors have grown out of the religious tendencies\nof the mind. So necessary is it to keep watch over our whole nature, to\nsubject the highest sentiments to the calm, conscientious reason. Men,\nstarting from the idea of God, have been so dazzled by it, as to forget\nor misinterpret the universe.\u201d _Channing_, vol. i. p. 14.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON II.\n\nVolume ii. page 14, Dr. Channing says\u2014\n\n\u201c1. I shall show that man cannot be justly held and used as property.\n\n\u201c2. I shall show that man has sacred rights, the gifts of God, and\ninseparable from human nature, of which slavery is the infraction.\n\n\u201c3. I shall offer some explanations to prevent misapplication of these\nprinciples.\n\n\u201c4. I shall unfold the evils of slavery.\n\n\u201c5. I shall consider the argument which the Scriptures are thought to\nfurnish in favour of slavery.\n\n\u201c6. I shall offer some remarks on the means of removing it.\n\n\u201c7. I shall offer some remarks on abolitionism.\n\n\u201c8. I shall conclude with a few reflections on the duties belonging to\nthe times.\u201d\n\nIn support of the first proposition, to wit, \u201cI will show that man\ncannot be justly held and used as property,\u201d the doctor has advanced\nseven arguments. He says, page 18\u2014\u201cIt is plain, that, if one man may be\nheld as property, then every other man may be so held.\u201d * * * \u201cNow let\nevery reader ask himself this plain question: Could I, can I, be\nrightfully seized, and made an article of property,\u201d &c. Page 19: \u201cAnd\nif this impression be delusion, on what single moral conviction can we\nrely? * * * The consciousness of indestructible rights is a part of our\nmoral being. The consciousness of our humanity involves the persuasion\nthat we cannot be owned as a tree or brute. As men, we cannot justly be\nmade slaves. Then no man can be rightfully enslaved.\u201d\n\nThe first idea we find, touching property, is in _Gen._ i. 26: \u201cAnd let\nthem have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the\nair, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every\ncreeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.\u201d Verse 28th: \u201cAnd God\nblessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and\nreplenish the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of\nthe sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that\nmoveth upon the earth.\u201d\n\nIn _Lev._ xxv. 44: \u201cBoth thy bond-men and bond-maids which thou shalt\nhave shall be of the heathen, that are round about you: of them shall ye\nbuy bond-men and bond-maids.\u201d Verse 45: \u201cMoreover of the children of the\nstrangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their\nfamilies that are with you which they beget in your land, and they shall\nbe your possession.\u201d Verse 46: \u201cAnd ye shall take them as an inheritance\nfor your children after you, to inherit them for a possession, they\nshall be your bondmen for ever.\u201d\n\nAnd if we look at the first verse of this chapter, that the foregoing\nwas announced by God himself to Moses from Sinai; and from which it\nwould seem that God and Dr. Channing were of quite a different opinion\non this subject.\n\nWe know not what notion Dr. Channing may have entertained of \u201cman\u2019s\nindestructible rights.\u201d But let us ask, what rights has he that may not\nbe destroyed? The right to breath? Suppose, by his own wantonness,\ncarelessness, or wickedness, he is submerged in water, what becomes of\nhis right to breathe, since he can no longer exercise it? Can you name\nany right that, under the providence of God, may not be destroyed?\nFreemen have rights, but subject to alteration, and even extinction;\nslaves have rights, but subject to the same changes. There is no such\nthing as an \u201cindestructible right\u201d appertaining to any existence, save\nto the Great Jehovah! He must be an immortal God who can possess an\n_indestructible right_. We use the word \u201cright\u201d in Dr. Channing\u2019s\nsense\u2014just claim, legal title, ownership, the legal power of exclusive\npossession. You ask, has not man an _indestructible right_ to worship\nGod? We answer, no! Man has no such right to worship God; such right\nwould make him a partner. The worship of God is a _duty_ which man owes;\nthe forbearance of which is forbidden by the moral law, by justice and\npropriety. Nothing can be forbidden or ordered touching an\n_indestructible right_; for such command, if to be obeyed, changes the\nquality of the right; or rather shows that it was not indestructible.\n\nSuch arguments may seem to give great aid and beauty to a mere\nrhetorical climax, but, before the lens of analyzation, evaporates into\nenthusiastic declamation,\u2014which, in the present case, seems to be\naddressed to the sympathies, prejudices, and impulses of the human\nheart.\n\nIn his writings on slavery, in fact through all his works, we find a\nfundamental error, most fatal to truth. He makes the conscience the\ngreat _cynosura_ of all that is right in morals, and of all that is true\nin religion.\n\nHence, in the passage before us,\u2014\u201cThe consciousness of _indestructible\nrights_ is a part of our moral being,\u201d\u2014the _consciousness_ of such\nrights is his proof that we possess them; therefore, \u201cthe consciousness\nof our humanity involves the persuasion (proof) that we cannot be\nowned;\u201d and, therefore, \u201cas men (being men) we cannot justly be made\nslaves.\u201d So, page 25: \u201cAnother argument against the right of property in\nman, may be drawn from a very obvious principle of moral science, the\nconscience.\u201d Page 33. \u201cHis conscience, in revealing the moral law, does\nnot reveal a law for himself only, but speaks as a universal legislator.\nHe has an _intuitive conviction_ that the obligations of this divine\ncode press on others as truly as on himself. * * * There is no deeper\nprinciple in human nature than the consciousness of rights.\u201d\n\nVol. iii. page 18: \u201cBy this I mean that a Christian minister should\nbeware of offering interpretations of Scripture which are repugnant to\n_any clear discoveries_ of reason, or dictates of _conscience_.\u201d\n\nPage 93: \u201cWe believe that all virtue has its foundation in the moral\nnature of man; that is, conscience, or his sense of duty.\u201d\n\nPage 164: \u201cOne of the great excellencies of Christianity is that it does\nnot deal in minute regulations; but, that, having given broad views of\nduty,\u201d &c., * * * \u201cit leaves us to apply these rules, and express their\nspirit, according to the promptings of the _divine monitor_ within\nus\u201d\u2014the conscience.\n\nVol. vi. page 308: \u201cWe have no higher law than our conviction of duty.\u201d\n\n\u201cConscience is the supreme power within us. Its essence, its grand\ncharacteristic, is sovereignty. It speaks with divine authority. Its\noffice is to command, to rebuke, to reward; and happiness and honour\ndepend on the reverence with which we listen to it.\u201d Vol. iii. pp. 335,\n336.\n\nSuch passages plainly expose the view of what Dr. Channing calls\n_conscience_: in answer to which we say, the conscience may be a poor\nguide to truth. The African savage feels a clear conscience when he\nkills and eats his captive. The Hindoo mother is governed by her\nconscience when she plunges her new-born infant beneath the flood, a\nsacrifice to her gods. The idolaters of Palestine were subdued by\nconscience when they thrust their suckling infants into the flames to\nappease Moloch; yet God did not think it was right, and forbade them to\ndo so.\n\nThe truth is, the conscience is merely that part of the judgment which\ntakes notice of what it deems right or wrong; consequently, is as prone\nto be in error as our judgment about any other matter.\n\nFor the accuracy of this definition, we refer to all the standard\nwriters on logic, and those on the human understanding, treating on the\nsubject. And in fact, Dr. Channing is forced to recede from his position\nwhen he finds that Abraham, Philemon, and some good men even of the\npresent day, were slave-owners; and in vol. vi. page 55, he says\u2014\u201cIt is\na solemn truth, not yet understood as it should be, that the worst\ninstitutions may be sustained, the worst deeds performed, the most\nmerciless cruelties inflicted by the _conscientious_ and the good.\u201d\n\nAnd again, page 57: \u201cThe great truth is now insisted on, that evil is\nevil, no matter at whose door it lies; and that men acting from\nconscience and religion may do nefarious deeds, needs to be better\nunderstood.\u201d\n\nWould it not have been more frank for Dr. Channing to have said, that\nthe conscience would be an unerring guide so long as it agreed with his,\nbut when it did not, why, then he would inquire into the matter?\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nIt is to be lamented that, among the unlearned at the present day, a\nconfused idea of something tantamount to the conscience being a divine\nmonitor within us has taken a deep root among the minds of men; having\ngrown out of the fact that such was the doctrine of some of the\nfanatical teachers of former days.\n\nIf we shall be permitted to speak of property, in reference to our and\nits relation to the Divine Being, then we cannot strictly say that man\ncan _own property_. Jehovah stands in no need. Behold the cattle upon a\nthousand hills are his; all is the work of his hand; all, all is his\nproperty alone! At most, God has only intrusted the possession, the\nadministration of the subjects of his creation, to man for the time\nbeing,\u2014to multiply, to replenish and subdue. It is only in reference to\nour relation to one another that we can advance the idea of property.\nMan was commanded to have dominion over the whole earth, to replenish\nand subdue, in proportion to the talent bestowed on him for that\npurpose. This command presupposes such a state of things as we find, of\nadvancement, progression, and improvement. But in the course of the\nDivine administration, God has seen fit to bestow on one man ten\ntalents, and on another but one; and who shall stand upon the throne of\nthe Almighty, and decide that he of the ten talents shall have no\nrelation with the progression of him of but one talent?\n\n\u201cTake therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him of ten\ntalents. For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have\nabundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that\nwhich he hath.\u201d _Matt._ xxv. 28, 29; see also _Luke_ xvii. 24\u201326.\n\nAnd what, in the course of Divine providence, is to become of him who\nburied his talent in the earth, and from whom it was taken away?\n\u201cBlessed is that servant whom his Lord when he cometh shall find so\ndoing. Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all\nthat he hath.\u201d _Luke_ xii. 43, 44. \u201cJesus answered them, Verily I say\nunto you, whoever committeth sin is the servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_,\n_slave_) of sin.\u201d _John_ viii. 34. \u201cBehold for your iniquities have ye\nsold yourselves.\u201d _Isa._ l. 1. \u201cCursed be Canaan; a servant of servants\nshall he be unto his brethren.\u201d _Gen._ ix. 25. \u05e2\u05b6\u05bd\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _ebed_,\n_ebedim_, a most abject slave shall he be!\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON III.\n\nThe second argument in support of his first proposition is, \u201cA man\ncannot be seized and held as property, because he has rights;\u201d to\nenforce which, he says\u2014\u201cNow, I say, a being having _rights_ cannot\njustly be made property; for this claim over him virtually annuls all\nhis rights.\u201d We see no force of argument in this position. It is also\ntrue that all domestic animals, held as property, have rights. \u201cThe ox\nknoweth his owner, and the ass his master\u2019s crib.\u201d They all have \u201cthe\nright of petition;\u201d and ask, in their way, for food: are they the less\nproperty?\n\nBut his third argument in support of his first proposition is, that man\ncannot justly be held as property, on the account of the \u201cessential\nequality of man.\u201d If to be born, to eat, to drink, and die alike,\nconstitutes an essential equality among men, then be it so! What! the\nAfrican savage, born even a slave amid his native wilds, who entertains\nno vestige of an idea of God, of a future state of existence, of moral\naccountability; who has no wish beyond the gratification of his own\nanimal desire; whose parentage, for ages past, has been of the same\norder; and whose descendants are found to require generations of\nconstant training before they display any permanent moral and\nintellectual advancement; what, such a one essentially equal to such a\nman as Dr. Channing?\n\nThe truth is, such a man is more essentially equal with the brute\ncreation. We shall consider the subject of the equality in another part\nof our study, to which we refer. We, therefore, only remark, that the\ndoctrine is a chimera.\n\nHis fourth argument in support of the proposition is, \u201cThat man cannot\njustly be held as property, because property is an exclusive right.\u201d\n\u201cNow,\u201d he says, \u201cif there be property in any thing, it is that of a man\nin his own person, mind, and strength.\u201d \u201cProperty,\u201d he repeats, \u201cis an\nexclusive right.\u201d\n\nIf a man has an exclusive right to property, he can alienate it; he may\nsell, give, and bequeath it to others. If a man is the property of\nhimself, suppose he shall choose to sell himself to another, and deliver\nhimself in full possession to the purchaser, as he had before been in\nthe full possession of himself\u2014whose property will he be then? See a\ncase in point in _Deut._ xv. 12\u201317; see also _Exod._ xxi. 1\u20137.\n\nHis fifth argument is that, \u201cif a human being cannot without infinite\ninjustice be seized as property, then he cannot, without equal wrong, be\nheld and used as such.\u201d If a human being shall be found a nuisance to\nhimself and others in a state of freedom, then there will be no\ninjustice in his being subjugated, by law, to such control as his\nqualities prove him to require in reference to the general good; even if\nthe subject shall not choose such control as a personal benefit to\nhimself.\n\nThe sixth argument is, that a human being cannot be held as property,\nbecause, if so held, \u201cthe latter is under obligation to give himself up\nas a chattel to the former.\u201d \u201cNow,\u201d he says, \u201cdo we not instantly feel,\ncan we help feeling, that this is false?\u201d And that \u201cthe absence of\nobligation proves the want of the right.\u201d\n\nWe suppose all acknowledge God as the author of the moral law. The moral\nlaw forcibly inculcates submission to the civil or political law, even\nindependent of any promise to do so. Now, no one can have a right to act\nin contradiction to law. The absence of this right, then, proves the\nexistence of the obligation.\n\nFor his seventh argument, he says\u2014\u201cI come now to what is, to my mind,\nthe great argument against seizing and using a man as property. He\ncannot be property in the sight of God and justice, because he is a\nrational, moral, immortal being; because created in God\u2019s image, and\ntherefore in the highest sense his child; because created to unfold\ngodlike faculties, and to govern himself by a Divine law, written on his\nheart, and republished in God\u2019s word.\u201d\n\nDr. Channing adds a page or two in the same impulsive strain, of the\nsame enthusiastic character. We may admire his style, his language, the\namiable formation of his mind, but we see nothing like precision or\nlogical deduction in support of his proposition. We see nothing in it\nbut the declamation of a learned, yet an over-ardent, enthusiastic mind.\nHis whole book is but a display of his mental formation. He could love\nhis friends; yea, his enemies. He could have rewarded virtue, but he\nnever could have punished sin. He could have forgiven the greatest\noutrage, but he never could have yielded a delinquent to the rigid\ndemands of justice. He was a good man, but he never could have been an\nunbending judge.\n\nThe laws of God have been made for the government and benefit of his\ncreatures. God, nor his law, is, like man, changeable. His law, as\nexpressed or manifested towards one class of objects, is also expressed\nand manifested towards all objects similarly situated. The law, brought\ninto action by an act of Cain, would also have been brought into action\nby a similar act of Abel. The law condemnatory of the shedding of blood\nis still in fearful existence against all who shall have brought\nthemselves within the category of Cain\u2019s acts, the most of which have\nprobably not been recorded.\n\nWe anticipate from another portion of our studies, that \u201csin is any want\nof conformity unto the law of God.\u201d Sin is as necessarily followed by\nill consequences to the sinner as cause is by effect. A man commits a\nprivate murder; think ye, he feels no horrors of mind\u2014no regrets? Is the\nwatchfulness he finds necessary to keep over himself for fear of\nexposure, through the whole of life, not the effect of the act? Is not\nhis whole conduct, his friendships and associations with men, his very\nmental peculiarities, his estimate of others, often all influenced and\ndirected in the path of his personal safety, the avoidance of suspicion?\nAnd is all this no punishment? Probably, to have been put to death would\nhave been a much less suffering; and who can tell how far this long,\nfearful, and systematic working of his mind is to affect the mental\npeculiarities of his offspring? Shall he, who, by wanton\nthoughtlessness, regardless of propriety, the moral law, and the\nconsequences of its breach, contracts some foul, loathsome, consuming\ndisease, that burns into the bones, and becomes a part of his physical\nconstitution, leave no trace of his sin on his descendants?\nDeteriorated, feeble, and diseased, they shall not live out half their\ndays!\n\nA long-continued course of sin, confined to an individual, or extended\nto a family or race of people, deteriorates, degenerates, and destroys.\nSuch deterioration, continued perhaps from untold time, has brought some\nof the races of men to what we now find them; and the same causes, in\nsimilar operation, would leave the same effect on any other race; and\nDr. Channing\u2019s \u201cchild of God\u201d ceases to be so. \u201cYe are of your father,\nthe devil.\u201d _John_ viii. 44. \u201cAnd Dr. Channing\u2019s man, created to unfold\ngodlike faculties, and to govern himself by a Divine law written on his\nheart,\u201d ceases to act as he supposes: \u201cAnd the lusts of your father ye\nwill do: he was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the\ntruth; because there is no truth in him.\u201d _John_ viii. 44. And what\nsaith the Spirit of prophecy to these degenerate sons of earth? \u201cWhen\nthou criest, let thy companions deliver thee; but the wind shall carry\nthem away; vanity shall take them; but he that putteth his trust in me\nshall possess the land, and shall inherit my holy mountain.\u201d _Isa._\nlvii. 13.\n\n\u201cAnd if thou shalt say in thy heart, wherefore came these things upon\nme? For the greatness of thine iniquity are thy skirts discovered, and\nthy heels made bare. Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard\nhis spots? Then may ye also do good that are accustomed to do evil.\nTherefore will I scatter them as stubble that passeth away by the wind\nof the wilderness. This is thy lot, the portion of thy measures from me,\nsaith the Lord: because thou hast forgotten me, and trusted in\nfalsehood. Therefore, will I discover thy skirts upon thy face, that thy\nshame may appear.\u201d _Jer._ xiii. 22\u201326.\n\n\u201cAnd I will sell your sons and your daughters into the hand of the\nchildren of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people\nfar off: for the Lord hath spoken it.\u201d _Joel_ iii. 8.\n\nAnd what saith the same Spirit to those of opposite character?\n\n\u201cThe sons also of them that afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee;\nand they that despised thee shall bow themselves down at the soles of\nthy feet.\u201d _Isa._ lx. 14.\n\n\u201cAnd strangers shall stand and feed your flocks, and the sons of the\nalien shall be your ploughmen and your vine-dressers.\u201d _Ibid._ lxi. 5.\n\n\u201cThey (my people) shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth trouble;\nthey are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with\nthem. And it shall come to pass, before they shall call, I will answer;\nand while they are yet speaking, I will hear.\u201d _Ibid._ lxv. 234.\n\nWhat are the threatenings announced in prospect of their deterioration\nand wickedness?\n\n\u201cAnd thou (Judah) even thyself, shalt discontinue from thy heritage that\nI gave thee; and I will cause thee _to serve_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05da\u05b8 _be a slave\nto_) thine enemies in a land which thou knowest not.\u201d _Jer._ xvii. 4.\n\n\u201cAre ye not as the children of the Ethiopians unto me, O children of\nIsrael? saith the Lord. * * * Behold the eyes of the Lord God are upon\nthis sinful kingdom, and I will destroy it from off the face of the\nearth; saving that I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob, saith\nthe Lord.\u201d _Amos_ ix. 7, 8.\n\nThe consequences of sin are degradation, slavery, and death:\n\n\u201cA righteous man hateth lying; but a wicked man is loathsome and cometh\nto shame.\u201d\n\n\u201cHe that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind; and the fool\nshall be _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b6\u05bd\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, _slave_) to the wise of heart.\u201d\n\n\u201cAs righteousness tendeth to life, so he that pursueth evil, pursueth it\nto his own death.\u201d _Prov._\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nDr. Channing has suffered his idea of property to bring him great mental\nsuffering: he evidently associates, under the term _property_, those\nqualities and relations only, which are properly associated in an\ninanimate object of possession, or at most in a brute beast. He has, no\ndoubt, suffered great misery from the reflection that a human being has\never been reduced to such a condition. But his misery has all been\nproduced by his adherence to his own peculiar definition of the word\n_property_. His definition is not its exact meaning, when applied to a\nslave. Had the doctor attempted an argument to show that the word\n_property_ could not consistently be applied to a slave, he might,\nperhaps, have improved our language, by setting up a more definite\nboundary to the meaning of this term, and saved himself much useless\nlabour.\n\nMankind apply the term _property_ to slaves: they have always done so;\nand since Dr. Channing has not given us an essay upon the impropriety of\nthis use of the word, perhaps the accustomed usage will be continued.\nBut we imagine that no one but the doctor and his disciples will contend\nthat it expresses the same complex idea when applied to slaves, which is\nexpressed by it when applied to inanimate objects, or to brute beasts.\nIt will be a new idea to the slaveholder to be told that the word\n_property_, as applied to his slaves, converts them at once into brute\nbeasts, no longer human beings; that it deprives them of all legal\nprotection; and that he, the master, in consequence of the use of this\nword, stands in the same relation to his slave that he does to his\nhorse; and we apprehend he will find it quite as difficult to comprehend\nhow this metamorphosis is brought about, as it is for the doctor and his\ndisciples, how the slave is property.\n\nWe may say a man has property in his wife, his children, his hireling,\nhis slave, his horse, and a piece of timber,\u2014by which we mean that he\nhas the right to use them, in conformity to the relations existing\nbetween himself and these several objects. Because his horse is his\nproperty, who ever dreamed that he had therefore the right to use him as\na piece of timber?\n\nNo man has a right to use any item of property in a different manner\nthan his relations with it indicate; or, in other words, as shall be in\nconformity with the laws of God. Our property is little else than the\nright of possession and control, under the guidance of the laws by which\nwe are in possession for the time being.\n\nThe organization of society is the result of the conception of the\ngeneral good. By it one man, under a certain chain of circumstances,\ninherits a throne; another, a farm; one, the protection of a bondman, or\nwhatever may accrue to these conditions from other operating causes; and\nanother, nothing. If Dr. Channing and his disciples can find out some\nnew principles by which to organize society, producing different and\nbetter results, they will then do what has not been done.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IV.\n\nThe doctrine that slavery, disease, and death are the necessary effects\nof sin, we humbly claim to perceive spread on every page of the holy\nbooks. This doctrine is forcibly illustrated in the warning voice of\nJehovah to the Israelites. They were emphatically called his\nchildren\u2014peculiar people\u2014his chosen ones. He made covenants with them to\nbless them; yet all these were founded upon their adherence to the\nDivine law. These promises repealed no ordinance of Divine necessity in\ntheir behalf. He expressed, revealed the law, so far as it was important\nfor them at the time, and then says, _Deut._ xxviii. 14\u201368:\u2014\n\n\u201c15. But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice\nof the Lord thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his\nstatutes which I command thee this day, that all these curses shall come\nupon thee and overtake thee:\n\n\u201c16. Cursed _shalt_ thou _be_ in the city, and cursed _shalt_ thou _be_\nin the field.\n\n\u201c17. Cursed _shall be_ thy basket and thy store.\n\n\u201c18. Cursed _shall be_ the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy land,\nthe increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.\n\n\u201c19. Cursed _shalt_ thou _be_ when thou comest in, and cursed _shalt_\nthou _be_ when thou goest out.\n\n\u201c20. The Lord shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all\nthat thou settest thy hand unto for to do, until thou be destroyed, and\nuntil thou perish quickly: because of the wickedness of thy doings\nwhereby thou hast forsaken me.\n\n\u201c21. The Lord shall make the pestilence cleave unto thee, until he have\nconsumed thee from off the land, whither thou goest to possess it.\n\n\u201c22. The Lord shall smite thee with a consumption, and with a fever, and\nwith an inflammation, and with an extreme burning, and with the sword,\nand with blasting, and with mildew: and they shall pursue thee until\nthou perish.\n\n\u201c23. And thy heaven that is over thy head shall be brass, and the earth\nthat _is_ under thee _shall be_ iron.\n\n\u201c24. The Lord shall make the rain of thy land powder and dust: from\nheaven shall it come down upon thee, until thou be destroyed.\n\n\u201c25. The Lord shall cause thee to be smitten before thine enemies: thou\nshalt go out one way against them, and flee seven ways before them; and\nshalt be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth.\n\n\u201c26. And thy carcass shall be meat unto all fowls of the air, and unto\nbeasts of the earth, and no man shall fray _them_ away.\n\n\u201c27. The Lord will smite thee with the botch of Egypt, and with the\nemerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou canst not be\nhealed.\n\n\u201c28. The Lord shall smite thee with madness, and blindness, and\nastonishment of heart:\n\n\u201c29. And thou shalt grope at noonday, as the blind gropeth in darkness,\nand thou shalt not prosper in thy ways; and thou shalt be only oppressed\nand spoiled evermore, and no man shall save _thee_.\n\n\u201c30. Thou shalt betroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her: thou\nshalt build a house, and thou shalt not dwell therein: thou shalt plant\na vineyard, and shalt not gather the grapes thereof.\n\n\u201c31. Thine ox _shall be_ slain before thine eyes, and thou shalt not eat\nthereof: thy ass _shall be_ violently taken away from before thy face,\nand shall not be restored to thee: thy sheep _shall be_ given unto thine\nenemies, and thou shalt have none to rescue _them_.\n\n\u201c32. Thy sons and thy daughters _shall_ be given unto another people,\nand thy eyes shall look, and fail _with longing_ for them all the day\nlong: and there _shall be_ no might in thy hand.\n\n\u201c33. The fruit of thy land and all thy labours shall a nation which thou\nknowest not eat up: and thou shalt be only oppressed and crushed always:\n\n\u201c34. So that thou shalt be mad for the sight of thy eyes which thou\nshalt see.\n\n\u201c35. The Lord shall smite thee in the knees, and in the legs, with a\nsore botch that cannot be healed, from the sole of thy foot unto the top\nof thy head.\n\n\u201c36. The Lord shall bring thee, and thy king which thou shalt set over\nthee, unto a nation which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, and\nthere shalt thou _serve_ (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc _ve abadta_, _and shall slave\nyourselves to_) other gods, wood and stone:\n\n\u201c37. And thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb, and a by-word,\namong all nations whither the Lord shall lead thee.\n\n\u201c38. Thou shalt carry much seed out unto the field, and shalt gather\n_but_ little in: for the locust shall consume it.\n\n\u201c39. Thou shalt plant vineyards and dress _them_, but shalt neither\ndrink of the wine, nor gather _the grapes_: for the worms shall eat\nthem.\n\n\u201c40. Thou shalt have olive-trees throughout, but thou shalt not anoint\n_thyself_ with the oil: for thine olive shall cast _his fruit_.\n\n\u201c41. Thou shalt beget sons and daughters, but thou shalt not enjoy them,\nfor they shall go _into captivity_.\u201d\n\n(_Into captivity_ is translated from \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9 _bashshebi_; the prefix\npreposition _in_, _into_, &c. here makes _bash_. The root is _shebi_.\nThe translation is correct, but the idea extends to such a possession of\nthe captive as includes the idea of a right of property. The same word\nis used when dumb beasts are taken as spoil in war; thus, _Amos_ iv. 10,\n\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9 \u05e1\u05d5\u05bc\u05e1\u05b5\u05d9\u05d1\u05b6\u05dd _shebi susekem_, _I have taken your horses_, _i. e._ I\nhave _captured_ your horses,\u2014the right of property in the horses is\nchanged. The idea in the text is, _they shall go into slavery_.)\n\n\u201c42. All thy trees and fruit of thy land shall the locust consume.\n\n\u201c43. The stranger that _is_ within thee shall get up above thee very\nhigh; and thou shalt come down very low.\n\n\u201c44. He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be\nthe head, and thou shalt be the tail.\n\n\u201c45. Moreover, all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue\nthee, and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed: because thou\nhearkenedst not unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his\ncommandments and his statutes which he commanded thee.\n\n\u201c46. And they shall be upon thee for a _sign_, and for a wonder, and\nupon thy seed for ever.\u201d\n\n(_For a sign_ \u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea _oth_, _a mark_, _sign_, _&c._ It may be noted that\nthis word is used in _Gen._ iv. 15: \u201cAnd the Lord set a _mark_ upon\nCain,\u201d \u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea _oth_, _mark_, _sign_, _&c._)\n\n\u201c47. Because thou servedst not the Lord thy God with joyfulness and with\ngladness of heart for the abundance of all _things_.\n\n\u201c48. Therefore shalt thou _serve_ (\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc _be a slave to_) thine\nenemies which the Lord shall send against thee, in hunger, and in\nthirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all _things_: and he shall put\na yoke of iron upon thy neck, until he have destroyed thee.\n\n\u201c49. The Lord shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end\nof the earth, _as swift_ as the eagle flieth, a nation whose tongue thou\nshalt not understand;\n\n\u201c50. A nation of fierce countenance, which shall not regard the person\nof the old, nor show favour to the young:\n\n\u201c51. And he shall eat the fruit of thy cattle, and the fruit of thy\nland, until thou be destroyed: which _also_ shall not leave thee\n_either_ corn, wine, or oil, _or_ the increase of thy kine, or flocks of\nthy sheep, until he have destroyed thee.\n\n\u201c52. And he shall besiege thee in all thy gates, until thy high and\nfenced walls come down, wherein thou trustedst, throughout all thy land:\nand he shall besiege thee in all thy gates throughout all thy land which\nthe Lord thy God hath given thee.\n\n\u201c53. And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy\nsons and of thy daughters which the Lord thy God hath given thee, in the\nsiege and in the straitness wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee:\n\n\u201c54. So _that_ the man _that_ is tender among you, and very delicate,\nhis eye shall be evil toward his brother, and toward the wife of his\nbosom, and toward the remnant of his children which he shall leave.\n\n\u201c55. So that he will not give to any of them of the flesh of his\nchildren whom he shall eat: because he hath nothing left him in the\nsiege, and in the straitness wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee\nin all thy gates.\n\n\u201c56. The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not adventure\nto set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and\ntenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and\ntoward her son, and toward her daughter,\n\n\u201c57. And toward her young one that cometh out from between her feet, and\ntoward her children which she shall bear: for she shall eat them for\nwant of all _things_ secretly in the siege and straitness wherewith\nthine enemy shall distress thee in thy gates.\n\n\u201c58. If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are\nwritten in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful\nname THE LORD THY GOD.\n\n\u201c59. Then the Lord will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of\nthy seed, _even_ great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore\nsicknesses and of long continuance.\n\n\u201c60. Moreover, he will bring upon thee all the diseases of Egypt, which\nthou wast afraid of, and they shall cleave unto thee.\n\n\u201c61. Also every sickness, and every plague which is not written in the\nbook of this law, them will the Lord bring upon thee, until thou be\ndestroyed.\n\n\u201c62. And ye shall be left few in number, whereas ye were as the stars of\nheaven for multitude; because thou wouldest not obey the voice of the\nLord thy God.\n\n\u201c63. And it shall come to pass, _that_ as the Lord rejoiced over you to\ndo you good, and to multiply you; so the Lord will rejoice over you to\ndestroy you and to bring you to nought; and ye shall be plucked from off\nthe land whither thou goest to possess it.\n\n\u201c64. And the Lord shall scatter thee among all people from the one end\nof the earth even to the other, and thou shalt _serve_ (\u05e2\u05c7\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc, _be\nslave to_) other gods which neither thou nor thy fathers have known,\n_even_ wood and stone.\n\n\u201c65. And among these nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the\nsole of thy foot have rest: but the Lord shall give thee there a\ntrembling heart, and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind.\n\n\u201c66. And thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear\nday and night, and shalt have none assurance of thy life:\n\n\u201c67. In the morning thou shalt say, Would God it were even! and at even\nshalt thou say, Would God it were morning! for the fear of thy heart\nwherewith thou shalt fear, and for the sight of thine eyes which thou\nshalt see.\n\n\u201c68. And the Lord shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the\nway whereof I spake unto thee. Thou shalt see it no more again: and\nthere ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bond-men and bond-women,\nand no man shall buy _you_.\n\n_Ye shall be sold_, _i. e._ be exposed to sale, or expose yourselves to\nsale, as the word \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05de\u05b7\u05db\u05b7\u05bc\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05dd _hith maccartem_ may be rendered; they\nwere vagrants, and wished to become slaves that they might be provided\nwith the necessaries of life.\u201d _Clarke\u2019s Commentary._\n\nThe markets were overstocked with them, says Josephus: * * * \u201cThey were\nsold with their wives and children at the lowest price, there being many\nto be sold, and few purchasers.\u201d\n\nHegesippus also says\u2014\u201cThere were many captives offered for sale, but few\nbuyers, because the Romans disdained to take the Jews for slaves, and\nthere were not Jews remaining to redeem their countrymen.\u201d\n\n\u201cWhen Jerusalem was taken by Titus, of the captives who were sent into\nEgypt, those under seventeen were sold; but so little care was taken of\nthem, that 11,000 of them perished for want.\u201d _Bishop Newton._\n\nSt. Jerome says\u2014\u201cAfter their last overthrow by Adrian, many thousands of\nthem were sold, and those who could not be sold were transported into\nEgypt, and perished by shipwreck and famine, or were massacred by the\ninhabitants.\u201d\n\nA similar condition happened to the Jews in Spain, when, under the reign\nof Ferdinand and Isabella, they were driven out of that kingdom,\nconcerning which, Abarbinel, a Jewish writer says\u2014\u201cThree hundred\nthousand, young and old, women and children, (of whom he was one,) not\nknowing where to go, left on foot in one day: some became a prey, some\nperished by famine, some by pestilence,\u2014some committed themselves to the\nsea, but were sold for slaves when they came to any coast; many were\ndrowned and burned in the ships which were set on fire. In short, all\nsuffered the punishment of God the Avenger.\u201d\n\nBenson, in his Commentary, says\u2014\u201cHow these instances may affect others,\nI know not, but for myself I must acknowledge, they not only convince,\nbut astonish me beyond expression. They are truly, as Moses foretold\nthey would be, _a sign and a wonder for ever_.\u201d\n\nScott says\u2014\u201cNumbers of captives were sent by sea into Egypt, (as well as\ninto other countries,) and sold for slaves at a vile price, and for the\nmeanest offices; and many thousands were left to perish from want; for\nthe multitude was so great that purchasers could not be found for them\nall at any price. * * * To such wretchedness is every one exposed, who\nlives in disobedience to God\u2019s commands. * * * None will suffer any\nmisery above his deserts: but, indeed, we are all exposed to this woful\ncurse, for breaking the law of God.\u201d\n\nHenry says\u2014\u201cI have heard of a wicked man, who, on reading these\nthreatenings, was so enraged that he tore the leaf out of his Bible.\u201d\n\nUpon a review of all this evidence, to what conclusion is the mind\ninclined? Are there no circumstances under which man may become a\nslave\u2014\u201cproperty, in the sight of God and justice?\u201d\n\nDr. Channing says, vol. ii. page 28\u2014\u201cSuch a being (man) was plainly made\nto obey a law within himself. This is the essence of a moral being. He\npossesses, as part of his nature, and the most essential part, a cause\nof duty, which he is to reverence and follow.\u201d\n\nThis is in accordance with his idea of conscience\u2014\u201cthe Divine monitor\nwithin us.\u201d But we are forced to differ from Dr. Channing. To obey the\nlaw of God, not some creature of man\u2019s, or our own judgment, is the\ncreed we inculcate; and we further teach that \u201csuch a being was plainly\nmade\u201d \u201cto reverence and follow\u201d the law of God, not his own opinion or\nthe feelings of his own heart.\n\nIf this doctrine is not true in theology, can it be so in regard to\nslavery, or any thing else?\n\nPage 29, he says\u2014\u201cEvery thing else may be owned in the universe; but a\nmoral, rational being cannot be property. Suns and stars may be owned,\nbut not the lowest spirit. Touch any thing but this. Lay not your hand\nupon God\u2019s rational offspring. The whole spiritual world cries out,\nFORBEAR!\u201d\n\nWe do not quote this as an argument. If his postulate be true concerning\nthe \u201claw within himself,\u201d he needs no argument; his opinion is enough:\nhis feeling, his \u201csense of duty\u201d governs the matter. But, while his\ndisciples \u201creverence and follow\u201d their \u201csense of duty,\u201d by obeying a law\nwithin themselves, and, according to their conscience, \u201cown the sun and\nstars,\u201d may not those who believe the Bible to be the word of God, who\n\u201creverence and follow\u201d it, as their \u201csense of duty,\u201d and obey it as a\nlaw within themselves, according to their conscience, own slaves?\n\nBut Dr. Channing continues\u2014\u201cThe highest intelligences recognise their\nown nature, their own rights, in the humblest human being. By that\npriceless, immortal spirit which dwells in him, by that likeness of God\nwhich he wears, tread him not in the dust, confound him not with the\nbrute.\u201d And he then gravely adds\u2014\u201cWe have thus seen that a human being\ncannot rightfully be held and used as property. No legislation, not that\nof all countries or worlds, could make him so. Let this be laid down as\na first, fundamental truth.\u201d\n\nSuch were his opinions. We view them, if not the ravings, at least the\nimpressions, of fanaticism. When counsellor Quibble saw his client\nStultus going to the stocks, he cried out, \u201cIt is contrary to my sense\nof justice; to the laws of God and man; no power can make it right!\u201d\n_Yet Stultus is in the stocks!_\n\nBut what shall we say of him who makes the sanction of his own feelings\nthe foundation of his creed, of his standard of right? What of him, who,\nin his search for truth, scarcely or never alludes to the Bible as the\nvoice of God, as the Divine basis of his reasons, as the pillar on which\nargument may find rest? Has some new revelation inspired him? Has he\nheard a voice louder and more clear than the thunder, the trumpet from\nthe mount of God? Has he beheld truth by a light more lucid than the\nflaming garments of Jehovah? Or has he only seen a cloud, not from the\ntop of Sinai, but from the dismal pit of human frailty?\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON V.\n\nDr. Channing\u2019s second proposition is: \u201cMan has sacred rights, the gifts\nof God, and inseparable from human nature, of which slavery is the\ninfraction;\u201d in proof of which he says, vol. ii. p. 23\u2014\u201cMan\u2019s rights\nbelong to him as a moral being, as capable of perceiving moral\ndistinctions, a subject of moral obligation. As soon as he becomes\n_conscious_ of a duty, a kindred _consciousness_ springs up, that he has\na _right_ to do what the sense of duty enjoins, and that no foreign will\nor power can obstruct his moral action without crime.\u201d\n\nSuppose man has rights as described; suppose he feels _conscious_, as he\nsays; does that give him a right to do wrong, because his sense of duty\nenjoins him to do so? And may he not be prevented from so doing? Was it\nindeed a crime in God to turn the counsels of Ahithophel into\nfoolishness?\n\nPage 33. \u201cThat some inward principle which teaches a man what he is\nbound to do to others, teaches equally, and at the same instant, what\nothers are bound to do to him!\u201d Suppose a few Africans, on an excursion\nto capture slaves, find that this \u201cinward principle\u201d teaches them that\nthey are bound to make a slave of Dr. Channing, if they can; does he\nmean that, therefore, he is bound to make slaves of them?\n\n_Idem_, p. 33. \u201cThe sense of duty is the fountain of human rights. In\nother words, the same inward principle which teaches the former, bears\nwitness to the latter.\u201d\n\nIf the African\u2019s sense of duty gives the right to make Dr. Channing a\nslave, we do not see why he should complain; since, by his own rule, the\nAfrican\u2019s sense of duty proves him to possess the right which his sense\nof duty covets.\n\nPage 34. \u201cHaving shown the foundation of human rights in human nature,\nit may be asked, what they are. * * * They may all be comprised in the\nright, which belongs to every rational being, to exercise his powers for\nthe promotion of his own and others\u2019 happiness and virtue. * * * His\nability for this work is a sacred trust from God, the greatest of all\ntrusts. He must answer for the waste or abuse of it. He consequently\nsuffers an unspeakable wrong when stripped of it by others, or forbidden\nto employ it for the ends for which it is given.\u201d\n\nWe regret to say that we feel an objection to Channing\u2019s argument and\nmode of reasoning, for its want of definiteness and precision. If what\nhe says on the subject of slavery were merely intended as eloquent\ndeclamations, addressed to the sympathies and impulses of his party, we\nshould not have been disposed to have named such an objection. But his\nworks are urged on the world as sound logic, and of sufficient force to\nopen the eyes of every slaveholder to the wickedness of the act, and to\nforce him, through the medium of his \u201cmoral sense,\u201d to set the slaves\ninstantly free.\n\nA moral action must not only be the voluntary offspring of the actor,\nbut must also be performed, to be judged by laws which shall determine\nit to be good or bad. These laws, man being the moral agent, we say, are\nthe laws of God; by them man is to measure his conduct.\n\nLocke says, \u201cMoral good and evil are the conformity or disagreement of\nour voluntary actions to some law, whereby good or evil is drawn upon us\nfrom the will or power of the lawmaker.\u201d\n\nBut the doctrine of Dr. Channing seems to be that this law is each man\u2019s\n_conscience, moral sense, sense of duty_, or the _inward principle_. If\nthe proposition of Mr. Locke be sound logic, what becomes of these\nharangues of Dr. Channing?\n\nWe say, that the law, rule, or power that decides good or evil, must be\nfrom a source far above ourselves; for, if otherwise, the contradictory\nand confused notions of men must necessarily banish all idea of good and\nevil from the earth. In fact, the denial of the elevated, the Divine\nsource of such law, is also a denial that God governs; for government\nwithout law is a contradiction.\n\nIf the conscience, as Dr. Channing thinks, is the guide between right\nand wrong according to the law of God; then the law of God must be quite\nchangeable, because the minds of men differ. Each makes his own\ndeduction; therefore, in that case, the law of God must be what each one\nmay severally think it to be; which is only other language to say there\nis no law at all. \u201cEvery way of a man is right in his own eyes.\u201d _Prov._\nxxi. 2. But, \u201cThe statutes of the Lord are right.\u201d _Ps._ xix. 8. The\nlaws of God touching the subject of slavery are spread through every\npart of the Scriptures. Human reason may do battle, but the only result\nwill be the manifestation of its weakness. The institution of slavery\nmust, of necessity, continue in some form, so long as sin shall have a\ntendency to lead to death; so long as Jehovah shall rule, and exercise\nthe attributes of mercy to fallen, degraded man.\n\nBut let us for a moment view the facts accompanying the slavery of the\nAfrican race, and compare them with the assertion, p. 35, that every\nslave \u201csuffers a grievous wrong;\u201d and, p. 49, that every slave-owner is\na \u201crobber,\u201d however unconscious he may be of the fact.\n\nSo far as history gives us any knowledge of the African tribes, for the\nlast 4000 years, their condition has been stationary; at least they have\ngiven no evidence of advancement in morals or civilization beyond what\nhas been the immediate effect of the exchange of their slaves for the\ncommodities of other parts of the world. So far as this trade had\ninfluence, it effected almost a total abolition of cannibalism among\nthem. That the cessation of cannibalism was the result of an exchange of\ntheir slaves as property for the merchandise of the Christian nations,\nis proved by the fact that they have returned to their former habits in\nthat respect upon those nations discontinuing the slave-trade with them.\nWhich is the greatest wrong to a slave, to be continued in servitude, or\nto be butchered for food, because his labour is not wanted by his owner?\n\nNo very accurate statistics can be given of African affairs; but their\npopulation has been estimated at 50,000,000, and to have been about the\nsame for many centuries; of which population, even including the wildest\ntribes, far over four-fifths have ever been slaves among themselves. The\nearliest and the most recent travellers among them agree as to the\nfacts, that they are cannibals; that they are idolaters, or that they\nhave no trace of religion whatever; that marriage with them is but\npromiscuous intercourse; that there is but little or no affection\nbetween husband and wife, parent and children, old or young; that in\nmental or moral capacity, they are but a grade above the brute creation;\nthat the slaves and women alone do any labour, and they often not enough\nto keep them from want; that their highest views are to take slaves, or\nto kill a neighbouring tribe; that they evince no desire for\nimprovement, or to ameliorate their condition. In short, that they are,\nand ever have been, from the earliest knowledge of them, savages of the\nmost debased character. We have, in a previous study, quoted authority\nin proof of these facts, to which we refer.\n\nWill any one hesitate to acknowledge, that, to them, slavery, regulated\nby law, among civilized nations is a state of moral, mental, and\nphysical elevation? A proof of this is found in the fact that the\ndescendants of such slaves are found to be, in all things, their\nsuperiors. If their descendants were found to deteriorate from the\ncondition of the parents, we should hesitate to say that slavery was to\nthem a blessing. Which would man consider the most like an act of mercy\nin Jehovah, to continue them in their state of slavery to their African\nmaster, brother, and owner, or to order them into that condition of\nslavery in which we find them in these States? Which state of slavery\nwould a man prefer, to a savage, or to a civilized master?\n\nThe Hebrews, Medes, Persians, Chaldeans, Syrians, Greeks, and Romans\nhave, on the borders of Africa, to some extent, amalgamated with them,\nfrom time immemorial. But such amalgamation has never been known to\nattain to the position, either physically, mentally, or morally, of\ntheir foreign progenitors; perhaps superior to the interior tribes, yet\noften they scarcely exhibit a mental or moral trace of their foreign\nextraction. The thoughtless, those of slovenly morals, or those of none\nat all, from among the descendants of Japheth, have commingled with them\nin the new world; but the amalgamation never exhibits a corresponding\nelevation in the direction of the white progenitor. The connection may\ndegrade the parent, but never elevate the offspring. The great mass look\nupon the connection with abhorrence and loathing; and pity or contempt\nalways attends the footsteps of the aggressor. These feelings are not\nconfined to any particular country or age of the world. Are not these\nthings proof that the descendants of Ham are a deteriorated race? Will\nthe declarations of a few distempered minds, as to their religion,\nfeeling, and taste, weigh in contradiction? What was the judgment of\nIsaac and Rebecca on this subject? See _Gen._ xxvi. 35; xxvii. 46; also\nxxviii. 1.\n\nSince the days of Noah, where are their monuments of art, religion,\nscience, and civilization? Is it not a fact that the highest moral and\nintellectual attainment which the descendants of Ham ever displayed is\nnow, at this time, manifested among those in servile pupilage? The very\nfact of their being property gives them protection. What, he their\n\u201crobber,\u201d who watches over their welfare with more effect and integrity\nthan all their ancestry together since the days of Noah! By the\ncontrivance of making them _property_, has God alone given them the\nprotection which 4000 years of sinking degradation demand, in an upward\nmovement towards their physical, mental, and moral improvement, their\nrational happiness on earth, and their hopes of heaven. What, God\u2019s\nagent in this matter a _robber_ of them!\n\nLet us assure the disciples of Dr. Channing that there are thousands of\nslaves too acute observers of truth to come to such a conclusion; who,\nalthough from human frailty they may sometimes seem to suffer an\noccasional or grievous wrong, can yet give good reason in proof that\nslavery is their only safety. Let us cast the mind back to a period of\nfive hundred years ago. A Christian ship, intent on new discoveries,\nlands on the African coast. The petty chieftain there, is and about to\nsacrifice a number of his slaves, either to appease the manes of his\nancestor, to propitiate his gods, or to gratify his appetite by\nfeasting. Presents have been made to the natives; it is thought their\nfriendship is secured; the Christians are invited to the _f\u00eate_, the\nparticipants are collected, the victims brought forward, and the club\nuplifted for the blow. The Christians, struck with surprise, or excited\nby horror, remonstrate with the chief; to which he sullenly replies:\n\u201cYonder _my_ goats, _my_ village, all around _my_ domain; _these are my\nslaves!_\u201d meaning that, by the morals and laws that have from time\nimmemorial prevailed there, his rights are absolute; that he feels it as\nharmless to kill a slave as a goat, or dwell in his village. But the\nclothing of the Christian is presented, the viands of art are offered,\nthe food of civilization is tasted, the cupidity of the savage is\ntempted, and the _f\u00eate_ celebrated through a novel and more valuable\noffering. What, these Christians, who have bought these slaves,\n_robbers_!\n\nLet us look back to the days of the house of Saul, when, perhaps, David,\nhiding himself from his face amid the villages of Ammon, chanced upon\nthe ancestors of Naamah, the mother of Rehoboam, a later king of Israel.\nFinding them about to sacrifice a child upon the altar of Moloch, \u201cStay\nthy hand!\u201d says the son of Jesse; \u201cI have a message to thee from the God\nof Israel; deliver me the child for these thirty pieces of silver!\u201d And,\naccording to the law of the God of his fathers, it becomes his \u201cbond-man\nfor ever.\u201d What, was David a robber in all this? Suppose the child to\nhave been sold, resold, and sold again, is the character of the owner\nchanged thereby?\n\nBut it is concerning the _rights_ of the descendants of these slaves\nthat we have now to inquire. See _Luke_ xvii. 7\u201310:\n\n\u201c7. But which of you having a servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _slave_) ploughing or\nfeeding cattle, will say unto him by and by, when he has come from the\nfield, Go, and sit down to meat?\n\n\u201c8. And will not rather say unto him, Make ready wherewith I may sup,\nand gird thyself, and serve me, till I have eaten and drunken and\nafterwards thou shalt eat and drink?\n\n\u201c9. Doth he thank that servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _slave_) because he did the\nthings that were commanded him? I trow not.\n\n\u201c10. So likewise ye, when ye have done all those things which are\ncommanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that\nwhich was our duty to do.\u201d\n\nSuppose a proprietor, in any country or at any age, receives into his\nemployment an individual, who thereafter resides and has a family upon\nhis estate: upon the death of the individual, will his heirs accrue to\nany of the rights of the proprietor, other than those granted, or those\nconsequent to their own or their ancestor\u2019s condition, or those that may\naccrue by operation of law? Where is the political enactment, the moral\nprecept, the Divine command, teaching an adverse doctrine?\n\nBefore we close our view of Dr. Channing\u2019s second proposition, we design\nto notice his use of the word \u201cnature.\u201d He says, that man has rights,\ngifts of God, inseparable from human \u201cnature.\u201d We confess that we are\nsomewhat at a loss to determine the precise idea the doctor affixes to\nthis term. The phrase \u201chuman nature\u201d is in most frequent use through\nthese volumes. But in vol. i. page 74, he says\u2014\u201cGreat powers, even in\ntheir perversion, attest a _glorious nature_.\u201d Page 77: \u201cThe infinite\nmaterials of illustration which nature and life afford.\u201d Page 82: \u201cTo\nregard despotism as a law of _nature_.\u201d Page 84: \u201cHis superiority to\n_nature_, as well as to human opposition.\u201d Page 95: \u201cWe will inquire\ninto the nature and fitness of the measures.\u201d Page 98: \u201cThe first object\nin education _naturally_ was to fit him for the field.\u201d Page 110: \u201cFrom\nthe principles of our _nature_.\u201d Page 111: \u201c_Nature_ and the human will\nwere to bend to his power.\u201d _Idem_: \u201cHe wanted the sentiment of a common\n_nature_ with his fellow-beings.\u201d Page 112: \u201cWith powers which might\nhave made him a glorious representative and minister of the beneficent\nDivinity, and with _natural_ sensibilities.\u201d Page 119: \u201cTraces out the\ngeneral and all-comprehending laws of _nature_.\u201d Page 143: \u201cA power\nwhich robs men of the free use of their _nature_,\u201d &c. Page 146: \u201cIts\nefficiency resembles that of darkness and cold in the _natural_ world.\u201d\nPage 184: \u201cWhose writings seem to be _natural_ breathings of the soul.\u201d\nPage 189: \u201cLanguage like this has led men to very injurious modes of\nregarding themselves, and their own _nature_.\u201d _Idem_: \u201cA man when told\nperpetually to crucify _himself_, is apt to include under this word his\nwhole _nature_.\u201d _Idem_: \u201cMen err in nothing more than in disparaging\nand wronging their own _nature_.\u201d _Idem_: \u201cIf we first regard man\u2019s\nhighest _nature_.\u201d Page 190: \u201cWe believe that the human mind is akin to\nthat intellectual energy, which gave birth to _nature_.\u201d _Idem_: \u201cTaking\nhuman _nature_ as consisting of a body as well as mind, as including\nanimal desire,\u201d &c. _Idem_: \u201cWe believe that he in whom the physical\n_nature_ is unfolded.\u201d Page 191: \u201cBut excess is not essential to\nself-regard, and this principle of our _nature_ is the last which could\nbe spared.\u201d Page 192: \u201cIt is the great appointed trial of our moral\n_nature_.\u201d Page 193: \u201cOur _nature_ has other elements or constituents,\nand vastly higher ones.\u201d _Idem_: \u201cFor truth, which is its object, is of\na universal, impartial _nature_.\u201d Page 196: \u201cIs the most signal proof of\na higher _nature_ which can be given.\u201d _Idem_: \u201cIt is a sovereignty\nworth more than that over outward _nature_.\u201d _Idem_: \u201cIts great end is\nto give liberty and energy to our _nature_.\u201d Page 198: \u201cOur moral,\nintellectual, immortal _nature_ we cannot remember too much.\u201d Page 200:\n\u201cThe moral _nature_ of religion.\u201d Page 202: \u201cWe even think that our love\nof _nature_.\u201d _Idem_: \u201cFor the harmonies of _nature_ are only his wisdom\nmade visible.\u201d Page 203: \u201cThat progress in truth is the path of\n_nature_.\u201d Page 211: \u201cIt has the liberality and munificence of _nature_,\nwhich not only produces the necessary root and grain, but pours forth\nfruits and flowers. It has the variety and bold contrasts of _nature_.\u201d\n_Idem_: \u201cThe beautiful and the superficial seem to be _naturally_\nconjoined.\u201d Page 212: \u201cAnd by a law of his _nature_.\u201d Page 213: \u201cThese\ngloomy and appalling features of our _nature_.\u201d Page 215: \u201cThese\nconflicts between the passions and the moral _nature_.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nWe regret that so eminent and accurate a scholar, and so influential a\nman, should have fallen into such an indefinite and confused use of any\nportion of our language. If we mistake not, it will require more than\nusual reflection for the mind to determine what idea is presented by its\nuse in the most of these instances. We know that some use this word so\nvaguely, that if required to explain the idea they wished to convey by\nit, they would be unable to do so. But there are those from whom we\nexpect a better use of language. Many English readers pass over such\nsentences without stopping to think what are the distinct ideas of the\nwriter. There are, in our language, a few words used in our\nconversational dialect, as if especially intended for the speaker\u2019s aid\nwhen he only had a confused idea, or perhaps none at all, of what he\ndesigned to say; and we extremely regret that words, to us of so\nimportant meaning, as _nature_ and _conscience_, should be found among\nthat class. The teacher of theology and morals should surely be careful\nnot to lead his pupils into error. Might not the unskilled inquirer\ninfer that _nature_ was a substantive existence, taking rank somewhere\nbetween man and the Deity? And what would be his notion, derived from\nsuch use of the term, of its offices, of its influence on, and man\u2019s\nrelation with it? What is our notion as to the definite idea these\npassages convey?\n\n\u201c_Man has rights, gifts of God, inseparable from human nature, of which\nslavery is the infraction._\u201d By \u201chuman nature,\u201d as here used, we\nunderstand _the condition or state of being a man_ in a general sense.\nOur inference is, then, that God has given man rights, that is, all men\nthe same rights, which are inseparable from his state of being a man;\nconsequently, if by any means these rights are taken from him, then his\nstate of being a man is changed, or ceases to exist; and since slavery\nbreaks these rights, therefore a slave is not a man.\n\nBut the fact we find to be that the slave is, nevertheless, a man; and\nhence it follows that these _rights_ were not inseparable from his state\nof being a man, or that he had not the _rights_.\n\nIf slavery is sinful because it infringes the rights of man, then any\nother thing is also sinful which infringes them. Will the disciples of\nDr. Channing deny that these rights are infringed by the constitution of\nthe civil government? The law gives parents the right to govern,\ncommand, and restrain minor children; to inflict punishment for their\ndisobedience. Is parental authority a sin? Government, in every form, is\nfound to deprive females of a large proportion of the rights which men\npossess. When married, their rights are wholly absorbed in the rights of\nthe husband. This must be very sinful!\n\nIdiots have no rights. In reality, the very idea of rights vanishes away\nwith the power to exercise them. But in a state of civil government, it\nis a mere question of expediency how personal rights shall be adjusted;\nwhich is very manifest, if we look at the different constitutions of\ngovernment now in the world. In one, men who follow certain occupations\nhave certain rights as a consequence. Men who are found guilty of\ncertain breaches of the law lose a portion or all their rights. The\npresident of our senate loses the right to vote, except under condition;\nand we agree that a mere majority shall rule. Thus forty-nine of the\nhundred cease to find their rights available. They must submit. Man, as\na member of civil society, is only a small fraction of an unit, and has\nno right to exercise a right unconformably to the expression of the\nsense of the general good. Man has no right to live independent of his\nfellow-man, like a plant or a tree; consequently, his rights must be\ndetermined and bounded by the general welfare. Dr. Channing ceases to be\nenlightened by moral science when he announces that, because a man is\n\u201cconscious of duty,\u201d therefore, what he may think his right cannot be\naffected by others \u201cwithout crime.\u201d So reverse may be the fact, that it\nmay be a crime in him to claim the right his conscious duty may suggest.\n\nMan cannot be said to be in possession of all things that he, or such\ntheorists, may deem his rights only in a monocratic state. But how will\nhe retain them? For then, so far as he shall have intercourse with\nothers, every thing will come to be decided by the law of _might_; so\nthat, instead of gaining, he will lose all rights. But suppose him to\nlive without intercourse; what is a naked, abstract right, that yields\nhim nothing above the brute? God never made a man for such a state of\nlife; because it at once includes rebellion to his government; and,\ntherefore, its every movement will be to retrograde.\n\nWill the disciples of Dr. Channing be surprised to find that the only\nmedicine God has prepared for such a loathsome moral disease as will\nthen be developed, is slavery to a higher order of men?\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON VI.\n\nDr. Channing\u2019s third position is to offer explanations to prevent\nmisapplication of the principles presented in his first two\npropositions.\n\nVol. ii. page 51, he says\u2014\u201cSympathy with the slave has often degenerated\ninto injustice towards the master.\u201d We fully agree with him; and we also\nadmit \u201cthat the consciences of men are often darkened by education.\u201d\nThis short chapter is evidently written in a spirit of conciliation, and\ncontains many truths eloquently told; yet, he finally grasps his\ndoctrines, and repeats his elucidations.\n\nHis fourth position is, \u201cTo unfold the evils of slavery.\u201d He says the\nfirst great evil is the debasement of the slave. Page 60: \u201cThis word,\n(slave,) borrowed from his condition, expresses the ruin wrought by\nslavery within him. * * * To be an instrument of the physical, material\ngood of another, whose will is his highest law, he is taught to regard\nas the great purpose of his being. Here lies the evil of slavery. Its\nwhips, imprisonment, and even the horrors of the middle passage from\nAfrica to America, these are not to be named in comparison with this\nextinction of the proper consciousness of a human being, with the\ndegradation of a man into a brute.\u201d\n\nIf it be a fact that the debasement of the negro race has been brought\nabout by their having been made slaves in America; then it will be a\nvery strong argument, we are willing to acknowledge, an insurmountable\none, against the institution. That Dr. Channing thinks such to be the\nfact, we have no doubt; for we cannot a moment admit that he would\nassert what he did not believe was true. But \u201cthe consciences of men are\noften darkened by education.\u201d We hold that the assertion is capable of\nproof, that the debasement of the race was the moral, the necessary\neffect of a long course of sin; and that, instead of slavery producing\nthe debasement, the fact is, the debasement produced the slavery; or, in\nother words, slavery is the moral, the necessary effect of the\ndebasement.\n\nThe leading object, through all our studies, is the elucidation of the\nfact, that sin has a poisonous effect upon the moral, mental, and\nphysical man, that is in constant action in the direction of\ndeterioration, debasement, ruin, death. Such we teach to be the doctrine\nof the holy books, spread through the whole volume, elucidated upon\nevery page; that slavery, like a saviour, steps in upon this descending\nroad, arresting the downward progress, the rapid fall to final, to\nunalterable ruin and death.\n\n\u201cIf his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; if they\nbreak my statutes, and keep not my commandments,\u2014then will I visit\ntheir transgressions with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes.\u201d\n_Ps._ lxxxix. 30\u201332. \u201cA righteous man hateth lying: but a wicked man\nis loathsome, and cometh to shame.\u201d _Prov._ xiii. 5. \u201cThou turnest man\nto destruction; and sayest, return, ye children of men.\u201d _Ps._ xc. 3.\n\u201cI have therefore delivered unto the mighty one of the heathen; he\nshall surely deal with him: I have driven him out for his wickedness.\u201d\n_Ezek._ xxxi. 11. \u201cAnd I will sell your sons and your daughters into\nthe hands of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the\nSabeans, to a people far off; for the Lord hath spoken it.\u201d _Joel_\niii. 8. \u201cNevertheless they shall be his _servants_ (\u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd\n_slaves_), that they may know my _service_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05a3\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3\u05b8\u05ea\u05b4\u0594\u05d9, and the\n_service_ (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3\u05b7\u0596\u05ea, _slavery_) of the kingdoms of the countries.\u201d\n2 _Chron._ xii. 8. \u201cThe show of their countenance doth witness against\nthem; and they declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Wo unto\ntheir soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves.\u201d _Isa._ iii.\n9. \u201cTherefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no\nknowledge; and their honourable men are famished, and their multitude\ndried up with thirst.\u201d \u201cAnd the mean man shall be brought down, and\nthe mighty man shall be humbled, and the eyes of the lofty shall be\nhumbled: but the Lord of hosts shall be exalted in judgment, and God\nthat is holy shall be sanctified in righteousness.\u201d _Isa._ v. 13, 15,\n16.\n\nDr. Channing\u2019s book before us goes on to specify this debasement as to\nthe intellect; its influence on the domestic relations; how it \u201cproduces\nand gives license to cruelty.\u201d The fact that debasement reaches all\nthese points, we agree to; nay, further, that it reaches to every act\nand thought. But we refer all these displays of debasement to the result\nof the degradation, of which slavery is only the moral, the natural\nconsequence. If we find a man debased as to one thing, it is in\nconformity with the common sense of mankind to expect to find him\ndebased as to another.\n\nChanning, pp. 78, 79. \u201cI proceed to another view of the evils of\nslavery. I refer to its influence on the master. * * * I pass over many\nviews. * * * I will confine myself to two considerations. The first is,\nthat slavery, above all other influences, nourishes the passion for\npower and its kindred vices. There is no passion which needs a stronger\ncurb. Men\u2019s worst crimes have sprung from the desire of being masters,\nof bending others to their yoke.\u201d\n\nIt is to be lamented that man is so prone to sin; that he is not more\nundeviating in the paths of virtue, of goodness, of perfection. The\ncharge made by Dr. Channing in the passage quoted, we are sorry to\nacknowledge, is too true. But so far as we have any knowledge of the\nhistory of man, even in the absence of slavery, the time has never been\nwhen the passion for power and its kindred vices did not find sufficient\nfood for their nourishment. The evil passions alluded to are not so\nparticular as to their food but that, if they do not find a choice thing\nto nourish themselves on, they will feed and nourish themselves on\nanother.\n\nIt, perhaps, would not be difficult to show that the love of power and\nits kindred vices first operated to bring on us \u201call our wo;\u201d stimulated\nCain to kill Abel; in fact, has been in most powerful action among those\ncauses that have introduced slavery to the world. Slavery gave no birth\nto these passions. They drove Nebuchadnezzar from his throne down to the\ndegradation of the brute. \u201cIs not this great Babylon that I have built\nfor the house of the kingdom, by the might of my power, and for the\nhonour of my majesty?\u201d _Dan._ iv. 12.\n\nHe had great power, great wealth, and, it is true, he had great\npossessions in slaves. The prophet understood his case, and spoke\nplainly. If his owning thousands of slaves merely had nursed in him a\nforgetfulness of God, the seer would not have hesitated so to inform\nhim. Great prosperity in the affairs of the world in his case, as in\nsome others of a somewhat later day, so puffed him up that he forgot who\nhe was. The owning of slaves may puff up a silly intellect\u2014doubtless,\noften does; but the same intellect would be more likely to be puffed up\nby a command of a more elevated grade, as officers of government, or,\neven in private life, by the control of superior amounts of wealth; or\neven by the conceit of possessing a great superiority of intellect.\n\nDoubtless, the disciples of Dr. Channing will agree that abundant\ninstances of such tumidity might be found in any country, even among\nthose who never owned a slave.\n\nIt may be a fact, that, to some, the having control over and owning a\nslave have a greater tendency to produce the effect of _puffing up_ the\nowner than would his value in money or other property; because it may be\na fact that a given amount in one kind of property may possess such\ntendency to a greater extent than another. But the truth probably is,\nthat one man would be the most puffed up by one thing, and another man\nby another. We agree that being thus _puffed up_ is a sin; that it leads\nto consequences extremely ruinous, and often fatal. Very small men are\nalso liable to the disease, and they sometimes take it from very slight\ncauses. It is true, \u201cthere is no passion that needs a stronger curb.\u201d\nWhat we contend is, that it is not a necessary consequence of owning\nslaves, any more than it is of owning any other property, or of\npossessing any other command of men; and that so far as it is an\nargument against owning slaves, it is also an argument against owning\nany other property, or of having any other control, or of possessing any\nother command among men.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VII.\n\nDr. Channing continues his view of the evils of slavery, and says, p.\n80, 81\u2014\n\n\u201cI approach a more delicate subject, and one on which I shall not\nenlarge. To own the persons of others, to hold females in slavery, is\nnecessarily fatal to the purity of a people: that unprotected females,\nstripped by their degraded condition of woman\u2019s self-respect, should be\nused to minister to other passions in man than the love of gain, is next\nto inevitable. Accordingly, in such a community, the reins are given to\nyouthful licentiousness. Youth, everywhere in peril, is, in these\ncircumstances, urged to vice with a terrible power. And the evil cannot\nstop at youth. Early licentiousness is fruitful of crime in mature life.\nHow far the obligation to conjugal fidelity, the sacredness of domestic\nties, will be revered amid such habits, such temptations, such\nfacilities to vice as are involved in slavery, needs no exposition. So\nsure and terrible is retribution even in this life! Domestic happiness\nis not blighted in the slave\u2019s hut alone. The master\u2019s infidelity sheds\na blight over his own domestic affections and joys. Home, without purity\nand constancy, is spoiled of its holiest charm and most blessed\ninfluences. I need not say, after the preceding explanations, that this\ncorruption is far from being universal. Still, a slave-country reeks\nwith licentiousness. It is tainted with a deadlier pestilence than the\nplague.\n\n\u201cBut the worst is not told. As a consequence of criminal connections,\nmany a master has children born into slavery. Of these, most, I presume,\nreceive protection, perhaps indulgence, during the life of the fathers;\nbut at their death, not a few are left to the chances of a cruel\nbondage. These cases must have increased since the difficulties of\nemancipation have been multiplied. Still more, it is to be feared that\nthere are cases in which the master puts his own children under the whip\nof the overseer, or sells them to undergo the miseries of a bondage\namong strangers.\n\n\u201cI should rejoice to learn that my impressions on this point are false.\nIf they be true, then our own country, calling itself enlightened and\nChristian, is defiled with one of the greatest enormities on earth. We\nsend missionaries to heathen lands. Among the pollutions of heathenism,\nI know nothing worse than this. The heathen who feasts on his country\u2019s\nfoe, may hold up his head by the side of the Christian who sells his\nchild for gain, sells him to be a slave. God forbid that I should charge\nthis crime to a people! But, however rarely it may occur, it is a fruit\nof slavery, an exercise of power belonging to slavery, and no laws\nrestrain or punish it. Such are the evils which spring naturally from\nthe licentiousness generated by slavery.\u201d\n\nThe owner of slaves who acts in conformity to the foregoing picture, to\nour mind displays proofs of very great debasement, and his offspring,\nstained with the blood of Ham, we should deem most likely to be quite\nfit subjects of slavery: we cannot therefore regret that the laws do not\npunish nor restrain him from selling them as slaves; we should rather\nregret that the laws did not compel him to go with them.\n\nThat there are instances in the Slave States where the owner of female\nslaves cohabits with them, and has offspring by them, is true. There may\nbe instances where such parent has sold them into slavery,\u2014they, in law,\nbeing his slaves; yet we aver we have never known an instance in which\nit has been done. That such offspring have been sold as slaves, by the\noperation of law, must certainly be acknowledged; and that such\ninstances have been more frequent since the action of the abolitionists\nhas aroused the Slave States to a sense of their danger, and thereby\ncaused the laws to be more stringent on the subject of emancipation, is\nalso true. And are you, ye agitators of the slave question, willing to\nacknowledge this fact? And that your conduct\u2014even you yourselves\u2014are\neven now the cause, under God, of the present condition of slavery,\nwhich many such persons now endure? Is not he who places the obstruction\non the highway, whereby the traveller is plunged in death, the guilty\none? In what light, think ye, must this class of slaves view you and\nyour conduct? But we wish not to upbraid you. If you are ignorant, words\nare useless. If you are honest men and know the truth, we prefer to\nleave you in the hands of God and your own conscience.\n\nWe hold that cohabitation with the blacks, on the part of the whites, is\na great sin, and is proof of a great moral debasement; nor will we say\nbut that the conservative influences of God\u2019s providence may have moved\nthe abolitionists to the action of for ever placing a bar to the\nemancipation of this class of slaves, such coloured offspring, in order\nthat the enormity of the sin of such cohabitation may be brought home,\nin a more lively sense, to the minds of their debased parents.\n\n\u201cI saw the Lord sitting upon his throne, and the host of heaven standing\non his right hand and on his left.\n\n\u201cAnd the Lord said, Who will entice Ahab, king of Israel, that he may go\nup and fall at Ramoth Gilead? And one spake after this manner, and\nanother saying after that manner.\n\n\u201cThen there came out a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said, I\nwill entice him; and the Lord said unto him, Wherewith?\n\n\u201cAnd he said, I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all\nhis prophets. And the Lord said, Thou shalt entice him.\u201d 2 _Chron._\nxviii. 18\u201321; 1 _Kings_, xxii. 19.\n\nWe wish to state a fact which may not be generally known to the\ndisciples of Dr. Channing: we speak of Louisiana, where we live. Here is\na floating population, emigrants from all parts of the world, especially\nfrom free countries and states, nearly or quite equal in number to the\nnative-born citizens who have been raised up and grown to maturity amid\nslaves or as the owners of slaves. If the cohabitation complained of is\nat all indicated by the mixed-blooded offspring, then the proof of this\ncohabitation will be far overbalancing on the side of this floating\npopulation.\n\nBut again, there are instances where an individual from this class, who\nthus cohabits with some master\u2019s slave, and has offspring, and,\nsucceeding in some business, buys her, probably with the intention of\nemancipation; but, as he becomes a proprietor and fixed citizen,\nprocrastination steals upon him, and he finds himself enthralled by a\ncoloured family for life.\n\nLet the number of these instances be compared with those where the\ndelinquents have been habituated, from the earliest youth, to the\nincidents of slavery, and the former class is found to be entitled to\nthe same pre-eminence. From this class also there are instances where\nthe white man, so cohabiting with the slave whom he has purchased for\nthe purpose of emancipation, sends her and his offspring to some free\nState, often to Cincinnati, the Moab of the South! \u201cLet mine outcasts\ndwell with thee, Moab.\u201d _Isa._ xvi. 4.\n\nLet such instances as this last named be contrasted with like instances\nemanating from among the native-born, or those raised among slaves, and\nthe former class are still far in the majority. In short, the fact is\nfound to be, that those who have been born, raised, and educated among\nthem, and as the owners of slaves, are found more seldom to fall into\nthis cohabitation than those who are by chance among slaves, but had not\nbeen educated from youth among them.\n\nFar be it from us to recriminate. Our object alone, in presenting these\nfacts, is to show, to give proof, that slavery is not the cause of the\ndebasement which urges the white man on to cohabitation with the negro.\n\nWe will ask no questions as to the frequency of such intercourse in some\nof the large Northern cities, in which blacks are numerous as well as\nfree, between them and the debased of the whites. What if we should be\ntold, in answer, if the charge were established, that such whites acted\nfrom _conscience_, under a sense of the essential equality of the negro\nwith the white man, and under the religious teaching of the advocates of\namalgamation!\n\nHe who writes on and describes moral influences, must be expected to\nview them as he has been in the habit of seeing them manifested. We\ntherefore regret exceedingly to see that Dr. Channing has made the\nassertion that, \u201cto own the persons of others, to hold females in\nslavery, is necessarily fatal to the purity of a people; that\nunprotected females, stripped by their degraded condition of woman\u2019s\nself-respect, should be used to minister to other passions in men than\nthe love of gain, is next to inevitable.\u201d\n\nIf this assertion is warranted by the moral condition of society as\ndisplayed before him, may we not find in it a solution of the fact, that\nthose who have been reared up under all the influences of slavery on the\nmaster, are far less frequently found to fall into the odious\ncohabitation with the negro than are those who have not.\n\nHowever, we have among us some very wicked and debased men, who own\nslaves, and who have been born and educated in the midst of the\ninfluences of the institution of slavery, and who yet cohabit with their\nfemale negroes. But the moral sense of the community, from day to day\nand from year to year, more and more distinctly gives reproof, more and\nmore emphatically points to such the finger of contempt and scorn, and\ncontinues to increase in energy, expressing its loathing and abhorrence;\nand all this is taking place under the influences of slavery on the\nmaster. Do all these things give proof that slavery is the progenitor of\nthis debasement, or the reverse?\n\nDr. Channing was mistaken; his mind was in error: he substituted the\nconsequent for the cause.\n\nWe deem it useless to spend time or argument with those who will\npertinaciously deny and refuse to listen to facts, unless they shall be\nin support of their previously conceived views or prejudices. We are\naware that the numerical proportion which we have ascribed to what we\ncall \u201ca floating population\u201d may seem incredible to those in other\ncountries, where the facts are quite different. Yet we are sure that\nsuch estimate is within the truth.\n\nHere, as everywhere else, the government, the legislative power of the\ncountry, is in the hands of the permanent and more elevated and wealthy\nclasses; in the hands of slave-owners. Would such a class consent to\nlaws throwing difficulties in the way of emancipation, if the effect of\nsuch laws were to be expended on their own offspring? To the more\nelevated and cultivated class of community in any country (and here such\nare all slave-owners) is to be ascribed the tone of moral feeling. Does\nany man covet for himself the loathing and scorn of community?\n\nThe family of the slave-owner is taught to regard the negro as a race of\nman radically inferior, in moral capacity, in mental power, and even in\nphysical ability, to the white man; that, although he is susceptible of\nimprovement in all these things, and even does improve in the state of\nslavery to the white man, yet that it would require untold generations\nto elevate him and his race to the present standing of the white races.\n\nThe child, the mere youth, and those of more experience, see proofs of\nthese facts in every comparison. The master feels them to be true, and\nis taught, that, while he governs with compassion, forbearance, and\nmercy, and as having regard to their improvement, any familiarity on\nterms of equality, beyond that of command on his side, and obedience on\ntheirs, is, and must be, disgrace to him. He is taught to consider the\nnegro race, from some cause, to have deteriorated to such extent that\nhis safety and happiness demand the control of a superior; he regards\nhim as a man, entitled to receive the protection of such control; and\nthat he, like every other man, will be called to account unto God,\naccording to the talents God has given him. He is taught, by every\nhour\u2019s experience, to know that slavery to the negro is a blessing. He\nis taught to feel it a duty to teach, as he would an inferior, the negro\nhis moral duty, his obligations to God, the religion of the Bible, the\ngospel of Christ.\n\nBut the man born and educated in the Free States is taught that \u201che who\ncannot see a _brother_, a child of God, a man possessing all the rights\nof humanity, under a skin darker than his own, wants the vision of a\nChristian.\u201d _Channing_, vol. ii. p. 14. \u201cTo recognise as brethren those\nwho want all outward distinctions, is the chief way in which we are to\nmanifest the spirit of him who came to raise the fallen and save the\nlost.\u201d _Ibidem._\n\nVol. ii. pp. 20, 21, 22, he says\u2014\u201cAnother argument against property (in\nslaves) is to be found in the essential equality of men.\u201d * * * \u201cNature\nindeed pays no heed to birth or condition in bestowing her favours. The\nnoblest spirits sometimes grow up in the obscurest spheres. Thus equal\nare men;\u2014and among these equals, who can substantiate his claim to make\nothers his property, his tools, the mere instruments of his private\ninterest and gratification?\u201d * * * \u201cIs it sure that the slave, or the\nslave\u2019s child, may not surpass his master in intellectual energy, or in\nmoral worth? Has nature conferred distinctions, which tell us plainly\nwho shall be owners and who shall be owned? Who of us can unblushingly\nlift up his head and say that God has written \u2018master\u2019 there? Or who can\nshow the word \u2018slave\u2019 engraven on his brother\u2019s brow? The equality of\nnature makes slavery a wrong.\u201d\n\nMay we aid the disciples of Dr. Channing by referring them to _Prov._\nxvii. 2, \u201cA wise _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b6\u05bd\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, _slave_) shall have rule over\na son that causeth shame, and shall have part of the inheritance among\nthe brethren?\u201d And will the doctor and his disciples believe the proverb\nany the more true, when we inform them that it is a matter of frequent\noccurrence in slave-holding communities. Vol. v. p. 89, 90, he says\u2014\u201cBut\nwe have not yet touched the great cause of the conflagration of the Hall\nof Freedom. Something worse than fanaticism or separation of the Union\nwas the impulse to this violence. We are told that white people and\nblack sat together on the benches of the hall, and were even seen\nwalking together in the streets! This was the unheard-of atrocity which\nthe virtues of the people of Philadelphia could not endure. They might\nhave borne the dissolution of the national tie; but this junction of\nblack and white was too much for human patience to sustain. And has it\nindeed come to this? For such a cause are mobs and fires to be let loose\non our persons and most costly buildings? What! Has not an American\ncitizen a right to sit and walk with whom he will? Is this common\nprivilege denied us? Is society authorized to choose our associates?\nMust our neighbour\u2019s tastes as to friendship and companionship control\nour own? Have the feudal times come back to us, when to break the law of\ncaste was a greater crime than to violate the laws of God? What must\nEurope have thought, when the news crossed the ocean of the burning of\nthe Hall of Freedom, because white and coloured people walked together\nin the streets?\n\n\u201cEurope might well open its eyes in wonder. On that continent, with all\nits aristocracy, the coloured man mixes freely with his\nfellow-creatures. He sometimes receives the countenance of the rich, and\nhas even found his way into the palaces of the great. In Europe, the\ndoctrine would be thought to be too absurd for refutation, that a\ncoloured man of pure morals and piety, of cultivated intellect and\nrefined manners, was not a fit companion for the best in the land. What\nmust Europe have said, when brought to understand that, in a republic,\nfounded on the principles of human rights and equality, people are\nplaced beyond the laws for treating the African as a man. This\nPhiladelphia doctrine deserves no mercy. What an insult is thrown on\nhuman nature, in making it a heinous crime to sit or walk with a human\nbeing, whoever it may be? It just occurs to me, that I have forgotten\nthe circumstance which filled to overflowing the cup of abolitionist\nwickedness in Philadelphia. The great offence was this, that certain\nyoung women of anti-slavery faith were seen to walk the streets with\ncoloured young men!\u201d\n\nSuch are the lessons taught the youth as well as the aged of the Free\nStates, even by Dr. Channing himself. We now ask, under the teachings of\nwhich school will the pupils be the best prepared for this cohabitation\nwith the negro?\n\nThe burning of the Hall of Freedom was, no doubt, a very great outrage,\nwell meriting severe condemnation. Yet we cannot but notice, that Dr.\nChanning has nowhere, in all his works, said one word about the burning\nof the Convent on Mount Benedict, by his own townsmen, the good people\nof Boston.\n\nWe care not with what severity he punishes such outrages. But it is the\ninfluence of his lesson in palliating the familiarity, and mitigating\nthe evil consequences of a coalition of the white man with the negro,\nthat we present to view. It is with grief that we find him infusing into\nhis disciples this nauseating, disgusting, moral poison; preparing their\nminds to feel little or no shame in a cohabitation with the negro, so\ndegrading to the white man, and so disgraceful in all Slave States. Yea\nfurther, what are we to think of the judgment, of the taste,\u2014may we not\nadd, habits, of a man who could unblushingly publish to the world his\npartiality to the negro of Jamaica, after his visit there, as follows:\n\n\u201cI saw too, on the plantation where I resided, a gracefulness and\ndignity of form and motion, rare in my own native New England.\u201d Vol. vi.\np. 51.\n\nAgain, page 52. \u201cThe African countenance seldom shows that coarse,\nbrutal sensuality which is so common in the face of the white man.\u201d\n\nMay we be pardoned for feeling a strong desire,\u2014rather, a curiosity,\u2014to\nbe made acquainted with the faces of the white men with whom he was the\nmost familiar!\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VIII.\n\nIn vol. ii. page 82, Dr. Channing says\u2014\n\n\u201cI cannot leave the subject of the evils of slavery, without saying a\nword of its political influence.\u201d\n\nHe considers that \u201cslave labour is less productive than free.\u201d This is\ndoubtless true; and if so, it proves that the master of the slave does\nnot require of him so much labour as is required of a hired labourer.\nAre the friends of abolition angry, because, in their sympathy for the\nslave, they have found something to be pleased with?\n\nHe considers that \u201cby degrading the labouring population to a state\nwhich takes from them motives to toil, and renders them objects of\nsuspicion or dread,\u201d impairs \u201cthe ability of a community to unfold its\nresources in peace, and to defend itself in war.\u201d\n\nThis proposition includes the idea that the Slave States have degraded a\nportion of their citizens to a state of slavery. This is not true. Our\nancestors, contrary to their will, were forced to receive a degraded\nrace among them, not as citizens, but slaves;\u2014and does it follow now,\nthat we must again be forced to make this degraded race our political\nequals? Even the British Government, with all its claim to sovereign\nrule, never dreamed of imposing on us a demand so destructive to our\npolitical rights; so blighting to social happiness; so annihilating to\nour freedom as men; so extinguishing to our very race. Do the friends of\nabolition deem us so stupid as not to see, if, even when the negro is in\nslavery, cases of amalgamation happen, that, when he shall be elevated\nto political freedom, the country would, by their aid, be overspread by\nit? Do they think that we do not see that such a state of things is\ndegeneracy, degradation, ruin, worse than death to the white men? And\nwill they chide, if, in its prevention, we drench our fields in our own\nblood in preference? The British Government urged the race here as an\narticle of property, of commerce and profit, as they did their _tea_.\nThey stipulated, they guaranteed them to be _slaves_, they and their\nposterity for ever\u2014not _citizens_! On such terms alone could they have\nbeen received. The South then, as now, to a man would have met death on\nthe battle-field, sooner than have suffered their presence on other\nconditions.\n\nThe British governmental councils, our colonial assemblies, our\nprimitive inquiring conventions never viewed them in any other light. It\nwas not on their account we sought for freedom. It was not in their\nbehalf we fought for liberty. It was not for them our blood ran like\nwater. It was not to establish for them political rights we broke the\nBritish yoke, or founded here this great government. Our national synods\nrecognised them only as property; our constitutional charter, only as\nslaves; our congressional statutes, only as the subjects of their\nmasters.\n\nThere is falsity in the very language that frames the proposition which\ninculcates that these slaves are a portion of population that ever can\nbe justly entitled to equal political rights, or that they are, or ever\nwere, degraded by the community among whom they are now found.\n\nSo degraded, both mentally and physically, is the African in his own\nnative wilds, that, however humiliating to a freeman slavery may seem,\nto him it is an elevated school; and however dull and stupid may be his\nscholarship, yet a few generations distinctly mark some little\nimprovement. We cannot doubt, some few individuals of this race have\nbeen so far elevated in their constitutional propensities that they\nmight be well expected to make provident citizens; and the fact is, such\ngenerally become free, without the aid of fanaticism. But what is the\nvalue of a _general assertion_ predicated alone upon a few exceptions?\nSome few of our own race give ample proof that they are not fit to take\ncare of themselves: shall we, therefore, subject our whole race to\npupilage?\n\nThat such a population, such a race of men, is as conducive to national\ngrandeur, either as to resources or defence, as the same number of\nintellectual, high-minded yeomanry of our own race might be well\nexpected to be, perhaps few contend; and we pray you not to force us to\ntry the experiment. But if such weakness attend the position in which we\nfeel God has placed us, why distress us by its distortion? Why torment\nour wound with your inexperienced, and therefore unskilful hand? Why\nstrive ye to enrage our passions, by constantly _twitting_ us with what\nis not our fault? Do you indeed wish to destroy, because you have no\npower to amend? Why, then, your inexperience as to facts, aided by\nmisrepresentation and sophistry in the digestion of language and\nsentiment,\u2014and we exceedingly regret that we can correctly say, open\nfalsehood,\u2014as found on pages 86, 87?\u2014\n\n\u201cSlavery is a strange element to mix up with free institutions. It\ncannot but endanger them. It is a pattern for every kind of wrong. The\nslave brings insecurity on the free. Whoever holds one human being in\nbondage, invites others to plant the foot on his own neck. Thanks to\nGod, not one human being can be wronged with impunity. The liberties of\na people ought to tremble, until every man is free. Tremble they will.\nTheir true foundation is sapped by the legalized degradation of a single\ninnocent man to slavery. That foundation is impartial justice, is\nrespect for human nature, is respect for the rights of every human\nbeing. I have endeavoured in these remarks to show the hostility between\nslavery and \u2018free institutions.\u2019 If, however, I err; if these\ninstitutions cannot stand without slavery for their foundation, then I\nsay, let them fall. Then they ought to be buried in perpetual ruins.\nThen the name of republicanism ought to become a by-word and reproach\namong the nations. Then monarchy, limited as it is in England, is\nincomparably better and happier than our more popular forms. Then,\ndespotism, as it exists in Prussia, where equal laws are in the main\nadministered with impartiality, ought to be preferred. A republican\ngovernment, bought by the sacrifice of half, or more than half of a\npeople, stripping them of their most sacred rights, by degrading them to\na brutal condition, would cost too much. A freedom so tainted with wrong\nought to be our abhorrence.\u201d\n\nLet not the looseness of the doctor\u2019s regard for the Union surprise.\nWith him a dissolution of the Union had become a fixed idea. On pages\n237 and 238, he says\u2014\n\n\u201cTo me it seems not only the right, but the duty of the Free States, in\ncase of the annexation of Texas, to say to the Slave-holding States, \u2018We\nregard this act as the dissolution of the Union.\u2019 * * * A pacific\ndivision in the first instance seems to me to threaten less contention\nthan a lingering, feverish dissolution of the Union, such as must be\nexpected under this fatal innovation. For one, then, I say, that,\nearnestly as I deprecate the separation of these States, and though this\nevent would disappoint most cherished hopes for my country, still I\ncould submit to it more readily than to the reception of Texas into the\nconfederacy.\u201d \u201cI do not desire to share the responsibility or to live\nunder the laws of a government adopting such a policy.\u201d * * * \u201cIf the\nSouth is bent on incorporating Texas with itself, as a new prop to\nslavery, it would do well to insist on a division of the States. It\nwould, in so doing, consult best its own safety. It should studiously\nkeep itself from communion with the free part of the country. It should\nsuffer no railroad from that section to cross its borders. It should\nblock up intercourse with us by sea and land.\u201d Vol. ii. p. 239.\n\nWe do not quote these passages for the sake of refuting them. \u201c_In\nEurope, the doctrine would be thought too absurd for refutation._\u201d\n_\u201cWhat must Europe have thought when\u201d these sentiments \u201ccrossed the\nocean.\u201d_ * * * \u201c_What must Europe have said, when brought to understand\nthat, in a republic founded on the principles of human rights and\nequality_,\u201d\u2014and this writer acknowledges the doctrine that \u201cthe\nconstitution was a compromise among independent States, and it is well\nknown that geographical relations and the local interest were among the\nessential conditions on which the compromise was made;\u201d and concerning\nwhich, he adds, \u201cWas not the constitution founded on conditions or\nconsiderations which are even more authoritative than its particular\nprovisions?\u201d (see vol. ii. p. 237,)\u2014\u201c_What must Europe have said_,\u201d when\ninformed that these sentiments were expressed against the right of the\nSouth to hold slaves? Slaves, whom she, herself, in our childhood, had\nsold us? Why, she must have thought that we were on the eve of a civil\nwar, and that Dr. Channing was about to take command of an army of\nabolitionists to compel the South to submit to his terms! \u201c_Europe might\nwell open its eyes in wonder_\u201d at such extravagance.\n\n\u201cSuch,\u201d says our author, are \u201cthe chief evils of slavery;\u201d and we are\nwilling to leave it to \u201cEurope\u201d to decide whether he has not furnished\nus with declamation instead of argument.\n\nUnder the head, \u201cEvils of Slavery,\u201d he examines those considerations\nthat have been urged in its favour, or in mitigation, which we deem\nunnecessary to notice further than to note a few passages in which there\nis between us some unity of sentiment.\n\nPage 89. \u201cFreedom undoubtedly has its perils. It offers nothing to the\nslothful and dissolute. Among a people left to seek their own good in\ntheir own way, some of all classes fail from vice, some from incapacity,\nsome from misfortune.\u201d\n\nPage 92. \u201cWere we to visit a slave-country, undoubtedly the most\nmiserable human beings would be found among the free; for among them the\npassions have a wider sweep, and the power they possess may be used to\ntheir own ruin. Liberty is not a necessity of happiness. It is only a\nmeans of good. It is a trust that may be abused.\u201d Page 93. \u201cOf all races\nof men, the African is the mildest and most susceptible of attachment.\nHe loves where the European would hate. He watches the life of a master,\nwhom the North American Indian, in like circumstances, would stab to the\nheart.\u201d\n\nThe African may exhibit mildness and attachment in slavery when others\nwould exhibit a reverse feeling; but it is not true that he exhibits\nthese qualities as a fixed moral principle, resulting from intellectual\nconclusion.\n\nPage 95. \u201cNo institution, be it what it may, can make the life of a\nhuman being wholly evil, or cut off every means of improvement.\u201d _Idem._\n\u201cThe African is so affectionate, imitative, and docile, that, in\nfavourable circumstances, he catches much that is good; and accordingly\nthe influence of a wise and kind master will be seen in the very\ncountenance and bearing of his slaves.\u201d Or, rather, we find traces of\nthese qualities developed among their descendants. But the truth is far\nbelow this description.\n\nWe had expected to have received light and pleasure from the examination\nof Dr. Channing\u2019s view of slavery in a political attitude. We confess we\nare disappointed. His political view of it is, at least, jejune. To us,\nit suggests the superior adaptation of his genius and education to the\nrhapsody of a prayer-meeting than to the labours of a legislative hall.\nWe doubt much whether he had ever arrived to any very clear and general\nview of the organization of society. Finding, under this head, very\nlittle in his volumes that a politician can descend to encounter, we\nshall close our present Lesson with a very few remarks.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nCapital and labour can exist in but two relations; congenerous or\nantagonistic. They are never congenerous only when it is true that\nlabour constitutes capital, which can only happen through slavery. The\ndeduction is then clear, that capital for ever governs labour; and the\ndeduction is also as clear, that, out of slavery, capital and labour\nmust be for ever antagonistic. But, again, capital governs labour,\nbecause, while capital _now exists_, labour can possess it only by its\nown consumption. But when the two are congenerous, labour, as a tool, is\nnot urged to its injury, because the tool itself is capital; but when\nantagonistic, the tool is urged to its utmost power, because its injury,\nits ruin touches not the capital. Hence, we often hear slave-labour is\nthe less productive. The proposition is not affected by facts attending\nhim who is said to be _free_, but who only labours for his individual\nsupport; because while he adds nothing to the general stock of capital,\nhe yet falls within the catalogue of being a slave _to himself_: \u201cThe\nLord sent him forth _to till_ the ground,\u201d (\u05dc\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3 _la evod, to slave\nthe ground_;) to do slave-labour for his own support; _to slave himself_\nfor his own subsistence.\n\nSuch is the first degree of slavery to which sin has subjected all\nmankind. Therefore, in such case, labour is capital. But the very moment\na lower degradation forces him to sell his labour, capital is the only\npurchaser, and they at once become antagonistic. On the one hand, labour\nis seeking for all; on the other, capital is seeking for all. But the\ncapital governs, and always obtains the mastery, and reduces labour down\nto the smallest pittance. Thus antagonistic are capital and labour, that\nthe former is for ever trying to lessen the value of the other by art,\nby machinery; thus converting the tool of labour into capital itself.\nThe political difference between the influence of these two relations,\ncapital and labour, is very great. We feel surprised that the sympathies\nof the abolitionists are not changed, from the miseries where capital\nand labour are decidedly congenerous, to a consideration of that morass\nof misery into which the worn-out, broken tools of labour are thrown,\nwith cruel heartlessness, where capital and labour are antagonistic.\n\nUnder the one system, beggars and distress from want are unknown,\nbecause such things cannot exist under such an organization of society.\nBut, under the other, pauperism becomes a leading element. The history\nof that class of community, in all free countries, is a monument and\nrecord of _free labour_.\n\nWe ask the politician to consider these facts, while he searches the\nhistory of man for light in the inquiry of what is the most tranquil,\nand, in all its parts, the most happy organization of society.\n\nUnder the head of \u201cThe Political Influence of Slavery,\u201d Dr. Channing has\ntaken occasion to inform us of his feelings as to the stability of this\nUnion; that he prefers its dissolution to the perpetuation of slavery;\nand that he proposes a \u201cpacific division.\u201d And what is his \u201cpacific\ndivision?\u201d Why, he says, (if we must repeat it,) \u201c_the South must\nstudiously keep itself from communion with the Free States; to suffer no\nrailroad from the Free States to cross its border; and to block up all\nintercourse by sea and land_!\u201d Why, it is \u201cdeath in the pot!\u201d\n\nO most unhappy man! the most unfortunate of all, to have left such a\nrecord of intellectual weakness and folly behind! But we will forbear.\n\nWe think Dr. Channing\u2019s declarations and proposals wholly uncalled for.\nWe regret the existence of such feelings at the North. We say\n_feelings_, because we are bold to say, such sentiments are alone the\noffspring of the most ignorant, wicked, and black-hearted feelings of\nthe human soul. Their very existence shows a preparedness to commit\n_treason_, perjury, and the murders of civil war! The disciples of Dr.\nChanning, on the subject of abolitionism, may be too stupid to perceive\nit; for \u201cEvil men understand not judgment.\u201d _Prov._ xxviii. 5.\n\nWe regret this feeling at the North the more deeply on the account of\nthe extraordinary generant quality of sin. For it propagates, not only\nits peculiar kind, but every monster, in every shape, by the mere echo\nof its voice! Will they remember, \u201cHe that diggeth a pit shall fall into\nit; and whoso breaketh a hedge, a serpent shall bite him.\u201d Or, that, \u201cIt\nis an honour to cease from strife; but every fool will be meddling.\u201d\n_Prov._ But since such feelings do exist, we feel thankful to God that\nthe sin of the initiative in the dissolution of this Union is not with\nthe Slave States. We know there are many good men in the North. Much\ndepends on what they may do. We believe the union of these States need\nnot\u2014will not be disrupted.\n\nBut if the laws of Congress can neither be executed nor continued, nor\noaths to be true to the constitution longer bind these maniacs, the\nissue will finally be left in the hand of the God of battles! It becomes\nthe South to act wisely, to be calm, and to hope as long as there can be\nhope. And to the North, let them say now, before it be too late, \u201cWe\npray you to forbear. We entreat you to be true to your oaths, and not\nforce us, in hostile array, to bathe our hands in blood.\u201d\n\nBut, if the term of our great national destiny is to be closed, and war,\nthe most cruel of all wars, is to spread far beyond the reach of human\nforesight,\u2014the South, like Abraham in olden time, will \u201carm their\ntrained servants,\u201d and go out to the war, SHOUTING UNDER THE BANNER OF\nTHE ALMIGHTY!\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IX.\n\nAs a fifth proposition; Dr. Channing says\u2014\u201c_I shall consider the\nargument which the Scriptures are thought to furnish in favour of\nslavery._\u201d\n\nIn the course of these studies, we have often had occasion to refer to\nthe Scripture in our support. We have shown that even the Decalogue gave\nrules in regulation of the treatment of slaves; that commands from the\nmouth of God himself were delivered to Abraham concerning his slaves;\nthat the Almighty from Sinai delivered to Moses laws, directing him whom\nthey might have as slaves,\u2014slaves forever, and to be inherited by their\nchildren after them; rules directing the government and treatment of\nslaves, who had become such under different circumstances. We have\nadverted to the spirit of prophecy on the subject of the providence of\nGod touching the matter, to the illustrations of our Saviour, and the\nlessons of the apostles. Others have done the same before us. But Dr.\nChanning says, page 99\u2014\u201cIn this age of the world, and amid the light\nwhich has been thrown on the true interpretation of the Scriptures, such\nreasoning hardly deserves notice.\u201d\n\nHad Tom Paine been an abolitionist, he could scarcely have said more! He\ncontinues\u2014\u201cA few words only will be offered in reply. This reasoning\nproves too much. If usages sanctioned in the Old Testament, and not\nforbidden in the New, are right, then our moral code will undergo a sad\ndeterioration. Polygamy was allowed to the Israelites, was the practice\nof the holiest men, and was common and licensed in the age of the\napostles. * * * Why may not Scripture be used to stock our houses with\nwives as well as slaves.\u201d\n\nWe know not what new light has come to this age of the world, enabling\nit to interpret the Scriptures more accurately than is afforded by the\nlanguage of the Scriptures themselves. Whatever it may be, we shall not\ndeprive Dr. Channing nor his disciples of its entire benefit, by the\nappropriation of its use to ourselves; and therefore we shall proceed to\nexamine his position, by interpreting the Scriptures in the\nold-fashioned way\u2014understanding them to mean what they say.\n\nThe first instance the idea is brought to view which we express by the\nterm _wife_, is found in _Gen._ ii. 20 \u201cThere was not found a _help\nmeet_ for him.\u201d The original is \u05dc\u05b9\u05bd\u05d0\u05be\u05de\u05b8\u05e6\u05b8\u05a5\u05d0 \u05e2\u05b5\u0596\u05d6\u05b6\u05e8 \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e0\u05b6\u05d2\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u05bd\u05d5\u05b9 _not\nfound_, _discovered_, _help, aid, or assistance_, _flowing_,\n_proceeding_, _at_, _to_, or _for him_. Let it be noticed that the idea\nis in the singular. The word _ishsha_, used to mean _one woman_, or\n_wife_, is so distinctly singular, that it sometimes demands to be\ntranslated by the word _one_, as we shall hereafter find.\n\nSame chapter, verse 22: \u201cMade he a _woman_,\u201d \u05d0\u05b4\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u0591\u05d4 _ishsha_, _woman_,\n_wife_.\n\nVer. 23: \u201cShall be called _woman_,\u201d \u05d0\u05b4\u05e9\u05b8\u05bc\u0594\u05d4 _ishsha_, _woman_, _wife_.\n\nVer. 24: \u201cTherefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and\ncleave unto his wife,\u201d \u05d0\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05bc\u0591\u05d5\u05b9 _ishto_, _his wife_, _his woman_, \u201cand\nthey shall be one flesh.\u201d\n\nVer. 25: \u201cThe man and his wife,\u201d \u05d0\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05bc\u0591\u05d5\u05b9 _ishto_, _wife_, _woman_.\n\nThese terms are all in the singular number. We propose for\nconsideration, how far these passages are to be understood as a law and\nrule of action among men.\n\n_Gen._ vii. 7: \u201cAnd Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his\nsons\u2019 wives with him, into the ark.\u201d\n\nVer. 9: \u201cThere went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and\nfemale, as God had commanded Noah.\u201d\n\nWe propose also for consideration, how far these passages are an\nindication of the law of God, and his providence, as bearing on\npolygamy.\n\n_Exod._ xx. 17 (18th ver. of the Hebrew text): \u201cThou shalt not covet thy\nneighbour\u2019s _wife_,\u201d \u05d0\u05b5\u05a3\u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05ea, _esheth_, in the construct state, showing\nthat she was appropriated to the neighbour in the singular number. If\nthe passage had read, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour\u2019s _wives_, or\nany of them, the interpretation must have been quite different.\n\nSo also _Deut._ v. 21: \u201cNeither shalt thou desire thy neighbour\u2019s\n_wife_,\u201d \u05d0\u05b5\u05a3\u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05ea, _esheth_.\n\nThe twenty-second chapter of Deuteronomy relates the law concerning a\nportion of the relations incident to a married state; but we find the\nidea always advanced in the singular number. There was no direction\nconcerning his _wives_. Had the decalogue announced, \u201cThou shalt have\nbut one wife,\u201d the language of these explanations and directions, to be\nin unison therewith, need not have been changed.\n\nThe subject is continued through the first five verses of the\ntwenty-fourth chapter, but we find the idea _wife_ still expressed in\nthe same careful language, conveying the idea, as appropriated to one\nman, in the person of one female only. The term \u201cnew wife,\u201d here used,\ndoes not imply that she is an addition to others in like condition, but\nthat her condition of being a wife is _new_, as is most clearly shown by\nthe word \u05d7\u05b2\u05d3\u05b8\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u0594\u05d4 _hadasha_, from which it is translated. The sentiment\nor condition explained in this passage is illustrated by our Saviour in\n_Luke_ xiv. 20: \u201cI have married a wife, and therefore I cannot\ncome,\u201d\u2014that is, until the expiration of the year,\u2014having reference to\nthis very passage in Deuteronomy for authority. But this passage is made\nvery plain by a direct command of God: see _Deut._ xx. 7: \u201cAnd what man\nis there that hath betrothed a wife, and hath not taken her? Let him go\nand return unto his house, lest he die in the battle, and another man\ntake her.\u201d\n\nBut the institution of marriage was established, before the fall of man,\nby the appropriation of one woman to one man. Now, that this fact, this\nexample, stands as a command, is clear from the words of Jesus Christ,\nin _Matt._ xix. 4, 5: \u201cAnd he answered and said, Have ye not read, that\nhe which made them at the beginning, made them male and female, and\nsaid, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother and shall\ncleave unto his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore, they\nare no more twain, but one flesh.\u201d\n\nWe trust, \u201cat this age of the world,\u201d there is a sufficiency of light,\namong even the most unlearned of us, whereby we shall be enabled to\ninterpret these scriptures, not to license polygamy, but to\ndiscountenance and forbid it, by showing that they teach a contrary\ndoctrine. But, perhaps, the explanation is more decided in _Mark_ x.\n8\u201311: And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain,\nbut one flesh.\u201d \u201cAnd he saith unto them, whoever shall put away his\nwife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.\u201d\n\nSurely, if a man commit adultery by marrying the second when he has\nturned off the previous, it may be a stronger case of adultery to marry\na second wife _without turning off the first one_!\n\nWe think St. Paul interprets the Scriptures in the old-fashioned way,\n_Eph._ v. 31: \u201cFor this cause shall a man leave his father and mother,\nand shall be joined unto his wife, and they _two_ shall be _one flesh_.\u201d\n\nSee 1 _Cor._ vi. 16\u201318: \u201cWhat! know ye not that he which is joined to a\nharlot is one body? For two, saith he, shall be one flesh. Flee\nfornication.\u201d And further, the deductions that St. Paul made from these\nteachings are plainly drawn out in his lessons to Timothy: \u201cIf a man\ndesire the office of bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must\nbe blameless, the husband of one wife.\u201d \u201cLet the deacons be the husbands\nof one wife.\u201d 1 _Tim._ iii. 1, 2, 12.\n\n\u201cThese things command and teach. Let no man despise thy youth; but be\nthou an example of the believers in word, in conversation, in charity,\nin faith, in purity.\u201d 1 _Tim._ iv. 11, 12.\n\nAnd we now beg to inquire whether this lesson to Timothy is not founded\nupon the law as delivered to Moses? \u201cAnd the Lord said unto Moses, Speak\nunto the priests the sons of Aaron, and say unto them:\u201d * * * \u201cThey\nshall be holy unto their God, and not profane the name of their God.\u201d *\n* * \u201cThey shall not take a wife that is a whore, or profane; neither\nshall they take a woman put away from her husband.\u201d * * * \u201cAnd _he that\nis_ the high priest among his brethren * * * shall take a wife in her\nvirginity.\u201d \u201cA widow, or a divorced woman, or profane, or a harlot,\nthese he shall not take; but he shall take a virgin of his own people to\nwife.\u201d \u201cNeither shall he profane his seed among his people: for I the\nLord do sanctify him.\u201d _Lev._ xxi. 1, 6, 7, 10, 13, 14, 15.\n\nWe doubt not it will be conceded that the teachings of the Bible are,\nthat polygamy includes the crime of adultery and fornication, both of\nwhich have a tendency towards a general promiscuous intercourse. In\naddition to the express commands as to the views thus involved, to our\nmind there are specifications on the subject equally decisive. \u201cIf any\nman take a wife * * * and give occasion of speech against her, * * *\nthen shall the father of the damsel and her mother take and bring forth\nthe tokens; * * * and the damsel\u2019s father shall say, * * * and, lo, he\nhath given occasion of speech against her. * * * And the elders of the\ncity shall take that man and chastise him; and they shall amerce him in\na hundred shekels of silver, * * * and she shall be his wife; he may not\nput her away all his days.\u201d \u201cBut if this thing is true, and the tokens\nof her virginity be not found for the damsel; then they shall bring out\nthe damsel to the door of her father\u2019s house, and the men of the city\nshall stone her with stones that she die.\u201d * * * \u201cIf a man be found\nlying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them\ndie.\u201d * * * \u201cIf a damsel _that is_ a virgin be betrothed unto a husband,\nand a man find her in the city and lie with her; then ye shall bring\nthem both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with\nstones that they die.\u201d * * * \u201cBut if a man find a betrothed damsel in\nthe field, and the man force her and lie with her; then the man only\nthat lay with her shall die.\u201d * * * \u201cIf a man find a damsel that is a\nvirgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her,\nand they be found, then the man that lay with her shall give unto the\ndamsel\u2019s father fifty _shekels_ of silver, and she shall be his wife: *\n* * he may not put her away all his days.\u201d _Deut._ xxii. 13\u201325, 28, 29.\n\n\u201cA bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even unto\nhis tenth generation.\u201d _Idem_, xxiii. 2.\n\n\u201cThese are the statutes which the Lord commanded Moses between a man and\nhis wife, between the father and his daughter, _being yet_ in her youth\nin her father\u2019s house.\u201d _Num._ xxx. 16.\n\n\u201cWhen thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, *\n* * and shalt say, I will set a king over me,\u201d &c. * * * \u201cBut he shall\nnot,\u201d &c. * * * \u201cNeither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his\nheart turn not away.\u201d _Deut._ xvii. 14\u201317.\n\nThe inferences to be drawn from a review of these statutes, in\nopposition to polygamy, we deem of easy deduction. We leave them for the\nconsideration of those who shall examine the subject.\n\nWe deem it extraordinary that, \u201cat this age of the world,\u201d we should\nfind men who seem to think that because Moses had a statute which, under\ncertain circumstances, authorized husbands to divorce their wives, that\nthereby he permitted polygamy.\n\n\u201cWhen a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that\nshe find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some _uncleanness_\nin her,\u201d (it is the same word elsewhere translated _nakedness_,) \u201cthen\nlet him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and\nsend her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house,\nshe may go and be another man\u2019s wife. And if the latter husband hate\nher, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and\nsendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took\nher to be his wife; her former husband which sent her away may not take\nher again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for this is\nabomination before the Lord.\u201d _Deut._ xxiv. 1\u20134.\n\nIs there any thing here that favours polygamy? Such was the law. But in\nthe original, there is a term used which became the subject of\ndiscussion among the Jews, perhaps shortly after its promulgation. This\nterm, in our translation \u201cuncleanness,\u201d some understand to mean such\nmoral or physical defects as rendered her marriage highly improper or a\nnullity; others understand it to mean, or rather to extend to and\nembrace, all dislike on the part of the husband whereby he became\ndesirous to be separated from her.\n\nThis interpretation seemed most conducive to the power of the husband,\nand, therefore, probably had the most advocates; and it is said that the\nJewish rulers so suffered it to be understood, and that even Moses, as a\nman, suffered it; noticing that where the wife became greatly _hated_ by\nthe husband, she was extremely liable to abuse, unless this law was so\nexplained as to permit a divorce. The Jews kept up the dispute about\nthis matter down to the days of our Saviour; when the Pharisees, with\nthe view to place before him a difficult question, and one that might\nentangle him, if answered adverse to the popular idea, presented it to\nhim, as related in _Matt._ xix. He promptly decides the question,\nwhereupon they say\u2014\n\n\u201cWhy did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put\nher away? He saith unto them, Moses, because of the hardness of your\nhearts, suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it\nwas not so. And I say unto you, Whoever shall put away his wife, except\nit be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery; and\nwhoever marrieth her that is put away, doth commit adultery.\u201d _Matt._\nxix. 7, 8, 9.\n\nMark describes this interview thus: \u201cAnd the Pharisees came to him, and\nasked him, saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife, tempting\nhim? And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? And\nthey said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her\naway. Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart\nhe wrote you this precept: but from the beginning of the creation, God\nmade them male and female.\u201d _Mark_ x. 2\u20136.\n\nBut do these answers, either way, favour polygamy? Is it not clear that\nthe law was in opposition to it?\n\nIt is true, the Jews, corrupted by the neighbouring nations who fell\ninto it, practised the habit to a great extent; and so they did idolatry\nand many other sins. But was _idolatry allowed to the Israelites_?\n\nWhat truth can there be in the assertion that they were _allowed_ a\nthing, in the practice of which they had to trample their laws under\nfoot? And, under the statement of the facts, what truth is there in the\nassertion that \u201cpolygamy was licensed in the age of the apostles?\u201d\n\nIf such was \u201cthe practice of the holiest men,\u201d it proves nothing except\nthat the holiest men were in the practice of breaking the law.\n\nIt is true that a looseness of adjudication on the subject of divorce\ngrew up, perhaps even from the time of Moses, among the Jews, on account\nof the dispute about the interpretation of the law. But upon the\nsupposition that the law was correctly interpreted by those who\nadvocated the greatest laxity, which Jesus Christ sufficiently\ncondemned, yet there is found nothing favouring polygamy in it; for even\nthe loosest interpretation supposed a divorce necessary. The dispute was\nnot about polygamy; but about what predicates rendered a divorce legal.\n\nIn the books of the Old Testament we find the accounts of many crimes\nthat were committed in those olden days; but can any one be so stupid as\nto suppose the law permitted those crimes, because the history of them\nhas reached us through these books?\n\nIf the polygamy of Jacob, rehearsed in these books, teaches the doctrine\nthat these books permitted polygamy,\u2014then, because these books relate\nthe history of the murder of Abel, it must be said that these books\npermit murder? And because, in these books, we have the account of the\ndisobedience of Adam and Eve, that therefore disobedience to the command\nof God is legalized also!\n\nBefore we can say that polygamy is countenanced by the Old Testament as\nwell as slavery, we must find some special law to that effect. And some\nof the advocates of abolition, striving to make a parallel between\nslavery and polygamy, pretend they have done so in _Lev._ xviii. 18:\n\u201cNeither shalt thou take a wife to her sister to vex _her_, to uncover\nher nakedness, besides the other in her lifetime.\u201d\n\nThese advocates interpret this law to permit a man to marry two wives or\nmore, so that no two of them are sisters; and because few take the\ntrouble to contradict them, they seem to think their interpretation to\nbe true, and urge it as such.\n\nIt was clear the law permitted no additional wife, so as to allow two or\nmore wives, unless, by the example of Jacob, the law was ameliorated.\nHis example was the taking of sisters; and if the original be correctly\ntranslated, his example is condemned by the law cited. We surely fail to\nsee how forbidding polygamy as to sisters, permits it as to others.\nLouisiana by law forbids any free white person being joined in marriage\nto a person of colour. If that State, in addition, forbids free white\npersons being married to slaves, does it repeal the law as to persons of\ncolour?\n\nBut to the Hebrew scholar we propose a small error in the translation of\nthis passage. The preceding twelve verses treat on the subject of whom\nit is forbidden to marry on the account of consanguinity, the last of\nwhich names the grand-daughter of a previous wife, declaring such act to\nbe wicked, and closes the list of objections on account of\nconsanguinity, unless such list be extended by the passage under review;\nfor the succeeding sentence is a prohibition of all females who may be\nunclean; consanguinity is no more mentioned; yet these prohibitions\ncontinue to the 23d verse; and it is to be noticed that each prohibition\nsucceeding the wife\u2019s grand-daughter commences with a \u05d5\u05b0 (_vav with\nsheva_), whereas not one on the ground of consanguinity is thus\nintroduced; illustrating the fact that each prohibition, succeeding the\nwife\u2019s grand-daughter, is founded upon new and distinct causes.\n\nThe widow of a deceased husband who had left no issue was permitted to\nmarry his brother; it was even made a duty. Therefore, by parity of\nreason, there could be no objection, on the account of consanguinity,\nfor the husband of a deceased wife to marry her sister.\n\nIt is clear then that the person whom this clause of the law forbids to\nmarry, is some person other than a deceased wife\u2019s sister.\n\nWe propose for consideration, as nearly literal as may be, to express\nthe idea conveyed\u2014_Thou shalt not take one wife to another, to be\nenemies, or to be exiles, the shame of thy bed-chamber through life_.\n\nThe doctrine it inculcates is, if a man has two wives, he must either\nlive in the midst of their rivalry and enmity, or exile one or both;\neither of which is disgrace. The reading may be varied; but let the\nHebrew scholar compare the first three words of the original with\n_Exod._ xxvi. 3, where they twice occur, and also with the 6th and 17th\nverses of the same chapter, in each of which they are also found. Let\nhim notice that, in the passage before us, in the word translated\n_sister_, the _vav_, under _holem_, is omitted; whereas such is not the\ncase in the preceding instances, where the word is correctly translated\nto express a term of consanguinity; and we think he will abandon the\nidea that \u05d0\u05b2\u05d7\u05b9\u05ea\u05b8\u05d4\u05bc _ahotha_, in the passage before us, means _sister_;\nand if not, the sentence stands a clear, indisputable, and general\ncondemnation of polygamy.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nCan Dr. Channing\u2019s disciples point out to us a law _allowing_ polygamy\nin as direct terms as the following would have done, substituting the\nword _wives_ for _slaves_?\n\n\u201cThy _wives_ which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are\nround about you: of them shall ye buy _wives_.\u201d \u201cMoreover, of the\nchildren of the strangers that sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy\n_wives_\u201d\u2014\u201cand of their families that are with you, which they beget in\nyour land, and they shall be your _wives_.\u201d \u201cAnd ye shall take them as\n_wives_ for your children after you, and they shall have them for\n_wives_\u201d\u2014\u201cthey shall be your _wives_ for ever.\u201d Compare _Lev._ xxv. 44,\n46.\n\nUntil they can do so, until they shall do so, we shall urge their not\ndoing it as one reason why the Scripture \u201ccannot be used to stock our\nhouses with _wives_ as well as with slaves.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON X.\n\nDr. Channing says, page 101, vol. ii.\u2014\n\n\u201cSlavery, at the age of the apostle, had so penetrated society, was so\nintimately interwoven with it, and the materials of servile war were so\nabundant, that a religion, preaching freedom to the slave, would have\nshaken the social fabric to its foundation, and would have armed against\nitself the whole power of the state. Paul did not then assail the\ninstitution. He satisfied himself with spreading principles which,\nhowever slowly, could not but work its destruction. * * * And how, in\nhis circumstances, he could have done more for the subversion of\nslavery, I do not see.\u201d\n\nMay we request the disciples of Dr. Channing to read the chapter on\n\u201cSlavery,\u201d in Paley\u2019s Moral and Political Philosophy, and decide whether\nthe above is borrowed in substance therefrom. And we beg further to\ninquire, whether it does not place Paul, considering \u201chis\ncircumstances,\u201d in an odious position? What, Paul satisfying himself to\nnot do his duty! What, Paul shrink from assailing an institution because\ndeeply rooted in power and sin! What, Paul, the apostle of God, fearing,\nhesitating, failing to denounce a great sin, because it was penetrating\nthrough and intimately interwoven with society!\n\nWhy did he not manifest the same consideration in behalf of other great\nsins? Would it not be an easier and more rational way to account for his\nnot assailing slavery, by supposing him to have known that it was the\nprovidence of God, in mercy, presenting some protection to those too\ndegraded and low to protect themselves? If such supposition describes\nthe true character of the institution of slavery, then the conduct of\nPaul in regard to it would have been just what it was. Paul lived all\nhis life in the midst of slavery; as a man among men, he had a much\nbetter opportunity to know what was truth in the case than Dr. Channing.\nBut as an apostle, Paul was taught of God. Will the disciples of Dr.\nChanning transfer these considerations from St. Paul to the Almighty,\nand say that he was afraid to announce his truth, his law, then to the\nworld, lest it should stir up a little war in the Roman Empire? In what\nposition does Dr. Channing place Him, who came to reveal truth, holding\ndeath and judgment in his hand!\n\n\u201cNow they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are\nof thee: For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and\nthey have received them.\u201d _John_ xvii. 7, 8.\n\n\u201cI take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all\n_men_, for I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of\nGod.\u201d _Acts_ xx. 26, 27.\n\n\u201cGod forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar.\u201d _Rom._ iii. 4.\n\nBut we propose to the disciples of Dr. Channing an inquiry: If he could\nnot see how St. Paul in his circumstances could have done more for the\nsubversion of slavery, why did he not take St. Paul for his example, and\nsuffer the matter to rest where St. Paul left it? For he says, vol. iii.\npage 152\u2014\u201cIt becomes the preacher to remember that there is a silent,\nindirect influence, more sure and powerful than direct assaults on false\nopinions.\u201d Or was he less careless than St. Paul about stirring up a\nservile war, and of shaking our social fabric to its foundation? Or did\nthe doctor\u2019s _circumstances_ place him on higher ground than St. Paul?\nHad \u201cthis age of the world\u201d presented him with new light on the true\ninterpretation of the Scriptures? Had the afflatus of the Holy Spirit\ncommissioned him to supersede Paul as an apostle? Are we to expect,\nthrough him, a new and improved edition of the gospel? And is this the\nreason why an argument drawn from the Old Edition now \u201chardly deserves\nnotice?\u201d\n\nDr. Channing says, vol. ii. p. 104\u2014\u201cThe very name of the Christian\nreligion would have been forgotten amidst the agitations of universal\nbloodshed.\u201d Is then the Christian religion a fabrication of men? Was\nChrist himself an impostor? And could Dr. Channing loan himself to such\na consideration?\n\n\u201cUpon this rock I will build my church: and the gates of hell shall not\nprevail against it.\u201d _Matt._ xvi. 18.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XI.\n\nThe sixth position in the treatise under consideration is, \u201cI shall\noffer some remarks on the means of removing it.\u201d His plan is, page\n108\u2014\u201cIn the first place, the great principle that man cannot rightfully\nbe held as property, should be admitted by the slaveholder.\u201d\n\nDr. Channing seems to suppose that his previous arguments are sufficient\nto produce the proposed admission.\n\nPage 109. \u201cIt would be cruelty to strike the fetters from a man, whose\nfirst steps would infallibly lead him to a precipice. The slave should\nnot have an owner, but he should have a guardian.\u201d\n\nWe take this as an admission that the slave is not a fit subject for\nfreedom. But he says\u2014\n\nPage 110. \u201cBut there is but one weighty argument against immediate\nemancipation; namely, that the slave would not support himself and his\nchildren by honest industry.\u201d\n\nDr. Channing\u2019s plan in short is, that the names, master and slave, shall\nbe exchanged for guardian and ward; but he awards no compensation to the\nguardian;\u2014that the negro shall be told he is free; yet he should be\ncompelled to work for his own and his family\u2019s support;\u2014that none should\nbe whipped who will toil \u201cfrom rational and honourable motives.\u201d\n\nPage 112. \u201cIn case of being injured by his master in this or in any\nrespect, he should be either set free, or, if unprepared for liberty,\nshould be transmitted to another guardian.\u201d\n\nDr. Channing proposes \u201cbounties,\u201d \u201crewards,\u201d \u201cnew privileges,\u201d\n\u201cincreased indulgences,\u201d \u201cprizes for good conduct,\u201d &c., as substitutes\nfor the _lash_. He supposes that the slave may be \u201celevated and his\nenergies called forth by placing his domestic relations on new ground.\u201d\n\u201cThis is essential; we wish him to labour for his family. Then he must\nhave a family to labour for. Then his wife and children must be truly\nhis own. Then his home must be inviolate. Then the responsibilities of a\nhusband and father must be laid on him. It is argued that he will be fit\nfor freedom as soon as the support of his family shall become his habit\nand his happiness.\u201d\n\nPage 114. \u201cTo carry this and other means of improvement into effect, it\nis essential that the slave should no longer be bought and sold.\u201d\n\nPage 115. \u201cLegislatures should meet to free the slave. The church should\nrest not, day nor night, till this stain be wiped away.\u201d\n\nWe do not choose to make any remark on his plan of emancipation; we\nshall merely quote one passage from page 106:\n\n\u201cHow slavery shall be removed is a question for the slaveholder, and one\nwhich he alone can answer fully. He alone has an intimate knowledge of\nthe character and habits of the slaves.\u201d\n\nIn this we fully concur; and we now ask our readers, what does Dr.\nChanning\u2019s confession of this fact suggest to their minds?\n\nDr. Channing\u2019s seventh proposition is, \u201cTo offer some remarks on\nabolitionism.\u201d The considerations of this chapter are evidently\naddressed to the abolitionists, with which we have no wish to interfere.\nThere are, however, in it, some fine sentiments expressed in his usual\neloquent style.\n\nThe eighth and concluding subject is, \u201cA few reflections on the duties\nof the times.\u201d These reflections, we are exceedingly sorry to find\nhighly inflammatory; they are addressed alone to the Free States. We\nshall present a few specimens. They need no comment: there are those to\nwhom pity is more applicable than reproof.\n\nPage 138. \u201cA few words remain to be spoken in relation to the duties of\nthe Free States. These need to feel the responsibilities and dangers of\ntheir present position. The country is approaching a crisis on the\ngreatest question which can be proposed to it; a question, not of profit\nor loss, of tariffs or banks, or any temporary interests; but a question\ninvolving the first principles of freedom, morals, and religion.\u201d\n\nPage 139. \u201cThere are, however, other duties of the Free States, to which\nthey may prove false, and which they are too willing to forget. They are\nbound, not in their public, but in their individual capacities, to use\nevery virtuous influence for the abolition of slavery.\u201d\n\nPage 140. \u201cAt this moment an immense pressure is driving the North from\nits true ground. God save it from imbecility, from treachery to freedom\nand virtue! I have certainly no feelings but those of good-will towards\nthe South; but I speak the universal sentiments of this part of the\ncountry, when I say that the tone which the South has often assumed\ntowards the North has been that of a superior, a tone unconsciously\nborrowed from the habit of command to which it is unhappily accustomed\nby the form of its society. I must add, that this high bearing of the\nSouth has not always been met by a just consciousness of equality, a\njust self-respect at the North. * * * Here lies the danger. _The North\nwill undoubtedly be just to the South._ It must also be just to itself.\nThis is not the time for sycophancy, for servility, for compromise of\nprinciple, for forgetfulness of our rights. It is the time to manifest\nthe spirit of MEN, a spirit which prizes, more than life, the principles\nof liberty, of justice, of humanity, of pure morals, of pure religion.\u201d\n\nPage 142. \u201cLet us show that we have principles, compared with which the\nwealth of the world is as light as air. * * * The Free States, it is to\nbe feared, must pass through a struggle. May they sustain it as becomes\ntheir freedom! The present excitement at the South can hardly be\nexpected to pass away without attempts to wrest from them unworthy\nconcessions. The tone in regard to slavery in that part of the country\nis changed. It is not only more vehement, but more false than formerly:\nonce slavery was acknowledged as an evil; now, it is proclaimed to be a\ngood.\u201d\n\nPage 143. \u201cCertainly, no assertion of the wildest abolitionist could\ngive such a shock to the slaveholder, as this new doctrine is fitted to\ngive to the people of the North. * * * There is a great dread in this\npart of the country that the Union of the States may be dissolved by\nconflict about slavery. * * * No one prizes the Union more than myself.\u201d\n\nPage 144. \u201cStill, if the Union can be purchased only by the imposition\nof chains on the tongue and the press, by prohibition of discussion on\nthe subject involving the most sacred rights and dearest interests of\nhumanity, then union would be bought at too dear a price.\u201d\n\nIn his concluding note, he says, page 153\u2014\u201cI feel too much about the\ngreat subject on which I have written, to be very solicitous about what\nis said of myself. I feel that I am nothing, that my reputation is\nnothing, in comparison with the fearful wrong and evil which I have\nlaboured to expose; and I should count myself unworthy the name of a man\nor a Christian, if the calumnies of the bad, or even the disapprobation\nof the good, could fasten my thoughts on myself, and turn me aside from\na cause which, as I believe, truth, humanity, and God call me to\nsustain.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XII.\n\nThe abolition writers and speakers are properly divided into two\nclasses: those who agitate and advocate the subject as a successful\nmeans of advancing their own personal and ambitious hopes; sometimes\nwith\n\n             \u201cOne eye turned to God, condemning moral evil;\n             The other downward, winking at the devil!\u201d\n\nThus, one seeks office, another distinction or fame. Small\nconsiderations often stimulate the conduct of such men.\n\nBut we have evidence that another class zealously labour to abolish\nslavery from the world, because they think its existence a stain on the\nhuman character, and that the laws of God make it the duty of every man\nto \u201ccry aloud and spare not,\u201d until it shall cease.\n\nOur author had no secondary views alluring him on to toil; no new\npurpose; no new summit to gain. What he thought darkness he hated,\nbecause he loved the light; what he thought wicked, to his soul was\nawful and abhorred, because, even in life, he was ever peering into the\nconfines of heaven. Ardour was cultivated into zeal, and zeal into\nenthusiasm.\n\nIn its eagerness to accomplish its object in behalf of liberty, the mind\nis often prepared to subvert without reflection\u2014to destroy without care.\nHence, even the religious may sometimes \u201crecord that they have a zeal of\nGod, but not according to knowledge.\u201d \u201cFor they being ignorant of God\u2019s\nrighteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness,\nhave not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.\u201d _Rom._ x.\n\nThey are convinced that they alone are right. But, \u201cCan a man be\nprofitable unto God, as he that is wise may be profitable unto himself?\n_Is it_ any pleasure to the Almighty, that thou art righteous? or _is\nit_ gain, that thou makest thy ways perfect.\u201d _Job_ xxii. 2, 3.\n\n\u201cKnowest thou the ordinances of heaven? Canst thou set the dominion\nthereof in the earth?\u201d Answer thou, Why \u201cleaveth the ostrich her eggs in\nthe earth, and warmeth them in the dust? Why forgetteth she that the\nfoot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them?\u201d\n\n\u201cWhy is she hardened against her young ones, as though they were not\nhers?\u201d \u201cWhy is her labour in vain without fear?\u201d\n\n\u201cWhy feedeth the fish upon its fellow, which forgetteth and devoureth\nits young?\u201d\n\n\u201cWho looketh on the proud and bringeth him low? and treadeth down the\nwicked in their place? hiding them in the dust, and binding their faces\nin secret?\u201d\n\nWho hardeneth the heart of Pharaoh? and multiplies signs and wonders\nbefore the children of men? Who is he who \u201chath mercy on whom he will?\u201d\nWhy was Esau hated or Jacob loved before they were born?\n\nWilt thou say, \u201cWhy doth he find fault? for who hath resisted his will.\u201d\nSee _Rom._ ix. 19.\n\nOr wilt thou rather say, \u201cBehold I am vile; what shall I answer thee? I\nwill lay my hand upon my mouth. Once have I spoken; but I will not\nanswer thee: yea, twice; but I will proceed no further.\u201d _Job_ xl. 4.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThere are in these volumes several other essays, under different titles,\non the same subject; but in most instances, although the language is\nvaried, the same arguments exert their power on the mind of the writer.\nAided by the common sympathy of the people among whom he lived, and the\nconscientious operations of his own mind, his judgment on the decision\nof the question of right and wrong became unchangeably fixed; while the\nevidence forced upon him by the only class of facts in relation to the\nsubject which his education and associations in society enabled him to\ncomprehend, became daily more imposing, more exciting in their review,\nmore lucid in their exposing an image of deformity, the most wicked of\nthe offspring of evil. Filled with horror, yet as if allured by an evil\ncharm, his mind seems to have had no power to banish from its sight its\nhorrid vision. Nor is it singular that it should, to some extent, become\nthe _one idea_\u2014his leading chain of thought. To him, the proofs of his\ndoctrine became a blaze of light, so piercingly brilliant that nothing\nof a contrary bearing was worthy of belief or consideration.\n\nThe following extracts will perhaps sufficiently develop the state to\nwhich his mind had arrived on this subject of his study. Vol. vi. p. 38,\nhe says\u2014\u201cMy maxim is, Any thing but slavery!\u201d\n\nPage 50. \u201cThe history of West India emancipation teaches us that we are\nholding in bondage one of the best races of the human family. The negro\nis among the mildest and gentlest of men. He is singularly susceptible\nof improvement from abroad. His children, it is said, receive more\nrapidly than ours the elements of knowledge.\u201d\n\nPage 51. \u201cA short residence among the negroes in the West Indies\nimpressed me with their capacity for improvement; on all sides, I heard\nof their religious tendencies, the noblest of human nature. I saw, too,\non the plantation where I resided, a gracefulness and dignity of form\nand motion rare in my own native New England. And that is the race which\nhas been selected to be trodden down and confounded with the brute.\u201d\n\nIf slavery in the West Indies has thus elevated the African tribes above\nthe majority of the people of New England, we will not ask the question,\nwhether the doctor\u2019s disciples propose the experiment on their\ncountrymen. But there is, nevertheless, abundant proof that slavery to\nthe white races does necessarily, and from philosophical causes, have\nthe most direct tendency to elevate the moral, mental, and physical\nability of the African; in fact, of any other race of men sunk equally\nlow in degradation and ruin.\n\nIf the negro slaves of the West Indies exhibit moral, mental, and\nphysical merit in advance of most of Dr. Channing\u2019s countrymen, who were\nnever in slavery, we beg to know how it is accounted for; what are the\ncauses that have operated to produce it? For we believe no sane man, who\nknows any thing of the African savage in his native state, whether bond\nor free, will so much as give a hint that they are as elevated in any\nrespect as are _his_ countrymen, the people of New England. Will the\nfact then be acknowledged, that slavery, however bad, does yet\nconstitutionally amend and elevate the African savage!\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nAt the moment the foregoing paragraphs were placed on paper, there\nhappened to be present a Northern gentleman, who very justly entertained\nthe most elevated regard for the personal character of Dr. Channing, to\nwhom they were read. His views seemed to be that the extracts from\nChanning were _garbled_, and the deductions consequent thereon unjustly\nsevere.\n\nWe war not with Dr. Channing, nor his character. He no longer liveth.\nBut his works live, and new editions crowd upon the public attention, as\nif his disciples were anxious to saturate the whole world with his\nerrors, as well as to make known his many virtues. We do not design to\ngarble; and therefore requote the extract more fully, from vol. vi. pp.\n50, 51:\n\n\u201cThe history of the West India emancipation teaches us that we are\nholding in bondage one of the best races of the human family. The negro\nis among the mildest, gentlest of men. He is singularly susceptible of\nimprovement from abroad. His children, it is said, receive more rapidly\nthan ours the elements of knowledge. How far he can originate\nimprovements, time only can teach. His nature is affectionate, easily\ntouched; and hence he is more open to religious impression than the\nwhite man. The European race have manifested more courage, enterprise,\ninvention; but in the dispositions which Christianity particularly\nhonours, how inferior are they to the African! When I cast my eyes over\nour Southern region, the land of bowie-knives, Lynch-law, and duels, of\n\u2018chivalry, honour,\u2019 and revenge; and when I consider that Christianity\nis declared to be a spirit of charity, \u2018which seeketh not its own, is\nnot easily provoked, thinketh no evil, and endureth all things,\u2019 and is\ndeclared to be \u2018the wisdom from above, which is first pure, then\npeaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good\nfruits,\u2019\u2014can I hesitate in deciding to which of the races in that land\nChristianity is most adapted, in which its noblest disciples are most\nlikely to be reared.\u201d\n\nPp. 52, 53. \u201cCould the withering influence of slavery be withdrawn, the\nSouthern character, though less consistent, less based on principle,\nmight be more attractive and lofty than that of the North. The South is\nproud of calling itself Anglo-Saxon. Judging from character, I should\nsay that this name belongs much more to the North, the country of\nsteady, persevering, unconquerable energy. Our Southern brethren remind\nme more of the Normans. They seem to have in their veins the burning\nblood of that pirate race.\u201d\n\n\u201cWho is he that hideth counsel without knowledge? Therefore have I\nuttered that I understood not; things too wonderful for me, which I knew\nnot.\u201d _Job_ xlii. 3.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nWill the disciples of Dr. Channing account for the curious facts\ndeveloped by the census of 1850, as follows?\u2014\n\n\u201cA writer in the New York Observer calls attention to some curious facts\nderived from the census of the United States. These facts show that\nthere is a remarkable prevalence of idiocy and insanity among the free\nblacks over the whites, and especially over the slaves. In the State of\nMaine, every fourteenth coloured person is an idiot or a lunatic. And\nthough there is a gradual improvement in the condition of the coloured\nrace as we proceed West and South, yet it is evident that the Free\nStates are the principal abodes of idiocy and lunacy among them.\n\n\u201cIn Ohio, there are just ten coloured persons, who are idiots or\nlunatics, where there is one in Kentucky. And in Louisiana, where a\nlarge majority of the population is coloured, and four-fifths of them\nare slaves, there is but one of these unfortunates to 4309 who are sane.\nThe proportions in other States, according to the census of 1850, are as\nfollow:\u2014In Massachusetts, 1 in 43; Connecticut, 1 in 185; New York, 1 in\n257; Pennsylvania, 1 in 256; Maryland, 1 in 1074; Virginia, 1 in 1309;\nNorth Carolina, 1 in 1215; South Carolina, 1 in 2440; Ohio, 1 in 105;\nKentucky, 1 in 1053. This is certainly a curious calculation, and\nindicates that diseases of the brain are far more rare among the slaves\nthan among the free _of the coloured race_.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIII.\n\nSympathy probably operates more or less in the mind of each individual\nof the human family. Traces of it are discovered even in some of the\nbrute creation; but yet we are far from saying that it is merely an\nanimal feeling. But we do say that sympathy often gives a direction to\nour chains of thought; and that, in some minds, such direction is\nscarcely to be changed by any subsequent reflection, or even evidence.\nSome minds seem incapable of appreciating any evidence which does not\nmake more open whatever way sympathy may lead; consequently a full\nhistory of its exercise would prove that it has been frequently expended\non mistaken facts, imaginary conditions, or fictitious suffering. In\nsuch cases, it may produce much evil, and real suffering. It therefore\nmay be of some importance to the sympathizer and to community, that this\nfeeling be under the government of a correct judgment founded on truth.\n\nAmong the rude tribes of men, and in the early ages of the world, its\naction seems to have taken the place of what, in a higher civilization\nand cultivation of the mind, should be the result of moral principle\nfounded on truth.\n\nBut even now, if we look abroad upon the families of men, even to the\nmost intellectual, shall we not find the greater number rather under the\ngovernment of the former than the latter? One inference surely is, that\nman, as yet, has not, by far, arrived at the fullest extent of\nintellectual improvement.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nBut suppose we say that God punishes sin; or, by the laws of God, sin\nbrings upon itself punishment;\u2014we propose the question, how far, under\nour relation to our Creator, is it consistent in us to sympathize with\nsuch punishment? It may be answered, we are instructed to \u201cremember\u201d to\nsympathize with those who are under persecution for their faith in\nChrist; so also, impliedly, with our brethren, neighbours, or those who\nhave done us or our ancestors favours, or those who have given or can\ngive some proof of goodness, when such have fallen, or shall fall into\nbondage; and, perhaps, with any one giving proof of such amendment as\nmay merit a higher condition. But in all these cases, does not the\ninjunction, \u201cremember,\u201d look to an action resulting from principle,\nemanating from truth, or the conformity of the person or thing to be\n\u201cremembered\u201d with the law of God?\n\nIn the holy books, the word nearest to a synonyme of our word\n_sympathy_, will be found in _Deut._ vii. 16: \u201cThou shalt consume all\nthe people which the Lord thy God shall deliver thee; thine eye shall\nhave no _pity_ \u05ea\u05b8\u05a5\u05d7\u05d5\u05b9\u05e1 _thehhos_) upon them,\u201d (_no sympathy for._)\n\nSo, xix. 13: \u201cThine eye shall not _pity_ (\u05ea\u05b8\u05d7\u05a4\u05d5\u05b9\u05e1 _thahhos_) him.\u201d So\nxiii. 8 (the 9th of the Hebrew text): \u201cNeither shall thine eye _pity_\nhim,\u201d (\u05ea\u05b8\u05d7\u05a4\u05d5\u05b9\u05e1 _thahhos_.)\n\nThis word, when used in relation to punishment, is usually associated\nwith the word implying the \u201ceye,\u201d as if the feeling expressed thereby\npartook more of an animal than a moral sensation. In _Gen._ xlv. 20, our\ntranslators finding our idea of sympathy inapplicable to inanimate\nobjects, expressed it by the word \u201c_regard_,\u201d meaning _care_, or\n_concern_. Now, since the command forbids this gush of feeling (whether\nmerely animal or not) in the cases cited, is it not evident that the\nfeeling inculcated as proper must be the produce of moral principle,\ncultivated and sustained by a truthful perception of the laws of God?\n\nThe feeling of sympathy, commiseration, or mercy, is inculcated in the\nlatter clause of _Lev._ xlvi. 26. The circumstances were these:\u2014The\ndescendants of Ham occupied the whole of Palestine, and the most of the\nadjoining districts. Those of Palestine had become so sunken in\nidolatry, and the most grievous practices, counteracting any improvement\nof their race, that God, in his providence, gave them up to be\nextirpated from the earth, and forbid the Israelites to have any \u201cpity,\u201d\nany sympathy for them; but to slay them without hesitation. While those\nof the adjacent tribes, who had, since the days of Noah, been denounced\nas fit subjects of slavery, on the account of their degradation, brought\nupon them by similar causes, were again specified to Moses as those whom\nthey were at liberty in peace to purchase, or in war to reduce to\nperpetual bondage.\n\nBut such is the deteriorating effect of sin, even individuals of the\nIsraelites themselves were often falling into that condition. But God\nmade a distinction between the condition of these heathen, and the\nIsraelites that might thus fall into slavery. The slavery of the heathen\nwas perpetual, while that of these improvident Jews was limited to six\nyears, unless such slave preferred to continue in his state of slavery;\nhis kin at all times having the right to redeem him, which right of\nredemption was also extended to the Jewish slave himself. But no such\nright was ever extended to the heathen slave, or him of heathen\nextraction. Under this state of facts, the Jewish master is forbidden to\nuse \u201crigour\u201d towards his Jewish slave: \u201cBut over your brethren the\nchildren of Israel, ye shall not rule over one another with rigour.\u201d\nThis evidently inculcates a feeling of commiseration for such of their\ncountrymen as may have fallen into slavery; and in conformity with such\nprecepts, all nations, at all times, who were advanced in civilization,\nseem to have ever felt disposed to extend relief when practical. Hence\nAbraham extended relief to the family of Lot: hence the prophet Obed\nsucceeded to deliver from slavery two hundred thousand of the children\nof Judah from the hand of the king of Israel, during the days of Ahaz.\nBut in no instance have such acts of mercy been manifested by a people\nsunk as low in degradation as the African races.\n\nFor several centuries, Britain supplied slaves for other parts of the\nworld; but, during the time she did so, she took no steps for the\nredemption of any; and such has invariably been the case at all times of\nthe world. All races of men, sunk in the lowest depths of degradation,\nhave never failed to be in slavery to one another, and to supply other\nnations with their own countrymen for slaves; and, perhaps, this may be\nadduced as an evidence of their having descended to that degree of\ndegradation that makes slavery a mercy to them. Sympathy for them could\ndo them no good; because a relief from slavery could not elevate\nthem,\u2014could do them no good, but an injury. Hence such sympathy is\nforbidden.\n\nThe degradation of the children of Jacob became almost extreme; yet they\nwent not into slavery until it was accompanied by a fact of like nature.\nWho shall say that slavery and the slave-trade in Britain was not one of\nthe steps, under Divine providence, whereby God brought about the\nelevated condition of the race of man there? Who will say that the\nslavery of the Israelites in Egypt was not to them a mercy, and did not\nbring to them an ameliorated, an elevated condition, necessary to them\nbefore the Divine law could fulfil its promise to Abraham? But this was\na mere temporary slavery; whereas the slavery pronounced on the races of\nHam was through all time, perpetual. During the dark ages of the world,\nthe races of men generally became deteriorated to an extraordinary\nextent. If our doctrine be true, slavery was a necessary consequence,\nand continued, until by its amendatory influence on the enslaved, in\naccordance with the law of God, they became elevated above the level of\nits useful operation.\n\nBut, during these periods, the slave in Africa, little sought after by\nother races, became of small value to the African master, and was the\nprey, frequently an article of food, even to the slaves themselves, as\nwell as to his own master; and this state of facts existed until the\nother races of man had mostly emerged from slavery; when the African\nslave became an article of commerce, and cannibalism, in consequence,\nbecame almost forgotten. Was this no blessing? Was this not a mercy\u2014an\nimproved condition?\n\nBut, as if God really intended, contrary to the apparent wishes of some\nmen, to fulfil his word, and establish their condition of never-ending\nbondage, he has suffered the slave-trade with Africa to be abolished\namong the Christian nations. The great surplus of slaves in Africa has\nrendered them of little value there; and these anthropophagi have again\nreturned to their ancient habits, giving proof that their condition of\nslavery, so far as mortal eye can see, is now for ever past hope. The\ntheological philosopher did once hope that the only commerce which could\nbring them generally in contact with Christian nations would have a\npermanent influence on the character of these people. But God, in his\nprovidence, has seen proper to order it otherwise. The slave-trade that\nhas been carried on between them and Western Asia, for more than four\nthousand years, now the only external influence on them as a people, may\ndoubtless extend the standard of Islam, and spread some few corruptions\nof its religious systems. But neither the religion nor the trade carries\nto the home of these savages a sufficiency of interest to excite new\npassions or stimulate into existence new habits or chains of thought.\n\n\u201cThe rod and reproof give wisdom.\u201d\n\n\u201cA _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _abed, a slave_) will not be corrected by words; for\nthough he understand, he will not answer.\u201d _Prov._ xxix. 15, 19.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn close, may we inquire what benefit has resulted to the slave in the\nSouth,\u2014what benefit to poor, bleeding Africa, from the sympathy of the\nworld on the subject of their slavery? What, none! If none\u2014has it done\nthem no evil? And will ye continue to do evil? In your weakness, will ye\nthink to contend against God?\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIV.\n\nThe abolitionist will probably consent to the truth of the proposition\nthat God governs the universe. It may be that they will also agree that\nhe is abundantly able to do so. But, whatever may be their decision, it\nis one of the revealed laws of God, that\u2014\n\n\u201cThou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness _of any\nthing_ that _is_ in heaven above, or that _is_ in the earth beneath, or\nthat _is_ in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow thyself to\nthem, nor serve them; for I, the Lord thy God, _am_, a jealous God,\nvisiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third\nand fourth _generation_ of them that hate me.\u201d\n\nIt is not to be supposed that man can comprehend God as it may be said\nhe comprehends things within the compass of his own understanding. If\nso, there would have been no need of revelation. Revelation has given us\nall the knowledge of God necessary to our welfare and happiness. We have\nnot yet learned that man has become able to go beyond revelation in his\nknowledge of God.\n\nBut suppose some one should take it into his fancy to say and believe\nthat the Sabbath was not a Divine institution, or that \u201cThou shalt not\nkill,\u201d \u201cThou shalt not commit adultery,\u201d \u201cThou shalt not steal,\u201d were\nmere human contrivances, and contrary to the will and laws of their God;\nnow, if the God who has revealed these laws to us is the genuine God,\nwould not the god who should teach these forbidden acts to be lawful be\na different god? And although he would exist only in the imagination of\nthose who believed in such a being, yet would it be any the less\nidolatry to worship him than it would be if a block were set up to\nrepresent him? Is it any sufficient excuse, because such worshipper acts\nfrom ignorance, or under the influence of a sincere _conscience_? Is it\nto be presumed that those who sacrificed their children, and even\nthemselves, to a false god, were not sincere? Did not Paul act with a\nsincere _conscience_ when he persecuted the Christians?\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nBut can we suppose that the real Jehovah would, in a revelation to man\nof his will, his law, recognise a thing as property among men, when, at\nthe same time, it was contrary to his will and his law that such thing\nshould be property among men?\n\n\u201cNeither shalt thou desire thy neighbour\u2019s wife; neither shalt thou\ncovet thy neighbour\u2019s house, his field, or his _man-servant_\n(\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u0591\u05d3\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u059c _his male slave_), or his maid-servant (\u05d5\u05b2\u05d0\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05ea\u05d5\u05b9\u0599 _his\nfemale slave_), his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy\nneighbour\u2019s.\u201d _Deut._ v. 21, the 18th of the Hebrew text.\n\nWould it not have been just as easy for God to have said, if such was\nhis will, \u201c_Thou shalt not have slaves_,\u201d as to have said this, as\nfollows? \u201cAnd also of the heathen shall ye buy slaves, and your children\nshall inherit them after you, and they shall be your slaves for ever!\u201d\n\nBut Dr. Channing, speaking of the various exertions now making in behalf\nof the abolition of slavery, gives us to understand that the Christian\nphilanthropy and the enlightened goodness, (and, he means, sympathy\nalone,) now pouring forth in prayers and persuasions from the press, the\npulpit, from the lips and hearts of devoted men, cannot fail. \u201cThis,\u201d he\nsays, \u201cmust triumph.\u201d \u201cIt is leagued with God\u2019s omnipotence.\u201d \u201cIt is God\nhimself acting in the hearts of his children.\u201d Vol. ii. p. 12. Does Dr.\nChanning mean the God who revealed the law to Moses? If so, has he\nchanged his mind since that time?\n\nWe know that some say that slavery is contrary to their moral sense,\ncontrary to their conscience, that under no circumstances can it be\nright. But if God has ordained the institution of slavery, not only as a\npunishment of sin, but as a restraint of some effect against a lower\ndegradation, had not such men better cultivate and improve their \u201cmoral\nsense\u201d and \u201cconscience\u201d into a conformity with the law of God on this\nsubject? They cannot think that, on the account of their much talking,\nGod will change his government to suit their own peculiar views. In our\njudgment, their views must bring great darkness to the mind, and, we\nthink, distress; for is it not a great distress itself, to be under the\ngovernment of one we think unjust? We know not but that we owe them, as\nfellow travellers through this momentary existence, the duty of trying\nto remove from their minds the cause of such darkness and distress.\nShall we counsel together? Will you, indeed, stop for a moment in\ncompany with a brother? Will you hear the Bible? Will you, through a\nchild, listen to the voice of God?\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nAll agree that slavery has existed in the world from a very remote age.\nWicked men and wicked nations have passed away, but slavery still exists\namong their descendants. Good men and enlightened nations have gone the\nway of all that is and has been, but slavery still abides on the earth.\nUpon the introduction of Christianity, men, who little understood its\nspirit, suddenly rose up to abolish slavery in cases where the slave\nbecame converted to its faith; also to cut loose the believing child\nfrom all obligations of obedience to the unbelieving parent, and also\nthe husband or wife from his or her unbelieving spouse. Yet this new\ndoctrine only met the condemnation of Peter and Paul. And even at the\npresent day, we find men ready to give up the religion of Christ, and\nthe gospel itself, rather than their own notions concerning slavery.\n\n\u201cIf the religion of Christ allows such a licence\u201d (to hold slaves) \u201cfrom\nsuch precepts as these, the New Testament would be the greatest curse\nthat was ever inflicted on our race.\u201d _Barnes on Slavery_, p. 310. (He\nquotes the passage from Dr. Wayland\u2019s Letters, pp. 83, 84, which work we\nhave not seen.)\n\nSuch writers may be _conscientious_, but their writings have only bound\nthe slave in stronger chains. God makes his very enemies build up his\nthrone. Thus the exertions of man are ever feeble when in contradiction\nto the providence of God. The great adversary has ever been at work to\ndethrone the Almighty from the minds of men. Abolition doctrines are no\nnew thing in the world. We concede them the age of slavery itself, which\nwe shall doubtless find as old as sin.\n\nStay thy haste, then, thou who feelest able to teach wisdom to thy\nCreator: come, listen to the voice of a child; the lessons of a worm;\nfor God is surely able to vindicate his ways before thee!\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nWhen Adam was driven out of paradise, he was told\u2014\n\n\u201cCursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all\nthe days of thy life.\u201d \u201cThorns and thistles shall it bring forth to\nthee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of thy face\nshalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground.\u201d\n\nThe expression, \u201cThou shalt eat the _herb_ of the field,\u201d we think has a\nvery peculiar significance; for God made \u201cevery _herb_ of the field\nbefore it grew;\u201d and one of the reasons assigned why the \u201cherb was made\nbefore it grew,\u201d we find to be, that \u201cthere was not a man to till the\nground.\u201d Now, the word _to till_ is translated from the word \u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05bd\u05d3\n_la ebod_, and means _to slave_; but in English we use the term not so\ndirectly. We use more words to express the same idea; we say _to do\nslave-labour on the ground_, instead of _to slave the ground_, as the\nexpression stands in Hebrew.\n\nThe doctrine is, that the herb, on which the fallen sinner is destined\nto subsist, was not of spontaneous growth; it could only be produced by\nsweat and toil, even unto sorrow. Sin had made man a slave to his own\nnecessities; he had _to slave the ground_ for his subsistence; and such\nwas the view of David, who, after describing how the brute creation is\nspontaneously provided for, says\u2014\n\n\u201cHe causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and _herb_ for the service\n(\u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u05b7\u05a3\u05ea _la ebodath, the slavery_) of man: that he may bring forth\nfood out of the earth.\u201d _Ps._ civ. 14.\n\nThis state of being compelled to labour with sweat and toil for\nsubsistence, is the degree of slavery to which sin reduced the whole\nhuman family. If we mistake not, the holy books include the idea that\nsin affects the character of man as a moral poison, producing\naberrations of mind in the constant direction of greater sins and an\nincreased departure from a desire to be in obedience to the laws of God.\nIf we mistake not, the doctrine also is prominent that idleness is not\nonly a sin itself, but exceedingly prolific of still greater sins. This\nmild state of slavery, thus imposed on Adam, was a constant restraint\nagainst a lower descent into sin, and can be regarded in no other light\nthan a merciful provision of God in protection of his child, the\ncreation of his hand. If it then be a fact that a given intensity of sin\ndraws upon itself a corresponding condition of slavery, as an operating\nprotection against the final effect of transgression, it will follow\nthat an increased intensity of sin will demand an increased severity of\nthe condition of slavery. Thus, when Cain murdered Abel, God said to\nhim\u2014\n\n\u201cNow art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to\nreceive thy brother\u2019s blood from thy hand. When thou _tillest_ (\u05ea\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05d3\u0599\n_tha ebod, thou slavest_) the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto\nthee her strength: a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the\nearth.\u201d * * * \u201cAnd the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him\nshould kill him.\u201d\n\n\u201cShall not yield unto thee her strength;\u201d either the earth should be\nless fruitful, or from his own waywardness, it should be less skilfully\ncultivated by him, or that a profit from his labour should be enjoyed by\nanother; or, perhaps, from the joint operation of them all. Thus an\naggravated degree of sin is always attended by an aggravated degree of\nslavery.\n\nThe next final step we discover in the history of slavery appears in\nHam, the son of Noah; and he said, \u201cCursed be Canaan; a servant of\nservants shall he be unto his brethren.\u201d \u201c_Servant of servants_,\u201d \u05e2\u05b6\u0596\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3\n\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05dd _ebed ebadim, slave of slaves_. This mode of expression in\nHebrew is one of the modes by which they expressed the superlative\ndegree. The meaning is, the _most abject slave_ shall he be to his\nbrethren.\n\nHeretofore slavery has been of less intensity; here we find the\nordination of the master, and it is not a little remarkable that he is\ndistinctly blessed!\n\n\u201cAnd he said, I am Abraham\u2019s servant. And the Lord hath blessed my\nmaster greatly, and he is become great: and he hath given him flocks,\nand herds, and silver and gold, and _men-servants_ (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _va\nebadim, and male slaves_), and _maid-servants_ (\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u0594\u05d7\u05b9\u05ea _va\nshephahoth, and female slaves_), and camels and asses.\u201d \u201cAnd Sarah, my\nmaster\u2019s wife, bare a son to my master when she was old: and unto him\nhath he given all that he hath.\u201d\n\nAnd of Isaac it is said\u2014\n\n\u201cThen Isaac sowed in that land, and received in the same year a hundred\nfold: and the Lord blessed him, and the man waxed great, and went\nforward and grew until he became very great: for he had possessions of\nflocks, and possessions of herds, and great store of servants\n(\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05bb\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05a5\u05d4 _va ebuddah, and a large family of slaves_): _and the\nPhilistines envied him_.\u201d We pray that no one in these days will imitate\nthose wicked Philistines!\n\nAnd of Jacob it is said\u2014 \u201cAnd the man increased exceedingly, and had\nmuch cattle, and _maid-servants_ (\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05d7\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea _vu shephahoth_), _and\nfemale slaves_ and _men-servants_ (\u05d5\u05b7\u05a5\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _va ebadim, and male\nslaves_), and camels, and asses.\u201d \u201cAnd the Lord said unto Jacob, Return\nunto the land of thy fathers, and to thy kindred; and I will be with\nthee.\u201d\n\n\u201c_He that is_ despised, and hath a _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed, a slave_), is\nbetter than he that honoureth himself, and lacketh bread.\u201d _Prov._ xii.\n9.\n\n\u201cI know that whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever; nothing can be\nput to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it that men should\nfear before him. That which hath been is now; and that which is to be,\nhath already been; and God requireth that which is past.\u201d _Eccl._ iii.\n14.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XV.\n\nWe shall, in the course of these studies, with some particularity\nexamine what evidence there may be that Ham took a wife from the race of\nCain; and we propose a glance at that subject now. Theological students\ngenerally agree that, in _Genesis_ vi. 2, \u201csons of God\u201d mean those of\nthe race of Seth; and that the \u201cdaughters of men\u201d imply the females of\nthe race of Cain. The word \u201cfair,\u201d in our version, applied to these\nfemales, does not justly teach us that they were white women, or that\nthey were of a light complexion. It is translated from the Hebrew \u05d8\u05b9\u05d1\u05b9\u05ea\n_tovoth_, being in the feminine plural, from \u05d8\u05d5\u05b9\u05d1 _tov_, and merely\nexpresses the idea of what may seem _good_ and _excellent_ to him who\nspeaks or takes notice: it expresses no quality of complexion nor of\nbeauty beyond what may exist in the mind of the beholder; it is usually\ntranslated good or excellent. Immediately upon the announcement that\nthese two races thus intermarry, God declares that his spirit shall not\nalways strive with man, and determines to destroy man from the earth. Is\nit not a plain inference that such intermarriages were displeasing to\nhim? And is it not also a plain inference, these intermarriages were\nproofs that the \u201cwickedness of man had become great in the earth?\u201d Cain\nhad been driven out a degraded, deteriorated vagabond. Is there any\nproof that his race had improved?\n\nThe fact is well known that all races of animals are capable of being\nimproved or deteriorated. A commixture of a better with a worse sample\ndeteriorates the offspring of the former. Man is no exception to this\nrule. Our position is, that sin, as a moral poison, operating in one\ncontinued strain in the degradation and deterioration of the race of\nCain, had at length forced them down to become exceedingly obnoxious to\nGod. Intermarriage with them was the sure ruin of the race of Seth: it\nsubjected them at once to the curses cleaving to the race of Cain. Even\nafter the flood, witness the repugnance to intermarry with the race of\nHam often manifested by the descendants of Shem; and that the Israelites\nwere forbidden to do so.\n\nNow, for a moment, let us suppose that Ham did marry and take into the\nark a daughter of the race of Cain. If the general intermixture of the\nSethites with the Cainites had so deteriorated the Sethites, and reduced\nthem to the moral degradation of the Cainites, that God did not deem\nthem worthy of longer encumbering the earth before the flood, would it\nbe an extraordinary manifestation of his displeasure at the supposed\nmarriage of Ham with one of the cursed race of Cain, to subject the\nissue of such marriage to a degraded and perpetual bondage?\n\nBut again, in case this supposed marriage of Ham with the race of Cain\nbe true, then Ham would be the progenitor of all the race of Cain who\nshould exist after the flood; and such fact would be among the most\nprominent features of his history. It would, in such case, be in strict\nconformity with the usages of these early times for his father to have\ncalled him by a name indicative of such fact: instead of calling him\nHam, he would announce to him a term implying his relationship with the\nhouse of Cain. If such relation did not exist, why did he call him\n_Canaan_?\n\nSome suppose that this question would be answered by saying that the\nterm was applied to the youngest son of Ham; but all the sons of Ham\nwere born after the flood; yet the planting of the vineyard and the\ndrinking of the wine are the first acts of Noah which are mentioned\nafter that deluge; and further, Canaan, the son of Ham, was most\ncertainly not the individual whose ill-behaviour was simultaneous with\nand followed by the curse of slavery. Have we any proof, or any reason\nto believe, that Canaan, the son of Ham, was then even born? But in the\ncatalogue of Noah\u2019s sons, even before the planting of the vineyard is\nmentioned, Ham is called the father of Canaan, even before we are told\nthat he had any sons. Why was he then so called the father of Canaan,\nunless upon the fact that by his marriage he necessarily was to become\nthe progenitor of the race of Cain in his own then unborn descendants?\n\nUnder all the facts that have come down to us, we are not to suppose\nthat there was any Cainite blood in Noah, or in Noah\u2019s wife. Why then\ndid Ham choose to commemorate the race of Cain, by naming his fourth son\nCain, a term synonymous with Cainite, or Canaanite? And why did the race\nof Ham do the same thing through many centuries, using terms differently\nvaried, sometimes interchanging the consonant and vowel sounds, as was\ncommon in the language they used? These variations, it is true, when\ndescending into a language so remote as ours, might not be noticed, yet\nthe linguist surely will trace them all back to their root, the original\nof \u201cCain.\u201d\n\nGod never sanctions a curse without an adequate cause; a cause under the\napprobation of his law, sufficient to produce the effect the curse\nannounces. The conduct of Ham to his father proved him to possess a\ndegraded, a very debased mind; but that alone could not produce so\nvital, so interminable a change in the moral and physical condition of\nhis offspring. And where are we to look for such a cause, unless in\nmarriage? And with whom could such an intermarriage be had, except with\nthe cursed race of Cain? The ill-manners of Ham no doubt accelerated the\ntime of the announcement of the curse, but was not the sole cause. The\ncause must have previously existed; and the effect would necessarily\nhave been produced, even if it had never been announced.\n\nBut again, the condition of slavery imposed on the descendants of Ham,\nsubjected them to be bought and sold; they became objects of purchase as\nproperty, for this quality is inseparable from the condition of the most\nabject slavery. Now the very name _Cain_ signifies \u201c_one purchased_.\u201d \u201cI\nhave _gotten_ a man from the Lord.\u201d The word \u201cgotten,\u201d in the original,\nis the word his mother Eve gave her son for his name, \u201cCain.\u201d _I have\npurchased_, &c., evidently shadowing forth the fact that his race were\nto be subjects of purchase.\n\nThe history of man since the flood is accompanied with a sufficiency of\nfacts by which we are enabled to determine that the descendants of Ham\nwere black, and that the black man of Africa is of that descent.\n\n\u201cAnd the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him would kill\nhim.\u201d\n\nThe word \u201c_mark_\u201d is translated from \u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea _oth_; its signification is,\n_a mark by which to distinguish_; _a memorial or warning_; _miraculous\nsign or wonder, consisting either in word or deed, whereby the certainty\nof any thing future is foretold or known_; and hence it partook of the\nnature of a prophecy. In the present case it was the mark of sin and\ndegradation; it was the token of his condition of slavery, of his being\na vagabond on the earth. It distinguished his rank of inferiority and\nwickedness, proclaiming him to be the man whose greatest punishment was\nto live and bear his burthens, _below all rivalship_.\n\nHence its protective influence. Now, by the common consent of all men,\nat all times, what has been the mark of sin and degradation? Were we\neven now, among ourselves, about to describe one of exceedingly wicked\nand degraded character, should we say that he looked very white? Or\nshould we say that his character was black? And so has been the use of\nthe term since language has been able to send down to distant times the\nideas and associations of men.\n\n\u201cTheir visage is blacker than a coal.\u201d\n\n\u201cOur skin was black.\u201d\n\n\u201cI am black: astonishment hath taken hold on me.\u201d\n\n\u201cFor though thou wash thee with nitre, and take thee much soap, yet\nthine iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord God.\u201d\n\nAnd who shall say that the wicked, disgusting mode of life, the\npractices deteriorating the physical and mental powers imputed to the\nCainites, do not constitute what some may call a philosophical cause of\nthe physical development of the mark of sin? Does not our own\nobservation teach us that a single lifetime, spent in the practice of\nsome degrading sins, leaves upon the person the evidence, the mark, the\nproof of such practice? We are under no compulsion of evidence or belief\nto suppose that the mark set upon Cain was the product of a moment; but\nthe gradual result of his wicked practices, as a physical and moral\ncause.\n\nBut allow the fact to have been that, in the case of Cain, the physical\nchange was instantaneous, God had the power to institute in a moment\nwhat should thereafter be produced only by progression or inheritance.\nGod created man; but, thereafter, man was born and became mature through\nthe instrumentality only of physical causes.\n\n\u201cThe shew of their countenance doth witness against them; and they\ndeclare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not.\u201d _Isa._ iii. 9. In fact,\n\u201cThe faces of them all gather blackness.\u201d _Nahum_ ii. 10.\n\nBut we know that the descendants of Ham were black; nor is it stated\nthat any personal mark was placed upon him, although the name applied to\nhis first-born son, \u201cCush,\u201d signifies that he was black, giving proof\nthat the colour was inherited; but from whom? Not from his father!\n\n\u201cCan the _Ethiopian_ (\u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9 _Cushi_, _the Cushite_, _the black man_)\nchange his skin?\u201d\n\nThe evidence forced on the mind leads to the conclusion that the\ndescendants of Ham were black, not by the progressive operation of the\nlaws of God on the course of sin which they doubtless practised, but\nthat they were so at birth,\u2014consequently an inheritance from parentage.\nAnd a further conclusion also is, that the wife of Ham must have been\nblack, of the race of Cain, inheriting his _mark_, and that _that mark_\nwas black.\n\nA further proof that Ham took to wife a daughter of the race of Cain is\nfound in the traces of evidence indicating her person, who she was.\nLamech, of the race of Cain, had a daughter, Naamah; her name is given\nas the last in the genealogy of Cain. Why did the inspired penman think\nit necessary to send her name down to us? Why was the genealogy of Cain\ngiven us, unless to announce some fact important for us to know? If this\nwhole race were to be cut off by the flood, we see nothing in the\ngenealogy teaching any lesson to the descendants of Noah. Why was the\nparticular line from Cain to Naamah selected, unless she was the\nparticular object designed to be pointed out? Hundreds of other\ngenealogies, commencing in Cain and terminating in some one just at the\ncoming of the flood, existed; but not written down nor transmitted, for\nthe obvious reason that such list could be of no benefit to posterity.\nAre we not, then, led to believe that there was some design in the\npreservation of the one terminating in Naamah? But this genealogy could\nonly be preserved through the family of Noah; through whom we also have\na genealogy of the line from Seth, terminating in Noah\u2019s youngest son.\nThese two stand in a parallel position, at the foot of each separate\nlist. But it is so extremely unusual for ancient genealogies to give the\nname of a female, who had brothers, that it becomes strong evidence,\nwhen such catalogue terminates in the name of such a female, that she\npersonally was the individual on whose account the catalogue was formed.\nIs not this consideration, and the fact that it could only be preserved\nby the family of Noah, evidence that they attached sufficient importance\nto it to make its preservation by them a desirable object?\n\nInasmuch as Naamah belonged to a race distinct from that of Seth, could\nthe family of Noah have any desire to preserve her lineage from any\nother cause than that of her having become a member of that family?\u2014in\nwhich case the cause of its preservation is obvious, and a thing to have\nbeen expected. On any other state of facts, would they have carefully\nhanded down the genealogy, so far as we are informed, of a mere\nuninteresting woman of the cursed race of Cain, and neglected to have\ngiven us the _name_ and _genealogy of Noah\u2019s wife_, of the more holy\nrace of Seth?\n\nThe presumption then being that she did become the wife of one of Noah\u2019s\nsons, the first inquiry is, to which was she attached? A sufficient\nanswer to this question, for the present moment, will be found in the\nfact that Ham was doomed to perpetual and bitter slavery, while his\nbrothers were blessed and ordained to be his masters. Now since an\namalgamation of the races of Seth and Cain was deemed a most grievous\nsin before the flood, if Japheth or Shem had either of them taken Naamah\nto wife, it would be past understanding to find them both highly blessed\nand made the masters of Ham.\n\nBut a more direct evidence that Ham did take to wife Naamah, of the race\nof Cain, is found in the fact that the descendants of Ham commemorated\nher name by giving it to persons of their race, as descendants might be\nexpected to do, who wished to keep it in remembrance. The name of her\nmother also is found in similar use.\n\nThese names are varied, often, from the original form, as are a great\nnumber of proper names found in use among the ancient nations. These\nwords we shall have hereafter occasion particularly to examine. We shall\nmerely add, that in the marriage of Ham and Naamah we may find a\nreasonable explanation for the otherwise inexplicable speech of Lamech\nto his two wives,\u2014since such marriage would have produced, what we find\nwas produced, the ruin and degradation of Ham,\u2014we might say, his moral\ndeath, his extinguishment, from the race of Seth. Some commentators\ndeduce the name Naamah from the root \u201c_nam_,\u201d and consequently make it\nsignify _beautiful_. We give it quite a different origin, which we shall\nexplain at large elsewhere. It is to be expected that men will differ in\nopinion as to the historical facts of these early days. Some have made\nNaamah a pure saint; some, the wife of Noah; some, of her brother,\nTubal-Cain; some make her the heathen goddess Venus; others, the mother\nof evil spirits.\n\nThus diversified have been the speculations of men. We present our view,\nbecause we believe it better sustained by Scripture and known facts than\nany we have examined: but we deem it no way important in the\njustification of the ways of God to man; for, whatever the truth may be,\nthis we know, that the curse of slavery was, if Scripture be true,\nunalterably uttered against the race of Ham,\u2014in which condition, as a\npeople, they ever have been and still are found: a condition so well\nadapted to their physical and mental organization, the result of ages\nspent in bad, degenerating habits, that when held in such relation by\nthe races of Japheth or Shem, the race of Ham is found gradually to\nemerge from its native brutality into a state of comparative elevation\nand usefulness in the world; a condition without which they, as a race,\nhave never been found progressing, but ever exhibiting the desire of\nwandering backward, in search of the life of the vagabond, in the midst\nof the wilderness of sin;\u2014unless in this author, Dr. Channing, we find\nan exception; for he more than intimates that he found the negro women\nof Jamaica rather to excel the white ones of New England. We believe,\naccording to his own taste and judgment, what he said was true; but we\nalso believe his taste was very depraved, and his judgment of no value\non this subject; yet we feel less astonishment at the degenerate sons of\nSeth before the flood, on the account of their admiration of the black\ndaughters of the race of Cain; and we should feel it a subject of\ncurious solicitude, if Dr. Channing\u2019s taste and judgment on this subject\nwere to become the standard among his disciples, whether they will, by\ntheir practice, illustrate the habit of these antediluvians!\n\n\n\n\n                  ------------------------------------\n\n                               Study IV.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON I.\n\nIn the course of the present study, we propose to notice the doctrine\nand action of the church as connected with the subject of slavery; and\nto examine what were the tenets and conduct of those men who claimed to\nbe governed by the immediate teachings of Christ and his apostles.\n\nIn this investigation, we must apply to the records of the Catholic\nChurch, although we are aware that, in the minds of some, strong and\nbitter prejudice may exist against these records; that some will say the\ncanker of corruption had destroyed the very kernel of Christianity in\nthat church.\n\nBower, a Protestant author, in the preface to his \u201cHistory of the\nPopes,\u201d 7 vols. quarto, says\u2014\n\n\u201cWe must own the popes to have been, generally speaking, men of\nextraordinary talents, the ablest politicians we read of in history;\nstatesmen fit to govern the world, and equal to the vast dominion they\ngrasped at; a dominion over the minds as well as the bodies and estates\nof mankind; a dominion, of all that ever were formed, the most wide and\nextensive, as knowing no other bounds but those of the earth.\u201d Page 10,\nvol. i. 3d edition, London, 1750.\n\nMr. Bower was a very learned man, had been educated a Catholic, was\nprofessor of rhetoric, history, and philosophy in the universities of\nRome, Fermo, and Macerata, and counsellor of the Inquisition at Rome. He\ncommenced a work to prove the pope\u2019s infallibility and supremacy. But he\nproved to himself the adverse doctrine. He resigned his professorships\nand places, removed to London, abjured the Catholic religion, and wrote\nthe work quoted. It is a work of great labour and merit, and well worth\nthe attention of the curious in these matters. But it is proper here to\nremark, that Mr. Sale, in his preface to his translation of the Koran,\nhas made a severe, yet an unexplained attack, on the character of this\nwriter; but whatever may have been the provocation, we have to view him\nthrough his book. It is not always possible for a just degree of merit\nto be awarded those who lived in former times. We cannot always learn\nthe circumstances influencing them, nor do we often throw our minds back\ninto their peculiar position, by which alone can we be able to give a\njust value to those influences.\n\nHistory has handed us a few of the acts of him who lived a thousand\nyears ago; by them we judge, as though he lived to-day, acts which\nprejudice may have distorted, or favour presented to the lens of time.\nWe must look to the condition of things at the time of the act; to the\nprobable effect under such condition, and to the real effect as\ndeveloped by time.\n\nPope Benedict IX. ascended the throne in A.D. 1033. He is very\nunfavourably known to history. During his time there was a very powerful\nfaction raging against him at Rome, by which, at one time, he was driven\ninto exile. He is said to have sold the popedom, because his\ndebaucheries made him an object of contempt, and he wished to be free\nfrom restraint; but in 1041, four years before he abandoned the papal\nchair, he established, at a council in Aquitaine, the _Treuga Dei_,\nwhence it has been said that, during three days in the week, he\npermitted any man to commit all sorts of crimes, even murder, free from\nchurch censure, &c. By the _Treuga Dei_, for any wrong done him, no\nperson was permitted to revenge himself, from Wednesday evening to\nMonday morning: construed, as above, by some, that he might do so during\nthe remaining portion of the week.\n\nThe facts were, all Europe was still groping in the ignorance of the\ndarkest ages; yet Christianity had been firmly established as a system\nof faith. The church had always forbidden a revengeful redress of\nindividual wrongs; and, for such acts, her priests ever threatened\nexcommunication. But these charges had little or no effect during these\nstill semi-idolatrous and barbarous ages.\n\nThe kings were but heads of tribes, too weak to restrain their nobles,\nas the nobles were their vassals: under such a state of things, each one\nstrove to redress his own wrongs. This led to constant murders, and\nevery kind of crime. Each state was constantly agitated by civil\ncommotions and bloodshed. Great moral changes are advanced by short\nsteps. The church took this evil in hand, and hence the _Treuga Dei_, a\nword used in the Latin of that day, a corruption from the Gothic\n_triggua_, and now found in the Spanish and Italian \u201c_tregua_,\u201d and from\nwhence our word _truce_. The curse of God was pronounced against all\noffenders, and death followed a discovery of the crime. It was thought\nto be a Divine suggestion, and hence the name. All consented to yield to\nit as such, and it was found to have a powerful effect. In 1095, it was\nwarmly sustained in the Council of Clermont, under Urban II., and\nextended to all the holy-days, and perpetually to clerks, monks,\npilgrims, merchants, husbandmen, and women, and to the persons and\nproperty of all who would engage in crusades, and against all\ndevastations by fire. It was re-established in 1102, by Paschal II.; in\n1139, by Innocent II.; in 1180, by Alexander III.; nor would it be\ndifficult to show that the _Treuga Dei_, the _Truce of God_, of Benedict\nIX., was one of the most important, during the primary steps towards the\ncivilization of Europe; such was the state of society in that age of the\nworld. But we acknowledge that individuals of the Roman church, some of\nwhom obtruded themselves into the priesthood, have been very corrupt\nmen. But have not similar obtrusions happened in every other Christian,\nProtestant, or worthy association of men? Have we not seen, among the\napostles, a Judas, betraying the Saviour of the world? Ananias and\nSapphira, attempting to swindle even God himself? Of confidence betrayed\namong men, need we point to the tragical death of Servetus, which has\nfor ever placed the bloody mark of murder on the face of Calvin?\n\nAnd may we not find sometimes, among ourselves, lamentable instances of\ncorruption, which, in the blackness of their character, defy the powers\nof the pen? Instances, where, recreant to every honest, noble, and holy\nfeeling, individuals, hidden, as they think, beneath the robes of\nrighteousness, have carried poverty and distress to the house of the\nwidow, trampling on the rights\u2014may be, the life\u2014of the orphan, and even\nusing the confidence of a brother to betray and rob him?\n\nNor is it a matter of any exultation to the broken, the wounded mind,\nthat, in all such instances, unless the stink of insignificance shall\ntotally exclude such criminal from the page of history, whatever may be\nthe cloak he may wear, truth will eventually for ever convert it into\nthe burning shirt of Nessus.\n\nBut, if you call a dog a thief, he feels no shame. Generations of\nenforced improvement and the grace of God alone can wipe out the stains\nof an evil heart. Nor can man alter this his destiny. Therefore, in all\nages, and among all men, the tares and the wheat have been found in the\nsame field. What presumption, then, if not blasphemy, in opposition to\nthe word of Jehovah, to say, that the looming light of truth never\ndawned upon this night of time until the advent of Luther or Knox!\n\nIn presenting the action and records of the church and early fathers, we\nhave freely adopted the sentiments and facts digested by Bishop England,\nto whom, we take occasion here to say, we feel as much indebted, as\nthough we had merely changed a particle or deleted what was irrelevant\nto our subject. Nor do we know of higher honour we can do this great and\ngood man than to lend our feeble mite to extend the knowledge of his\nresearch, his purity, and great learning; and if, in the continuation of\nthis his unfinished study, amid the pagan superstitions and bigoted\nthousands of Islam in benighted Asia, the conflicts of the Cross and the\nWand of Woden, during the dark ages of continental Europe, we may be\nsuffered to feel the elevating influence of his life-giving mantle, we\nshall also surely feel elevated hopes of a high immortality.\n\nBut, it may be well here to remark, that we have no sectarian church to\nsustain; that we belong to no religious order; nor have, as yet,\nsubscribed to any faith formed by man. And while we advocate the cause\nof religion and truth, yielding ourselves in all humility to the\ninfluence of Divine power, we feel as certain of his final notice, as\nthough we had marched through under a thousand banners at the head of\nthe world. We have all confidence in the word of him who hath said that\neven the sparrow falleth not without his notice.\n\nBut, it is said, when disease infuses bile into the organs of sight, the\nobjects of vision have a peculiar tinge: to blend previous, sometimes\nnumerous, impressions into one perception, is a common action of the\nmind. Thus the present idea is often modified by those that have\npreceded; and hence we may conclude how often the mind is under the\ninsensible influence of prejudice. Upon these facts she has enthroned\nher power.\n\nBut he who has schooled his mind in the doctrines of a tranquil\ndevotion, who habituates himself to view all things past, present, and\nto come, through the medium of cause and effect, as the mere links of\none vast chain, reaching from Omnipotence to the present action, may\nwell rise superior to the tumult of passion or the empire of prejudice.\nAnd to the utilitarian permit us to say, that prejudice is peculiarly\nunsuited to the age of moral and physical improvement in which we live.\nLet no one say, the spirit of improvement has a deep root, and its lofty\nhopes cannot be subverted; that the most penetrating philosophy cannot\nprescribe its limits, the most ardent imagination reach its bounds:\nrather let him reflect that all improvement must for ever follow the\nfootsteps of truth; and that the peculiar province of prejudice is to\nset us aside from its path.\n\nWith such views, let us for a moment consider the circumstances\nattending the early ages of the Roman church; and let us note that,\nalthough her priests were but men, whether her records are not as\nreliable as if some of her peculiarities had been different, or she had\nbeen called by a different name. But we shall not quote or pursue these\nrecords down to so late a day as the Protestant Reformation. We hope,\ntherefore, that the Protestant will say that the records we quote are,\nmost decidedly, the records of the church.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON II.\n\nThe moral condition of man was peculiar. To a great extent the religious\nsystems of the Old World had been analyzed by the intelligent; they no\nlonger gave confidence to the mind. The sanctity of the temples was\ndissipated by the mere speculations of philosophy, and the gods of\nidolatry tottered on their pedestals.\n\nThe nations of the earth were brought in subjection, in slavery, to the\nfeet of imperial Rome; and their gods, being presented face to face,\nlost their divinity by the rivalship of men.\n\nSuch was the condition of the moral world when Christianity was\nintroduced to mankind.\n\nThe old religions pretended to give safety by bargain of sacrifice, by\npenance, and payment, but the religion of Jesus Christ taught that\nsalvation and safety were the free gift of God.\n\nThe history of man proves the fact that he has ever been disposed to\npurchase happiness on earth and felicity in heaven by his own acts, or\nby the merit of his condition; and hence, we always find that a\ncorrupted Christianity for ever borders on the confines of idolatry. Nor\nis it difficult to show how this easily runs into all the wild\nextravagancies of human reason, or, rather, human ignorance; while the\nsimplicity of truth tends to a calm submission, and a desire of\nobedience to the will and laws of the only true God. The one was the\nreligion of the government of men, of show, of political power, and\nexpediency; the other is of heaven, of truth. \u201cMy kingdom is not of this\nworld.\u201d\n\nThe barbarians of northern Europe and western Asia, while yet only\nillumined by some faint rays of the Christian light, feeling from habit\nthe want of the external pomp and the governing control of a religious\npower, in a half-savage, half-heathen state of mind, were disposed to\nprostrate themselves at the feet of the chief priest of Rome.\n\nIn the year 312, under the pontificate of Melchiades, (by the Greeks\ncalled Miltiades,) the Emperor Constantine established the Christian\nchurch by law. Thus sustained, it became at once the pool in which\nambition and crime sought to cleanse their robes. Yet, beneath its\nwaters were priceless pearls. Torn by schism, sometimes by temporal\nmisrule, the church languished,\u2014but lived. For several centuries the\nfuture became a mere variation of the past. The ways of God are indeed\ninscrutable. A flaming meteor in the east now agitated the mind. Like\nthe insects of twilight, thousands marshalled under the crescent light\nof the prophet. The disciples of Mohammed swept from the earth the\nchurches at Antioch and Alexandria, suddenly made inroads on Europe,\nconquered Spain, and were in step to overleap the Pyrenees and Alps. Let\nus step aside, and reconnoitre their host!\n\nThe object of the Arabian, Saracen, and Moorish warriors was the\npropagation of their creed. The alternative was proposed to all,\u2014its\nembrace, or tribute; if rejected, the chance of war. Persia and Syria\nwere quickly subdued. Egypt and Cyprus gave way, A.D. 645. The slave of\nJews or Christians seldom rejected freedom in favour of the cross; if\nso, he was reduced to the level of the vilest brute. The free were\neither put to death, or, as a great favour, permitted to be slaves. Thus\nthe Christian master and slave were often in a reversed condition under\nMohammedan rule. Sicily and the whole northern Africa substituted the\ncrescent for the Cross; and in quick succession Spain was invaded and\nthe throne of Roderick overturned. Toledo yielded to Mousa; and Fleury,\nlib. xli. part 25, says\u2014\u201cHe put the chief men to death, and subjugated\nall Spain, as far as Saragossa, which he found open. He burned the\ntowns, he had the most powerful citizens crucified, he cut the throats\nof children and infants, and spread terror on every side.\u201d\n\nItaly was in consternation; the church trembled, and Constantinople was\nthreatened. Crossing the Pyrenees, A.D. 719, they poured down upon\nFrance, met Charles, the father of Pepin, and Eude of Aquitaine, who\nslew Zama, and compelled his troops to raise the siege of Toulouse; but,\nrecovering confidence, their incursions were frequent and bloody; and\nthe historians of that day announce that, upon one occasion alone, they\nlost 370,000 men upon the fields of France. But these reverses were the\nbow of hope to the Peninsula. Alphonsus struck a blow, and in one day\nretook many towns and released from bondage ten thousand Christian\nslaves. These exertions were continued with intermitted success; and,\nlike the retiring thunder of the retreating storm, the rage of battle\nbecame less terrific and at more distant periods; but the standard of\nIslam still continued to affrighten the world, alternately flaming its\nred glare over the Peninsula to the mountains of France and the plains\nof Italy, and until embattled Europe, excited to Croisade, dispelled its\npower on the banks of the Jordan.\n\nBut, let us return. Aistulphus appears amid this flame of war. His\nLombards threaten extermination, and brandish the sword at the very\ngates of Rome. Pepin had now usurped the throne of the Franks. He\ndemanded the confirmation of the church; and, in return, promised\nprotection to the \u201cRepublic of God.\u201d Rome saw the prospect of her ruin,\nwith searching eyes looked for aid, and confirmed Pepin in his secular\npower; who, in gratitude, drove for a time the Lombards from Italy, and\ndeposited the keys of the conquered cities on the altar of Saint Peter.\n\nThe Roman emperors had now long since removed their court to\nConstantinople. Their power over western Europe vacillated with the\nstrife of the times. Charlemagne now appears kissing the steps of the\nthrone of the church. Again he appears, master of all the nations\ncomposing the Western Empire, and of Rome; and, on Christmas-day, in the\nyear 800, Leo III. placed the crown of the Roman emperors on the head of\nthe son of Pepin. But, as yet, the act of crowning by the pope was a\nmere form.\n\nFifty years had scarcely sunk in the past, when the Emperor Basilius\nexpelled Photius from the patriarchal see of his capital. He was charged\nwith having been the tool of the Emperor Michael. He claimed supremacy\nover the pope of Rome. Hadrian had now ascended the papal chair, 867.\nJealous of the bold spirit of Photius, his excommunication was recorded,\nand Ignatius installed in his see.\n\nBut the Greeks and Bulgarians, jealous for their native priesthood,\ndemanded by what authority the see of Rome claimed jurisdiction over the\nOld and New Epirus, Thessaly, and Dardania, the country now called\nBulgaria. For more than four centuries there had been occasional\njealousies between these two churches; certain articles of faith\ncontinued subjects of difference; and the questions of temporal and\nspiritual precedence made them ever watchful. History records that, as\nearly as 606, Phocas, having ascended the imperial throne, treading upon\nthe dead bodies of the Emperor Mauritius, his children and\nfriends,\u2014Cyriacus, the patriarch, exposed to his view the enormity of\nhis crimes, and most zealously exhorted to repentance. The supremacy of\norder and dignity was instantly granted to the patriarch of Rome, in the\nperson of Boniface III. But his successors, their historians say, wisely\nrefused, disclaimed the favour of Phocas, but claimed it as a Divine\nright derived from St. Peter. Thus commenced and was made final the\nseverance of the Greek and Roman churches.\n\nBut the loss of spiritual rule in the east was accompanied by an\nenlargement of temporal power in the west. Upon the death of Hadrian,\nJohn, the son of Gundo, succeeded to the papal chair; and, upon the\ndemise of Lewis II., (876,) his uncles, Lewis, king of Germany, and\nCharles the Bald, king of France, were rivals for the vacant throne.\nCharles and Hadrian were ever at variance. But, seizing upon the moment,\nbecause he was more ready at hand, or more yielding to his wishes, John\ninvoked him instantly at Rome, received him with loudest acclamations,\nand crowned him emperor, just seventy-five years to a day from the\nelevation of Charlemagne to the Western Empire.\n\nUpon this occasion, Pope John announced that he had elected him emperor\nin conformity to the revealed will of God; that his act of crowning him\nmade him such; and that the sceptre, under God, was his free gift. This\nnew doctrine was assented to by Charles, and ever after claimed as one\nof the powers of the pope of Rome. Thus the church of Rome became wholly\nseparated from the Eastern Empire,\u2014\u201cfreely losing its hold on a decayed\ntree, to graft itself upon a wild and vigorous sapling.\u201d _D'Aubigne._\n\nEutropius, the Lombard, informs us of the rich presents made to St.\nPeter for these favours of the pope, and that the emperor ceded to him\nthe dukedoms, Benevento and Spoleti, together with the sovereignty of\nRome itself.\n\nThus we have seen why and how the brawny shoulders of the idolatrous\nchildren of the north elevated to the throne, thus how the Franks\nestablished the temporal power, of the popes of Rome; yet, perhaps,\nlittle was foreseen how this state of things was destined, in the course\nof events, to elevate the church of Rome, and the power of its pontiffs,\nto a supremacy of all temporal government. It could not have been\nforeseen how the genius of Hildebrand (Pope Gregory VII.) should, two\nhundred years after, carry into full accomplishment, by mere words of\npeace, \u201cwhat Marius and C\u00e6sar could not by torrents of blood.\u201d\n\nBut corruption, to a greater or less extent, necessarily followed such a\nconnection of church and state. It matters not to whom, nor in what\nage,\u2014give churches temporal power, and they are _liable_ to be corrupt.\n\nBut the church was still a fountain from which the living waters were\ndispensed to mankind. Instances of personal wickedness may have been\nmore or less common; yet the spirit of truth found it a focal residence,\nand diffused its light to the world.\n\nThe Christian church is not the contrivance of man, whose works pass\naway, but of God, who upholds what he creates, and who has given his\npromise for its duration. Its object is to satisfy the religious wants\nof human nature, in whatever degree that nature may be developed; and\nits efficacy is no greater for the learned than for the unlearned; for\nthe exalted of the earth, than for the slave.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON III.\n\nIt is said all nature swarms with life. But every animal, in some way,\npreys upon his fellow. Even we cannot move our foot without becoming the\nmeans of destruction to petty animals capable of palpitating for hours,\nmay be days, in the agonies of death. There is no day upon this earth,\nin which men, and millions of other animals, are not tortured in some\nway, to the fullest extent of life.\n\nLet us look at man alone; poor and oppressed; tormented by injustice,\nand stupified to lethargy; writhing under disease, or tortured by his\nbrethren! Recollect his mental pains! The loss of friends, and the\npoison of ingratitude; the rage of tyranny, and the slow progress of\njustice; the brave, the high-minded, the honest, consigned to the fate\nof guilt!\n\nDive into the dungeon, or the more obscure prison-house of penury. See\nthe aged long for his end, and the young languish in despair; talents\nand virtue in eternal oblivion: see malice, vengeance, and cruelty at\ntheir work, while they propagate every hour; for severity begets its\nkind, and hate begets hate.\n\nLook where you will, the heart is torn with anguish; the soul is\nsaddened by sorrow. All things seem at war; all one vast abortion. Such\nis the rugged surface; and the eye sees no golden sands, no precious\ngems gleaming from beneath the blackened waters of human suffering.\nThese things are so; creation has grown up; and human life can never\neffect one tremble of the leaf on which it has found its residence.\n\nBut the Christian philosopher views these evidences of a great moral\ncatastrophe without madness. He perceives that sin has sunk man into\ndegradation, slavery, and death. He comprehends his own weakness, and\ntrusts in God.\n\nBut there is a man, with all these facts before him, who rages. He makes\nwar on the providence, and determines, as if to renovate the work, of\nthe Almighty. Is he a man of a single idea? If not, let him make a\nbetter world; and, while he is thus employed, let us resume our subject.\n\nSlavery, either voluntary or involuntary, whether the immediate result\nof crime or of mental and physical degradation, is equally the\nconsequent of sin. Let us consider how far its existence is sustained by\nthe laws of justice, of religion, and of God.\n\nOur word, God, is pure Saxon, signifying \u201cperfectly good;\u201d \u201cGod is\ngood.\u201d \u201cAnd God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, _it was_\nvery good.\u201d\n\nSuppose the laws of Japan permit voluntary slavery, as did those of\nMoses. (See _Exod._ xxi. 5; also _Lev._ xxv. 47.) Suppose an African\nnegro, of the lowest grade, destitute and naked, voluntarily finds\nhimself in that island, where the poor, free inhabitants scarcely\nsustain life by the most constant toil. The negro finds no employment.\nHe can neither buy, beg, nor steal; starvation is at hand. He applies to\nsell himself, under the law of the country, a slave for life. Is not\nslavery, in this case, a good, because life is a greater good than\nliberty? Liberty is worth nothing in opposition to life. Liberty is\nworth nothing without available possessions to sustain it. The\npreservation of life is the highest law. The law of God, therefore,\nwould be contradictory, if it forbid a man to sell himself to sustain\nhis life; and the justice and propriety of such law must be universal\nand eternal, so far as it can have relation with the condition of man\nupon this earth.\n\nBut, \u201cWhat is life without liberty?\u201d said a beggar-woman! He, who thinks\nlife without liberty worth nothing, must die if he have no means to\nsustain his liberty. Esther entertained no such notion: \u201cFor we are\nsold, I and my people, to be destroyed and slain, and to perish. But if\nwe had been sold for bond-men, and bond-women, I had held my tongue.\u201d\n_Esth._ vii. 4.\n\nNor has such ever been the notion of the church. Bergier says, Dict.\nTheo., Art. _Esclava_\u2014\n\n\u201cThat civil liberty became a benefit, only after the establishment of\ncivil society, when man had the protection of law, and the multiplied\nfacilities for subsistence; that, previous to this, absolute freedom\nwould be an injury to a person destitute of flocks, herds, lands, and\nservants.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe common possession of all things is said to be of the natural law;\nbecause the distinction of possessions and slavery were not introduced\nby nature, but by reason of man, for the benefit of human life; and thus\nthe law of nature is not changed by their introduction, but an addition\nis made thereto.\u201d _St. Thomas Aquinas, 1, 2, q. 94 a 95 ad 2_.\n\nAnd the same father says again, _2, 2 q. 57 a 3 ad 2_\u2014\u201cThis man is a\nslave, absolutely speaking, rather a son, not by any natural cause, but\nby reason of the benefits which are produced; for it is more beneficial\nto this one to be governed by one who has more wisdom, and the other to\nbe helped by the labour of the former. Hence the state of slavery\nbelongs principally to the law of nations, and to the natural law, only\nin the second degree, not in the first.\u201d\n\nBut a man having the natural right to _sell_ himself proves that he has\nthe same right to _buy_ others. The one follows the other. But, suppose\nthe laws of Japan do not permit voluntary slavery for life, or, rather\nthat they have no law on the subject; but that they have a law, that\nwhosoever proves himself to be so degraded that he cannot, or will not\nsustain himself, but is found loitering, begging, or stealing, shall be\nforcibly sold a slave for life,\u2014is not the same good effected as in the\nother case, although the individual may be too debased to perceive it\nhimself? And is it difficult to perceive, that the same deteriorating\ncauses have produced both cases? The doctrine of the church is that\n\u201cdeath, sickness, and a large train of what is called natural evils, are\nconsidered to be the consequences of sin. Slavery is an evil, and is\nalso a consequence of sin.\u201d _Bishop England_, p. 23.\n\nAnd St. Augustine preached the same doctrine, as long ago as the year\n425. See his book, \u201c_Of the City of God_,\u201d liber xix. cap. 15. He\nsays\u2014\u201cThe condition of slavery is justly regarded as imposed on the\nsinner. Hence, we never read _slave_ (as one having a master) in\nScripture before the just Noe, by this word, punished the sin of his\nson. Sin, not nature, thus introduced the word.\u201d\n\nAnd St. Ambrose, bishop of Milan, A.D. 390, in his book on \u201c_Elias and\nFasting_\u201d c. 5, says\u2014\u201cThere would be no slavery to-day had there not\nbeen drunkenness.\u201d\n\nAnd so, St. John Chrysostom, bishop of Constantinople, A.D. 400, Hom.\n29, in Gen.: \u201cBehold brethren born of the same mother! Sin makes one of\nthem a servant, and, taking away his liberty, lays him under\nsubjection.\u201d\n\nThe very expression, \u201cCursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he\nbe to his brethren,\u201d most distinctly shows the sentence to have been the\nconsequent of sin, and especially so when compared with the blessing\nbestowed upon the two brothers, in which they are promised the\n_services_ of him accursed.\n\nPope Gelesius I., A.D. 491, in his letter to the bishops of the Picene\nterritory, states, \u201cslavery to have been the consequence of sin, and to\nhave been established by human law.\u201d\n\nSt. Augustine, lib. xix. cap. 16, \u201cOn the City of God,\u201d argues at length\nto show \u201cthat the peace and good order of society, as well as religious\nduty, demand that the wholesome laws of the state regulating the conduct\nof slaves should be conscientiously observed.\u201d\n\n\u201cSlavery is regarded by the church * * * not to be incompatible with the\nnatural law, to be the result of sin by Divine dispensation, to have\nbeen established by human legislation; and, when the dominion of the\nslave is justly acquired by the master, to be lawful, not in the sight\nof the human tribunal only, but also in the eye of Heaven.\u201d _Bishop\nEngland_, page 24.\n\nBut again, in the works already quoted, \u201cDe Civitate Dei,\u201d St. Augustine\nsays, liber xix. caput 15, that, \u201calthough slavery is the consequence of\nsin, yet that the slavery may not always light upon the sinful\nindividual, any more than sickness, war, famine, or any other\nchastisement of this sinful world, whereby it may often happen that the\nless sinful are afflicted, that they may be turned more to the worship\nof God, and brought into his enjoyment,\u201d and refers to the case of\nDaniel and his companions, who were slaves in Babylon, and by which\ncaptivity Israel was brought to repentance.\n\nIn cap. 16, \u201che presents to view the distinction of bodily employment\nand labour between the son and the slave; but that each are equally\nunder the master\u2019s care; and as it regards the soul, each deserved a\nlike protection, and that therefore the masters were called _patres\nfamilias_, or _fathers of households_; and shows that they should\nconsult for the eternal welfare of their slaves as a father for his\nchildren; and insists upon the weight and obligation of the master to\nrestrain his slaves from vice, and to preserve discipline with strict\nfirmness, but yet with affection; not by verbal correction alone, but,\nif requisite, corporeal chastisement, not merely for the punishment of\ndelinquency, but for a salutary monition to others.\u201d\n\nAnd he proceeds to show \u201cthat these things become a public duty, since\nthe peace of the vicinage depends upon the good order of its families,\nand that the safety of the state depends upon the peace and discipline\nof all the vicinage.\u201d\n\nThis author also shows, from the etymology of the word \u201c_servus_,\u201d that,\naccording to the law of nations at the time, the conqueror had at his\ndisposal the lives of the captives. If from some cause he forbore to put\nsome of them to death, then such one was _servati_, or _servi_, that is,\nkept from destruction or death, and their lives spared, upon the\ncondition of obedience, and of doing the labours and drudgery of the\nmaster.\u201d\n\nAnd we may again inquire whether, when prisoners taken in war, under\ncircumstances attending their capture by which the captor feels himself\nentitled to put them to death,\u2014it is not a great good to the captured to\nhave their lives spared them, and they permitted to be slaves? The\nanswer will again turn upon the question, whether life is worth any\nthing upon these terms? And whatever an individual may say, the world\nwill answer like Esther. Thus far slavery is an institution of mercy and\nin favour of life.\n\nWe close this lesson by presenting the condition of slavery among the\nChinese, and their laws and customs touching the subject.\n\nM. De Guignes, who traversed China throughout its whole extent,\nobserving with minuteness and philosophical research every thing in\nrelation to its singular race, does not believe slavery existed there\nuntil its population had become overloaded, when, as a partial relief\nfrom its miseries, they systematically made slaves of portions of their\nown race.\n\nHe says, that in ancient times, \u201cit is not believed that there were\nslaves in China, except those who were taken prisoners in war, or\ncondemned to servitude by the laws. Afterwards, in times of famine,\nparents were frequently reduced to the necessity of selling their\nchildren. This practice, originated in the pressure of necessity, has\ncontinued to exist, and even become common. * * * A person may also sell\nhimself as a slave when he has no other means of succouring his father;\na young woman, who finds herself destitute, may in like manner be\npurchased with her own consent.\n\n\u201cThe prisoners of war are the slaves of the emperor, and generally sent\nto labour on his land in Tartary. The judges have the power to pass the\nsentence of slavery on culprits such as are sold at public auction;\nslaves also who belong to persons whose property is confiscated, are\nsold to the highest bidder by public outcry.\u201d See work as quoted by\nEdin. Encyc., Article, \u201c_China_.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IV.\n\nThe titles which divines and canonists have considered to be good and\nvalid for the possession of slaves, are purchase, inheritance, gift,\nbirth, slaves made in war, and sentenced for crime; but, in all cases,\nthe title is vitiated when not sustained by the civil law. Yet the civil\nlaw may be repealed, or ameliorated, so that prisoners taken in war or\ncrime may not be subject to death or servitude, in which case the\nvalidity of the title follows in the footsteps of the civil law; but\nthese conditions primarily exist, as perpetual as the condition of man.\nThe civil law, by its intervention, merely diverts the action during its\nrule.\n\nBut, in all cases of a secondary title, the validity follows the\ncharacter of the previous holding, as no man can sell, give, or leave by\ninheritance a better title than that which he has. The question thus\nruns to the origin of what gives a good title, to wit, the condition\nthat enforces one to be sold, or to sell himself, a slave, in favour of\nlife. True, Blackstone, Montesquieu, and others of less note, contend\nthat no man has a right _to sacrifice his liberty_; and what is their\nargument? They make an assumption, where there is no parallel, \u201cthat\nliberty is of equal worth to life;\u201d but before their argument is good,\nthey must show that liberty is of more value than life: for surely a man\nmay barter an equal for an equal. They cry, \u201cGod gave all men liberty.\u201d\nEven that is a fiction. The truth is, God gave no man liberty, only upon\nconditions.\n\nBut to show that life is of more value than liberty, we need only\nobserve that even with the loss of liberty there is hope\u2014hope of change,\nof liberty, and of the means of sustaining it; and such hopes have often\nbeen realized. There is no truth in the proposition that liberty is of\nequal value (or rather superior) to life. The doctrine therefore is,\nthat man, in his natural state, is the master of his own liberty, and\nmay dispose of it as he sees proper in favour of life; that he may be\ndeprived of it by force, in consequence of crime, or from his not being\nable to sustain it; and in all cases where liberty has become of less\nvalue than life, and both cannot be sustained, the one may be properly\nexchanged for the safety of the other. And upon this principle, in those\ncountries where the parent had the right, by their law, to put to death\nhis own children, he also had the right to sell them into slavery; and\nfurther, by natural law, where the parent cannot sustain the life of his\nchild, where civil law gives him no power over its life, he yet, in\nfavour of life, may sell him into slavery.\n\nNatural law recognises the principle that the child, of right, is\nsubject to the condition of the parent; and in these enfeebled\nconditions of man, for sake of more certainty, the civil law usually\nacknowledges the maternal line. It acknowledges the paternal line only\nwhen the elevated condition forms a presumption of equal certainty.\n\nThe Divine law recognises a good title to hold slaves among all people.\nThe Divine grant to hold slaves was not an \u201cespecial permit to the\nHebrews.\u201d Abimelech gave slaves to Abraham: had his title been bad,\nAbraham could not have received them. Bethuel and Laban gave slaves to\ntheir daughters. None of these were Hebrews, yet they held slaves by a\ngood title; for the very act of acceptance, in all these cases, is proof\nthat the title was good.\n\nBesides, the Divine law itself instructed the Israelites to buy slaves\nof the surrounding nations. See _Lev._ xxv. 44. Can there be a stronger\nproof of the purity of a title, than this gives of the title by which\nthe \u201cnations round about\u201d held slaves? The same law which permitted the\nIsraelites to buy slaves of the \u201cheathen round about,\u201d also permitted\nthe \u201cheathen round about\u201d to hold slaves, because it acknowledges their\ntitle to be good.\n\nBy an inquiry into the history of these \u201cheathen round about,\u201d their\nreligion, civil condition, their manners and customs, as well as the\nfinal state to which they arrived, we may form some idea how a good\ntitle to hold slaves and to sell them arose among them; and since the\nlaws of God are everlasting, and always applicable to every case where\nall the circumstances are similar, we may reasonably conclude that the\nsame race, or any other race, then, or at any other period of time, to\nwhom the same descriptions will apply, will also be found attended with\nthe same facts in regard to slavery.\n\nThe conclusion therefore is, that from such a people, who have a good\nright to hold and sell slaves, other people, whose civil laws permit\nthem to do so, may purchase slaves by a good title.\n\nIt may not then be wholly an idle labour to compare the history and race\nof these \u201cheathen round about,\u201d with the history, race, and present\ncondition of those African heathen who have from time immemorial held\nand sold slaves.\n\nBut it being shown that the Divine sanction to hold slaves, did, at one\ntime, exist, it devolves on them, who deny its religious legality, now\nto prove that the sanction had been withdrawn.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON V.\n\nWE proceed to prove, by a variety of documents, that the Church of\nChrist did, at all times during its early ages, consider the existence\nof slavery and the holding of slaves compatible with a religious\nprofession and the practice of Christian duties.\n\nIt is first in order to present the sermons of St. Paul and St. Peter\ndirect upon this subject. Having heretofore quoted them, we now merely\nrepeat the references, and ask for their perusal: See 1 _Cor._ vii.\n20\u201324; _Eph._ vi. 5\u20139; _Col._ iii. 22 to iv. 1; 1 _Tim._ vi. 1\u201314;\n_Tit._ ii. 9\u201315; _Philemon_ entire, and 1 _Pet._ ii. 18\u201325. These\nscriptures distinctly teach the doctrine of the Christian church. But it\nremains to see what was the practice that grew up under it.\n\nUpon the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the mind cannot well conceive how\nthe apostles could have avoided, from time to time, meeting together for\nthe purposes of consultation and agreement among themselves as to the\nparticulars of their future course; and that such was the fact, we have\nin evidence, _Acts_ i. 15\u201326, where they did thus meet, and elected\nMatthias to fill the vacancy in their number. Also, _Acts_ ix. 26\u201331,\nwhere Paul was received by them and sent forth as an apostle; but the\nbook in question only gives us the outlines of what they did. Now, there\nis found among the ancient records of the church what is called \u201cThe\nCanons of the Apostles,\u201d which, if not actually written by them, is\nstill known to be in conformity with their doctrine, as developed in\ntheir own writings and the earliest usages of the church.\n\nAmong these, the canon lxxxi. is the following:\n\nServos in clerum provehi sine voluntate dominorum, non permittimus, ad\neorum qui possident molestiam, domorum enim eversionem talia efficiunt.\nSiquando autem, etiam dignus servus visus sit, qui ad gradum eligatur,\nqualis noster quoque Onesimus visus est, et domini concesserint ac\nliberaverint, et \u0153dibus emiserint, fiat.\n\n_We do not permit slaves to be raised to clerical rank without the will\nof their masters, to the injury of their owners. For such conduct\nproduces the upturning of houses. But if, at any time, even a slave may\nbe seen worthy to be raised to that degree, as even our Onesimus was,\nand the masters shall have granted and given freedom, and have sent them\nforth from their houses, let it be done._\n\nThis is the first of a series of similar enactments, and it should be\nobserved that it recognises the principle of the perfect dominion of the\nmaster, the injury to his property, and requires the very legal\nformality by which the slave was liberated and fully emancipated.\n\nThe slave had the title, without his owner\u2019s consent, to the common\nrights of religion and the necessary sacraments. In using these, no\ninjury was done to the property of his owner; but he had no claim to\nthose privileges which would diminish his value to the owner, or would\ndegrade the dignity conferred, and which could not be performed without\noccupying that time upon which his owner had a claim.\n\nThere are eight other books of a remote antiquity, known as \u201cThe\nConstitutions ascribed to the Apostles,\u201d said to be compiled by Pope\nClement I., who was a companion of the apostles. It is generally\nbelieved that, though Clement might have commenced such a compilation,\nhe did not leave it in the form which it now holds, but, like the Canons\nof the Apostles, the exhibition of discipline is that of the earliest\ndays.\n\nIn book iv. ch. 5, enumerating those whose offerings were to be refused\nby the bishops as unworthy, we have, among thieves and other sinners,\n\n(Qui) famulos suos dure accipiunt et tractant; id est, verberibus, aut\nfame afficiunt, aut crudeli servitute premunt.\n\n_They who receive and treat their slaves harshly; that is, who whip or\nfamish them, or oppress them with heavy drudgery._\n\nThere is no crime in having the slave, but cruelty and oppression are\ncriminal.\n\nIn the same book, ch. 11 regards slaves and masters.\n\nDe famulis quid amplius dicamus, quam quod servus habeat benevolentiam\nerga dominum cum timore Dei, quamvis sit impius, quamvis sit improbus,\nnon tamen cum eo religione consentiat. Item dominus servum diligat, et\nquamvis pr\u00e6stet ei, judicet tamen esse \u00e6qualitatem, vel quatenus homo\nest. Qui autem habet dominum Christianum, salvo dominatu, diligat eum,\ntum ut dominum, tum ut fidei consortem et ut patrem, non sicut servus ad\noculum serviens sed sicut dominum amans, ut qui sciat mercedem famulat\u00fbs\nsui a Deo sibi solvendam esse. Similiter dominus, qui Christianum\nfamulum habet, salvo famulatu, diligat eum tanquam filium, et tanquam\nfratrem propter fidei communionem.\n\n_What further, then, can we say of slaves, than that the servant should\nhave benevolence towards his master, with the fear of God, though he\nshould be impious, though wicked; though he should not even agree with\nhim in religion. In like manner, let the master love his slave, and\nthough he is above him, let him judge him to be his equal at least as a\nhuman being. But let him who has a Christian master, having regard to\nhis dominion, love him both as a master, as a companion in the faith,\nand as a father, not as an eye-servant, but loving his master as one who\nknows that he will receive the reward of his service to be paid by God.\nSo let the master who has a Christian slave, saving the service, love\nhim as a son and as a brother, on account of the communion of faith._\n\nNe amaro animo jubeas famulo tuo aut ancill\u00e6 eidem Deo confidentibus: ne\naliquando gemant adversus te, et irascatur tibi Deus. Et vos servi\ndominis vestris tanquam Deum repr\u00e6sentantibus subditi estote cum\nsedulitate et metu, _tanquam Domino, et non tanquam hominibus_.\n\n_Do not command your man-servant nor your woman-servant having\nconfidence in the same God, in the bitterness of your soul; lest they at\nany time lament against you, and God be angry with you. And you servants\nbe subject to your masters, the representatives of God, with care and\nfear_, as to the Lord, and not to men.\n\nIn the eighth book, ch. 33, is a constitution of SS. Peter and Paul,\nrespecting the days that slaves were to be employed in labour, and those\non which they were to rest and to attend to religious duties.\n\nStephen I., who was the pontiff in 253, endeavoured to preserve\ndiscipline, and set forth regulations to remedy evils.\n\nAccusatores vero et accusationes, quas s\u00e6culi leges non recipiunt, et\nantecessores nostri prohibuerunt, et nos submovemus.\n\n_We also reject these accusers and charges which the secular laws do not\nreceive, and which our predecessors have prohibited._\n\nSoon after he specifies:\n\nAccusator autem vestrorum nullus sit servus aut libertus.\n\n_Let not your accuser be a slave or a freed person._\n\nThus, in the ancient discipline of the church, as in the secular\ntribunals, the testimony of slaves was inadmissible.\n\nIn the year 305, a provincial council was held at Elvira, in the\nsouthern part of Spain. The fifth canon of which is\u2014\n\nSi qua domina furore zeli accensa flagris verberaverit ancillam suam,\nita ut in tertium diem animam cum cruciatu effundat: eo quod incertum\nsit, voluntate, an casu occiderit, si voluntate post septem annos; si\ncasu, post quinquennii tempora; acta legitima p\u00e6nitentia, ad communionem\nplacuit admitti. Quod si infra tempora constituta fuerit infirmata,\naccipiat communionem.\n\n_If any mistress, carried away by great anger, shall have whipped her\nmaid-servant so that she shall within three days die in torture, as it\nis uncertain whether it may happen by reason of her will or by accident,\nit is decreed that she may be admitted to communion, having done lawful\npenance, after seven years, if it happened by her will; if by accident,\nafter five years. But should she get sick within the time prescribed,\nshe may get communion._\n\nSpanish ladies, at that period, had not yet so far yielded to the benign\ninfluence of the gospel, and so far restrained their violence of temper,\nas to show due mercy to their female slaves.\n\nIt may be well to observe a beneficial change, not only in public\nopinion, but even in the court, by reason of the influence of the spirit\nof Christianity; so that the pagan more than once reproved, by his\nmercy, the professor of a better faith.\n\nTheodoret (l. 9, de Gr\u00e6c. cur. aff.) informs us that Plato established\nthe moral and legal innocence of the master who slew his slave. Ulpian,\nthe Roman jurist (l. 2, de his qu\u00e6 sunt sui vel alieni jur.) testifies\nthe power which\u2014in imitation of the Greeks\u2014the Roman masters had over\nthe lives of their slaves. The well-known sentence of Pollio upon the\nunfortunate slave that broke a crystal vase at supper,\u2014that he should be\ncast as food to fish,\u2014and the interference of Augustus, who was a guest\nat that supper, give a strong exemplification of the tyranny then in\nmany instances indulged.\n\nAntoninus Pius issued a constitution about the year 150, restraining\nthis power, and forbidding a master to put his own slave to death,\nexcept in those cases where he would be permitted to slay the slave of\nanother. The cruelty of the Spaniards to their slaves, in the province\nof B\u0153tica, gave occasion to the constitution; and we have a rescript of\nAntoninus to \u00c6lius Martianus, the proconsul of B\u0153tica, in the case of\nthe slave of Julius Sabinus, a Spaniard. In this the right of the\nmasters to their slaves is recognised, but the officer is directed to\nhear their complaints of cruelty, starvation, and oppressive labour; to\nprotect them, and, if the complaints be founded in truth, not to allow\ntheir return to the master; and to insist on the observance of the\nconstitution.\n\nCaius (in l. 2, ad Cornel. de sicar.) states that the cause should be\nproved in presence of judges before the master could pronounce his\nsentence. Spartianus, the biographer, informs us that the Emperor\nAdrian, the immediate predecessor of Antoninus, enacted a law forbidding\nmasters to kill their slaves, unless legally convicted. And Ulpian\nrelates that Adrian placed, during five years, in confinement\n(relegatio) Umbricia, a lady of noble rank, because, for very slight\ncauses, she treated her female slaves most cruelly. But Constantine the\nGreat, about the year 320, enacted that no master should, under penalty\ndue to homicide, put his slave to death, and gave the jurisdiction to\nthe judges but if the slave died casually, after necessary chastisement,\nthe master was not accountable to any legal tribunal. (Const. in 1. i.;\nC. Theod. de emendat. servorum.)\n\nAs Christianity made progress, the unnatural severity with which this\nclass of human beings was treated became relaxed, and as the civil law\nameliorated their condition, the canon law, by its spiritual efficacy,\ncame in with the aid of religion, to secure that, the followers of the\nSaviour should give full force to the merciful provisions that were\nintroduced.\n\nThe principle which St. Augustine laid down was that observed. The state\nwas to enact the laws regulating this species of property; the church\nwas to plead for morality and to exhort to practise mercy.\n\nAbout the same time, St. Peter, archbishop of Alexandria, drew up a\nnumber of penitential canons, pointing out the manner of receiving,\ntreating, and reconciling the \u201clapsed,\u201d or those who, through fear of\npersecution, fell from the profession of the faith. Those canons were\nheld in high repute, and were generally adopted by the eastern bishops.\n\nThe sixth of those canons exhibits to us a device of weak Christians,\nwho desired to escape the trials of martyrdom, without being guilty of\nactual apostasy. A person of this sort procured that one of his slaves\nshould personate him, and in his name should apostatize. The canon\nprescribes for such a slave, who necessarily was a Christian and a slave\nof a Christian, but one-third of the time required of a free person, in\na mitigated penance, taking into account the influence of fear of the\nmaster, which, though it did not excuse, yet it diminished the guilt of\nthe apostasy.\n\nThe general council of Nice, in Bythinia, was held in the year 325, when\nConstantine was emperor. In the first canon of this council, according\nto the usual Greek and Latin copies, there is a provision for admitting\nslaves, as well as free persons who have been injured by others, to holy\norders. In the Arabic copy, the condition is specially expressed, which\nis not found in the Greek or Latin, but which had been previously well\nknown and universally established, \u201c_that this should not take place\nunless the slave had been manumitted by his master_.\u201d\n\nAbout this period, also, several of the _Gnostic_ and _Manichean_ errors\nprevailed extensively in Asia Minor. The _fanatics_ denied the\nlawfulness of _marriage_; they forbid _meat to be eaten_; they condemned\nthe _use of wine_; they praised extravagantly the monastic institutions,\nand proclaimed the _obligation on all_ to enter into religious\nsocieties; they decried the _lawfulness of slavery_; they denounced the\n_slaveholders_ as violating equally the laws of _nature and of\nreligion_; they offered to _aid slaves_ to _desert their owners_; gave\nthem _exhortations_, _invitations_, _asylum_, and _protection_; and in\nall things assumed to be more _holy_, more _perfect_, and more\n_spiritual_ than other men.!!!\n\nOsius, bishop of Cordova, whom Pope Sylvester sent as his legate into\nthe east, and who presided in the council of Nice, was present when\nseveral bishops assembled in the city of Gangr\u00e6, Paphlagonia, to correct\nthose errors. Pope Symmachus declared, in a council held in Rome, about\nthe year 500, that Osius confirmed, by the authority of the pope, the\nacts of this council. The decrees have been admitted into the body of\ncanon law, and have always been regarded as a rule of conduct in the\nCatholic church. The third canon:\n\nSi quis docet servum, pietatis pr\u00e6textu, dominum contemnere, et a\nministerio recedere, et non cum benevolentia et omni honore domino suo\ninservire. Anathema sit.\n\n_If any one, under the pretence of piety, teaches a slave to despise his\nmaster, and to withdraw from his service, and not to serve his master\nwith good-will and all respect. Let him be anathema._\n\n_Let him be anathema_ is never appended to any decree which does not\ncontain the expression of unchangeable doctrine respecting belief or\nmorality, and indicates that the doctrine has been revealed by God. It\nis precisely what St. Paul says in _Gal._ i. 8: \u201cBut though we, or an\nangel from heaven, preach a gospel to you beside that which we have\npreached to you, let him be anathema.\u201d 9: \u201cAs we said before to you, so\nI say now again: If any man preach to you a gospel besides that which\nyou have received; let him be anathema.\u201d It is therefore manifest, that\nalthough this council of Gangr\u00e6 was a particular one, yet the universal\nreception of this third canon, with its _anathema_, and its recognition\nin the Roman council by Pope Symmachus, gives it the greatest authority\nand in Labbe it is further entitled as approved by Leo IV., about the\nyear 850, _dist. 20, C. de libell_.\n\nSeveral councils were held in Africa in the third and fourth centuries,\nin Carthage, in Milevi, and in Hippo. About the year 422, the first of\nPope Celestine I., one was held under Aurelius, archbishop of Carthage,\nand in which St. Augustine sat as bishop of Hippo and legate of Numidia.\nA compilation was made of the canons of this and the preceding ones,\nwhich was styled the \u201cAfrican Council.\u201d The canon cxvi. of this\ncollection, taken into the body of the canon law, decrees that slaves\nshall not be admitted as prosecutors, nor shall certain freedmen be so\nadmitted, except to complain for themselves; and for this, as well as\nfor the incapacity of several others there described, the public law is\ncited, as well as the 7th and 8th councils of Carthage.\n\nThe great St. Basil was born in 329, and died in 379. His works, called\n\u201cCanonical,\u201d contain a great number of those which were the rules of\ndiscipline, not only for Asia Minor, but for the vast regions in its\nvicinity. The fortieth canon regards the marriages of female slaves. In\nthis he mentions a discipline which was not general, but was peculiar to\nthe north-eastern provinces of the church, requiring the consent of the\nmaster to the validity of the marriage-contract of a female slave: this\nwas not required in other places, as is abundantly testified by several\ndocuments.\n\nThe forty-second canon treats in like manner of the marriages of\nchildren without their parents\u2019 consent, and generally of those of all\nslaves without the consent of the owner.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON VI.\n\nIt may not be improper now to take a more particular view of the civil\nworld, its condition, and of those wars at the instance of which it had\nbeen, and then was, flooded with slaves. As an example, we select the\nmiddle of the fifth century:\n\nAttila, to whom the Romans gave the sobriquet, \u201c_Flagellum Dei_,\u201d\n_Scourge of God_, was driven by \u00c6tius out of Gaul in the year 451; and\nthe following year, pouring his wild hordes down upon Italy, conquered\nAquillia, Pavia, Milan, and a great number of small cities, and was in\nthe attitude of marching on Rome. The Emperor Valentinian III., who was\na weak prince, panic-struck, shut himself up in Ravenna; and his\ngeneral, \u00c6tius, who had been so victorious in Gaul, partook of the\ngeneral fear when invaded at home. The destruction of Rome and its\nimperial power, the slaughter and slavery of the Roman people, and the\nextinction of the church appeared probable. Under such a state of\nthings, the emperor and his council prevailed on Leo the pontiff\nhimself, supported by Albienus and Tragelius, men of great experience\nand talent, to undertake an embassy to the enemy\u2019s camp, then on the\nbanks of the Minzo. This embassy was accompanied by a most grand and\nnumerous retinue\u2014a small army\u2014armed, not with the weapons of war, but\nwith the crosier and crook. Nor did Attila attempt to hide his joy for\ntheir arrival. The most profound attention, the most convincing\ndemonstrations of his kindness to them, were studiously displayed by\nhim.\n\nThe terms proposed were readily accepted, and Attila and his army, a\ntornado fraught with moral and physical ruin to Rome, the church, and\nthe civilized world, silently sank away far behind the Danube.\n\nNor is it strange that the great success of this embassy should have\nbeen attributed to some intervention of miraculous power during the dark\nages that followed;\u2014and hence we find that, four hundred years after, in\none of Gruter\u2019s copies of \u201cThe Historica Miscella,\u201d it is stated that\nSt. Peter and St. Paul stood, visible alone to Attila, on either side of\nLeo, brandishing a sword, commanding him to accept whatever Leo should\noffer; and this is quoted as credible history by Barronius, _ad ann._\n452, _no._ 47\u201359, and has been painted by Raffaele, at a much later\nperiod. The idea was perhaps poetical, and this piece alone would have\nimmortalized the artist. But it is truly singular that this appearance\nof Peter and Paul should have gained a place in the Roman Breviary,\nespecially as it is nowhere alluded to by Leo, nor by his secretary,\nProsper, who was present at that treaty, nor by any contemporary\nwhatever. The facts attached to Attila, in connection with this treaty,\nwere:\u2014His army was extremely destitute, and a contagious and very mortal\ndisease was raging in his camp; in addition to which, Marcian had\ngathered a large army, then under march for Italy, to join the imperial\nforces under \u00c6tius, while, at the same moment, another army, sent by\nMarcian long before, were then ravaging the country of the Huns\nthemselves: of these facts Attila was well advised. These were the\nagencies that operated on his mind in favour of peace with Valentinian.\nTo us the idea seems puerile to suppose Jehovah sending Peter and Paul,\nsword in hand, to frighten his Hunnish majesty from making slaves of the\nRoman people.\n\nWould it not be more consonant with the general acts of his providence\nto point Attila to his diseased army; to their consequent want of\nsupplies, and to the threatening danger of his being totally cut off by\nthe two armies of Marcian, saying nothing of the possibility of a\nrestored confidence among the then panic-struck Romans? Besides, it has\nbeen well ascertained that, at the time of Leo\u2019s arrival, he had been\nhesitating whether to march on Rome\u2014or recross the Alps. See _Bower_,\nvol. ii. p. 202; also, _Jornandez Rer. Goth._ c. 41, 49.\n\nBut, we acknowledge the intervening influences of the Divine will, in\nthis case, as forcibly as it could be urged, even if attended with all\nthe particulars and extravagancies of the poetic painter\u2019s fancy. We\nhave alluded to this particle of the history of that day, as it stands\nupon the records, in order that, while we quote, we may not be\nmisunderstood as to our view of the providences of God.\n\nBut to return to our subject:\u2014Upon a review of these times, we may\nnotice the distractions of the church by means of the various heresies\nwhich imbittered against each other the different professions of the\nChristian faith. How the followers of Arius, for more than half a\ncentury, spread confusion and violence over the entire Christian\nworld:\u2014How, crushed and driven out by Theodosius, thousands took shelter\namong the pagans, whose movements they stimulated, and whom we now\nperceive in progress of the gradual overthrow of the Roman Empire:\u2014How,\nupon the partial or more general successes of these hordes, their Arian\nconfederates, with a fresh memory of their late oppressions and the\ncruelties inflicted on them, retaliated with unsparing severity and\nbloodshed upon their Nicene opponents; while, among all these savage\ninvaders, the Arian creed supplanted and succeeded the pagan\nworship:\u2014How this wild Attila swept the banks of the Danube and the\nRhine, carrying death or desolation to the followers of Pharamond, and\nto the Goths, who had then already established themselves in the\nstrongholds of ancient Gaul and of the more modern Romans. True, his\ncareer was checked on the banks of the Rhone, but, like a hunted lion,\nhe rushed towards the Mediterranean, and, recruiting his force in\nPannonia, directed his march to Italy; and to-day, after fourteen\ncenturies, it is said that Aquillia still stands the monument of his\nbarbarity. We have this moment noticed the extraordinary manner in\nwhich, it is said, by the monition of Leo, his path of ruin was suddenly\ndirected to the ice-bound fortresses of the north. But the captives made\non both sides, in these desolating wars, greatly increased the number of\nslaves of the white race, which otherwise, from operating causes, would\nhave been diminished.\n\nUp to this time in these regions, and, as we shall see, to a much later\ntime, slavery was the result of that mercy in the victor, whereby he\nspared the life of the conquered enemy. Its condition did not depend on\nany previous condition of degradation, of freedom or slavery, nor upon\nthe race or colour of the captive,\u2014and the wars, for ages, which had\nbeen and were so productive of slavery, were almost exclusively among\nthose who, in common, claimed a Caucasian origin. Instances of African\nslavery were rare. The Romans derived some few from their African wars,\nvalued mostly by pride, because they were the most rare.\n\nThus we read in the Life of Nero, by Tacitus:\u2014\u201cNero never travelled with\nless than a thousand baggage-wagons; the mules all shod with silver, and\nthe drivers dressed in scarlet; his African slaves adorned with\nbracelets on their arms, and the horses decorated with the richest\ntrappings.\u201d But these times had passed away. Yet we find in the Life of\nAlphonso el Casto, that, upon his conquest of Lisbon, 798, he sent seven\nMoorish slaves as a present to Charlemagne. And also, in Bower\u2019s \u201cLives\nof the Popes,\u201d that in 849, \u201cA company of Moors, from Africa,\nrendezvoused at Tozar, in Sardinia, and thence made an incursion, by the\nTiber, on Rome. But they were mostly lost in a storm before landing. Of\nthose who got on shore, some were killed. in battle, some were hanged,\nand a large number were brought to Rome and reduced to slavery.\u201d\n\nYet the great mass of slaves were of the same race and colour of their\nmasters; and at this age, a most important fact with the Christian, if\nthey were pagans, was their conversion to Christianity.\n\nFor the first three hundred years, we may notice how Christianity had\nthreaded her way amidst the troublous and barbarous paganisms of that\nage. But, at the time to which we have arrived, Christianity had ruled\nthe civilized world for more than a century. And had Providence seen fit\nto have attended her future path with peace, human sympathy might have\nfondly hoped that the mild spirit of her religion would have been poured\nin ameliorating, purifying streams upon the condition and soul of the\nslave, and like a dissolving oil on the chains that bound him.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VII.\n\nWe present a series of records and documents which elucidate the\npractice and doctrine of the church in regard to slavery, as we find it\nin that age.\n\nThese records are mostly extracts from Bishop England\u2019s Letters, and\ncollated by him with accuracy. Some few, from Bower, Bede, Lingard, and\nothers, will be noticed in their place.\n\nIt should be remembered that, in all cases where the contrary is not\nexplicitly announced, the slave is of the same colour and race as the\nmaster. At this era of the world, slaves were too common, and their\nvalue too little, to warrant the expense of a distant importation. The\nnegro slave, from his exhibiting an extreme variety of the human\nspecies, was regarded more as an article of curiosity and pride than\nusefulness; and therefore was seldom or never found in Europe, except\nnear the royal palaces, or in the trains of emperors.\n\nAs early as the days of Polycarp and St. Ignatius, who were disciples of\nthe apostles, Christians had, from motives of mercy, charity, and\naffection, manumitted many of their slaves in presence of the bishops,\nand this was more or less extensively practised through the succeeding\nperiod. In several churches, it was agreed that if a slave became a\nChristian, he should be manumitted on receiving baptism. In Rome, the\nslave was frequently manumitted by the form called _vindicta_, with the\npr\u00e6tor\u2019s rod. Constantine, in the year 317, Sozomen relates, lib. i. c.\n9, transferred this authority to the bishops, who were empowered to use\nthe rod in the church, and have the manumission testified in the\npresence of the congregation. A rescript of that emperor to this effect\nis found in the Theodosian code, 1. i. c. _De his qui in eccl.\nmanumitt_. The master, who consented to manumit the slave, presented him\nto the bishop, in presence of the congregation, and the bishop\npronounced him free, and became the guardian of his freedom. The\nrescript was directed to Protogenas, bishop of Sardica, and was in the\nconsulship of Sabinus and Ruffinus.\n\nIn book ii. of the same code, is a rescript to Osius, bishop of Cordova,\nin which the emperor empowers the bishops to grant the privilege of\nRoman citizenship to such freedmen as they may judge worthy.\n\nIn the consulship of Crispus and Constantine, a grant was given to the\nclergy of manumitting their own slaves when they pleased, by any form\nthey should think proper. About a century later, St. Augustine, bishop\nof Hippo, informs us (_Sermo. de diversis_, 50) that this form was\nestablished in Africa. \u201cThe deacon of Hippo is a poor man: he has\nnothing to give to any person: but, before he was a clergyman, he, by\nthe fruit of his labour and industry, bought some little servants, and\nis to-day, by the episcopal act, about to manumit them in your sight.\u201d\n\nThis same bishop writes, (_Enarrat in Ps._ cxxiv.,) \u201cChrist does not\nwish to make you proud while you walk in this journey, that is, while\nyou are in this life. Has it happened that you have been made a\nChristian, and you have a man as your master: you have not been made a\nChristian that you may scorn to serve. When, therefore, by the command\nof Christ you are the servant of a man, your service is not to him, but\nto the one that gave you the command to serve. And he says, Hear your\nmasters, according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, and in the\nsimplicity of your hearts, not as eye-servants, as if pleasing men, but,\nas the servants of Christ, doing the will of God, from your hearts, with\na good will. Behold, he did not liberate you from being servants, but he\nmade those who were bad servants to be good servants. Oh, how much do\nthe rich owe to Christ who has thus set order in their houses! So, if\nthere be in his family a faithless slave, and Christ convert him, he\ndoes not say to him, Leave your master, because you have now known him\nwho is the true Master! Perhaps this master of yours is impious and\nunjust, and that you are faithful and just; it is unbecoming that the\njust and faithful should serve the unjust and the infidel: this is not\nwhat he said; but, let him rather serve.\u201d This great doctor of the\nchurch continues at considerable length to show how Christ, by his own\nexample, exhorts the servants to fidelity and obedience to their masters\nin every thing, save what is contrary to God\u2019s service. Subsequently, he\npasses to the end of time, and the opening of eternity, and shows many\ngood, obedient, and afflicted servants mingled with good masters among\nthe elect, and bad, faithless, and stubborn servants, with cruel\nmasters, cast among the reprobates.\n\nIn his _book_ i., _on the Sermon of Christ on the Mount_, he dwells upon\nthe duty of Christian masters to their slaves. They are not to regard\nthem as mere property, but to treat them as human beings having immortal\nsouls, for which Christ died.\n\nThus we perceive that, though from the encouragement of manumission and\nthe spirit of Christianity, the number of slaves had been greatly\nreduced and their situation greatly improved, still the principles were\nrecognised of the moral and religious legality of holding slave\nproperty, and of requiring that they should perform a reasonable\nservice.\n\nThe instances of voluntary slavery, such as that of St. Paulinus, were\nnot rare. It is related, that having bestowed all that he could raise,\nto ransom prisoners taken by the barbarians who overran the country;\nupon the application of a poor widow whose son was held in captivity, he\nsold himself, to procure the means of her son\u2019s release. His good\nconduct procured the affection of his master, and subsequently his\nemancipation. Thus slavery lost some of its degrading character. This,\ntogether with the confusion arising from the turbulence accompanying the\ninvasions, caused a relaxation of discipline: to remedy some of the\nabuses, Pope Leo issued several letters. The following is an extract\nfrom the first of them: it has been taken into the body of the canon\nlaw. _Dist. 5, Admittuntur_:\u2014\n\n\u201cAdmittuntur passim ad ordinem sacrum, quibus nulla natalium, nulla\nmorum dignitas suffragatur: et qui a dominis suis libertatem consequi\nminime potuerunt, ad fastigium sacerdotii, tanquam servilis vilitas hunc\nhonorem jure capiat, provehuntur, et probari Deo se posse creditur, qui\ndomino suo necdum probare se potuit. Duplex itaque in hac parte reatus\nest, quod et sacrum mysterium (ministerium) talis consortii vilitate\npolluitur, et dominorum, quantum ad illicit\u00e6 usurpationis temeritatem\npertinet, jura solvuntur. Ab his itaque, fratres carissimi, omnes\nprovinci\u00e6 vestr\u00e6 abstineant sacerdotes: et non tantum ab his, sed ab\nillis etiam, qui aut originali aut alicui conditioni obligati sunt,\nvolumus temperari: nisi forte corum petitio aut voluntas accesserit, qui\naliquid sibi in eos vindicant potestatis. Debet enim esse immunis ab\naliis, qui divin\u00e6 militi\u00e6 fuerit aggregandus; ut a castris Dominicis,\nquibus nomen ejus adscribitur, nullis necessitatis vinculis\nabstrahatur.\u201d\n\n_Persons who have not the qualifications of birth or conduct, are\neverywhere admitted to holy orders; and they who could not procure\nfreedom from their masters are elevated to the rank of the priesthood;\nas if the lowliness of slavery could rightfully claim this honour: and,\nas if he who could not procure the approbation of even his master, could\nprocure that of God. There is, therefore, in this a double criminality:\nfor the holy ministry is polluted by the meanness of this fellowship,\nand so far as regards the rashness of this unlawful usurpation, the\nrights of the masters are infringed. Wherefore, dearest brethren, let\nall the priests of your province keep aloof from these: and not only\nfrom these, but also, we desire they should abstain from those who are\nunder bond, by origin or any condition, except perchance upon the\npetition or consent of the persons who have them in their power in any\nway. For he who is to be aggregated to the divine warfare, ought to be\nexempt from other obligations: so that he may not by any bond of\nnecessity be drawn away from that camp of the Lord for which his name\nhas been enrolled._\n\nProsper, lib. 2 _de vit\u00e2 contemplat._ c. 3, and many other writers of\nthis century, treat of the relative duties of the Christian master and\nhis Christian slave. The zeal and charity of several holy men led them\nto make extraordinary sacrifices during this period, to redeem the\ncaptives from the barbarians: besides the remarkable instance of\nPaulinus, we have the ardent and persevering charity of Exuperius,\nbishop of Toulouse, who sold the plate belonging to the church, and used\nglass for the chalice, that he might be able by every species of economy\nto procure liberty for the enslaved.\n\nNor was this a solitary instance. About the year 513, Pope Symmachus\ncalled a national council, by which, among other enactments, he\nestablished the rule that under no circumstances, could the church\nproperty be alienated. See Bower, vol. ii. p. 277.\n\nAbout the year 535, C\u00e6sarius, primate of Arles, applied to Pope Agapetus\nfor means to relieve the poor Christians in Gaul. But, at that time, the\nchurch being quite destitute of money, the pope excused himself, and\nquoted the decree of Symmachus. The Arians, and some others, hence\ninculcated the doctrine that the alienation of church property, under\nany circumstances, was sacrilege. The laws of the empire also forbid\nsuch alienation, but with the proviso, \u201cexcept there was no other means\nby which the poor could be relieved in time of famine, nor the captives\nbe redeemed from slavery.\u201d Such was the practice among the most pious of\nthe age.\n\nSt. Ambrose did not scruple to melt down the communion-plate of the\nchurch of Milan to redeem some captives, who otherwise must have\ncontinued in slavery. The Arians charged him with sacrilege: in answer\nto which he wrote his Apology, which has reached this late day, as the\nrules and reasons of the church in such cases. He says\u2014\u201cIs it not better\nthat the plate should be melted by the bishop to maintain the poor, when\nthey can be maintained by no other means, than that it should become the\nspoil and plunder of a sacrilegious enemy? Will not the Lord thus\nexpostulate with us, Why did you suffer so many helpless persons to die\nwith hunger, when you had gold to relieve and support them? Why were so\nmany captives carried away and sold without ransom? Why were so many\nsuffered to be slain by the enemy? It would have been better to have\npreserved the vessels of living men than lifeless metals. To this, what\nanswer can be returned? Should one say, I was afraid that the temple of\nGod should want its ornaments: Christ would answer, My sacraments\nrequire no gold, nor do they please me more for being ministered in\ngold, as they are not to be bought with gold. The ornament of my\nsacrament is the redemption of captives; and those alone are precious\nvessels that redeem souls from death.\u201d\n\nThe saint concludes that though it would be highly criminal for a man to\nconvert the sacred vessels to his own private use, yet it is so far from\nbeing a crime, that he looks upon it as an obligation incumbent on him\nand his brethren to prefer the living temples of God to the unnecessary\nornaments of the material edifices. See Ambrose de Offic. lib. ii. cap.\n28; and such was the doctrine of St. Austin, see Possid. Vit. Aug. caput\n24; of Acacius of Amida, see Socrat. lib. vii. c. 24; of Deigratias of\nCarthage, see Vict. de Persec. Vandal, lib. i.; of Cyril of Jerusalem,\nsee Theodoret, lib. ii. c. 27; yea all, who have touched on the subject,\nhave subscribed to the doctrine of St. Ambrose. Even the Emperor\nJustinian, in his law against sacrilege, forbids the church plate,\nvestments, or any other gifts, to be sold, or pawned; but adds, \u201cexcept\nin case of captivity or famine, the lives and souls of men being\npreferable to any vessels or vestments whatever.\u201d See Codex Just. lib.\ni. tit. 2. de Sacr. Eccles. leg. 21; also see Bower\u2019s Life of Agapetus,\np. 354.\n\nIt will be readily conceived that the barbarians, in the earlier ages of\nthe Christian church, treated their slaves with cruelty, inconsistent\nwith the spirit of the new religion; and, upon their adoption of the\nChristian creed, they sometimes ran into an opposite extreme, contrary\nto the rules of the church. In both cases the church used her authority,\nand, says Bishop England, upon their embrace of Christianity, \u201cslavery\nbegan to assume a variety of mitigated forms among them,\u201d which will, in\nsome degree, be developed as we proceed with the history of canonical\nlegislation on that subject.\n\nThe rules of the Christian church are evidently founded upon the laws of\nGod, as delivered to Moses: \u201cAnd if a man smite his servant, or his\nmaid, with a rod, and he die under his hand, he shall be surely\npunished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be\npunished: for he is his money.\u201d\n\n\u201cIf a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it\nperish, he shall let him go free for his eye\u2019s sake. And if he smite his\nman-servant\u2019s tooth, or his maid-servant\u2019s tooth, he shall let him go\nfor his tooth\u2019s sake.\u201d _Exod._ xxi. 20, 21, 26, 27. And if a man took\nhis female slave to wife, and became displeased with her * * * she\nshould be free. See _Deut._ xxi. 10\u201315. But fornication in a female\nslave was not punished by death, but by stripes. See _Lev._ xix. 20\u201323.\n\nNeither the laws of Moses, nor indeed of any civilized people, have ever\npermitted unusual or cruel punishments to be inflicted on the slave.\nCivilization, as well as Judaism, seems to have inculcated, \u201cBe not\nexcessive toward any; and without discretion do nothing. If thou have a\nservant, let him be unto thee as thyself, because thou hast bought him\nwith a price.\u201d _Eccl._ xxxiii. 29.\n\nAmong heathen nations, their laws were to the effect, that when the\nslave, sick or wounded, was neglected, or abandoned to his fate by his\nmaster; yet, if he recovered, the master should lose his property in\nsuch slave, and the slave should be free; and such neglect was often\notherwise made punishable. The Roman law sanctioned this doctrine: \u201cSi\nverberatus fuerit _servus_ non mortifere, negligentia autem perierit, de\nvulnerato actio erit, non de occiso.\u201d See Lex Aquillia. And so in\nancient France, see F\u0153dere, vol. iii. p. 290: _If negligence or bad\ntreatment towards the slave was proved in the master, the slave was\ndeclared free._\n\nAt this day, in all civilized countries, the civil law forbids unusual\nand cruel punishment of slaves, and also a wanton and careless\nnegligence of them, either in sickness or health. Thus the law punishes\nthe master for his neglect to govern his slaves, by making him\nresponsible for their bad conduct, and the damage their want of proper\ngovernment may occasion others.\n\nIn the year 494, Pope Gelesius admonished the bishops, at their\nordinations, that\u2014\n\n\u201cNe unquam ordinationes pr\u00e6sumat illicitas; ne * * * cur\u00e6 aut cuilibet\nconditioni obnoxium notatumque ad sacros ordines permittat accedere.\u201d\n\n_That he should never presume to hold unlawful ordinations; that he\nshould not allow to holy orders * * * any person bound to the service of\nthe court, or liable to bond for his condition_ (slavery) _or marked\nthereto_.\n\nIn the year 506, a council was held at Agdle, the sixty-second canon of\nwhich is\u2014\n\n\u201cSi quis servum proprium sine conscienti\u00e2, judicis occiderit,\nexcommunicatione vel p\u0153nitentia biennii reatum sanguinis emendabit.\u201d\n\n_If any one shall put his own servant to death, without the knowledge of\nthe judge, let him make compensation for the guilt of blood by\nexcommunication or two years\u2019 penance._\n\nAnother council was held eleven years later. Many of the canons of this\nsynod are transcripts of those of Agdle. The thirty-fourth is:\n\n\u201cSi quis servum proprium sine conscienti\u00e2, judicis occiderit,\nexcommunicatione biennii effusionem sanguinis expiabit.\u201d\n\n_If any one shall slay his own servant without the knowledge of the\njudge, let him expiate the shedding of blood by an excommunication of\ntwo years._\n\nThis was nearly two hundred years after the law of Constantine\nforbidding this exercise of power by the master.\n\nThe third council of Orleans was held in the year 538.\n\nThe thirteenth canon regulates, that if Christian slaves shall be\npossessed by Jews, and these latter require them to do any thing\nforbidden by the Christian religion, or if the Jews shall seize upon any\nof their servants to whip or punish them for those things that have been\ndeclared to be excusable or forgiven, and those slaves fly to the church\nfor protection, they are not to be given up, unless there be given and\nreceived a just and sufficient sum to warrant their protection.\n\nThe canon xxvi. gives a specimen of the early feudalism nearly similar\nto the subsequent villain service.\n\n\u201cUt nullus servilibus colonariisque conditionibus obligatus, juxta\nstatuta sedis apostolic\u00e6, ad honores ecclesiasticos admittatur; nisi\nprius aut testamento, aut per tabulas legitime constiterit absolutum.\nQuod si quis episcoporum, ejus qui ordinatur conditionem sciens,\ntransgredi per ordinationem inhibitam fortasse voluerit, anni spatio\nmissas facere non pr\u00e6sumat.\u201d\n\n_Let no one held under servile or colonizing conditions be admitted to\nchurch honours, in violation of the statutes of the Apostolic see;\nunless it be evident that he has been previously absolved therefrom by\nwill or by deed. And if any bishop, being aware of such condition of the\nperson so ordained, shall wilfully transgress by making such unlawful\nordination, let him not presume to celebrate mass for the space of a\nyear._\n\nThe colonial condition was in its origin different from the mere\nservile. The _mancipium_ or _manu captum_ was the _servus_ or slave made\nin war: the _colonus_, or husbandman, though, at the period at which we\nare arrived, he frequently was in as abject a condition, yet was so by a\ndifferent process. St. Augustine, in cap. i. lib. x. _De Civitate Dei_,\ntells us, \u201cColoni _dicuntur_, qui conditionem debebant genitali solo\npropter agriculturam sub dominio possessorum.\u201d They are called\n_colonists who owe their condition to their native land, under the\ndominion of its possessors_.\n\nThe following history of various modes by which they became servants, is\ntaken from the work _De Gubernat. Dei_, lib. v., by the good and erudite\nSalvianus, a priest, who died at Marseilles, about the year 484.\n\nNonnulli eorum de quibus loquimur, * * * cum domicilia atque agellos\nsuos pervasionibus perdunt, aut fatigati ab exactoribus deserunt, quia\ntenere non possunt, fundos majorum expetunt, et coloni divitum fiunt.\nAut sicut solent hi qui hostium terrore compulsi, ad castella se\nconferunt, aut qui perdito ingenu\u00e6 incolumitatis statu ad asylum aliquod\ndesperatione confugiunt: ita et isti qui habere amplius vel sedem vel\ndignitatem suorum natalium non queunt, jugo se inquilin\u00e6 abjectionis\naddicunt: in hanc necessitatem redacti, ut exactores non facultatis\ntantum, set etiam conditionis su\u00e6, atque exultantes non a rebus tantum\nsuis, sed etiam a seipsis, ac perdentes secum omnia sua, et rerum\nproprietate careant, et jus libertatis amittant. * * * Illud gravius et\nacerbius, quod additur huic malo servilius malum. Nam suscipiuntur\nadven\u00e6, fiunt pr\u00e6judicio habitationis indigen\u00e6, et quos suscipiunt ut\nextraneos et alienos, incipiunt habere quasi proprios: quos esse constat\ningenuos, vertunt in servos.\n\n_Some of those, when they lose their dwellings and their little fields\nby invasion, or leave them, being worried by exactions, as they can no\nlonger hold them, seek the grounds of the larger proprietors, and become\nthe colonists of the wealthy. Or, as is usual with those who are driven\noff by the fear of enemies, and take refuge in the castles, or who,\nhaving lost their state of safe freedom, fly to some asylum in despair:\nso they who can no longer have the place or the dignity derived from\ntheir birth, subject themselves to the abject yoke of the sojourner\u2019s\nlot; reduced to such necessity, that they are stripped not only of their\nproperty, but also of their rank; going into exile not only from what\nbelongs to them but from their very selves, and with themselves losing\nall that they had, they are bereft of any property in things and lose\nthe very right of liberty. * * * A more degrading injury is added to\nthis evil. For they are received as strangers, they become inhabitants\nbereft of the rights of inhabitants; they who receive them as foreigners\nand aliens begin to treat them as property, and change into slaves those\nwho, evidently, were free._\n\nIn this picture of the colonist, we may find the outline of the villain\nof a later age; and in the several enactments and regulations of\nsucceeding legislators and councils, we shall discover the changes which\nservitude underwent previous to its total extinction in Europe.\n\nFlodoardin, c. 28, History of the church of Rheims, gives us the will of\nSt. Remi, its bishop, who baptized Clovis, upon his conversion in 496,\nand who was still living in the year 550. This document grants freedom\nto some of the colonists belonging to that church and retains others in\nservice.\n\nDu Cange says (Art. _Colonus_) that though in several instances the\ncondition of the colonists was as abject as that of slaves, yet\ngenerally they were in a better position. _Erant igitur coloni medi\u00e6\nconditionis inter ingenuos seu liberos et servos._\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VIII.\n\nFrom the fact that the slaves of this era were of the same colour and\nother physical qualities of their masters; from their great number, and\nconsequently little value, their condition became attended with\nextremely diverse circumstances; so various were, therefore, the\nrelations between them and the master, that it would now be impossible,\nperhaps, to give an accurate history of their various castes. These\nfacts should be kept in mind, lest we mistake, and find confusion, where\ndistinction was sufficiently clear and obvious.\n\nMuratori, treating of the Roman slaves and freedmen, acknowledges that\nhe is unable accurately to state the conditions on which they manumitted\ntheir slaves. In his treatise, \u201c_Sopra i Servi e Liberti Antichi_,\u201d he\nhas a passage thus:\n\nNoi non sappiamo se con patti, e con quai patti una vulta si\nmanomettessero que\u2019 Servi, che poi continuavano come Liberti a servire\nin Casa de\u2019 loro Padroni, con essere alzati a piu onorati impieghi.\nSappiamo bensi dal Tit. _ne Operis Libertorum_, e dall\u2019 altro _de bonis\nLibertorum_ ne\u2019 Digesti, che moltissimi acquistavano la Liberta con\nobbligarsi di fare ai Padroni de\u2019 Regaii, o delle Fatture, se erano\nArtefici, _Operas, vel Donum_. Questo si praticava verisimilmente dai\nsoli Mercatanti, ed altri Signori dati all\u2019 interarse, ma non gia dalle\nNobili Case. Per conto di questo, le antiche Iscrizioni ci fanno vedere,\nche moltissimi furono coloro, che anche dopo la conseguita Liberta\nseguitavano a convivere, e servire in quelle medesime Case, non piu come\nServi, ma come Liberti, perche probabilmente tornava il conto agli uni e\nagli altri. I Padroni si servivano di Persone loro confidenti, e gia\ninnestate nella propria Famiglia; ei Liberti cresciuti di onore, e di\nguadagno poteano cumulare roba per se e per li Figli. Non ho io potuto\nscoprire se i Romani tenessero Servi Mercenarj come oggidi. O di veri\nServi, o di Liberti allora si servivano. Cio posto, maraviglia e, che il\nPignoria, in trattando degli Ufizj de\u2019 Servi antichi, imbrogliasse tanto\nle carte, senza distinguere i Servi dai Liberti, e con attribuir molti\nimpieghi ai primi, che pure erano riserbati agli ultimi. E piu da\nstupire e, citarsi da lui Marmi, che parlano di Liberti, e pure sono\npresi da esso, come se parlassero di Servi.\n\n_We know not whether they manumitted upon condition, or, if so, upon\nwhat conditions they manumitted formerly those servants who continued\nthenceforth as freed persons, but elevated to more honourable\nemployments, to serve in the houses of their masters. We do indeed know\nin the Tit._ de Operis Libertorum, _and in another_ de bonis Libertorum\n_of the Digests, that very many acquired their liberty with the\nobligation of giving to their masters presents, or doing work if they\nwere artists_, Operas vel donum. _This was in all likelihood practised\nonly by merchants or other masters given to making profit, but not by\nnoble houses. As to these the ancient inscriptions exhibit to us that\nvery many who obtained their freedom, yet continued to live and to do\nservice in those same houses, no longer as slaves, but as freed persons,\nbecause probably each party found it beneficial. The patrons kept about\nthem persons in whom they had confidence, and who had already been\nengrafted on their families; the freed persons, grown to honour and\nmaking profit could create property for themselves and for their\nchildren. I cannot discover whether the Romans had hireling servants, as\nis now the case. They had then true slaves and sometimes freed persons.\nThis being the case, it is matter of surprise that Pignoria, in treating\nof the employment of the ancient slaves, should have been so perplexed\nas not to be able clearly to distinguish slaves from freed persons, and\nshould have attributed to the former many employments which were\nspecially reserved for the latter: and it is more to be wondered at,\nthat marbles which speak of freed persons are referred to by him and\nexplained as treating of slaves._\n\nIt is clear that even in the days of the Emperor Claudius, to whose\nreign, A.D. 45, the marble of which he treats refers, and probably long\nbefore that period, many of the freedmen of the Roman empire were bound\nto do certain services for the patrons who had been their masters, and\nthat this obligation descended to their progeny. Hence this would still\nbe a species of servitude.\n\nThe barbarians who overran the empire came chiefly from Scythia and\nGermany, as that vast region was then called which stretches from the\nAlps to the Northern Ocean. When they settled in the conquered provinces\nof Gaul and in Italy, they introduced many of their customs as well of\ngovernment as of policy. Most of their slaves were what the writers of\nthe second, third, and fourth centuries describe as _coloni_ and\n_conditionibus obligati_. As Tacitus describes, in xxv. _De Moribus\nGermanorum_:\n\n\u201cThe slaves in general are not arranged at their several employments in\nthe household affairs, as is the practice at Rome. Each has his separate\nhabitation, and his own establishment to manage. The master considers\nhim as an agrarian dependant, who is obliged to furnish a certain\nquantity of grain, cattle, or wearing-apparel. The slave obeys, and the\nstate of servitude extends no further. All domestic affairs are managed\nby the master\u2019s wife and children. To punish a slave with stripes; to\nload him with chains, or condemn him to hard labour, is unusual. It is\ntrue that slaves are sometimes put to death, not under colour of\njustice, or of any authority vested in the master; but in a transport of\npassion, in a fit of rage, as is often the case in a sudden affray but\nit is also true that this species of homicide passes with impunity. The\nfreedmen are not of much higher consideration than the actual slaves;\nthey obtain no rank in their master\u2019s family, and, if we except the\nparts of Germany where monarchy is established, they never figure on the\nstage of public business. In despotic governments they often rise above\nthe men of ingenuous birth, and even eclipse the whole body of the\nnobles. In other states the subordination of the freedmen is a proof of\npublic liberty.\u201d\n\nAt all ages, slaves who belonged to the absolute monarch, sometimes\nbecame elevated above the native nobility: witness the case of Joseph in\nEgypt; of Ebed Melech, who was black, in Judea; of Haman, also a black,\nan Amalekite; of Mordecai, his successor; of Esther the queen; of Daniel\nthe prophet, and Felix, governor of Judea, a Greek slave to the Roman\nemperor. But such things can never occur in a republic. To a political\nmisfortune of this kind the prophet alludes\u2014\u201cServants (slaves) have\nruled over us\u201d\u2014than which nothing can be more expressive of the loss of\nliberty.\n\nIn the appendix to the Theodosian code, Const. 5, we read\u2014\n\nInverecund\u00e2 arte defendetur, si hi ad conditionem vel originem\nreposcuntur, quibus tempore famis, cum in mortem penuria cogerentur,\nopitulari non potuit dominus aut patronus.\n\n_It is forbidden as a shameless trick, that an effort should be made to\nregain to their condition or original state, those whom the master, or\npatron could not aid, when, in a period of famine, they were pressed\nnearly to death by want._\n\nThis exhibits the obligation on the patron of the person _under\ncondition_, and on the master of the slave, to support them, and the\ndestruction of their title by the neglect of their duty.\n\nMuratori observes, that in process of time, the special agreements and\nparticular enactments regarding the _conditions_, gave such a variety as\nbaffled all attempts at classification and precision.\n\nAt a much earlier period, slaves had become a drug in the Italian\nmarket. When, about the year 405, Rhadagasius, the Goth, was leading\nupwards of three hundred thousand of his barbarians into Italy, the\nEmperor Honorius ordered the slaves to be armed for the defence of the\ncountry, by which arming they generally obtained their freedom;\nStilichon, the consul, slew nearly one hundred and fifty thousand of the\ninvaders in the vicinity of Florence, and made prisoners of the\nremainder, who were sold as slaves at the low price of one piece of gold\nfor each. Jacobs estimates the _aureus_ at eleven shillings. It is\nsupposed to have contained about 70 grains of gold, which will make the\nprice of a slave, at that time, about $2.60. But Wilkins (Leges Saxon.)\ninforms us that, in England, about the year 1000, the price of a slave\nwas \u00a32 16_s._ 3_d._ sterling, not quite the value of two horses. But, of\nthese slaves of Stilichon, numbers died within the year, so that\nBaronius relates (Annals, A.D. 406) that the purchasers had to pay more\nfor their burial than for their bodies; according to the remarks of\nOrosius, in this state of the market, it was easy for the slave to\nprocure that he should be held _at a condition_, and thenceforth the\nnumber under condition greatly increased, and in process of time became\nmore numerous than those in absolute slavery.\n\nIn the year 541, the fourth council of Orleans was celebrated, in the\nthirtieth year of King Childebert. The ninth canon:\u2014Ut episcopus, qui de\nfacultate propria ecclesi\u00e6 nihil relinquit, de ecclesi\u00e6 facultate si\nquid aliter quam canones eloquuntur obligaverit, vendiderit aut\ndistraxerit, ad ecclesiam revocetur, (ab ecclesia, _in other editions_.)\nSane si de servis ecclesi\u00e6 libertos fecit numero competenti, in\ningenuitate permaneant, ita ut ab officio ecclesi\u00e6 non recedant.\n\nBe it enacted, _That a bishop who has left none of his private property\nto the church shall not dispose of any of the church property, otherwise\nthan as the canons point out. Should he bind or sell or separate any\nthing otherwise, let it be recalled for the church. But if, indeed, he\nhas made freemen of slaves of the church to a reasonable number, let\nthem continue in their freedom, but with the obligation of not departing\nfrom the duty of the church_.\n\nThe canon xxii. of the same council is\u2014\n\nUt servis ecclesi\u00e6, vel sacerdotum, pr\u00e6das et captivitates exercere non\nliceat; qui iniquum est, ut quorum domini redemptionis pr\u00e6stare solent\nsuffragium, per servorum excessum disciplina ecclesiastica maculetur.\n\n_That it be not lawful for the slaves of the church, or of the priests,\nto go on predatory excursions or to make captives, for it is unjust that\nwhen the masters are accustomed to aid in redeeming, the discipline of\nthe church should be disgraced by the misconduct of the slaves._\n\nIn Judaism, God had established a limited sanctuary for slaves and for\ncertain malefactors, not to encourage crime, but to protect against the\nfury of passion, and to give some sort of aid to the feeble. Paganism\nadopted the principle, and the Christian temple and its precincts\nbecame, not only by common consent, but by legal enactment, the\nsanctuary instead of the former. Like every useful institution, this too\nwas occasionally abused.\n\nThe xxixth canon was\u2014\n\nQu\u00e6cumque mancipia sub specie conjugii ad ecclesi\u00e6 septa confugerint, ut\nper hoc credant posse fieri conjugium, minime eis licentia tribuatur,\nnec talis conjunctio a clericis defensetur: quia probatum est, ut sine\nlegitim\u00e2 traditione conjuncti, pro religionis ordine, statuto tempore ab\nEcclesi\u00e6 communione suspendantur, ne in sacris locis turpi concubitu\nmisceantur. De qu\u00e2 re decernimus, ut parentibus aut propriis dominis,\nprout ratio poscit personarum, accept\u00e2 fide excusati sub separationis\npromissione reddantur: postmodum tamen parentibus atque dominis\nlibertate concess\u00e2, si eos voluerint propri\u00e2 voluntate conjungere.\n\n_Let not those slaves who, under pretext of marriage, take refuge within\nthe precincts of the church, imagining that by this they would make a\nmarriage, be allowed to do so, nor let such union be countenanced by the\nclergy: for it has been regulated that they who form an union, without\nlawful delivery, should be, for the good order of religion, separated\nfor a fixed period from the communion of the church, so that this vile\nconnection may be prevented in holy places. Wherefore we decree, that\nsuch persons, being declared free from the bond of any plighted faith\nand made to promise a separation, should be restored to their parents or\nowners, as the case may require; to be, however, subsequently, if the\nparents or owners should grant leave, married with their own free\nconsent._\n\nAs we have seen in some parts of the East at an earlier period, now in\nthis portion of the West, the slaves were made incapable of entering\ninto the marriage-contract without the owner\u2019s consent.\n\nIn this same council, canon xxx., provision is made for affording to the\nChristians, who are held as slaves by the Jews, not only sanctuary of\nthe church, but in the house of any Christian, until a fair price shall\nbe stipulated for and paid to the Jewish owner, if the Christian be\nunwilling to return to his service. _This is a clear recognition of the\nright of property in slaves._\n\nCanon xxxi. of this council provides, that \u201c_if any Jew shall bring a\nslave to be a proselyte to his religion, or make a Jew of a Christian\nslave, or take as his companion a Christian female slave, or induce a\nslave born of Christian parents to become a Jew under the influence of a\npromise of emancipation, he shall lose the title to every such slave.\nAnd further, that if any Christian slave shall become a Jew for the sake\nof being manumitted with condition, and shall continue to be a Jew, the\nliberty shall be lost and the condition shall not avail him._\u201d\n\nCanon xxxii. provides, that the \u201c_descendants of a slave, wherever they\nmay be, even after a long lapse of time, though there should be neglect,\nif found upon the land or possession upon which their parents were\nplaced, shall be held to the original conditions established by the\ndeceased proprietor for the deceased parents, and the priest of the\nplace shall aid in enforcing the fulfilment, and any persons who shall\nthrough avarice interpose obstacles, shall be placed under church\ncensures_.\u201d\n\nThe doctrine and discipline of the church of the Franks were like that\nof other churches in the several regions of Christendom at this period.\n\nA fifth council was held at Orleans, in the year 549, the thirty-eighth\nof King Childebert. The sixth canon of this council relates to the\nimproper ordination of slaves, and also exhibits distinctly the freedmen\n_under condition_, classing them in the same category with slaves.\n\nCanon vi. Ut servum, qui libertatem a dominis propriis non acceperit,\naut etiam jam libertum, nullus episcoporum absque ejus tantum voluntate,\ncujus aut servus est, aut eum absolvisse dignoscitur, clericum audeat\nordinare. Quod si quisquam fecerit, si qui ordinatus est a domino\nrevocetur, et ille qui est collator ordinis, si sciens fecisse probatur,\nsex mensibus missas tantum facere non pr\u00e6sumat. Si vero s\u00e6cularium\nservus esse convincitur, ei qui ordinatus est benedictione servat\u00e2,\nhonestum ordini domino suo impendat obsequium. Quod si s\u00e6cularis dominus\namplius eum voluerit inclinare, ut sacro ordini inferre videatur\ninjuriam, duos servos sicut antiqui canones habent, episcopus qui eum\nordinavit domino s\u00e6culari restituat; et episcopus eum quem ordinavit ad\necclesiam suam revocandi habeat potestatem.\n\n_That no bishop shall dare to ordain as a clergyman, the slave who shall\nnot have received licence from his proper owners, or a person already\nfreed, without the permission of either the person whose servant he is,\nor of the person who is known to have freed him. And if any one shall do\nso, let him who is ordained be recalled by his master, and let him who\nconferred the order, if it be proved that he did so knowing the state of\nthe person, not presume to celebrate mass for six months only. But if it\nbe proved that he is the servant of lay persons, let the person ordained\nbe kept in his rank and do service for his owner in a way becoming his\norder; but if his lay owner debases him under that grade, so as to do\nany dishonour to his holy order; let the bishop who ordained him give,\nas the ancient canons enact, two slaves to his master, and be empowered\nto take him whom he ordained to his church._\n\nThe canon regards manumission, and the protection of those properly\nliberated from slavery, against the injustice of persons who disregarded\nthe legal absolution from service.\n\nCanon xii. Et quia plurimorum suggestione comperimus, eos qui in\necclesiis juxta patrioticam consuetudinem a servitio fuerint absoluti,\npro libito quorumcumque iterum ad servitium revocari, impium esse\ntractavimus, ut quod in ecclesia Dei consideratione a vinculo servitutis\nabsolvitur, irritum habeatur. Ideo pietatis caus\u00e2, communi consilio\nplacuit observandum, ut qu\u00e6cumque mancipia ab ingenuis dominis servitute\nlaxantur, in e\u00e2 libertate maneant, quam tunc a dominis perceperunt.\nHujusmodi quoque libertas si a quocumque pulsata fuerit, cum justiti\u00e2 ab\necclesiis defendatur, pr\u00e6ter eas culpas pro quibus leges collatas servis\nrevocare jusserunt libertates.\n\n_And since we have discovered by information from several, that they\nwho, according to the custom of the country, were absolved from slavery\nin the churches, were again, at the will of some persons, reduced to\nslavery; we have regarded it to be an impiety; that what has by a\njudicial decree been absolved from servitude in the church of God,\nshould be set at nought. Wherefore, through motives of piety, it is\ndecreed by common counsel to be henceforth observed, that whatever\nslaves are freed from servitude by free masters are to remain in that\nfreedom which they then received from the masters; and should this\nliberty of theirs be assailed by any person, it shall be defended within\nthe limits of justice by the churches, saving where there are crimes for\nwhich the laws have enacted that the liberty granted to servants shall\nbe recalled._\n\nIt is quite evident, from Exodus xii. 44, that the Israelites, who were\nthemselves slaves in Egypt, also themselves possessed slaves. Also from\nNehemiah vii. 67, that the Jews who were slaves in Babylon, yet, upon\ntheir liberation, were found to own 7337 slaves; and from the foregoing\nit appears that the persons then called _liberti_ or freedmen, or the\n_conditionati_ or persons under condition, and probably, in some\ninstances, _coloni_ or colonists, had slaves, but were not permitted to\nliberate them, at least without the consent of their own masters, for\nthe canon speaks of only the servants of the _ingenui_, or those who\nenjoyed perfect freedom. We see, also, what is evident from many other\nsources, that persons who had obtained their freedom were for some\ncrimes reduced to servitude, and we shall see, in future times, even\nfreemen are enslaved for various offences.\n\nAgain, in the canon xxii. of this council, we find provision which\nexhibits the caution which was used in regulating the right of sanctuary\nfor slaves. This right was, in Christianity, a concession of the civil\npower, humanely interposing, in times of imperfect security and violent\npassion, the protecting arm of the church, to arrest the violence of one\nparty, so as to secure merciful justice for the other, and to make the\ncompositions of peace and equity be substituted for the vengeance or the\nexactions of power. It was, so far from being an encouragement to crime,\none of the best helps towards civilizing the barbarian.\n\nCanon xxii. De servis vero, qui pro qualibet culp\u00e2 ad ecclesi\u00e6 septa\nconfugerint, id statuimus observandum, ut, sicut in antiquis\nconstitutionibus tenetur scriptum, pro concess\u00e2 culp\u00e2 datis a domino\nsacramentis, quisquis ille fuerit, egrediatur de veni\u00e2 jam securus.\nEnimvero si immemor fidei dominus transcendisse convincitur quod\njuravit, ut is qui veniam acceperat, probetur postmodum pro e\u00e2 cum\nqualicumque supplicio cruciatus, dominus ille, qui immemor fuit dat\u00e6\nfidei, sit ab omnium communione suspensus. Iterum si servus de\npromissione veni\u00e6 datis sacramentis a domino jam securus exire noluerit,\nne sub tali contumaci\u00e2 requirens locum fug\u00e6 domino fortasse disperiat,\negredi nolentem a domino eum liceat occupari, ut nullam, quasi pro\nretentatione servi, quibuslibet modis molestiam aut calumniam patiatur\necclesia: fidem tamen dominus, quam pro concess\u00e2 veni\u00e2 dedit, null\u00e2\ntemeritate transcendat. Quod si aut gentilis dominus fuerit, aut\nalterius sect\u00e6, qui a conventu ecclesi\u00e6 probatur extraneus, is qui\nservum repetit personas requirat bon\u00e6 fidei Christianas, ut ipsi in\nperson\u00e2 domini servo pr\u00e6beant sacramenta: quia ipsi possunt servare quod\nsacrum est, qui pro transgressione ecclesiasticam metuunt disciplinam.\n\n_We enact this to be observed respecting slaves, who may for any fault\nfly to the precincts of the church, that, as is found written in ancient\nconstitutions, when the master shall pledge his oath to grant pardon to\nthe culprit, whosoever he may be, he shall go out secure of pardon. But,\nif the master, unmindful of his oath, shall be convicted of having gone\nbeyond what he had sworn, so that it shall be proved that the servant\nwho had received pardon was afterwards tortured with any punishment for\nthat fault, let that master who was forgetful of his oath be separated\nfrom the communion of all. Again, should the servant secured from\npunishment by the master\u2019s oath, be unwilling to go forth, it shall be\nlawful for the master, that he should not lose the service of a slave\nseeking sanctuary by such contumacy, to seize upon such a one unwilling\nto go out, so that the church should not suffer either trouble or\ncalumny by any means on account of retaining such servant: but let not\nthe master in any way rashly violate the oath that he swore for granting\npardon. But, if the master be a gentile, or of any other sect proved\nwithout the church, let the person who claims the slave procure\nChristian persons of good account who shall swear for the servant\u2019s\nsecurity in the master\u2019s name: because they who dread ecclesiastical\ndiscipline for transgression can keep that which is sacred._\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IX.\n\nBishop England has, in his eighth letter, alluded to the state of\nsociety in England and Ireland at this early day, for the purpose of\nelucidating the fact that the doctrines of the church concerning slavery\nand the civil condition of those regions were materially without\ndifference from the other parts of Europe. Some portions of his letter,\nalthough, perhaps, too distant from our subject, are, nevertheless, too\ninteresting to omit.\n\nAbout the year 462, Niell Naoigialluch, or Neill of the Nine Hostages,\nravaged the coast of Britain and Gaul. In this expedition a large number\nof captives were made. One youth, sixteen years of age, by the name of\nCothraige, was sold to Milcho, and was employed by him in tending sheep,\nin a place called Dalradia\u2014within the present county of Antrim. This\nCothraige was St. Patrick, subsequently the apostle of Ireland.\n\nSt. Patrick, in his Confessions, states that many of his unfortunate\ncountrymen were carried off and made captives, and dispersed among many\nnations.\n\nThe Romans had possession of Britain, and even had not slavery existed\nthere previously, they would have introduced it; but, the Britons needed\nnot this lesson; they had been conversant with it before: we shall see\nevidence of the long continuance of its practice.\n\nAbout the year 450, a party of them, among whom were several that\nprofessed the Christian religion, made a piratical incursion upon the\nIrish coast, under the command of Corotic, or Caractacus, or Coroticus.\n\nLanigan compiles the following account of this incursion from the\n_Eccles. History of Ireland_, vol. i. c. iv.\n\n\u201cThis prince, Coroticus, though apparently a Christian, was a tyrant, a\npirate, and a persecutor. He landed, with a party of his armed\nfollowers, many of whom were Christians, at a season of solemn baptism,\nand set about plundering a district in which St. Patrick had just\nbaptized and confirmed a great number of converts, and on the very day\nafter the holy chrism was seen shining in the foreheads of the\nwhite-robed neophytes. Having murdered several persons, these marauders\ncarried off a considerable number of people, whom they went about\nselling or giving up as slaves to the Scots and the apostate Picts. St.\nPatrick wrote a letter, which he sent by a holy priest whom he had\ninstructed from his younger days, to those pirates, requesting of them\nto restore the baptized captives and some part of the booty. The priest\nand the other ecclesiastics that accompanied him being received by them\nwith scorn and mockery, and the letter not attended to, the saint found\nhimself under the necessity of issuing a circular epistle or declaration\nagainst them and their chief Coroticus, in which, announcing himself a\nbishop and established in Ireland, he proclaims to all those who fear\nGod, that said murderers and robbers are excommunicated and estranged\nfrom Christ, and that it is not lawful to show them civility, nor to eat\nor drink with them, nor to receive their offerings, until, sincerely\nrepenting, they make atonement to God and liberate his servants and the\nhandmaids of Christ. He begs of the faithful, into whose hands the\nepistle may come, to get it read before the people everywhere, and\nbefore Coroticus himself, and to communicate it to his soldiers, in the\nhope that they and their master may return to God, &c. Among other very\naffecting expostulations, he observes that the Roman and Gallic\nChristians are wont to send proper persons with great sums of money to\nthe Franks and other pagans, for the purpose of redeeming Christian\ncaptives; while, on the contrary, that monster, Coroticus, made a trade\nof selling the members of Christ to nations ignorant of God.\u201d\n\nThe Britons were frequently invaded by the Scots, upon the abandonment\nof their country by the Romans; and at the period here alluded to, it is\nsupposed by many that the captives taken from Ireland were in several\ninstances given by their possessors to the plundering and victorious\nNorthmen, by the Britons, in exchange for their own captured relatives,\nwhom they desired to release.\n\nAbout the year 555, Pope Pelagius held, under the protection of King\nChildebert, the third council of Paris, in which we find a canon,\nentitled, \u201cDe Servis Degeneribus,\u201d concerning \u201cbastard slaves,\u201d as\nfollows: (See Du Cange.)\n\nCanon ix. De degeneribus servis, qui pro sepulchris defunctorum pro\nqualitate ipsius ministerii deputantur, hoc placuit observari, ut sub\nqu\u00e2 ab auctoribus fuerint conditione dimissi, sive heredibus, sive\necclesiis pro defensione fuerint deputati, voluntas defuncti circa eos\nin omnibus debeat observari. Quod si ecclesia eos de fisci functionibus\nin omni parte defenderit ecclesi\u00e6 tam illi, quam posteri eorum,\ndefensione in omnibus potiantur, et occursum impendant.\n\n_It is enacted concerning bastard slaves who are placed to keep the\nsepulchres, because of the rank of that office, that whether they be\nplaced under the protection of the heirs or of the church for their\ndefence, upon the condition upon which they were discharged by their\nowners, the will of the deceased should be observed in all things in\ntheir regard. But, if the church shall keep them entirely exempt from\nthe services and payments of the fisc, let them and their descendants\nenjoy the protection of the church for defence, and pay to it their\ntribute._\n\nThe _auctores_, or authors, in the original sense, were _owners_ or\n_masters_; and subsequently, especially in Gaul, it was often taken to\nmean _parents_, which probably, from the context, is here its meaning;\nand, we find a new title and a new class, where the master having\ncommitted a crime with his servant, the offspring was his slave; yet,\nhis natural affection caused the parent to grant him a conditioned\nfreedom, to protect which this canon specified the guardian to be either\nthe heir or the church.\n\nMartin, archbishop of Braga, who presided at the third council of that\ncity, in the year 572, collected, from the councils of the east and the\nwest, the greater portion of the canon law then in force, and made a\ncompendium thereof, which he distributed into eighty-four heads, which\nformed as many short canons, and thenceforth they were the basis of the\ndiscipline in Spain.\n\nThe forty-sixth of these canons is\u2014\n\nSi quis obligatus tributo servili, vel aliqua conditione, vel patrocinio\ncujuslibet dom\u00fbs, non est ordinandus clericus, nisi proband\u00e6 vit\u00e6 fuerit\net patroni concessus accesserit.\n\n_If any one is bound to servile tribute, or by any condition, or by the\npatronage of any house, he is not to be ordained a clergyman, unless he\nbe of approved life, and the consent of the patron be also given._\n\nThis canon is taken into the body of the canon law. _Dist._ 53.\n\nCanon xlvii. Si quis servum alienum caus\u00e2 religionis doceat contemnere\ndominum suum et recedere \u00e0 servitio ejus, durissim\u00e8 ab omnibus arguatur.\n\n_If any person will teach the servant of another, under pretext of\nreligion, to despise his master and to withdraw from his service, let\nhim be most sharply rebuked by all._\n\nThis too is taken into the body of the canon law. (17, q. 4, _Si quis_.)\n\nIn the year 589, the third council of Toledo, in Spain, was celebrated,\nin the pontificate of Pope Pelagius II. All the bishops of Spain\nassembled upon the invitation of King Reccared.\n\nThe articles of faith form twenty-three heads of various length; after\nwhich follow twenty-three _capitula_, or little chapters or heads of\ndiscipline.\n\nThe sixth of these is in the following words:\n\nDe libertis autem id Dei pr\u00e6cipiunt sacerdotes, ut si qui ab episcopis\nfacti sunt secundum modum quo canones antiqui dant licentiam, sint\nliberi; et tamen a patrocinio ecclesi\u00e6 tam ipsi, quam ab eis progeniti\nnon recedant. Ab aliis quoque libertati traditi, et ecclesiis\ncommendati, patrocinio episcopali regantur: \u00e0 principe hoc episcopus\npostulet.\n\n_The priests of God decree concerning freedmen, that if any are made by\nthe bishops in the way the ancient canons permit, they shall be\nconsidered free; yet so that neither they nor their descendants shall\nretire from the patronage of the church. Let those freed by others and\nplaced under the protection of the church, be placed under the bishop\u2019s\nprotection. Let the bishop ask this of his prince._\n\nThis too is taken into the body of the canon law. (12, q. 2, _De\nlibertis_.)\n\nA custom had already gained considerable prevalence, which we shall find\ngreatly extended in subsequent ages, of granting to the churches slaves\nfor its service and support. The administrators of the church property\nwere called _familia fisci_. The church property was in ecclesiastical\ndocuments styled the fisc. The _fisca regis_, or royal fisc, was a\ndifferent fund or treasury. It sometimes happened that the clergy who\nwere the administrators sought to obtain from the \u201cconditioned slaves\u201d\nmore than they were bound to give, and also, sometimes, others sought to\nhave their service taken from the church. The capitulary viii. of this\nthird council of Toledo was enacted to remedy this latter grievance.\n\nInnuente (other copies, jubente) atque consentiente domino piissimo\nReccaredo rege, id pr\u00e6cipit sacerdotale consilium, ut clericorum\n(others, clericos) ex famili\u00e2 fisci nullus audeat a principe donatos\nexpetere; sed reddito capitis sui tributo ecclesi\u00e6 Dei, cui sunt\nalligati, usque dum vivent, regulariter administrent.\n\n_By the suggestion (or by the command) and with the consent of the most\npious lord King Reccared, the council of priests directs that no one\nshall dare to reclaim from the administrators of the church those clergy\ngiven by the prince; but having paid their tribute to the church of God,\nto which they are bound, let them, as long as they live, administer\nregularly._\n\nIn the same council, the canon xv. is the following:\n\nSi qui ex servis fiscalibus ecclesias forte construxerint easque de su\u00e2\npaupertate ditaverint, hoc procuret episcopus prece su\u00e2 auctoritate\nregi\u00e2 confirmari.\n\n_If any of the king\u2019s special servants shall have built churches, and\nhave enriched them by the contributions from their poverty, let the\nbishop obtain that it be confirmed by the royal authority._\n\nThe _servi fiscales_ were the private or patrimonial property of the\nking.\n\nThis also exhibits the principle that the slave was not permitted to\ncontribute, without the consent of his owner, to religious\nestablishments.\n\nA canon of the assembly held in Constantinople, 692:\n\nCanon lxxxv. In duobus vel tribus testibus confirmari omne verbum ex\nScriptura accepimus. Servos ergo qui a dominis suis manumittuntur, sub\ntribus testibus eo frui honore decernimus, qui pr\u00e6sentes libertati vires\net firmitatem afferent, et ut iis qu\u00e6 ipsis testibus facta sunt fides\nhabeatur efficient.\n\n_We have learned from the Scripture that every word is confirmed in two\nor three witnesses. We therefore declare that slaves who are manumitted\nby their masters shall be admitted to enjoy that honour under three\nwitnesses, who may be able to afford security by their presence to the\nfreedom, and who may be able to secure credit for the acts done in their\nview._\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON X.\n\nAs late as the year 577, Britain furnished other nations with slaves,\nwhich is sufficiently proved by the following extract from Bede:\n\nNec silentio pr\u00e6tereunda opinio qu\u00e6 de beato Gregorio, traditione\nmajorum, ad nos usque perlata est: qu\u00e2 videlicet ex caus\u00e2 admonitus, tam\nsedulam erga salutem nostr\u00e6 gentis curam gesserit. Dicunt, quia die\nqu\u00e2dam cum advenientibus nuper mercatoribus multa venalia in forum\nfuissent conlata, multique ad emendum confluxissent, et ipsum Gregorium\ninter alios advenisse, ae vidisse inter alia pueros venales positos,\ncandidi corporis ac venusti vult\u00fbs, capillorum quoque form\u00e2 egregi\u00e2.\nQuos cum aspiceret, interrogavit, ut ajunt, de qu\u00e2 regione vel terr\u00e2\nessent adlati. Dictumque est quod de Brittani\u00e2 insul\u00e2, cujus incol\u00e6\ntalis essent aspect\u00fbs. Rursus interrogavit, utrum iidem insulani,\nChristiani, an paganis adhuc erroribus essent implicati? Dictumque est,\nquod essent pagani. At ille intimo ex corde longa trahens suspiria:\n\u201cHeu, proh dolor!\u201d inquit, \u201cquod tam lucidi vult\u00fbs homines tenebrarum\nauctor possidet, tantaque gratia frontispicii mentem ab intern\u00e2 grati\u00e2\nvacuam gestat!\u201d Rursus ergo interrogavit, quod esset vocabulum gentis\nillius? Responsum est quod Angli vocarentur. At ille, \u201cBen\u00e8,\u201d inquit,\n\u201cnam et angelicam habent faciem, et tales angelorum in c\u0153lis decet esse\ncoheredes. Quod habet nomen ipsa provincia de qu\u00e2 isti sunt adlati?\u201d\nResponsum est quod Deiri vocarentur iidem provinciales. At ille: \u201cBen\u00e8,\u201d\ninquit, \u201cDeiri, de ir\u00e2 eruti, et ad misericordiam Christi vocati. Rex\nprovinci\u00e6 illius, quomodo appellatur?\u201d Responsum est quod _Aella_\ndiceretur. At ille adludens ad nomen ait: \u201c_Alleluia_, laudem Dei\ncreatoris illis in partibus oportet cantari.\u201d Accedensque ad Pontificem\nRoman\u00e6 et Apostolic\u00e6 sedis, nondum enim erat ipse Pontifex factus,\nrogavit, ut genti Angliorum in Britanniam aliquos verbi ministros, per\nquos ad Christum converterentur, mitteret: seipsum paratum esse in hoc\nopus Domino co-operante perficiendum, si tamen Apostolico Pap\u00e6 hoc ut\nfieret placeret. Quod dum perficere non posset; quia etsi pontifex\nconcedere illi quod petierat voluit, non tamen cives Romani ut tam longe\nab urbe recederet potuere permittere; mox ut ipse pontificat\u00fbs officio\nfunctus est, perficit opus diu desideratum: alios quidem pr\u00e6dicatores\nmittens, sed ipse pr\u00e6dicationem ut fructificaret suis exhortationibus et\nprecibus adjuvans.\n\n_Nor is that notice of the blessed Gregory which has come down to us by\nthe tradition of our ancestors to be silently passed over: for, by\nreason of the admonition that he then received, he became so industrious\nfor the salvation of our nation. For they say, that on a certain day\nwhen merchants had newly arrived, many things were brought into the\nmarket, and several persons had come to purchase; Gregory himself came\namong them, and saw exposed for sale, youths of a fair body and handsome\ncountenance, whose hair was also beautiful. Looking at them, they say,\nhe asked from what part of the world they were brought; he was told from\nthe island of Britain, whose inhabitants were of that complexion. Again\nhe asked whether these islanders were Christians or were immersed in the\nerrors of paganism. It was said, that they were pagans. And he, sighing\ndeeply, said, \u201cAlas! what a pity that the author of darkness should\npossess men of so bright a countenance, and that so graceful an aspect\nshould have a mind void of grace within!\u201d Again he inquired what was the\nname of their nation. He was told that they were called Angles. He said,\n\u201cIt is well, for they have angelic faces, and it is fit that such should\nbe the coheirs with Angels in Heaven.\u201d From what province were they\nbrought, was his next inquiry. To which it was answered, The people of\ntheir province are called Deiri. \u201cGood again,\u201d said he, \u201cDeiri, (de ir\u00e2\neruti,) rescued from anger and called to the mercy of Christ.\u201d What is\nthe name of the king of that province? He was told, Aella. And, playing\nupon the word, he responded, \u201cAlleluia. The praises of God our Creator\nought to be chanted in those regions.\u201d And going to the pontiff of the\nRoman Apostolic See, for he was not yet made pope himself, he besought\nhim to send to Britain, for the nation of the Angles, some ministers of\nthe word, through whom they may be converted to Christ; and stated that\nhe was himself ready, the Lord being his aid, to undertake this work, if\nthe pope should so please. This he was not able to do, for though the\npontiff desired to grant his petition, the citizens of Rome would not\nconsent that he should go to so great distance therefrom. As soon,\nhowever, as he was placed in the office of pope, he performed his long\ndesired work: he sent other preachers, but he aided by his prayers and\nexhortations, that he might make their preaching fruitful._\n\nGregory became pope in 590. Soon after his elevation to the pontifical\ndignity, he sought to purchase some of the British youths, in order to\nhave them trained up to be missionaries to their countrymen.\n\nThe holy see had already a considerable patrimony in Gaul, bestowed by\nthe piety of the faithful: we shall see from the following epistle of\nthe pope to the priest Candidus, whom he sent as its administrator, the\nuse which was made of its income.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nLib. v. Epist. x.\u2014GREGORIUS Candido Presbytero eunti ad patrimonium\nGalli\u00e6.\n\nPergens auxiliante Domino Deo nostro Jesu Christo ad patrimonium, quod\nest in Galliis gubernandum, volumus ut dilectio tua ex solidis quos\nacceperit, vestimenta pauperum, vel pueros Anglos, qui sunt ab annis\ndecem et septem, vel decem et octo, ut in monasteriis dati Deo\nproficiant, comparet; quatenus solidi Galliarum, qui in terr\u00e2 nostr\u00e2\nexpendi non possunt, apud locum proprium utiliter expendantur. Si quid\nvero de pecuniis redituum, qu\u00e6 dicuntur ablat\u00e6, recipere potueris, ex\nhis quoque vestimenta pauperum comparare te volumus; vel, sicut pr\u00e6fati\nsumus, pueros qui in omnipotentis Dei servitio proficiant. Sed quia\npagani sunt, qui illic inveniri possunt, volo, ut cum eis presbyter\ntransmittatur, ne quid \u00e6gritudinis contingat in vi\u00e2, ut quos morituros\nconspexerit debeat baptizare. Ita igitur tua dilectio faciat, ut h\u00e6c\ndiligenter implere festinet.\n\nGREGORY _to the Priest Candidus, going to the patrimony of Gaul_.\n\n_As you are going, with aid of the Lord Jesus Christ, our God, to govern\nthe patrimony which is in Gaul; we desire that out of the shillings you\nmay receive, you, our beloved, should purchase clothing for the poor, or\nEnglish youths about the age of seventeen or eighteen, that, being\nplaced in monasteries, they may be useful for the service of God; so\nthat the money of Gaul, which ought not to be expended in our land, may\nbe laid out in its own place beneficially. If you can also get any of\nthe money of that income called tolls_, (ablat\u00e6,) _we also desire that\nyou should therewith buy clothing for the poor, or, as we have before\nsaid, youths who may become proficients in the service of God. But as\nthey who dwell in that place are pagans, it is our desire that a priest\nbe sent with them lest they should get sick on the journey, and he ought\nto baptize those whom he may see in a dying state. So let you, our\nbeloved, do, and be alert in fulfilling what we have desired_.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe commission of Pope Gregory to purchase those youths was executed.\nBut, as Lingard observes, (Ant. Anglo-Saxon Chu. c. i.,) \u201ctheir progress\nwas slow, and his zeal impatient.\u201d The result was that St. Augustine and\nhis companions were sent by the pope, and effected the conversion of the\nisland.\n\nIn the same chapter, Lingard describes the Saxons who had settled in\nEngland, previous to their conversion, and refers to Will. of Malmesbury\n(_de reg._ 1. i., c. 3.)\n\n\u201cThe savages of Africa may traffic with the Europeans for the negroes\nwhom they have seized by treachery, or captured in open war; but the\nmost savage conquerors of the Britons sold without scruple, to the\nmerchants of the continent, their countrymen, and even their own\nchildren.\u201d\n\n\u201cBut their ferocity soon yielded to the exertions of the missionaries,\nand the harsher features of their origin were insensibly softened under\nthe mild influence of the gospel. In the rage of victory, they learned\nto respect the rights of humanity. Death or slavery was no longer the\nfate of the conquered Britons; by their submission, they were\nincorporated with the victors; and their lives and property were\nprotected by the equity of their Christian conquerors. * * * The humane\nidea, that by baptism all men become brethren, contributed to meliorate\nthe condition of slavery, and scattered the seeds of that liberality\nwhich gradually undermined, and at length abolished, so odious an\ninstitution. By the provision of the legislature, the freedom of the\nchild was secured from the avarice of an unnatural parent; and the\nheaviest punishment was denounced against the man who presumed to sell\nto a foreign master one of his countrymen, though he were a slave or a\nmalefactor.\u201d\n\nLingard here refers to the statutes of Ina, quoted in a previous study.\nBut it may be remarked that here is the earliest notice of the African\nslave-trade, as a branch of European commerce, compared with the ancient\nslave-trade carried on with Britain.\n\nIn his book, \u201cPastoralis Cur\u00e6,\u201d _Of the Pastoral Care_, part 3, c. i.\nAdmonit. vi., Pope Gregory says\u2014\n\nADMONITIO VI.\u2014Aliter admonendi sunt servi, atque aliter domini. Servi\nscilicet, ut in se semper humilitatem conditionis aspiciant: domini\nvero, ut natur\u00e6 su\u00e6 qu\u00e2 \u00e6qualiter sunt cum servis conditi, memoriam non\namittant. Servi admonendi sunt ne dominos despiciant, ne Deum offendant\nsi ordinationi illius superbiendo contradicunt: domini quoque admonendi\nsunt, quia contra Deum de munere ejus superbiunt, si eos quos per\nconditionem tenent subditos, \u00e6quales sibi per natur\u00e6 consortium non\nagnoscunt. Isti admonendi sunt ut sciant se servos esse dominorum: illi\nadmonendi sunt ut cognoscant se conservos esse servorum. Istis namque\ndicitur: _Servi, obedite dominis carnalibus._ Et rursum: _Quicumque sunt\nsub jugo servi, dominos suos omni honore dignos arbitrentur_: illis\nautem dicitur: _et vos, domini, eadem facite illis, remittentes minas,\nscientes quod et illorum et vester dominus est in c\u0153lis_.\n\nADMONITION VI.\u2014_Servants are to be admonished in one way, masters in\nanother way: servants indeed, that they should always regard in\nthemselves the lowliness of their condition: masters however, that they\nlose not the recollection of their nature, by which they are created\nupon a level with their slaves. Slaves are to be admonished not to\ndespise their masters, lest they offend God, if growing proud they\ncontradict his ordinance: masters too are to be admonished; because they\ngrow proud against God by reason of his gift, if they do not acknowledge\nas their equals, by the fellowship of nature, those whom by condition\nthey hold as subjects. These are to be admonished that they be mindful\nthat they are the slaves of their masters; those that they recollect\nthat they are the fellow-servants of servants. To these it is said_:\nServants, obey your masters in the flesh: _and again_, Whosoever are\nservants under the yoke, let them consider their masters worthy of all\nhonour: _but to those it is said_: And you, masters, do in like manner\nto them, laying aside threats, knowing that your and their Master is in\nheaven.\n\nIn his book ii. of Epistles, ep. xxxix., writing to Peter, a subdeacon\nof Campania, he directs him how to act in the case of a female slave,\nbelonging to a proctor or manager of church property, (_defensor_,) who\nwas anxious to be allowed to become a sister in a monastery, which was\nnot lawful without the consent of her owner. The pope neither orders the\nmaster to manumit her nor to permit her profession, for, though he was\nemployed by the church, the religion to which he belonged did not\nrequire of him to give away his property, nor had the head of that\nchurch power to deprive him thereof; hence he writes\u2014\n\nPreterea quia Felix defensor puellam nomine Catillam habere dicitur, qu\u00e6\ncum magnis lacrymis, et vehementi desiderio habitum conversionis\nappetit, sed eam pr\u00e6fatus dominus suus converti minime permittit:\nproinde volumus, ut experientia tua pr\u00e6fatum Felicem adeat, atque puell\u00e6\nejusdem animum sollicite requirat; et si ita esse cognoverit, pretium\nejusdem puell\u00e6 su\u00e6 domino pr\u00e6beat, et huc eam in monasterio dandam cum\npersonis gravibus, Domino auxiliante, transmittat. Ita vero h\u00e6c age, ut\nnon per lentam actionem tuam pr\u00e6fat\u00e6 puell\u00e6 anima detrimentum aliquod in\ndesiderio suo sustineat.\n\n_Moreover, because the proctor Felix is said to have a servant named\nCatilla, who with many tears and vehement desire wishes to obtain the\nhabit of religion; but her aforesaid master will not by any means permit\nher making profession: it is then our desire that your experience would\ncall upon the said Felix, and carefully examine the disposition of that\nyoung woman, and if you should find it such as is stated, pay to the\nmaster her price, and send her hither with discreet persons, to be\nplaced, with God\u2019s help, in a monastery. But do this, so that the soul\nof the young woman may not suffer any inconvenience in her desire,\nthrough your tardiness._\n\nThe following is a deed of gift which the same Pope made, to assure the\npossession of a slave to the bishop of Porto, one of the suburban sees\nnear Rome. It is curious, not merely as exhibiting the fact that the\npope and the See of Rome held and transferred slaves at this period, but\nalso as giving a specimen of a legal document of that date and tenor:\u2014\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nLIB. X. EP. LII.\u2014GREGORIUS, Felici Episcopo Portuensi.\n\nCharitatis vestr\u00e6 grati\u00e2 provocati, no infructuosi vobis videamur\nexistere, pr\u00e6cipu\u00e8 cum et minus vos habere servitia noverimus; ideo\nJoannem juris ecclesiastici famulum, natione Sabinum, ex mass\u00e2 Flavian\u00e2,\nannorum plus minus decem et octo, quem nostra voluntate jam diu\npossidetis, fraternitati vestr\u00e6 jure directo donamus atque concedimus;\nita ut cum habeatis, possideatis, atque juri proprietatique vestra\nvindicetis atque defendatis, et quidquid de eo facere volueritis, quippe\nut dominus, ex hujus donationis jure libero potiamini arbitrio. Contra\nquam munificenti\u00e6 nostr\u00e6 chartulam nunquam nos successoresque nostros\nnoveris esse venturos. Hanc autem donationem a notario nostro\nperscriptam legimus, atque subscripsimus, tribuentes etiam non expectat\u00e2\nprofessione vestr\u00e2 quo volueritis tempore alligandi licentiam legitim\u00e2\nstipulatione et sponsione interposit\u00e2. Actum Rom\u00e6.\n\n_Excited by our regard for your charitable person, that we may not\nappear to be useless to you, especially as we know you are short of\nservants: we therefore give and grant to you our brother, by our direct\nright, John, a servant of the church domain, by birth a Sabine, of the\nFlavian property, now aged about eighteen years, whom by our will you\nhave a good while had in your possession. So that you may have and\npossess him, and preserve and maintain your right to him and defend him\nas your property. And that you may, by the free gift of this donation,\nenjoy the exercise of your will, to do what you may think proper in his\nregard, as his lord._\n\n_Against which paper of our munificence, you may know that neither we\nnor our successors are ever to come. And we have read this deed of gift,\nwritten out by our notary, and we have subscribed the same, not even\nawaiting your profession, respecting the time you would desire license\nto register it in the public acts by interposing the lawful process of\nsignature and covenant. Done at Rome, &c._\n\nThe _massa_ was generally a portion of land of about twelve acres: and\nthe servants belonging specially thereto are in the documents of this\nand a later period generally called either _servi de_ (or _ex_) _massa_,\nand when they subsequently became _conditioned_, or freed to a certain\nextent, they were called _homines de masnada_, or other names equivalent\nthereto.\n\nLIB. V. EP. XXXIV.\u2014GREGORIUS, Athemio Subdiacono.\n\nQuantus dolor, quantaque sit nostro cordi afflictio de his, qu\u00e6 in\npartibus Campani\u00e6 contigerunt, dicere non possumus: sed ex calamitatis\nmagnitudine potes ipse cognoscere. E\u00e2 de re, pro remedio captivorum qui\ntenti sunt, solidos experienti\u00e6 tu\u00e6 per horum portitorem Stephanum virum\nmagnificum transmisimus, admonentes ut omnino debeas esse sollicitus, ac\nstrenu\u00e8 peragas, et liberos homines, quos ad redemptionem suam sufficere\nnon posse cognoscis, tu eos festines redimere. Qui vero servi fuerint,\net dominos eorum ita pauperes esse compereris, ut eos redimere non\nassurgant, et hos quoque comparare non desinas. Pariter etiam et servos\necclesi\u00e6 qui tu\u00e2 negligenti\u00e2 perierunt, curabis redimere. Quo cumque\nautem redemeris, subtiliter notitiam, qu\u00e6 nomina eorum, vel quis ubi\nmaneat, sive quid agat, seu unde sit, contineat, facere modis omnibus\nstudebis, quam tecum possis afferre cum veneris. Ita autem in h\u00e2c re te\nstudiose exhibere festina, ut ii qui redimendi sunt, nullum te\nnegligente periculum possint incurrere, et tu apud nos postea vehementer\nincipias esse culpabilis, sed et hoc quam maxime age, ut si fieri\npotest, captivos ipsos minori possis pretio comparare. Substantiam ver\u00f2\nsub omni puritate atque subtilitate describe, et ipsam nobis\ndescriptionem cum celeritate transmitte.\n\nGREGORY, _to the Subdeacon Anthemius_:\n\n_We cannot express how great is our grief and the affliction of our\nheart, by reason of what has occurred in a part of Campania; but you may\nyourself estimate it from the extent of the calamity. Wherefore, we send\nto your experience, by Stephen, a worthy man, the bearer hereof, money\nfor the aid of those captives who are detained; admonishing you that you\nought to be very industrious and exert yourself to discover what freemen\nare unable to procure their own release, and that you should quickly\nredeem them. But respecting the slaves, when you shall discover that\ntheir masters are so poor as not to have it in their power to release\nthem, you will also not omit to buy them. In like manner you will be\ncareful to redeem the servants of the church who have been lost through\nyour neglect._\n\n_You will also be very careful by all means to make a neat brief, which\nyou can bring when you come, containing their names, as also where any\none remains, how he is employed, or whence he is. You will be diligent,\nand so industrious in this transaction, as to give no cause of danger by\nyour neglect, for those who are to be released, nor run the risk of\nbeing exceedingly culpable in our view. You will be most particular,\nabove all things, to procure the release of the captives at the lowest\npossible rate. You will make out the accounts as accurately and as\nclearly as possible, and send them to us with speed._\n\nThe calamity which he bewails was an incursion of the Lombards, who,\ncoming originally from Scandinavia, settled for a while in Pomerania,\nand about this period ravaged Italy.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XI.\n\nAt this age of the world, there still existed a feeling of rivalship\nbetween the Jew, the pagan, and the Christian; and, in truth, between\nsome of the different sects of the latter, as to which system of\nreligion should prevail. This state of facts often rendered the\ncondition of the slave peculiar.\n\nThe Jew and the Christian were in opposition from the very origin of\nChristianity. The first persecutors of the Christians were the relatives\nof the first Christians; the death of the Saviour and the martyrdom of\nStephen, the imprisonment of Peter, the mission of Saul to Damascus, and\na variety of other similar facts, exhibit in strong relief the spirit of\nhatred which caused not merely separation, but enmity. The destruction\nof Jerusalem, the captivity of the people who preserved the early\nrecords of revelation, and the increase of the Christian religion, even\nunder the swords and the gibbets of its persecutors, only increased and\nperpetuated this feeling.\n\nThe pride of the Gentile ridiculed what he denominated superstition:\nwhile he smote the believer whom he mocked, he bowed before the idol of\npaganism. The early heresies of those who professed the Christian name,\nbut separated from Christian unity, sprang generally from the efforts to\ndestroy the mysterious nature of the doctrine of the apostles, and to\nexplain it by the system of some Gentile philosopher, or to modify it by\nsuperinducing some Judaic rite or principle. The Jew, the Gentile, and\nthe heretic equally felt elevated by his imagined superiority over the\nfaithful follower of the doctrine of the Galilean. Thus the sword of the\npersecutor, the scoff of ridicule, and the quibbling of a false\nphilosophy, were all employed against the members of the church; and\namong those who were by their situation the most exposed to suffering,\nwere the Christian slaves of the enemies of the cross. Even they who\nbelonged to the faithful had peculiar trials, because, frequently, in\ntimes of persecution, masters, desirous of obtaining protection, without\nactually sacrificing to idols, compelled their servants to personate\nthem in perpetrating the crime. They were frequently circumcised, even\nagainst their will, by the Jewish owners. They were frequently mutilated\nby the infidel master. They were also exposed to the continued hardships\nand enticements of owners who desired to make them proselytes.\n\nIt was, therefore, at an early period after the conversion of\nConstantine, enacted that no one who was not a Christian should hold a\nChristian slave, upon that principle contained in _Lev._ xxv. 47, 48. We\nfind in the civil code, lib. i. tit. 10, \u201cJud\u00e6us servum Christianum nec\ncomparare debebit, nec largitatis aut alio quocumque titulo\nconsequetur.\u201d _A Jew shall not purchase a Christian slave, nor shall he\nobtain one by title of gift, nor by any other title._\n\nIn a subsequent part of the title the penalty is recited, \u201cnon solum\nmancipii damno mulctetur, ver\u00f9m etiam capitali sententia punietur.\u201d _Not\nonly shall he be mulcted by the loss of the slave, but he shall be\npunished by a capital sentence._\n\nBy a decree of Valentinian III., found after the Theodosian code, and\nentitled, \u201cDe diversis ecclesiasticis capitibus,\u201d bearing date 425,\nAquileia, vii. of the ides of July, Jews and pagans were prohibited from\nholding Christian slaves.\n\nThus by the laws of the empire at this period, no Jew or Gentile could\nhave any property in a Christian slave. This principle was not adopted\nuntil a much later period by the Franks and other nations, and this will\naccount for the diversity of legislation and of judgment which the books\nof the same period exhibit in various regions.\n\nAnother clause of the code was more comprehensive: \u201cGr\u00e6cus, seu paganus,\net Jud\u00e6us, et Samaritanus, et alius h\u00e6reticus, id est, non existens\northodoxus, non potest Christianum mancipium habere.\u201d _A Greek or pagan,\na Jew, a Samaritan, and any heretic, that is, one not orthodox, cannot\nhold a Christian slave._\n\nThe authority of Gregory over Sicily was not merely spiritual. He had a\ntemporal supervision, if not a full sovereignty, over the island.\u2014The\ndocument is ep. xxxvii. lib. ii. indict. xi.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS Libertino, Pr\u00e6fecto Sicili\u00e6.\n\n_De pr\u00e6sumptione Nas\u00e6 Jud\u00e6i, qui altare nomine B. Heli\u00e6 construxerat, et\nde mancipiis Christianis comparatis._\n\nAb ipso administrationis exordio, Deus vos in caus\u00e6 su\u00e6 voluit vindicta\nprocedere, et hanc vobis mercedem propitius cum laude servavit. Fertur\nsiquidem qu\u00f2d Nasas quidam sceleratissimus Jud\u00e6orum, sub nomine beati\nHeli\u00e6 altare puniend\u00e2 temeritate construxerit, multosque illic\nChristianorum ad adorandum sacrileg\u00e2 seductione decepit. Sed et\nChristiana, ut dicitur, mancipia comparavit, et suis ea obsequiis ac\nutilitatibus deputavit. Dum igitur severissim\u00e8 in eum pro tantis\nfacinoribus debuisset ulcisci, gloriosus Justinus medicamento avariti\u00e6,\nut nobis scriptum est, Dei distulit injuriam vindicare. Gloria autem\nvestra h\u00e6c omnia district\u00e2 examinatione perquirat: et si hujusmodi\nmanifestum esse repererit, ita districtissime ac corporaliter in eundem\nsceleratum festinet vindicare Jud\u00e6um; quatenus h\u00e2c ex caus\u00e2 et gratiam\nsibi Dei nomine conciliet, et his se posteris pro su\u00e2 mercede imitandum\nmonstret exemplis. Mancipia autem Christiana, qu\u00e6cumque eum comparasse\npatuerit, ad libertatem, juxta legum pr\u00e6cepta, sine omni ambiguitate\nperducite, ne, quod absit, Christiana religio Judais subdita polluatur.\nIta ergo omnia districtissim\u00e8 sub omni festinatione corrigite, ut non\nsolum pro h\u00e2c vobis disciplin\u00e2 gratias referamus, sed et testimonium de\nbonitate vestr\u00e2 ubi necesse fuerit, pr\u00e6beamus.\n\nGREGORY to Libertinus, Prefect of Sicily:\n\nConcerning the presumption of Nasas, a Jew, who had erected an altar in\nthe name of the blessed Elias; and concerning the procuring of Christian\nslaves.\n\n_God has willed that from the very beginning of your administration you\nshould proceed to the avenging of his cause; and he has mercifully kept\nthis reward for you with praise. It is indeed said that one Nasas, a\nvery wicked man, of the Jewish people, has, with a rashness deserving\npunishment, constructed an altar under the name of the blessed Elias,\nand deceitfully and sacrilegeously seduced many Christians thither for\nadoration. It is also said that he has procured Christian slaves, and\nput them to his service and profit. It has also been written to us that\nthe most glorious Justin, when he ought to have most severely punished\nhim for such crimes, has, through the soothing of his avarice, put off\nthe avenging of this injury to God._\n\n_Do you, glorious sir, most closely examine into all the premises; and\nif you shall find the allegations evidently sustained, hasten to proceed\nmost strictly to have bodily justice done upon this wicked Jew, so as to\nprocure for yourself the favour of God in this case, and to exhibit for\nyour reward, to those who will come after us, an example for imitation.\nBut, further, do you carry through, according to the prescriptions of\nthe laws, to their liberty, without any cavilling, every and any\nChristian slaves that it may be evident he procured, lest, which God\nforbid, the Christian religion should be degraded by subjection to the\nJews._\n\n_Therefore do all this correction most exactly and quickly, that you may\nnot only have our thanks for preserving discipline, but that we may,\nwhen opportunity offers, give you proof of our recognition for your\ngoodness._\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nCanon xxx. of the fourth council of Orleans:\n\nC\u00f9m prioribus canonibus jam fuerit definitum, ut de mancipiis\nChristianis, qu\u00e6 apud Jud\u00e6os sunt, si ad ecclesiam confugerint, et\nredimi se postulaverint, etiam ad quoscumque Christianos refugerint, et\nservire Jud\u00e6is noluerint, taxato et oblato a fidelibus justo pretio, ab\neorum dominio liberentur; ideo statuimus, ut tam justa constitutio ab\nomnibus Catholicis conservetur.\n\n_Whereas it has been decreed by former canons, respecting the Christian\nslaves that are under the Jews, that if they should fly to the church,\nor even to any Christians, and demand their redemption, and be unwilling\nto serve the Jews, they should be freed from their owners upon a fair\nprice being assessed by the faithful and tendered for them: we therefore\nenact that this so just a regulation shall be observed by all\nCatholics._\n\nAt this period, 541, in this province and kingdom, the Jew had a good\ntitle to his Christian slave, and could not be deprived of him except by\nlaw, or for value tendered.\n\nThe first council of Macon was assembled at the request of King Guntram,\nor Goutran, one of the sons of Clotaire I., to whom the division of\nOrleans was left upon the death of his father in 561. This assembly was\nheld in 581. The sixteenth canon is\u2014\n\nEt licet quid de Christianis, qui aut captivitatis incursu, aut\nquibuscumque fraudibus, Jud\u00e6orum servitio implicantur, debeat observari,\nnon solum canonicis statutis, sed et legum beneficio pridem fuerit\nconstitutum: tamen quia nunc ita quorundam querela exorta est, quosdam\nJud\u00e6os, per civitates aut municipia consistentes, in tantam insolentiam\net proterviam prorupisse ut nec reclamantes Christianos liceat vel\nprecio de eorum servitute absolvi. Idcirco pr\u00e6senti concilio, Deo\nauctore, sancimus, ut nullus Christianus Jud\u00e6o deinceps debeat servire;\nsed datis pro quolibet bono mancipio xii. solidis, ipsum mancipium\nquicumque Christianus seu ad ingenuitatem, seu ad servitium, licentiam\nhabeat redimendi: quia nefas est, ut quos Christus Dominus sanguinis\neffusione redemit persecutorum vinculis maneant irretiti. Quod si\nacquiescere his qu\u00e6 statuimus quicumque Jud\u00e6us noluerit, quamdiu ad\npecuniam constitutam venire distulerit, liceat mancipio ipsi cum\nChristianis ubicumque voluerit habitare. Illud etiam specialiter\nsancientes, quod si qui Jud\u00e6us Christianum mancipium ad errorem Judaicum\nconvictus fuerit persuasisse, ut ipso mancipio careat, et legandi\ndamnatione plectetur.\n\n_And although the mode of acting in regard to Christians who have been\nentangled in the service of the Jews by the invasions for making\ncaptives, or by other frauds, has been regulated heretofore not only by\ncanonical enactments, but also by favour of the civil laws; yet because\nnow the complaint of some persons has arisen, that some Jews dwelling in\nthe cities and towns have grown so insolent and bold, that they will not\npermit the Christians demanding it to be freed even upon the ransom of\ntheir service; wherefore, by the authority of God, we enact by this\npresent act of council, that no Christian shall henceforth lawfully\ncontinue enslaved to a Jew; but that any Christian shall have the power\nof redeeming that slave either to freedom or to servitude, upon giving\nfor each good slave the sum of twelve shillings_ (_solidum_): _because\nit is improper that they whom Christ redeemed by the shedding of his\nblood, should continue bound in the chains of persecutors. But if any\nJew shall be unwilling to acquiesce in these enacted provisions, it\nshall be lawful for the slave himself to dwell where he will, with\nChristians, as long as the Jew shall keep from taking the stipulated\nmoney. This also is specially enacted, that if any Jew shall be\nconvicted of having persuaded his Christian slave to the adoption of\nJewish error, he shall be deprived of the slave and amerced to make a\ngift._\n\nIt was only at this period that we find any of the laws of the Franks\nintroducing the right of a Christian to refuse service to a Jew. This,\nhowever, was not the case in all the territory, for that over which\nGuntram ruled was but a fourth part of the empire.\n\nThe following is ep. xxi. lib. iii. indic. xii.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS Venantio, Episcopo Lunensi:\n\n_Quod Jud\u00e6i non possunt Christiana habere mancipia: sed coloni et\noriginarii pensiones illis pr\u00e6bere debent._\n\nMultorum ad nos relatione pervenit, a Jud\u00e6is in Lunensi civitate\ndegentibus in servitio Christiana detineri mancipia: qu\u00e6 res nobis tanto\nvisa est asperior, quanto ea fraternitati tu\u00e6 patientia operabatur.\nOportebat quippe te respectu loci tui, atque Christian\u00e6 religionis\nintuitu, nullam relinquere occasionem, ut superstitioni Judaic\u00e6\nsimplices anim\u00e6 non, tam suasionibus quam potestatis jure, quodammodo\ndeservirent. Quamobrem hortamur fraternitatem tuam, ut secundum\npiissimarum legum tramitem, nulli Jud\u00e6o liceat Christianum mancipium in\nsuo retinere dominio. Sed si qui penes eos inveniuntur, libertas eis\ntuitionis auxilio ex legum sanctione servetur. Hi vero qui in\npossessionibus eorum sunt, licet et ipsi ex legum distinctione sint\nliberi; tamen quia colendis eorum terris diutius adh\u00e6serunt, utpote\nconditionem loci debentes, ad colenda qu\u00e6 consueverant rura permaneant,\npensionesque pr\u00e6dictis viris pr\u00e6beant: et cuncta qu\u00e6 de colonis vel\noriginariis jura pr\u00e6cipiunt, peragant, extra quod nihil eis oneris\namplius indicatur. Quodsi quisquam de his vel ad alium migrare locum,\nvel in obsequio suo retinere voluerit, ipse sibi reputet, qui jus\ncolonarium temeritate su\u00e2, jus vero juris dominii sui severitate\ndamnavit. In his ergo omnibus ita te volumus solerter impendi, ut nec\ndirepti gregis pastor reus existas, nec apud nos minor \u00e6mulatio\nfraternitatem tuam reprehensibilem reddat.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORY _to Venantius, Bishop of Luna_:\n\nThat Jews should not have Christian slaves, but that colonists and those\nborn on their lands should pay them pensions.\n\n_We have learned by the report of many persons that Christian slaves are\nkept in servitude by the Jews dwelling in the city of Luna, which is the\nmore grievous to us as it has been caused by the remissness of you our\nbrother. For it was becoming you, as well by reason of the place you\nhold, as from your regard for the Christian religion, not to allow the\nexistence of any occasion by which simple souls may be subjected to the\nJewish superstition, not only by the force of persuasion, but by a sort\nof right arising from power. Wherefore we exhort you, our brother, that,\naccording to the regulation of the most pious laws, it should not be\npermitted to any Jew to keep a Christian slave under his dominion, and\nthat if any such be found under them, the liberty of such should be\nsecured by the process of law and the aid of protection._\n\n_And as regards those who are on their lands, though by strict\nconstruction of law they may be free, yet, because they have remained a\nlong time in the cultivation of the soil, as bound to the condition of\nthe place, let them remain to till the lands as they have used to do,\nand pay their pension to the aforesaid men; and let them do all that the\nlaws require of colonists or persons of origin. Let no additional\nburthen however be laid on them._\n\n_But should any one of these desire to migrate to another place; or\nshould he prefer remaining in his obedience, let the consequences be\nattributed to him who rashly violated the colonial rights, or who\ninjured himself by the severity of his conduct towards his subject._\n\n_It is our wish that you be careful so to give your attention to all\nthese letters as not to be the guilty pastor of a plundered flock, nor\nthat your want of zeal should compel us to reprehend our brother._\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe law of the empire in force through Italy and Sicily:\n\n1. Slaves who were Christians could not be held by those who were not\nChristians.\n\n2. It being unlawful for others than Christians to hold them, these\nothers could have no property in them: the persons so held were entitled\nto their freedom.\n\n3. The church was the guardian of their right to freedom, and the church\nacted through the bishop.\n\n4. Consequently it was the duty, as it was the right, of the bishop to\nvindicate that freedom for those so unjustly detained.\n\n5. The right and duty of the pope was to see that each bishop was\ncareful in his charge, and this part of his charge came as much as any\nother did under the supervision of his superior and immediate inspector,\nand it was the duty of that superior to reprehend him for any neglect.\n\n6. The law of each country was to regulate the duty of the master and\nslave, and if that law made, as in Italy and its environs, the church\nthe proper tribunal for looking to the performance of those duties, any\nneglect of the church in its discharge would be criminal.\n\n7. Through the greater part of Italy and Sicily, at this period, the\npope was the sovereign, and it was only by his paramount influence that\nthe half-civilized Gothic and Lombard chiefs were kept in any order, and\ntheir despotism partially restrained.\n\nThey were times of anarchy, between which and the present no analogy\nexists. The Jews and separatists from the church were very numerous, and\non their side, as well as on that of their opposers, passion frequently\nassumed the garb of religion, and the unfortunate slave was played upon\nby each. The position of the pope was exceedingly difficult, for while\nhe had to restrain the enemies of the church on one side, he had to\ncorrect the excesses of its partisans upon the other.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XII.\n\nThe laws of the empire having declared it unlawful for Jews or pagans to\nhold Christian slaves, the church took a further step, which, in effect,\nforbade pagan slaves being sold to Jews, and which, to a considerable\nextent, suppressed their introduction, by the difficulties with which\nthe following order surrounded the traffic. It is found in lib. v.\nindic. xiv. epist. xxxi.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS, Fortunato Episcopo Neopolitano:\n\nNe mancipia qu\u00e6 Christianam fidem suscipere volunt, Jud\u00e6is venundentur:\nsed pretium \u00e0 Christiano emptore percipiant.\n\nFraternitati vestr\u00e6 ante hoc tempus scripsimus, ut hos qui de Judaica\nsuperstitione ad Christianam fidem Deo aspirante venire desiderant,\ndominis eorum nulla esset licentia venundandi: sed ex eo quo voluntatis\nsu\u00e6 desiderium prodidissent, defendi in libertatem per omnia debuissent.\nSed quia quantum cognovimus, nec voluntatem nostram, nec legum statuta\nsubtili scientes discretione pensare, in paganis servis h\u00e2c se non\narbitrantur conditione constringi: fraternitatem vestram oportet de his\nesse solicitam, et si de Jud\u00e6orum servitio non solum Jud\u00e6os, sed etiam\nquisquam paganorum fieri voluerit Christianus, postquam voluntas ejus\nfuerit patefacta, nec hunc sub quolibet ingenio vel argumento cuipiam\nJud\u00e6orum venundandi facultas sit: sed is qui ad Christianam converti\nfidem desideret, defensione vestr\u00e2 in libertatem modis omnibus\nvindicetur. Hi vero quos hujusmodi oportet servos amittere, ne forsitan\nutilitates suas irrationabiliter \u00e6stiment impediri, sollicit\u00e2 vos h\u00e6c\nconvenit consideratione servare: ut si paganos, quos mercimonii caus\u00e2 de\nexternis finibus emerint, intra tres menses, dum emptor cui vendi\ndebeant non invenitur, fugere ad ecclesiam forte contigerit, et velle se\nfieri dixerint Christianos, vel etiam extra ecclesiam hanc talem\nvoluntatem prodederint, pretium ibi \u00e0 Christiano scilicet emptore\npercipiant. Si autem post pr\u00e6finitos tres menses quisquam hujusmodi\nservorum velle suum edixerit, et fieri voluerit Christianus, nec aliquis\neum postmodum emere, nec dominus qu\u00e2libet occasionis specie audeat\nvenundare, sed ad libertatis proculdubio pr\u00e6mia perducatur: quia hunc\nnon ad vendendum, sed ad serviendum sibi intelligitur comparasse. H\u00e6c\nigitur omnia fraternitas vestra ita vigilantes observet, quatenus ei nec\nsupplicatio quorumdam valeat, nec persona surripere.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY to Fortunatus, Bishop of Naples:\n\n\u201cThat slaves who wish to embrace the Christian faith must not be sold to\nJews, but (the owners) may receive a price from a Christian purchaser.\n\n\u201cWe have before now written to you, our brother, that their masters\nshould not have leave to sell those who, by the inspiration of God,\ndesire to come from the Jewish superstition to the Christian faith; but\nthat from the moment they shall have manifested this determination they\nshould be, by all means, protected to seek their liberty. But, as we\nhave been led to know some persons, not exactly and accurately giving\nheed to our will, nor to the enactments of the laws, think that, as\nregards pagan slaves, this law does not apply, it is fit that you, our\nbrother, should be careful on this head; and if among the slaves of the\nJews, not only a Jew, but any of the pagans, should desire to become a\nChristian, to see that no Jew should have power to sell him under any\npretext, or by any ingenious device, after this his intention shall have\nbeen made known; but let him who desires to become of the Christian\nfaith have the aid of your defence, by all means, for his liberty.\n\n\u201cAnd respecting those who are to lose such servants, lest they should\nconsider themselves unreasonably hindered, it is fit that you should\ncarefully follow this rule: that, if it should happen that pagans, whom\nthey bought from foreign places for the purpose of traffic, should\nwithin three months, not having been purchased, fly to the church and\nsay that they desire to be Christians, or even make known this intention\nwithout the church, let the owners be capable of receiving their price\nfrom a Christian purchaser. But if, after the lapse of three months, any\none of those servants of this description should speak his will and wish\nto become a Christian, no one shall thereafter dare to purchase him, nor\nshall his master under any pretext sell him; but he shall unquestionably\nbe brought to the reward of liberty, because it is sufficiently\nintelligible that this slave was procured for the purpose of service,\nand not for that of traffic. Do you, my brother, diligently and closely\nobserve all these things, so that you be not led away by any\nsupplication, nor affected by personal regard.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe grounds of the law above given may be partially gathered from the\nfollowing, which is a letter to the bishop of Catania in Sicily. Lib. v.\nind. xiv. epist. xxxii.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS, Leoni Episcopo Catanensi:\n\n_De Samar\u00e6is qui pagana mancipia emerunt et circumciderunt._\n\nRes ad nos detestabilis, et omnino legibus inimica pervenit, qu\u00e6, si\nvera est, fraternitatem vestram vehementer accusat, eamque de minori\nsolicitudine probat esse culpabilem.\n\nComperimus autem quod Samar\u00e6i degentes Catin\u00e6 pagana mancipia emerint,\natque ea circumcidere ausu temerario pr\u00e6sumpserint. Atque idcirco\nnecesse est, ut omnimodo zelum in h\u00e2c caus\u00e2 sacerdotalem exercens, cum\nomni hoc vivacitate ac solicitudine studeas perscrutari: et si ita\nrepereris, mancipia ipsa sine mor\u00e2 in libertatem modis omnibus vindica,\net ecclesiasticam in eis tuitionem impende, nec quidquam dominos eorum\nde pretio quolibet modo recipere patiaris: qui non solum hoc damno\nmulctandi, sed etiam ali\u00e2 erant p\u0153n\u00e2 de legibus feriendi.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY to Leo, Bishop of Catania:\n\n\u201cConcerning Samaritans (or Jews) who purchased pagan slaves and\ncircumcised them.\n\n\u201cAccounts have been brought to us of a transaction very detestable and\naltogether opposed to the laws, and which, if true, shows exceedingly\ngreat neglect on the part of you, our brother, and proves you to have\nbeen very culpable.\n\n\u201cWe have found that some Jews dwelling at Catania have bought pagan\nslaves, and with rash presumption dared to circumcise them. Wherefore it\nis necessary that you should exert all your priestly zeal in this case,\nand give your mind to examine closely into it with energy and care; and,\nshould you find the allegation to be true, that you should by all means,\nand without delay, secure the liberty of the slaves themselves, and give\nthem the protection of the church; nor should you suffer their masters,\non any account, to receive any of the price given for them, for they not\nonly should be fined in this amount, but they are liable also to suffer\nsuch other punishment as the laws inflict.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIII.\n\nIn Judea, the creditor could take the children of the debtor, and keep\nthem as his slaves, to labour until the debt was paid; and among the\nGentiles this right was not only in existence, but in most cases the\nchild could be subjected to perpetual slavery, and in many instances the\ndebtor himself could thus be reduced to bondage. Improvement had been\nmade in this respect, as will be seen by the following document, found\nin lib. iii. indic. xii. epist. xliii.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS, Fantino Defensori:\n\n_De Cosma Syro multis debitis obligato._\n\nLator pr\u00e6sentium, Cosmas Syrus, in negotio quod agebat, debitum se\ncontraxisse perhibuit, quod, et multis aliis et lacrymis ejus\nattestantibus, verum esse credidimus. Et quia 150 solidos debebat, volui\nut creditores illius cum eo aliquid paciscerentur: quoniam et lex habet,\nut homo liber pro debito nullatenus teneatur, si res defuerint, qu\u00e6\npossunt eidem debito addici, creditores ergo suos, ut asserit, ad 80\nsolidos consentire possibile est. Sed quia multum est ut a nil habente\nhomine 80 solidos petant, 60 solidos per notarium tuum tibi\ntransmisimus; ut cum eisdem creditoribus subtiliter loquaris, rationem\nreddas, quia filium ejus quem tenere dicuntur, secundum leges tenere non\npossunt. Et si potest fieri, ad aliquod minus quam nos dedimus,\ncondescendant. Et quidquid de eisdem 60 solidis remanserit, ipsi trade,\nut cum filio suo exinde vivere valeat. Si autem nil remanet, ad eamdem\nsummam debitum ejus incidere stude, ut possit sibi libere postmodum\nlaborare. Hoc tamen solerter age, ut acceptis solidis ei plenariam\nmunitionem scripto faciant.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY, to the Proctor Fantinus:\n\n_Of Cosmas, the Syrian, deeply in debt._\n\n\u201cThe bearer hereof, Cosmas the Syrian, has informed us that he\ncontracted many debts in the business in which he was engaged. We\nbelieve it to be true; he has testified it with many tears and\nwitnesses. And, as he owes 150 shillings, I wish his creditors would\nmake some composition with him. And as the law regulates that no freeman\nshall be held for a debt, if there be no goods which can be attached for\nthat debt, he says that his creditors may be induced to accept 80\nshillings; but it is extravagant on their part to ask 80 shillings from\na man who has nothing. We have sent you 60 shillings by your notary,\nthat you may have a discrete conference with his creditors, and explain\nmatters to them, because they cannot legally hold his son, whom they are\nsaid to keep. And if they will come down to any thing less, by your\nefforts, than the sum that we send, should any thing remain of the 60\nshillings, give it to him to help to support himself and his son; should\nnothing be left, exert yourself to have his debt cancelled by that\namount sent, so that henceforth he may be free to exert himself for his\nown benefit. But be careful, in doing this, to get for him a full\nreceipt and discharge in writing for this money that they get.\u201d\n\nThe law to which the pope refers, and by which the persons of the\nunfortunate debtor and his family were protected, is found in Novell.\n134, c. vii., and was enacted by Justinian I. in 541.\n\n_Ne quis creditor filium debitoris pro debito retinere pr\u00e6sumat._\n\nQuia ver\u00f2 et hujuscemodi iniquitatem in diversis locis nostr\u00e6 reipublic\u00e6\ncognovimus admitti, quia, creditores filios debitorum pr\u00e6sumunt retinere\naut in pignus, aut in servile ministerium, aut in conductionem: hoc\nmodis omnibus prohibemus: et jubemus ut si quis hujusmodi aliquid\ndeliquerit, non solum debito cadat, sed tantam aliam quantitatem\nadjiciat dandam ei qui retentus est ab eo, aut parentibus ejus, et post\nhoc etiam corporalibus p\u0153nis ipsum subdi a loci judice; quia personam\nliberam pro debito pr\u00e6sumpserit retinere aut locare aut pignorare.\n\n\u201cThat no creditor should presume to retain for debt the son of the\ndebtor.\n\n\u201cAnd because we have known that this sort of injustice has been allowed\nin several places of our commonwealth,\u2014that creditors presume to keep\nthe children of their debtors, either in pledge or in slavish\nemployment, or to hire them out. We by all means forbid all this: and we\norder that, if any person shall be guilty of any of these things, not\nonly shall he lose the debt, but he shall in addition give an equal sum,\nto be paid to the person that was held by him, or to the parents of such\nperson; and, beyond this, he shall be subjected to corporal punishment\nby the local judge, because he presumed to restrain or to hire out, or\nkeep in pledge, a free person.\u201d\n\nThe following document will exhibit in some degree the origin of the\nprinciple of escheats to be found in slavery. The slave being freed upon\ncertain conditions, if they were not fulfilled the master of course\nre-entered upon his rights. The manumitted slave was sometimes allowed,\nnot only freedom, but a certain gift, and often with the condition that,\nif he had not lawful issue, the gift, and its increase by his industry,\nshould revert to the master or his heir. So, in after times, the lord of\nthe soil, or the monarch, gave portions of land to his vassals upon\ncondition of service, and, upon failure of service or of heirs, his land\nescheated, or went back to the lord of the soil.\n\nThe document is found in lib. v. indic. xiv. epist. xii.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS, Montan\u00e6 et Thom\u00e6:\n\n_Libertatem dat, et eos cives Romanos efficit._\n\nCum Redemptor noster totius conditor creatur\u00e6 ad hoc propitiatus humanam\nvoluerit carnem assumere, ut divinitatis su\u00e6 gratia, dirupto quo\ntenebamur captivi vinculo servitutis, pristin\u00e6 nos restitueret\nlibertati: salubriter agitur, si homines quos ab initio natura liberos\nprotulit, et jus gentium jugo substituit servitutis, in e\u00e2 natur\u00e2 in qu\u00e2\nnati fuerant, manumittentis beneficio, libertati reddantur. Atque ideo\npietatis intuitu, et hujus rei consideratione permoti, vos Montanam\natque Thomam famulos sanct\u00e6 Roman\u00e6 ecclesi\u00e6, cui, Deo adjutore,\ndeservimus, liberos ex hac die, civesque Romanos efficimus, omneque\nvestrum vobis relaxamus servitutis peculium. Et quia tu, Montana, animum\nte ad conversionem fateris appulisse monachicam: idcirco duas uncias,\nquas tibi quondam Gaudiosus presbyter per suprem\u00e6 su\u00e6 voluntatis\narbitrium institutionis modo noscitur reliquisse, hac die tibi donamus,\natque concedimus omnia scilicet monasterio Sancti Laurentii cui\nConstantina abbatissa pr\u00e6est, in quo converti Deo miserante festinas,\nmodis omnibus profutura. Si quid vero de rebus suprascripti Gaudiosi te\naliquomodo celasse constituerit, id totum ecclesi\u00e6 nostr\u00e6 juri sine\ndubio mancipetur. Tibi autem, suprascripto Thom\u00e6, quem pro libertatis\ntu\u00e6 cumulo etiam inter notarios volumus militare, quinque uncias, quas\npr\u00e6fatus Gaudiosus presbyter per ultimam voluntatem hereditario tibi\nnomine dereliquit, simul et sponsalia qu\u00e6 matri tu\u00e6 conscripserat,\nsimiliter hac die per hujus manumissionis paginam donamus, atque\nconcedimus, e\u00e2 sane lege, atque conditione subnex\u00e2, ut si sine filiis\nlegitimis, hoc est, de legitimo susceptis conjugio, te obire contigerit,\nomnia qu\u00e6 tibi concessimus, ad jus sanct\u00e6 Roman\u00e6 ecclesi\u00e6 sine\ndiminutione aliqu\u00e2 revertantur. Si autem filios de conjugio, sicut\ndiximus, cognitos lege susceperis, eosque superstites reliqueris,\nearumdem to rerum dominum sine quadam statuimus conditione persistere,\net testamentum de his faciendi liberam tibi tribuimus potestatem. H\u00e6c\nigitur, qu\u00e6 per hujus manumissionis chartulam statuimus, atque\nconcessimus, nos successoresque nostros, sine aliqu\u00e2 scitote\nrefragatione servare. Nam justiti\u00e6 ac rationis ordo suadet, ut qui sua a\nsuccessoribus desiderat mandata servari, decessoris sui proculdubio\nvoluntatem et statuta custodiat. Hanc autem manumissionis paginam\nPaterio notario scribendam dictavimus, et propri\u00e2 manu un\u00e0 cum tribus\npresbyteris prioribus et tribus diaconis pro plenissim\u00e2 firmitate\nsubscripsimus, vobisque tradidimus. Actum in urbe Rom\u00e2.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY to Montana and Thomas:\n\n\u201cHe emancipates them, and makes them Roman citizens.\n\n\u201cSince our Redeemer, the Maker of every creature, mercifully vouchsafed\nto take human flesh, that, breaking the chain by which we were held\ncaptive, he may, by the grace of his divinity, restore us to our first\nliberty, it is then salutary that they whom he at first made free by\nnature, and whom the law of nations subjected to the yoke of slavery,\nshould in the nature in which they were born be restored to liberty by\nthat kindness of their emancipator. And therefore, moved by this\nconsideration, and in respect to piety, we make you, Montana and Thomas,\nslaves of the holy Roman church, in whose service we are by God\u2019s help\nengaged, from this day forward free and Roman citizens. And we release\nto you all your allowance of slavery.\n\n\u201cAnd because you, Montana, have declared that it was your wish to enter\ninto the monastic state, we give and grant to you this day two ounces,\nwhich it is well known were formerly left as a legacy to you for\ninheritance by the priest Gaudiosus, to be by all means available to the\nmonastery of St. Lawrence, over which Constantina is superioress, and\ninto which you desire anxiously by God\u2019s mercy to be admitted. But\nshould it appear that you have concealed any of the effects of the said\nGaudiosus, the entire thereof doubtless is by right for the service of\nour church.\n\n\u201cBut to you, the said Thomas, whom, in addition to the bestowal of\nfreedom, we desire to be enrolled in service among our notaries, we\nlikewise this day give and grant, by this charter of manumission, five\nounces which the same Gaudiosus the priest left to you by name in his\nlast will, and the portion which he assigned for your mother, but upon\nthis ground and condition well attached, that, should you die without\nissue by lawful marriage, all those goods which we have granted to you\nshall come back, without any diminution, under the dominion of the holy\nRoman church; but should you leave behind you children lawfully\nrecognised from your marriage, we give to you full power to hold the\nsame effects as their owner, and without any condition, and to make free\ndisposition of the same by will.\n\n\u201cKnow you, therefore, that what we have thus, by this charter of\nmanumission, enacted and granted to you, bind, without any gainsay,\nourselves and our successors for its observance. For the order of\njustice and of reason requires that he who desires his own commands to\nbe observed by his successors, should also doubtless observe the will\nand the statutes of his predecessor.\n\n\u201cWe have dictated this writing of manumission to be copied by our notary\nPaterius, and have for its most perfect stability subscribed it with our\nhand, and with those of three of the more dignified priests and three\ndeacons, and delivered them to you.\n\n\u201cDone in the city of Rome, &c.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nOne of the subjects which at all times caused slavery to be surrounded\nwith great difficulties was the result of marriage. The liability to\nseparation of those married was a more galling affliction in the\nChristian law, where the Saviour made marriage indissoluble, and it\noften happened that an avaricious or capricious owner cared as little\nfor the marriage bond as he did for the natural tie of affection. Hence,\nas Christianity became the religion of the state, or of the great body\nof the people, it was imperatively demanded that some restraint should\nbe placed upon that absolute power which the owners sometimes abused, of\nwantonly making these separations. On the other hand, the association of\nthe sexes made marriage desirable: it was ordained by God to be the\ngeneral state of the bulk of mankind, and even the self-interest or the\navarice of the master calculated upon its results. Then again the slave\ndreaded separation, not only because of the violence committed on the\nmost sacred affections, but also because, though the husband and wife\nshould be separated by impassable barriers, yet the bond of their union\nsubsisted, and could be severed by death alone.\n\nThis was a strong temptation to both master and slave to prefer\nconcubinage to wedlock.\n\nAnother difficulty arose, in cases of the colonist, by reason of the\nclaims of the several owners where colonists of distinct estates and\ndifferent owners intermarried. In the case of perfect slaves, the child\ngenerally followed the mother, both as regarded condition and property.\nThis was not, however, universally the case. But the owners of colonized\nlands set up different claims. At length the dispute was settled in the\nRoman Empire by a law of Justinian, in 539, Novell. clxii. cap. iii.,\nand confirmed by a decision in a case brought up by the church-wardens\nof Apamea, in Phrygia, in 541, on the kalends of March, by dividing\nequally the progeny between the estates to which the parents belonged,\ngiving the preference, in all cases of uneven number, to that estate to\nwhich the mother was attached. Nov. clvii. tit. xxxix.\n\nThe following law concerning marriages and the separation of married\npersons from each other, and of children from their parents, is of the\nsame date.\n\nNOVELL. CLVII. _De Rusticis qui in alienis pr\u00e6diis nuptias contrahunt._\nTit. xl.\n\nImp. Justin. August. Lazaro Comiti Orientis.\n\nPr\u00e6fatio. Ex his qu\u00e6 diverso modo ad nos relata sunt, didicimus in\nMesopotami\u00e2 et Osdroen\u00e2 provinciis quidquam delinqui, nostris plane\ntemporibus indignum: consuetudinem etiam apud ipsos esse, ut qui ex\ndiversis originem trahant pr\u00e6diis, nuptias inter se contrahant. Inde\nsane conari dominos, de facto jam contractas nuptias dissolvere, aut\nprocreatos filios a parentibus abstrahere, exindeque totum ilium locum\nmisere affligi, dum et rusticani viri et mulieres ex un\u00e2 parte\ndistrahantur, et proles his adimitur, qui in lucem produxerunt, et sol\u00e2\nnostr\u00e2 opus esse providenti\u00e2.\n\nCap. I. Sancimus igitur, ut pr\u00e6diorum domini de c\u00e6tero rusticos suos,\nprout voluerint, conservent: neque quisquam eos qui jam conjuncti sunt\npossit secundum consuetudinem prius obtinentem divellere, aut compellere\nut terram ad ipsos pertinentem colant, abstrahereve a parentibus filios\npr\u00e6textu conditionis colonari\u00e6. Sed et si quid hujusmodi forte jam\nfactum est, corrigi hoc simul, et restitui efficies, sive filios\nabstrahi contigerit, sive etiam mulieres, nempe vel a parentibus, vel\ncontubernii consortibus: eo, qui reliquo deinceps tempore hujusmodi\naliquid facere pr\u00e6sumpserit, etiam de ipso pr\u00e6dio in periculum vocando.\nQuare libera sunto contubernia metu, qui dudum ipsis immittitur, et\nparentes habento ex hac jussione filios suos: nequeuntibus pr\u00e6diorum\ndominis subtilibus contendere rationibus, et vel nuptias contrahentes\nvel filios abstrahere. Qui enim tale quid facere pr\u00e6sumpserit, etiam de\nipso pr\u00e6dio in periculum veniet, cui eos vindicare rusticos attentat.\n\nEpilogus. Qu\u00e6 igitur nobis placuerunt, et per sacram hanc pragmaticam\ndeclarantur fornam, eam providentiam habeto magnificentia tua, tibique\nobtemperans cohors, et qui pro tempore eundem magistratum geret; ut ad\neffectum deducantur conserventurque, trium librarum auri p\u0153na imminenti\nei, qui ullo unquam tempore h\u00e6c transgredi attentaverit. Dat. Kal. Maii,\nConstantinop. D.N. Justin. PP. Aug. Bisil. V.C. Cons.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201c_Of country persons who contract marriage on divers estates._ The\nEmperor JUSTINIAN AUGUSTUS, to Lazarus the Count of the East.\n\n\u201cPreamble. We have learned by relation in various ways, that a\ndelinquency quite unworthy of our times is allowed in the provinces of\nMesopotamia and of Osdroene. They have a custom of having marriage\ncontracted between those born on different estates: whence the masters\nendeavour to dissolve marriages actually contracted, or to take away\nfrom the parents the children who are their issue; upon which account\nthat entire place is miserably afflicted, while country people, husbands\nand wives, are drawn away from each other, and the children whom they\nbrought into light are taken away from them; and that there needs for\nthe regulation only our provision.\n\n\u201cChapter I. Wherefore, we enact, that otherwise the masters of the\naforesaid keep their colonists as they will; but, it shall not be\nallowed, by virtue of any custom heretofore introduced and in existence,\nto put away from each other those who were married, or to force them to\ncultivate the land belonging to themselves, or to take away children\nfrom their parents, under the colour of colonial condition. And you will\nbe careful that if any thing of this sort has haply been already done,\nthe same be corrected and restitution made, whether it be that children\nwere taken away from their parents or women from their consorts of\nmarriage. And for any who shall in future presume to act in this way, it\nshall be at the hazard of losing the estate itself.\n\n\u201cWherefore, let marriages of servants be exempt from that fear which has\nhitherto hung over them: and from the issue of this order, let the\nparents have their children. It shall not be competent for the lords of\nthe estates to strive by any subtle arguments either to take away those\nwho contract marriage, or their children. For he who shall presume to do\nany such thing shall incur the risk of losing that estate for which he\nattempts to claim those colonists.\n\n\u201cEpilogue. That therefore which has been good in our view, and is\ndeclared by this sacred pragmatic form, let your magnificence provide to\nhave carried into execution, and the cohort which obeys you, as also he\nwho for the time being shall hold the same magisterial office. To the\nend, then, that this edict may produce its effect and continue in force,\nlet him who may at any time violate its enactments be liable to a\npenalty of three pounds of gold.\n\n\u201cGiven at Constantinople, on the kalends of May, our most pious lord\nJustinian being Augustus, and the most renowned Basil being consul.\u201d\n\nTo rectify this, it became a principle, where an estate was large and\nthe colonists numerous, to confine the choice of the servants within the\nbounds of the property; and thus marriage had its full sanctity, and\nfamilies remained without separation.\n\nWe have an instance of the exercise of this right, by Pope St. Gregory,\nin a document found in lib. x. indic. v. epist. 28.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS, Romano Defensori.\n\n_De filiis Petri defensoris extra massam in qua nati sunt non\njungendis._\n\nPetrus quem defensorem fecimus, quia de massa juris ecclesi\u00e6 nostr\u00e6, qu\u00e6\nVitelas dicitur, oriundus sit, experienti\u00e6 tu\u00e6 bene est cognitum. Et\nideo quia circa eum benigni debemus existere, ut tamen ecclesi\u00e6 utilitas\nnon l\u00e6datur: hac tibi pr\u00e6eptione mandamus, ut eum districte debeas\nadmonere, ne filios suos quolibet ingenio vel excusatione foris alicubi\nin conjugio sociare pr\u00e6sumat, sed in e\u00e2 mass\u00e2, cui lege et conditione\nligati sunt, socientur. In qu\u00e2 re etiam et tuam omnino necesse est\nexperientiam esse sollicitam, atque eos terrere, ut qualibet occasione\nde possessione cui oriundo subjecti sunt exire non debeant. Nam si quis\neorum exinde, quod non credimus, exire pr\u00e6sumpserit; certum illi est\nquia noster consensus nunquam illi aderit, ut foris de mass\u00e2 in qu\u00e2 nati\nsunt, aut habitare aut debeant sociari, sed et superscribi terram eorum.\nAtque tunc sciatis vos non leve periculum sustinere, si vobis\nnegligentibus quisquam ipsorum quidquam de iis qu\u00e6 prohibemus facere\nqualibet sorte tentaverit.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY to the Proctor Romanus.\n\n\u201c_Of not marrying the children of Peter the Proctor, without the limits\nof the estate upon which they were born._\n\n\u201cYou, experienced sir, are well aware that Peter, whom we made a\nproctor, is a native of the estate of our church territory which is\ncalled Vitelas. And as our desire is to act towards him with such favour\nas is compatible with avoiding any injury to the church, we command you\nby this precept, that you should strictly warn him not to presume, under\nany pretext or excuse, to have his children joined in wedlock anywhere\nbut on that estate to which they may be bound by law or by condition. In\nwhich matter it is quite necessary that you, experienced sir, be very\ncareful, and instil into them a fear to prevent any of them from going\non any account beyond the estate to which they are subject by origin.\nFor if any one of them shall presume, as we believe he will not, to go\nthence, let him be assured that he shall never have our consent either\nto dwell or to associate himself without the estate on which he was\nborn, but that the land of any such person shall be more heavily charged\n(_superscribi_). And know you, that if, by your negligence, any of them\nshall attempt to do any of those things which we prohibit, you will\nincur no small danger.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nMany of the restrictions on marriage that are found in subsequent ages,\nunder the feudal system, had their origin in this principle, because\nindeed the vassal, in feudal times, was but a slave under a more loose\ndominion in a mitigated form.\n\nThe following document shows that, in the west, the separation of\nmarried persons was very uncommon, (quam sit inauditum atque crudele,\n_unheard of and cruel_.) It is found in lib. iii. indic. iii. ep. xii.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS, Maximiano Episcopo Syracusano.\n\n_De uxore cujusdam ablat\u00e2 et alteri venumdat\u00e2._\n\nTanta nobis subinde mala, qu\u00e6 aguntur in ist\u00e2 provinci\u00e2, nunciantur, ut\npeccatis facientibus, quod avertat omnipotens Deus, celeriter eam\nperituram credamus. Pr\u00e6sentium namque portitor veniens lacrymabiliter\nqu\u00e6stus est, ante plurimos annos ab homine nescio quo de possessione\nMessanensis ecclesi\u00e6 de fontibus se susceptum, et violenter diversis\nsuasionibus puell\u00e6 ipsius junctum, ex qu\u00e2 juvenculos filios jam habere\nse asseruit, et quam nunc violenter huic disjunctam abstulisse dicitur,\natque cuidam alii venumdedisse. Quod si verum est, quam sit inauditum\natque crudele malum, tua bone dilectio perspicit. Ideoque admonemus, ut\nhoc tantum nefas sub ea vivacite, quam te in causis piis habere\ncertissime scimus, requiras atque discutias. Et si ita, ut supradictus\nportitor insinuavit, esse cognoveris, non solum quod male factum est, ad\nstatum pristinum revocare curabis; sed et vindictam, qu\u00e6 Deum possit\nplacare, exhibere modis omnibus festinabis. Episcopum vero, qui homines\nsuos talia agentes corrigere negligit atque emendare, vehementer\naggredere, proponens, quia si denuo talis ad nos de quoquam qui ad eum\npertinet qu\u00e6rela pervenerit, non in eum qui excesserit, sed in ipsum\ncanonice vindicta procedet.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY to Maximian, Bishop of Syracuse.\n\n\u201c_Concerning the wife of some one that was taken away and sold to\nanother._\n\n\u201cWe are told of so many bad things done in that province, that we are\nled to believe, which may God forbid, the place must soon be destroyed.\n\n\u201cNow, the bearer of these presents complained to us in a pitiable\nmanner, that many years ago, some man whom I know not, belonging to the\nchurch of Messina stood as his sponsor at baptism, and prevailed upon\nhim by extreme urgency to marry his servant, by whom, he says, he has\nnow young children, and whom now this man has violently taken away and\nsold to another. If this be true, you, our beloved, will see plainly how\nunheard of and how cruel is the evil. We therefore admonish you to look\ninto and to sift so great a crime, with that earnestness which we\nassuredly know you have in matters of piety: and should you come to know\nthat the fact is as the aforesaid bearer has stated, you will be careful\nnot only to bring back to its former state that which was badly done,\nbut you will quickly, by all means, have that punishment inflicted which\nmay appease God. Give a severe lecture to the bishop that neglected to\ncorrect or to amend his people who do such things; setting before him\nthat if a like complaint comes to us again of any one who belongs to\nhim, canonical process for punishment shall issue, not against the one\nthat shall have done wrong, but against himself.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIV.\n\nThe form of a deed of gift found in lib. ii. indic. xi. epist. 18:\n\nGREGORIUS, Theodoro Consiliario.\n\n_Acosimum puerum dat per epistolam._\n\nEcclesiasticis utilitatibus desudantes ecclesiastic\u00e2 dignum est\nremuneratione gaudere, ut qui se voluntariis obsequiorum necessitatibus\nspont\u00e8 subjiciunt, dign\u00e8 nostris provisionibus consolentur. Quia igitur\nte Theodorum, virum eloquentissimum, consiliarium nostrum, mancipiorum\ncognovimus ministerio destitutum, ideo puerum nomine Acosimum, natione\nSiculum, juri dominioque tuo dari tradique pr\u00e6cipimus. Quem quoniam\ntraditum ex nostr\u00e2 voluntate jam possides, hujus te necesse fuit scripti\npro futuri temporis testimonio ac robore largitatis auctoritate fulciri:\nquatenus, Domino protegente, secur\u00e8 eum semper et sine ullius\nretractionis suspicione, quippe ut dominus, valeas possidere. Neque enim\nquemquam fore credimus, qui tam parvam largitatem pro tu\u00e2 tibi devotione\nconcessam desideret, vel tentet ullo modo revocare: c\u00f9m uno eodemque\ntempore, et verecundum sit a decessoribus ben\u00e8 gesta resolvere, et\nverecundum sit docere ceteros in su\u00e2 quandoque resolutoriam proferre\nlargitate sententiam.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY, to Theodore the Counsellor.\n\n\u201c_He, by letter, gives him the boy Acosimus._\n\n\u201cIt is fit that they who labour for the benefit of the church should\nenjoy a reward from the church, that they who voluntarily and of their\nown accord have undertaken burthensome duties should be worthily\nassisted by our provision. Because, therefore, we have known that you,\nTheodore, our counsellor, a most eloquent man, were not well provided\nwith the service of slaves, we have ordered that a boy, by name\nAcosimus, of the Sicilian nation, should be given up and delivered to\nyour right and dominion. And as you already have him in your possession\nby delivery, upon our will, it was necessary to fortify you with the\nauthority of this writing as a testimony to the future and for\nprotection of the gift: so that by God\u2019s protection you may have power\nto possess him as his lord and master, always securely for ever and\nwithout any question being raised of his being in any way taken back.\nNor indeed do we believe that there is any one who would desire or would\nattempt in any way to revoke so small a bounty given to you for your\ndevotion, since it would be shameful to undo the good deeds of our\npredecessors, as it would to teach others that each could from time to\ntime make the revocation of his own gift.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe next document is found in lib. x. indic. v. epist. 40:\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS, Bonito Defensori.\n\n_De mancipio Fortunati Abbatis._\n\nFilius noster Fortunatus abbas monasterii sancti Severini, quod in h\u00e2c\nurbe Roman\u00e2 situm est, latores pr\u00e6sentium, monachos suos, illic pro\nrecolligendis mancipiis juris sui monasterii qu\u00e6 illic latitare dicuntur\ndirigens, petiit ut experienti\u00e6 tu\u00e6 ei debeant adesse solatia. E\u00e2\npropter pr\u00e6senti tibi auctoritate pr\u00e6cipimus, ut eis in omnibus salv\u00e2\nratione concurrere ac opitulari festines: quatenus te illic cor\u00e0m\nposito, atque in h\u00e2c caus\u00e2 ferente solatia, salubriter h\u00e6c citi\u00f9s\nvaleant qu\u00e6 sibi injuncta sunt ad effectum, Deo auctore, perducere.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY, to the Proctor Bonitus.\n\n\u201c_Concerning the slave of the Abbot Fortunatus._\n\n\u201cOur son Fortunatus, the abbot of the monastery of St. Severinus which\nis in the city of Rome, directing his monks, the bearers of these\npresents to your neighbourhood, to gather slaves belonging to the rights\nof his monastery, who are said to be there in concealment, begged that\nhe should have your aid for that object. Wherefore, we command you, by\nthis present order, that you would be alert in giving them all\nreasonable concurrence and aid; so that you being present there and\ncomforting them in this business, they may, with God\u2019s aid, be able in a\nwholesome manner the sooner to perform the duty which has been laid upon\nthem.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe pope did not consider it unbecoming in the monastery of St.\nSeverinus to hold slaves, nor irreligious for the abbot to send monks to\nbring back runaways, nor criminal for the monks to go looking for them,\nnor offensive to God, on his own part, to give letters to his officer\nand overseers to aid by all reasonable means to discover and to capture\nthem.\n\nThe following document enters into details for the recovery of a runaway\nslave. It is found in lib. vii. ind. ii. epist. 107.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS Sergio Defensori.\n\n_De Petro puero fug\u00e2 lapso._\n\nFilius noster vir magnificus Occilianus, tribunus Hydruntin\u00e6 civitatis,\nad nos veniens, puerum unum, Petrum nomine, artis pistori\u00e6, ex jure\ngermani nostri, ad eum noscitur perduxisse. Quem nunc fug\u00e2 lapsum ad\npartes illas reverti cognovimus. Experientia ergo tua, antequam ad\nHydruntinam civitatem valeat is ipse contingere, sub qu\u00e2 valueris\nceleritate, vel ad episcopum Hydruntin\u00e6 civitatis, vel ad pr\u00e6dictum\ntribunum, si vel alium quem in loco tuo te habere cognoscis, scripta\ndirigas, ut uxorem vel filios pr\u00e6dicti mancipii sub omni habere debeant\ncautel\u00e2 atque de ipso sollicitudinem gerere, ut preveniens valeat\ndetineri, et mox, cum rebus suis omnibus qu\u00e6 ad eum pertinent navi\nimpositis, per fidelem personam huc modis omnibus destinari. Experientia\nitaque tua cum omni hoc studeat efficaci\u00e2 solerti\u00e2que perficere, ne de\nneglectu vel mor\u00e2 nostros quod non optamus animos offendas.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY, to the Proctor Sergius.\n\n\u201c_Concerning Peter, a servant who fled away._\n\n\u201cOur son Occilianus, a highly respectable man, a tribune of the city of\nOtranto, brought with him to our cousin, as is known, when he was coming\nto us, a boy named Peter, a baker, who belonged to that cousin. We have\nnow learned that he has run away, and returned to your country. Let then\nit be your care, experienced sir, before he shall be able to get back to\nOtranto, to direct, as quickly as you can, a writing to the bishop of\nOtranto, or to the foresaid tribune himself, or to any one else whom you\nknow, that you can depute, to have a good care of the wife or children\nof the said slave, and to be very careful respecting himself, that as\nsoon as he shall arrive he may be detained, and sent with every thing\nthat pertains to him, by all means hither, embarking them on board a\nship under care of some faithful person.\n\n\u201cYou, experienced sir, will therefore exert yourself to do this with all\nattention and effect, so as not to displease us by a delay or neglect,\nwhich we should not desire.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe following is taken from lib. viii. indic. iii. epist. 4.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS, Fantino Defensori.\n\n_De mancipiis Romani spectabilis viri._\n\nMancipia juris Romani spectabilis memori\u00e6 viri, qui in domo su\u00e2 gu\u00e6\nNeapoli sita est monasterium ordinari constituit, habitare in Sicili\u00e2\nperhibentur. Et quia monasterium ipsum juxta voluntatem ejus, Deo\nauctore, noscitur ordinatum, experientia tua pr\u00e6sentium portitoribus,\nqui ad recolligenda mancipia ipsa illuc directi sunt, omni studio\nsolatiari festinet, et recollectis eis, possessiones illi ubi laborare\ndebeant, te solatiante, conducant. Et quidquid eorum labore accesserit,\nreservato unde ipsi possint subsistere, reliqua ad pr\u00e6dictum\nmonasterium, experienti\u00e6 tu\u00e6 cur\u00e2, annis singulis, auxiliante Domino,\ntransmittantur.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY, to the Proctor Fantinus.\n\n\u201c_Concerning the slaves of the honourable man Romanus._\n\n\u201cThe slaves of the man of honourable memory, Romanus, who directed that\nhis house in Naples should be formed into a monastery, are said to dwell\nin Sicily. And as it is known that, with God\u2019s help, the monastery has\nbeen established according to the regulations of his will; you,\nexperienced sir, will without delay use your best efforts to aid the\nbearers of these presents, who are sent thither, to collect those\nslaves: and when they shall be collected, let them hire lands under your\ncountenance, where they may labour; keeping them out of their produce of\nlabour, whatever may be necessary for their support; let the remainder,\nunder the care of you, experienced sir, be sent, with God\u2019s help, every\nyear to the foresaid monastery.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nGREGORIUS, Vitali Defensori Sardini\u00e6.\n\n_De Barbaricinis mancipiis comparandis._\n\nBonifacium pr\u00e6sentium portitorem, notarium scilicet nostrum, nos\nexperientia tua illuc transmisisse cognoscat, ut in utilitatem parochi\u00e6\nBarbaricina debeat mancipia comparare. Et ideo experientia tua omnino et\nstudio sesolliciteque concurrat, ut bono pretio, et talia debeat\ncomparare, qu\u00e6 inministerio parochi\u00e6 utilia valeant inveniri, atque\nemptis eis huc Deo protegente is ipse celerius possit remeare. Ita ergo\nte in hac re exhibere festina, ut te quasi servientium amatorem, quorum\nusibus emuntur, ostendas, et nobis ipsi te de tu\u00e2 valeant sollicitudine\ncommendare.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\n\u201cGREGORY, to Vitalis, Proctor of Sardinia.\n\n\u201c_Of buying Barbary slaves._\n\n\u201cKnow, experienced sir, that Boniface, our notary, the bearer of these\npresents, has been sent by us to your place to purchase some Barbary\nslaves for the use of the hospital. And therefore, you will be careful\nto concur diligently and attentively with him, that he may buy them at a\ngood rate, and such as would be found useful for the service of the\nhospital. And that having bought them, he may, under the protection of\nGod, very speedily return hither. Do you then be prompt to show yourself\nin this business so as to exhibit your affection for those who serve the\nhospital, and for whose use the purchase is made, and that they may have\nit in their power to commend you to us for your zeal in their regard.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe word _parochi\u00e6_, which is translated \u201chospital,\u201d is more properly\n_ptochia_ in some of the ancient MSS., which is a sort of Latinized\nimitation of \u03c0\u03c4\u03c9\u03c7\u03af\u03b1\u2014a house for feeding the poor. Gregory had a large\nestablishment of this description in Rome, attended by pious monks, for\nwhose service those barbarians were purchased. Procopius informs us,\nlib. ii. de Bello Vandanco, cap. 13, who these Barbary slaves were.\n\u201cWhen the Vandals had conquered the Moors of Africa, they were annoyed\nby the incursions of some of the barbarians of the southern part of\nNumidia. In order to prevent this, they seized upon them, their wives\nand children, and transported them to the island of Sardinia: kept\nprisoners and slaves for some time here, they escaped to the vicinity of\nCagliari, and, forming a body of 3000 men, they regained a sort of\nfreedom. Gregory made various efforts to convert them. They who were\nkept in thraldom were frequently purchased, as in this instance, by the\nItalians and others.\u201d\n\nThis is the first instance on record of the purchase of negro slaves by\nthe church, and occurred about the year 600. At that time, white slaves\ncost less than the expense of importation from Africa.\n\nIn his sixth book, ep. 21, Gregory commands the priest Candidus, who was\nhis agent in Gaul, to purchase four of the brothers of one Dominic, who\ncomplained to him that they were redeemed from their captors by Jews in\nNarbonne, and held by them in slavery.\n\nThe seventh book, ep. 22, to John, the bishop of Syracuse, is a very\ncurious document. It recites the case of one Felix, who was a slave born\nof Christian parents, and given in his youth as a present to a Jew by a\nChristian owner: he served illegally during nineteen years the Jew who\nwas disqualified from holding a Christian slave; but Maximinian the\nformer bishop of Syracuse, learning the facts, had, as in duty bound,\nFelix discharged from this service and made free. Five years\nsubsequently, a son of the Jew became, or pretended to become, a\nChristian, and being thus qualified to hold a Christian slave, claimed\nFelix as his property. Felix appealed to the pope, and the letter to the\nbishop of Syracuse is a decision in favour of his freedom, containing\nalso an order to the bishop to protect him and defend his liberty.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XV.\n\nWe have heretofore, in our fifth lesson, noticed the doctrine of the\nchurch, that the civil power had the prerogative of making laws in\nregard to slavery; although, at that time, paganism may be said to have\ngoverned the world. And while we travel rapidly through the seventh\ncentury, finding the Roman Empire, the mistress of the world, now\ntottering to decay; the Lombards firmly established in Italy; the Franks\nin Gaul; the Goths in Spain; the Suevi in Portugal; and all Germany\nfilled by various hordes, governed by their petty chieftains, just now\nshowing some symptoms of civilization, and Christianity in the\nascendant; yet we find this doctrine of the church unchanged.\n\nThe church may now be considered strong; and although the civil power is\nregarded as the legitimate legislative authority, yet, in no instance,\nare the laws found to run counter to the doctrines of the church on this\nsubject.\n\nIn the precept of King Clotaire II. for endowing the abbey of Corbey,\nafter the grant of the parcels of land therein recited, he adds, \u201cun\u00e0\ncum terris, domibus, mancipiis, \u00e6dificiis, vineis, silvis, pratis,\npascuis, farinariis, et cunctis appenditiis,\u201d &c.\u2014_Together with the\nlands, houses, slaves, buildings, vineyards, woods, meadows, pastures,\ngranaries, and all appendages._\n\nAnd the abbey not only possessed the slaves as property, but by the same\nprecept had civil jurisdiction over all its territory and all persons\nand things thereon, to the exclusion of all other judges.\n\nThe fourth council of Toledo, in 633, in its fifty-ninth canon, by the\nauthority of King Sisenand and his nobles in Spain, restored to liberty\nany slaves whom the Jews should circumcise, and in the sixty-sixth\ncanon, by the same authority, Jews were thenceforth rendered incapable\nof holding Christian slaves. The seventieth and the seventy-first canons\nregulated the process regarding the freed persons and colonists of the\nchurch, and the latter affixed a penalty of reduction to slavery for\nneglect of formal observances useful to preserve the evidence of title\nfor the colonist. The seventy-second canon places the freed persons,\nwhether wholly manumitted or only conditioned, when settled under\npatronage of the church, under the protection of the clergy.\n\nThe seventy-fourth allows the church to manumit worthy slaves belonging\nto herself, so that they may be ordained priests or deacons, but still\nkeeps the property they may acquire, as belonging to the church which\nmanumitted them, and restricts them even in their capacity as witnesses\nin several instances; and should they violate this condition, declares\nthem suspended.\n\nIn the year 650, which was the sixth of King Clovis II., a council was\nheld at Chalons. The canon begins with the announcement\u2014\n\nPietatis est maxim\u00e6 et religionis intuitus, ut captivitatis vinculum\nomnino \u00e0 Christianis redimatur. Unde sancta synodus noscitur censuisse,\nut nullus mancipium extra fines vel terminos qui ad regnum domini\nClodovei regis pertinent, penitus, debeat venumdare; ne, quod absit, per\ntale commercium aut captivitatis vinculo, vel, quod pejus est, Judaic\u00e2\nservitute mancipia Christiana teneantur implicita.\n\n\u201cIt is a work of the greatest piety, and the intent of religion, that\nthe bond of captivity should be entirely redeemed from Christians.\nWhence it is known to be the opinion of the holy synod, that no one\nought, at all, to sell a slave beyond the dominions of our lord Clovis\nthe king; lest, which God forbid, Christian slaves should be kept\nentangled in the chains of captivity, or what is worse, under Jewish\nbondage.\u201d\n\nIn the tenth council of Toledo, celebrated in the year 656, in the reign\nof Receswind, king of the Goths, the seventh chapter is a bitter\ncomplaint of the practice, which still prevailed among Christians, of\nselling Christian slaves to the Jews, to the subversion of their faith\nor their grievous oppression.\n\nIn the year 666, a council was held in Merida, in Spain. The eighteenth\ncanon of which allows that, of the slaves belonging to the church, some\nmay be ordained minor clerks, who shall serve the priests as their\nmasters with due fidelity, receiving only food and raiment.\n\nThe twentieth chapter complains of many irregularities in the mode of\nmaking freedmen for the service of the church, regulates the mode of\nmaking them, and provides for the preservation of the evidence of their\nobligation and the security of their service.\n\nThe twenty-first regulates the extent to which a bishop shall be allowed\nto grant gifts to his friends, the slaves, the freedmen, or others.\n\nThe thirteenth council of Toledo was held in the year 683, in the reign\nof Ervigius, the successor of Wamba. There was an old law of the Goths,\nfound in lib. v. tit. vii., and repeated in other forms in lib. x. and\nxi., regulating that no freedman should do an injury or an unkindness to\nhis master, and authorizing the master who had suffered, to bring such\noffender back again to his state of slavery. And in lib. xvii. the\nfreedman, and his progeny for ever, were prohibited from contracting\nmarriage with the family of their patron or behaving with insolence to\nthem. King Ervigius was reminded by many of his nobles that former\nkings, in derogation of this law, had given employments about the palace\nto slaves and to freedmen, and even sustained them in giving offence to\ntheir masters, had even sometimes ordered them so to do, and protected\nthem; for this the nobles sought redress. The king called upon the\ncouncil to unite with him in putting a stop to this indignity. And in\nthe sixth canon we have the detail of the evils set forth, and also the\nenactment, in concurrence with the king, that thenceforward it shall be\nunlawful to give any employment whatever about the palace, or in the\nconcerns of the crown, to any slave or freedman.\n\nThe third council of Saragossa was celebrated in the year 691, in the\nreign of Egica, king of the Goths.\n\nIn Toledo, it had been enacted, that any freedman of the church, who did\nnot comply with certain regulations, should lose his freedom and be\nreduced to slavery. One of the conditions was, that any person\npretending to have been manumitted, or claiming as the descendant of a\nfreedman, should, upon the death of the bishop, exhibit his papers to\nthe successor of the deceased, within a year, or, upon his neglect,\nshould be declared a slave. The object of this was to discern those who\nwere partially free from the perfect slave, and to cause the former to\npreserve their muniments.\n\nThe fathers of Saragossa, however, discovered that some of the bishops,\nstudying their own gain, had been too rigid in enforcing this law, and\nthereby reduced several negligent or ignorant persons to bondage; in\norder then to do justice, they enacted in their fourth chapter, that the\nyear within which the documents should be exhibited should not commence\nto run until after the new bishop, subsequently to his institution,\nshould have given sufficient notice to those claiming to be put in\npartial service, to produce their papers.\n\nThe sixteenth council of Toledo was held in the year 693. The fifth\nchapter of the acts, determining when a priest may hold two churches,\nhas the following passage:\n\nUt ecclesia, qu\u00e6 usque ad decem habuerit mancipia, super se habeat\nsacerdotem, qu\u00e6 vero minus decem mancipia habuerit aliis conjungatur\necclesiis.\n\n\u201cThat the church which shall have as many as ten slaves shall have one\npriest over it, but that one which shall have less than ten slaves shall\nbe united to other churches.\u201d\n\nIn the tenth chapter of the acts of the same council, not only was\nexcommunication pronounced against all who should be guilty of high\ntreason against Egica, the king of the Gothic nation, but the bishops\nand clergy united with the nobles (_palatii senioribus_) and the popular\nrepresentatives in condemning traitors and their progeny to perpetual\nslavery, (_fisci viribus sub perpetu\u00e2 servitute maneant religati_.)\n\nThe laws of Ina, king of the West Saxons, about the year 692, were made\nfor the regulation of religion:\n\nServus, si quid operis patr\u00e2rit die Dominico ex pr\u00e6cepto domini sui,\nliber esto, dominus triginta solidos dependito. Verum si id operis\ninjussu domini sui aggressus fuerit, verberibus c\u00e6ditor, aut saltem\nvirgarum metum precio redimito. Liber, si die hoc operetur injussu\ndomini sui, aut servituti addicitor, aut sexaginta solidos dependito.\nSacerdos, si in hanc partem deliquerit, p\u0153na in duplum augeator.\n\n\u201cIf a slave shall do any work on the Lord\u2019s day, by order of his master,\nlet him become free, and let the master pay thirty shillings, (another\ncopy adds, \u2018ad witam,\u2019 as a fine.) But, if he went to this work without\nhis master\u2019s command, let him be cut with whips, (another copy has\n\u2018corium perdat,\u2019 let him lose his skin,) or at least, let him redeem the\nfear of the scourge by a price. A freeman, if on this day he shall work\nwithout the order of his lord, let him be reduced to slavery, or pay\nsixty shillings. Should a priest be delinquent in this respect, his\npenalty shall be increased to double.\u201d\n\nIn the eighth, the division of the weregild for the killing of a\nstranger:\n\nWallus censum pendens annuum, 120 solidorum \u00e6stimatur, filius ejus 100.\nServus, alias 60, alias 50, solidis valere putatur. Wallus virgarum\nmetum 12 solidis redimito. Wallus quinque terr\u00e6 hydas possidens 600\nsolidis \u00e6stimandus est.\n\n\u201cA stranger paying a yearly rent is to be rated at 120 shillings, his\nson at 100. A slave at either 50 or 60, is a fair estimation. Let a\nstranger redeem his fear of whipping for 12 shillings. A stranger being\nin possession of five hydes of land is to be valued at 600 shillings.\u201d\n\nThe seventeenth council of Toledo was celebrated in 694, in the reign of\nEgica. It was enacted\u2014\n\nSi quis servum proprium sine conscienti\u00e2 judicis occiderit,\nexcommunicatione biennii sanguinis se mundabit.\n\n\u201cIf any one shall put his own slave to death, without the knowledge of\nthe judge, he shall cleanse himself the blood by an excommunication of\ntwo years.\u201d\n\nIn the council of Berghamstead, near Canterbury, held in 697, under\nWithred, king of Kent, at which Gebmund, bishop of Rochester, was\npresent, and where a sort of parliament also assembled and gave a civil\nsanction to the temporal enactments and penalties of the canons, several\nregulations were made concerning slaves. The Saxon MS. is the adoption\nof the canons into the common law of Canterbury, anti is entitled \u201c_The\nJudgments of Withred_.\u201d\n\nThe ninth canon in this collection is the following:\n\nSi quis servum suum ad altare manumiserit, liber esto, et habilis sit ad\ngaudendum hereditate et wirigildo, et fas sit ei ubi volet sine limite\nversari.\n\n\u201cIf any person shall manumit his servant at the altar, let him be free,\nand capable of enjoying inheritance and weregild, and let it be lawful\nfor him to dwell where he pleases without limit.\u201d\n\nThe tenth canon is:\n\nSi in vesper\u00e2 pr\u00e6cedente diem solis postquam sol occubuit, aut in\nvesper\u00e2 pr\u00e6cedente diem lun\u00e6 post occasum solis, servus ex mandato\ndomini sui opus aliquod servile egerit, dominus factum octoginta solidis\nluito.\n\n\u201cIf on the evening preceding Sunday, after the sun has set, or on the\nevening preceding Monday, after the setting of the sun, a slave shall do\nany servile work by command of his master, let the master compensate the\ndeed by eighty shillings.\u201d\n\nThe eleventh:\n\nSi servus hisce diebus itineraverit, domino pendat sex solidos, aut\nflagello c\u00e6datur.\n\n\u201cIf a servant shall have journeyed on these days, let him pay six\nshillings to his master, or be cut with a whip.\u201d\n\nThe thirteenth:\n\nSi paganus uxore nesci\u00e2 diabolo quid obtulerit, omnibus fortunis suis\nplectatur et collistrigio. Sin et ambo pariter itidem fecerint, omnium\nbonorum suorum amissione ipsa etiam luat et collistrigio.\n\n\u201cIf a villain, without the knowledge of his wife, shall have offered any\nthing to the devil, let him be punished by the loss of all his fortune\nand by the pillory. And if both did so together, let her also lose all\nher goods and be punished by the pillory.\u201d\n\nThe English _villain_ was the _colonist_ of the European continent, and\nin the Speculum Saxonicum, lib. i. art. 3, his imperfect liberty is\ncompared with the freeman. Also in Du Cange, Paganus, Pagenses, &c.\n\nThe fourteenth:\n\nSi servus diabolo offerat, sex dependat solidos, aut flagro vapulet.\n\n\u201cIf a slave offers to the devil, let him pay six shillings, or be\nwhipped.\u201d\n\nThe fifteenth:\n\nSi quis servo carnem in jejunio dederit comedendam, servus liber exeat.\n\n\u201cIf any one shall give his slave flesh-meat to eat on a fast-day, let\nthe slave go out free.\u201d\n\nThe sixteenth:\n\nSi servus ex sponte su\u00e2 eam ederit, aut sex solidis aut flagello.\n\n\u201cIf the slave shall eat it of his own motion, let the penalty be either\nsix shillings or a whipping.\u201d\n\nAfter regulating the mode of declaration of swearing and of\ncompurgation, for the king, the bishop, the abbot, the priest, the\ndeacon, the cleric, the stranger, and the king\u2019s thane, the twenty-first\ncanon enacts\u2014\n\nPaganus cum quatuor compurgatoribus, capite suo ad altare inclinato,\nsemet eximat.\n\n\u201cLet the villain deliver himself with four compurgators, with his head\nbowed down to the altar.\u201d\n\nThe twenty-third:\n\nSi quis Dei mancipium in conventu suo accusaverit, dominus ejus eum\nsimplici suo juramento purgabit, si eucharistiam susceperit. Ad\neucharistiam autem si nusquam venerit, habeat in juramento fidejussorem\nbonum, vel solvat, vel se tradat flagellandum.\n\n\u201cIf any person shall accuse a slave of God in his convent, his lord\nshall purge him with a simple oath, if he shall have received the\neucharist. But if he has never come to the eucharist, let him in his\noath have a good surety to answer, or let him pay or give himself up to\nbe whipped.\u201d\n\nThe slave of God was one belonging to a monastery, of whom there appear\nto have been a good number in England, at that period, as well as on the\ncontinent. The previous canon had legislated for the bishop\u2019s dependants\nas distinguished from the slave of the monastery.\n\nThe twenty-fourth canon is:\n\nSi servus viri popularis servum viri ecclesiastici accusaverit, vel\nservus ecclesiastici servum viri popularis, dominus ejus singulari suo\njuramento eum expurgabit.\n\n\u201cIf the slave of a lay person shall accuse the slave of a clergyman, or\nif the slave of a clergyman shall accuse the slave of a layman, let his\nmaster purge him by his single oath.\u201d\n\nThe twenty-seventh regulated the punishment of the person who permitted\na thievish slave to escape, and, respecting the slave himself, concluded\nthus:\n\nSi quis eum occiderit, domino ejus dimidium pendito.\n\n\u201cIf any one shall slay him, let him pay to his master one-half.\u201d\n\nIn Germany, however, as yet, in most places paganism prevailed, and\nhuman sacrifices were offered. St. Boniface had been sent by the Holy\nSee to endeavour to reclaim to religion and to civilization the nations\nor tribes that composed this undefined extent of territory. We find in a\nletter of Pope Gregory III., written in answer to his request for\nspecial instructions, about the year 735, the following paragraph:\n\nH\u00e6c quoque inter alia crimina agi in partibus illis dixisti, quod quidam\nex fidelibus ad immolandum paganis sua venumdent mancipia. Quod ut\nmagnopere corrigere debeas, frater, commonemus, nec sinas fieri ultra:\nscelus est enim et impietas. Eis ergo qui h\u00e6c perpetraverunt, similem\nhomicid\u00e6 indices p\u0153nitentiam.\n\n\u201cYou have said that, among other crimes, this was done in those parts,\nthat some of the faithful sold their slaves to pagans to be immolated.\nWhich you should use all your power to correct, nor allow it to be done\nany more: for it is wickedness and impiety. Impose then upon its\nperpetrators the same penance as for homicide.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XVI.\n\nTheodore, archbishop of Canterbury, governed the English church from 670\nto 690, when he died. The following extracts are from his canonical\nregulations:\n\nVII. Gr\u00e6ci et Romani dant servis suis vestimenta, et laborant excepto\nDominico die. Gr\u00e6corum monachi servos non habent, Romani habent.\n\n\u201cThe Greeks and Romans give clothing to their slaves, and they work\nexcept on the Lord\u2019s day. The Greek monks have not slaves, the Romans\nhave.\u201d\n\nXVII. Ingenuus cum ingenu\u00e2 conjungi debet.\n\n\u201cA free man should be married to a free woman.\u201d\n\nLXV. Qui per jussionem domini sui occiderit hominem, dies xl. jejunet.\n\n\u201cHe who, by the command of his master, shall kill a man, shall fast\nforty days.\u201d\n\nThe seventy-first prohibits the intermarriages of those slaves whose\nowners will prevent their living together.\n\nThe seventy-fourth regulates, that if a free pregnant-woman be sold into\nslavery, the child that she bears shall be free; all subsequently born\nshall be slaves.\n\nLXXIX. Pater filium necessitate coactus in servitium sine voluntate\nfilii tradat.\n\n\u201cA father, compelled by necessity, may deliver his son into slavery\nwithout the will of that son.\u201d\n\nLXXXIX. Episcopus et abbas hominem sceleratum servum possunt habere, si\nprecium redimendi non habet.\n\n\u201cA bishop or an abbot can hold a criminal in slavery, if he have not the\nprice of his redemption.\u201d\n\nCXVII. Servo pecuniam per laborem comparatam nulli licet auferre.\n\n\u201cIt is not lawful for any one to take away from a slave the money made\nby labour.\u201d\n\nIn the council of Verberie, held in a palace of King Pepin, the sixth\ncanon made regulations in the case of marriage between free persons and\nslaves. The following are its provisions:\n\n1. If any free person contracted marriage with a slave, being at the\ntime ignorant of the state of bondage of that party, the marriage was\ninvalid.\n\n2. If a person under bond should have a semblance of freedom by reason\nof condition, and the free person be ignorant of the bondage, and this\nbond person should be brought into servitude, the marriage was declared\noriginally void.\n\n3. An exception was made where the bond person, by reason of want,\nshould, with the consent of the free party, sell himself or herself into\nperfect slavery with the consent of the free party; then the marriage\nwas to stand good, because the free party had consented to the\nenslavement, and profited of its gains.\n\nThe seventh canon would seem to show that a slave could hold property in\nslaves:\n\nSi servus suam ancillam concubinam habuerit, si ita placet, potest ill\u00e2\ndimiss\u00e2 comparem suam ancillam domini sui accipere: sed melius est suam\nancillam tenere.\n\n\u201cIf a man-servant shall have his own female slave as a concubine, he\nshall have power, if he wishes, leaving her, to marry his equal, the\nfemale servant of his master: but it is better that he should keep his\nown servant in wedlock.\u201d\n\nThe eighth canon provided, in the case of a freedman who, subsequently\nto his liberation, committed sin with the female slave of his former\nmaster, that the master should have power, whether the freedman would or\nnot, to compel him to marry that female slave; and should this man leave\nher, and attempt a marriage with another woman, this latter must be\nseparated from him.\n\nThe thirteenth declares that when a freeman, knowing that the woman whom\nhe is about to marry is a slave, or, not having known it until after\nmarriage, voluntarily upon the discovery consents to the marriage, it is\nthenceforth indissoluble.\n\nThe nineteenth declares that the separation of married parties, by the\nsale of one who is a slave, does not affect the marriage. They must be\nadmonished, if they cannot be reunited, to remain continent.\n\nThe twentieth provides for the case of a male slave freed by letter,\n(_chartellarius_,) who, having for his wife taken a slave with the\nlawful consent of her master, and leaving her, takes another as his\nwife. The latter contract is void, and the parties must separate.\n\nAnother assembly was held by King Pepin, in Compeigne, forty-eight miles\nnorth-east of Paris, where he had a country-seat. At this assembly also\nthe prelates held a council in 757, and made eighteen canons. The fourth\nmakes provision for the case of a man\u2019s giving his free step-daughter in\nwedlock to a freeman or to a slave. The fifth declares void the marriage\nbetween a free person and a slave, where the former was ignorant of the\ncondition of the latter. The sixth regards a case of a complicated\ndescription, where a freeman got a civil benefice from his lord, and\ntakes his own vassal with him, and dies upon the benefice, leaving after\nhim the vassal. Another freeman becomes invested with the benefice, and,\nanxious to induce the vassal to remain, gives him a female serf attached\nto the soil as his wife. Having lived with her for a time, the vassal\nleaves her, and returns to the lord\u2019s family, to which he owed his\nservices, and there he contracts a marriage with one of the same\nallegiance. His first contract was invalid, the second was the marriage.\n\nIn the year 772, a council was held in Bavaria, at a place called\n_Dingolvinga_, the present city of Ingolstadt, in the reign of Tassilo,\nduke of Bavaria. The tenth canon of this council decides that a noble\nwoman, who had contracted marriage with a slave, not being aware of his\ncondition, is at liberty to leave him, the contract being void, and she\nis to be considered free and not to be reduced to slavery. By _noble_ we\nare here to understand _free_, as distinguished from _ignoble_, that is,\na slave.\n\nWe have then sixteen amendments of the national law.\n\nThe first regulates, by the authority of the prince and consent of the\nwhole assembly, that henceforth no slave, whether fugitive or other,\nshould be sold beyond the limits of the territory, under penalty of the\npayment of his weregild.\n\nIn the second, among other things, it is enacted that if a slave should\nbe killed in the commission of house-breaking, his owner is to receive\nno compensation; and should the felon who is killed in man-stealing,\nwhen he could not be taken, whether it be a freeman or a slave that he\nis carrying off, no weregild shall be paid by the slayer, but he shall\nbe bound to prove his case before a court.\n\nThe seventh regards the trial by ordeal of slaves freed by the duke\u2019s\nhand.\n\nThe eighth establishes and guards the freedom, not only of themselves,\nbut of their posterity, of those freed in the church, unless when they\nmay be reduced to slavery from inability to pay for damages which they\nhad committed.\n\nThe ninth contains, among other enactments, those which explain the\ntenth canon of the council. After specifying different weregilds for\nfreed persons, it says\u2014\n\nSi ancilla libera dimissa fuerit per chartam aut in ecclesi\u00e2, et post\nh\u00e6c servo nupserit, ecclesi\u00e6 ancilla permanebit.\n\n\u201cShould a female slave be emancipated by deed or in the church, and\nafterwards marry a slave, she shall be a slave to the church.\u201d\n\nIt then continues, respecting a woman originally free, and the _nobilis_\nof canon x.:\n\nSi autem libera Bajoaria servo ecclesi\u00e6 nupserit, et servile opus\nancilla contradixerit, abscedat.\n\n\u201cBut if a free Bavarian female shall have married a servant of the\nchurch, and the maid will not submit to servile work, she may depart.\u201d\n\nSi autem ibi filios et filias generaverit, ipsi servi et ancill\u00e6\npermaneant, potestatem exinde (exeundi) non habeant.\n\n\u201cBut if she shall have there borne sons and daughters, they shall\ncontinue slaves, and not have power of going forth.\u201d\n\nHer freedom was not, however, immediately destroyed, for the law\nproceeds\u2014\n\nIlla autem mater eorum, quando exire voluerit, ante annos iii, liberam\nhabeat potestatem.\n\n\u201cBut she, their mother, when she may desire to go forth before three\nyears, shall have free power therefor.\u201d\n\nIn this case the marriage subsisted, but the free woman could separate,\nwithout however the marriage-bond being rent. If she remained beyond the\ntime of three years, she lost her freedom; and it shows us that,\nprobably, previous to this amendment, any free woman who married a\nslave, thereby lost her own freedom; and that the tenth canon, showing\nthe marriage of which it treated to be invalid, showed that the woman\nshould not lose her liberty. The concluding provision of the ninth law\nis as follows:\n\nSi autem iii annos induraverit opus ancill\u00e6, et parentes ejus non\nexadomaverunt eam ut libera fuisset, nec ante comitem, ducem, nec ante\nregem, nec in publico mallo, transactis tribus kalendis Martis, (Martu,)\npost h\u00e6c ancilla permaneat in perpetuum, et quicumque ex ea nati fuerint\nservi et ancill\u00e6 sunt.\n\n\u201cBut if she shall have continued three years doing the work of a slave,\nand her relations have not brought her out so that she should be free,\neither before the count, or the duke, or the king, or in the public high\ncourt, (mall,) when the kalends of March shall have thrice passed, after\nthis she shall remain perpetually a slave, and they who shall be born of\nher, male and female, shall be slaves.\u201d\n\nIn 774, Pope Adrian I. delivered to Charlemagne a digest of canon law,\nthen in force, in which we find\u2014\n\n\u201cThe third of Gangr\u00e6, condemning as guilty of heresy those who taught\nthat religion sanctioned the slave in despising his master; the\nthirtieth in the African collection, which showed that the power of\nmanumission in the church was derived from the civil authority; the one\nhundred and second of the same, which declared slaves and freed persons\ndisqualified to prosecute, except in certain cases and for injuries done\nto themselves.\u201d\n\nIn a capitulary of Charlemagne, published in such a synod and general\nassembly in 779, in the month of March, in the eleventh year of his\nreign, at Duren, on the Roer, (Villa Duria,) between Cologne and\nAix-la-Chapelle, there being assembled episcopis, abbatibus, virisque\nillustribus, comitibus, un\u00e0 cum piissimo domino nostro,\u2014\u201cthe bishops,\nabbots, and the illustrious men, the counts, together with our most\npious lord,\u201d\u2014we find the following chapter:\n\nXX. De mancipiis qu\u00e6 venduntur, ut in pr\u00e6senti\u00e2 episcopi vel comitis\nsit, aut in pr\u00e6senti\u00e2 archdiaconi, aut centenarii, aut in pr\u00e6senti\u00e2\nvicedomini, aut judicis comitis, aut ante bene nota testimonia. Et foras\nmarcham nemo mancipium vendat. Qui fecerit, tantis vicibus bannos\nsolvet, quanta mancipia vendidit. Et si non habet precium vivadio, pro\nservo semetipsum donet comiti, usqu\u00e8dum ipsos bannos solvat.\n\n\u201cConcerning slaves that are sold, let it be in presence of the bishop,\nor of the count, or in presence of the archdeacon, or of the judge of\nthe hundred, or in presence of the lord\u2019s deputy, or of the judge of the\ncounty, or of well known witnesses. And let no one sell a slave beyond\nthe boundary. Whosoever shall do so shall pay as many fines as he sold\nslaves. And if he has not the money, let him deliver himself to the\ncount in pledge as a slave until he shall pay the fines.\u201d\n\nIn a capitulary of Pope Adrian I., containing the summary of the chief\npart of the canon law then in force, as collected from the ancient\ncouncils and other sources, delivered to Ingilram, bishop of Metz, or,\nas it was then called, Divodurum, or oppidum Mediomatricorum, on the\n19th of September, xiii. kalendas Octobris, indic. ix. 785, the\nsixteenth chapter, describing those who cannot be witnesses against\npriests, mentions not merely slaves, but quorum vit\u00e6 libertas nescitur,\nthose _who are not known to be free_; and in the notes of Anthony\nAugustus, bishop of Tarragona, on this capitulary, he refers for this\nand another passage, viles personae, _persons of vile condition_, which\nis the appellation of slaves, to decrees of the earliest of popes, viz.,\nAnacletus, A.D. 91, and Clement his immediate successor; Evaristus, who\nwas the next, and died A.D., 109; Pius, who died A.D. 157; Calistus, in\n222; Fabian, 250; and several others. In chapter xxi. among incompetent\nwitnesses, are recited, nullus servus, nullus libertus\u2014_no slave, no\nfreedman_. The notes of the same author inform us that this portion of\nthe chapter is the copy of an extract from the first council of Nice,\nand that it is also substantially found in a passage from Pope\nPontianus, who died in 235, as well as in several of the early African\nand Spanish councils, which he quotes.\n\nOne of these assemblies, in which Charlemagne published a capitulary,\nwas held at Aix-la-Chap\u00e8lle (Aquisgranum) in 789, in which eighty-two\nchapters were enacted. No. xxiii. is founded upon canon iv. of the\ncouncil of Chalcedon, and upon an enactment of Leo the Great. It\nprohibited all attempts to induce a slave to embrace either the clerical\nor monastical state without the will and license of the master. No. xlv.\nprohibits, among others, slaves from being competent witnesses, or\nfreedmen against their patrons: founded upon the ninety-sixth canon of\nthe African councils. No. lvii. referring to the third canon of the\ncouncil of Gangr\u00e6, prohibits bishops ordaining slaves without the\nmaster\u2019s license.\n\nIn 794 a council was held at Frankfort on the Maine, at which the\nbishops of a large portion of Europe assisted; the twenty-third canon of\nwhich is the following:\n\nDe servis alienis, ut a nemine recipiantur, neque ab episcopis sacrentur\nsine licenti\u00e2 dominorum.\n\n\u201cOf servants belonging to others: they shall be received by no one, nor\nadmitted to orders by bishops, without their masters\u2019 license.\u201d\n\nIn the year 697, at another assembly held at Aix-la-Chapelle, the\ncapitulary for the pacification and government of Saxony was enacted by\nCharlemagne. The eighth chapter is\u2014\n\nSi quis hominem diabolo sacrificaverit, et hostiam in more paganorum\nd\u00e6monibus obtulerit, morte moriatur.\n\n\u201cIf any person shall sacrifice a man to the devil, and offer him as a\nvictim to devils after the fashion of pagans, he shall be put to death.\u201d\n\nAn explanation of this will be found where Pope Gregory III. answers St.\nBoniface, who informed him that unfortunate slaves were bought to be\nthus immolated.\n\nXI. Si quis filiam domini sui rapuerit, morte moriatur.\n\n\u201cIf any one shall do violence to his master\u2019s daughter, he shall be put\nto death.\u201d\n\nXII. Si quis dominum suum vel dominam suam interfecerit, simili modo\npuniatur.\n\n\u201cIf any one shall kill his master or his mistress, he shall be punished\nin like manner.\u201d\n\nXIV. De minoribus capitulis consenserunt omnes, ad unamquamque ecclesiam\ncurtem et duas mansas terr\u00e6 pagenses ad ecclesiam recurrentes condonent:\net inter centum viginti homines nobiles et ingenuos, similiter et litos,\nservum et ancillam eidem ecclesi\u00e6 tribuant.\n\n\u201cAll agreed concerning the smaller congregations, that the colonists\nfrequenting each church should bestow upon it one dwelling, with proper\nout-offices, and two manses (24 acres) of land; and that they should\ngive to the same church one male slave and one female slave between one\nhundred and twenty noble and free men, and counting also the conditioned\nservants.\u201d\n\nIn this newly settled ecclesiastical province the provision made for the\nsupport of religion consisted of land and slaves.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XVII.\n\nUpon the ascension of Charlemagne to the imperial throne, the Roman\nEmpire may date its extinction. But, in the reign of the Franks, in\ntheir succession to the throne of the western empire, we fail to find\nany change of doctrine on the subject of slavery. But the Lombards had\nlong disturbed Italy: Charlemagne succeeded in reducing them to better\norder, and, in the year 801, amended their laws. One chapter assimilated\nto that of France and of Germany:\n\nVI. _De Aldionibus publicis ad jus publicum pertinentibus._\n\nAldiones vel Aldianes e\u00e2 lege vivant in Itali\u00e2, in servitute dominorum\nsuorum, qu\u00e2 fiscalini vel liddi vivunt in Franci\u00e2.\n\n\u201c_Of the public Aldions, belonging to the public estate._\n\n\u201cThe Aldions, or Aldians, shall in Italy exist upon the same principle\nin the service of their masters that the fiscals and lids do exist in\nFrance.\u201d\n\nThe Aldions were bond-men or bond-women, whose persons were not at the\ndisposal of their masters, nor did they pass with the land as colonists\ndid, but their masters or patrons had certain claims upon stated\nservices from them. They were generally either freed persons or the\ndescendants of those who had been manumitted upon the condition of\nperforming stipulated services; and if they failed to perform these,\nthey were liable to be reduced to slavery. The _lidus_ or _liddus_ or\n_litus_ of the Saxon was so called from being spared in the conquest,\nand left on the land, with the obligation of paying the master, who\nowned it and himself, a certain portion of its produce, and doing him\nother fixed services. Thus neither of them was an absolute slave whose\nperson and property were at the owner\u2019s disposal. The slave was\nmanumitted, but this latter description of servants were generally\nreleased by deed or charter: hence, when so freed, they were called\n_chartulani_, _chartellani_, or \u201cchartered.\u201d The transition from slavery\nto this latter kind of servitude was, at the commencement of the ninth\ncentury, greatly on the increase.\n\nVIII. _De servis fugacibus._\n\nUbique intra Italiam, sive regius, sive ecclesiasticus, vel cujuslibet\nalterius hominis servus fugitivus inventus fuerit \u00e0 domino suo sine ull\u00e2\nannorum pr\u00e6scriptione vindicetur, e\u00e2 tamen ratione, si dominus Francus\nsive Alemannus, aut alterius cujuslibet nationis sit. Si vero\nLongobardus aut Romanus fuerit, e\u00e2 lege servos suos vel adquirat vel\nadmittat, qu\u00e6 antiquit\u00f9s inter eos constitutus est.\n\n\u201c_Concerning runaway slaves._\n\n\u201cWheresoever within the bounds of Italy, either the runaway slave of the\nking or of the church or of any other man shall be found by his master,\nhe shall be restored without any bar of prescription of years; yet upon\nthe provision that the master be a Frank or a German or of any other\nnation, (foreign.) But if he be a Lombard or a Roman, he shall acquire\nor receive his slaves by that law which has been established from\nancient times among them.\u201d\n\nHere is evidence of the prevalent usage of the church holding property\nin slaves, just as commonly as did the king or any other person.\n\nIn the year 805, Charlemagne published a capitulary at Thionville, in\nthe department of Moselle, France, (Theodonis villa.) In the chap. xi.\nwe read\u2014\n\n_De servis propriis vel ancillis._\n\nDe propriis servis et ancillis, ut non supr\u00e0 modum in monasteria\nsumantur, ne deserentur vill\u00e6.\n\n\u201c_Concerning their own male or female slaves._\n\n\u201cLet not an excessive number of their own male or female slaves be taken\ninto the monasteries, lest the farms be deserted.\u201d\n\nThis capitulary regards principally the regulation of monasteries.\n\nSt. Pachomius, who was born in Upper Egypt, in 292, and who was the\nfirst that drew up a regular monastic rule, would never admit a slave\ninto a monastery. _Tillemont_, vii. p. 180.\n\nIn the year 813, a council was held at Chalons, the portions of whose\nenactments in any way affecting property or civil rights were confirmed\nby Charlemagne and made a portion of the law of the empire.\n\nMany of the churches, especially in the country, were curtailed in their\nincome and reduced to difficulties, because the bishops and abbots had\nlarge estates within their parishes, and many servants occupied in their\ncultivation, and the prelates prevented these servants paying tithes to\nthe parish clergy, claiming for themselves an exemption from the\nobligation. The canon xix. is the following:\n\nQuesti sunt pr\u00e6terea quidam fratres, quod essent quidam episcopi et\nabbates, qui decimas non sinerent dari ecclesiis ubi illi coloni missas\naudiunt. Proinde decrevit sacer ille conventus, ut episcopi et abbates\nde agris et vineis, qu\u00e6 ad suum vel fratrum stipendium habent, decimas\nad ecclesias deferri faciant: famili\u00e6 vero ibi dent decimas suas, ubi\ninfantes eorum baptizantur, et ubi per totum anni circulum missas\naudiunt.\n\n\u201cMoreover some brethren have complained, that there were some bishops\nand abbots who would not permit tithes to be given to those churches\nwhere colonists hear mass. Wherefore that holy assembly decreed, that,\nfor those fields and vineyards which they have for their own support or\nthat of their brethren, the bishops and abbots should cause the tithe to\nbe paid to the churches. And let the servants pay their tithes to the\nchurch where their infants are baptized, and where during the year they\nhear mass.\u201d\n\nIn this we have additional evidence of the fact that large bodies of\nland, and numerous servants attached to them, were held by bishops and\nabbots, not only for themselves, but for their churches and their\nmonasteries. The canon xxx. is the following:\n\nDictum nobis est quod quidam legitima servorum matrimonia potestiv\u00e2\nqu\u00e2dam pr\u00e6sumptione dirimant, non attendentes illud evangelicum: _Quod\nDeus conjunxit, homo non separet._ Unde nobis visum est, ut conjugia\nservorum non dirimantur, etiam si diversos dominos habeant: sed in uno\nconjugio permanentes dominis suis serviant. Et hoc in illis observandum\nest, ubi legalis conjunctio fuit, et per voluntatem dominorum.\n\n\u201cIt has been stated to us that some persons, by a sort of magisterial\npresumption, dissolve the lawful marriages of slaves; not regarding that\nevangelical maxim, _What God hath put together, let man not separate_.\nWhence it appears to us, that the wedlock of slaves may not be\ndissolved, even though they have different masters; but let them serve\ntheir masters, remaining in one wedlock. And this is to be observed with\nregard to those where there has been a lawful union, and with the will\nof the owners.\u201d\n\nIn the year 816, a council was held at Aix-la-Chapelle, in which a large\nportion of the canon law then in force regarding the clergy was imbodied\ninto one hundred and forty-five chapters. After the session of the\ncouncil, the emperor published a capitulary containing thirty chapters;\nthe sixth of which complains of the continued indiscretion of bishops in\nordaining servants, contrary to the canons, and forbids such ordinations\nexcept upon the master\u2019s giving full liberty to the slave. If a servant\nshall impose upon a bishop by false witnesses or documents of freedom,\nand thus procure ordination, he shall be deposed and taken back by his\nowner. If the descendant of a slave who came from abroad shall have been\neducated and ordained, where there was no knowledge of his condition,\nshould his owner subsequently discover him and prove his property, if\nthis owner grants him liberty, he may keep his clerical rank; but if the\nmaster asserts his right and carries him away, though the slave does not\nlose his character of order, he loses his rank, and cannot officiate.\nShould masters give servants freedom that they may be capable of\nordination, it shall be in the master\u2019s discretion to give or to\nwithhold the property necessary to enable the person to get orders.\n\nThe archbishops are to have in each province the emperor\u2019s authority in\nthe original, to authorize their ordaining the servants of the church,\nand the suffragan bishops are to have copies of this original, and when\nsuch servant is to be ordained, this authority must be read for the\npeople from the pulpit or at the corner of the altar. The like form was\nto be observed when any of the laity desired to have any servant of the\nchurch promoted to orders, or when the like promotion was petitioned for\nby the prior of a chapter or of a monastery. Lotharius, the emperor,\npublished a capitulary in Rome, in 842.\n\nIn the third chapter of the first part, we find the following\nexpression:\n\nIn electione autem Romani pontificis nullus, sive liber sive servus,\npr\u00e6sumat aliquod impedimentum facere.\n\n\u201cLet no one, whether freeman or slave, presume to create any impediment\nin the election of the Roman pontiff.\u201d\n\nWhich leads us to suspect that some slaves possessed considerable power\nor influence.\n\nIn the second chapter, fines are imposed for creating riots in any\nchurch. And the chapter concludes in the following words:\n\nEt qui non habet unde ad ecclesiam persolvat, tradat se in servitio\neidem ecclesi\u00e6, usque dam totum debitum persolvat.\n\n\u201cAnd let him who has not the means of paying the church, give himself in\nservitude to that same church until he pays the whole debt.\u201d\n\nBy the tenth chapter he restrained the power of manumission.\n\nQuod per xxx annos servus liber fieri non possit, si pater illius\nservus, aut mater ancilla fuit. Similiter de Aldionibus pr\u00e6cipimus.\n\n\u201cThat a slave whose father or whose mother was a slave cannot become\nfree before thirty years of age. We order that the same shall be the\ncase respecting Aldions.\u201d\n\nIn the twelfth he states that these are but a continuance of the laws of\nhis grandfather Charles and of his father Louis. And in tit. i. 12 of\nUlpian, reference is made to a variety of enactments of the ancient\nRoman law, that a slave manumitted under the age of thirty could not be\na Roman citizen except by a special grant of a court.\n\nThe thirteenth declares that free women who unite with their own slaves\nare in the royal power, and are given up, together with their children,\nto slavery among the Lombards.\n\nThe fourteenth enacts that a free woman who shall unite herself to the\nmale slave of another, and remain so for a year and a day, shall,\ntogether with her children, become enslaved to her husband\u2019s owner.\n\nThe fifteenth regulates that if the free husband of a free woman shall,\nfor crime or debt, bring himself into servitude to another, and she not\nconsent to remain with him, the children are free; but if she die, and\nanother free woman, knowing his condition, marries him, the children of\nthis latter shall be slaves.\n\nA number of chapters are also on these records showing the insufficiency\nof servile testimony. Others provide against the oppression of poor\nfreemen, so that they shall not be easily compelled to sell themselves\ninto slavery.\n\nAbout the year 860, Pope Nicholas I. sent to the newly converted\nChristians of Bulgaria answers to several inquiries which they made for\nthe regulation of their conduct. The ninety-seventh regards slaves who\naccuse their masters to the prince or to the court: and the pope refers\nthem to the obligation of the master as given in chapter vi. of the\nepistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians, (not to use threatenings towards\ntheir servants,) and then asks, how much more strongly does the spirit\nof this maxim of kindness and affection bear upon the servant, and teach\nhim to be of an humble and forgiving disposition, such as that chapter\nenjoins; referring also to the direction of our Saviour, _Luke_ vi. 37,\nand the injunction of the apostle, 1 _Thess._ v. 15, for their\ndirection.\n\nAt this period of time, the piratical wars of the Northmen, who were\nperpetually making inroads on the rest of Europe, kept the whole of\nChristendom in commotion, and marked perhaps the darkest period of the\ndark ages.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                             LESSON XVIII.\n\nUNCONNECTED FACTS.\n\nIn 1030, Peter, bishop of Girona, in Spain, came to Rome, and begged\nleave of the pope (John XIX.) to wear the pall twelve days in the year,\npromising to redeem thirty slaves then in captivity among the Saracens,\nprovided his holiness granted him this request. It was readily granted.\nSee Bower, vol. v. p. 153.\n\nShortly after the 30th October, 1051, Pope Leo IX., having visited\nVercelli and Augsburg, returned to Rome, and held a council soon after\nEaster, in which he excommunicated Gregory, bishop of Vercelli, for\ncommitting adultery with a widow betrothed to his uncle. The bishop was\nabsent when this sentence was given, but he flew to Rome as soon as he\nheard of it; and upon his promising to perform the penance that his\nholiness imposed upon him, he was absolved from the excommunication, and\nrestored to the functions of his office. On that occasion the canons\nissued by other councils against the incontinence of the clergy were\nconfirmed, and \u201csome new ones were added, and, in order to check more\neffectually the scandalous irregularity of the _Roman_ clergy in\nparticular, it was decreed, at the request of the pope, that all women\nwho should for the future prostitute themselves to the priests within\nthe walls of Rome should be condemned to serve as slaves in the Lateran\npalace.\u201d See Herman, ad an. 1051; also Bower, idem, p. 183.\n\nBy one of Constantine\u2019s laws, they who ravished virgins or stole them,\neven with their consent, against the will of their parents, (with the\nview to make slaves of them or not,) were burned alive. Cod. Theodos. 1.\nix. tit. 29, leg. 1. The severity of this law was somewhat mitigated by\nConstantius, but he still made it a capital offence. Ibid. leg. 2. It\nwas upon this law, Pope Hadrian II. applied to the emperor for redress\nagainst _Eleutherius_, who had carried off his daughter _Stephania_ by\nforce, and married her, although she was betrothed to another. See\nBower, idem, p. 11. We have a remarkable letter, written by Gregory\nVII., in January, 1080, in answer to one he had received from\nVratislaus, duke of Bohemia, desiring leave to have Divine service\nperformed in the Sclavonian tongue, that is, in the language of the\ncountry. That letter the pope answered in the following words:\n\n\u201cAs you desire us to allow Divine service to be performed among you in\nthe Sclavonian tongue, know that by no means can I grant your request,\nit being manifest to all, who will but reflect, that it has pleased the\nAlmighty that the Scripture should be withheld from some, and not\nunderstood by all, lest it should fall into contempt, or lead the\nunlearned into error. And it must not be alleged that all were allowed,\nin the _primitive times_, to read the Scriptures, it being well known\nthat in those early times the church _connived_ at many things, which\nthe holy fathers disapproved and corrected when the Christian religion\nwas firmly established. He cannot therefore grant, but absolutely\nforbid, by the authority of Almighty God and his blessed apostle Peter,\nwhat you ask, and command you to oppose to the utmost of your power all\nwho require it.\u201d Greg. l. vii. ep. ii.; also Bower, idem, p. 279.\n\nOn the subject of the above letter, it should be remembered none\nspoke the Sclavonic at that day except the Sclavonians themselves;\nthat the great mass of that people were slaves, either to some few\nindividuals of their own nation, or to the other European nations,\nby whom they had been captured, or to whom they had been sold. They\nwere a nation of slaves, and hence the Romans called their language\n_Servian_, from _servus_, a slave. There is still extant among the\nancient German archives some account of the physical and moral\nappearance of this people, representing them as robust, filthy,\nfaithless, and extremely wicked. They called themselves _sclava_ or\n_sclavas_, &c., which word, in their language, implied an elevated\ndistinction, and was in common use as a _suffix_ to individual\nnames, indicating that the person was highly elevated among his\ncountrymen, as in this case, Vrati-Slaus\u2014indicating the fact that\n_Vrati_ was famous, elevated, a man of high and honourable\ndistinction. Such men often held immense numbers of their less\nelevated countrymen in bondage. From the form and meaning of this\n_suffix_, some modern scholars have erroneously supposed it to have\ncome from the Latin, _laus_. We may form some idea of the feelings\nof Pope Gregory VII., upon this application, by imagining what would\nhave been the feelings of a Virginia legislature, fifty years ago,\nhad some free African, then there, petitioned to have the laws\npublished in _Eboe_, for the benefit of the slaves. In the above\nletter, the meaning of the assertion, \u201cin those early times the\nchurch _connived at_ many things which the holy fathers\ndisapproved,\u201d &c., at this late day is very liable to be\nmisconceived. He does not allude to any thing said or done by Jesus\nChrist or his apostles, but to the action of his predecessors in the\npontificate on this very subject. About the year 860, Pope Nicholas\nI. granted this very privilege to the Sclavonians in Moravia; and\nabout ten years after, the same was renewed by Hadrian II., upon the\nrequest of St. Cyril, the apostle of the Moravians. See the Life of\nCyril, (Latin,) page 22. And John VIII., in the year 882, confirmed\nthe same, at the request of _Sfento Pulcher_, prince of Moravia,\ncalling it the _license_ granted by Pope Nicholas, \u201cof saying the\ncanonical hours and celebrating mass in their native language.\u201d\n\n\u201c_The Sclavonian language we justly commend_,\u201d says the pope in his\nletter to the prince, \u201c_and order the praise and the works of Christ our\nLord to be celebrated in that tongue, being directed by Divine authority\nto praise the Lord, not in three only, but in all languages, agreeably\nto what we find in holy writ\u2014\u2018Praise ye the Lord, all ye nations, and\nbless him, all ye people_.\u2019 _The apostles announced the wonderful works\nof God in all languages,\u201d &c., \u201cand he who made the three chief\nlanguages, the Hebrew, the Greek, and the Latin, created all the rest\nfor his praise and glory._\u201d See Johan. ep. 247.\n\nThe same privilege was granted by the _Greek_ church to the _Russians_,\nwho speak the _Sclavonian_ language; and they perform, to this day, as\nwell as the Moravians, Divine service in their native language. The\npope, however, ordered the gospel to be first read in _Latin_, and\nafterwards, for the sake of those who understood not that language, in\nthe _Sclavonian_. (See Bower, idem, p. 37.) It is not relevant to our\nsubject to inquire what facts presented themselves to the mind of\nGregory VII., whereby he apprehended that the Scripture might \u201c_fall\ninto contempt_,\u201d or they \u201c_lead the unlearned into error_.\u201d But we have\nseen, in our own day, a wide deviation from the instruction of St. Paul,\nin a version of the New Testament in Romaic, or modern Greek, evidently\ntranslated from our English version, instead of from the ancient Greek;\nwherein Paul is made to say, 1 _Tim._ i. 10, _anthropokleptas_, which\nindicates the stealing of a free man\u2014instead of what Paul did say,\n_andrapodistais_, which indicates the stealing of a slave. It is true,\nKing James\u2019s translators substituted \u201c_men-stealers_,\u201d without any\nfurther allusion that the _men_ who were to be the _things stolen_ were\nslaves. It does not appear to have occurred to them that a _free man_\ncould be _stolen_, since in no sense could he be _property_. In said\nversion are other errors of equal magnitude; and we have it from good\nauthority that the Greek patriarch, after an examination of said\nversion, most strictly forbad his people to read it, and, also, to\nintroduce it among them. If such errors were incident to the\n_Sclavonic_, Gregory VII. had at least some ground for his\napprehensions. But the Sclavonians were of the same colour and physical\nformation of the northern tribes to whom they were in bondage. There was\nno physical or moral degradation consequent to an amalgamation with\nthem; and such connection did happen to a very great extent, and at this\nday has very nearly extinguished all caste between them. But in the days\nof Gregory VII., and long since, the politer nations of the south of\nEurope regarded those of the north, whether free or in servitude, as but\na mere grade, if at all, above barbarians; and this pope seems to have\nbeen disposed to have fed them with \u201cmilk,\u201d and not with \u201cstrong meat.\u201d\n_Heb._ v. 12. We may perceive how the south estimated the north at those\nearly times, by an incident related by D'Aubigne, vol. i. p. 96.\nReuchlin, a native of Pforzheim, had made himself a distinguished\nscholar for any age. In 1498, he found his way to Rome, when\nArgyropylos, a celebrated Greek professor, was lecturing on the elevated\nstanding in literature to which the Greeks had formerly arrived, &c.\nReuchlin, highly delighted with the lecture, visited the professor, and\naddressed him in Greek. Argyropylos, perceiving him to be a German,\nsays, \u201cWhence come you, and do you understand Greek?\u201d Reuchlin replies,\n\u201cI am a German, and am not quite ignorant of your language.\u201d He took up\nThucydides and read; when Argyropylos said, in grief, tears, and\nastonishment, \u201cAlas, alas, Greece cast out and fugitive, is gone to hide\nherself beyond the Alps!\u201d But the funeral fire of Greece and Rome\nillumed the extreme north, and by its light the savage freeman and his\nmore savage slave were taught their religion, civilization, and science.\n\u201cIt was thus,\u201d says D'Aubigne, \u201cthat the sons of barbarous Germany and\nthose of ancient Greece met together in the palaces of Rome; thus it was\nthat the east and the west gave each other the right hand of fellowship\nin this rendezvous of the world, and that the former poured into the\nhands of the latter those intellectual treasures which it had carried\noff in its escape from the barbarism of the Turks. God, when his plans\nrequire it, brings together in an instant, by some unlooked-for\ncatastrophe, those who seemed for ever removed from each other.\u201d This\nimproved condition of the northern nations was foreseen, perhaps already\nfelt, by Innocent IV., in 1254, when he permitted Divine service to be\nperformed in the Sclavonic language, which is noticed by Bower, vol. vi.\np. 254. At the close of his remarks on Pope Innocent IV., he says\u2014\u201cWe\nhave a great number of letters written by this pope on different\noccasions, and a decree allowing the _Sclavonians_ to perform Divine\nservice in their mother tongue, contrary to a decree of Gregory VII.\u201d We\nbeg to notice Pope Gregory IX.; for, \u201cby this pope was confirmed the\nreligious order of _St. Mary de Mercede_, as it is called, an order\ninstituted to make gatherings all over the Christian world for the\nredemption of Christians taken and kept in _slavery_ by the infidels.\u201d\nBower, idem, p. 236. This order was instituted by James, king of\nArragon, about the year 1223, and was confirmed by Gregory on the 17th\nof January, 1230. The general of this order resides constantly at\nBarcelona, where it was instituted by the king of Arragon, under the\ndirection of _Raimund de Pennefort_, then canon of that city. See\n_Oldoinus in notis ad Ciacon. Bullarium in Greg. IX. constit. 9_. About\nthe year 1312, charges of the most wicked and gross nature were had\nagainst the _Knights Templars_. Their chief persecutor was King Philip,\nwho suspected them to have encouraged an insurrection during his war in\nFlanders. Through his influence the whole order were arrested, not only\nin France, but in all Christendom. Pope Clement V. took charge of their\nprosecution. But it appearing that thousands of them had and were ready\nto defend the Christian religion at the expense of their lives, and that\nmany of their order were then in _slavery_ among the Saracens, from\nwhich they might redeem themselves by repudiating Jesus Christ and his\nreligion, yet they preferred rather to live and die in chains than to\npurchase freedom at so high a price, their judges considered these facts\nto overbalance the evidence against them. But through Philip\u2019s influence\nthe order was suppressed. See Bower, vol. vi. p. 39. By the laws of\nMoses, when the Hebrews found it necessary to make war and subdue their\nenemies in battle, they were directed to put all the men to death, and\nto make slaves of the women and children. See _Deuteronomy_ xx. 13, 14.\nThe milder treatment of the women and children was in mercy, predicated\non the presumption of their being more tractable and less unalterably\nsunk in sin. We perceive the same state of facts when the Lord commanded\nthe Hebrews to put the Canaanites to death. \u201cThou shalt smite them, and\nutterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show\nmercy to them: neither shalt thou make marriages with them,\u201d &c. _Deut._\nvii. 2, 3. Whereas the adjoining and kindred tribes were only devoted to\nslavery. \u201cBoth thy bond-men and thy bond-maids which thou shalt have,\nshall be of the heathen that are round about you: of them shall ye buy\nbond-men and bond-maids.\u201d _Lev._ xxv. 44. It is, and ever has been, the\nuniversal rule to destroy from the earth, whenever sin has sunk its\nvotary so low in the depths of crime that there is no longer even hope\nof reform. Whereas, for a less degree of depravity, mercy intercedes for\nthe reformation of the victim, by placing him someway in surveillance,\neither for life or for a term of years. On the same principle is founded\nthe distinction of punishment between homicide attended with\npremeditated malice, and that which is not so attended.\n\n\u201cBehold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig-tree, and\nfind none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? And he answering,\nsaid unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I may dig about\nit, and dung it: and if it bear fruit, well; and if not, then after that\nthou shalt cut it down.\u201d _Luke_ xiii. 7.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIX.\n\nOur English word _war_ is of Saxon origin, (Sax. _waer_,) and from\nwhence has also been derived many of the corresponding terms in the\npresent European languages. Its primary sense implies the action of a\ncompetent power in accomplishing something. But, like many other words,\nits use has degenerated into various shades of meaning. The\ncorresponding Greek term, _palemos_, from _pallo_, or its cognate,\n_ballo_, seems originally to have been illustrative of offensive and\ncoercive action, and hence implies all the agitative and repulsive\nmovement illustrated by our present word _battle_: whereas the Hebrew\nterm, _laham_, cognate with _Ham_, on whose descendants the curse of\nslavery was pronounced by Noah, involves the idea of _destruction_, as a\nthing _burned_, _consumed_, _devoured_, and _destroyed_; hence the\nHebrews would say, the sword devoured, that is, eats up, &c.; yet their\nterm _gerav_, or _kerab_, boldly implied offensive and opposing force;\nhence, to advance upon, or, to approach unto, in which sense it was\noften used, as well as to imply conflict and war. We wish to illustrate\nthe fact that, when the mind of a Hebrew was in exercise with the\ncomplex idea which we express by the term _war_, the conception embraced\na larger portion of the simple elements which enter into the complex\nideas of destruction, annihilation, and death, than is now found\nassociated in the mind of the more highly cultivated descendants of the\nCaucasian races. In the idea _war_, with him, the leading sentiment was\nthe extinction of those against whom the _war_ was waged. Their\n_doctrine_, that God governed the world; that the Hebrews were his\nchosen people; that no war was justifiable unless authorized by Jehovah;\nthat the object of war was to destroy from the earth those who were too\nwicked to live, or to place in subjection and servitude, those who\nmanifested a less degree of stubbornness, but whose sins made them a\nnauseant, a nuisance, in the world; that God always governed a war in\nsuch a manner as rendered it a punishment for sins. Hence the law of\n_Deut._ xx. 13, 14, before quoted. Hence the wars of the Israelites are\nnamed as \u201cthe wars of the Lord,\u201d _Numb._ xxi. 14. Hence, we find in\n_Ex._ xvii. 16, \u201cThe Lord hath sworn that the Lord _will have_ war with\nAmalek from generation to generation,\u201d and in the preceding verse, that\n\u201cMoses built an altar and called it _Jehovah-nissi_.\u201d The word _nissi_\nmeans the flag, standard, or banner of an army, indicating the centre of\ncommand, or the location and movement of the commander, and is sometimes\nused in the sense of _example_, or model of action, and by figure is\nalso used to mean the commander or leader himself. And Joshua said unto\nthem, \u201cFear not nor be dismayed, be strong and of good courage: for thus\nshall the Lord do to all your enemies whom ye fight.\u201d _Josh._ x. 25. \u201cHe\nteacheth my hands to war, so that a bow of steel is broken by mine\narms.\u201d 2 _Sam._ xxii. 35. Also the same, _Ps._ xviii. 34. \u201cWith good\nadvice make war.\u201d _Prov._ xxiv. 6. _Ps._ xviii. 37: \u201cI have pursued mine\nenemies and overtaken them; neither did I turn again until they were\nconsumed.\u201d 38. \u201cI have wounded them that they were not able to rise.\nThey are fallen under my feet.\u201d 39. \u201cFor thou hast girded me with\nstrength unto the battle. Thou hast subdued under me those that rose up\nagainst me.\u201d 40. \u201cThou hast also given me the necks of mine enemies;\nthat I might destroy them that hate me.\u201d 41. \u201cThey cried, but there was\nnone to save them: even unto the Lord, but he answered them not.\u201d 42.\n\u201cThen did I beat them small as the dust before the wind: I did cast them\nout as the dirt in the streets.\u201d 43. \u201cThou hast delivered me from the\nstrivings of the people: and thou hast made me the head of the heathen:\na people whom I have not known _shall serve me_,\u201d (_abedini_, _shall be\nslaves to me_.) 44. \u201cAs soon as they shall hear of me, they shall obey\nme: the strangers shall submit themselves unto me.\u201d\n\n\u201cO God the Lord, the strength of my salvation, thou hast covered my head\nin the day of battle.\u201d cxiv. 7.\n\n\u201cBlessed be the Lord God of my strength, which teacheth my hands to war\n_and_ my fingers to fight.\u201d cxliv. 1.\n\nSo the prophets: \u201cA noise shall come even to the ends of the earth, for\nthe Lord hath a controversy with the nations; he will plead with all\nflesh: he will give them that are wicked to the sword.\u201d _Jer._ xxv. 31.\n\n\u201cAnd I will smite thy bow out of thy left hand, and will cause thy\narrows to fall out of thy right hand.\n\n\u201cThou shalt fall upon the mountains of Israel, thou, and all thy bands,\nand the people that is with thee: I will give thee unto the ravenous\nbirds of every sort, and unto the beasts of the field, to be devoured.\nThou shalt fall upon the open field: for I have spoken it, saith the\nLord God.\u201d _Ezek._ xxxix. 3\u20135.\n\n\u201cAt the same time spake the Lord by Isaiah the son of Amos, saying, Go,\nand loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from\nthy foot: and he did so, walking naked and barefoot.\n\n\u201cAnd the Lord said, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and\nbarefoot three years for a sign and wonder upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia;\n\n\u201cSo shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the\nEthiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their\nbuttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt.\u201d _Isa._ xx. 2, 3, 4.\n\nAnd again, \u201cThe word of the Lord came again unto me, saying, Son of man,\nprophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord God; Howl ye, Wo worth the day!\n\n\u201cFor the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near, a cloudy day: it\nshall be the time of the heathen.\n\n\u201cAnd the sword shall come upon Egypt, and great pain shall be in\nEthiopia, when the slain shall fall in Egypt, and they shall take away\nher multitude, and her foundations shall be broken down.\n\n\u201cEthiopia (_Cush_) and Libya (_Put_) and Lydia (_Ludim_) and all the\nmingled (_ereb_, _mixed-blooded_) people, and _Chub_, (the Arabians read\n_Nub_, Nubia,) and the men of the land that is in league, shall fall\nwith them by the sword.\n\n\u201cThus saith the Lord: They also that behold Egypt (_Mitsraim_) shall\nfall; and the pride of her power shall come down: from the tower of\nSyene shall they fall in it by the sword, saith the Lord God.\n\n\u201cAnd they shall be desolate in the midst of the countries _that are_\ndesolate, and her cities shall be in the midst of the cities _that are_\nwasted.\n\n\u201cAnd they shall know that I am the Lord, when I have set a fire in\nEgypt, (_Mitsraim_,) and when all her helpers shall be destroyed.\n\n\u201cIn that day shall messengers go forth from me in ships to make the\ncareless (_betahh_, _confident of one\u2019s own security_, _thoughtless_,\n_unconcerned_, _trusting in themselves_) Ethiopians afraid, and great\npain shall come upon them: as in the day of Egypt, (_Mitsraim_:) for lo\nit cometh!\n\n\u201cThus saith the Lord God, I will make the multitude of Egypt to cease by\nthe hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon.\n\n\u201cHe and his people with him, the terrible of the nations, shall be\nbrought to destroy the land: and they shall draw their swords against\nEgypt, and fill the land with the slain.\n\n\u201cAnd I will make the rivers dry, and sell the land into the hand of the\nwicked: and I will make the land waste, and all that is therein, by the\nhand of strangers. I the Lord have spoken it.\n\n\u201cThus saith the Lord God: I will also destroy the idols, and I will\ncause their images to cease out of Noph: and there shall be no more a\nprince of the land of Egypt: and I will put a fear in the land of Egypt.\n\n\u201cAnd I will make Pathros (a Coptic word signifying _south land_, _&c._)\ndesolate, and will set a fire in Zoan, (both _Isoan_ and _Isaan_; _it_\nmeans _a wanderer_, &c. and was the name of a city at the mouth of the\nNile,) and will execute judgments in _No_.\n\n\u201cAnd I will pour my fury on Sin, the strength of Egypt; and I will cut\noff the multitude of No.\n\n\u201cAnd I will set fire in Egypt: Sin shall have great pain, and No shall\nbe rent asunder, and Noph shall have distresses daily.\n\n\u201cThe young men of Aven and Pi-beseth shall fall by the sword: and these\ncities shall go into captivity.\n\n\u201cAt Tehaphnehes also the day shall be darkened, when I shall break there\nthe yokes of Egypt: and the pomp of her strength _shall cease in her_: a\ncloud shall cover her, and her daughters shall go into captivity. Thus\nwill I execute judgments in Egypt, (_Mithraim_, the same as _Misraim,\nthe son of Ham_:) and they shall know that I am the Lord.\u201d _Ezek._ xxx.\n1\u201319.\n\nAnd so _Zeph._ ii. 12: \u201cYe Ethiopians also, ye shall be slain by my\nsword.\u201d We shall take occasion to notice this passage elsewhere. And\n_Joel_ iii. 8: \u201cAnd I will sell your sons and your daughters into the\nhand of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans,\nto a people far off: for the Lord hath spoken it.\u201d _Zephaniah_ iii. 8\u201310\nmay be said to develop the ultimate providence of God touching this\nmatter:\n\n\u201cTherefore, wait ye upon me, saith the Lord, until the day that I rise\nup to the prey: for my determination is to gather the nations, that I\nmay assemble the kingdoms, to pour upon them mine indignation, _even_\nall my fierce anger: for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire\nof my jealousy.\n\n\u201cFor then I will turn to the people a pure language, that they may all\ncall upon the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent.\n\n\u201cFrom beyond the rivers of Ethiopia, my suppliants, _even_ the daughter\nof my _dispersed_ (_Putsi, the daughters of Put_; the word means\n_dispersed_, because they were scattered and lost as to name) shall\nbring mine offering.\u201d They were evidently the most deteriorated of all\nthe descendants of Ham.\n\nWhen a people or nation give evidence that they are insensible to all\nrules of right, either divine or human, it necessarily follows that\ntheir hand will be found against every man, and every man\u2019s hand against\nthem. The subjugation of such a people, so regardless of all law, can\nonly end in their being put to death, or, in the more merciful provision\nof the divine law, by reducing them to a state of absolute slavery.\n\nThe experience of mankind proves that such heathen, so reduced to a\nstate of bondage, have always given evidence that their moral and even\nphysical condition has been ameliorated by it, and in proportion to the\nscrupulous particularity by which they to whom they were enslaved\nsuccessfully compelled and forced them to walk in the paths of\nrectitude.\n\nEver since the world has been peopled by nations, none have ever\nhesitated to make war a protection to themselves against those who thus\nhad become a nuisance in it. To such men, either individually or\ncollectively, reason, justice, law are without effect or influence:\nnothing short of absolute compulsive force can avail them beneficially.\nAnd, indeed, it is upon this principle that civilized communities do\nessentially, in their prisons and by other mode of restraint, enslave,\nfor life or a term of years, those who have proved themselves too\nreckless to be otherwise continued among them.\n\nIn the year 1437, the Christian right or duty of declaring, or rather of\nmaking war against infidels, was proposed to the church for the pope\u2019s\ndecision and counsel. Duarte, king of Portugal, was importuned by his\nbrother Ferdinand, to make war on the Moors with a view to the conquest\nof Tangier. Duarte entertained scruples about his moral and Christian\nright to do so; and therefore proposed the subject to the theologians\nand to the pope. Eugenius IV., who then filled the papal chair, decided\nthat there were but two cases in which an offensive war could be\njustifiably undertaken against unbelievers, &c.: 1st. \u201cWhen they were in\npossession of territory which had belonged to Christians, and which the\nlatter sought to recover. 2d. When, by piracy or war, or any other\nmeans, they injured or insulted the true believers.\u201d In all other cases,\nproceeded his holiness, hostilities are unjust. The elements, earth,\nair, fire, and water, were created for all; and to deprive any creature,\nwithout just cause, of these necessary things, was a violation of\nnatural right. See _Lardner_, Hist. Portugal, vol. iii. p. 204. We\nproceed to instances wherein the records show the church to have\ndeclared offensive war.\n\nIn 1375, \u201cthe Florentines, entering into an alliance with the Visconti\nof Milan, broke unexpectedly into the territory of the Church, made\nthemselves masters of several cities, demolished the strongholds, drove\neverywhere out the officers of the pope, and setting up a standard, with\nthe word \u2018Libertas\u2019 in capital letters, encouraged the people to shake\noff the yoke and resume their liberty: at their instigation, Bologna,\nPerugia, and most of the chief cities in the pope\u2019s dominions openly\nrevolted, and, joining the Florentines, either imprisoned, or\nbarbarously murdered those whom the pope had set over them. Gregory\n(XI.) was no sooner informed of that general revolt, and the unheard of\nbarbarities committed by the Florentines, and those who had joined them,\nthan he wrote to the people and magistrates of Florence, exhorting them\nto withdraw their troops forthwith out of the dominions of the Church,\nto forbear all further hostilities, to satisfy those whom they had\ninjured, and revoke the many decrees they had issued absolutely\ninconsistent with the ecclesiastical immunity as established by the\ncanons. As they paid no regard to the pope\u2019s exhortations, he summoned\nthe magistrates to appear in person, and the people by their\nrepresentatives, at the tribunal of the apostolic see, by the last day\nof March, 1376, to answer for their conduct. The Florentines, far from\ncomplying with that summons, insulted the pope\u2019s messengers in the\ngrossest manner, and, continuing their hostilities, laid waste the\ngreater part of the patrimony, destroying all before them with fire and\nsword.\n\n\u201cGregory, therefore, provoked beyond all measure, issued the most\nterrible bull against them that had ever yet been issued by any pope.\nFor, by that bull, the magistrates were all excommunicated; the whole\npeople and every place and person under their jurisdiction were laid\nunder an interdict. All traffic, commerce, and intercourse with any of\nthat state, in any place whatever, were forbidden on pain of\nexcommunication. Their subjects were absolved from their allegiance; all\ntheir rights, privileges, and immunities were declared forfeited; their\nestates, real and personal, in what part soever of the world, were given\naway, and declared to be the property of the first who should seize\nthem, _prima occupantis_; all were allowed, and even exhorted and\nencouraged, to seize their persons, wherever found, as well as their\nestates, and reduce them to slavery. Their magistrates were declared\nintestable, and their sons and grandsons incapable of succeeding to\ntheir paternal estates, or to any inheritance whatever; their\ndescendants, to the third generation, were excluded from all honours,\ndignities, and preferments, both civil and ecclesiastic. All princes,\nprelates, governors of cities, and magistrates were forbidden, on pain\nof excommunication, to harbour any Florentine, or suffer any in the\nplaces under their jurisdiction in any other state or condition than\nthat of a slave.\u201d This bull is dated in the palace of Avignon, in some\ncopies the 30th of March, and in some the 20th of April, in the sixth\nyear of Gregory\u2019s pontificate, that is, in 1376, (_apud Raynald. ad hunt\nann. num._ i. _et seq._, _et Bzovium, num._ xv.) Walsingham writes, that\nupon the publication of this bull the Florentine traders who had settled\nin England, delivered up all their effects to the king, and themselves\nwith them, for his slaves. One of the authors of Gregory\u2019s life (_auctor\nprim\u00e6 vit. Gregor._) tells us, that in all other countries, especially\nat Avignon, they abandoned their effects, and returned, being no where\nelse safe, to their own country. (See Bower, vol. vii. p. 23.)\n\nAgain, in 1508 was concluded the famous treaty or league of Cambray,\nagainst the republic of Venice: that state had been long aspiring at the\ngovernment of all Italy. The contracting parties were the pope, the\nemperor, the king of France, and the king of Spain; and it was agreed\nthat they should enter the state of Venice on all sides; that each of\nthem should recover what that republic had taken from them; that they\nshould therein assist one another: and that it should not be lawful for\nany of the confederates to enter into an agreement with the republic but\nby common consent. The duke of Ferrara, the marquis of Mantua, and\nwhoever else had any claims upon the Venetians, were to be admitted into\nthis treaty. The Venetians had some suspicion of what was contriving\nagainst them at Cambray, but they had no certain knowledge of it, till\nthe pope informed them of the whole. For Julius II., (then pope,) no\nless apprehensive of the emperor\u2019s power in Italy than the French\nking\u2019s, acquainted the Venetian ambassador at Rome, before he signed the\ntreaty, with all the articles it contained, represented to him the\ndanger that his republic was threatened with, and offered not to confirm\nthe league, but to start difficulties and raise obstacles against it,\nprovided they only restored to him the cities of _Rimini_ and _Faenza_.\nThis demand appeared to be very reasonable to the pope, but it was\nrejected by a great majority of the senate, when communicated to them by\ntheir ambassador; and the pope thereupon confirmed the league by a bull,\ndated at Rome, the 22d of March, 1508. The Venetians, hearing of the\nmighty preparations that were carrying on all over Christendom against\nthem, began to repent their not having complied with the pope\u2019s request\nand by that means broken the confederacy. They therefore renewed their\nnegotiations with his holiness, and offered to restore to him the city\nof _Faenza_. But Julius, instead of accepting their offer, published, by\nway of monitory, a thundering bull against the republic, summoning them\nto restore, in the term of twenty-four days, all the places they had\nusurped, belonging to the apostolic see, as well as the profits they had\nreaped from them since the time they first usurped them. If they obeyed\nnot this summons, within the limited time, not only the city of\n_Venice_, but all places within their dominions, were, _ipso facto_, to\nincur a general interdict; nay, all places that should receive or\nharbour a Venetian. They were, besides, declared guilty of high treason,\nworthy to be treated as enemies to the Christian name, and all were\nempowered \u201cto seize on their effects, wherever found, and to enslave\ntheir persons.\u201d (See _Guicand, et Onuphrius in vita Julii II., et\nRaymund ad ann. 1509_, and _Bower_, vol. vii. p. 379.)\n\nIn 1538 was published the bull of excommunication against Henry VIII. It\nhad been drawn up in 1535, on the occasion of the execution of Cardinal\nFisher, bishop of Rochester; had been submitted to the judgment of the\ncardinals, and approved by most of them in a full consistory. However,\nthe pope, flattering himself that an accommodation with England might\nstill be brought about, delayed the publication of it till then, when,\nfinding an agreement with the king quite desperate, he published it with\nthe usual solemnity, and caused it to be set up on the doors of all the\nchief churches of Rome. By that bull the king was deprived of his\nkingdom, his subjects were not only absolved from their oaths of\nallegiance, but commanded to take arms against him and drive him from\nthe throne; the whole kingdom was laid under interdict; all treaties of\nfriendship or commerce with him and his subjects were declared null, his\nkingdom was granted to any who should invade it, and all were allowed\n\u201cto seize the effects of such of his subjects as adhered to him, and\nenslave their persons.\u201d See _Burnet\u2019s Hist. of the Reform._ 1. 3.\n_Pallavicino_, 1. 4. _Saudeos de Schis._ b. i., and _Bower_, vol. vii.\np. 447.\n\nWe ask permission to introduce a case on the North American soil, of\nsomewhat later date. We allude to an act, or law, passed by the \u201cUnited\nEnglish Colonies, at New Haven,\u201d in the year 1646, and approved and\nadopted by a general court or convention of the inhabitants of Windsor,\nHartford, and Wethersfield, in the year 1650. We copy from the \u201cCode of\n1650,\u201d as published by Andrus, and with him retain the orthography of\nthat day:\n\n\u201cThis courte having duly weighed the joint determination and agreement\nof the commissioners of the United English Colonyes, at New Haven, of\nanno 1646, in reference to the indians, and judging it to bee both\naccording to rules of prudence and righteousness, doe fully assent\nthereunto, and order that it bee recorded amongst the acts of this\ncourte, and attended in future practice, as occasions present and\nrequire; the said conclusion is as follows:\n\n\u201cThe commissioners seriously considering the many willful wrongs and\nhostile practices of the indians against the English, together with\ntheir interteining, protecting, and rescuing of offenders, as late our\nexperience sheweth, which if suffered, the peace of the colonyes cannot\nbee secured: It is therefore concluded, that in such case the\nmagistrates of any of the jurisdictions, may, at the charge of the\nplaintiff, send some convenient strength, and according to the nature\nand value of the offence and damage, seize and bring away any of that\nplantation of indians that shall intertein, protect, or rescue the\noffender, though hee should bee in another jurisdiction, when through\ndistance of place, commission or direction cannott be had, after notice\nand due warning given them, as actors, or at least accessary to the\ninjurye and damage done to the English: onely women and children to be\nsparingly seized, unless known to bee someway guilty: and because it\nwill bee chargeable keeping indians in prison, and if they should\nescape, they are like to prove more insolent and dangerous after, it was\nthought fitt, that uppon such seizure, the delinquent, or satisfaction\nbee again demanded of the sagamore, or plantation of indians guilty or\naccessary, as before; and if it bee denyed, that then the magistrate of\nthis jurisdiction, deliver up the indian seized by the partye or partyes\nindammaged, either to serve or to bee shipped out and exchanged for\nneagers, as the case will justly beare; and though the commissioners\nforesee that said severe, though just proceeding may provoke the indians\nto an unjust seizing of some of ours, yet they could not at present find\nno better means to preserve the peace of the colonyes; all the\naforementioned outrages and insolensies tending to an open warr; onely\nthey thought fitt, that before any such seizure bee made in any\nplantation of indians, the ensuing declaration bee published, and a\ncopye given to the particular sagamores.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XX.\n\nUnder the term _war_, mankind have from time immemorial included those\nacts which the more enlightened nations of modern days have designated\nby the name of _piracy_, a word derived from the Greek _peirao_. The\nprimary sense is _to dare_, _to attempt_, &c., as, _to rush_, and _drive\nforward_, &c.; used in a bad sense, as to attempt a thing contrary to\ngood morals and contrary to law, and now mostly applied to acts of\nviolence on the high seas, &c.; the same acts on land being called\n_robbery_, &c. These acts of violence have generally been founded on the\ndesire of plunder, and in all ages have been recognised as good cause of\nwar against those nations or tribes who upheld and practised them. Such\npiratical war has ever been considered contrary to the laws of God and\nrepugnant to civilized life; and it may be with the strictest truth\nasserted that those nations and tribes of people whom God devoted to\ndestruction, and also those of whom he permitted the Jews to make\nslaves, were distinguished for such predatory excursions. The first\naccount we have of any such predatory war is found in Genesis. True, it\nis said, they had been subject to Chedorlaomer twelve years, and\nrebelled, but the manner in which he and his allies carried on the war\nleaves sufficient evidence of its character, even if they had not\ndisturbed Lot and his household; and it may be well here remarked, that\nthe original parties to this war were of the black races; in fact,\nprogenitors of the very people who were denominated by Moses as the\n_heathen round about_.\n\nThe second instance of this kind of warfare we find carried on by the\nsons of Jacob against the Hivites. True, they professed to be actuated\nby a spirit of revenge for the dishonour of Dinah. They put all the\nadult males to death, made slaves of the women and children, and\npossessed themselves of all the wealth of Shechem, for which they were\nreprimanded by Jacob. Their conduct upon this occasion was in conformity\nto the usages of the heathen tribes who knew not God, and, if persisted\nin, must have ultimately just as necessarily been fraught with their own\ndestruction and extinction from the earth. And this was no doubt one of\nthe many crimes that gave proof of their deep degradation, and which\nfinally sunk them in slavery. The heathen tribes in all ages have ever\nbeen characterized by this kind of warfare, however truly and often the\nmore civilized portions of the world may have been obnoxious to similar\ncharges. The doctrine is, that where such predatory war essentially\nexists against a people, they, finding no other efficient remedy, are\nauthorized by the laws of God to make war a remedy, to repel force by\nforce, to destroy and kill until they overcome, and, as the case may be,\nto subjugate and govern or reduce to slavery. And the laws of modern\ncivilized nations regulating the conduct of belligerants are merely an\namelioration; but give evidence that such belligerants are already\nelevated above those grades of human life which look to subjugation and\nslavery as the only termination of war. But the condition of man, in\nthis higher state of mental and religious improvement, is none the less\ngoverned by the laws of Divine power, influencing and adapted to his\nimproved state. _Corollary_: When the time shall come, that all men\nshall live in strict conformity to the laws of God, war shall cease from\nthe earth, and slavery be no more known; and at that time the Lord will\n\u201cturn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the\nname of the Lord,\u201d to serve him with one consent. \u201cThen from beyond the\nrivers of Ethiopia, my suppliants, even the daughter of my dispersed,\n(_phut_) shall bring mine offering.\u201d _Zeph._ iii. 9, 10.\n\nWe have heretofore alluded to the idolatrous barbarians of the north of\nEurope and to their inroads upon the more civilized regions of the\nsouth. It may be well to take some further notice of these people, to\nmark the influence of their predatory wars on the morals of those times,\nand of the influences of the church in counteracting and ameliorating\ntheir effect on the character and condition of the Christian world.\nTheir religion was cast upon the model of their savage appetite: easily\nexcited by the love of conquest and plunder, their minds were still\nfurther inflamed by their bards, who promised them, after death, daily\ncombats of immortal fury, with glittering weapons and fiery steeds, in\nthe immediate presence of their supreme god, Oden. The wounds of these\nconflicts were to be daily washed away by the waters of life.\nCongregated in the great hall of their deity, seated upon the skulls of\nthose they had slain in battle, they spent each night in celebrating in\nsong the victories they had won, refreshing themselves with strong drink\nout of the skulls on which they rested, while they feasted on the\nchoicest morsels of the victims they had sacrificed to their gods.\nConstantine, having succeeded to the throne of the Roman Empire,\ntransferred his court to Constantinople. This, a notable step in the\ndownfall of Rome, was followed by his dividing his dominions between\nthree sons and two nephews. The imperial power thus partitioned away,\nthe northern nations, who had been subjected to her rule, no longer\nregarded Rome as a sovereign power over them: at once the German tribes,\namong whom were the Franks, overran Gaul: the Picts and Saxons broke\ninto Britain, and the Sarmatians into Hungary. The spirit of war was let\nloose. As early as the time of the Christian era, scattered from the\nCaucasus to the north-eastern Pacific, were numerous tribes whom the\nall-conquering arm of Rome had never reached. Cradled amidst precipitous\nmountains, savage and wild scenery, howling tempests or eternal snows,\nthe form of their minds and the character of their religion associated\nwith the region of their birth.\n\nEurope has given some of them the appellation, Vandals, Sueves, Alans,\nSclavas, Goths, Huns, Tartars, and Veneti. Restless as the elements of\ntheir native clime, their leaders ever showed themselves striving for\ndominion and thirsty for power. Pushing westward, one upon the other,\nthey became somewhat amalgamated in the north of Europe, under the\ngeneral term of Scandinavians, yet receiving new cognomens or retaining\ntheir old as fancy or knowledge of them suggested; yet, in the middle\nand south of Europe, they were as commonly known by the appellation of\nNorthmen. The most of these people were emphatically warlike and savage.\nThe world possessed no one power sufficiently strong to restrain them.\nItaly was overrun and Rome itself was captured by the Goths, under\nAlaric\u2014then by the Herulians, under Odoacer. They in turn were subdued\nby Theodoric the Ostrogoth\u2014then by the Lombards from Brandenburg, who\nestablished a more permanent government. But they, in turn, yielded to\nthe power of the Franks, under Charlemagne, who entered Rome in triumph,\nand was crowned Emperor of the West, as elsewhere noted by us.\n\nUp to the time of Charlemagne, the Northmen were excited to war, not\nalone by their love of liberty and a desire to extend their possessions,\nbut also by their hatred to the Christians and their religion; and in\nthe countries further north, this prejudice existed until a much later\nday. But we have only time to give an example of the character of their\ninroads on the peace and prosperity of Europe. Scotland had been early\nengaged in these conflicts. In June, 793, the Northumbrians were alarmed\nby a large armament on their coast. These barbarians were permitted to\nland without opposition. The plunder of the churches exceeded their\nexpectations, and their route was marked by the mangled carcasses of the\nnuns, the monks, and the priests, whom they had massacred. Historians\nhave scarcely condescended to notice the misfortunes of other churches\nthan that of Lindesferne, which became a prey to these barbarians: their\nimpiety polluted the altars; their rapacity was rewarded by its gold and\nsilver ornaments. The monks endeavoured, by concealment, to elude their\ncruelty; the greater number were discovered and slaughtered. If the\nlives of the children were spared, they were sold into slavery. (See\nLingard.) In 800, these Northmen made an irruption on the German coast,\nand carried off plunder and captives. They shortly visited France: a\nlarge party entered the Loire, and fixed permanent quarters in the\nisland of Hero, and made their incursions thence. The French writers\ndescribe them as now pushing in upon their northern coasts, carrying off\ncaptives into slavery and loading their vessels with booty. In 841 they\nentered the Seine, sacked and burned the monastery of St. Ouen, of\nJumieges, spared Fontenelle for a ransom, where the monks of St. Denys\npaid them twenty-six pounds of silver for sixty-eight captives. For\nnineteen days they ravaged both banks of the river. In 843, they again\nentered the Loire, took Nantes, when the city was filled by the\ninhabitants of the neighbouring country, celebrating the festival of St.\nJohn, who retired with the bishop and clergy to the cathedral. The gates\nwere soon burst open, and a general slaughter ensued: loaded with booty\nand captives, they retired to their ships. In 844, they sailed up the\nGaronne, pillaged Toulouse, made an attempt on Gallicia in Spain, but\nwere repelled by the Saracens. In 845, Ragner Lodbroy, one of their\nsea-kings, entered the Seine with twenty-six ships, and spread\nconsternation through the land, leaving, in their rear, Christians\nhanging on trees, stakes, and even in their houses. They entered Paris,\nwhen Charles the Bald, by the advice of his lords, paid them seven\nthousand pounds of silver, and they swore by their gods to never\nre-enter his kingdom except by his invitation. They ravaged the seacoast\non their return homeward, and were wrecked on the shores of Northumbria,\nwhere Ragner and the survivors recommenced to plunder. They were\nattacked by Aella, and Ragner slain. But a formidable fleet, under the\ncommand of Ragner\u2019s sons, was soon on the coast of the East Angles, and\nmarked their advances to Northumbria in lines of blood and ruin. Aella\nfell into their hands, and was put to death with untold torture. This\nincursion of Ragner is noticed by Voltaire, who says that Charles the\nBald paid him fourteen thousand marks in gold to retire from France, and\nadds, in his \u201cGeneral History of Europe,\u201d such payments to the Northmen\nonly induced them to continue these piratical incursions. That these\nwars were most strictly piratical, not undertaken for the good of\nmankind, but for plunder alone, we beg here to introduce some proof from\nthe early writers.\n\nAdam of Bremen, who, about the year 1080, wrote his work entitled, \u201cDe\nSitu Danae et Reliquarum, Septentrionalium,\u201d says of the city of\n\u201cLunden,\u201d in the island Sch\u00f6nen\u2014\u201cIt is a city in which there is much\ngold, which is procured by those incursions on the barbarous nations on\nthe shores of the Baltic Sea, which are tolerated and encouraged by the\nking of Denmark on account of the tribute he draws from them.\u201d In proof\nthat Voltaire\u2019s estimate of the influence of such payments to these\nnorthern pirates was just, we advert to their inroads on Ethelred. Soon\nafter he ascended the throne, he was invaded by Sweyn, by some called\nSitric, and Olave, and paid them sixteen thousand pounds. Ten years\nafter, he was forced to pay these Northmen thirty thousand pounds, and\nthen, at the expiration of only four years, forty thousand pounds more;\neach time the Northmen swearing by their gods to never trouble the\ncountry again. Yet, twelve years after the last payment, the crown and\nthrone were transferred to Canute. We have an anonymous Latin author, a\ncontemporary of Canute, who informs us to what use these pirate lords\napplied the vast sums thus procured. The book is entitled, \u201cEmm\u00e6\nAnglorum Regin\u00e6 Encomium,\u201d\u2014The Encomium of Emma, the Queen of England.\nShe was the wife of Canute. Page 166, the author, describing the Danish\nships, says\u2014\u201cOn the stern of the ships, lions of molten gold were to be\nseen: on the mast-heads were either birds, whose turning showed the\nchange of the wind, or dragons of various forms, which threatened to\nbreathe out fire. There were to be seen human figures looking like life,\nglittering with gold and silver; dolphins of precious metals, and\ncentaurs that brought to mind the ancient fables. But how shall I\ndescribe the sides of the ships, which swelled out with gold and silver\nornaments! But the royal ship exceeded all the rest as far as the king\nin appearance exceeded the common soldiers or people.\u201d This author, in\nthe second book, describing the landing of the Danes, repeats and\nsays\u2014\u201cThe ships were so splendid that they seemed a flame of fire, and\nblinded the eyes of the beholders; the gold flamed on the sides, and\nsilver-work was mingled with it. Who could look upon the lions of gold?\nWho on the human figures of electrum, (a mixture of gold and silver,)\ntheir faces of pure gold? Who on the dragons, gleaming with brilliant\ngold? Who could look on the carved oxen, that threatened death with\ntheir golden horns? Who could look on all these things and not fear a\nking possessed of so great power?\u201d Jacobs\u2019s \u201cInquiry into the Precious\nMetals\u201d attributes the accumulation of gold and silver, of which we have\nseen a specimen among these northern barbarians, to the piracies of\nthese people. Helmodus, in his Sclavonic Chronicles, (_Chronican\nSclavicum_,) lib. iii., says the people of Denmark abounded in all\nriches, the wealthy being clothed in all sorts of scarlet, in purple and\nfine linen, (nunc non salum scarlatica vario grisio, sed purpurea et\nbysso induntur;) and he further adds, \u201cthat this wealth is drawn from\nthe herring-fishery at the island of Sch\u00f6nen, whither traders of all\nnations resorting, bring with them gold, silver, and other commodities,\nfor purchasing fish.\u201d The fact was, that island became a place of great\nresort by these pirates for supplies. But we return to sketch these\npiracies:\u2014In about the year 846, an immense body of Scandinavians\nascended the Elbe with six hundred vessels under their king Roric.\nHamburg was burned; they then poured down upon Saxony; but, having met\nwith a defeat, and just then learning the fate of Ragner, sent\nmessengers to Louis, king of Germany, sued for peace, and were permitted\nto retire from the country upon their giving up their plunder and\nreleasing their captives. After leaving the Elbe, Roric went to the\nRhine and the Scheldt, destroyed all the monasteries as far as Ghent,\nand the Emperor Lothaire, unable to subdue him, received him as his\nvassal and gave him a large territory. In 850, Godfrey, another\nchieftain, repulsed in an attack on England, sailed up the Seine, and,\nafter some successes, obtained from King Charles a permanent location\nand territory about Beauvais. In 856, nearly all the coast of France,\nand to the interior as far as Orleans, was overrun. The churches were\nplundered, and captives carried away and enslaved. In Flanders, all the\nchief men and prelates were either slain or in slavery. These pirates\ncircumnavigated Spain, amalgamated with the Moors of Africa; some\nentered the Gulf of Lyons, and committed depredations in Provence and\nItaly. All notions of peace, of justice, were wasting away, and the laws\nof the monarchs and the canons of the councils began to exhibit the\nruins of morality. In 861, the Seine is again infested, and Paris\nterrified. In 883, they poured themselves on both sides of the Rhine, as\nhigh as Coblentz, where the Emperor Charles made a treaty with Godfrey\nand gave him the duchy of Friesland. France was so much overrun by the\npagans, that thousands of Christians, to escape death or bondage,\npublicly renounced their religion and embraced the pagan rites; and not\nlong after, Rollo, the grandfather of William the Conqueror, at the head\nof his Scandinavian bands, took possession and held the dukedom of\nNormandy, and forced Charles the Simple to bestow him Gisla his daughter\nin marriage. In England, Alfred, placing himself at the head of his\nfaithful followers, subdued the Danes, who had overrun his kingdom; and\nmany of them, embracing the Christian religion, were adopted as subjects\nof the realm. In 893, a fleet of three hundred and thirty sail\nrendezvoused at Boulogne, under the command of Hastings, for the avowed\npurpose of conquering for himself a kingdom in Britain. Three years he\ncontended against Alfred, who eventually subdued him, but restored to\nhim all the captives upon his promise to leave the island for ever.\n\nNor did Ireland escape the ravages of the Northmen. In 783, they landed\nin the extreme north of the island, and burned the town and abbey of\n_Dere Columb-kill_, the Londonderry of more modern times. Here the\n_Hydaher-teagh_, the _chiefs of the oak habitations_, (the\n_O'Dougherty\u2019s_ of a latter day,) secured the record of their name in\nthe \u201c_Book of Howth_.\u201d But here the _Tuatha De Danaan_, the Darnii of\nPtolemy, washed out even the history of their race in the blood of\nbattle.\n\nIn 790, the Danes made a general assault upon this devoted island: in\n797, wasted the island of Ragulin, devastated Holm Patrick, and carried\naway captives, among whom was the sister of St. Findan, and, shortly\nafter, the saint himself. In 802, they burned the monastery of Hy: in\n807, destroyed Roscommon, ravaged the country, and made captives and\nslaves. In 812, they again burned Londonderry and its abbey; massacred\nthe students and the clergy; nor did they relax their attacks upon the\nnorth of the island until, twenty years after, they were driven from the\nplace by Neil Calne, with most incredible slaughter. But yet the whole\nisland was infested by these northern marauders.\n\nIn 812, the Irish made a more determined resistance, and the Northmen,\nafter three defeats, escaped from the island. But, in 817, Turgesius,\nwith a large force, overran a large portion of the island, and a large\nportion of the clergy, monks, and nuns were massacred, and many of the\ninhabitants taken into captivity.\n\nIn 837, two large additional fleets arrived; one entered the Boyne, and\nthe other the Liffy. The masses which they poured upon the country\nspread in all directions, committing every kind of excess.\n\nIn 848, Olchobair McKinde, king of Munster, uniting his troops with\nthose of Dorcan, king of Leinster, was encouraged by a succession of\nvictories over the pagans; yet the archbishop of Armagh and seven\nhundred of his countrymen were made captive, and sent by Turgesius to\nLimerick as slaves. But Melseachlin, king of Ireland, defeated Turgesius\nand put him to death. The Irish now arose on every side and drove the\nbarbarians from the country. But yet, in 850, Dublin was invaded by a\nband of Northmen, whom the Irish denominated _Fin-gal_, or white\nstrangers, and by another body, called _Dubh-gal_, or black strangers,\nwho took possession of Leinster and Ulster, and ravaged the country. In\n853, a sea-king, named Amlave, _Auliffe_, or _Olave_, from Norway, with\ntwo brothers, Sitric and Ivor, with large additional forces, arrived,\nand was acknowledged chief of all the Northmen in the islands. He took\npossession of Dublin, Limerick, and Waterford, which he enlarged and\nimproved, as if their possession was to be perpetual. But war not only\nraged between them and the Irish, but the Irish and Danes were in\nperpetual conflict, different parties of Danes with one another, and\ndiscord and strife were constant among the Irish themselves. Carnage and\nbloodshed, captivity and slavery everywhere covered the island.\n\nIn 860, Melseachlin, the king, defeated Auliffe with great slaughter;\nbut, recovering strength, he plundered and burned Armagh, and took a\nlarge number of captives, who were sent away for slaves. In 884, Kildare\nwas plundered, and more than 300 sent away for slaves. In 892, Armagh\nwas again captured, and 800 captives sent to the ships. But, in quick\nsuccession, Carrol, with Leinster forces, and Aloal Finia, with the men\nof Bregh, defeated the Danes and retook Dublin, while in other parts of\nthe island the Northmen suffered great reverses; but in 914 we find them\nagain returned and in possession of Dublin and Waterford, but quickly\nput to the sword by the Irish. Another division succeeded to plunder\nCork, Lismore, and Aghadoe; and, in 916, were again in Dublin, ravaged\nLeinster, and killed Olioll, the king. In 919, they were attacked near\nDublin by Niell Glunndubh, king of Ireland. Their resistance was\ndesperate, under the command of the chiefs Ivor and Sitric: here fell\nthe Irish monarch, the choice nobility, and the flower of the army.\nDonough revenged the death of the king, his father, and the barbarians\nwere again signally defeated; but we find them, in 921, under the\ncommand of Godfrey, their king, in possession of Dublin, marching to and\nplundering Armagh, and, for the first time, sparing the churches and the\nofficiating clergy. A predatory war, without decisive encounters, was\ncontinued for more than twenty years, when they suffered two severe\ndefeats from Cougall II, in which their king, Blacar, and the most of\nhis army were slain. In\u2014\u2014but the mind sickens, tires at these recitals;\na whole army is swept away, and, as if the ocean poured twice its\nnumbers on shore, whole centuries gave no relief. In short, we have a\ncontinuation of these scenes of piratical war, until the power and\nspirit of this restless race of the Northmen were broken at Clontarf,\nnear Dublin, on the 23d of April, 1014, where they suffered an\nirrecoverable defeat from the Irish, under the command of Brian\nBoroimhe.\n\nIreland did well to rejoice in the perfect overthrow of these ruthless\ninvaders; but here fell Brian, whom ninety winters had only nerved for\nthe conflict. Here fell his son Morogh, and his grandson Turlogh,\npersonifications of the rage of battle; here fell a numerous, almost the\nentire, nobility; here fell Ireland\u2019s valiant warriors in unnumbered\nheaps. The voice of Ireland is yet sometimes heard, but it is the voice\nof a broken heart; of complaint, of weakness, of weeping, and sadness.\nIn a review of these times and those that followed, the providence of\nGod may be traced by its final development. Where no mercy was, it is\ninfused by hope of gain; and the savage and the captured slave are led\nto an equal elevation in the service of the altar of the God Jehovah.\n\nThe sacrifice of the Lamb is substituted for the victim of war in the\nwoods of Woden; while the proud flashes of the crescent of Islam became\ndim before the continued ray of the Star of Bethlehem.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XXI.\n\nThe condition of the slave, throughout the whole of Europe, was attended\nwith some circumstances of great similarity.\n\nThe slaves were generally of the same nation, tribe, and people, who\nformed a constituent portion of the free population of the country where\nthey were, and always of the same colour and race. Even the Sclavonians,\non the continent, formed no exception in the more northern parts of\nEurope. In short, slavery, as it existed in Europe, was only in a very\nfew instances in the south marked by any radical distinction of race:\nconsequently, the condition of the slave could never be as permanent and\nfixed as it ever must be where strong distinctions of race mark the\nboundaries between bondage and freedom\u2014although often far more cruel.\n\nThe disgrace of the _free_, from an amalgamation with the _slaves_, did\nnot proceed from any consideration as to _race_, but merely from the\ncondition of the slave\u2014more pointed, but somewhat analogous to the\ndisgrace among the more elevated and wealthy, arising from an\nintermarriage with the ignorant, degraded, or poor. Influenced by such a\nstate of facts, the particulars of his condition were liable to constant\nchange, as affected by accident, the good or ill conduct of the\nindividual slave, the sense of justice, partiality, fancy, or the wants\nand condition of the master; nor needed it the talent of deep prophecy\nto have foretold that such a state of slavery must ultimately eventuate\nin freedom from bondage.\n\nA description of the slaves of Britain will give a general view of those\nof the continent, for which we refer to Dr. Lingard.\n\nThe classes whose manners have been heretofore described constituted the\nAnglo-Saxon nation. They alone were possessed of liberty, or power, or\nproperty. But they formed but a small part of the population, of which\nnot less than two-thirds existed in a state of slavery.\n\nAll the first adventurers were freemen; but in the course of their\nconquests, made a great number of slaves. The posterity of these men\ninherited the lot of their fathers, and their number was continually\nincreased by freeborn Saxons, who had been reduced to the same condition\nby debt, or made captives in war, or deprived of liberty in punishment\nof their crimes, or had voluntarily surrendered it to escape the horrors\nof want.\n\nThe ceremony of the degradation and enslavement of a freeman was\nperformed before a competent number of witnesses. \u201cThe unhappy man laid\non the ground his sword and his lance, the symbols of the free, took up\nthe bill and the goad, the implements of slavery, and falling on his\nknees, placed his head, in token of submission, under the hands of his\nmaster.\u201d\n\nAll slaves were not, however, numbered in the same class. In the more\nancient laws we find the _esne_ distinguished from the _theow_; and read\nof female slaves of the first, the second, and third rank. In later\nenactments we meet with _borders_, _cocksets_, _parddings_, and other\nbarbarous denominations, of which, were it easy, it would be useless to\ninvestigate the meaning. The most numerous class consisted of those who\nlived on the land of their lord, near to his mansion, called in Saxon\nhis _tune_\u2014in Latin, his _villa_. From the latter word they were by the\nNormans denominated _villeins_, while the collection of cottages in\nwhich they dwelt acquired the name of _village_. Their respective\nservices were originally allotted to them according to the pleasure of\ntheir proprietor. Some tilled his lands, others exercised for him the\ntrades to which they had been educated. In return, they received certain\nportions of land, with other perquisites, for the support of themselves\nand their families.\n\nBut all were alike deprived of the privileges of freemen. They were\nforbidden to carry arms. Their persons, families, and goods of every\ndescription were the property of their lord. He could dispose of them as\nhe pleased, either by gift or sale: he could annex them to the soil, or\nremove them from it: he could transfer them with it to a new proprietor,\nor leave them by will to his heirs.\n\nOut of the hundreds of instances preserved by our ancient writers, one\nmay be sufficient. In the charter by which Harold of Buckenhole gives\nhis manor of Spaulding to the abbey of Croyland, he enumerates among its\nappendages Colgrin, his bailiff, Harding, his smith, Lefstan, his\ncarpenter, Elstan, his fisherman, Osmund, his miller, and nine others,\nwho probably were his husbandmen; and these with their wives and\nchildren. Wherever slaves have been numerous, and of the same race as\nthe master, this variety in their condition has always followed. See the\nstatement of Muratori concerning the Roman slaves; also the laws of\nCharlemagne concerning those of the Lombards and Goths. These records\nare proof that slavery, accompanied with such facts, is always in the\nact of wearing out.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XXII.\n\nAll historians agree that the Sclavonians, who at an early age made\ntheir appearance on the north-eastern borders of Europe, came, a\ncountless multitude, pouring down upon those countries from the middle\nregions of Asia.\n\nThe precise place from which they originated, the causes of such\nemigration, and the successive impulses that pushed them westward, have\nnow, for centuries, been buried beneath the rubbish of the emigrants\nthemselves and the general ignorance that overspread the events of that\nage.\n\nBut there are some facts that assign to them a place among the Hindoo\ntribes. Brezowski, speaking the Sclavonic of his day, in his travels\neastward, was enabled to understand the language of the country as far\neast as Cochin-China; and scholars of the present day find numerous\nIndian roots in this language. A similarity of religious rites is to be\nnoticed between the ancient Sclavonians and the Hindoos. They burned\ntheir dead, and wives ascended the funeral piles of their husbands.\nTheir principal gods were Bog, and Seva, his wife. They worshipped good\nspirits called Belbog, and bad spirits called Czarnebog.\n\nThese hordes overspread the countries from the Black Sea to the Icy\nOcean; and, in their turn, were forced westward by similar hordes of\nWends, Veneti, Antes, Goths, and Huns. Thus attacked and pushed in the\nrear, they poured themselves upon the inhabitants of the more western\nregions, who, more warlike, and with superior arms, put them to death by\nthousands, until the earth was covered with the slain. Thus fleeing from\ndeath, they met it in front, until the nations then occupying the north\nand east of Europe, satiated and sickened by their slaughter, seized\nupon their persons as slaves, and converted them into beasts of burden.\nTheir numbers exceeding every possible use, the captors exported them to\nadjoining countries as an article of traffic; and the Venetians, being\nthen a commercial people, enriched themselves by this traffic for many\nyears. All continental Europe was thus filled by this race, from the\nAdriatic to the Northern Ocean. Thus their national appellation became\nthrough Europe the significant term for a man in bondage; and although\nin their own language their name signified _fame_ and _distinction_, yet\nin all the world besides, it has superseded the Hebrew, the Greek, and\nRoman terms, to signify the condition of man in servitude. Thus the\nDutch and Belgians say _slaaf_; Germans, _sclave_; Danes, _slave_ and\n_sclave_; Swedes, _slaf_; French, _esclave_; the Celtic French, &c.,\n_sclaff_; Italians, _schiavo_; Spanish, _esclavo_; Portuguese,\n_escravo_; Gaelic, _slabhadh_; and the English, _slave_.\n\nNor was this signification inappropriate to their native condition. For\nthese countless hordes were the absolute property of their leaders or\nkings, who were hereditary among them,\u2014as was, also, their condition of\nbondage.\n\nThe Romans called their language _Servian_, from the Roman word\n_servus_, a bond-man; and from the same cause, also, a district of\ncountry low down on the Danube, _Servia_, which name it retains to this\nday. This country belongs to Turkey, from whence they took the name\n_serf_. This term has been borrowed from thence, by the Sclavonic\nRussians, to signify a man in bondage. The whole number of their\ndescendants is now estimated at 100,000,000; and notwithstanding their\namalgamation has identified them with the nations with whom they were\nthus intermingled, yet a thousand years have not ended their condition\nof bondage in Russia, and 40,000,000 are accounted only as an\napproximation to the number that still remain in servitude in the north\nof Europe and Asia.\n\n\u201cThe unquestionable evidence of language,\u201d says the author of the\nDecline and Fall, \u201cattests the descent of the Bulgarians from the\noriginal stock of the Sclavonian, or more properly Slavonian, race; and\nthe kindred bands of Servians, Bosnians, Rascians, Croatians,\nWalachians, followed either the standard or example of the leading\ntribes, from the Euxine to the Adriatic, in the state of captives, or\nsubjects, or allies, or enemies; in the Greek empire, they overspread\nthe land: and the national appellation of the SLAVES has been degraded\nby chance or malice from the signification of _glory_ to that of\n_servitude_. Chalcocondyles, a competent judge, affirms the identity of\nthe language of the Dalmatians, Bosnians, Servians, Bulgarians, Poles,\n(_De Rebus Turcitis_, 1. x. p. 283,) and elsewhere of the Bohemians, (1.\nii. p. 38.) The same author has marked the separate idiom of the\nHungarians.\n\nSee the work of John Christopher de Jordan, _De Originibus Sclavicis,\nVindobon\u00e6_, 1745, in four parts. Jordan subscribes to the well-known and\nprobable derivation from _slava_, _laus_, _gloria_, a word of familiar\nuse in the different dialects and parts of speech, and which forms the\ntermination of the most illustrious names. _De Originibus Sclavicis_,\npart i. p. 40, part iv. p. 101, 102.\n\nThis conversion of a national into an appellative name appears to have\narisen in the eighth century, in the oriental France, where the princes\nand bishops were rich in Sclavonian captives, not of the Bohemian\n(exclaims Jordan) but of Sorabian race. From thence the word was\nextended to general use, to the modern languages, and even to the style\nof the last Byzantines. (See the Greek and Latin Glossaries of Ducange;\nalso Gibbon\u2019s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. iv. p. 38.)\n\nThe Moors, with whom the early Christians in the south of Europe had so\nmany and frequent contentions, at this day differ from all the other\nAfrican races, in their physical and mental development;\u2014in person,\nblack, with the straight hair of the Arab, whom they exceed in stature\nand intellect.\n\nThe Arabs are admitted to be an amalgamation of the descendants of Shem,\nof Canaan, and Misrain. Into the particulars of their admixture, it will\nbe as useless to inquire as it would be into the paternity of the goats\non their mountains.\n\nThe Moors, according to King Hiempsal\u2019s History of Africa, as related by\nSallust, are descended from an admixture of Medes, Persians, and\nArmenians with the Libyans and G\u00e6tulians, the original occupants of the\ncountry. His statement is, that Hercules led a large army of the people\nto conquer new and unknown countries; that after his death in Spain, it\nbecame a heterogeneous mass, made up of a great number of nations, among\nwhom were many ambitious chiefs, each one aspiring to rule; that a\nportion of this mass, mostly of Japhanese descent, passed over to Africa\nand seized on the shores of the Mediterranean; that their ships, being\nhauled ashore, were used for shelter; that the Persians among them\npassed on to the interior, and mingled with the G\u00e6tulians, and in after\ntimes were known as Numidians,\u2014whereas those who remained upon the coast\nintermarried with Libyans, and in course of time, by a corruption of\ntheir language, Medi, in the barbarous dialect of Libya, became\n_Mauri_\u2014now Moor.\n\nTo the foregoing, digested from Hiempsal, as given by Sallust, we may\nadd:\u2014To this amalgamation was also adjoined, from time to time, large\nparties of adventurers from the Hebrews, Greeks, Romans, and from almost\nevery part of Europe, which were all absorbed by the native masses; and\nbetween the years 850 and 860, large masses of the Scandinavian hordes\nwere also absorbed into this general amalgam of the races of man.\n\nThe instances of slavery, and the laws and customs of the church\nregulating it, as presented in this study, with few exceptions, have\npointed to the case where the white races have been enslaved or have\nenslaved one another; where no strongly marked physical impediment has\nbranded amalgamation with deterioration and moral disgust; nor is it\nthought necessary to present an argument to prove that, under such a\nstate of facts, the condition of Europe at the present moment is in\nstrict conformity with the result produced by the unchangeable laws of\nGod touching the subject.\n\nGod always smiles upon the strong desire of moral and physical\nimprovement. Had Europe remained under deteriorating influences which\ndetermined her moral and physical condition two thousand years ago, her\ncondition as to slavery could not have changed. Nor is it seen that she\nis yet in so highly favoured a condition as to call upon her the\nprovidence of God, charging her with the pupilage of the backslidden\nnations of the earth.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                             LESSON XXIII.\n\nIt has been heretofore remarked that the great mass of the African\ntribes are slaves in their own country,\u2014that slavery there subjects them\nto death at the will of the master, to sacrifice in the worship of their\ngods, and to all the evils of cannibalism; and yet it has been seen that\neven such slavery is a more protected state than would be a state of\nfreedom with their religion, and other moral and physical qualities.\nHistory points not to the time when their present condition did not\nexist, nor to the time when their removal, in a state of slavery, to the\npagan nations of Asia commenced. Upon the adoption of Mohammedanism\nthere, we find the black tribes of Africa succeeding to them in a state\nof slavery; and we also find, and history will support the assertion,\nthat in some proportion as the slavery of these tribes was adopted by\nChristian nations, it was diminished among the Mohammedans; and also,\nthat as the slave-trade with Africa was abolished by the Christians, it\nwas increased there; and also, that in the proportion it has been\nextended among both or either of these creeds of religion abroad, it has\nbeen invariably ameliorated at home. The causes of this state of facts\nseem to have been these:\u2014The African slave-owner found his bargain with\nthe Christian trader more profitable than with the Mohammedan. He\nreceived more value, and in materials more desired by him: the labour of\nthe slave was of more value in America than Asia; and the transportation\nto the place of destination was attended with less cruelty and hardship\nby sea than by land. The slave of the African owner was increased in\nvalue beyond any native use to which he could be applied, by reason of\nboth or either trade: hence the slave in his native land became of\ngreater interest and concern. The native owner ceased to kill for food\nthe slave whose exportation would produce him a much greater quantity.\nHis passions were curbed by the loss their indulgence occasioned. The\nsacrifice was stayed by a less expensive, but, in his estimation, a more\nvaluable offering.\n\nThe object of our present inquiry is, whether the slavery of the African\ntribes to the followers of Mohammed is at all recognised or alluded to\nby the inspired writers. The fact exists, nor can it be contested,\nalthough the condition of the African slave is far more degraded among\nthe Asiatics and Arabians than among the Christians, but that even there\nit is far more elevated than in his native land. \u201cBlessed be the Lord\nGod of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant.\u201d _Gen._ ix. 26. The\nprophet Daniel was a captive the greater portion of his life, in the\nvery region of country, and among the ancestors of the Mohammedans of\nthe present day, and, of all the prophets, the most to have been\nexpected to have been endowed with prophetic gifts in relation to that\ncountry and its future condition. It is proper also to remark that\nalthough there is in many instances among the Mohammedans of the present\nday a mixture of Japhanese descent, yet their main stock is well known\nto be Shemitic. It should also be noticed that the Shemites have at all\ntimes more frequently amalgamated with the descendants of Ham than those\nof Japhet, consequently more liable to moral and physical deterioration;\nand here, indeed, we find a reason why it was announced that Japhet\nshould possess the tents of Shem.\n\n_Dan._ viii. 9: \u201cAnd out of one of them came forth a little horn, which\nwaxed exceeding great towards the south, and towards the east, and\ntowards the pleasant land. 10. And it waxed great, even to the host of\nheaven, and it cast down some of the host of the stars to the ground,\nand stamped upon them. 11. Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince\nof the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the\nplace of his sanctuary was cast down. 12. And an host was given him\nagainst the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down\nthe truth to the ground, and it practised and prospered. 23. And in the\nlatter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the\nfull, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences,\nshall stand up. 24. And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own\npower: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and\npractise, and shall destroy the mighty and holy people. 25. And through\nhis policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand, and he\nshall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he\nshall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be\nbroken without hand.\u201d\n\n_Dan._ xi. 40: \u201cAnd at the time of the end shall the king of the south\npush at him, and the king of the north shall come against him like a\nwhirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships, and he\nshall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over. 41. He\nshall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be\noverthrown; but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom and Moab,\nand the chief of the children of Ammon. 42. He shall stretch forth his\nhand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape.\n43. But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver,\nand over all the precious things of Egypt, and the Libyans and the\nEthiopians shall be at his steps.\u201d\n\nOf the language used by this prophet, it is proper to remark that there\nare many variations from the more ancient Hebrew, both as to form of\nexpression and the particular words used, among which Arabicisms and\nAramacisms are quite common. Faber supposes that this remarkable vision\nrelates to the history of Mohammedanism: no previous theory has been\nsatisfactory to the Christian world, and it is now generally believed\nthat he has suggested a correct interpretation. We may therefore be\nallowed to follow him in considering it as descriptive of the rise and\nprogress of that religion.\n\nMohammed was born at Mecca. His education was contracted, and his\nyounger days devoted to commercial and warlike pursuits. By his marriage\nwith the widow of an opulent merchant, he rose to distinction in his\nnative city. For several years he frequently retired into the cave of\nHera and cherished his enthusiastic sentiments, till, at the age of\nforty, he stated that he had held communication with the angel Gabriel,\nand was appointed a prophet and apostle of God. In 612, he publicly\nannounced to his relations and friends that he had ascended through\nseven heavens to the very throne of Deity, under the guidance of\nGabriel, and had received the salutations of patriarchs, prophets, and\nangels. This monstrous statement, however, did not succeed, except with\na very few; and on the death of his uncle Abn Taleb, who had been his\npowerful protector, he was compelled, in 622, to seek security by flight\nto Medina. This henceforth became the epoch of Mohammedan chronology;\nhis power was more consolidated, and his influence extended by a large\naccession of deluded, but determined followers. He very soon professed\nto have received instructions from the angel Gabriel to propagate his\nreligion by the sword; and power made him a persecutor. In seven years\nhe became the sovereign of Mecca, and this led to the subjugation of all\nArabia, which was followed by that of Syria. In less than a century from\nthe period of its rise in the barren wilds of Arabia, the Mohammedan\nreligion extended over the greater part of Asia and Africa, and\nthreatened to seat itself in the heart of Europe.\n\nThe unity of God was the leading article of Mohammed\u2019s creed. When\naddressing the Jews, he professed highly to honour Abraham, Moses, and\nthe prophets, and admitted, for the sake of conciliating Christians,\nthat Jesus was the Messiah of the Jews, and will be the judge of all.\nThis compromising policy is seen in the Koran.\n\nMohammedan morals enforce many principles of justice and benevolence,\nand inculcate a degree of self-denial, but, at the same time, permit the\nindulgence of some of the strongest passions of our nature. The\nrepresentations given of paradise are adapted to gratify the sensuality\nof men,\u2014and of hell, to awaken their fears of disobeying the Koran or\nthe prophet. \u201cEastern Christendom,\u201d says Mr. Foster, \u201cat once the parent\nand the prey of hydra-headed heresy, demanded and deserved precisely the\ninflictions which the rod of a conquering heresiarch could bestow. The\nking of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, well\nexpresses the character of Mohammed and his religion.\u201d \u201cMohammed,\u201d says\nGibbon, \u201cwith the sword in one hand, and the Koran in the other, erected\nhis throne on the ruins of Christianity and of Rome. The genius of the\nArabian prophet, the manners of his nation, and the spirit of his\nreligion involve the causes of the decline and fall of the Eastern\nempire, and our eyes are curiously intent on one of the most memorable\nrevolutions which impressed a new and lasting character on the nations\nof the globe.\u201d\n\nHis first efforts were directed against the Jews, who refused to receive\nMohammed\u2019s effusions as the revelations of heaven, and, in consequence,\nsuffered the loss of their possessions and lives.\n\n\u201cWhen Christian churches,\u201d says Scott, \u201cwere converted into mosques, the\n\u2018daily sacrifice\u2019 might be said to be taken away,\u201d (viii. 11, 12,) and\nthe numbers of nominal Christians who were thus led to apostatize, and\nof real Christians and ministers who perished by the sword of this\nwarlike, persecuting power, fulfilled the prediction that he cast down\nsome of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped on them. It\nis said that \u201ca host was given him against the daily sacrifice,\u201d (or\nworship of the Christian church, corresponding with the Jewish\nsanctuary,) \u201cby reason of transgression.\u201d A rival priesthood subverted\nthe priesthood of a degenerate church. The imams of Mohammed assumed the\nplace of the apostate teachers of Christianity. The event here predicted\nwas to occur in the latter part of the Grecian empire, (ver. 23,) \u201cwhen\nthe transgressors are come to the full.\u201d\n\nHistory relates that the remains of the Eastern empire and the power of\nthe Greek church were overthrown by Mohammedans. Their chief endeavoured\nto diffuse his doctrine, but found that it could not prevail by \u201cits own\npower,\u201d or the inherent moral strength of the system: it was requisite\nto support his pretensions by \u201ccraft\u201d and \u201cpolicy.\u201d Mohammed sanctioned\nas much of the inspired Scriptures as he thought might tend to obviate\nthe prejudices of the Jews, and incorporated as much of his own system\nwith the errors of the Eastern church as might tend to conciliate Greek\nChristians.\n\n\u201cAlthough Mohammedism did not first spring up in the Macedonian empire,\nyet it now spread from Arabia to Syria, and occupied locally, as well as\nauthoritatively, the ancient dominion of the he-goat.\u201d (_Scott._) It has\nbeen remarked, however, by Mr. Foster, (Mohammedism Unveiled,) that the\npart of Arabia which included the native country of Mohammed, composed\nan integral province both of the empire of Alexander and of the\nPtolemean kingdom of Egypt. Ptolemy had Egypt, Syria, Arabia,\nC\u00e6lo-syria, and Palestine. The sovereignties of Egypt and Syria, before\ncalled the king of the south and the king of the north, disappeared when\nthey were absorbed in the Roman empire, and the new power, or the\nSaracen and Turkish empires, that succeeded, are now brought to view.\nBut let it be observed, that the Saracens became masters of Egypt, the\noriginal territory of the king of the south, and the Turks possessed\nSyria, or the kingdom of the north, and still retain it. \u201cThe king of\nthe south shall push at him.\u201d The power of Rome was overthrown in the\neast by the Saracens. This was the first wo of the revelation, which was\nto pass away after three hundred years. The Turks then came, a whirlwind\nof northern barbarians, and achieved a lasting conquest, in a day, of\nthe Asiatic provinces of the Roman empire. The line of march was along\nthe north of Palestine, and the Turkish monarch entered only to pass\nthrough and overflow: \u201che entered into the glorious land;\u201d for, as\nGibbon has stated it, the most interesting conquest of the Seljukian\nTurks was that of Jerusalem, which soon became the theatre of nations.\n\u201cBut Edom and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon escaped out\nof his hand.\u201d Even when all the regions round owned the Turkish sway,\nthese retained their detached and separate character, and even received\ntribute from the pilgrims as they passed to the shrines of Mecca and\nMedina. Thus they have escaped and maintained their independence of the\nPorte. A race of monarchs arose to stretch out their hand upon the\ncountries. Othman, Amurath, Bajazet, and Mohammed conquered nation after\nnation, and finally fixed the seat of their empire at Constantinople.\nThe land of Egypt \u201cdid not escape;\u201d it was indeed the last to yield;\nbut, though its forces had vanquished both Christians and Turks, it was\nat length subdued by Selim I. in 1517, and came into possession of the\nOttomans. (_Cox, on Daniel._) And it may be here remarked, as a fact of\nwell-known history, that the countries known as Libya and Ethiopia have,\nat all ages of the world, supplied this country with slaves, whoever may\nhave borne rule, and still continue to do the same. Thousands from the\ninterior of Africa are yearly transplanted from the slavery of their\nnative land into those countries now under Mohammedan rule. And it may\nbe well here for the Christian philanthropist to notice, that so far as\nthe slave-trade with Africa has ceased with Christian nations, to the\nsame extent it has substantially increased with Mohammedan countries.\n\n\u201cAnd the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps,\u201d\u2014a form of\nspeech as clearly indicating the condition of slavery as though ever so\nbroadly asserted. The Hebrew word here translated \u201cat his steps,\u201d\n\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05de\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05d9\u05d5 _in his footsteps_, &c., i. e. attached or subjected to\nhis interests as slaves, is cognate with the Arabic word \u0645\u0650\u0635\u0639\u0627\u062f\u064c\n_metsuad_, and means the chains by which the feet of captive slaves are\nbound, and in Hebrew form this word is used in _Isa._ iii. 20, \u05e6\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05d3\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea\u0599\n_tseadoth_. The whole passage is strictly an Arabicism, and is to be\nconstrued, with reference to that language, _chain for the legs_. Of\nthis passage, Adam Clark says, \u201c_Unconquered Arabs_ all sought their\nfriendship, and many of them are tributary to the present time.\u201d Some\ncommentators seem to understand this passage to mean only that Libyans\nand Ethiopians would be in courteous attendance, &c. If so, the Hebrew\nwould have read, as in _Judg._ iv. 10, \u05e8\u05b6\u05d2\u05bc\u05dc _regel_. \u201cAnd he went up\nwith ten thousand men _at his feet_.\u201d This passage, foretelling the\nslavery of the Ethiopians to the Mohammedans, may well be compared with\n_Isa._ xlv. 14, announcing the slavery of the same people to those of\nthe true religion. \u201cThus saith the Lord, the labour of Egypt and the\nmerchandise of Ethiopia and of the Sabeans, men of stature, shall come\nover unto thee, and they shall be thine; they shall come after thee, in\nchains they shall come over, and they shall fall down unto thee; they\nshall make supplication unto thee, saying, Surely God is in thee, and\nthere is none else, there is no God\u201d _beside_.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XXIV.\n\nIn reflection upon the leading ideas that present themselves in the\nreview of the subjects of this study, we may notice that slavery has\nbeen introduced to the world as a mercy in favour of life. That, in its\noperation, its general tendency is to place the weak, deteriorated, and\ndegraded under the control and government of a wisdom superior to their\nown; from whence the intellectual, moral, and physical improvement of\nthe enslaved, to some extent, is a consequence as certain as that cause\nproduces its effect.\n\nThe world never has, nor will it ever witness a case where the moral,\nintellectual, and physical superior has been in slavery, as a fixed\nstate, to an inferior race or grade of human life. The law giving\nsuperior rule and government to the moral, intellectual, and physical\nsuperior is as unchangeable as the law of gravitation. No seeming\nexception can be imagined which does not lend proof of the existence of\nsuch law. The human intellect can make no distinction between the\nestablisher of such law and the author and establisher of all other laws\nwhich we perceive to be established and in operation, and which we\nattribute to God. No one has ever yet denied that obedience to the laws\nof God effects and produces mental and physical benefits to the\nobedient, or that their disregard and contempt are necessarily followed\nby a deterioration of the condition of the disobedient; nor can any one\ndeny that the neglect of obedience to the laws of God, which, in its\nproduct, yields to the disobedient mental and physical deterioration, or\nany one of them, is sin,\u2014and in proportion to its magnitude, so will be\nits consequent degradation. To be degraded is sin, because the law is\nimprove. No one will pretend that the relation of master and slave is\nnot often attended with sin on the part of the master, on the account of\nhis disobedience to the law of God in his government of his slave; or on\nthe part of the slave, on the account of his disobedience to the same\nlaw in his conduct towards his master. Therefore, such master is not as\nmuch benefited, not the slave as much improved by the relation, as would\notherwise be the case. It is therefore incumbent on the master to search\nout and exclude all such abuses from the intercourse and reciprocal\nduties between him and his slave. Placed upon him is the responsible\ncharge of governing both himself and his slave. The responsibility of\nthe master in this respect is of the same order as that of a guardian\nand that of a parent.\n\nThe want of a less affectionate regard in the master towards the slave\nis supplied and secured to the safety of the slave by the increased\nwatchfulness of the master over the slave from the consideration that\nthe slave is his property. For where affection cannot be supposed\nsufficiently strong to stimulate a calm and wise action, interest steps\nin to produce the effect.\n\nThat every mind will see and comprehend these truths, where prejudice\nand education are in contradiction, is not to be expected. The\ninfluences of a false philosophy on the mind, like stains of crime on\nthe character, are often of difficult removal. Some forbearance towards\nthose who honestly entertain opposing ideas on this subject, can never\ndisgrace the Christian character,\u2014and we think it particularly the duty\nof the men of the South, towards the men, women, and children of the\nNorthern States, especially of the unlearned classes. For even among\nourselves of the South, we sometimes hear the announcement of doctrines\nthat declare all the most rabid fanatic at the North need claim, on the\nsubject of immediate abolition. We refer to and quote from Walker\u2019s\nReports of Cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Mississippi, at the\nJune term, 1818, page 42: \u201cSlavery is condemned by reason and the laws\nof nature.\u201d This false and suicidal assertion, most unnecessarily and\nirrelevantly introduced, still stands on the records of the Supreme\nCourt of that State, and is an epitaph of the incapacity and stupidity\nof him who wrote it and engraved it on this monument of Southern\nheedlessness. We were at first surprised at the silence of the reporter,\nbut, at that day, any criticism by that officer would have been\ncontempt. Yet we may infer that the ingenious and talented gentleman\ncontrived to express his most expunging reprobation, by wholly omitting\nall allusion to the point in his syllabus of the case.\n\nIf in the course of these Studies we shall not have shown that slavery\nas it exists in the world is commanded by \u201creason\u201d and the laws of\n\u201cnature,\u201d we shall have laboured in vain; and even now an array of\nbattle is formed, and our enemy has chosen human \u201creason\u201d for the \u201cbolt\nof Jove,\u201d as wrought from strands of Northern colds, Southern heats, and\nEastern winds; in their centre, bound by cloudy fears and avenging\nfires; for their \u00e6gis, \u201c_the laws of nature_\u201d supply Minerva\u2019s shield,\nupon which fanaticism has already inscribed its government over thirty\nStates, far exceeding in purity, they think, that of the God of Israel.\nAnd we have come up to the war!\u2014armed neither with the rod of Hermes nor\nthe arrows of Latona\u2019s son; but with a word from him of Bethlehem:\n\u201cSanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n                  ------------------------------------\n\n                                Study V.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON I.\n\nThe inquirer after truth has two sources by which he can arrive at some\nknowledge of the will of God:\u20141st. By faith and revelation; 2d. By the\nobservance of the facts uniformly developed in the material and moral\nworld. The accuracy of his knowledge will be coincident with the\naccuracy of the mental perceptions and the extent of the research of the\ninquirer.\n\nIn the Bible he will find the declarations of God himself: some of them\nare express, and some of them implied.\n\nIn the second place, he may discover the will of God from the\narrangement of his works as manifested in the visible world. Some call\nthis the light of nature; others the laws of nature. But what do they\nmean other than the light and laws of God? Are not the laws of\ngravitation as much the laws of God as they would be if set down in the\ndecalogue, although not as important to man in his primary lessons of\nmoral duty?\n\nLet us view the forest as planted by the hand of God: we see some trees\nmade to push their tall boughs far above the rest; while others, of\ninferior stem and height, seem to require the partial shade and\nprotection of their more lofty neighbours; others, of still inferior and\ndwarfish growth, receive and require the full and fostering influence of\nthe whole grove, that their existence may be protected and their organs\nfully developed for use.\n\nLet us view the tribes of ocean, earth, and air: we behold a regular\ngradation of power and rule, from man down to the atom.\n\n           Whether with reason or with instinct blest,\n           All enjoy that power that suits them best:\n           Order is Heaven\u2019s first law; and this confess\u2019d,\n           Some are, and must be, greater than the rest\u2014\n           More rich, more wise; but who infers from hence\n           That such are happier, shocks all common sense.\n           Heaven to mankind impartial we confess,\n           If all are equal in their happiness;\n           But mutual wants this happiness increase.\n           All nature\u2019s difference, keeps all nature\u2019s peace:\n           Condition, circumstance, is not the thing;\n           Bliss is the same, in subject, or in king!\n                                              POPE\u2019S _Essay_.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON II.\n\nThey who study even only such portion of the works of God as can,\nseemingly, to some extent be examined by the human mind, never fail to\ndiscover a singular affinity between all things, the creation of his\nhand. This, to us, would be proof, independent of inspiration, that one\nCreator made the whole world and all things therein.\n\nSo great is the affinity between the vegetable and animal kingdoms, that\nit is to this day a doubt where the one terminates or where the other\nbegins. Naturalists all agree that they both spring from \u201cslightly\ndeveloped forms, perhaps varied, yet closely connected;\u201d true, \u201cstarting\naway in different directions of life,\u201d but ever preserving, it may be an\nobscure, yet a strict analogy to each other.\n\nThese analogies are sufficiently obvious to prove that one power, one\nand the same general law, has brought them both into existence. Thus the\ndevout worshipper of God may, in some sense, view the vegetable\ninhabitants of the earth as his brethren.\n\nThe animal kingdom may be considered as divisible into five groups. The\nvertebreta, annulosa, (the articulata of Cuvier,) the radiata, the\nacrita, (in part the radiata of Cuvier,) and the molusca.\n\nEach one of these groups will be found divisible into five classes. Let\nus take, for example, the vertebreta, and it is readily divided into the\nmammalia, reptilia, pisces, amphibia, and aves.\n\nSo each one of these classes is divisible into five orders. Let us take,\nfor example, the mammalia; and it is readily divided into the\ncheirotheria, (animals with more or less perfect hands,) fer\u00e6, cetacea,\nglires, and ungulata.\n\nSo each one of these orders is divisible into five genera. Let us take,\nfor example, the cheirotheria, and it is readily divided into the bimana\nor homo, the quadrumana or simiad\u00e6, the natatorials or vespertilionid\u00e6,\nthe suctorials or lemurid\u00e6, the rasorials or cebid\u00e6.\n\nSo each one of these genera is divided in five species. Let us take, for\nexample, the bimana or homo, and it is readily divided into the\nCaucasian or Indo-European, the Mongolian, the Malayan, the Indian or\naboriginal American, and the Negro or African.\n\nThus we behold man in his relation to the animal world: true, far in\nadvance as to his physical and mental development; yet the natural\nphilosopher finds traces of all his mental powers among the inferior\nanimals, as does the comparative anatomist those of his physical\nstructure.\n\nDoes he feel degraded by the fact that God has been pleased to order\nthis relation of brotherhood with the lower orders of creation? Or will\nhe for ever suffer his pride to hedge up the way of progress by the\nimpassable darkness of his own ignorance.\n\nThe uniformity of these penta-legal ramifications, which reach down from\nman through all the orders and groups of the animal world, gives\nevidence of a preconceived design\u2014of an arrangement by Almighty power\u2014of\na God whose thought is law!\u2014while the analogy of animal formation, the\ntraces of affinity in the mental qualities found in all, in proportion\nas those qualities are more or less developed, and the apparent\nadaptation of each one to the condition in which it is found,\ndemonstrate the unity of the law which governs their physical being.\n\nThese analogies, found to exist between all the individuals of the\nanimal world, and particularly striking and more and more obvious as we\nproceed from a particular group to its genera and species, have led some\nphilosophers to suppose that the more perfectly developed species have\nbeen progressively produced by some instance of an improved development,\nas an offshoot from the genera, and so on back to its original form of\nanimal life, in obedience to the laws of the great First Cause. But we\nwish to disturb no man\u2019s philosophy. We deem it of little importance to\nus what method God pursued in the creation of our species; whether we\nwere spoken instantly into life, as was the light, or whether ages were\nspent in reproducing improved developments from the earlier forms of\nanimal life.\n\nIn either case we see nothing contradictory to the inspired writings of\nMoses. Man is as much the creation of God through one means as another.\nThe wisdom and power required are the same; for his existence alone\ndemonstrates him to be the work of a God. The fact of the existence of\nthese analogies is alone what we propose to notice. And we offer them\nmerely as indications of a course of study that may lead to some\nimportant results in elucidation of the mental and physical relations\nbetween the different varieties of man.\n\nIn further illustration, let us for a moment look at the bovine species,\nfrom the genus ruminantia, from the order ungulata, and we find the ox,\nthe bison, the buffalo, the elk, and the goat.\n\nLike the five species of homo, we find the bovine species divided into a\ngreat number of families or varieties, of which we need take no further\nnotice. Does any one fail to perceive the analogy between these species\nof the bos? Are they more obscure, more aberrant than are the relations\nbetween the species of man? Examine the high physical development of the\nmost intellectual Caucasian; trace down the line to the diminutive and\nill-formed cannibal savage of Africa, the habits and mental development\nof whom would seem rather allied to the lower orders of animals than to\nthe Caucasian! How will it comport with the general laws manifested by\nthe condition of the animal world and of the obvious inferiority and\ninfluence of one over another, in proportion to their apparent\nsuperiority in physical and mental development, to place the lowest\ngrade of the African in equal power or in control of the Caucasian\nbrother? Is there any manifestation of the Creator of an arrangement\nlike this, even through the eternity of his own work?\n\nOn the contrary, through the whole animal race, we find power and\ncontrol lodged everywhere in proportion as we find an advance towards\nperfection in the development bestowed.\n\nIn conformity to this law, God gave Adam \u201cdominion\u201d over every living\nthing that moved upon earth.\n\nIt is known to most men, that, under certain circumstances, the race of\nany animal will improve: so also, under adverse, they degenerate. We see\nthese facts daily in the breeds of domestic animals. We see these\nchanges even in the families of all the species of man. Nor is it a\nmatter of the least importance to our inquiry, whether these species of\nthe race have been produced by an upward movement from the lowest, or a\ndownward degenerating movement from the most elevated. It is sufficient\nthat they exist from some cause; for an individual having been, say an\nequal, but now degenerate, falls under the influence and control of his\nsuperior. And in conformity to this law, it was announced to Eve, the\nhelpmate of Adam, that \u201che shall rule over thee.\u201d\n\nBut if these particles of inspiration had never been proclaimed, man\nwould have discovered this law from its constant operation, not only on\nthe family of man, but on every branch of the animal world.\n\nWe can spend but little time with such infidel principles as lead some\nmen to say, \u201cDown with your Bible that teaches slavery.\u201d \u201cIf the\nreligion of Jesus Christ allows slavery, the New Testament is the\ngreatest curse that could be inflicted on man.\u201d \u201cDown with your God who\nupholds slavery; he shall be no God of mine.\u201d \u201cJesus Christ was himself\na negro!\u201d Our hearts bleed when we see such evidence of a destroyed\nintellect. The maniac in his ravings excites our extreme sorrow. We feel\nno harshness. He has sunk far below resentment. Can we administer to\nsuch mental deformity any relief? Will it be absurd to ask him to deduce\nfrom nature, as it is found to operate, that the various grades of\nsubjection spread through the animal world exist in conformity to the\nnatural law?\n\nBut, says the querist, \u201cYour remarks have a tendency towards the\nconclusion,\u2014upon the supposition that Adam was created with a perfect,\nor rather with a very high order of physical organization and mental\ndevelopment,\u2014that the facts of the greater or less degeneration of the\npeople of the world, since his fall, now exhibited by the different\nspecies of man upon the earth, had their origin in his transgression.\nNow, by parity of argument, we may conclude, if such high physical\nelevation was the original condition of Adam, that each genus of the\nbrute creation also was originally created on a proportional scale. If\nso, their degeneration is quite as visible as that of man. Yet we have\nno account that they committed sin and \u2018fell.\u2019\u201d\n\nWe do not say that such was the original condition of the first man. We\nsay, the creation of the animal world was upon principles compatible\nwith progressive improvement; and that as far as these principles are\nnot obeyed, but changed or reversed by the practice of the animal world,\nthat the effect is to remain stationary, or to retrograde and\ndeteriorate.\n\nIt is a matter of no importance to our argument what was the first\ncondition of Adam. But allow it to be as querist has stated: We answer,\nthe Bible was given to man for his moral government; not to teach him\ngeology, chemistry, or other sciences. Such matters were left for him to\nattain by progressive improvement. A minute history of the brute\ncreation, or any portion of it, from the earliest dawn of animal life up\nto the time of revelation, other than the announcement of their creation\nand subjection to him, was irrelevant. But man was the very head and\ngovernor of the whole animal race. Now, who is to say that the\ndegeneration of the ruler will not produce a change of conduct in the\nruled? Who is to say that the poisoned moral feeling of him in command,\nbreaking forth in acts of violence on all around, will not produce a\ncorresponding effect on the animate objects under him? Witness the\neffect, we need not say on children, but on domestic animals, of the\nrash, cruel, and crazy treatment of a wicked and inconsistent man?\n\nThe idea that the brute creation were injured in condition by the fall\nof man is put forth by St. Paul, in _Rom._ viii. 9\u201322, where the word\n\u201ccreature\u201d is translated from the Greek term that implies the whole\nanimal or the whole created world. But no answer to querist is\nnecessary. The fact is sufficient that animals, under habits ill-adapted\nto their organization, do degenerate.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON III.\n\nHowever insensible individuals themselves may be of the fact, some men,\nand those of quite different character, find it unpleasant to submit\nthemselves to the great Author of animal life. For they, in substance,\nmake a continual inquiry, How is it to be reconciled that a Being so\nperfectly good should have admitted into the midst of his works, as a\nconstant attendant of all his sentient creations, so large an admixture\nof what we call evil?\n\nWe might continue the inquiry by adding, Why, in a mere drop of water,\ndo we find the animalcul\u00e6 manifesting all the agonies and repeating the\noutrages upon one another strikingly visible among the larger animal\ndevelopments of the great ocean and of the land? Why such an admixture\nof pain and misery among men? Why the male of all animals making\ndestructive war on their kind? Why exterminating wars among men? And why\nthe numberless, nameless evils everywhere spread through the world?\n\nAnd do we forget that the great Creator of animal life brought forth his\nworks and sustains each thing by the unchangeable exercise of his laws?\nLaws which are found to have a direct tendency to progressive\nimprovement? Will rational beings expect God to change their actions to\nsuit their disregard of them? Will fire cease to burn because we may\nchoose to thrust in the hand? And what if, even in all this, we shall\ndiscover his wisdom and goodness by making what we may call punishment\nfor the breach of the law, a pulling back from deeper misery, a powerful\nstimulus for a change of direction from a downward to an upward movement\nin the path of progressive improvement? Do we find no satisfaction in\nthis view of the constitution of nature, of the wisdom of God?\n\nThese men seem desirous that the works of God should have been on a\ndifferent footing, or that every thing should have been at once perfect\nto the extent of his power. Would they then desire to be his equal too?\nBut, at least as to man, the mind incapable of error, the body of\nsuffering! It is possible that under such a dispensation, our mental\nenjoyments would have been on a par with a mathematical axiom, and our\nbodies have about as much sympathy for the things around them as has a\nlump of gold. And how do they know that the rocks, minerals, and trees,\nyea, the starry inhabitants of the firmament, are not the exact\nmanifestations of what would have been creations of that order? We will\nnot stop here to inquire how far the complaints of these men operate to\ntheir own mental and physical injury.\n\nIt is a great popular error to suppose all of our own species to be born\nequals. It involves the proposition that each one also possesses the\nsame faculties and powers, and to the same extent. Even every\nwell-informed nursery-maid is furnished with a good refutation. The\ngrades of physical development are proofs of grades of mind.\n\nThrough the whole animal world, as with man, mental action takes place,\nproviding for the sustenance and security of life; and the amount of\nmental power each one possesses is ever in proportion to the development\nof the nervous system and animal structure. Upon this earth, the highest\ngrade of such development is found among the Caucasian species of man.\nPhysiologists assert that the African exhibits, in maturity, the\nimperfect brain &c. of a Caucasian f\u0153tus some considerable time before\nits birth: so the Malay and Indian, the same at a period nearer birth;\nwhile the Mongolian, that of the infant lately born. See _Lloyd\u2019s\nPopular Physiology_. The _beard_, among men the attribute of a full\nmaturity, largest in the Caucasian, is scarcely found among the lower\ngrades of the African.\n\nColour is also found darkest where the development is the least perfect,\nand the most distant from the Caucasian; and hence a philosopher of\ngreat learning makes the question pertinent, \u201cMay not colour then depend\non development also? Development being arrested at so immature a stage\nin the case of the negro, the skin may take on the colour as an\nunavoidable consequence of its imperfect organization.\u201d The different\nspecies and all the varieties of man are nothing but a short history of\ntheir different grades of organization and development. One fraction, by\na long and more or less strict observance of the laws of nature,\nbecomes, after many generations, quite improved in its organization.\nFrom an opposite course, another fraction has degenerated and sunk into\ndegradation. It is now a well-known fact that Caucasian parents too\nnearly related exhibit offspring of the Mongolian type. So, a particular\ntribe of Arabs, now on the banks of the Jordan, from an _in-and-in_\npropagation have become scarcely to be distinguished from Negroes. This\nis only an instance, but is important when we notice the deteriorating\ninfluence such intercourse has among domestic animals. In short, every\nbreach of the laws tending to the path of progressive improvement must\nhave a deteriorating effect on the offspring. There was truth in the\nancient adage, \u201cThe fathers have eaten sour grapes and the children\u2019s\nteeth are set on edge.\u201d\n\nEvery private habit and circumstance in life that enervates or deranges\nthe physical system, or disturbs the balance of the mind, stamps its\nimpress on the descendant. The moral and physical condition of the\nprogeny, with slight exceptions the result of an elevating and upward\nmovement, or a downward and deteriorating one, (as the case may be,) is\nthe necessary result of the moral and physical condition of the\nparentage: and this influence is doubtless felt back for many\ngenerations.\n\nBut does God make man wicked? does he predestine to evil? These queries\nmay seem pertinent to some, because we are in the habit of considering\neach individual by itself; whereas each individual is only a link in the\nchain of phenomena, which owe their existence to laws productive of\ngood, and even of progressive improvement, but of necessity, in their\nbreach, admit these evils, because such breach is sin. Our moral\nfaculties are permitted to range in a wide field; but evil is the result\nof a disruption of the rules of action. It is the flaming sword elevated\nto guard our good, showing us the awful truth, the mere bad habit in the\nparent may become a constitutional inherent quality in the off spring.\n\nWe do not suppose these influences always very perceptibly immediate.\nMany generations are doubtless often required in the full development of\nan upward movement to a higher order of moral perception; and so in the\nopposite. Yet we cannot forbear to notice how often the immediate\ndescendant is quite apt to prove its parentage.\n\nWill the theologian object\u2014\u201cYou contradict the Scripture. You make five\nspecies of man. Whereas they are all the descendants of Noah.\u201d Have we\nnot shown ample ground and time for their formation from his stock?\nBesides, we expect hereafter to prove by Scripture that Ham took a wife\nfrom the degenerate race of Cain; which, if so, would alone place his\ndescendants in the attitude of inferiority and subjection.\n\nNo! but we advertise the theologian that we shall take the Scripture for\nour platform. We believe it, and hope to even hold him close to it.\n\nBut we now ask for the reflection of all, does not the degenerate man,\ndegraded in constitution below the possibility of his emerging from the\ndepth to which he has sunk, by any self-renovating power, still\nlingering about his reduced condition, require the aid of one of\nsuperior nature, of superior organization and mental development, to act\nas his adviser, protector, and master? Would not such a provision be a\nmerciful one?\n\nAnd may we not also inquire, whether the superior endowments here\nrequired do not also require to be exercised in bearing rule over the\nwayward energies of those more degenerate, as a necessary element in the\nschool to a higher advance? And shall we not perceive that such a\nrelation must produce a vast amount of improvement and happiness to\nboth?\n\nChildren and inferior persons often show themselves, upon the slightest\ntemptation, false and cruel,\u2014often the inheritance of parental\nimperfection. Absolute command, sustained by physical force, has alone\nbeen found sufficient to eradicate these old, and to found new habits of\ntruthfulness and humanity.\n\nTrue, the Scripture asserts that all men are equal in the sight of God,\njust as a father feels an equal parental regard for all his children.\nThe philosophic mind cannot well conceive otherwise than that God feels\nan equal regard for all parts of his creation; for \u201cThe glory of the\nLord shall endure for ever: the Lord shall rejoice in his work.\u201d But\nthis view reaches not the physical fact; for the father hesitates not to\nplace a guardian over his wayward child, or disinherit the utterly\nworthless. So God \u201cturneth man to destruction; and sayeth, Return, ye\nchildren of men.\u201d And how gladly would the parent provide the fatted\ncalf for the worthless son upon his return to honour and virtue! So\nthere is more joy in heaven over the return of one sinner than over\nninety-nine who have not gone astray.\n\nThe mercy of God shines upon the world in floods of celestial light; for\nChristianity, in its passports to heaven, judges all men by their own\nacts. Therefore, the most degraded nature, upon a sight of its\ndeformity, may feel an unchangeable regret, and inherit its portion.\n\nHere Christianity itself points the way to progressive improvement, and\ncommands children to obey their parents, wives their husbands, and\nservants their masters.\n\nThe grace of God is as openly manifested in the welfare of the child or\nslave, when produced through the interposition of the parent or master,\nas if the interposition had been more immediate.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IV.\n\nIntellect is not found to exist only in connection with a corresponding\nphysical organization. In the family of man, if that which may appear a\ngood organization is accompanied by an inferior intellect, we may\nsuspect our nice accuracy of discernment, rather than a discrepancy in\nthe operation of the general law; so also where we may seem to perceive\na good intellect, but which produces inferior or unworthy results. We do\nnot always notice the small steps of degeneration. Often the first\nnotice we take is of the fact of a changed condition, as proved by the\nresults: \u201cBy their fruits ye shall know them.\u201d\n\nThe idea that intellect and mental development can be independent of\nphysical organization is an absurdity. A suppressed or incomplete\norganization must arrest a further enlargement of the mental faculties.\nThese faculties may be improved, brought into action, or even their\naction to some extent suppressed, by government and culture. Such indeed\nare the guides to progressive improvement. EXPLANATION:\u2014_Man has no\norganization by which he could build a honey-comb like a bee._ Will any\nculture applied to him teach him? _Man has no organization by which he\ncan closely examine spiritual existences_: his ideas about them are\ntherefore variant and confused. Who will arrange their study into a\nscience? _Man has no organization by which he can fully comprehend God._\nWill he ever do so in his present state?\n\nAre, then, the actions of the child, and of those persons whose mental\ndevelopment has been arrested at a very early stage, (as has been\nsupposed the case with the lower orders of animals, and of those animals\nthemselves,) the result of some faculty or mental power different from\nmind? The result of instinct? And what is instinct but mind in the early\ndawn of its development? Are not such actions as the chick breaking its\nshell, the young-born infant receiving its natural food, the necessary\nconsequents of the state of their infantile organization, which the\nearliest development of mind could prompt and enable them to put forth;\nand will it be deemed beyond the reach of reason, to prove that with the\ndifference of maturity in organization and development, the same general\nconnection of mind and organization is found, through the entire of life\nas well as infancy?\n\nPhilosophers have, with indefatigable labour, endeavoured to enlighten\nthe world on the subject of instinct. Can we be pardoned if we suggest\nthat their theories on this subject signally prove they were but men?\nDes Cartes says\u2014\u201cBrutes are machines without sensation or ideas; that\ntheir actions are the result of external force, as the sound of an organ\nis the result of the air being forced through the pipes.\u201d This is his\n\u201cinstinct.\u201d If this be true, then it follows that every action in the\nmaterial world is instinct. Then the thunder utters its voice, the earth\nquakes, and the telegraph works by \u201cinstinct.\u201d Yet, his theory has found\nan advocate in that very classical Latin poem, \u201cAnti Lucretius,\u201d by\nCardinal Polignac.\n\nDr. Reid sustains the mechanical nature of brutes, but classifies their\nactions into those of habit and those of instinct.\n\nDr. Darwin says that instinct is mental, and that the actions of brutes\nresult from faculties, the same in nature as those of man, but extremely\nlimited. Smellie takes the same view. Yet Darwin asserts that instinct\nis the reason; and Smellie, that reason is the result of instinct.\nCudworth says that instinct is an intermediate power, taking rank\nbetween mind and matter, yet often vibrating from one to the other.\nBuffon contends that brutes possess an _intellectual principle_, by\nwhich they distinguish between pleasure and pain, and desire the one and\nrepel the other. This is his _instinct_.\n\nReimar divides _instinct_ into three classes: _mechanical_, such as the\npulsation of the heart; _representative_, such as result from an\nimperfect kind of memory, and, so far as it is memory, in common with\nmankind; and _spontaneous_, the same as Buffon\u2019s. Cuvier says that\ninstinct consists of ideas that do not result from _sensation_, but flow\ndirectly from the brain! Dupont says that there is no such distinct\nfaculty as instinct. His views are analogous to Darwin and Smellie.\n\nPope, Stahl, and others say, \u201cIt is the divinity that stirs within us.\u201d\n\n              \u201cAnd reason raise o\u2019er instinct as you can,\n              In this \u2019tis God directs, in that \u2019tis man.\u201d\n\nCullen, Hoffman, and others say that _instinct_ is the \u201cvis medicatrix\nnatur\u00e6.\u201d Dr. John Mason Good says that \u201c_instinct is the law of the\nliving principle_,\u201d that \u201c_instinctive actions are the actions of the\nliving principle_.\u201d If so, instinct is as applicable to vegetables as to\nanimals.\n\nDr. Hancock, in his work on the Physical and Moral Relations of\nInstinct, has evidently enlarged on the doctrine of Pope and Stahl. He\nsays instinct is the \u201c_impulse_,\u201d \u201c_the inspiration of the Holy\nSpirit_;\u201d and, in his own words, \u201c_which we can only regard as an\nemanation of Divine wisdom_.\u201d\n\nHe asserts that the lower we descend in the scale of animal organization\nand mental development, the more active and all-pervading over the\nconduct of the animal is instinct! But, nevertheless, holds that\n\u201c_instinct_ is in such animals an _unconscious intelligence_.\u201d We much\nadmire why he did not think proper to cast off from the ancients the\ncharge of a _puerile idolatry_, on the account of their worship of\n_bulls_, _calves_, _alligators_, _snakes_, _beetles_, and _bugs_, for\nthey must have entertained a somewhat similar notion. But the doctor\ngoes further, and says, that as the lower grades of the animal world\nhave this _quality_, in which \u201cthe Divine energy seems to act with most\nunimpeded power,\u201d so the holiest of men has it also, but consciously and\nwillingly, and it then becomes his ruling principle, \u201cDivine counsellor,\nhis never-failing help, a light to his feet, and a lantern to his path.\u201d\n(Page 513.) It is quite evident that the doctor\u2019s instinct is the same\nwith the \u201cunerring conscience,\u201d \u201cthe innate principle of light,\u201d \u201cthe\nmoral sense,\u201d \u201cthe spiritual power,\u201d \u201cthe Divine reason,\u201d \u201cthe internal\nteaching,\u201d \u201cthe perfect light of nature,\u201d and \u201cthe Divine afflatus\u201d of\nthe theologico-abolition speakers and writers of the present day, which,\nthey say, is the gift of God to every man. This strange error of some of\nthese writers we have already had occasion to notice. But it is to be\nregretted, for the good credit of _religious profession_, that they did\nnot acknowledge from whom they borrowed the idea; or, will they at this\nlate day, excuse themselves, and frankly acknowledge they took it, not\nfrom Dr. Hancock, or any other modern, but as a deduction from the\npractices of ancient idolatry?\n\nSince we have ventured an opinion on the subject of instinct, we trust\nforgiveness for the introduction of that of others.\n\nOur desire is to present such considerations as lead to the conclusion\nthat men are born into the world with different physical and mental\naptitudes: in short, that their corporeal and intellectual organizations\nare not of equal power; or, if some prefer the term, that their\n_instincts_ are not of equal extent and activity.\n\nFor substantially, upon a contrary hypothesis, are founded all those\nbeautiful arguments in favour of the entire equality of man. Some whole\nsystems of political justice are founded upon the proposition that there\nis no innate principle; and one class of philosophers argue that, as\nthere is no innate principle, therefore all men are ushered into the\nworld under the circumstance of perfect equality; consequently, all the\ninequality afterwards found is the result of usurpation and injustice.\n\nDo they forget that organization itself is innate, and that different\norganizations must direct the way through different paths? But these\nphilosophers still persist that there is no such disparity among the\nhuman race whereby the inferiority of one man shall necessarily place\nhim in subjection to another. This doctrine is perhaps confuted by\npractice better than by argument. Counsellor Quibble saw his client\nStultus in the stocks, on which he cries out, \u201cIt is contrary to law.\nThe court has no such power. They cannot do it.\u201d Nevertheless, Stultus\nis still in the stocks! But what would it avail, even if all men were\nborn equals? Could they all stand in the same footsteps, do the same\nthings, think the same thoughts, and be resolved into a unit? Who does\nnot perceive the contrary?\u2014but that from their birth they must stand in\ndifferent footsteps, walk in different paths, think different things,\nand, in the journey of life, arrive at different degrees of wealth,\nhonour, knowledge, and power?\n\nMen organized into some form of government cannot be equal; because the\nvery thing, government, proves the contrary: among perfect equals,\ngovernment is an impossibility. If laws were prescribed, they could\nnever be executed until some of these equals shall have greater power\nthan those who infringe them. Man is never found so holy as to punish\nhimself for his own impulses. Thus the idea of government among equals\nis a silly fiction.\n\nMen without government cannot be equal, because the _strong_ will have\npower over the _weak_.\n\nThe inequality of men is the progenitor of all civil compact. One man is\nstrong, another weak; one wise, another foolish: one virtuous, another\nvicious: each one yielding himself to a place in the compact, all\nacquire additional protection, especially so long as all shall adhere to\nthe terms of the compact. But the compact itself is the result of the\nproposition that the majority shall have more power than the minority,\nbecause they are supposed to have more animal force, and that they hold\nthe evidence of a more lofty mental development. Here has sprung forth\nthe doctrine that _the good of the greater part is the good of the\nwhole_: hence, under this system, an opposing fraction is often\nsacrificed to the ruling power. We must here remark that this doctrine\nwas changed at an early day into, \u201cThe good of the ruling power is the\ngood of the whole.\u201d\n\nAlthough not a part of our study, we may turn aside here to remark that,\nfrom this _monad_ in the composition of the doctrines of government, did\nemanate the idea of all those strange sacrifices that now deform the\npages of ancient idolatry. In its aid the idol divinity vouched its\ninfluence, and the daughter of Ham yielded her new-born to the flaming\nembraces of her god. Even now the ancient sources of the Ganges still\npour down their holy waters, are still drinking in an excessive\npopulation from the arms of the Hindoo mother. Nor is this idea only an\nancient thought; it is not half a century since it was broached in one\nof the European parliaments to so hedge around the institution of\nmarriage with thorny impediments, that none excessively poor could\nlegally propagate. But to our minds these things strangely show forth\nthe facts that prove \u201cmen are not equal.\u201d\n\nBut even the lowest grades yield their obedience, and are protected from\ngreater evils. Even though they may have been so low as to have not been\nable to take any part in the formation of the compact, yet they are as\ncertainly benefited as the most elevated.\n\nSuch has been the condition of the race through all time, while\nfalsehood has often mingled in her ingredients, adding misery to the\ndegradation of man;\u2014for it is truly observable that falsehood has for\never led to deeper degradation, to an increased departure from the laws\nof civil rule. So far as human intellect has threaded its way along the\npath of truth and through the mazes of human depravity, so far has man\nimproved his condition by increasing his knowledge and power,\u2014while a\nreversed condition has ever attended a retrograde movement. May not the\nconclusion then be had, such is the ordinance of God! But equality among\nmen is a chimera, not possible to be reduced to practice, nor desirable\nif it could be. They never were so, nor was it intended they ever should\nbe. Cain and Abel were not equal: God told Cain that if he behaved well,\nhe should have rule over Abel; but if he did not, he should suffer the\nconsequences of sin. \u201cWho art thou that repliest against God? Shall the\nthing formed say unto him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?\nHath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one\nvessel to honour and another to dishonour?\u201d _Rom._ ix. 20, 21. \u201cWho hath\nmade thee to differ one from another?\u201d 1 _Cor._ iv. 7. \u201cAnd the Lord\nsaid unto her, Two nations are in thy womb; and two manner of people\nshall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger\nthan the other people, and the older shall _serve_ (\u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05a5\u05d3 _ya avod_,\n_be a slave to_) the younger.\u201d _Gen._ xxv. 23. See also _Rom._ ix. 12.\nCan the inequality of man be more strongly inculcated? And St. Paul\nseems to suggest that such inequality will exist hereafter. \u201cThere is\none glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of\nthe stars; for as one star differeth from another star in glory, so also\nis the resurrection of the dead.\u201d 1 _Cor._ xv. 41, 42.\n\nThe idea that the souls of men are unequal in a future state of\nexistence seems to be consonant with the faith of most of the Christian\nchurches. \u201cAnd his lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful\nservant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee\nruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. For unto\nevery one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance; but\nfrom him that hath not, shall be taken away even that he hath; and cast\nye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping\nand gnashing of teeth.\u201d _Matt._ xxv. 21, 29, 30.\n\nSome politicians say, government is founded on opinion. Be it so; yet\nopinion is predicated upon the very incidents of men\u2019s conduct, which,\nwhen analyzed, are found to prove their inequality. So also, when, by\nthe aid of the compact formed, one individual holds a part of the\ncommunity in subjection, such extended rule is dependent on the same\nprinciples as the elementary case. The truth is, human society never\nrecedes far from elementary influences, notwithstanding all the\nartificials in government that ever have or ever can be brought into\nuse. The conditions to govern and to be in subjection necessarily imply\nsuperiority and inferiority: change these relative qualities, and the\ncondition of the parties is changed also. But, upon the organization of\nsociety, in all countries and at all times, we find inequality in the\nconditions of men, growing out of their social state; distinctions\nbetween them, affecting their personal considerations, and often\ndisposing of them for life. Thus, in one country a man is born a\nmonarch, in another a priest of the Lord, a prince, a peer, a noble, a\ncommoner, a freeman, a serf, a slave. This arrangement of the conditions\nof social and civil life, from long habit, may well be said to become\nconstitutional, and necessary to the happiness of that society, although\nthereby one may seem forced to be a tinker and another a tailor. Hence\nwe infer, inequality among men is the necessary result of the rules of\ncivil life.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON V.\n\nJustice, as a general term, means all moral duty. One of its rules is,\nthat we should \u201clove our neighbours as ourselves.\u201d Some men have\nconstrued this to include each individual of the human family. Such\nconstruction we deem to be error. The word \u201cneighbour,\u201d as here used,\nincludes those virtues which render one good man acceptable to another\nand to God. \u201cAnd who is my neighbour?\u201d \u201cAnd Jesus answered and said, A\ncertain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves,\nwhich stripped him, and departed, leaving him half dead. And by chance\nthere came down a certain priest that way, and when he saw him, he\npassed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at the\nplace, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. But a\ncertain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw\nhim, he had compassion on him, and went to him and bound up his wounds,\npouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him\nto an inn, and took care of him. And on the morrow, when he departed, he\ntook out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take\ncare of him, and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again I will\nrepay thee.\u201d _Luke_ x. 30\u201336.\n\nWho has given a better definition of the word neighbour? And how shall\nwe esteem him, who, instead of loving such an one as himself, shall\ntreat him with ingratitude, fraud, and cruelty? \u201cGod is angry with the\nwicked every day.\u201d _Ps._ vii. 2. If to \u201clove our neighbour as ourselves\u201d\nimplies that we should love all men equally alike, it also necessarily\nwill imply a subversion of order, and consequently lead to acts of\ninjustice, because all men are not equal. \u201cFor if any provide not for\nhis own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the\nfaith, and is worse than an infidel.\u201d 1 _Tim._ v. 8.\n\nIt would be ungrateful and unjust to not save a parent from death in\npreference to a stranger\u2014the life of him on whom the life and happiness\nof thousands depended, in preference to an obscure individual.\n\nOne man may be of more value to me, and to the public, than another,\nbecause he is further removed from being a mere animal. He has more\nknowledge, more power, and does dispense more happiness to his\nfellow-man.\n\nA very evil man and a good one may be in the vicinity or elsewhere; but\nto regard them equally alike is a contradiction of Christian duty. When\nwe love our neighbour as ourselves, we love the man, his acts, his\ncharacter; but when we are taught to love our enemies, the mind reaches\nhim as a creature of God, our erring fellow-mortal, our brother steeped\nin sin\u2014and we look upon him with pity, forgiveness; and yet hate his\nqualities and conduct. The cases are quite dissimilar. \u201cLove not the\nworld, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the\nworld, the love of the Father is not in him.\u201d 1 _John_ ii. 15.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON VI.\n\nVirtue is always an appellant to justice. It is manifested by the acts\nof an intelligent being of correct and benevolent motives, contributing\nto the general good. Consequently an act, however benevolent may have\nbeen the motive of the actor, cannot be a virtuous act if it have an\nevil tendency. Ignorance can never be virtue: so, no man can be virtuous\nwho acts from a wicked motive, however beneficial may be the result. The\nmotive must be pure, and the effect good, before the act or the actor is\nvirtuous. A man, may be virtuous, but in so low a degree as to not merit\nthe appellation: we must compare what he does, with what he has the\npower of doing. The widow\u2019s mite may be an example.\n\nWe submit the inquiry\u2014Is not the deduction clear, that men are not\nequal\u2014neither physically, religiously, mentally, or morally? Can they\nthen be so politically? Will not the proposition be correct, that\npolitical equality can never exist with an inequality in these previous\nterms?\n\nRaynal has said, we think correctly, \u201cthat equality will always be an\nunintelligible fiction, so long as the capacities of men are unequal,\nand their claims have neither guarantee nor sanction by which they can\nbe enforced.\u201d \u201cOn a dit que nous avions tous les m\u00eames droits. J'ignore\nce que c'est que les m\u00eames droits, o\u00f9 il y a in\u00e9galit\u00e8 de talens ou de\nforce, et nulle garantie, nulle sanction.\u201d _Raynal, Revolution\nd'Amerique_, p. 34.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VII.\n\nThe rules of Christianity are always coadjuvant to those of justice. The\nleast deviation from justice begins to mark the unchristian character.\n\u201cJust balances, just weights, a just _epha_ and a just _hin_ shall ye\nhave.\u201d _Lev._ xix. 36. \u201cBut thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a\nperfect and just measure shalt thou have; that thy days may be\nlengthened in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.\u201d _Deut._ xxv.\n15. \u201cYe shall have a just balance and a just epha, and a just bath.\u201d\n_Ezek._ xlv. 10.\n\n\u201cJustice and judgment are the habitation of thy throne; mercy and truth\nshall go before thy face.\u201d _Ps._ lxxxix. 14.\n\n\u201cAs I hear I judge, and my judgment is just.\u201d\n\n\u201cFinally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are\nhonest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure,\nwhatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, if\nthere be any virtue, if there be any praise, think on those things.\u201d\n_Phil._ iv. 8.\n\nBut justice, as an act emanating from the rules of right, is wholly\ndependent on the law: with the abolition of all law, justice or its\nopposite would cease to exist.\n\nWe are aware there are a class who say that Christians have nothing to\ndo with the law of God; that they believe in Christ, and are excused\nfrom obedience to the law; that they are not under the law, but the\ngospel; that the law to them is of none effect; that the laws of God as\nrevealed to Moses have been repealed;\u2014or rather they seem to have but a\nconfused idea of what they do believe touching the matter, while they\nfashion a theory of Divine providence to suit their own fancies, and\nsubstantially, by their own hands, fashion Jehovah into an idol,\nalthough not of wood or stone, yet as much in conformity to their own\nnotions; perhaps but little thinking that their notions may have arisen\nfrom pride or ignorance. We cannot promise any benefit by addressing\nsuch. He who dares take the character of Jehovah into keeping, selecting\nfrom among the manifestations of his providence, and decide this law to\nbe repealed, or this only in force, would seem to be as far beyond the\nreach of human reason as his position is beyond the bounds of moral\nsense.\n\nBut let us, who claim not so high prerogative, who are able only to\nnotice some faint emanations of the Divine mind, as He has seen fit to\nreveal himself to our feeble perceptions,\u2014who have been taught by the\nexercise of faith to perceive them in the holy books of his record of\nwhat is past, and the present display of his power and rule in the\ngovernment of the world,\u2014take counsel together, and examine and compare\nthe teachings they may give of the unchangeableness of, and our relation\nwith, the laws of God.\n\nThe Creator of things may be deemed able to impose such relations\nbetween the things created as he may judge suitable to effect the object\nhad in their creation. Such relations we call law; because, as we notice\nthings, they are the rules by which they act or are acted upon. So far\nas human reason has been able to examine, such laws are as unchangeable\nas the Deity who imposed them. To such certainty and unchangeableness we\ngive the name of truth, and hence we say God is truth, having reference\nto the unchangeableness of his nature and of his laws.\n\nWith the idea of the changeability of his laws, of necessity must be\nassociated the idea of the changeability of God himself. The wickedness\nof such argument is announced in its tendency to the dethronement of\nJehovah. It was the very argument used by the serpent in Eden.\n\nThe conclusion is, it is inconsistent with the Deity that his laws\nshould be repealed; the same circumstance, under which his law has been\nnoticed to manifest itself, reappearing, and it is again developed. They\nare the laws of eternity. They are the voice of God. The doctrine of the\ngospel is bold and plain upon this subject.\n\n\u201cWherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.\u201d\n_Rom._ vii. 12.\n\n\u201cNow we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who\nare under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world\nmay become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law, there\nshall no flesh be justified in his sight, for the law is the knowledge\nof sin.\u201d \u201cDo we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea,\nwe establish the law.\u201d _Rom._ iii. 19, 20, 31.\n\n\u201cWhosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law, for sin is the\ntransgression of the law.\u201d 1 _John_ iii. 4.\n\n\u201cThink not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets; I am not\ncome to destroy, but to fulfil. Whosoever therefore shall break one of\nthese least commandments, and shall teach so to do, he shall be called\nthe least in the kingdom of heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach\nthem, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.\u201d _Matt._\nv. 17, 19.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VIII.\n\nAnother of the rules of Christian justice which will be found applicable\nto our subject, is, \u201cTherefore all things whatsoever ye would that men\nshould do unto you, do ye even so unto them: for this is the law and the\nprophets.\u201d _Matt._ vii. 12.\n\nThe remarks made upon the first rule are in some measure applicable to\nthis.\n\nThe desire of something to be done must be founded on good reason and\nconformable to justice. Folly ever marks an unreasonable desire; and\nthat desire is always unjust which merely reaches to the taking from\nanother without the corresponding desire to reciprocate. Such desires\nare changed instantly into the action of the mind called \u201c_coveting_,\u201d\nand are most strictly forbidden, for this good reason, that very action\nof the mind is a mental theft; and the moral wickedness in the\nindividual \u201ccoveting\u201d is the same as though he were practically a thief.\nBut, further, the desire must be predicated upon a presumable condition:\nfor, by the rule, it would be unjust to desire that which it would not\nbe possible to have done to us; so it would be to desire any other\nimpossibility. Suppose A. should desire that you would make him rich,\ndoes it follow that he must make you rich when he has no ability to do\nso? The case is not founded upon a presumable condition, nor, on good\nreason, upon a desire to reciprocate, consequently unjust.\n\nBut suppose A. feels anxious for your warm regard for his prosperity in\nhis lawful understandings, here the desire reaches to nothing unjust, to\nno disorder in society, or beyond your power, and clearly within his\npower to reciprocate; he is then bound by the rule to feel a warm desire\nfor your prosperity in all your lawful undertakings. And who does not\nperceive that if one desires your good wishes, he must of necessity feel\ngood wishes for you. Whether the desire imply merely a mental or\nphysical action, similar examples will illustrate. The rule is truly a\ngolden one, and, so far as acted upon, binds society together in peace\nand good-will.\n\nIt is quite analogous to the twenty-fourth maxim of Confucius, which\nreads thus: \u201cDo unto another as thou would be dealt with thyself; thou\nonly needest this law alone: it is the foundation and principle of all\nthe rest.\u201d And is in spirit with the fifty-third maxim of the same\nphilosopher: \u201cAcknowledge the benefits by the return of other benefits;\nbut never revenge injuries.\u201d We trust the rule is none the less sacred\nbecause it was revealed to man at an early period.\n\nLet us illustrate the correctness of these views by the inconsistency of\nthose opposite. Others say that if we were in slavery we should wish to\nbe made free, therefore we are bound by this rule to set free all who\nare in slavery now.\n\nIf this be true, in order that the whole circle of action may be\nconsistent, there must be another link added to the chain; hence we find\nthat the advocates of this interpretation say, also, \u201cthat same inward\nprinciple which teaches a man what he is bound to do for others, teaches\nequally, and at the same instant, what others are bound to do to him.\u201d\n_Channing_, vol. ii. p. 33. This proposition inevitably follows the\npreceding; for who is he that can say among men that that is a good rule\nwhich is not reciprocal.\n\nThis imaginary rule would perhaps be less obnoxious in case of universal\nequality. For, in that case, we may suppose an universal equality of\ndesire, without which one wishes one thing and another its opposite. But\nso long as God rules, universal equality can only happen in case of\nuniversal perfection, in which case neither sin nor slavery can exist,\nand in which case the argument will not be wanted. But the rule as left\nby Jesus Christ was made for man in his fallen state.\n\nBut again, if the interpretation of our opponents be true, then the\nproposition may be resolved into this state:\u2014A. is as much bound by the\ndesire of B. as by his own, and the whole world is fully bound by both.\nBut the whole world individually desire adversely to each other, yet\neach desire is to be harmoniously gratified. Let each one make out the\nexamples; we think they will find them extremely ridiculous in the\nresult. The doctrine involves plainly the most gross contradictions, and\nis therefore a naked nullity.\n\nAgain, if it be the law of God, that because we desire a thing,\ntherefore we are bound to give that thing to another, it implies that\nthe desire was the manifestation of God\u2019s will; in short, that the\ndesire was a portion of his revealed law; consequently, whatever any man\ndesires is a portion of inspiration. Hence Channing says, (page as\nabove,) \u201chis conscience, in revealing the moral law, does not reveal a\nlaw for himself only, but speaks as a universal legislator.\u201d Now it\nfollows, that, as each man desires an opposite, therefore there are as\nmany opposite systems of the laws of God as there are individuals who\ndesire them; in other words, it would be making God\u2019s law just what each\none desired it to be. Thus making the law of God a perfect nullity.\n\nBut again, if the interpretation of the golden rule, as employed by them\nwho use it to inculcate immediate emancipation, be true, then it\ncontradicts the spirit of the command, \u201cThou shalt not covet thy\nneighbour\u2019s house. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour\u2019s wife; nor his\n_man-servant_, (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u05a4\u05d5\u05b9 _ve abeddo_, _male slave_,) nor his\n_maid-servant_, (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05d0\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05ea\u05d5\u05b9\u0599 _va amatho_, _female slave_,) nor his ox,\nnor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour\u2019s.\u201d _Exod._ xx. 17.\nHere the word \u201ccovet\u201d is used to mean a strong desire without the wish\nor ability to reciprocate; therefore without good reason\u2014consequently\nunjust. It is the same exercise of the mind that leads a man to acts of\ntheft that is here forbidden: an exercise of the mind that leads to many\ndisorders in society, and hence this command. The command does not\nextend to him who desires his neighbour\u2019s house, man-servant,\nmaid-servant, ox, or ass, upon the condition that the desire is founded\nupon good reason. The neighbour having the will and power to part with,\nand he who desires the power and will to reciprocate, these\nqualifications bring the desire within the purview of the golden rule,\nand remove all tendency to disorders in society. To buy and sell with\nthe view to reciprocate gain, has a very strong tendency to bind society\ntogether in peace and good-will.\n\nIn the lesson of the golden rule, the Saviour gave a check to impetuous\nand improper desires,\u2014to the wicked and improper hankering after the\nsubstance or condition of others,\u2014by bringing to view the propriety of\nperforming themselves such acts as they demanded of others: that they\nshould prove themselves worthy of the solicited favour by a reciprocity\nof feeling and action.\n\nThis we think evident from what precedes: \u201cIf then ye, being evil, know\nhow to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your\nFather that is in heaven give good things unto them that ask him.\u201d\n\nThe doctrine of the golden rule seems to be often misunderstood. We\nquote from the great Selden: \u201cGuided by justice and mercy, do unto all\nmen as you would have them do to you, were your circumstances and theirs\nreversed. If the prisoner should ask the judge whether he would be\ncontent to be hanged were he in his case, he would answer, No! Then says\nthe prisoner, Do as you would be done to. Neither of them must do as\nprivate men; but the judge must do by him as they have publicly agreed:\nthat is, both judge and prisoner have consented to the law, that if\neither of them steal, he shall be hanged.\u201d _Selden._\n\n\u201cIf the wickedest wretches among yourselves, the most peevish, weak, and\nill-natured of you all, will readily give good gifts to their children\nwhen they cry for them, how much rather will the great God, infinite in\ngoodness, bestow blessings on his children who endeavour to resemble him\nin his perfections, and for that ask his grace and other spiritual and\nheavenly blessings;\u201d but God grants these blessings alone upon this\ncondition, that, \u201canimated by his goodness, you study to express your\ngratitude for it by your integrity and kindness to your\nfellow-creatures, treating them in every instance as you would think it\nreasonable to be treated by them, if you were in their circumstances,\nand they in yours; for this is, in effect, a summary and abstract of all\nthe human and social virtues recommended in the moral precepts of the\n_law_ and the _prophets_, and it was one of the greatest ends of both to\nbring men to this equitable and amiable temper.\u201d _Doddridge._\n\nSuch are the comments of these men upon this subject.\n\nBut permit us to remark that the word _man-servant_, in the command just\nquoted, is translated from the Hebrew \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, and means what we\nmean by the word _slave_. And let it be remembered that, in the\ndecalogue, in one of the original laws of God the Father, delivered to\nMoses from Sinai, the slave is classed with the ox, the ass, in short,\nwith all other property, as an article of possession; and that we are\ncommanded not to have a desire to change the possession unjustly. And\nthat, by a fair interpretation of the golden rule issued by the living\nlips of Jesus Christ, if we reasonably and justly desire to change the\npossession, we must honestly reciprocate the full value thereof.\n\nLet the candid world, the truth-searching philosopher, and the humble\nChristian examine, and say whether these conclusions are not founded on\nreason, justice, and the laws of God.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IX.\n\nWe suppose all Christians will agree that God is a Spirit eternal and\ninfinite, unchangeable and unaccountable, omnipotent, omnipresent, and\nomniscient, most wise, most true, most holy, and most good, without\nbeginning or without end. Such from eternity were his qualities, and\nsuch to eternity they will remain.\n\nIn contemplation of these characteristics of Jehovah, we are led to\ndeduce that God must originally and essentially within himself be\neternally happy. \u201cMy counsel shall stand, and I will do all my\npleasure.\u201d _Isa._ xlvi. 10. If it is proper to say that God has desires,\nthen it must be his desire that his \u201ccounsel shall stand,\u201d because it is\ninconsistent with happiness to be unable to gratify desire or fail in\ncounsel; besides, it would prove some deficiency of power. Before God\ncreated some other being or thing, he existed alone. Can it be said he\nhad wants? For what purpose then did he create other things? What object\nhad he in view? The object must have been worthy of calling forth his\naction. What other object could have been worthy of his action than\nhimself? Because his work must in all its parts reflect his power, his\nevery quality, we must therefore conclude God is the sole and ultimate\nend of every thing he does. If all the labours of Deity were not solely\nfor himself, then of the greatness and rectitude of many of his\nprovidences and acts, perhaps none could ever be comprehended or even\nperceived by mortals. For God legislates not merely for a city, a tribe\nor nation, but for the universe: not for an hour, a day or a thousand\nyears, but for eternity. \u201cI know that whatsoever God doeth it shall be\nfor ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it; and God\ndoeth it, that men shall fear before him.\u201d _Eccl._ iii. 14.\n\nIf God himself is the ultimate end of all things, then that moral\nphilosopher, a poor, ignorant man, a worm of but momentary existence,\nmistakes, who teaches in substance that true religion, that is, worship\nof God, consists in an advantageous, successful, and well-directed\nselfishness in favour of himself; for, upon that principle the vilest\nenemy may take shelter under the cloak of his adversary,\u2014but will he be\nthe more worthy? If God is the supreme object of creation, then this\nrighteous selfishness must be in extreme opposition to God. There are\nimportant deductions emanating from these reflections, which we are\nunwilling to deprive others the pleasure of drawing out for themselves.\nThe use God makes of his creations proves the end for which he made\nthem. We might rest here; but we have heard some say that God\u2019s object\nin creation was the happiness of all his sentient creatures. If so, then\nthey all would be happy; which is not the fact. Human misery is the\nfirst object we behold everywhere. True, man can never have a very\ncompetent idea of God. His powers of thought are too low; his\nassociations too trivial. But if the object God had in creation was the\ndevelopment of his own glory, then there can be no greater conformity\nunto God than there is knowledge of his character. Hence, where we see,\nhear, and learn the most of God, we become the most pure and holy.\nHoliness depends on a knowledge of God. The reason is obvious: a holy\nman is a more perfect exhibition of the Divine character. If so, then\nthe happiness of man depends upon his perception of God. Therefore man\ncan never be happy only in proportion as he is holy. But if the glory of\nGod is the ultimate end of creation, and if the happiness of his\nrational creatures depends upon their perception of him, then the\nultimate end secures in the highest possible degree their happiness.\n\nThe great cause of human misery will be found to proceed from the\nunquenchable desire in the unregenerate man to rebel against God\u2014to set\nup a government of his own, more wise than he conceives the government\nof God to be; in fact, he does not perceive his government, for he has\nno perception of him.\n\nWe might deduce an argument in proof that a perception of God is\nhappiness to man, from the formation of his mental powers. To whom does\nit not give deep distress to behold what we call talent and virtue hid\nin obscurity and bowed down beneath oppression and want? To whom does it\nnot give great delight to perceive a lucid manifestation of these\nqualities? The great object in the individual creation of man is his\nimprovement; his advance towards an approximation of being able to see\nGod as he is. The business of angels and saints in heaven is to\nintensely seek after a more full knowledge of God.\n\nIf the happiness of man is thus dependent upon his perception of the\ngreatness and power of God, then we may conclude that a continued\nmanifestation of it is essential to him in producing before his mind an\nincreasing brilliancy of view of the great Jehovah.\n\nThe order and gradation in the power bestowed on the different objects\nhis hand has made, displaying his foresight in the work of creation,\nfrom the seraph down to the veriest mite, would seem an arrangement that\nmight furnish the mind of man or an angel with never-ending study, with\na never-ending employment to find out God.\n\nIf the wide and permanent diversity of character and condition in the\npresent world, and in that which is to come,\u2014if the relations we find\nbetween man and man,\u2014if the great sacrifice for sin and the redemption\nwrought therefrom,\u2014if the eternal wrath of Jehovah against the\nincorrigible sinner, all in combination manifest the greatest display of\nthe power and perfections of God;\u2014in short, if the providences of God\ncollectively, as we see them manifested in the world, are the true\ndevelopments of his character, then it will follow that they all, in\ncombination, terminate in the greatest good, and, in their external\nconsequences, subserve to the greatest extent of happiness to which the\nhuman mind, in the pursuit of its only legitimate employment, is now or\never will be susceptible.\n\nThe first deduction is that sin must always be accompanied with misery,\nbut that holiness is as surely accompanied with happiness, no matter\nwhat may be the physical condition. It may not be improper here to\nadvert to one of the characteristics of our intellectual constitution,\nwhich is this: whatever is presented to the mind calling on its energy\nand our physical action can never be approached by us with any tolerable\ndegree of perfectedness unless by constant and long-continued\nrepetitions; whence we say, \u201cpractice makes perfect.\u201d Whereas, whatever\nis presented wherein we are wholly passive, repetition and familiarity\nare in constant action to diminish, weaken, and wash out the impressions\nfirst made. Examples in proof of the first position are found in the\nnecessary and long-continued exertions before we become adepts in the\narts and practices of civilized life. In the African savage, often, many\ngenerations of constant exertion in the same direction are required\nbefore that race is found to have attained such a state of\nperfectibility in these things as is required to sustain a position in\ncivilized life; and it is to this they owe their state of pupilage among\nthe civilized races.\n\nExamples of the second position are found in the ready and quick\nadaptation of ourselves to the condition in which we are placed: even\nour senses, from constant repetition and familiarity, often cease to\nloathe that which was obnoxious. The mind to which the starry firmament\nis first unfolded will be filled with astonishment and wonder; but the\nfamiliarity of a constant gaze does not even excite an emotion.\n\nThis characteristic of the human intellect gives strong proof of the\npower and wisdom of God. For through its means, all in civilized and\nChristian life and practice, from the king upon the throne down to the\nslave, are rendered equally happy and contented with their condition.\nTherefore he is not a correct philosopher who measures the happiness of\na lower grade in life by his own feelings.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON X.\n\nFrom consideration of our previous lesson, we should make the deduction\nthat Christianity is incompatible with savage life. The Christian can no\nlonger be a savage, notwithstanding the habits of civilization may be\nyet too weakly established to guaranty against lapses to former habits.\nThe habits of the savage must be changed so as to approximate civilized\nlife before Christianity can be successfully taught him. Hence one error\ninto which the missionary and the teacher of the Negro sometimes fall.\nThey confine their labours to instructions concerning the more abstruse\ndoctrines of Christianity; but the savage has no capability to\ncomprehend them: his mind has never been prepared for their reception.\n\nThe child can never comprehend the laws of astronomy till he has first\nlearned mathematics. The savage must first be made to comprehend the\nnecessity that individual wants must be supplied by individual labour,\nand all the consequent attendants of such a state of things, before the\npossibility can exist that he will comprehend the higher moral duties.\nBecause, without that, he remains passive under such teachings; and in\nsuch case, the more familiar such lessons are made to him the less they\naffect him. Instances are not wanting where such a state of facts exists\nin circles of society where it would seem they should be the least\nexpected! and from whence the great truth is deducible, that mental and\nphysical idleness is a most deadly poison to good morals and\nintellectual improvement, and the conduct of such men is always found\nsearching the way back to a deteriorated condition.\n\nThe animal propensities require to be forced into habits contributive to\nthe relations and duties of civilized and Christian life. The mind must\nbe made to comprehend what our relative duties are, both experimentally\nand habitually, and also the impossibility of their being dispensed\nwith, before it will be able to perceive the laws which bind our action\nto their performance. And it may be here remarked, that a perception of\nthese laws sufficiently strong to influence the conduct of a man will at\nleast place him in the position of Agrippa before Paul. The history of\nman does not point to an instance where an individual has regenerated\nhimself from the depth of human degradation, except under the pupilage\nand control of a superior wisdom.\n\nUpon this state of facts was founded the necessity of a Saviour for the\nchildren of men.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XI.\n\nThe lowness of individual condition, in relation to our fellow men, or\nto human society generally, is not incompatible with the humility of the\nChristian in the performance of our duty to man or God, because the\nChristian is not required to display intellectual powers which he does\nnot possess, nor possessions not his own. If he has but one talent, its\noccupation alone is required,\u2014the desire to bestow one mite marks his\ncharacter. It is therefore a very great error which some of the\nabolitionists seem to suppose, that, because a man is a slave, he is\nthereby prevented from being a Christian or hindered from the worship of\nGod. On the contrary, so essential is humility to the Christian\ncharacter, that Jesus Christ, in a lesson to his disciples, says,\n\u201cWhosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant,\u201d \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n_doulos_, _slave_; a figure, a sentence, which the Divine Being could\nnever have pronounced, if slavery was inconsistent with his doctrine,\neither as to the condition of the slave or that of the master. With\ngreat similarity of figure and sameness of the humility in the\nworshipper of God, David addresses Jehovah: \u201cO Lord, truly I am thy\nservant,\u201d (\u05e2\u05b7\u05ab\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b6\u05da\u05b8 _abedeka, thy slave_,) \u201cI am thy servant (\u05e2\u05b7\u05ab\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05da\u05b8\n_abedeka, thy slave_) and the son of thy _hand-maid_,\u201d \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\u05be\u05d0\u05b2\u05ea\u05b6\u0591\u05da\u05b8\n_amatheka, thy female slave_,) \u201cthou hast loosed my bonds.\u201d Compare with\n_John_ viii. 36, also 1 _Cor._ vii. 22.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XII.\n\nThe institutions of slavery and Christianity can never be antagonistic.\nSlavery enforces obedience in the inferior to a superior power, for the\nreciprocal benefit of both. Any deviation from the law of God pertinent\nto the case, to some extent lessens the benefit and diminishes what\nshould have been the quotient of the general good. Slavery is therefore,\nhowever rude in its obedience or commands, an attempt at civilized life;\nand we may therefore judge of the amount of its abuses by its greater or\nless success in the cultivation of those virtues incident to that\ncondition. True, this result is scarcely perceptible where the most\nelevated are still deeply degraded, as is for ever the case in all those\nregions where the light of Christianity has never been diffused. And it\nis from these facts we find the providence of God to be that slavery, in\nsuch regions, is always seeking abroad for a more enlightened master.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIII.\n\nThe path of the Christian is described as strait and narrow; in it there\nare no broad provisions for licentiousness, immorality, crime, or sin of\nany kind, nor, at suitable distances, are there private apartments\nprepared, wherein cunning expediency may change her apparel; nor will\nthe poor traveller be perplexed with ambiguous directions, whereby any\nthing is to be performed contrary to the plain understanding of the law.\nBut each step therein must be in conformity to the directions of him who\nmade, knows, and governs all.\n\nHow feeble then shall prove the man, swelled with the pride of his own\nsupposed holiness, who shall attempt to straighten, alter, and make\nbetter this highway to heaven! \u201cFor who hath known the mind of the Lord?\nor who hath been his counsellor? or who hath first given to him, and it\nshall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to\nhim are all things!\u201d _Rom._ xi. 34\u201336. On every step of this footway to\nheaven, made for poor sinners to walk in, for the slave as well as for\nthe crowned head, are engraven, in letters of the light of God himself,\ndirections for the poor traveller, so that \u201cthe wayfaring men, though\nfools, shall not err therein.\u201d _Isa._ xxxv. 8. And let us now read some\nof these records, and see how they comport with the doctrine of\nuniversal equality as involved in the labours before us:\n\n\u201cLet every soul be subject unto the higher powers; for there is no power\nbut of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.\n\n\u201cWhosoever therefore resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God;\nand they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.\n\n\u201cFor rulers are not a terror to good works but to the evil. Wilt thou\nthen not be afraid of the power, do that which is good, and thou shalt\nhave praise of the same.\n\n\u201cBut if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the\nsword in vain; for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute\nwrath upon him that doeth evil.\n\n\u201cWherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for\nconscience sake.\n\n\u201cFor, for this cause pay ye tribute also; for they are God\u2019s ministers,\nattending continually upon this very thing.\n\n\u201cRender therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due;\ncustom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.\u201d _Rom._\nxiii. 1\u20138.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIV.\n\nBefore we close our present Study, let us survey for a moment the\nposition of the truly Christian character. Let us see and examine a\nposition, whether filled by _lord_, _subject_, or _slave_, that seems so\nsurrounded with hope, so particularly the focus of all the irradiations\nof heaven, that the distinctions and miseries of human life, even wrongs\ndone us, are blotted out by the brilliancy of their illumination.\n\nBut let us view it in connection with man in an unchristianized state,\nunder the control of the appetites, passions, and influences of an\nunredeemed world; and it may be we shall behold with wonder the\noperation of that redemption by which his felicity is made steadfast.\n\nThe uncertainty and vanity of human pursuits have for ever been a\nsubject of remark.\n\nAnd, if we examine the motives of human conduct and see the fallacious\nobjects of human hope, we always perceive the constant attendance of\npain, misery, and woe.\n\nAs the visions of early life are relinquished, we transfer to the future\nthat confidence which has been for ever betrayed by the past, and as\nthese illusions are successively dispelled, new objects continue to fill\nthe imagination, till the very moment when all our prospects are\ninvolved in the darkness of the tomb. Nor think ye that the miseries\nthat flow from ambition, avarice, voluptuousness, and open crime, are\nthe only ones that attend us. Each refinement of life is accompanied\nwith its own peculiar symptom. Besides, there are sufferings that no\nforesight can foresee, which no excellence can elude.\n\nThe imperfection of a master, or of him placed in power, may bring to\nhis slave or other dependant unutterable wo!\n\nThe lassitude of sickness, the agony of its pain, the distresses, the\nimperfections of our friends, their alienation from us, and our final\nseparation from the objects of our tenderest regard, would transform\nparadise itself into a wilderness of wo, did not the light of God keep\nit for ever illumined.\n\nEven could we escape from all the external causes of wo, yet the waters\nof bitterness would continue to flow from the never-ceasing sources of\nsorrow that lie deep in our own bosoms buried.\n\nWe are therefore constrained, forced to conclude, that the balance of\nour moral constitution has been destroyed; and by the derangement of a\nsystem once harmoniously attuned, our principles of action, no longer in\nunison, are thrown into perpetual collision: maintaining no longer their\noriginal or their relative strength, they lead us into perpetual error,\nand by their conflicts produce a moral discord incompatible with the\nhappiness of man. \u201cFor the creature was made subject to vanity, not\nwillingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope.\u201d\n\u201cBecause the creature itself shall be delivered from the bondage\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2, _slavery_) of corruption into the glorious liberty of\nthe children of God.\u201d _Rom._ viii. 20.\n\nHad we been made acquainted merely with the fall of man and its effect\nupon his moral constitution, we should have still been bewildered in the\nperplexities of our condition. A consciousness of guilt would have\nfilled our minds with apprehension, and the fear of the Divine\ndispleasure would have mingled its bitterness with every gratification,\nwould have seized upon every hope. Like Cain, we should have cried out,\n\u201cOur punishment is greater than we can bear,\u201d and solicited the black\nmark of slavery as an antidote to threatened and instant death.\n\nBut the mercy of God, which always tempers even the natural events to\nthe delicate sensibilities of our physical perceptions, concealed from\nour view the desolation of our condition, till, in the maturity of his\ncounsels, he saw fit to blend with the discovery the bright visions \u201cof\nthe glory about to be revealed.\u201d _Rom._ viii. 18.\n\nThe heathen nations, although painfully alive to the brevity of human\nlife, and deeply impressed with the vanity of our hopes, were equally\nignorant of our fallen nature, and of the holiness of that God before\nwhom we are to be adjudged. Their conception of an existence after death\nwas cheerless and indistinct, although, even at this late day, among the\nmost lofty intellects of their time, we can now perceive a longing\ndesire after something to them unknown, a hankering for the proof of a\nspiritual immortality. Thus, while there was but little in their\nanticipations of a future state to excite their apprehension or alarm,\nthere was but little to stimulate their hope.\n\nThe vulgar were sometimes alarmed by the majestic terrors of the\nThunderer, and the philosopher was sometimes penetrated by those\nperfections which he was led to ascribe to the mighty Mind.\n\nYet the wisest sages of antiquity do not seem to have perceived in human\nguilt an internal malignity, which no penitence can expiate, nor blood\nof dying victims wash away.\n\nIf some glimpses of the miseries and dangers in which sin had involved\nus were disclosed to the favoured few, yet visions of prophecy dispelled\nthe gloom; for, \u201cwhere there is no vision the people perish.\u201d _Prov._\nxxix. 18.\n\nIt was not till our Saviour had sealed the charter of our hope, that our\ncondition, with a full view of its desolation, was proclaimed to a\nfallen world. A knowledge of the disease and the remedy has in mercy\nkept pace with each other. If we learn that the \u201ccreature was made\nsubject to vanity,\u201d we also learn that he was made so in hope.\n\nNow, when we behold our condition, although we see evidences of our\nfallen state, of the degradation of our intellectual and moral\nfaculties, yet we see also a provision of mercy by which the creature\nmay be delivered from \u201cthe bondage (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2, _slavery_) of corruption\ninto the glorious liberty of the children of God.\u201d\n\nViewed in connection with this sublime truth, the value of human\ninterests, the pain of human sufferings, and the grief of human wrongs\ndisappear; yea, vanish from the eye of the true believer. The grandeur\nof his future prospects dignifies his present state, however humble. His\npresent evils, which might overwhelm him if attached to his ultimate\ncondition, lose all their bitterness when converted by redeeming love\ninto mere lessons of moral discipline. The pain is softened by the\nendearment of paternal tenderness, and he feels and knows that they will\nonly accompany the mere infancy of his being.\n\nThe poor, humble, but Christian slave, hears constantly the lessons of\nTitus, and is happy in his obedience to his own master, that he may\nplease him well in all things, watchful to not contradict, nor purloin\nfrom any one, and careful to show all good fidelity, that he may adorn\nthe doctrine of God. He feels that no one has a deeper interest in that\ngrace; for it hath equally appeared to all men.\n\nHe remembers his fellow-slaves of Colosse, and while with singleness of\neye he heartily serves his earthly master, he feels that the act is\nennobled, and is transferred to be an act of devotion and obedience to\nthe great Jehovah.\n\nSympathy carries him back to his Corinthian brethren, in common with\nwhom he feels no anxious care to change the condition in which he was\ncalled, for while he is content to abide where God has placed him, he\nknows that he has been purchased by the blood of Christ, and promoted to\nthe rank of a freeman of the Lord.\n\nWith his fellow-slaves of Ephesus, he may tremble with fear lest his\nobedience to his master shall not be performed with good-will and\nsingleness of heart, as unto Christ himself, for he knows that God has\nnot required of him merely eye-service; yet he also knows that\nChristians, whether bond or free in this world, will hereafter be\nremembered of God for whatever good they do. Yea, he yields himself to\nthe exhortations of Timothy, and accounts his own master worthy of all\nhonour and obedience, that the name of God and his doctrine should not\nbe blasphemed; nor does he feel the less reverence for his believing\nmaster, but rather does his service with alacrity as to a brother, and\nwith heart-felt joy, because he is a faithful and beloved partaker of\nthe benefits of his labour.\n\nAnd when he hears men, whose ignorance of God has caused them to be\npuffed up with the idea of their own importance and purity, evidently\nfilled with pride, as though they could teach God a more holy\ngovernment, attempting to exhort and teach them a different doctrine, he\nfeels, he knows that such are not only evil and bad men, but ignorant\nones, such as dote about questions, and strifes of words, which have no\nother tendency than to fill the mind with envy, strife, railing, and\nevil surmises, such as are among men of corrupt minds, among men who are\ndestitute of the truth, and among men who suppose that gain is\ngodliness. He will view such men, however thoughtless they may be of\ntheir true position or sincere in their belief, as standing in the\nposition of the serpent in Eden. Their lessons to him are disobedience\nto God. From such he will withdraw himself; yea, he will fly from them\nas from a deadly poison, because disobedience to God for ever ends in\nruin and death. But from Timothy he learns contentment, for, as he\nbrought nothing into the world with him, and as he can most certainly\ncarry nothing out, so, having food and raiment, he will be content, and\nespecially so as contentment and godliness are great gain.\n\nAnd finally he hears as it were a trumpet sounding from the very gates\nof heaven, and looking, he beholds Peter standing there; he hears a\nstill small voice, the voice of Jesus Christ, saying, \u201cThou art Peter,\nand on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not\nprevail against it, and I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of\nheaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in\nheaven.\u201d _Matt._ xvi. 18, 19. And then Peter, raising his arm in the\ndirection of the Gentile nations, says to the slaves: \u201cBe subject to\nyour masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to\nthe froward: for this is thank-worthy, if a man for conscience towards\nGod endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when\nye be buffeted for your faults, ye take it patiently? But if, when ye do\nwell, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable to\nGod. For even hereunto were ye called; because Christ also suffered for\nus, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps, who did no\nsin, neither was guile found in his mouth; who when he was reviled,\nreviled not again; when he suffered he threatened not, but committed\nhimself to him that judgeth righteously; who his own self bare our sins\nin his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live\nunto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. For ye were as\nsheep gone astray, but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of\nyour souls.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XV.\n\nFrom the immense disproportion between our finite minds and the infinite\nobjects of future hope, our conceptions of the disimbodied spirit must\nnecessarily be feeble. But while we anticipate the promised freedom of\nthe celestial world, the disenthralment of our intellectual faculties,\nand the deliverance of our moral powers from all corruption, the mind\nbecomes more and more habituated to the scenes thus disclosed, and even\nreaches to prospects of resplendent beauty; to visions of unclouded\ntruth; to the solution of the little difficulties of our own earthly\ntrials; to the evolutions of the Divine character in connection with our\nlittle planet, and even to that infinitude that mocks the bounds of time\nand space.\n\nThus the pious Christian, who meditates upon God and the heavens, the\nwork of his hand, feels a divine influence spread over his soul, while\nthe active and the retired, the ardent and the timid, the philosopher\nwhose mind is illumined by the varied lights of science, and the pious\n_slave_, whose researches are confined to the sayings of some unlettered\nexpositor, will each cherish anticipations congenial to his peculiar\nstate of mind. Yet all will grow in grace; all will rise above the level\nof temporal delights; and all will embrace in their expanding\nconceptions the mighty import of that glorious promise, that \u201ceye hath\nnot seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man,\nthe things that God hath prepared for them that love him,\u201d 1 _Cor._ ii.\n9, till elevated so far above earthly associations, that each can say,\n\u201cI shall be satisfied when I awake in thy likeness.\u201d _Ps._ xvii. 15.\n\nWhat degree of moral likeness will gradually be produced by a near\ncontemplation of unveiled perfection is reserved for eternity to\ndisclose. But the time will at length come when to every sincere\nChristian and true disciple, dazzled by the refulgence that will break\nupon his astonished sight, Jesus Christ will address the language of\naffection, as he did to Martha: \u201cSaid I not unto thee that if thou\nwouldst believe thou shouldst see the glory of God?\u201d _John_ xi. 40.\n\n\u201cThen we all, with open face, beholding, as in a glass, the glory of\nGod, are changed into the same image, from glory to glory.\u201d 2 _Cor._\niii. 18.\n\nSuch, then, is the picture and such the prospect of the Christian\ncharacter; and well may Christians, even the slave, \u201cReckon that the\nsufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the\nglory which shall be revealed.\u201d _Rom._ viii. 18.\n\nFrom the monarch down, viewed from the distance of eternity, man\noccupies but a point. All earthly distinctions become so small that\nnothing short of the eye of omnipotence can see them. The same language\ndescribes, and the same God will prepare their rest.\n\nThe Christian slave feels exalted even while on earth, for he is well\npersuaded \u201cthat neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities,\nnor power, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor\ndepth, nor any creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of\nGod.\u201d _Rom._ viii. 38.\n\nIf for a few days the afflicted Christian and _slave_ \u201cwander in the\nwilderness in a solitary way;\u201d if \u201chungry and thirsty, their souls faint\nin them,\u201d he is yet \u201chastening to a city of habitations.\u201d _Ps._ cvii. 4,\n5, 7.\n\nIf even the sun of his earthly hopes be set, yet he is hastening to a\ncountry where \u201cthy sun shall no more go down; neither shall thy moon\nwithdraw itself; for the Lord shall be thine everlasting light, and the\ndays of thy mourning shall be ended.\u201d _Isa._ lx. 20.\n\nWith such views the heart is elevated above the pains and miseries of\nthis transitory world to the contemplation of hope celestial.\n\nThe mere philosopher, who views the mutilated structure of the moral\nworld, sees no renovating principle to reorganize its scattered\nfragments. He mourns with unavailing sorrow over the ruins of his race,\nand chills with horror at the prospect of his own decay. But the\nChristian sees a fairer earth and a more radiant heaven. And should the\npoor slave, forgetful of this high destiny of his Christian character,\nand of his ultimate home, feeling, like Hagar, the slave of Sarah, the\nhand of his mistress dealing hardly by him, and, like her, attempt a\nremedy by flight; like her, he will hear the voice of God, saying,\n\u201cReturn to thy mistress, and submit thyself under her hand.\u201d _Gen._ xvi.\n9.\n\nLike her, in humble submission, he obeys the command, and prays, \u201cO\nLord, correct me,\u201d for \u201cI know that the way of man is not in himself it\nis not in man that walketh to direct his steps.\u201d _Jer._ x. 23.\n\nIn the miseries and vanities with which he is surrounded, the Christian\nonly sees proofs of a fallen, not of a hopeless state. He, like old\n\u00c6neas, is seeking and looking for a home in a foreign land, and, like\nhim, constantly requires the interposition of some friendly providence\nto warn him that he is still distant from the destined shores.\n\n         Mutand\u00e6 sedes; non h\u00e6c tibi littora suasit,\n         Delius, aut Cret\u00e6 jussit considere Apollo.\u2014_2d \u00c6nead._\n\nLike the Israelites, he has pitched his tent in a wilderness of sin, and\nfeels grateful for those afflictions that reiterate the admonition:\n\u201cArise and depart, for this is not your rest.\u201d _Micah_ ii. 10.\n\nHe knows that \u201cthis corruptible will put on incorruption, that this\nmortal will put on immortality, and that as he has borne the image of\nthe earthly, he shall also bear the image of the heavenly.\u201d See 1 _Cor._\nxv. 49, 53.\n\nWhy then should our hearts sink in sadness, because, as we have seen,\nsin has destroyed the balance of moral power among men,\u2014even the\nfoundation on which their universal equality could exist, whence some\nraces of men have gone deep down in the pit of human degradation, until\nthe man and the brute are found in the same animal tenement.\n\nSuch is the poisonous nature of sin, that the heart that deviseth wicked\nimaginations always finds \u201cfeet running swiftly to ruin.\u201d See _Prov._\nvi. 18.\n\nBut God hath promised that the remnant of Israel shall not speak lies:\n\u201cNeither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth, for they\nshall feed and lie down, and none shall make them afraid.\u201d _Zeph._ iii.\n12, 13.\n\nBut the ways of God are not as the ways of man; he makes his enemies\nbuild his throne.\n\nTherefore, be ye not deceived, for \u201cthere shall be false teachers among\nyou, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord\nthat bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.\u201d 2 _Pet._\nii. 1.\n\nStudy and pray to improve the powers that God hath given, while you\ncompare the things that be with the causes and designs of Providence;\nand while you note that \u201cthe evil bow before the good, and the wicked at\nthe gates of the righteous,\u201d note also that \u201cthe way of the ungodly\nshall perish.\u201d They shall be \u201clike the chaff which the wind driveth\naway.\u201d For \u201cthe hand of the diligent shall bear rule; but the slothful\nshall be under tribute.\u201d \u201cHe that hath not sells himself to him that\nhath.\u201d Therefore, \u201cthe borrower is _servant_ to the lender,\u201d and\nwherefore, \u201c_wisdom_ is better than rubies;\u201d for \u201cby me princes rule,\nand nobles, even all the judges of the earth. I love them that love me,\nand those that seek me early shall find me. Riches and honour are with\nme: yea, durable riches and righteousness.\u201d\n\nBut God hath promised that \u201cthe whole earth shall be full of the\nknowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.\u201d _Isa._ xi. 9.\nTherefore, so long as the tares and the wheat shall grow together, \u201cWait\nye upon me, saith the Lord, until the day that I will rise up to the\nprey: for my determination is to gather the nations, that I may assemble\nthe kingdoms to pour out upon them mine indignation, even all my fierce\nanger; for all the earth shall be devoured with the fire of my jealousy.\nFor then will I turn to the people a pure language that they may all\ncall on the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent. From beyond\nthe rivers of Ethiopia my suppliants, even the daughter of my\n_dispersed_, (\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea\u05be\u05e4\u05d5\u05bc\u05e6\u05b7\u0594\u05d9 _Bath Putsi, the daughter of Phut, the most\ndegraded of the African tribes_,) shall bring mine offering.\u201d _Zeph._\niii. 8\u201310.\n\nThe slavery of the African tribes to those of the true faith is here\nclearly announced, and the great benefit of their conversion to the\nworship of the true God proclaimed as an abundant reason.\n\nThus Isaiah, speaking of the house of Israel, the prototype of the\nchurch of God, says\u2014\u201cThus saith the Lord, The labour of Egypt, and the\nmerchandise of Ethiopia and the Sabeans, men of stature, shall come over\nunto thee, and they shall be thine; they shall come after thee; in\nchains they shall come over, they shall fall down unto thee; they shall\nmake supplication unto thee, saying, Verily, God is in thee, and there\nis no God\u201d _beside_. _Isa._ xlv. 14.\n\nAnd these people, in a state of pupilage, are thus referred to by\n_Zephaniah_: \u201cI will also leave in the midst of thee an afflicted and\npoor people, and they shall trust in the name of the Lord.\u201d\n\nGod ever requires of the powerful the protection of the weak, of the\nmore learned the instruction of the ignorant, and of the more wise the\ngovernment of those who cannot govern themselves.\n\n\u201cFor so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a\nlight to the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the\nends of the earth.\u201d _Acts_ xiii. 47.\n\n\n\n\n                  ------------------------------------\n\n                                Study VI\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON I.\n\nSin is any want of a conformity to the law of God. Man was created free\nfrom sin. He was placed under the government of laws adapted to his\ncondition. But a want of conformity to any item of such law necessarily\ndisorganized and deranged some portion of his original condition. Let us\ncast a hasty view at the operation of these laws. It is contrary to the\nlaw of God that a man should put his hand in the fire; when he does so,\nhis condition is somewhat physically changed, and he is in trouble.\n\nIt is contrary to the law of God that a man should bear false testimony;\nhe having done so, his condition is changed mentally, and his troubles\nincrease.\n\nIt is contrary to the law of God that a man should remain ignorant; he\ndoing so, is not in the condition of him who has multiplied and\nreplenished his mental and physical capabilities: he is less capable, he\nhas less power.\n\nThe law of God is all powerful, and will be executed. The punishment of\nits breach is certain. It is effect following cause. The whole of God\u2019s\ncreation is planned by this principle.\n\nA want of conformity to the law operates as a poison, that spreads\nthrough the moral and physical man, sinking, forcing him down to\ntrouble, pain, misery, ruin, and death.\n\nThe boy, intending to appropriate to himself, takes a pin. If there is\nnaught that checks him, petty thefts push him on to deeper crimes, that\nend in death. The young gentleman drinks the social glass, nor thinks\nharm to himself; he feels strong, he fears nothing: but habit becomes\nexcess; his physical appearance becomes sickly; his mind obtuse, his\npleasures gross; his condition is changed; he is evidently tending\ndownwards to the grave. And such are the course and progress of every\nother sin; for, whatever has a tendency to injure the character, health,\nmind, and body, is sin.\n\nSpeculators upon the holy writ may say what they will; yet it is\ncertain, that act, called the eating the apple, was an act, whatever it\nmay have been, that necessarily injured the character, health, mind, and\nbody of man. It is certain, because it did so. It was the very birth of\ndeath itself. The wages of sin are death\u2014the Lord God Almighty hath\nspoken it!! Another law of God, till then unknown to man, was brought\ninstantly into operation. His wants were changed; the earth no longer\nproduced spontaneously to them. In the emphatic language of that day, it\nwas cursed, that he might have less leisure time and opportunity to\ncontinue in the downward course of sin to sudden destruction and death.\nHe was in great mercy condemned to labour for the supply of his daily\nwants; he was made the slave to the necessities of animal life. Is it\nnecessary to quote Scripture to show that it abounds with the doctrine\nthat idleness is a wonderful promoter of sin? God in great mercy\ncontrived that his hungry body and naked back should in some measure\nkeep him from it.\n\n\u201cTherefore, the Lord sent him forth from the garden of Eden _to till_\nthe ground from which he was taken.\u201d _Gen._ iii. 23, \u201cTo till\u201d is\ntranslated from \u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u0599 _la avod, to slave_. It is the very word that\nmeans a slave; but is here used as a verb, and literally means _to slave\nthe ground_. In this early instance of its use in holy writ, in relation\nto man, it is used as a verb, to show us, not that he had become the\nproperty of any other person, but a slave to his own necessities, and\nthat the labour required was the labour of a slave.\n\nUntil man had become poisoned by sin there was no want of a law, of an\ninstitution to interpose between him and his sudden destruction and\ndeath.\n\nThis is the first degree of slavery among poor, fallen men, and upon\nwhich now depend their health, happiness, and continuance of life.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON II.\n\n\u201cBut Cain was a tiller of the ground.\u201d The word _tiller_ is translated\nfrom the same word used as a noun, _a slave of the ground_, having\nreference to its cultivation for his support and sustenance. And here we\nsee the peculiar propriety of the language of the Psalmist: \u201cHe causeth\nthe grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the _service_ of man,\nthat he may bring forth food out of the earth.\u201d _Ps._ civ. 14. In this\ninstance, \u201cservice\u201d means slavery, and is translated from the same word,\n\u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u05b7\u05a3\u05ea _la avodath_. \u201cHe causeth the grass to grow for the cattle,\nand herb for the slavery of man, that he may bring forth food out of the\nearth.\u201d\n\nBut we are directly informed that the Lord had no respect for the\noffering of Cain; that Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell;\nand the Lord reasoned with him and said, \u201cIf thou doest well, shalt thou\nnot be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door;\u201d\nalso promising him, if he would do well, he should have rule over his\nyounger brother! All this shows that Cain\u2019s progress in sin had become\nvery considerable, notwithstanding the mild yet unavoidable slavery\nalready imposed. But, like many other sinners, he ran his race rapidly,\nuntil his hands were dyed in his brother\u2019s blood.\n\n\u201cWhen thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee\nher strength: a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth.\u201d\n_Gen._ iv. 12. Here _tillest_ is also translated from the same word, and\nmeans \u201cwhen _thou slavest the ground_,\u201d showing most clearly that the\nslavery imposed on Adam was attached to Cain, with the additions, that\nthe earth should not yield unto him her strength,\u2014that he should be a\nfugitive and a vagabond,\u2014and a mark was placed upon him. The expression\nthat the ground should not yield unto him its strength, may be\nunderstood to mean that it should not be as productive, or, that some\nother person should enjoy a portion of the benefit of his labour, or in\nfact both: his labours were to be in some measure fruitless. And let us\nnotice how this portion of his sentence compares with other\nannouncements of Jehovah:\n\n\u201cTreasures of wickedness profit nothing, but righteousness delivereth\nfrom death.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe Lord will not suffer the soul of the righteous to famish, but he\ncasteth away the substance of the wicked.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe hand of the diligent shall bear rule, but the slothful shall be\nunder tribute.\u201d\n\n\u201cPoverty and shame shall be to him that refuses instruction, but he that\nregardeth reproof shall be honoured.\u201d\n\n\u201cA good man leaveth an inheritance to his children\u2019s children, but the\nwealth of the sinner is laid up for the just.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe righteous eateth to the satisfying of his soul, but the belly of\nthe wicked shall want.\u201d _Proverbs._\n\n\u201cHe should be a fugitive and a vagabond.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe wicked flee when no man pursueth; but the righteous are bold as a\nlion.\u201d _Prov._ xxviii. 1.\n\n\u201cBlessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor\nstandeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.\nBut his delight is in the law of the Lord; and his law doth he meditate\nday and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of\nwater, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall\nnot wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. The ungodly are not\nso, but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. Therefore the\nungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation\nof the righteous. For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous; but the\nway of the ungodly shall perish.\u201d _Ps._ i.\n\nAnd again: \u201cSet thou a wicked man over him; and let Satan stand at his\nright hand. When he shall be judged, let him be condemned; and let his\nprayer become sin. Let his days be few, and let another take his office.\nLet his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow. Let his children\nbe continually vagabonds and beg; let them seek their bread also out of\ntheir desolate places. Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and\nlet the strangers spoil his labour. Let there be none to extend mercy\nunto him: neither let there be any to favour his fatherless children.\nLet his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their\nname be blotted out. Let the iniquities of his fathers be remembered\nwith the Lord, and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out.\u201d _Ps._\ncix. 6\u201314.\n\nSuch is the prospect of the desperately wicked: \u201cThe curse of the Lord\nis in the house of the wicked: but he blesseth the habitation of the\njust.\u201d _Prov._ iii. 33.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON III.\n\nBut Cain had a mark set upon him. The word translated _mark_ is \u05d0\u0594\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea\n_oth_: it means a mark of a miraculous nature, whereby some future thing\nis of a certainty known, and may be something done or only said.\nWhatever it may have been, the object was to prevent him from being\nslain by any one meeting him, by its proclamation of the burden of the\ncurses under which he laboured. It was, therefore, absolutely the mark\nof sin, sealing upon him and his race this secondary degree of slavery.\nThe mark distinguished them as low and servile as well as wicked, and\nhence its protective influence.\n\nBut what was the mark of sin? What is it now? and what has it ever been?\nIf one is accused of some vile offence, a little presumptive evidence\nwill make us say, It is a very dark crime; it makes him look very black.\nThis figure, if it be one, now so often applied, is so strongly used in\nScripture, and in fact by all in every age, that the idea seems well\nwarranted that the downward, humiliating course of sin has a direct\ntendency, by the Divine law, to even physically degrade, perhaps blacken\nand disbeautify, the animal man.\n\nA similar doctrine was well known to the Greeks. Demosthenes says to the\nAthenians, \u201cIt is impossible for him who commits low, dishonourable, and\nwicked acts, not to possess a low, dirty intellect; for, as the person\nof a man receives, as it were, a colouring from his conduct, so does the\nmind take upon itself a clothing from the same acts.\u201d See Second\nOlynthiac. So the Arabians: \u201cGod invited unto the dwelling of peace, and\ndirected whom he pleaseth into the right way. They who do right shall\nreceive a most excellent reward, and a superabundant addition; neither\nblackness nor shame shall cover their faces.\u201d _Koran_, chap. x.\n\n\u201cOn the day of the resurrection, thou shalt see the faces of those who\nhave uttered lies concerning God, become black.\u201d _Koran_, chap. xxxix.\n\nSo, the Mohammedan belief is that a man who has some good qualities may\ndie; but, on the account of his wickedness, he will be sent to hell, and\nthere tormented until his skin is black; but that if he shall ever be\ntaken thence, by the mercy of God, he will be immersed in the river of\nlife, and his skin become whiter than pearls; see _Pocock, notis in\npart. Moris_, p. 289 and 292; but that the faces of the wicked will ever\nremain black. See _Yalkut Shemuni_, part ii. fol. 86; also _Sale,\nPrelim. Disc._ p. 104, 105.\n\nSo the Mohammedan tradition, that the bad spirits, Monker and Nakir,\nwho, upon the death of a man, come to examine him, are awful and black.\nSee _Prelim. Disc._ p. 90. And hence the belief is that the wicked, even\nbefore judgment, will stand looking up to God with their faces obscured\nby blackness and disfigured by all the marks of sorrow and deformity.\n_Idem_, p. 99.\n\nSo also the fable, that a precious stone of paradise fell down to the\nearth to Adam, whiter than milk, but turned black by the touch of a\nwicked woman, or, as others say, by wickedness of mankind generally; but\nthe story is that its blackness is only skin-deep, and hence the\nArabians carefully preserved it in the Caaba at Mecca. _Idem_, p. 125.\nAlso, _Al Zamakh_, &c. _in Koran_; and _Ahmed Eb\u0115n Yusef_; and _Pocock,\nSpec._ p. 117.\n\nSimilar traditions and quotations may be gathered from all quarters of\nthe world, and from all portions of time; but let us turn to the book\nthat never lies nor misleads. \u201cBehold, I am against thee, saith the Lord\nof hosts; and I will discover thy skirts upon thy face, and I will show\nthe nations thy nakedness, and the kingdoms thy shame.\u201d _Nahum_, iii. 5.\n\nThe word here translated skirts, is \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05bc\u05dc\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05da\u05b0 _shulaik_. We believe\nthat all scholars agree the Hebrew root of this word is borrowed from\nthe Arabic \u0634\u064e\u064a\u0644\u08e8, of which the meaning is _postremum cujusque rei_; and,\nhence the idea _skirt_, the extreme of something hanging down, tending\ndownward.\n\nAnd from the same source we have the Hebrew word \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05b9\u05dc\u05b8\u05dc _sholal_, a\ncaptive, a thing captured, &c., because the captive is in an extreme\ncondition; and thus \u05e9\u05d5\u05bc\u05dc _sh\u016bl_ is made to mean a hem or skirt, from its\ncognate and Arabic root, the extreme of something tending downwards.\nThus \u0634\u064e\u0644\u064e\u0644 _shaal_, _to be loose_, _to hang down_. From these\nconsiderations, the word was often used to mean a prisoner, a captive.\nThus, _Job_ xii. 19: \u201cHe leadeth princes away spoiled,\u201d \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05b9\u05dc\u05b8\u0591\u05dc\n_sholal_, _captive_, _reduced to the lowest extremity_, &c.\n\nTherefore, although perhaps not as literal, the idea of the prophet\nwould have been more exactly conveyed had it been translated, \u201c_And I\nwill discover the low extremity of your condition upon your face_;\u201d and\nin this same sense the word is used in _Jer._ xiii. 22: \u201cIf thou say in\nthine heart, Wherefore come these things upon me? For the greatness of\nthine iniquity are thy skirts (\u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05bc\u05dc\u05b7\u0596\u05d9\u05b4\u05da\u05b0 _shulaik_) discovered, and\nthy heels made bare.\u201d Evidently proclaiming the doctrine, that a course\nof sin, through the Divine providence, will leave its mark.\n\n\u201cShe is empty, and void, and waste, and the heart melteth, and the knees\nsmite together, and much pain is in all loins, and the faces of them all\ngather blackness. Behold, I am against thee, saith the Lord.\u201d _Nah._ ii.\n10, 13.\n\n\u201cAt Tehaphnehes also the day shall be darkened, when I shall break there\nthe yokes of Egypt; and the pomp of her strength shall cease in her: as\nfor her, a cloud shall cover her, and her daughters shall go into\ncaptivity. Thus will I execute judgments in Egypt: and they shall know\nthat I am the Lord.\u201d _Ezek._ xxx. 18, 19.\n\n\u201cOur necks are under persecution: we labour and have no rest. We have\ngiven the hand to the Egyptians, and to the Assyrians, to be satisfied\nwith bread. Our fathers have sinned, and are not; and we have borne\ntheir iniquities. _Servants_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd\u0599 _abadim_, _slaves_) have ruled\nover us: there is none that doth deliver us out of their hand. We get\nour bread with the peril of our lives, because of the sword of the\nwilderness. Our skin is black like an oven, because of the terrible\nfamine.\u201d _Lam._ v. 5\u201310.\n\n\u201cFor the hurt of the daughter of my people I am hurt; I am black;\nastonishment hath taken hold on me.\u201d _Jer._ viii. 21.\n\n\u201cJudah mourneth, and the gates thereof languish; they are black unto the\nground; and the cry of Jerusalem is gone up.\u201d _Jer._ xiv. 2.\n\n\u201cHer Nazarites were purer than snow; they were whiter than milk; they\nwere more ruddy in body than rubies; their polishing was of sapphire.\nTheir visage is blacker than a coal; they are not known in the streets.\u201d\n_Lam._ iv. 7, 8.\n\n\u201cFor ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that\nburned with fire; nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest.\u201d _Heb._\nxii. 18.\n\n\u201cRaging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars,\nto whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.\u201d _Jude_ 13.\n\n\u201cFor though thou wash thee with nitre, and take thee much soap, yet\nthine iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord God.\u201d _Jer._ ii. 22.\n\n\u201cThe show of their countenance doth witness against them.\u201d _Isa._ iii.\n9.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IV.\n\nBut experience proved that even this second degree of slavery was not a\nsufficient preventive of sin to preserve man upon the earth. \u201cThat the\nsons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were fair; and they took\nthem wives of all which they chose. And the Lord said, My spirit shall\nnot always strive with man.\u201d _Gen._ vi. 2, 3. The word translated\n\u201cfair,\u201d and applied to the daughters of men, is \u05d8\u05b9\u05d1\u05b9\u0596\u05ea _to voth_; it is\nin the feminine plural, and comes from \u05d8\u05b8\u05d1 _tav_, and cognate with the\nSyriac word \u071b\u0712\u0733\u0717\u0733 _tov_ or _tob_; it merely means _good_, _excellent_,\nas the quality may exist in the mind of the person taking cognisance.\n\nIt implies no quality of virtue or complexion, but in its use is\nreflective back to the nominative. It is one of those words which we\nfind in all languages, of which rather a loose use is made. We find it\nin _Dan._ ii. 32, (the 31st of the English text,) \u201c_excellent_;\u201d also\n_Ezra_ v. 17, \u201c_good_.\u201d When it is said of Sarah, in _Gen._ xii. 11,\nthat she was \u201cfair,\u201d meaning that she was of a light complexion, the\nword \u05d9\u05b0\u05e4\u05b7\u05d4 _y\u0115phath_, is used, and is the same with our Japheth, the son\nof Noah, and comes from \u05d9\u05b8\u05e4\u05b7\u05d4 _yapha_, and means to _shine_, _to give\nlight_, and, as an adjective, well means lightness of complexion,\nfairness, and brilliancy of beauty. So in _Esth._ ii. 7, \u201cand the maid\nwas fair and beautiful,\u201d \u05d9\u05b8\u05e4\u05b7\u05d4 _yephath_. 1 _Sam._ xvi. 12, \u201cNow he was\nruddy and of a fair countenance,\u201d \u05d9\u05b0\u05e4\u05b7\u05d4 _yepha_. 1 _Kings_ i. 4, \u201cand\nthe damsel was fair,\u201d \u05d9\u05b8\u05e4\u05b8\u05a3\u05d4 _yaphah_.\n\nIt is true that in _Solomon\u2019s Song_, i. 16, \u201cBehold, thou art fair, my\nbeloved,\u201d\u2014ii. 10, \u201cMy beloved spake and said unto me, Rise up my love,\nmy fair one, and come away,\u201d\u2014iv. 1, \u201cBehold, thou art fair, my love;\nbehold, thou art fair; thou hast doves\u2019 eyes,\u201d\u2014iv. 7, \u201cThou art fair, my\nlove; there is no spot in thee,\u201d and also v. 9, \u201cO thou fairest among\nwomen,\u201d the word \u05d9\u05b8\u05e4\u05b7\u05d4 _yapha_, in grammatical form, is used in the\noriginal, and that the term is applied to a black woman. But this whole\nsong is written in hyperbole. In the description of Solomon\u2019s person, it\nsays, v. 11, \u201cHis head is as the most fine gold;\u201d in the original, \u201cHis\nhead is the most fine gold.\u201d 14: \u201cHis hands are as gold rings set with\nthe beryl: his belly as bright ivory overlaid with sapphires. 15: His\nlegs are as pillars of marble, set upon sockets of gold: his countenance\nis as Lebanon, excellent as the cedars.\u201d\n\nAsiatic poetry always abounded in hyperbole. Thus an Arabian poet,\nspeaking of his mistress, says\u2014\n\n    \u201cI behold in thine eyes, angels looking at me.\n    Deformity in another, in thee is excellent beauty;\n    The garments of the shepherd, upon thee, are the finest tissue,\n    And brass ornaments become fine gold.\n    Thy excellence, so great among men, the god beholds,\n    And is astonished at thy beauty.\u201d\n\nIt is not from such productions that we are to look for the simple,\noriginal, and radical meaning of terms; and probably even in the case of\nCanticles, the word \u05d9\u05b8\u05e4\u05b7\u05d4 _yapha_ would not have been allowed by the\nrules of composition, had it not been first announced in a calm,\ninitiatory manner, that she was a black woman, in order that no\nmisconception might arise from such hyperbole.\n\nLet us suppose ourselves in Arabia, and some poet announces that, for\nour evening entertainment and diversion, he will deliver a panegyric\nupon some black woman, and, among other things, says\u2014\n\n       Thy neck is as a tower of ivory.\n       Thy teeth are like a flock of sheep.\n       Thy lips are like a thread of scarlet.\n       Thy nose like the tower of Lebanon,\n       That looketh towards Damascus;\n       And the smell of thy nose like apples;\n       And the smell of the roof of thy mouth like the best wine\n       Thy stature is like the palm-tree.\n       Thy skin is fairer than snow,\n       And thy breasts like two clusters of grapes.\n       Thy head is as Mount Carmel,\n       And the hair of thy head like purple,\n       And the curls of thy hair like a flock of goats.\n       Behold, thou art fair, my love; thou hast doves\u2019 eyes.\n\nTrue, amid such hyperbole, we might have mistaken her colour, if he had\nnot previously informed us on that subject. But, as it stands, there is\nno falsehood asserted; there is no liability to mistake. The poet merely\nmeans that, at least in his conception, she is as lovely, beautiful, and\ndesirable as all those hyperboles would make her. And we think we have\nreason to contend, that the hyperbolic use of the word \u05d9\u05b8\u05e4\u05b7\u05d4 _yapha_, in\nCanticles, does not alter in any sense its real meaning, or, in any\nordinary use of language, make it a term applicable to people of colour,\nor in any sense whatever a synonyme of the \u05d8\u05b8\u05d1 _tav_, or \u05d8\u05b9\u05d1\u05b9\u05ea _to\nvoth_, as used in Genesis.\n\nThis explanation is thought necessary, since it is seen that we shall\nhereafter contend that the descendants of Cain were black.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON V.\n\nIf we take the passage, _Gen._ vi. 2, 3, as it stands in connection, it\nseems to us an obvious deduction that the commingling of the races of\nSeth and Cain was obnoxious to the Lord.\n\nIt is placed in position as the cause why his Spirit should not always\nstrive. He saw that such amalgamation would, did deteriorate and destroy\nthe more holy race of Seth; and therefore determined, with grief in his\nheart, to destroy man from the earth. All were swept away, except Noah,\nhis three sons, and their four wives. Yet sin found a residence among\nthe sons of Noah, and Canaan was doomed to perpetual bondage, as it now\nexists upon the earth. \u201cAnd he said, Cursed be Canaan: a servant of\nservants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the Lord\nGod of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth,\nand he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, and Canaan shall be his\nservant.\u201d _Gen._ ix. 25\u201327.\n\nThe expression \u201c_servant of servants_\u201d is translated from the words\n\u05e2\u05b6\u05a5\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05dd _ebed abadim, slave of slaves_. The expression is\nidiomatic, and means the most abject slave.\n\nIn the passage quoted, the word servant, in all cases, is translated\nfrom _ebed_, and means slave. There was no master placed over Adam,\u2014it\nis not certain there was over Cain,\u2014but here the master is named and\nblessed; and the slave is named, and his slavery pronounced to be of the\nmost abject kind. If we mistake not, it is an article of the Christian\ncreed of most churches, that Adam was the federal head and\nrepresentative of his race; that the covenant was made, not only with\nAdam, but also with his posterity; that the guilt of his sin was imputed\nto them; that each and every one of his posterity are depraved through\nhis sin; that this, their original sin, is properly sin, and deserves\nGod\u2019s wrath and curse. If so, can we say less in the case of Cain? or\nthat a new relation did intervene in the case of Ham?\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON VI.\n\nHaving traced the institution of slavery down to its third and final\ndegree, and finding it firmly lodged in the family of Ham, let us now\ninquire what proof there may be that his descendants are also the\ndescendants and race of Cain. This evidence is to be found in the fact,\n1st. That the descendants of Ham were black, inheriting the mark of\nCain. 2d. That the traditions and memorials of the family of Ham are\nalso traditions and memorials of the family of Cain. 3d. That Naamah, of\nthe family of Cain, is found to be kept in memory by the earlier\ndescendants of Ham. 4th. That the characteristics of these families are\nthe same, and that no facts are found to exist discordant to the\nproposition of their being one and the same race; but on the contrary,\nevery vestige of them is in unison with such proposition.\n\nIn presenting the evidence touching the several facts of the inquiry, we\ncannot claim the most lucid or logical arrangement, nor that our remarks\nwill be classed in the best methodical order for the subjects of\nconsideration. But we present the proposition that aboriginal names are\nalways significant terms: thus, Abram, the high father; Abraham, the\nfather of a multitude; Jacob, holding by the heel, supplanting; Israel,\none who wrestles with God; and Cain, one that has been purchased or\nbought: \u201cAnd she bare Cain, and said, I have _gotten_ a man from the\nLord.\u201d _Gen._ iv. 1. The word Cain is from \u05e7\u05b8\u05e0\u05b8\u05d7 _Cana_, and means to\nbuy, to purchase, and, as a noun, a thing bought; and the word \u201cgotten,\u201d\n\u05e7\u05b7\u05e0\u05b4\u05a5\u05d9\u05ea\u05b4\u05d9 _canithi_, terminating with its verbal formation, means, _I\nhave bought_ or _purchased_\u2014his name signified _one purchased_.\n\nThere is an allusion to Cain in the Koran; and, although we do not\npresent it as or for authority, yet it may not be out of place to notice\nwhat the ancient Arabians have said on the subject: \u201cVerily, I (the\nprophet) am no other than a denouncer of threats, and a messenger of\ngood tidings unto the people who believed. It is he who hath created you\nfrom one person and out of him produced his wife, that he might dwell\nwith her; and when he had known her, she carried a light burden for a\ntime, wherefore she walked easily therewith: but when it became more\nheavy, they called upon God their Lord, saying, If thou give us a child\nrightly shaped, we will surely be thankful. Yet when he had given them a\nchild rightly shaped, they attributed companions unto him, for that\nwhich he had given them. But far be that from God, which they associated\nwith him! Will they associate with him false gods, which create nothing,\nbut are themselves created, and can neither give them assistance nor\nhelp themselves?\u201d _Koran_, chap. vii.\n\nThe Arabian commentators, in explanation of this passage, relate a\ntradition among them. They say, when Eve was big with her first child,\nthe devil came to frighten and fill her mind with apprehension. But he\npretended to her that by his prayers to God he could persuade him to\ncause her to have a well-shaped child, a son, the likeness of Adam, and\nthat she should be safely delivered of it, upon the condition that she\nshould dedicate or name the child _abed al hareth, the slave of the\ndevil_, instead of the name that Adam would give it, _abed Allah, the\nslave of God_; that Eve accepted the terms, and the child was born, &c.\nThe legend is varied by the commentators, some saying the child died as\nsoon as born, or that the devil applied to Adam instead of Eve, &c.; but\nthey all agree that _al hareth_ was the name the devil went by among the\nangels.\n\nIt is a little remarkable that the passage in _Gen._ iv. 2, \u201cBut Cain\nwas a tiller of the ground,\u201d Heb. _obed adamah, the slave of the\nground_, would be, in Arabic, this phrase, _abed al hareth_, the cognate\nof the Hebrew word \u05d0\u05e8\u05e6 _erets_, the earth. And therefore the Arabic,\n_abed al hareth_, will be a translation of the Hebrew in Genesis. This\nlegend will be found in _Al Beidawi, Jallado' ddin, Zamakhshari, et al._\nSee _Sale\u2019s Koran_, vol. i. p. 360.\n\nThe discovery of the western continent by Columbus was the great and\nabsorbing event of the age in which it happened. It was an event which,\nin consideration of the characteristics of men, would be held in\ncommemoration: in all parts of the world it would be a matter of such\nrecord as literature made convenient, or the relative influence of the\nevent rendered constant to the mind. And hence we find it referred to\nnot only in books, but in the continent discovered; it is commemorated\nby the application of the name of the discoverer to its seas, lakes,\nrivers, mountains, districts of country, cities, towns, &c. Now, if at\nthe time of the event, the world had not advanced to the achievement of\nliterary records, it is evident that the latter mode of commemoration\ncould have been the only one practicable; and history shows us that this\nmode of commemoration was adopted at the earliest ages, nor laid aside\neven at this day. This disposition to commemorate is one of the\ncharacteristics of the whole human family. Thus Eve commemorated some\nevent, described as the purchase of her first-born of the Lord, by\ngiving said first-born the name of \u201c_one purchased_.\u201d\n\n\u201cAnd the sons of Noah that went forth of the ark were Shem, and Ham, and\nJapheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan.\u201d \u201cAnd Ham, the father of\nCanaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren\nwithout.\u201d \u201cAnd Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son\nhad done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan.\u201d _Gen._ ix. 18, 22,\n24, 25. The things here recorded took place in quick succession from the\nremoval of Noah\u2019s family from the ark. Ham ultimately had four sons, the\nyoungest of whom he named Canaan. Is there any evidence, at the time of\nthese records, that any of the children of Ham were born, and especially\nhis youngest?\n\nIt does appear to us that the word Canaan, as here used, does not mean\nany particular son of Ham. It is evidently used at a time before he had\nany sons. From the manner of the relation it seems probable the planting\nof the vineyard was among the first things Noah did after the flood. Two\nor three years was all the time required for the consummation of this\nevent. In case Ham had married a female of the race of Cain, he had also\nidentified himself with that race, and might well be called by his\nfather, especially at a moment of displeasure, by a term emphatically\nshowing, yea announcing prophetically, his degradation through all\nfuture time,\u2014the degradation to which that connection had reduced him.\n\nThe ill-manners of Ham towards his father were not the great cause of\nthe curse. The cause must have previously existed. The ill-manners only\ninfluence the time of its announcement. Even had it never been\nannounced, the consequences would have been the same. The sentence of\nthe law is only declaratory of the relation in which one has placed\nhimself. The cause of the curse or degradation here pronounced must have\nbeen something adequate, to have produced it. The ill-manners could have\nno so great effect. And let us inquire, where are we to find an adequate\ncause for the immediate degradation of an unborn race, unless we find it\nin intermarriage. His intermarriage, then, could have been with no other\nthan the race of Cain? When Noah spoke to Ham, and said, \u201cCursed be\nCanaan,\u201d he had no reference to any particular descendant of Ham, but\nincluded them all, as the race of Cain, and, in reproof and\ndisparagement to his son, reproaching the connection. Suppose, even at\nthis day, a descendant of Japheth should choose to amalgamate with the\nNegro, could not his father readily foretell the future destiny of the\noffspring,\u2014their standing among the rest of his family? The term\n_Canaan_, thus spoken and applied to Ham, was significant of the\ncharacter his conduct had created, by identifying himself with the race\nof Cain. It was a new name, deeply and degradingly distinguishing him\nfrom the rest of his father\u2019s family. Jacob was called Israel, after\nhaving wrestled with God; but an honourable cognomen would be made known\nand used, whereas one of reverse character might or might not.\n\nIt cannot be expected, at this late day, to account for the anomalies of\nthe ancient Hebrew. Terms applied as proper names, whether significant\nor not, are in all languages, and in all ages, subject sometimes to\nstrange and even oblique alterations. Thus, in the family of Benjamin,\n\u201c_Ard_,\u201d of Genesis and Numbers, is changed into _Addar_ in Chronicles;\nand thus _Colon_ of Genoa was converted into _Columbus_ in the western\ncontinent.\n\nThus, _Muppim_ and _Huppim_, in Genesis, are changed into _Shupham_ and\n_Hupham_ in Numbers, and into _Shephupham_ and _Huram_ in Chronicles.\nSee _Gen._ xlvi. 21, _Num._ xxvi. 39, and 1 _Chron._ viii. 5. The\nKenites, Kennizites, and Canaanites of _Gen._ xv. 19; the Kenaz, xxxvi.\n11 and 42; the Kenite and Kenites of _Num._ xxiv. 21; the _Kenites_ of 1\n_Sam._ xxvii. 10, xv. 5, 6; _Judges_ iv. 11\u201317; and the city called\n\u201c_Cain_,\u201d \u05d4\u05b7\u05e7\u05bc\u05ad\u05d9\u05b4\u05df _ha Kain_, _Josh._ xv. 57, also _Kinah_, \u05e7\u05b4\u05d9\u05e0\u05b8\u05a5\u05d4\n_idem_ 22,\u2014are all legitimately derived and descended from the name\ngiven to the first-born of mankind. Doubtless a critical search would\nfind many more; but in all these instances the derivative is used for\nand by the descendants of Ham. But no instance is found where any such\nderivative is in use by the unmixed posterity of Shem or Japheth. We\nsurely need not point in the direction of the cause of these facts.\n\nIn _Judges_ iv. 11, we have, \u201cNow, Heber the Kenite, \u05d4\u05b7\u05e7\u05b5\u05bc\u05d9\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05a8 _ha\nKeni_,) which was of the children of Hobab, (the Jethro of Genesis,) the\nfather-in-law of Moses.\u201d We shall hereafter have occasion to show that\nthe father-in-law of Moses was a descendant of Misraim, the second son\nof Ham; that he dwelt in the mountains of Midian, and, when spoken of in\nregard to his country, was called a Midianite; but his daughter, when\nspoken of in regard to her colour, was called an Ethiopian; but now,\nwhen he is spoken of in regard to his race, he is called a Cainite,\n_Kenite_.\n\nIn _Josh._ xv. 17, we have a derivative in common origin of the\nforegoing, in \u201cKenaz,\u201d the brother of Caleb; but upon examining 1\n_Chron._ ii., we shall find a sufficient reason in the blood of that\nfamily; and in all instances where such derivative is found, we shall\nfind the same cause to warrant its use.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VII.\n\nSuch evidence as there may be that Ham did take to wife some particular\nfemale of the race of Cain, will also be the most positive evidence that\ntheir descendants are one and the same.\n\nLet it be noticed that, immediately preceding the account of the flood,\nand the causes which led to that judgment upon the earth, we are\npresented with the genealogical tables of the families of Cain and Seth,\ndown to that period; and that these tables terminate with Ham, in that\nof Seth, and in the female Naamah, the daughter of Lamech, in the\ngenealogy of Cain. Ham and Naamah are thus placed upon a parallel, so\nfar as it regards these tables.\n\nIt surely is not difficult to perceive the cause why, in the table of\nSeth, the genealogical line ending in the family of Noah was selected;\nbut, if the entire race of Cain were to be destroyed by the flood, why\nwas the particular line ending in Naamah chosen? Why was any such table\nof his race required? Beside Eve, the two wives of Lamech and this\nNaamah are the only females whose names are given before the flood? If\nthe entire race of Cain was destroyed, how was the name of Naamah of\nmore importance for us to know than that of thousands of the same race?\nWhy has God sent these facts down to us? Has he ever revealed to us any\nthing unnecessary for us to know? Is it consistent with his character to\ndo so? There have been, through all time since the deluge, traditions\nand legends among the Arabians, and many other Asiatic tribes, that this\nNaamah and her posterity continued upon the earth subsequent to that\nperiod. We give in substance a tale of traditionary lore among the\nEastern nations, found in the Book Zohar, and referred to by Sale, page\n87. They believe that at an extremely ancient time, there was an\ninferior race of beings, whom they call \u201cjin,\u201d (query, a cognate of \u05d9\u05e0\u05d4\n_yana_ or _jana_, to cast down, destroyed, used in a bad sense, to cast\naway;) that this race was created from, by, or someway connected with\nfire, heat, &c., either in their original state or in an acquired\ncondition; that they eat, drink, propagate, and die, and are subjects of\nsalvation or reprobation, like men; that they inhabited the world for\nages before Adam was created; that they fell at length into general\ncorruption; that, therefore, Eblis (one of the names of the devil) drove\nthem into a remote part of the earth, and confined them there; but,\nhowever, some of their race remained; and that Tahmunah, (the Noah of\nthe Hebrew Scriptures,) one of the ancient kings of Persia, drove them\ninto the mountains of _K\u00e2f_.\n\nAnother version of the same legend is, that this race of beings was\nbegotten by Aza with Naamah, the daughter of Lamech. (Let us here note,\n\u05d0\u05d6\u05d0 _aza_ is a Chaldaic word, meaning _heat, to grow hot_, &c., and as\nsuch is used in _Dan._ iii. 22,\u2014therefore a synonyme with Ham, as\napplied to the son of Noah.) But some have it that the race is the joint\noffspring, or from the double paternity, of Aza and Azael. (Let us also\nnotice, that this monstrosity of paternity is reduced to a single\npersonage by the fact, that the Hebrew suffix _el_ merely gives quality,\neven by repetition, as thus,\u2014Aza the mighty Aza.) But this version of\nthe legend denominates the race \u201c_Shedim_,\u201d the plural of _shed_, a word\nsometimes used to express idols, but more often used to mean desolation,\ndestruction, &c.; and because the nursing breast is often exhausted, or\nfrom the notion that such exhaustion is akin to a thing destroyed, this\nword is applied to the female breast; and hence a posterity strongly\nmarked by natural peculiarities would very readily take some name\nexpressive of such fact. Even at this day, in reference to such\npeculiarities, we say, they took it from the \u201cbreast.\u201d\n\nWe deem it unnecessary to enter into a critical history of the word\n_shed_ or _shedim_, as used by the Arabians, the \u201c_sed_\u201d of the Hebrews;\nbut we may be permitted to remark that, from its conveying the idea of\ndestruction, desolation, so strongly, the Hebrews applied it also to\nmean a \u201cfield,\u201d or country, in a destroyed or desolate or uncultivated\ncondition; and it is thus used in many places. See _Genesis_ iii. 1.;\nand is thus the word we call _Sodom_. It always carries with it the idea\nopposite to improvement; and, governed by the same leading idea, writers\nhave applied it, perhaps rather figuratively, to any living existence\nfound wandering over waste and solitary districts. We might pursue the\nsubject of this tradition, and from the analogy of language, as well as\nfrom ancient associations, at least find some evidence that _Zahmurah_\nwas no other than Noah; that the affix \u201c_el_\u201d with _Aza_ arose from the\nacknowledged superiority of the race of Seth to that of Cain, in\nconsequence of which they were sometimes described as \u201cthe sons of God,\u201d\n_Gen._ vi. 4; and that the tradition points to the race of Ham, and\ntheir humble condition in the world.\n\nTraces of this legend will not only be found as above, but also in\nGemara, in Hagiga, and Igrat Baale Hayyin, c. 15.\n\nIf it be a fact that the Negro race are the descendants of Ham and\nNaamah, the daughter of Lamech, of the race of Cain, it might be thought\nthere would still be existing some traditions of such an extraordinary\nfact. As such we present the legend: not that we attach to it any undue\nimportance, and especially not to be received as evidence at all, in\ncontradiction of one word found in the holy books. But if a legend of\nancient time shall be found, when sifted from the ignorance of fable or\nthe fraud of design, to coincide with facts as related in the holy\nbooks, we may be permitted to consider the same as a circumstance not\naltogether unworthy of consideration.\n\nBut, we repeat, unless Naamah was to survive the destruction of the\ndeluge, why was her name, why was her genealogy recorded and sent down\nto future time?\n\nWe think it certain that if she did survive the flood, she must have\ndone so as the wife of one of Noah\u2019s sons. Now, as it is evident that\nthe intermixture of the two races was regarded by Jehovah as a sin, it\nis not probable that either Shem or Japheth took her to wife, since they\nwere both most honourably distinguished by a public blessing immediately\nafter the flood.\n\nBut again: Noah had been preaching the then impending ruin near a\nhundred years. Lamech might well have had some glimpses of the\nsubdiluvian world, and certainly saw the consequential ruin to young\nHam, of the holy family of Noah, from such a connection with his\ndaughter, Naamah. It could not otherwise than operate as a moral death\nto all the high hopes of him and his posterity. In case such connection\nwas formed, and Lamech was forward in aiding or influencing it, then\nwell might his troubled soul exclaim to his two wives as related.\n\nBut in case Ham did take to wife this daughter of Lamech, we might\nexpect her name also to be held in remembrance by her posterity, as we\nhave seen to some extent was that of Cain; and if we find such fact to\nexist in regard to her, it will be to our mind strong additional proof,\nthat the descendants of Ham were in common the descendants of Cain. We\nnotice here the fact, which we may hereafter deem necessary to prove,\nthat, of the children of Ham, Cush originally settled in Arabia and the\nsouthwestern parts of Asia generally, Misraim in Egypt, Phut in the\nnorthern parts of Africa and southward indefinitely, and Canaan in\nPalestine.\n\nWhen this latter country came to be conquered by Joshua, he found a city\nby the name of \u201cNaamah,\u201d situated in that portion which was given to the\ntribe of Judah. See _Josh._ xv. 41. But we shall directly see that there\nmust have also been another city by the name of \u201cNaamah,\u201d situated\nprobably in the region originally occupied by Cush. The book of Job is\nsupposed to have been written as early as the days of Abraham. One of\nthe men named in it is Zophar the \u201cNaamathite.\u201d See _Job_ ii. 11; also\nxi. 1.; also xlii. 9. He was an inhabitant of \u201cNaamah,\u201d at a much more\nancient period than the time of Joshua. Job is represented as of the\nland of \u201cUz,\u201d far distant from the land of Canaan, in the eastern parts\nof Arabia. His intimate friends and acquaintances cannot be expected to\nhave been of so distant a country as was the land of Judea. The evidence\nis then that there must have been a city in the land of Cush by the same\nname. But in _Gen._ x. 7, one of the sons of Cush is called _Raamah_: we\nthink those who will examine the subject will find this term a mere\nalteration or adulteration of _Naamah_, as there are many others, a\ntedious explanation of which might not be excused at our hand. Suffice\nit then to say that among the Cushites at a very early period one whole\ntribe were called \u201c_Naamathites_,\u201d distinct from the _Naamathites_ that\nlived in the city of _Naamah_ conquered by Joshua. Another variation of\nthis word will be found in the word \u201c_Hamathites_,\u201d _Gen._ xvi. 18. This\nword is used, differently varied, in _Num._ xiii. 21, xxvi. 40; _Judges_\niii. 3; 1 _Kings_ x. 65, xiv. 21\u201331; 2 _Kings_ v. 1\u201327; 2 _Sam._ viii.\n9; 1 _Chron._ viii. 4, 7; 2 _Chron._ viii. 3, xii. 13; _Isa._ x. 9, also\nxi. 11, also xvii. 10; _Ezek._ xlvii. 16, 20, also xlviii. 1, and\nperhaps many other places; and in all cases in reference to individuals,\nthe people and country of the Canaanites, and no doubt in memory of\ntheir great female progenitor, Naamah, the daughter of Lamech, of the\nrace of Cain.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VIII.\n\nBefore we close this branch of our inquiry, let us examine into the\nsignificancy and composition of the name \u201cNaamah,\u201d as applied to the\ndaughter of Lamech: and we take occasion here to say how deeply we are\nindebted to the labours of the Rev. Dr. Lee, the regius professor of\nHebrew in the University of Cambridge, England, and whom we have no\nquestion in believing to be among the most penetrating oriental scholars\nof the age. By an intimate knowledge of the Asiatic languages, he\ndiscovered that in many instances where, in a cognate case, the Heemanti\nwould be used in Hebrew, in them the word was supplied with a particle,\nchanging or influencing the sense. Upon full research, he determined\nthat the Heemanti, in Hebrew, were the fragments of ancient or obsolete\nparticles, still influencing the significance as would have done the\nparticles themselves. Let us take an example in our own language: _able_\nimplies fulness of power; add to it the prefix _un_, and you reverse the\nsense wholly. Yet we do not perceive, without reflection, that the\nprefix really is a contraction of something similar to \u201c_I am not_,\u201d &c.\n\nWith this door open to a constitutional knowledge of the language, let\nus take the word \u05e6\u05dd _am_. The terminating aspirate of the word Naamah\nwill be readily formed from this by the usual feminine, as a fragment of\nthe \u05d1\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05ea later \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea _bath_. And for the prefix _nun_, we beg leave to\nquote from Lee\u2019s Lectures, pages 123 and 124:\n\n\u201cWe come now to propose a conjecture on the prefix _nun_, and on the\nmodification of sense which primitive words undergo in consequence of\nits influence. If then we take this (\u05e0) as the defective form of some\nprimitive word, appearing sometimes in the form of \u05d4\u05e0, at other times as\n\u05e0 only, we may suppose it to have been derived from the (Arabic) root,\nwhich, had it been preserved in Hebrew, might have been written \u05d4\u05b8\u05e0\u05b8\u05bd\u05d4\n_hanah_, \u05d0\u05b8\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4 _anah_, or \u05d0\u05b8\u05e0\u05b8\u05d0 _ana_. The senses attributed to it by\nCastell (in his Arabic Lexicon) are, among others, \u2018ad extremum\nperfectionis terminum pervenit\u2014assecutus fuit, seu percepit\u2014retinuit,\ndetinuit, coercuit,\u2014lenitate, modestia et patientia usus fuit,\u2019 &c.\nSupposing this word, or some defective form of it, to be construed with\nany other, the sense of both taken together would, in general, give the\nforce of the forms thus compounded. And as this form of compound is\noften in the leading word of one of the conjugations, it becomes the\nmore important to ascertain its properties. Primitive words receiving\nthis particle will have a sort of passive sense, or will exhibit\nsubjection to the action implied by the primitive accidentally, but not\nhabitually. Words receiving this augment, subjecting them to the action\nimplied by the primitive word, may, when the context requires it, also\nbe construed as having a reciprocal sense, or as implying possibility,\u201d\n&c.\n\nNow then, let us present examples of the influence of this particular\nHeemanti: \u2014\u05e9\u05b8\u05c2\u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e8 _sakur_, _a hireling_, one whose habit is to be\nhired, one whose occupation is that of being hired by others. Add \u05e0\n_nun_, and we have \u05e0\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c2\u05db\u05b8\u05bc\u0594\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc _niskkaru_, as in 1 _Sam._ ii. 5, and\ntranslated thus: \u201cThey that were full have hired out themselves for\nbread.\u201d The idea in Hebrew is: They who were habitually full, from the\nforce of the circumstances influencing the case, have been compelled to\nhire themselves to others for bread. The _sakur_ is a hireling from\nhabit, from constitution, from custom, &c., and which idea enters into\nthe meaning of the word. But the prefix of the proposed Heemanti at once\ndestroys all idea of habit, fitness, constitution, or custom; but yet\nthe individual is a \u201chireling,\u201d but only as the force of circumstances\ninfluencing the case compelled him to be so. Thus this Heemanti gives a\nreflective quality, reflecting back upon the agent or actor, as thus:\n\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05de\u05b7\u05e8 _shamar_, _he guards_, \u05e0\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05de\u05b7\u05e8 _nishmar_, _he guards himself_;\nthat is, under the force of circumstances affecting the case, he was\ncompelled to guard himself. Thus \u05db\u05bc\u05de\u05e8 _chemar_ is sometimes used to\nexpress the idea _black_, as a constant, habitual quality. In _Lam._ v.\n10, we find it with this Heemanti, thus, \u05e0\u05b4\u05db\u05b0\u05de\u05b8\u0594\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc _nichemaru_, \u201cour\nskin was black;\u201d not that their skin was naturally and habitually black,\nbut made so by the facts of the case: and this same word, with this\nHeemanti, is used in _Gen._ xliii. 30, and translated, by attempting to\nexpress a Hebrew cognate idea, into \u201c_yearn_.\u201d The idea is, his bowels\ndid not habitually \u201cyearn,\u201d but the action was forced upon him by the\nfacts of the case; and the same again in 1 _Kings_ iii. 26. In _Hosea_\nxi. 8, we find it again translated \u201cmy repentings are kindled:\u201d because\nhis people were bent on backsliding, which would cause the Assyrian to\nbe their king, and war to be in their cities continually, and their bad\ncounsels themselves to be destroyed, his repentings were forced to be\n\u201ckindled.\u201d See the passage.\n\nThis particle then prefixed to the word \u05e2\u05dd _am_, with its feminine\ntermination, makes the word \u05e0\u05e2\u05de\u05d4 _Naamah_, with the meaning, under the\ncondition of things, she was to become a people distinct to herself; not\nthat she would be a people absolutely, by the habitual action of\nconstituent ability, but she would be a people distinct to herself, only\nas the peculiar influencing causes made her so,\u2014showing also that these\ncauses gave distinction and character to her posterity. Thus her very\nname shadowed forth the condition of her race. A Frenchman goes to\nEngland, or _vice versa_: a generation passes and nationality is lost.\nNot so with the Ethiopian. For \u201cthough thou wash thee with nitre and\ntake thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked before me, saith the\nLord God.\u201d _Jer._ ii. 22.\n\nA form of the word \u201cNaamah\u201d is used in character of a masculine plural,\nin _Isa._ xvii. 10, and translated \u201cpleasant,\u201d as if from \u05e0\u05e2\u05dd _nam_.\nForced to differ from this translation, we beg leave to place the whole\npassage before the scholars of the day:\n\n                          \u05db\u05b4\u05bc\u05a4\u05d9 \u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05db\u05b7\u0599\u05d7\u05b7\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u0599 \u05d0\u05b1\u05dc\u05b9\u05d4\u05b5\u05a3\u05d9 \u05d9\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e2\u05b5\u0594\u05da\u05b0 \u05d5\u05b0\u05e6\u0596\u05d5\u05bc\u05e8 \u05de\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05bb\u05d6\u05b5\u05bc\u05ad\u05da\u05b0 \u05dc\u05b9\u05a3\u05d0 \u05d6\u05b8\u05db\u05b8\u0591\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc \u05e2\u05b7\u05dc\u05be\u05db\u05b5\u05bc\u05c4\u05df \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d8\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05b4\u05d9\u05a8\n                                            \u05e0\u05b4\u05d8\u05b0\u05e2\u05b5\u05a3\u05d9 \u05e0\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d5\u05bc\u05d6\u05b0\u05de\u05a5\u05e8\u05b7\u05c4\u05ea \u05d6\u05b8\u0596\u05d3 \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d6\u05e8\u05b8\u05e2\u05b6\u05bd\u05e0\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05c3\n\nIt is translated thus: \u201cBecause thou hast forgotten the God of thy\nsalvation, and hast not been mindful of the rock of thy strength,\ntherefore shalt thou plant pleasant plants and shalt set it with strange\nslips.\u201d\n\nWe beg to inquire whether there is not a material defect in the latter\nclause of this translation? The verb \u201cto plant,\u201d in Hebrew, governs two\naccusatives, to wit, the plantation and the thing planted. In English,\nwe are compelled to render one of the names as governed by a\npreposition. Thus, he planted a field with corn, or he planted corn in a\nfield. The word \u05d6\u05b0\u05de\u05b9\u05e8\u05b7\u05d4 _zemorath_, is often translated a song, as \u201cThe\nLord Jehovah is my strength and song.\u201d See _Ps._ cxviii. 14 and _Isa._\nxii. 2. But the idea is more comprehensive than is our idea expressed by\nthe term \u201csong.\u201d It includes the result of a course of conduct. Thus the\nresult of a devout worship of God is that Jehovah becomes the\n\u201c_Zemorath_\u201d of the worshipper; and we doubt not our term _result_,\nalthough imperfect, will give a better view of the prophet\u2019s idea in\nthis place than the _song_. In this sense this word is used in _Gen._\nxliii. 11, and translated \u201cfruits:\u201d thus, \u201ctake of the best fruits of\nthe land,\u201d that is, the best results of our cultivation. The prophet\ninforms his people that they intermix and amalgamate with the\nNaamathites because they have forgot God, and that the result is the two\nlast words in the passage, to wit, the \u201c_zar_\u201d and \u201c_tizera-ennu_\u201d that\nis, a \u201cstranger.\u201d See _Exod._ xxx. 33; _Levit._ xxii. 10, 12, 13, where\n\u201c_zar_\u201d is translated \u201cstranger;\u201d also, _Job_ xix. 15, 17; also, _Prov._\nv. 10, 17, and 20; and many other places, surely enough to determine its\nmeaning here. The original sense of the last word in the passage was to\n_sow seed_, hence to _scatter_ and _destroy_. The result of such\namalgamation then is, their posterity will be a deteriorated race, and\nthe pure Hebrew stock sown to the winds, scattered, wasted away and\ndestroyed.\n\nIn these highly excited and poetic effusions of the prophet, we are to\nnotice the chain of thought and mode of expression by which he reaches\nthe object in view. This chapter commences with the information that\nDamascus shall cease to be a city; that Aroer shall be forsaken, and\nEphraim be without a fortress to protect her; and finally that Jacob\nshall be made thin, like a few scattering grapes found by the gleaner,\nor a few berries of the olive left in the top of the bough, and the\nhouse of Jacob become desolate. In the passage under consideration the\ncauses of this condition of Jacob are announced. If our view of the word\n\u201cNaamah\u201d be correct, in the masculine plural, as here used, it will be\nquite analogous to Ethiopians. But we have no one word of its meaning;\nperhaps the idea will be more correctly expressed by Naamathites.\nEvidently the idea intended to be conveyed by the prophet by the word\n\u05e0\u05b7\u05a5\u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u0594\u05d9\u05dd _Naamanim_, is, a people whose cultivation would be\nabortive as to them and injurious to the cultivator; that is, a people\nwith whom intermarriage will produce nothing but injury and destruction\nto the house of Jacob.\n\nBy the use of some such paraphrasis the idea of the prophet will be\nbrought to mind: \u201cBecause thou hast forgotten the God of thy salvation,\nand hast not been mindful of the rock of thy strength, therefore shalt\nthou (or therefore dost thou) plant _Naamathites_,\u201d (that is, amalgamate\nwith the descendants of Ham and Naamah,) \u201cand the fruits of the land\nshall be a stranger\u201d (that is, their adulterated posterity will be\nheathen) \u201cscattering thee away;\u201d that is, wasting away not only the\npurity of the Hebrew blood, but their worship also.\n\nRepeat: \u201cBecause thou hast forgotten the God of thy salvation, and hast\nnot been mindful of the rock of thy strength.\u201d Therefore dost thou\ncohabit with the heathen, and thy posterity, O Jacob, shall be an enemy,\nand thou scattered away and destroyed! Such is the announcement of the\nprophet.\n\nOne of the most bitter specimens of irony contained in the Scriptures is\nthe answer of Job to the Naamathite: \u201cNo doubt but ye are the people,\nand wisdom shall die with you.\u201d The passage needs no comment.\n\nThe view we take of the word \u201c_Naamanim_,\u201d as used by Isaiah, we think\nwarranted by the succeeding sentence, which we ask the scholar to\nnotice.\n\n\u201cFor a day thou shalt make thy plant to grow, for a morning thou shalt\nmake thy seed to flourish, but the harvest shall be a heap\u201d (a burden\nunbearable) \u201cin the days of grief and desperate sorrow.\u201d And such has\never been the lot of the white parent who has amalgamated with the\nnegro; as to posterity, it is ruin.\n\nThe prophet borrowed his figure from agriculture. His intention was to\npresent to the mind the abortiveness of such a course of sin, by\npresenting a bold and distinct view of the mental and moral character of\nthe descendants of Naamah; and is on a par with\u2014\u201cAre ye not as the\nchildren of the Ethiopians unto me, O children of Israel? saith the\nLord.\u201d _Amos_ ix. 7.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IX.\n\nBy referring to the instances where we allege are to be found variations\nof the names _Cain_ and _Naamah_, it will be at once noticed that some\nof them are quite remarkable. Shall we be excused for a few remarks in\nexplanation, by way of example, of other lingual changes? Queen\nElizabeth lived but yesterday; and her history has not advanced through\na very great variety of languages, yet we find, in commemoration of her,\none place named Elizabeth, Elizabeth City, Elizabethtown,\nElizabethville, Elizabethburg, and another, even Betsey\u2019s Wash-tub, and\nbecause she was never married, one is called Virgin Queen, and another\nVirginia.\n\nNow, we all know that at a very ancient period, the worship of the sun\nand of fire was introduced into the British Isles. Is there nothing left\nat this day in commemoration of that fact? The sun became an object of\ngreat and absorbing consideration. The ancient Celtic word _grian_ meant\nthe sun; from the application of this word and its variations, we have a\nproof, not only of how words are made to change, but also of the fact\nthat the people of that country were once addicted to the worship of the\nsun or fire. Hence Apollo, who was the sun personified, was called\nGryn\u00e6us. At once we find a singular change in the name of the Druidical\nidol _Crom-Cruach_, often called _Cean Groith_, the head of the sun.\nThis was the image or idol god to whom the ancient inhabitants of\nIreland offered infants and young children a sacrifice. It was in fact\nthe same as the Moloch of the ancient Hamitic occupants of Palestine,\nand was so firmly established in the superstitions of the world, that\nwhatever race had the ascendency in Ireland, it continued to be thus\nworshipped, giving the name of the \u201cPlains of slaughter\u201d to the place of\nits location, until St. Patrick had the success to destroy the image and\nits worship; and hence also the names _Knoc-greine_ and _Tuam-greine_,\nhills where the sun was worshipped, and other places in Ireland, even\nnow keep in memory that worship: _Cairn-Grainey_, the sun\u2019s heap,\nGranniss\u2019 bed, corrupted from _Grian-Beacht_, the sun\u2019s circle. A point\nof land near Wexford is called _Grenor_, the sun\u2019s fire, and the town of\n_Granaid_, because the sun was worshipped there. And we may notice a\nstill greater variation in _Carig-Croith_, the rock of the sun\u2014and even\nour present word _grange_, from the almost obsolete idea, a place\nenclosed, separate and distinct, but open to the sun, now used as a\nsynonyme of _farm_.\n\nLet us take our word _fire_, and we shall perceive remarkable changes\nthrough all the languages from the Chaldaic down. _Gen._ xi. 28, \u201c_Ur_\u201d\nis translated from \u05d0\u05d5\u05bc\u05e8 which means fire. Abraham was a native of\nChaldea, and from a place where they worshipped fire, or the sun. It was\nused to mean the sun, _Job_ xxxviii. 12; also, in the plural, _Isa._\nxxiv. 15: \u201cWherefore glorify ye the Lord in the fires?\u201d It is here \u05d0\u05e8\u05bb\u05d9\u05dd\n_urim_. Because fire emitted light, it became used to mean light. The\nwords _urim_ and _thummim_ meant lights or fires, and truth: among the\nfire-worshippers the same term meant _fire_ and _sun_. The Copts called\ntheir kings _suns_. Hence from this term they took the word _ouro_, to\nmean the idea of royalty; their article _pi_, made _piouro_, the sun or\nthe _king_, which being carried back to the Hebrews, they made it\n_Pharaoh_; but the sun was regarded as a god, and hence the Egyptian\nkings came to be called gods; but the Chaldaic and Hebrew \u05d0\u05d5\u05bc\u05e8, when\napplied to fire or the sun by the Copts, as an object of worship, was\ndistinguished from the idea of royalty by the term _ra_ and _re_, with\nthe particle _pira_ and _pire_, generally written _phra_ and _phre_.\nHence the Greek \u03c0\u03c5\u03c1, _pur_, to mean fire, and hence pyrites, which means\na fire-stone, a stone well burned, or a stone containing fire, &c.\n\nAnd hence also the Hebrew word \u05e8\u05d0\u05d9 _rai_, a mirror, vision, the god of\nvision, and by figure a conspicuous or illustrious person. But according\nto Butman, the Sanscrit root _Raja_ is the original of the obsolete\nGreek word, \u1fec\u03b1, \u1fec\u03b1\u03b9\u03b1, \u1fec\u03b1\u03c9\u03bd, and if so, possibly of the Chaldaic word\nunder view. But however that may be, it is evident that the Greek\n_radios_ is at least derived through the channel indicated; and we now\nuse the term _ray_ to mean an emanation from great power. Our word\n_regent_ is also from the same source, through the Latin _rex_, and may\nbe found, slightly modified, through all the European dialects. And it\nmay be remarked that, cognate therewith, we have the Arabic word\n_raiheh_, or _raygeh_, to mean fragrancy; the poetic minds of the\nArabians uniformly applying this image to legitimate rule and\ngovernment.\n\nAnd if we take a view of the filiations of languages, even as they are\nnow found, such changes cannot be deemed unusual, especially if we take\ninto consideration the inevitable variation words are found to undergo\nin their progress through different countries and ages of time; and more\nespecially, if we notice the precise manner in which lingual variations\nare found to operate.\n\nChanges of language sometimes take place upon a single word apparently\nby caprice, among different tribes of people,\u2014sometimes by the\ntransposition of the consonant or vowel sound; by the insertion of a\nletter or letters for the sake of euphony; by the contraction or\nabbreviation of letters for the sake of despatch; by the reduplication\nof a letter or syllable on the account of some real or fancied\nimportance or emphasis attached to it; and by the deletion or addition\nof a letter or syllable at the commencement or end of a word, for a real\nor supposed more felicitous enunciation of certain sounds in succession;\nand hence alterations, slight at first, are liable to become quite\nremarkable.\n\nThus \u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03b7 in Greek, becomes _form\u00e6_ in Latin; _regnum_ becomes _reign_;\n_c\u0153lum, ciel_; _ultra jectum, Utrecht_; and \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _ebed, eved_, as\nvariously pronounced, meaning a _slave_, becomes _obediens_,\n_obedienter_, _obedio_, _obedientia_, in Latin, and _obey_, _obedient_,\n&c., in English. The Celtic _ros_ becomes _horse_, and the English\n_grass_ becomes _garse_. Consonants of the same order are interchanged;\np becomes _b_, and b _v_, d _t_, g _k_ and sometimes _n_,\u2014\u03c6 becomes _ph_\nor _f_, d or t becomes _th_, and g or c _gh_. It is therefore impossible\nthat such changes should not have taken place, and therefore they give\nproof of the genuineness of the history they may develop.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON X.\n\nWE have heretofore remarked that such names as are derived from _Cain_\nor _Naamah_ are never found in the holy books, except among and applied\nto the descendants of Ham. But there are some few instances of the\napplication of these terms in the family of the Benjamites. It is\ntherefore our design now to prove, so far as may be, that such\ninstances, in the family of Benjamin, are wholly confined to those cases\nwhere the Benjamite was a mixed-blooded person, and a descendant of Ham,\nas well as of the youngest son of Jacob. The holy books do give evidence\nthat individuals of the race of Shem did sometimes commingle with the\ndescendants of Ham.\n\nFrom the proximity of the Israelite tribes to those of Ham; from their\nco-habitation of Palestine itself, it was natural to expect among the\nlow and vulgar, as well as among those whose morals hung loosely about\nthem, that such intermixture should take place. \u201cNow Sheshan had no\nsons, but daughters. And Sheshan had a servant, (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, a\n_slave_,) an Egyptian, (\u05de\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05e8\u05b4\u0596\u05d9 _Mitsri_, a _Misraimite_, a descendant\nof the second son of Ham,) whose name was Jarha. And Sheshan gave his\ndaughter to Jarha his servant, (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed, slave_) to wife.\u201d 1\n_Chron._ ii. 34, 35. Proving the wisdom and truth of the saying of\nSolomon, \u201cHe that delicately bringeth up his servant (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed,\nslave_) from a child, shall have him become his son at length.\u201d _Prov._\nxxix. 21.\n\n\u201cRehoboam was forty-one years old when he began to reign; and he reigned\nseventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the Lord did choose out of\nall the tribes of Israel to put his name there: and his mother\u2019s name\nwas Naamah, an Ammonitess. And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was\nburied with his fathers in the city of David. And his mother\u2019s name was\n_Naamah_, an _Ammonitess_.\u201d 1 _Kings_ xiv. 21, 31.\n\n\u201cFor Rehoboam was one-and-forty years old when he began to reign, and he\nreigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the Lord had chosen\nout of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there, and his mother\u2019s\nname was _Naamah_, an _Ammonitess_.\u201d 2 _Chron._ xii. 13.\n\n\u201cBut King Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter\nof Pharaoh; women of the Moabites, _Ammonites_, Edomites, Zidonians, and\nHittites; of the nations concerning which the Lord said unto the\nchildren of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come\nin unto you.\u201d 1 _Kings_ xi. 1, 2.\n\nBy thus personally amalgamating with the various nations over whom he\nruled, Solomon, no doubt, expected more firmly to establish his throne.\nThis led to the selection of the son of this woman for his successor.\n\nA vast majority of the tribes over whom his reign extended were the\ndescendants of Ham.\n\nBut this very act, which he thought to be political wisdom, although\ncontrary to the laws of God, brought ruin to the permanency of his\ndynasty. The great majority of his Jewish subjects, hunting up, as was\nnatural, plausible excuses, rejected with scorn the contamination of the\nroyal house.\n\nAnd we see such manifestation of Divine providence even at the present\nday: even among ourselves, men whose talents and patriotism might\nauthorize them to look to any station, are forced back by public\nsentiment, degraded by a notorious amalgamation with the descendants of\nHam.\n\nWe shall hereafter see some proof that this \u201c_Naamah_,\u201d the mother of\nRehoboam, was the individual whose praises are celebrated in the book of\nCanticles: at any rate, she was an Ammonitess, a descendant of Ham, and\nthe prophet Hanani includes the Ammonites among those whom he calls\nEthiopians. See 2 _Chron._ xvi. 8.\n\nIf then it be true that Naamah, the daughter of Lamech, was the great\nfemale progenitor of the race of Ham, we should expect to find some\ntestimony of her remembrance even among her mingled offspring. And since\nthe unmixed race of Ham have generally, at all times of the world, been\ntoo degraded to even leave behind them any written memorials, it is to\nthe mixed race, and their connection with the races of Shem and Japheth,\nthat we are principally to look for any particular fact concerning them;\nand it is reasonable to conclude, as we find this kind of memorial among\nthe mixed race, that the same kind of memorial existed much more\nfrequently among the unmixed races of Ham.\n\n\u201cAnd the sons of Benjamin were Belah, and Becher, and Ashbel, Gera, and\n_Naaman_, Ehi, and Rosh, Muppim, and Huppim, and Ard.\u201d _Gen._ xlvi. 21.\n\n\u201cThe sons of Benjamin after their families of Bela, the family of the\nBelaites; of Ashbel, the family of the Ashbelites; of Ahiram, the family\nof the Ahiramites; of Shupham, the family of the Shuphamites; of Hupham,\nthe family of the Huphamites. And the sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman;\nof Ard, the family of Ardites, and of Naaman, the family of Naamanites.\u201d\n_Num._ xxvi. 38\u201340.\n\n\u201cNow Benjamin begat Bela his first-born, Ashbel the second, and Ahirah\nthe third, Nohah the fourth, and Rapha the fifth. And the sons of Bela\nwere Addar, and Gera, and Abihud, and Abishua, and _Naaman_, and Ahoah,\nand Gera, and Shephuphan, and Huram. And these are the sons of Ehud:\nthese are the heads of the fathers of the inhabitants of Geba, and they\nremoved them to Manahath. And _Naaman_, and Ahiah, and Gera, he removed\nthem, and begat Uzra and Abihud. And _Shaharaim_ begat children in the\ncountry of Moab, after he had sent them away.\u201d 1 _Chron._ viii. 1\u20138.\n\nThe hurried reader might well apprehend these three different accounts\nof the same matter to be somewhat contradictory. We think otherwise. We\nhad, in fact, prepared several sheets, elucidating these genealogies of\nBenjamin, but upon a review we found much irrelevant to the subject of\nour present inquiry: we deem only a few remarks necessary.\n\nOur object is to show that these genealogies prove that some portion of\nthe family named were coloured people, descended from Ham, and that\n_Naaman_ is distinguished most clearly to be of that class.\n\nIt will be readily perceived that _Muppim_ \u05de\u05b4\u05e4\u05bb\u05bc\u05d9\u05b4\u05a5\u05dd, in Genesis, is\nformed from \u05de\u05b9\u05e3 _Moph_, and thus used in _Hos._ ix. 6: \u201c_Memphis_ (\u05de\u05b7\u05b9\u05e3\n_Moph_) shall bury them.\u201d Our word is a Hebraism of the Coptic word \u05e0\u05b9\u05e3\n_Noph_, the _Nod_ of Genesis, the _No_ of the prophets Ezekiel and\nNahum, and finally confounded with _Memphis_.\n\nIt is here used after the form of a Hebrew masculine plural, and as a\ncaput, to aid in the classification of the descendants of Benjamin; and\nclearly designates, whatever may have been their blood, that one class\nwere _Memphites_.\n\nSo the word _huppim_ \u05d4\u05bb\u05e4\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05dd is formed from the quite ancient word \u05d4\u05b7\u05e3\n_haph_, which means innocence, purity; whence also the word \u05d4\u05b8\u05e4\u05b8\u05d4\n_haphah_, covered, shielded, protected; and hence, \u05d4\u05bb\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 _hupah_,\n_bride-chamber_, _the marriage-bed_, and _marriage_ itself. In this\nsense the word is used in _Joel_ ii. 16, and in several other places,\nwhere the translator has so paraphrased the idea as to make it\nimperceptible to the English reader.\n\nNor is it an unworthy consideration in the etymology of this word, that\nfrom the idea _purity_, the Arabians borrowed from it their word \u062c\u0627\u0631\n_hhar_, to mean _white_, which was quickly introduced into Hebrew in the\nword \u05d4\u05d5\u05bc\u05e8 _hur_, and \u05d4\u05d5\u05b9\u05e8 _hor_, to mean _white_ also. Hence, Mount \u05d4\u05b8\u05d5\u05e8\n_Hor_, \u201cthe white mountain;\u201d and from which branch of the derivation the\ncorresponding words in Numbers and Chronicles have taken their origin.\nHere, then, we have another word used in the same manner, to designate\nanother class of the descendants of Benjamin, as of the _pure stock_,\n_legitimate_ and _white_.\n\nThe word \u05d5\u05b8\u05d0\u05b8\u05bd\u05e8\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc _va ard_ or _ared_ in Genesis, and \u05d0\u05b7\u05a3\u05e8\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc _ard_\nor _ared_ in Numbers, is changed by _dagesh_ and transposition into\n\u05d0\u05b7\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05e8 _addar_ in Chronicles. It is unnecessary to go into an\nexplanation of Hebrew peculiarities. It is probable that we never have\nhad the true pronunciation of any of these words. But however that may\nbe, the analogy of language seems to show that this word is a cognate of\nthe Arabic \u063a\u064e\u0631\u064e\u0636 _gharadh_, and the Syrian \u0715\u0713\u0733\u072a\u0733\u0715 _dharadh_, and from\nwhence \u05e2\u05b2\u05e8\u05b8\u05d3 _harad_ or _arad_; yet there is nothing more common than\nfor _aleph_ and _ghain_ to interchange in one and the same word. They\nare ever regarded as cognates. But again, the word is not of Hebrew\norigin, and with the latter spelling, we find it in _Num._ xxi. 1,\nxxxiii. 40, _Josh._ xii. 14, and _Judges_ i. 16, as the name of a\nCanaanitish city. The Arabic is more guttural than Hebrew, and it has\ntwo _ghains_, one more guttural than the other, distinguished by \u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2\u05b7\n_r\u0115vi\u0103_, a _resting upon_; thus, in translating Arabic into Hebrew, the\none will take the Hebrew _ghain_, but the Arabic _ghain_ with which this\nword is spelled is at once converted into the Hebrew _aleph_; so that\nwhile we thus find the very word, we find it with the evidence of a\nCanaanitish admixture.\n\nIts application in Hebrew seems to be mostly confined to the _wild ass_,\n(see _Dan._ v. 21;) but the Syriac gives it _effr\u00e6natus_, _effr\u00e6nis\nfuit_, and the Arabic, _durus fuit_, _fugit_. Such, then, being its\nsignification in these languages, we may well perceive its adaptedness\nto the _wild ass_. We all know that the wild Arabs are the descendants\nof Ishmael; now a true synonyme in Hebrew of this word was applied to\nhim: \u201cHe shall be a _wild man_;\u201d he was illegitimate, mixed-blooded. The\nterm can apply to no other than such a race as that of Ishmael,\u2014_wild_,\n_illegitimate_, and of _impure blood_.\n\nIn Numbers we find _Shupham_, and in Chronicles _Shephuphan_,\nsubstituted for the _Muppim_ in Genesis; both being the same word in\ndifferent forms. The root is \u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05e4\u05b4\u05d9 _shephi_, a high situation; hence\n\u05e9\u05b8\u05e4\u05b7\u05d8 _shaphat_, a judge, and its derivatives are applied to the person\nor thing adjudged. Hence \u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05e4\u05b0\u05d7\u05b8\u05d4 _shiphehhahh_, a _female slave_; (See\n_Gen._ xvi. 16; i. 2, 3; also xx. 14; also xxxii. 22;) and hence, also\nthe Syrian \u072b\u0733\u0726\u0726\u0730 _shafefa_, a _serpent_, because the serpent had been\nadjudged, condemned. Whence the Hebrew _shephiphim_, poetically used to\nmean a serpent, as, \u201cDan shall judge his people; Dan shall be a serpent\nby the way.\u201d _Gen._ xlix. 16. In this passage in Hebrew, there is a\nbeautiful _paronomasia_ in the word _Dan_, which also means a judge,\n_judge_ and the _serpent_. But the serpent is called \u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b4\u05d9\u05e4\u0596\u05df\u05b9\n_shephiphon_, only as it had been adjudged; and it is to be noticed, as\nhere used, it has the same points and accents as in Chronicles, and is\nsubstantially the same word,\u2014not, as here, borrowed from the Syriac, to\nmean a serpent, but used to mean the adjudged, condemned to some\ncondition or degradation. \u201cAnd they removed them to _Manahath_.\u201d\n_Manahath_ was a district of country near the Dead Sea, near the ancient\ncity Zoar; and it is a little remarkable that Zoar was by the Canaanites\ncalled _Bela_, the very name of the son of Benjamin. The whole country\nwas called by the general term Moab. The fact that it was a custom to\nsend persons of a certain description there, seems to be alluded to by\nthe prophet: \u201cLet mine outcasts dwell with thee, O Moab!\u201d _Isa._ xvi. 4.\n\nBut, who were sent there? \u201c_Naaman_, _Ahia_, and _Gera_, he removed\nthem. * * * And _Shaharaim_ begat children in the land of Moab after he\nhad sent them away.\u201d This explains the whole matter. _Shaharaim_ is a\nplural formation of _Shihor_, and means _black_. \u201c_And these blacks\nbegat children in the land of Moab after he had sent them away_,\u201d\u2014that\nis, _Naaman_, _Ahia_, and _Gera_; further establishing the fact that the\nword _Naamah_ is kept in remembrance only by the descendants of Ham. One\nclass of the race of Benjamin is described in Genesis as _Memphites_; in\nfact, that whole genealogy substantially divides them into those who\nwere white, and of pure descent, and into those who were not white, and\nof impure descent. Numbers and Chronicles confirm and warrant the same\ndistinction.\n\nThe seventh Psalm commences thus:\u2014\u201cShiggaion of David, which he sang\nunto the Lord, concerning the words of Cush, the Benjamite.\u201d It would\nhave been more readily understood, and more decidedly a translation\nthus: _A song of lamentation of David, which he sang unto the Lord,\nconcerning the words of an Ethiopian, a Benjamite_.\n\nThe word \u201cCush,\u201d as often elsewhere, is here used to designate a\ndescendant of Ham by his colour. But it clearly proves an amalgamation,\nto some extent, of the race of Ham, in the family of Benjamin.\n\nIndeed, the race of Benjamin had become deeply intermixed with the\ndescendants of Ham; and this fact well accounts why they did, upon an\noccasion, behave like as the Sodomites to Lot; and why the other tribes\nof Israel so readily joined in league to utterly destroy and annihilate\nthis tribe, and did put to death fifty thousand warriors in one day, and\nevery man, woman, and child of the whole tribe, except a few hundred\nmen, who hid in the rock Rimmon. See _Judges_ xix. xx.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XI.\n\nIt remains now to examine what proof there exists that the descendants\nof Ham were black. We wish to impress upon the mind the fact, that among\nall aboriginal nations, and in all primitive languages, proper names are\nalways significant terms. Such is the fact among the Indian tongues of\nAmerica at this day. The holy books give ample proof that such was\neminently the case among the ancient Hebrews. Every name that Adam\nbestowed was the consequence of some cause that operated on his mind.\nAnd if we examine minutely into the influences operating even among\nourselves, in such cases, we shall be unable to deny that such is the\nuniversal law. There is a cause for every thing.\n\n\u201cAnd the sons of Ham (_were_) Cush and Misraim, and Phut and Canaan.\u201d\n_Gen._ x. 6.\n\nIt will not be denied that the word Ethiopian, as used in Scripture,\nmeans a black man. \u201cCan the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard\nhis spots.\u201d _Jer._ xiii. 23. The word \u201cEthiopian,\u201d in this passage from\nJeremiah, is translated from \u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05a8 _Cushi_, the very name of the\noldest son of Ham. And we shall find in every instance where in the Old\nTestament the word Ethiopia or Ethiopian is used, that it is translated\nfrom the same word, varied in termination according to the position in\nwhich it is used, and as applied to country or people. \u201cAre ye not as\nthe children of the Ethiopians (\u05db\u05bb\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u0599\u05d9\u05dd _Cushiim_) unto me?\u201d _Amos_\nix. 7. It became and was used as a general term, by which all\ndescendants of Ham were designated by their colour, in the same manner\nas we now use the Latin word _negro_ to designate the same thing. \u201cAnd\nMiriam and Aaron spake against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom\nhe had married: for he had married an _Ethiopian_ woman.\u201d _Num._ xii. 1.\nAnd we deem these facts alone sufficient to establish the truth of the\nproposition that that branch of Ham\u2019s family were black.\n\nIn the examination of what evidence may now be found that the family of\nMisraim were black, we beg to notice a fact which we suppose no scholar\nwill dispute\u2014that he settled in Egypt, and, in fact, gave his name to\nthat country. As Cush gave his name to all Ethiopia and its inhabitants,\nas Canaan gave his name to the land of Canaan, and Canaanites to its\ninhabitants, so Misraim gave his name to Egypt and its inhabitants.\nWhenever we find the word Egypt or Egyptian in our English version, we\nnever fail to find \u05de\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05e8\u05b8\u05d9\u05dd _Mitsraim_ in the Hebrew text. His\ndescendants took upon them the particular appellation _Misraimites_, as\nin _Gen._ xvi. 1: \u201cAnd she had a handmaid, (\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05e4\u05b0\u05d7\u05b8\u05a5\u05d4 _shiphehhah, a\nfemale slave_,) an Egyptian, (\u05de\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05e8\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05ea _Mitsrith_ a descendant of\nMisraim,) whose name was Hagar.\u201d She was a _Misraim_, a descendant from\nthe second son of Ham. The word is translated \u201cEgyptian.\u201d A family feud\ngrowing up upon the occasion of her having a son by her master Abraham,\nshe and her son were sent away to the wilderness of Paran; where, when\nthe son was grown, she took him a wife of her own race, from the land of\nEgypt. See _Gen._ xxi. 21. The descendants of Ishmael, therefore, were\nthree-fourths of Misraimitish blood, and are known and distinguished as\nof his _race_, by the particular name of Ishmaelites.\n\nMidian was a district of country lying near to and including Mount\nSinai. The people, in reference to the country, were called Midianites,\nbut without any reference to their descent or race. From the position of\nthe district of country called Midian, it would be reasonable to suppose\nthe inhabitants in after times to be descended from Ishmael; and in\nfact, whenever we find any allusion made to the whole country of the\nIshmaelites, we shall find it to include Midian. But it may be proper to\nremark, that from a notable mountain called _Gilead_, situated in this\nregion, the whole country was sometimes called by that name, and one of\nthe cities in it also called Gilead.\n\nWe are all acquainted with that most beautiful and pathetic history of\nJoseph; but let us read a passage\u2014and we pray you to notice with\ndistinctness the language:\n\n\u201cAnd they lifted up their eyes and looked, and behold a company of\nIshmaelites came from Gilead, with their camels bearing spicery and balm\nand myrrh, going to carry it down to Egypt. * * * And Judah said, * * *\nCome, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon\nhim. * * * And his brethren were content. Then there passed by\nMidianites, merchantmen, and they drew and lifted up Joseph out of the\npit, and sold Joseph to the _Ishmaelites_; and the Midianites sold him\ninto Egypt unto Potiphar. And Joseph was brought down to Egypt, and\nPotiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, captain of the guard, an Egyptian,\nbought him of the hands of the Ishmaelites which had brought him down\nthither.\u201d _Gen._ xxxvii. 25\u201336, and xxxix. 1. Is it not positive and\nclear that the Ishmaelites and the Midianites were one and the same\npeople?\n\nBut again, there was, during the days of the judges, a destructive war\nbetween the Israelites and the Midianites. \u201cAnd the Midianites and the\nAmalekites, and all the children of the east, lay along in the valley,\nlike grasshoppers for multitude. * * * And when Gideon was come, behold,\nthere was a man that told a dream. * * * And when Zeba and Zalmunna\nfled, he pursued after them, and took the two kings of Midian, Zeba and\nZalmunna, and discomfited all the host.\n\n\u201cAnd Gideon the son of Joash returned from the battle before the sun was\nup. * * * Then the men of Israel said unto Gideon, Rule thou over us,\nboth thou and thy son, and thy son\u2019s son also, for thou hast delivered\nus from the hand of Midian. And Gideon said unto them, I would desire a\nrequest of you, that you would give me every man the ear-rings of his\nprey. (For they had golden ear-rings, because they were Ishmaelites.)\u201d\nSee _Judg._ vii. 12\u201314, also viii. 12\u201324.\n\nHere then is another instance where the Midianites and the Ishmaelites\nare announced to be the same people. \u201cAt the mouth of two witnesses\nshall the matter be established.\u201d See _Deut._ xix. 15; also 2 _Cor._\nxiii. 1. \u201cNow Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the\npriest of Midian.\u201d _Exod._ iii. 1.\n\n\u201cWhen Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses\u2019 father-in-law, heard of all\nthat God had done for Moses, and for Israel his people, and that the\nLord had brought Israel out of Egypt, then Jethro, Moses\u2019 father-in-law,\ntook Zipporah, Moses\u2019 wife, (after he had sent her back,) and her two\nsons.\u201d _Exod._ xviii. 1, 2, 3.\n\n\u201cAnd Miriam and Aaron spake against Moses, because of the Ethiopian\nwoman whom he had married, for he had married an Ethiopian woman.\u201d\n_Num._ xii. 1.\n\nEven in the poetic strain of the prophet, there is a vestige that goes\nto prove the sameness between the _Midianites_ and the _Ethiopians_. \u201cI\nsaw the tents of _Cushan_ (\u05db\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u0591\u05df _Ethiopians_) in affliction, and the\ncurtains of the land of Midian did tremble.\u201d _Hab._ iii. 7.\n\nAre these facts no proof that the descendants of Misraim were black?\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nLet us then proceed to the same inquiry concerning the descendants of\nPhut.\n\nIn the Antiquities of Josephus, book i. 6, we find the following: \u201cThe\nchildren of Ham possessed the land from Syria and Amanus and the\nmountains of Lybanus; seizing upon all that was upon the seacoasts and\nas far as the ocean, and keeping it as their own. Some, indeed, of its\nnames are utterly vanished away; others of them being changed, and\nanother sound given, hardly to be discovered; yet a few there are, which\nkept their denominations entire. For of the four sons of Ham, time has\nnot at all hurt the name of _Chus_; for the Ethiopians, over whom he\nreigned, are even at this day, both by themselves and by all men of\nAsia, called _Chusites_.\u201d \u201cThe memory also of the Mesraites is preserved\nin their name, for we who inhabit this country (Judea) call Egypt\n_Mestra_, and the Egyptians _Mestreans_. Phut also was the founder of\nLybia, and called the inhabitants Phutites, from himself. There is also\na river in the country of the Moors which bears that name, whence it is\nthat we may see the greatest part of the Grecian historiographers\nmention that river, and the adjoining country, by the appellation of\nPhut. But the name it has now has been by change given it from one of\nthe sons of Mestraim, who was called Lybios.\u201d His name, in the English\nversion of Genesis, is _Ludim_. From him the Lybian desert has taken its\nname, and the country now called Lybia. Thus we discover from Josephus\nthat the memorials of the nephew had obliterated those of Phut, his\nuncle. As Phut was the founder of Lybia, which was at one time called by\nhis name, it may be well to inquire as to the extent of that region,\nthat we may know where the descendants of Phut have resided from the\ntime of their progenitor till now.\n\nIn order to form a tolerably correct idea of what was the country once\ncalled Phut, we have to examine how far the son of Misraim extended his\nname in superseding him. We quote from the Melpomene of Herodotus, where\nhe compares the extent of Lybia, Asia, and Europe. Concerning Lybia, he\nsays\u2014\n\n\u201cExcept in that particular part which is contiguous to Asia, the whole\nof Lybia is surrounded by the sea. The first person who has proved this\nwas, as far as we are able to judge, Necho, king of Egypt: when he had\ndesisted from his attempt to join, by a canal, the Nile with the Arabian\nGulf, he despatched some vessels, under the conduct of Ph\u0153nicians, with\ndirections to pass the columns of Hercules, and, after penetrating the\nNorthern Ocean, to return to Egypt.\n\n\u201cThese Ph\u0153nicians, taking their course from the Red Sea, entered into\nthe Southern Ocean. On the approach of autumn they landed in Lybia, and\nplanted some corn in the place where they happened to find themselves.\nWhen this was ripe, and they had cut it down, they again departed.\n\n\u201cHaving thus consumed two years, they in the third doubled the columns\nof Hercules and returned to Egypt. Their relation may obtain attention\nfrom others, but to me it seems incredible; for they affirm that, having\nsailed round Lybia, they had the sun on their right hand. Thus was Lybia\nfor the first time known.\u201d\n\nHanno, a Carthaginian, was sent, about 600 years before our era, with\n30,000 of his countrymen, to found colonies on what is now the western\ncoast of Africa. His account commences\u2014\u201cThe voyage of Hanno, commander\nof the Carthaginians, round the parts of _Lybia_, which lie beyond the\npillars of Hercules.\u201d\n\nIn the body of the work he says\u2014\u201cWhen we had passed the pillars on our\nvoyage, and sailed beyond them two days, we founded the first city,\nwhich we named Thurmiaterium. Below it lay an extensive plain.\nProceeding thence towards the west, we came to Solous, a promontory of\nLybia.\u201d\n\nHaving proceeded on with his voyage, he says\u2014\u201cWe came to the great\n_Lixus_, which flows from Lybia; on its banks the Lixit\u00e6, a shepherd\ntribe, were feeding their flocks, among whom we continued several days,\non friendly terms. Beyond the Lixit\u00e6 dwell the inhospitable\n_Ethiopians_.\u201d\n\nHerodotus, immediately preceding our quotation of him, says\u2014\u201cLybia\ncommences where Egypt ends; about Egypt the country is narrow; one\nhundred thousand orgi\u00e6, or one thousand stadia, comprehend the space\nbetween this and the _Red Sea_. Here the country expands and takes the\nname of Lybia.\u201d\n\nAfrica, to an indefinite extent, was the country of Phut.\n\nThe result of the inquiry thus far is, that the tribes of Phut\namalgamated with the descendants of Misraim, until all family memorials\nof them became extinct. But let us examine what memorials of Phut are to\nbe found in the holy books. \u201cEthiopia and Egypt were thy strength, _Put_\nand _Lubim_ were thy helpers.\u201d _Nahum_ iii. 9.\n\n_Put_ is the same Phut; in the text the _letter_ is _dagheshed_, which\ntakes away the aspirate sound. We here notice that _Put_ and _Lubim_ are\nassociated together.\n\n\u201cThey of Persia, and of Lud, and of Phut, were in thine army, thy men of\nwar.\u201d _Ezek._ xxvii. 10.\n\n\u201cPersia, Ethiopia, and Lybia with them: all of them with shield and\nhelmet.\u201d _Ezek._ xxxviii. 5.\n\nIn this instance the word _Lybia_ is translated from _Phut_. We take\nthis as proof that the country of the son of Misraim and Phut was the\nsame, and the two families amalgamated.\n\n\u201cCome up, ye horses, and rage, ye chariots: and let the mighty men come\nforth, the Ethiopians and the Lybians that handle the shield.\u201d _Jer._\nxlvi. 9. _Lybians_ is also here translated from _Phut_.\n\n\u201cWere not the Ethiopians and the Lubims a huge host?\u201d _2 Chron._ xvi. 8.\nThere Phut is lost in that of Lubim, as accounted for by Josephus. The\nfamilies were wholly amalgamated, the nephew carrying off the trophy of\nremembrance.\n\nThe proof that the family of Phut were black is rather inferential than\npositive; but can the mind fail to determine that it is certain?\n\nBut again, Phut, as an appellative, signifies _scattered_. Thus Num. x.\n30. \u201cLet thine enemies be scattered,\u201d (\u05e4\u05bb\u05bc\u05e6\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc _phutsu_.) In Genesis x.\n18, it is used with the same Heemanti, and with the same effect, which\nwe have noticed in the word _Naamah_, thus: \u201cAnd afterwards were the\nfamilies of the Canaanites _spread abroad_,\u201d \u05e0\u05b8\u05e4\u05b9\u0594\u05e6\u05d5\u05bc _naphotsu_. The\nidea is, by the influence of the circumstances attending them, _they\nwere scattered_. The condition is involuntary, the action implied is\nreflective. A similar use of the word occurs in 2 Samuel xviii. 8: \u201cThe\nbattle was scattered,\u201d \u05e0\u05b8\u05e4\u05b4\u05b9\u05e6\u05b6\u05d5\u05af\u05ea _naphotseth_; that is, it was\nscattered only as it was forced to be by the circumstances attending it.\nThe distinctive appellation thus of the family of Phut, means a\nscattered people. The phonetic synonyme of Phut means scattered, in all\nthe Shemitic tongues.\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nThus in Arabic, \u0641\u064e\u0627\u064e\u0637\u0633 _phats_, and its variations, put down, _abiit_,\n_peregrinatus fuit_ in terra, &c. In Coptic, \u2caa\u2c8f\u2ca7 fet _phet_ has the same\nmeaning; but in the hieroglyphical writings of the Copts, found in\nEgypt, the idea _scattered_ is represented by an arrow. But an arrow is\ncalled _phet_, because it is shot away, scattered. And the country or\npeople of the _Phutites_ is represented by a _bow_, _segment_ of a\n_globe_, _nine arrows_, and an _undulating surface_. Those who have made\nresearches in such matters say, the phonetic power of this is\n_nephaiat_. It will be perceived to be quite analogous to the _Heemanti_\nprefixed to the root. _The people who have been compelled to be\nexceedingly scattered._\n\nWhen Jonathan wished in an emphatic manner to signify to his friend\nDavid that he should depart, go off from his family, &c., he shot an\narrow beyond him. Was not the arrow emblematical of what was supposed\nhis only safe condition?\n\nThese explanations as to the significance of the word Phut will enable\nus better to understand _Zephaniah_ iii. 10. \u201cFrom beyond the rivers of\nEthiopia, my suppliants, _even the daughter of my dispersed_,\n(\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea\u05be\u05e4\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e6\u05b7\u0594\u05d9 _bath Putsa_, the descendants of Phut,) shall bring mine\noffering.\u201d Unknown and scattered as they are over the trackless wastes\nof Africa, yet even to them shall come the knowledge of the true God.\nThey shall, at one day, come to the knowledge of the truth.\n\nThe hieroglyphical record relating to the Phutites is considered, by\nthose versed in such matters, to point to a period of at least 2000\nyears anterior to our era. The inference, to our mind, is clear, that\nthe family of Phut at an exceedingly ancient period was wholly absorbed\nand lost sight of among the other families of Ham, especially in that of\nLudim, the oldest son of Mitsraim: that they were of the same colour and\nother family distinctions, unless it may be they differed in a deeper\ndegradation: that for numberless ages the mass of the descent are alone\nto be found in the most barbarous portions of Africa.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XII.\n\nIn the inquiry, What evidence have we that the Canaanites were black? we\nmay find it necessary to refer to various facts which have come down to\nus, connecting their history with that of the Israelitish people.\n\nPerhaps no fact could be better established than that Abraham lived on\nthe most friendly terms with the Canaanites. He was a confederate with\ntheir kings. When they lost a battle, he retrieved it. They treated him\nwith the utmost regard, and he them with a generous liberality. Could he\nnot have wedded his son among them, to whom he chose?\n\n\u201cAnd Abraham said unto the eldest servant of his house, that ruled over\nall that he had, Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh: and I will\nmake thee swear by the Lord, the God of heaven, and the God of the\nearth, that thou shalt not take a wife unto my son of the daughters of\nthe Canaanites among whom I dwell.\u201d _Gen._ xxiv. 2, 3.\n\nUnder the circumstances of the case, what could have influenced such a\ndetermination?\n\n\u201cAnd Rebecca said unto Isaac, I am weary of my life, because of the\ndaughters of Heth: if Jacob take a wife of the daughters of Heth, such\nas those which are the daughters of the land, what good shall my life do\nme? And Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him, and charged him, Thou shalt\nnot take a wife of the daughters of Canaan.\u201d _Gen._ xxvii. 46, xxviii.\n1.\n\nOn what rational ground are we to account for this extraordinary\nrepugnance?\n\nThe conduct of the sons of Jacob does not determine them to have been\nvery sincerely religious. The soul of Shechem, a prince of the country,\nclave unto Dinah their sister; he was rich, and offered ever so much\ndowry for an honourable marriage with her; and to show his sincerity,\neven abandoned his old, and adopted their religion. There must have been\nsome other deep and unalterable cause for their unchangeable aversion to\nthat proposed marriage of their sister.\n\n\u201cWhen the Lord thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest\nto possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites,\nand the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the\nPerizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater\nand mightier than thou;\n\n\u201cAnd when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee, thou shalt\nsmite them and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with\nthem, nor show mercy unto them:\n\n\u201cNeither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt\nnot give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.\u201d\n_Deut._ vii. 1, 2, 3.\n\nThe laws of God are always predicated upon some sufficient cause: in\nsuch cases we may ever notice a tendency towards the prevention of\ndeterioration.\n\n\u201cWhosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.\u201d _Ex._ xxii.\n19.\n\nThe terms Japhet, Laban, Hor, and their derivatives in significancy ever\ninclude the idea white, of a light colour. These terms are applied among\nthe descendants of Japheth and Shem, as the appellatives of their races\nand individual names, and as adjectives in description of their personal\nappearance, too frequently to permit a doubt of these families belonging\nto the white race.\n\nThere is but a single case in all the holy books, where any of these\nterms is applied to a person of colour, and which we trust we have\nexplained; and if our view be correct, how came the poet to require its\nuse there, unless to elevate the character he celebrates! Do we use any\nterm to signify that a person is white in a country where there are none\nbut white people? Whatever evidence then there may be that the families\nof Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were white people, is also just as positive\ntestimony that the Canaanites were black. See _Gen._ xxvi. 34, 35.\n\nBut in Judges i. 16, we find that the family of the race of Ishmael out\nof which Moses took his wife are denominated Kenites. We think that we\nhave abundantly proved that they were black. From this connection of\nMoses, the Israelites seem to have felt some regard for that race. Now\nit appears that some of that descent were afterwards residing in the\ncities of Amalek; for we find in 1 Samuel xv. 6, that \u201cSaul said unto\nthe Kenites, Go, depart, get ye down from among the Amalekites, lest I\ndestroy you with them, for ye showed kindness to all the children of\nIsrael when they came out of Egypt. So the Kenites departed.\u201d How should\nit be a fact, since they were black, that he could not distinguish them\nfrom the Amalekites, unless the Amalekites were black also?\n\nThe Amalekites were Canaanites, notwithstanding they claimed Esau in\ntheir ancestry. \u201cEsau took his wives of the daughters of Canaan. Adah\nthe daughter of Ebon the Hittite; * * * and Adah bore to Esau, Eliphaz;\n* * * and Timna was concubine to Eliphaz, Esau\u2019s son; and she bore to\nEliphaz, Amalek.\u201d _Gen._ xxxvi. 2, 4, 12.\n\nThe Amalekites were one of those tribes, that the Israelites were\nparticularly commanded to destroy from off the earth; and in them, he\nwho amalgamates with the daughters of Ham may see his own prospect as to\nposterity.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIII.\n\nThere are circumstances in evidence that the descendants of Ham were\nblack, more properly referable to the whole family than to either\nparticular branch.\n\nAmong this class of circumstances, we might mention the tradition so\nuniversal through the world, that we know no age of time or portion of\nthe globe that can be named in exception, that the descendants of Ham\nwere black; and that the fact announced by that tradition is made\nexceedingly more probable by the corresponding tradition, that the\ndescendants of Japheth and Shem were white.\n\nThe holy books provide proof that Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca,\nJacob, Leah, and Rachel, were white. Their descendants sojourned in\nEgypt in a state of bondage about four hundred years, in the course of\nwhich time there was a law that all the male Hebrew children should be\nput to death at their birth. When the mother of Moses put him in the ark\nof bulrushes, she would have disguised his birth as much as possible,\nfor the safety of his life. Yet no sooner had the daughter of Pharaoh\nbeheld the infant than she proclaimed it to be a Hebrew child. If there\nwas no difference of colour, from whence this quick decision as to the\nnationality of an infant three months old?\n\nBut during the residence of the Israelites in Egypt, it is to be\napprehended there was more or less commixture between the two races;\nand, if the two races were of different colour, that there would have\nbeen left us some allusion to such offspring; and so we find the fact.\n\n\u201cAnd the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six\nhundred thousand on foot, that were men, besides children. And a mixed\nmultitude went up also with them.\u201d _Exod._ xii. 37, 38. The word\n\u201c_mixed_\u201d is translated from \u05e2\u05b8\u05e8\u05b8\u05d1 _ereb, arab_. The word means of\n_mixed-blood_, that is, the mixture of the white man with the black; and\nin consequence thereof is often used to mean black itself, and is\nuniversally applied as the appellative, and has become the established\nname of the mixed-blooded people of Arabia, the _Arabs_; and because it\nbecame a common term to express the idea black, a dark colour, &c., it\nwas applied to the raven; and even at this day, who can tell whether\nElijah was fed by the _ravens_ or the _Arabs_, because the one word was\nused to mean both or either. _And a multitude of persons of colour, of\nHebrew and black parentage, went up also with them._\n\nThis word is used to express the idea of a mulatto race, in _Num._ xi.\n4, and the \u201c_mixed multitude_;\u201d also _Neh._ xiii. 3, \u201cThey separated\nfrom Israel all the _mixed multitude_;\u201d also _Jer._ xxv. 20, 24, thus:\n\u201cAnd all the mingled people,\u201d _mixed-blooded_, \u201cand all the kings of\nArabia, and all the kings of the _mingled people_,\u201d _mixed-blooded\npeople_. By the expression _mixed multitude_, it is clear Moses included\nthe offspring of the Hebrew with the race of Ham. But would there have\nbeen such distinction if there was no difference of colour? It will be\nrecollected that the children of Ishmael were three-fourths of\nMisraimitish blood, consequently quite dark. It will also be recollected\nthat when Esau perceived how extremely offensive to his father and\nmother was his connection with the Canaanitish women, that he took wives\nof the house of Ishmael. It should also be recollected that Ishmael\nnamed one of his sons _Kedar_. As we shall hereafter refer to this word,\nwe propose to examine its meaning and formation. It is of Arabic\nderivation, _Arab._ \u062f\u0631\u08e8, Hebrew \u05d3\u05b7\u05bc\u05e8 _dar_, and in this form is used\n_Esth._ i. 6, and translated _black marble_. With the prefix of the\nHebrew koph it becomes \u05e7\u05b5\u05d3\u05b8\u05e8 _Kedar_, and is equivalent to \u201c_the\nblack_.\u201d It is used in Hebrew to mean black, in 1 _Kings_ xviii. 45;\n_Job_ vi. 16, 30, 28; _Isa_ lx. 3; _Jer._ iv. 28; _Ezek._ xxxii. 7, 8,\nand many other places. The very name of the son of Ishmael was\ntantamount to \u201c_the black_.\u201d\n\nIn the poem called Solomon\u2019s Song, the female whose praises are therein\ncelebrated, says, \u201cI am _black_, but comely, O ye daughters of\nJerusalem, as the tents of _Kedar_, as the curtains of Solomon. Look not\nupon me because I am _black_; because the sun hath looked upon me: my\nmother\u2019s children were angry with me, they made me the keeper of the\nvineyards, but mine own vineyards have I not kept.\u201d _Cant._ i. 5, 6.\n\nThe word _black_, which twice occurred in the text, is translated from\n\u05e9\u05b8\u05d7\u05b7\u05e8 _shahar_, with many variations. The words mean abstractly the idea\n_black_. Examples of its use will be found in _Lev._ xiii. 31, 37, thus:\n\u201cAnd there is no _black_ hair in it.\u201d \u201cAnd there is _black_ hair grown\nup therein.\u201d _Job_ xxx. 30: \u201cMy skin is _black_ upon me.\u201d _Zech._ vi. 2,\n6: \u201cAnd in the second chariots _black_ horses. The _black_ horses that\nare therein.\u201d _Lam._ iv. 8: \u201cTheir visage is _blacker_ than a coal.\u201d\n_Cant._ v. 11: \u201cHis locks are bushy and _black_ as a raven.\u201d There is no\nmistake about the meaning of this word; she was surely _black_, and she\nsays that she is as _black_ as the tents of _Kedar_.\n\nThe inquiry, then, now is, who was she? When we take into consideration\nthe Asiatic mode of expression, from the term \u201cbecause the sun hath\nlooked upon me,\u201d we are forced to understand that she was from a more\nsouthern region. That she was not a native of Palestine, or especially\nof Jerusalem. Figures of somewhat analogous import are occasionally\nfound among the Roman poets. But we suppose, no one will undertake the\nargument that she was black, merely because she had been exposed to the\nsun!\n\nIn vii. 1 of the Hebrew text, she is called _Shulamite_. Some suppose\nthis is a formation of the Gentile term \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05bc\u05e0\u05b5\u05dd _Shunem_, because they\nsay the _lamda_ was sometimes introduced. In that case it would be the\nsynonyme of _Shunamite_, and would locate her in the tribe of Issacar.\nBut we see no necessity of a forced construction, when a very easy and\nnatural one is more obvious. We omit the _dagesh_. \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05bc\u05dc\u05b7\u05de\u05b4\u05d9\u05ea\n_Shulammith_ is readily formed as the feminine of \u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05dc\u05b9\u05de\u05b9\u05d4 _Shelomoh,\nSolomon_, after the Arabic form \u0634\u064f\u0644\u064a\u0652\u0645\u064e\u0646\u08e8 _Suleiman_, and, so used,\nwould be quite analogous to what is now quite common\u2014to apply the\nhusband\u2019s name as an appellative of the wife. Upon the occasion of her\nconsecration into Solomon\u2019s household, she well might, even at that age,\nbe called by a term that would imply such consecration, especially in\nthe poem celebrating her nuptials. And we may remark that the use of\nthis word is in strict conformity to the usage of the Hebrew and Arabic\npoets, because it creates an implied _paronomasia_, derived from \u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05bc\u05dc,\nsignifying that she was a captive by her love to Solomon, and if she\nstood in any such relation to him politically, the beauty of the figure\nwould at that age have been considered very greatly increased. The\npoets, at that age of time, in compositions of the character of this\npoem, appear to have been ever on the search for an occasion to\nintroduce figures of this class; and the more fanciful and extreme, the\nmore highly relished. We fail therefore to derive any knowledge of her\norigin from this term. We have dwelt upon this particular thus long,\nmerely because commentators have been so desirous to find out a clue to\nthe history of the poem. Some commentators of elevated character,\nsuppose this subject of their epithalamium to have been the daughter of\nPharaoh, simply because she was _black_, and is addressed: \u201cO prince\u2019s\ndaughter!\u201d Undoubtedly she was the daughter of some prince or king. But\nthe question now, is of what one? There is no probability that the kings\nof Egypt, nor even the nobility of that kingdom, had been of the race of\nHam for many ages. Egypt had been conquered by the Shemites as early as\nthe days of Abraham, and there is no proof that the descendants of Ham\never again ascended the throne; although, perhaps, their religion had\nbeen adopted by their successors from motives of policy, the great mass\nof the population being of the old stock.\n\nIn fact, the mixed-blooded races, and indeed the Shemites of pure blood,\nhave, from time immemorial, shown a disposition to settle in Egypt. The\nPersians and the Greeks have also, for a very long time, aided in the\namalgamation of the Egypt of the middle ages of the world.\n\nBut she is made to say that she is \u201cthe rose of Sharon;\u201d as much as to\nsay, _the most excellent of her country_. This district of country will\nbe found to embrace the Ammonites, and perhaps some other of the ancient\ntribes of the family of Ham, at that time under the government of\nSolomon. And, iv. 8, we find Sharon called by its Ammonitish name, amid\na cluster of figures having relation to the locality and productions of\nthat country.\n\nIn short, the whole body of this extraordinary poem points to the region\nof the Ammonites for her native place of abode. Now, since Solomon had\nan Ammonitess by the name of Naamah for a wife, and since he selected\nher son to succeed him on the throne, it seems at least quite probable\nshe was the person it commemorates; and that fact will make quite\nintelligible the allusion to her having been elevated from a servile\ncondition. But, nevertheless, if it shall be thought not sufficiently\nproved that she was the mother of Rehoboam, yet she surely was of some\none of the Canaanitish or Hamitic tribes, and was as surely black; and\nso far is in direct proof that the descendants of Ham generally were\nblack also.\n\nThere are incidents of this poem which it would seem cannot be explained\non other ground than that this marriage was one of state policy on the\npart of Solomon; and the queen upon this occasion selected was from some\none of the heathen nations of the descendants of Ham, whom he had\nsubjected to his government. It will be recollected that these nations,\nwhom the Israelites had failed to destroy, had omitted no occasion to\nmake war on the Hebrews, from the time of Joshua down to that of David;\nand that they occasionally had them in subjection.\n\nSolomon had no guarantee how long his rule over them would prove quiet,\nor how far they would yield obedience to his successor. What could\ninduce him to marry an Ammonite princess, and place her son upon his\nthrone, if not to effect this purpose? Even at the time of the nuptials\na reference to this political union might well find a place in the songs\nto which it gave birth. We introduce one of the incidents to which we\nallude: we select the close of the sixth strain. This poem is written in\nthe form of a dialogue, mostly between the bride and groom.\n\n_Solomon._ Return, return, O Shulamite; return, return, that we may look\nupon thee.\n\n_Naamah._ What will ye see in the Shulamite?\n\n_Solomon._ As it were the company of two armies.\n\nThis surely needs no comment. The poem had already recited every mental\nand personal quality; was it then unnatural delicately to allude to her\npolitical importance? The art of the poet, however, to cover the\nallusion, recommences a view of her personal charms, changes his order,\nand commences with her feet.\n\nMuch learning has come to many untenable conclusions concerning this\npoem, among which, that of the Targum may be placed in the lead.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIV.\n\nWe have heretofore noticed how, in 2 _Chron._ xvi. 8, the name Phut is\nlost in that of Lubim, as accounted for by Josephus. But it should be\nrecollected that the prophet Hanani most distinctly refers to one of the\nwars between the black tribes and the Jewish people, of which there had\nbeen a long series from the exodus down.\n\nWe propose to adduce an argument from the language used in the\ndescription of these wars.\n\nIn the time of King Asa, the invading army is described thus: \u201cAnd there\ncame out against them Zerah, the Ethiopian, with a host of a thousand\nthousand and three hundred chariots. And Asa cried unto the Lord his\nGod; so the Lord smote the Ethiopians before Asa, and before Judah, and\nthe Ethiopians fled: and Asa, and the people that were with him, pursued\nthem unto Gerar, and the Ethiopians were overthrown.\u201d These people the\nprophet calls Ethiopians and Lubims. This term proves that many of them\nwere from Lybia. Now is it to be presumed that so vast an army, one\nmillion of men and three hundred chariots, was not composed of all the\ntribes between the remotest location of any named and the place of\nattack?\n\nBut this battle was commenced in the valley of Zephathah, in Philistia,\nand pursued to Gerar, a city of the same country. \u201cAnd they smote all\nthe cities round about Gerar. For the fear of the Lord came upon them,\nand they spoiled all the cities, for there was exceeding much spoil in\nthem. They smote all the tents of cattle, and carried away sheep and\ncamels in abundance, and returned to Jerusalem.\u201d See 2 _Chron._ xiv. 14,\n15.\n\nThese facts could not have existed had not the Philistines composed a\npart of the army.\n\nYet they are all Ethiopians. Is this no evidence that the tribes of Ham\ngenerally were black?\n\nBut again, with the view to arrive at a greater certainty as to what\nraces did compose these armies, we propose to examine that which invaded\nJerusalem during the reign of Rehoboam.\n\n\u201cAnd it came to pass when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and\nhad strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the Lord, and all\nIsrael with him; and it came to pass in the fifth year of King\nRehoboam, Shishak, king of Egypt, came up against Jerusalem, because\nthey had transgressed against the Lord, with twelve hundred chariots\nand threescore thousand horsemen; and the people were without number\nthat came with him out of Egypt, the Lubims, the Sukkims, and the\nEthiopians; and he took the fenced cities, which pertain to Judah,\nand came to Jerusalem.\u201d 2 _Chron._ xii. 1\u201310. \u201cAnd the people were\nwithout number that came with him out of Egypt, _the Lubims_, _the\nSukkims_, _and the Ethiopians_.\u201d The Hebrew construction of the\nlatter clause of this is thus: \u05de\u05b4\u05de\u05b4\u05bc\u05e6\u05b0\u05e8\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05dd \u05dc\u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b4\u05a5\u05d9\u05dd \u05e1\u05bb\u05db\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u0596\u05d9\u05dd\n\u05d5\u05b0\u05db\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05b7\u05c1\u05d9\u05dd\u05c3 _Mim-mits-raim, Lubim, Sukkiyyim ve Cushim_. We suggest\na slight error in the translation of these words. The prefix \u05de _mem_\npreceding _Mitsraim_, we read a preposition, _out of_, _from_, &c.,\ninfluencing and governing the two following words also; as, _from\nEgypt_, _from Lybia_, _from Succoth_. It will be noticed that\n_Cushim_ is preceded by the prefix \u05d5 _vav_. Grammarians have written\nmuch upon this particle: we cannot enter into an argument on Hebrew\ngrammar, but, with all the learning that has been expended on this\nparticle, the Hebrew scholar must find the fact to be, that it is\nsometimes used to designate a _result_; and we take occasion here to\nsay that, in our opinion, Professor Gibbs has given a more definite\nand philosophical description of the Hebrew use of this particle,\nthan any lexicographer of modern research.\n\nSuppose an ancient Hebrew physician wished to teach that certain\ndiseases were incurable, that they ended in death, might he not have\nsaid, \u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b7\u05c1\u05d7\u05b6\u05e4\u05b6\u05ea \u05e7\u05b7\u05d3\u05b7\u05bc\u05d7\u05b7\u05ea \u05d0\u05b8\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05c1 \u05d5\u05b0\u05de\u05d5\u05bc\u05d4\u05c3 _mish shahhepheth kaddahhath\nanish vemuth_,\u2014_from consumption, burning fever, the mortal sickness,\ntermination is death?_ Or, allow our Hebrew not to be so classical,\ncould he not have expressed the idea after this form? \u201cThe army was\nwithout number, from Egypt, from Lybia, from the Nomads, all\nEthiopians.\u201d And we here suggest the query, whether this is not the true\nreading? We do not propose that this prefixed \u05d5\u05b0 _vav_ has the power of\nan adjective or a verb, although it might require the one or the other\nto give the idea in English. What we say is, that it is the sign of the\nthing which is the result of the preceding nouns. If it had been used\nhere as a connective particle, then the two preceding nouns would also\nhave had it for a prefix. Such was the Hebrew idiom. It would then have\nread, \u201cAnd the people were,\u201d &c., from Egypt, and from Lybia, and from\nthe Nomads, and from Ethiopia, as the translator seems to have supposed.\nBut, as it is, it determines them all to have been Ethiopians. This will\nbe in strict conformity with the description of the army at the time of\nAsa. The invading army, at that time, was denominated Ethiopian,\nalthough it is evident that many of the Hamitic tribes composed it.\n\nThe real cause of all these wars was the contest whether Palestine\nshould be held by the Hamitic race, or by the Shemitic, who were bearing\nrule. Keeping this in mind, let us note how perfectly natural is this\ndescription of those who composed the army under Shishak. The troops\nfirst collected would be from among his own immediate people, the\nEgyptians. The next, those who lived beyond him from the point of\nattack, to wit, the Lubims, who lived to the west of Egypt. These being\ncollected together, they would commence their march, and the Nomads be\nadded to the list of the army after they joined it; but none other than\nthose governed by the same impulses would attach themselves to it.\nSuffer us to illustrate this description of Shishak\u2019s army by supposing\na somewhat analogous case, in much more modern times:\u2014That during the\nreign of Elizabeth, King Philip of Spain had made war on England, upon\nthe issue of whether the Protestant or Catholic faith should prevail in\nthat country. Philip would have first collected troops in Spain. He may\nbe supposed to collect large numbers in Portugal. These Spanish and\nPortuguese troops may be supposed to march through France, and his army\nvastly increased there; and, when upon the coast of England, some\nFroissart would have said, that the people who came with Philip were\nwithout number, Spaniards, Portuguese, French, all Catholics. The manner\nof such description would be in exact similitude with this description\nof Shishak\u2019s army. Any one who is acquainted with the history of the\nCrusades will readily see how a similar description would have in truth\nfitted the army of the Cross. We think it proof conclusive that the\ndescendants of Ham were black. But we might add some proof from sketches\nof profane history. In the 22d section of Euterpe, Herodotus says that\nthe natives on the Nile are universally black. In the 32d section,\ngiving an account of a party of Neesamonians, who in Africa were out\nupon an excursion, he says\u2014\u201cWhile they were thus employed, seven men, of\ndwarfish stature, came where they were, seized their persons, and\ncarried them away. They were mutually ignorant of each others\u2019 language.\nBut the Neesamonians were conducted over marshy grounds to a city, in\nwhich all the inhabitants were of diminutive appearance and of a black\ncolour.\u201d\n\nIn the 57th section, he gives an account of an Egyptian priestess who\nwas brought among the Threspoti. He says that \u201cthe circumstance of her\nbeing black explains to us her Egyptian origin.\u201d\n\nIn the 104th section, he says\u2014\u201cThe Cholchians certainly appear to be of\nEgyptian origin, which indeed, before I had conversed with any one on\nthe subject, I had always believed. But as I was desirous of being\nsatisfied, I interrogated the people of both countries. The result was,\nthat the Cholchians seemed to have a better remembrance of the\nEgyptians, than the Egyptians of the Cholchians. The Egyptians were of\nthe opinion that the Cholchians were descended of a part of the troops\nof Sesostris: to this I myself was also inclined, because they are\nblack, and have their hair short and curling.\u201d\n\nCambyses fought the black tribes of Egypt and Africa under Amasis, in\nthe western parts of Arabia. Herodotus says, (Thalia, section 12th,)\n\u201cThe bones of those who fell in the engagement were soon afterwards\ncollected, and separated into two distinct heaps. It was observed of the\nPersians, that their heads were so extremely soft as to yield to the\nslight impression even of a pebble. Those of the Egyptians, on the\ncontrary, were so firm that the blow of a large stone could hardly break\nthem. * * * I saw the very same fact at Papremis, after examining the\nbones of those who, under the conduct of Ach\u00e6menes, son of Darius, were\ndefeated by Inaius the African.\u201d\n\nHerodotus notices the distinction between the Arabs and the Negroes, but\ncalls them all Ethiopians. In the 70th section of Polymnia, he\nsays\u2014\u201cThose Ethiopians who came from the most eastern part of their\ncountry, served with the Indians. These differed from the former in\nnothing but their language and their hair. The Oriental Ethiopians have\ntheir hair straight: those of Africa have their hair more crisp and\ncurling than other men.\u201d\n\nHerodotus lived and wrote about five hundred years before our era. We\nhave quoted him through a translation, but not without examining the\noriginal.\n\nWe shall close our evidence on this point with a single quotation from\n_Judg._ iii. 8 and 10. The children of Israel intermarried with the\nCanaanites: the writer says, \u201cTherefore the anger of the Lord was hot\nagainst Israel, and he sold them into the hand of _Chusan rishathaim_,\u201d\n_the wicked Ethiopians_. Whereas it is as well known as any other fact\nof biblical history, that these \u201c_wicked Ethiopians_\u201d were none other\nthan the Philistines and other aboriginal tribes of the land of Canaan.\n\nUpon the conquest of Palestine by the Israelites, portions of the\nCanaanites overspread the approachable parts of Africa, where numerous\nhordes of their race were already in possession. For ages, there is said\nto have stood near Tangier, a monument with inscriptions signifying that\nit was built in commemoration of the people who fled from the face of\n_Joshua_ the robber. From the presumption of this being a fact, and from\na collection of other facts connected with early commerce, Moore, in the\nfirst volume of his History of Ireland, has strongly suggested that the\nancient Irish are partially indebted to the ancient Canaanites for their\norigin; whereas we think we have sufficiently proved that they were\nblack. We hope the impulsive sons of the Emerald Isle will repel the\ninsult. But, if what Moore says be true, it only proves another portion\nof our theory; for, as sin sinks to all moral and physical degradation\nand slavery, so virtue and holiness elevate to freedom and all animal\nand mental perfections; and since _Iern_ was for ages regarded as an\nisland of saints, Moore may have the benefit of the argument, if he\nchooses, whereby to account for the high-toned feeling and personal\nperfections of the modern Irish.\n\nIn conclusion, from the history of the family of man, we may all know\nthat the descendants of Japheth and Shem, when free from amalgamation\nwith the black tribes, are white people. Unless then the descendants of\nHam were black, how are we to account for the phenomena of the existence\nof that colour among men? Philosophy has been in search, and history has\nbeen on the watch; facts upon facts have been recorded touching every\nmatter; but have you ever heard of the uncontaminated descendants of\nJapheth, living in the extreme, or in the central zone, exhibiting the\nwoolly crown of the sons of Ham?\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XV.\n\nWe suggest some origin, some complexion of thought, from whence may have\nemanated the word \u201cHam,\u201d and its derivatives, as found to have existed\nin the days of the prophets; and we may here state that the Shemitic\nlanguages seem to exist all in a cluster, like so many grapes; nor are\nwe able to say which stands nearest the vine. Doubts may be raised as to\nthe priority of any one named; yet we might adduce some proof that the\nCoptic is younger, as we could that the Greek is younger still.\n\nThe Arabic word \u0645\u064e\u0627 _ma_ corresponds with the Syriac \u0721\u0733\u0710 _ma_, and the\nHebrew \u05de\u05b8\u05d4 _mah_, and has been translated into the Latin _quid_, as an\ninterrogatory, used in all languages very elliptically. Thus, _Gen._ iv.\n10: \u05de\u05b6\u05a3\u05d4 \u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05b4\u05c2\u0591\u05d9\u05ea\u05b8 \u201c_What have you done?_\u201d If the \u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05b4\u05c2\u0591\u05d9\u05ea\u05b8 had been\nomitted, the \u05de\u05b6\u05a3\u05d4 would have expressed the whole idea.\n\nIt was an interrogatory expression of exclamation and astonishment, to\none who had committed a heinous offence. So when Laban pursued, Jacob\nsaid, \u05de\u05b8\u05d4 _mah, What is my trespass?_ &c., as if in derision,\u2014_What is\nmy horrid crime?_ Ever since the days of Cain some have manifested\nwicked acts, as though they were operated on by some strong desire, some\ncoveting overwhelming to reason,\u2014as if the action was in total disregard\nof the consequences that must follow it. This state of mind seems to\nhave been expressed, in some measure, by the particular use of this\nparticle. Let us conceive that such a state of mind must be a heated, a\ndisturbed state of mind, as was that of Cain, and as must have been that\nof Jacob, had he stolen the goods of Laban. The word thus incidentally\nexpressive of such an idea, by being preceded or influenced by a\nparticle implying particularity, giving it definiteness and boundary,\nmust necessarily be converted into an action or actor, implying some\nportion of the primitive idea; and hence we find \u05d4\u05b5\u05bd\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 and \u0647\u0645\u064f\u0651 and\n\u0647\u064e\u0645\u064e\u064a _ham_ and _hami_ in Arabic, \u071a\u0733\u0721 _ham_ in Syriac, to mean a cognate\nidea, i. e. _to grow hot_, &c., _to boil_, _rage_, &c., sometimes\n_tumult_, &c., &c. And we now ask, these being facts, is it difficult to\npoint in the direction of the origin of the word Ham? Nor is it a matter\nof any importance, if the relationship exists, whether the noun and verb\nhave descended from such exclamatory particle, or the reverse; yet we\ncan easily imagine, in the early condition of things, that the mind,\ntaking cognisance of some horrid act, would impel some such exclamation,\nand that it would become the progenitor of the name of the act or actor.\n\nHowever this may be, each Hebrew scholar will inform us that the word\n\u05d4\u05b8\u05dd is an irregular Hebrew word. Grammarians have usually arranged words\nof this peculiar class among the Heemanti and augmented words, and they\nhave accurately noticed that the punctuatists have always preceded the \u05dd\n_mem_ by a (\u05b8) _Kamets_, or a (\u05d5\u05b9) _Kholem_. This circumstance has\ninduced Hiller to suppose that the \u05dd _mem_, as a _Heemanti_, was a\nparticle, while the adjunct was either \u05d4\u05b5\u05dd or \u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05dd; but all agree that\nthe form of these nouns shows that they are intensive in their\nsignification.\n\nIf then \u05d4\u05b8\u05dd _ham_ is a particle of \u05d4\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05d4 _hamah_, which carries with it\nthe ideas before named, it may be less difficult to conceive how the\nparticle, when added to other nouns, will make them intensive also,\nwhile the particle itself would be used alone to express some intensity\nin an emphatic manner, more particularly of its root.\n\nBut we find the word \u05d7\u05b8\u059e\u05dd _ham_, as applied to the son of Noah, from the\nroot \u05d4\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05d4 _hammah_, or \u05d7\u05b5\u05de\u05b7\u05d4 and used in Hebrew thus: In _Josh._ ix.\n12, \u201cThis our bread we took hot \u05d7\u05b8\u059e\u05dd for our provision,\u201d &c. _Job_\nxxxvii. 17, and vi. 17: \u201cHow thy garments _warm_ (\u05d7\u05b7\u05de\u05b4\u05bc\u0591\u05d9\u05dd _hammin,\nhot_) when he quieteth the earth by the south wind.\u201d \u201cWhat time they wax\nwarm, they vanish when it is _hot_,\u201d \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u059d\u05d7\u05bb\u05de\u05bc\u0597\u05d5\u05b9 _behummo, in the heat_.\nSo _Gen._ viii. 22: \u201cWhile the earth remaineth, seed-time and harvest,\ncold and heat \u05d5\u05b8\u05d7\u05b9\u059c\u05dd, and summer and winter, and day and night, shall\nnot cease.\u201d _Gen._ xviii. 1: \u201cAnd he sat in the tent door in the heat\n\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d7\u05b9\u05a5\u05dd of the day.\u201d 1 _Sam._ xi. 9\u201311: \u201cTo-morrow, by the time the sun\nis hot, (\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d7\u05b9\u05a3\u05dd _be hom, in heat_.) And slew the Ammonites until the\nheat of the day,\u201d \u05e2\u05b7\u05d3\u05d7\u05b9\u05dd _ad hom, until the hot_. xxi. 7 (the 6th of the\nEnglish text): \u201cTo put _hot_, \u05d7\u05b9\u0594\u05dd _hot_ in the day,\u201d &c. 2 _Sam._ iv.\n5: \u201cAnd came about the _heat_ of the day,\u201d \u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05d7\u05b9\u05a3\u05dd _ke hom, at the_\n_hot_. _Isa._ xxiii. 4: \u201cLike a clear _heat_ \u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05d7\u05b9\u05dd upon herbs, and like\na cloud of dew in the heat \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d7\u05b9\u05a5\u05dd of harvest.\u201d _Hag._ i. 6: \u201cYe clothe\nyou, but there is none warm,\u201d \u05dc\u05b0\u05d7\u05b9\u05a5\u05dd _be hom, not hot_. _Jer._ li. 39:\n\u201cIn their heats,\u201d \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d7\u05bb\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05dd _be hummon, in their heats_, &c.\n\nBut in Hebrew, as in some other languages, the phonetic power expressing\nthe idea _hot_, _heat_, &c. was cognate with rage, stubbornness, anger,\nwickedness, &c. &c., and hence we say _hell is hot_, and hence, in\n_Dan._ iii. 13, 19: \u201cThen Nebuchadnezzar in his rage,\u201d \u05d7\u05b1\u05de\u05b8\u05b9\u05d0 _hama_,\n_heat_, _hot_. \u201cTherefore shall he go forth with great fury,\u201d\n\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d7\u05b4\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05a3\u05d0\u05a5 _be hama_, _heat_, _rage_, _fury_, &c.\n\nShould it be said, the words in their declination, or rather the affixed\nand suffixed particles, differ, and are marked with different vowel\npoints, we answer by quoting _Lee\u2019s Heb. Lex._ p. 205: \u201cThis variety in\nthe vowels may be ascribed either to the punctuatists or the copyists,\nand is of no moment. But as the word \u05d7\u05b8\u05dd _ham_ was thus applied in\nHebrew to the original idea of active caloric, as emanating from the\nsun, so it will agree with its homophone in Arabic and Syriac; for let\nit be noticed, that the Arabic word \u062d\u064e\u0645\u064c\u0651 _ham_ or _haman_, means to be\n_hot_, as of the sun. So the Syriac \u0717\u0721\u0733\u0710 _hama_ means _\u0153stus_, _calor_,\n&c. But in _Deut._ xxxii. 24, 33, it is translated _poison_; thus,\npoison of serpents, and \u2018the poison of dragons,\u2019 from the notion that\ngreat heat, rage, anger, &c. are cognate with poison.\u201d\n\nThis word occurs in _Zeph._ ii. 12. The received version is, \u201cYe\nEthiopians also, ye shall _be_ slain by my sword.\u201d The original is,\n\u05d2\u05b7\u05bc\u05dd\u05be\u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05a3\u05dd \u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u0594\u05d9\u05dd \u05d7\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05dc\u05b5\u05a5\u05d9 \u05d7\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05b4\u05bc\u0596\u05d9 \u05d4\u05b5\u05bd\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4, and has been subject\nto much investigation. Gesenius considers the word \u05d4\u05b5\u05bd\u05de\u05b8\u05d4 a pronoun in\nthe second person, and Lee seems to side with him, but says, \u201cthe truth\nis, the place is inverted and abrupt, and should read thus: \u05d2\u05b7\u05bc\u05dd\u05be\u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05a3\u05dd\n\u05d7\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05dc\u05b5\u05a5\u05d9 \u05d7\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05b4\u05bc\u0596\u05d9 \u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u0594\u05d9\u05dd \u05d4\u05b5\u05bd\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4,\u201d and which he translates\nthus\u2014\u201c_Even ye (are) (the) wounded of my sword_,\u2014they are _Cushites_.\u201d\nWe do not perceive how he has made the passage more plain. Let us, for a\nmoment, examine how the Hebrews used this form \u05d7\u05b5\u05de\u05b8\u05d4 or \u05d7\u05b5\u05dd, that we may\nthe better comprehend its sense in the present instance. _Jer._ v. 22:\n\u201cThough they _roar_,\u201d \u05d5\u05b0\u05d4\u05b8\u05de\u05a5\u05d5\u05bc _ve hamu_, _rage_, &c., \u201cyet can they not\npass over it!\u201d vi. 23: \u201cTheir voice roareth like the sea,\u201d \u05d9\u05b6\u05bd\u05d4\u05b1\u05de\u05b6\u05d4\n_rageth_, &c. xxxi. 35; \u201cWhich divideth the sea, when the waves thereof\n_roar_,\u201d \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b6\u05bd\u05d4\u05b1\u05de\u0596\u05d5\u05bc _say ye_, _hemen_, _rage_, &c. li. 15: \u201cWhen her\nwaves do roar (\u05d5\u05b0\u05d4\u05b8\u05de\u05a4\u05d5\u05bc _ve hamu se_, _rage_, &c.) like great waters.\u201d\n_Isa._ li. 13: \u201cBut I am the Lord thy God that divided the sea, whose\nwaves roared,\u201d _raged_. li. 13: \u201cBecause of the _fury_ (\u05d7\u05b2\u05de\u05b7\u05a3\u05ea _rage_,\n&c.) of the oppressor,\u201d \u201cand where is the fury (\u05d7\u05b2\u05de\u05b7\u05a5\u05ea _hamath_, _rage_,\n&c.) of the oppressor?\u201d li. 15: \u201cwhose waves _roared_,\u201d \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b6\u05bd\u05d4\u05b1\u05de\u0596\u05d5\u05bc\n_raged_, &c. _Ps._ xlvi. 4 (the 3d of the English text): \u201c_Though_ the\nwaters thereof _roar_ (\u05d9\u05b6\u05bd\u05d4\u05b1\u05de\u05a3\u05d5\u05bc _rage_, &c.) and be troubled,\u201d\n\u05d9\u05b6\u05d7\u05b0\u05de\u05b0\u05a3\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc _great agitation_, _rage_, &c.\n\nBut let us take a more particular view of this word, as used in the\npassage from _Zephaniah_. The Septuagint has translated this passage in\n\u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f51\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u0391\u1f30\u03b8\u03af\u03bf\u03c0\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 \u1fe5\u03bf\u03bc\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03ad, which is very much like\nour received version.\n\nBut it should be noticed that it has translated the Hebrew word \u05d7\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05dc\u05b4\u05a5\u05d9\ninto \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03b9; \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 would imply the injury, wounds, carnage, or\nslaughter of a whole nation, army, or body of people; but \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\nimplies individuality, and reaches no farther than the person or persons\nnamed. The prophet had been uttering denunciations against many nations,\nbut in this passage emphatically selects the Ethiopians as individuals;\nand the Greek translator evidently discovered there was in this\ndenunciation something peculiarly personal as applied to the Ethiopians.\n\nThe Hebrew conveys the idea of reducing, subjecting, or bringing low, as\nby force, to cause to sink in character as in _Ps._ lxxxix. 40 (39th of\nthe English text): \u201cThou hast made void the covenant of thy servant:\nthou hast \u05d7\u05b4\u05dc\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05dc\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc _wounded_, _subjected_, or _reduced_ his crown to\nthe earth.\u201d _Ezek._ xxii. 26: \u201cHer priests have violated my law, and\nhave \u05d7\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05a3\u05d5\u05bc (_wounded_, _subjected_, _lowered the character of_) my\nholy things.\u201d\n\nBut the word \u05d7\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b5\u05d9 is here used in the construct state, showing that\nthe idea imposed by this word was brought about by the following term,\n\u05d7\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9\u0596, which the Septuagint translates rhomphaias, which properly\nmeans the Thracian spear; but \u05d7\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05bc\u05d9 means any weapon, a goad harpoon\nas well as a sword. The fact is, neither of these words were the usual\nHebrew or Greek term to mean a sword. The Greeks would have called a\nsword \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b1, and the Hebrews \u05d7\u05b2\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05ea or \u05d3\u05b9\u05d7\u05b7\u05de or \u05db\u05b4\u05bc\u05d3\u05d5\u05b9\u05df, or perhaps\n\u05e9\u05c2\u05db\u05d4; and Dr. Lee has given \u1f0d\u03c1\u03c0\u03b7 as the Greek translation of \u05d7\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05b4\u0596\u05d9,\nwhich means a sickle, a goad for driving elephants, &c. It was a thing\nto inflict wounds by which to enforce subjection, and the idea is that\nthe Ethiopians are covered by wounds by their being reduced by it, or\nthat they shall be. When Jeremiah announced captivity and slavery to the\nEgyptians and the adjacent tribes, he used this word as the instrument\nof its execution. Thus _Jer._ xlvi. 14: \u201cDeclare ye in Egypt, and\npublish in Migdol, and publish in Noph, and in Taphanhes; say ye, Stand\nfast, and prepare thee, for the _sword_ \u05d7\u05b6\u0596\u05e8\u05b6\u05d1 shall devour round about\nthee.\u201d 16: \u201cArise and let us go again to our own people, and to the land\nof our nativity, from the oppressing _sword_,\u201d \u05d7\u05b6\u0596\u05e8\u05b6\u05d1. Many such\ninstances might be cited, showing the fact that, in poetic strain, this\nwas the instrument usually named, as in the hand of him subjecting\nothers to bondage; and much in the same manner, even at this day, we use\nthe term \u201cwhip,\u201d in the hand of the master, in reference to the\nenforcement of his authority over his slave.\n\nIn a further view of the word \u05d7\u05b5\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4, as used in this passage, we deem\nit proper to state that Gibbs considers it a pronoun of the third person\nplural, masculine, _they_, and adds, \u201csometimes\u201d (probably an\nincorrectness drawn from the language of common life) \u201cused in reference\nto women,\u201d and quotes _Zech._ v. 10; _Cant._ vi. 8; _Ruth_ i. 22. And he\nfurther adds, \u201cIt is used for the substantive verb in the third person\nplural, 1 _Kings_ viii. 40, ix. 20; _Gen._ xxv. 16; also for the\nsubstantive verb in the second person, _Zeph._ ii. 12: \u2018Also, ye\nCushites \u05d7\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05dc\u05b5\u05a5\u05d9 \u05d7\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05b4\u05bc\u0596\u05d9 \u05d4\u05b5\u05bd\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 _shall be slain by my sword_.\u2019\u201d\n_Gibbs\u2019s Lex._ p. 175. In Stuart\u2019s Grammar, p. 193, he says, \u201c_Personal\npronouns of the third person sometimes stand simply in the place of the\nverb of existence_;\u201d e. g. he cites _Gen._ ix. 3, _Zech._ i. 9, and\nsays, \u201cPlainer still is the principle in such cases, as follows: _Zeph._\nii. 12, \u2018Ye Cushites, victims of my sword \u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05a3\u05dd \u05d4\u05b5\u05bd\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 are ye.\u2019\u201d\n\nThe fact is, the verb of existence, called the verb \u201cto be,\u201d and the\nverb substantive, in Hebrew, as in all other languages, is often not\nexpressed, but understood. This circumstance is well explained in\nGessenius\u2019 Hebrew Grammar, revised by Rodiger, and translated by Conant,\np. 225, thus, \u201cWhen a personal pronoun is the subject of a sentence,\nlike a noun in the same position, it does not require for its union with\nthe predicate a distinct word for the copula, when this consists simply\nin the verb \u2018to be,\u2019 \u05d0\u05b8\u05bd\u05e0\u05b9\u05db\u05b4\u05a3\u05d9 \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e8\u05b9\u05d0\u05b6\u0594\u05d4 \u2018_I (am) the seer_,\u2019 _1 Sam._\nix. 19.\u201d And again: \u201cThe pronoun of the third person frequently serves\nto convert the subject and predicate, and is then a sort of substitute\nfor the copula of the verb _to be_, e. g. _Gen._ xli. 26: \u2018_The seven\ngood cows_, \u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05a4\u05d1\u05b7\u05e2 \u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd\u0599 \u05d4\u05b5\u0594\u05e0\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 _seven years_ (are) _they_.\u2019\u201d To\nsay in English, \u201cThe seven good cows, seven years they,\u201d would be\nthought too elliptical; but we do not perceive how the expression\nconverts \u201c_they_\u201d into the verb \u201cto be.\u201d\n\nBut again, the same author says, p. 261: \u201cThe union of the\nsubstantive or pronoun, which forms the subject of the sentence,\nwith another substantive or adjective, as its predicate, is most\ncommonly expressed by simply writing them together without any\ncopula. 1 _Kings_ xxiii. 21: \u05d9\u05b0\u05d4\u05d5\u05b8\u05a4\u05d4 \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05d0\u05b1\u05dc\u05b9\u05d4\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd\u0599 \u2018_Jehovah_ (is)\n_the true God_.\u2019\u201d The idiom of the language then does not\nnecessarily convert \u05d4\u05b5\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 in the passage before us into the verb\n\u201cto be.\u201d And here let us repeat the sentence, \u05d2\u05b7\u05bc\u05dd\u05be\u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05a3\u05dd\n\u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u0594\u05d9\u05dd \u05d7\u05b7\u05bd\u05dc\u05b0\u05dc\u05b5\u05a5\u05d9 \u05d7\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05b4\u05bc\u0596\u05d9 \u05d4\u05b5\u05bd\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 _Zeph._ ii. 12. It will be\nperceived that \u05d2\u05b7\u05bc\u05dd\u05be\u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05a3\u05dd are connected _by Makkaph_. Hebrew\nscholars do not agree as to how far this character is effective as\nan accent. But the rules for its use are\u2014\u201cMakkaph is inserted in the\nfollowing cases: 1. Particles, which, from their nature, can never\nhave any _distinctive_ accent, are mostly connected with other words\nby the mark _Makkaph_: \u05d2\u05b7\u05bc\u05dd\u05be\u05dc\u05b0\u05d0\u05b4\u05d9\u05e9\u05b7\u05c1\u05d4\u05bc _even to her husband_;\n\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05ea\u05b8\u05dd\u05be\u05dc\u05b0\u05d1\u05b8\u05d1\u05b4\u059b\u05d9 _in the integrity of my heart_. _Gen._ xx. 5, &c. 2.\nWhen words are to be construed together, &c., as \u05d6\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05e2\u05d5\u05b9\u05be\u05d1\u0596\u05d5\u05b9 _its\nseed_ (is) within itself. _Gen._ i. 11,\u201d &c.\u2014_Lee\u2019s Lectures_, p.\n61.\n\nBut Stuart, seeing no way to translate the sentence without making\n\u05d4\u05b4\u0596\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 the verb \u201c_to be_,\u201d 3d person plural, \u201c_are_,\u201d takes \u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05a3\u05dd the\npersonal pronoun, 2d person plural, equivalent to _ye_ or _you_, away\nfrom \u05d2\u05b7\u05bc\u05dd, to which it is attached by _Makkaph_, and carries it down to\nprecede \u05d4\u05b5\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 in the sentence, and thus reads \u201c_are ye_,\u201d while he\nsupplies another \u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05dd\u05a3 as understood to precede \u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd, and reads,\n\u201cye Cushites, victims of my sword are ye.\u201d We consider this as quite as\nobjectionable as Dr. Lee\u2019s\u2014\u201c_Even ye_ (are) (the) _wounded of my\nsword,\u2014they are Cushites_.\u201d\n\nBut permit us now to inquire into the probability of \u05d4\u05b5\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 being even a\npronoun. \u05d0\u05b8\u05e0\u05db\u05b4\u05d9 _a-no-khi_ is not believed to be a Hebrew word. It is a\nhomophone of the Coptic word \u2c80\u2c9b\u2c9f\u2c95, and used by the Egyptians, who spoke\nCoptic, as the personal pronoun _I_. This word is believed to have been\nborrowed by the Hebrews at the time they were in bondage in Egypt, and\nthe habit of it so strongly established during their four hundred years\nof servitude, that neither the literature of the age of Moses nor the\ngenius of the people could ever eradicate it. Their original personal\npronoun was probably totally lost; nothing analogous to this Coptic term\ncan be found in any other of the Shemitic tongues. But Lee says that\nGessenius has found it in Punic, and quotes Lehrege-baude, note, p. 200.\nIn Chaldaic, _the personal pronoun, first person singular_, is \u05d0\u05b2\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n_a-nah_, and its phonetic cognates are found in all the other sister\ndialects. We may then well suggest that _the lost_ Hebrew term was \u05d0\u05b2\u05e0\u05b8\u05d0\n_a-na_, or quite analogous thereto.\n\nSuch then being the facts, let us inquire into the origin, composition,\nand signification of this Coptic pronoun. It will be agreed that some\nlanguage must have had precedence in the world, and it is usually\nyielded to the Hebrew. That such precedence was the property of some one\nof the Asiatic dialects all agree; and the nearer the subsequent\nlanguage exists to its precedent, the more plainly will its descent be\nmanifest. If the Hebrew was such precedent, or any other of its\nimmediate sisters, the Coptic, existing in their immediate\nneighbourhood, must have been originally very analogous to them.\n\nIt is immaterial whether our suggestion be right or wrong as to what\nparticularly was the lost Hebrew pronoun; let us take the Chaldaic,\nwhich, of all these dialects, was the most nearly like the Hebrew\u2014the\npersonal pronoun \u05d0\u05b2\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4 _I_, _I am_, and the word \u05db\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9 _ki_, which means\na _mark as a stigma_, indelibly fixed, as burned in, a mark intended\npointedly to indicate something; and hence it became a particle attached\nto a word often by Makkaph, whence the attention was to be particularly\ncalled, as, _mark me_, _mark ye_, are _just_, &c. &c. _Isa._ iii. 24: pm\ntr1 he '\u05db\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9 \u05ea\u05b7\u05d7\u05b7\u05ea \u05d9\u05d5\u05c4\u05e4\u05b4\u05d9' 'k\u00ee ta\u1e25at ywp\u00ee' _a burned mark of stigma_,\ninstead of beauty. Some have doubted the accuracy of the Hebrew in this\ninstance, and the fact is, no doubt, that it is rather an Arabicism; but\nthat in no way affects our deduction; it matters not whether the Coptic\nborrowed from Chaldean, Hebrew, or Arabic. These two words are beyond\nquestion the origin, the compound of the Coptic pronoun, meaning and\nincluding the individuality of the first person singular, and originally\nexpressing also the fact, that such person was _marked_ as a stigma\nindelibly, _as burned in_, &c. _Anoki, I, a marked one_; _I, one\ndeformed as if_ _branded_, &c.; _I, one that carry the mark of_, &c.\n&c., was the original idea expressed by this Coptic term of\nindividuality. Thus it expressed the fact that the person was a\nsuccessor in the curses of Ham and Cain, and in no other manner can the\nextraordinary appearance of \u05d4\u05b5\u05dd and sometimes \u05d4\u05b5\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 in the third person\nof the pronoun be accounted for. It is evidently from a new and other\nsource, the same or cognate with the term applied to the son of Noah.\n\nThese adjective associations of the pronoun, through the lapse of ages,\nwould naturally be forgotten by the Copts themselves, and were probably\nunknown to the Hebrews; just as we ourselves have forgotten that our\nword _obedient_ still expresses some of the qualities of the Hebrew word\n\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_ and _abed_, from which it has been derived through the Latin.\n\nThis pronoun \u05d0\u05b8\u05e0\u05c4\u05db\u05b4\u0596\u05d9 _I_, &c. was often contracted by the Hebrews into\n\u05d0\u05b2\u05e0\u05b4\u0596\u05d9 _ani_, and in its declination stood thus:\n\n\n                 _1st person singular, common gender_:\n          \u05d0\u05b8\u05e0\u05db\u05b4\u05d9 sometimes  \u05d0\u05b2\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9                  _I_.\n                               _Plural_:\n          \u05d0\u05b2\u05e0\u05b7\u05bd\u05d7\u05b0\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc                                _We_.\n                    _2d person singular masculine_:\n          \u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u0596\u05d4                                  _Thou_.\n                               _Plural_:\n          \u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u0596\u05dd                                  _You_.\n                          _Singular feminine_:\n          \u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc                                   _Thou, fem._\n                               _Plural_:\n          \u05d0\u05b2\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05df                                  _You, fem._\n                    _3d person singular, masculine_:\n          \u05d4\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\u05d0                                  _He_.\n                               _Plural_:\n          \u05d4\u05b5\u05a5\u05dd _hem_\u2014occasionally  \u05d4\u05b5\u0596\u05de\u05b8\u05d4           _They_.\n\nHere we find the word in question, if a pronoun. The feminine of the\nthird person is \u05d4\u05b4\u05d9\u0596\u05d0, and plural \u05e0\u05b8\u05d4, and yet \u05d4\u05b5\u05bd\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 is used in\n_Canticles_ in a condition evidently feminine; and yet in _Zeph._ ii.\n12, it is said it must be in the _second person plural_. But can any one\nbelieve that these words, thus arranged in the declination of this\npronoun, could ever have had a common origin? The fact is, no original\nlanguage was ever formed from rules; the rules are merely its\ndescription after it is formed. Language, in the infancy of its\nformation, resents restraint and all laws, except such as apply to its\nincipient state. Suppose a soldier for life should persist in calling\nhis infant son _soldier_, either playfully or mournfully; the child\nwould associate the term \u201csoldier\u201d with his individuality, and say\n_soldier am sleepy_, &c. In case the soldier\u2019s family was isolated from\nthe rest of the world, in the land of Nod, or elsewhere, then the family\nof languages would be quite apt to have a new term as a personal\npronoun.\n\nMore pertinent examples would explain our idea perhaps more fully. There\nnever was a language upon this earth, of which any thing is known, that\ndoes not show an extraordinary irregularity in the formation of its\npersonal pronouns,\u2014often giving proof that the different cases and\npersons have been formed from different roots. Webster says\u2014\u201c_I_, the\npronoun of the first person, the word which expresses one\u2019s self, or\nthat by which a speaker or writer denotes himself.\u201d \u201cIn _the plural_, we\nuse _we_ and _us_, which appear to be words radically distinct from\n_I_.\u201d Under _we_, he says, \u201cFrom plural of _I_, or rather a different\nword, denoting,\u201d &c. Does any one imagine that _I_, you, me, and _us_\nare from the same root? Webster noticed the discrepancy; we could have\nhoped that he would have given the world a history of the personal\npronoun of all languages: we know of no intellect more capable. Such a\nhistory would develop many curious things in the history of man, but\nwould be attended with great labour; and human life has too few days for\nsuch a man.\n\nThus we may, hypothetically at least, point out the class of operating\ncauses whereby the Copts introduced \u05d4\u05b5\u05dd or occasionally \u05d4\u05b5\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 as a\nperson of the pronoun, with the signification that the person to whom it\nwas applied was a descendant of the son of Noah; and the pronoun so\nintroduced derived from the noun \u05d7\u05b8\u05dd _Ham_. For, can we suppose the\n_first person singular_ \u05d0\u05b8\u05e0\u05b9\u05db\u05b4\u0596\u05d4 _a-no-ki_, and its third person plural\n\u05d4\u05b5\u0596\u05dd _hem_, occasionally \u05d4\u05b5\u05bd\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 _hemmah_, have the same root, or are of\nthe same origin? This \u05d4\u05b5\u05dd and the word \u05d7\u05b8\u05dd _the son of Noah_, are\nidentical, except the son of Noah is generally written with a _heth_,\ninstead of a _he_; but all know, who have studied the matter, these\ncharacters very often interchange, and that copyists have often\ninadvertently placed the one for the other. That which would seem the\npronoun is used in _Gen._ xiv. 5, and the Septuagint has translated it\nas a _pronoun_; but our received version has no doubt restored the true\nreading. The passage \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d4\u05b8\u0591\u05dd is translated \u201cin _Ham_,\u201d _i. e._ the land\noccupied by the descendants of Ham, the son of Noah. The change of\n_Kamets_ into _Tsere_, is really of no moment. These characters were\nnever invented until after the language ceased to be spoken, and was\nlong since dead. The points, in reality, are no part of the language.\nThe word in Genesis is indisputably a noun, preceded and governed by the\n_preposition_ \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc.\n\nPerhaps no one has ever yet succeeded to satisfy himself and others in\nthe translation of this passage of Zephaniah; all, or others for them,\nfind it full of difficulty: but let us consider \u05d4\u05b5\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 a noun of the\nsame order as the \u05d4\u05b8\u05dd of xiv. 5 of _Genesis_,\u2014in some respect in\napposition to \u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd, but more emphatic, as the affix of \u05d4 would seem\nto indicate, by its increase of the intensity, as well as its accounting\nfor the _dagesh_ of the \u05de _mem_, or its duplication. Let us consider it\nto mean the descendants of Ham,\u2014to express the idea, with great\nintensity, that the _Cushites_ were _Hamites_. True, it is not in the\nusual form of a patronymic. But we know not who will account, by\ngrammatical rules, for all the anomalies found in Hebrew, a language so\nfull of ellipses that some have thought it a mere skeleton language.\nWith this view of the subject it will read elliptically, thus: _So ye\nEthiopians wounded of the sword, Hamites_\u2014with the meaning, that the\nEthiopians were subject to bondage, and at the same time putting them in\nmind that the curse of slavery, as to the posterity of Ham, was\nunalterable.\n\nThe meaning of the prophet is\u2014So ye Ethiopians, reduced to a condition\nof bondage, remember ye are the inheritors of the curse of Ham!\n\nThe arrangement of the language to us clearly indicates that sense.\nBesides, we must take into consideration the peculiar meaning of the\nwords \u05d7\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05dc\u05b5\u05d9 and \u05d7\u05b7\u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05b4\u05bc\u0596\u05d9\u2014 that the prophet is writing in a highly\nfigurative and poetic strain; and we would also compare what this\nprophet says to the Ethiopians with what the other prophets have said of\nthe same people. \u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05dd is here applicable to all the tribes of Ham,\nas in _Amos_ ix. 7: \u201cAre ye not as children of the Ethiopians unto me? O\nchildren of Israel, saith the Lord.\u201d It may be well here to notice also\nthat the word \u201cEthiopian\u201d is of Greek origin, and associates with the\nidea blackness, like that of Ham. Thus, \u0391\u03b9\u03b8\u03b9\u03bf\u03c0\u03c2, _Aithiops_,_\nsun-burnt_, _swarthy as Ethiopians_; \u03b1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, _warmth_, _heat_, _fire_,\n_ardent_, _blazing like fire_, _blackened by fire_, _black_, _dark_;\n\u03b1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bf\u03c0\u03c2, _burning_ _fiery_, _blazing_, _burned_, _darkened by fire_,\n_dark-coloured_, _consuming_, _destroying_. _Donnegan_ p. 34. But Isaiah\nspeaks of the descendants of Ham perhaps in a more figurative language,\nand in a more elevated and poetical strain:\n\n 1. Wo to the land shadowing with wings,\n   Which _is_ beyond the rivers of Ethiopia:\n\n 2. That sendeth ambassadors by the sea,\n   Even in vessels of bulrushes upon the waters,\n   _Saying_, Go, ye swift messengers, to a nation scattered and peeled;\n   To a people terrible from the beginning hitherto;\n   A nation meted out and trodden down,\n\n 3. Whose land the rivers have spoiled!\n   All ye inhabitants of the world, and dwellers on the earth,\n   See ye, when he lifteth up an ensign on the mountains,\n   And when he bloweth a trumpet, hear ye!\n\n 4. For so the Lord said unto me, I will take my rest,\n   And I will consider in my dwelling-place,\n   Like a clear heat upon herbs,\n   And like a cloud of dew in the heat of harvest.\n\n 5. For afore the harvest, when the bud is perfect,\n   And the sour grape is ripening in the flower,\n   He shall both cut off the sprigs with pruning-hooks,\n   And take away and cut down the branches.\n\n 6. They shall be left together unto the fowls of the mountains,\n   And to the beasts of the earth;\n   And the fowls shall summer upon them,\n   And the beasts of the earth shall winter upon them.\n\n 7. In that time shall a present be brought unto the Lord of hosts,\n   Of a people scattered and peeled,\n   And from a people terrible from the beginning hitherto;\n   A nation meted out and trodden under foot,\n   Whose land the rivers have spoiled,\n   To the place of the name of the Lord of hosts, the Mount Zion.\n                                                             _Isa._ 18.\n\nThe denouncements of Jehovah against the children of Ham are more\nplainly expressed in the promises of God to these of the true worship,\nhis peculiar people:\n\n               Thus saith the Lord,\n       The labour of Egypt, and merchandise of Ethiopia,\n       And of the Sabeans, men of stature,\n       Shall come over unto thee, and they shall be thine:\n       They shall come after thee;\n       In chains they shall come over;\n       And they shall fall down unto thee.\n       They shall make supplication unto thee,\n       _Saying_, Surely God _is_ in thee;\n       And there is none else,\n       There is no God (_beside_),\u2014(_or, there is no other God._)\n                                                  _Isa._ xlv. 14.\n\nSo _Jeremiah_: \u201cDeclare ye in Egypt, and publish it in Migdol, and\npublish in Noph and in Taphanhes; say ye, Stand fast, and prepare thee;\nfor the sword shall devour round about thee.\n\n\u201cO thou daughter dwelling in Egypt, furnish thyself to go into\ncaptivity: for Noph shall be waste and desolate, without an inhabitant.\n\n\u201cThe daughter of Egypt shall be confounded; she shall be delivered into\nthe hands of the people of the north.\u201d _Jer._ xlvi. 1, 19, 24.\n\n\u201cAnd the sword shall come upon Egypt, and great pain shall be in\nEthiopia, when the slain shall fall in Egypt, and they shall take away\nher multitudes, and her foundations shall be broken down.\n\n\u201cEthiopia, and Lybia, and Lydia, and all the mingled (_mixed-blooded_)\npeople, _Chub_ and the men of the land that is in league, shall fall\nwith them by the sword.\n\n\u201cIn that day shall messengers go forth from me in ships to make the\ncareless Ethiopians afraid, and great pain shall come upon them, as in\nthe day of Egypt: for, lo, it cometh.\n\n\u201cThe young men of Aven and of Pibeseth shall fall by the sword: and\nthese cities shall go into captivity.\n\n\u201cAt Taphanhes also the day shall be darkened, when I shall break there\nthe yokes of Egypt: and the pomp of her strength shall cease in her: as\nfor her, a cloud shall cover her; and her daughters shall go into\ncaptivity.\n\n\u201cAnd I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations and disperse them\namong the countries, and they shall know that I am the Lord.\u201d _Ezek._\nxxx. 4, 5, 9, 17, 18, 26.\n\n\u201cAnd I will sell your sons and your daughters into the hands of the\nchildren of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people\nafar off: for the Lord hath spoken it.\u201d _Joel_ iii. 8.\n\nIt may be we have occupied too much time, in remarks too obscure and\nindistinct for biblical criticism, upon this passage of _Zephaniah_; and\nit may be that, in the judgment of some, we have thus made ourselves\nobnoxious to the satire of the reverend and witty commentator upon the\nwords:\n\n                \u201cStrange such difference there should be\n                'Twist tweedle-dum and tweedle-dee.\u201d\n\nBut we were sure the passage had been greatly misunderstood, and were,\nperhaps, too much emboldened by the hope, that the providence of the\nAll-wise might yet again issue forth the truth from the tongue of the\nfeeble.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XVI.\n\nFrom the root \u05d4\u05de\u05bc\u05d4 has also been derived the Arabic word \u062d\u064e\u0645\u064e\u0651\u0627\u0646\u064c\n_haman_, and the Syriac \u071a\u0733\u0721\u0733\u0722' _haman_, and adopted by the Hebrews in\nthe word \u05d7\u05b7\u05de\u05b8\u05df _haman_, which Castell translates \u201c_images_,\u201d dedicated\nto the worship of the sun, the worship of fire, heat, &c.\n\nThe Hebrew use of this word will be found in a plural form in _Lev._\nxxvi. 30, thus: \u201cAnd I will destroy your high places, and cut down your\n_images_,\u201d _hammanekem_. 2 _Chron._ xiv. 3 (the fourth of the Hebrew\ntext:) \u201cAnd brake down the _images_,\u201d \u05d7\u05b7\u05de\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u0591\u05d9\u05dd _hammanim_; also xxxiv.\n4, 7: \u201cAnd the _images_, (\u05d7\u05b7\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _hammanim_) that were on high above\nthem, he cut down,\u201d \u201cand had beaten the graven images (\u05d7\u05b7\u05de\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05dd\n_hammanim_) into powder.\u201d _Isa._ xvii. 8: \u201cEither the groves or the\n_images_,\u201d \u05d7\u05b7\u05de\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05dd _hammanim_; also xxvii. 9: \u201cThe groves and images\n(\u05d7\u05b7\u05de\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05dd hammanim) shall not stand up.\u201d _Ezek._ vi. 4, 6: \u201cYour altars\nshall be desolate, and your _images_ (\u05d7\u05b7\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05a3\u05e0\u05b5\u05d9\u05db\u05b6\u0594\u05dd _hammanekem_) shall\nbe broken,\u201d \u201cand your _images_ (\u05d7\u05b7\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05a3\u05e0\u05b5\u05d9\u05db\u05b6\u0594\u05dd _hammanekem_) may be cut\ndown.\u201d We have no possible word to express literally this term, but the\n_hammanekens_, or little HAMS, or fire-houses, the objects of religious\nadoration, were conical towers, from fifty to one hundred feet high, and\nfifteen to twenty feet in diameter at the base, and gradually decreasing\nupward, with a small door or opening fifteen or twenty feet above the\nbase, and four smaller ones near the apex, looking towards the cardinal\npoints.\n\nThe moderns have no certain knowledge of their particular use, yet all\nbelieve that in them was attempted to be kept the perpetual or holy\nfire, and perhaps into them was thrust the infant sacrificed to the god.\nMay we not suppose that Daniel and his brethren would have informed us,\nhad it been necessary for us to know more? Spencer, Heb. Laws, lib. ii.\ncap. 25, \u00a7 3, says of these edifices: \u201c_They were of a conical form and\nof a black colour_.\u201d It seems to us this identifies these edifices with\nthe round towers of Persia and elsewhere, remains of many of which were\nanciently found in Ireland. The curious about this matter are referred\nto Gesenius\u2019s Thesaurus, p. 489; also Lee\u2019s Lex. p. 297, where he quotes\nHenrici Arentii Hamaker Miscellanea Ph\u0153nicia, pp. 49, 54; also Diatribe\nPhilologico-Critica aliquot monumentorum Punicorum; Selden, de Diis\nSyris, ii. cap. 8, and the authors severally cited by them. Upon a full\nconsideration of the subject, Dr. Lee says\u2014\u201cUpon the whole, I am\ndisposed to believe that the term \u05d4\u05b8\u05dd (_haman_) is rather derived from\n\u05d4\u05b8\u05dd _Ham_, the father of Canaan, of Mitsraim, &c., _Gen._ x. 6\u201320; and\nhence by the latter worshipped as presiding angel of the sun, under the\ntitle of \u1f0c\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, _Greek_ \u1f0c\u03bc\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd (_Ammon_), which is probably our very\nword.\u201d If so, then his very name became significant of the worship of\nfire, and even expressive of the fire-temples themselves.\n\nBy some fanciful relation, not relevant to our subject, between the fire\nor sun worshippers and astronomy, when the sun was in aries (the ram),\nthe god Ham, _Ammon_, _Hammon_, or _Jupiter Hammon_, was represented\nwith a ram\u2019s head for his crest; with this crest became associated the\nidea of the god, and hence chonchologists, even to this day, call\ncertain shells, that are fancied to resemble the ram\u2019s horn,\n_Ammonites_, giving further evidence, even now, of how deeply seated was\nthe association between the earlier descendants of Ham and the fire\nworship of their day.\n\nThe long and fanciful story of _Io_, changed by Jupiter into a white\ncow; of her flight from the fifty sons of Egyptus; of her becoming the\nprogenitor of the _Ionians_; the Egyptians claiming her under the name\nof _Isis_; of her marriage with _Osiris_, who became at length _Apis_\nand _Serapis_, worshipped in the image of a black bull with a white spot\nin his forehead, and many such tales, are all legitimately descended\nfrom his family peculiarities, their relative condition in the world,\nand the fact that Ham became the imaginary _deity_ of his descendants.\n\nMuch evidence may be had proving that Ham became inseparably associated\nwith, and in fact the very father of, idolatry, and of all those\nenormities growing out of it; enormities with which idolatry has ever\nbeen attended, and which time and the history of man for ever give proof\nto be a total preventive of all physical and moral elevation and\nimprovement; and which, like other breaches against the laws of God,\nhave, at all times, among all men, for ever been accompanied by both\nphysical and moral degradation. But the descendants of Ham gave his name\nto their country. \u2cac\u2c8f\u2c99\u2c93 _Chemi_ was the Coptic name for Egypt, which the\nSeptuagint translates into \u03a7\u03b1\u03bc _Cham_. Plutarch styles Egypt \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\n_Chemia_, from the Coptic \u2cac\u2c8f\u2c99\u2c93 _Chemi_, and, as if he wished to give\nsome account of its origin, adds, \u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bc\u03ae \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f55\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1, \u201cfor it is\n_hot and humid_;\u201d showing that the \u2cac\u2c8f\u2c99\u2c93 _Chemi_ of the Copts signified\nthe same as the Ham of the Hebrews. But the Coptic word \u2cac\u2c8f\u2c99\u2c93 _Chemi_,\n\u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9 and \u03a7\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5 of Plutarch, also signified the adjective _black_. See\nGibbs\u2019s Hebrew Lexicon, under the word \u05d7\u05b8\u05dd _Ham_; and with this\nsignification the word _Ham_ is used in _Ps._ lxxviii. 51: \u201cThe chief of\ntheir strength in the tabernacles of _Ham_:\u201d Septuagint, \u03a7\u03b1\u03bc, _Cham_,\nfrom the Coptic \u2cac\u2c8f\u2c99\u2c93 _chemi_, black. cv. 23: \u201cAnd Jacob sojourned in the\nland of _Ham_,\u201d \u05d7\u05b8\u05dd _Ham_: Septuagint, \u03a7\u03b1\u03bc, _Cham_, from the Coptic \u2cac\u2c8f\u2c99\u2c93\n_chemi_, black. 27: \u201cAnd wonders in the land of Ham:\u201d Septuagint, \u03a7\u03b1\u03bc\n_Cham_, from the Coptic \u2cac\u2c8f\u2c99\u2c93 _chemi_, black. cvi. 22: \u201cWondrous works in\nthe land of _Ham_:\u201d Septuagint, \u03a7\u03b1\u03bc _Cham_, from the Coptic \u2cac\u2c8f\u2c99\u2c93\n_chemi_, black. The idea is, the land of the black people.\n\nIn this sense also the word is used in _Gen._ xiv. 5: \u201cAnd smote the\nRephaims in Ashteroth Karnaim, and the Zuzims in _Ham_.\u201d The Septuagint\ntranslates this passage into \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03b7 \u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03c1\u03ac \u1f05\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, as though the\n\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d4\u05b8\u0591\u05dd _be Ham_ was a pronoun, and which seems to have been the view of\nseveral ancient translators. But such certainly was not the view of the\ntranslators of the received version; nor of Martindale, and others from\nwhom he compiled. He says of this passage\u2014\u201c2. _Ham_, crafty, or heat;\nthe country of the Zuzims, the situation of which is not known:\u201d p. 326.\nWe certainly agree with the Septuagint that \u05d6\u05d5\u05bc\u05d6\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _Zuzim_ was a\nsignificant term, and perhaps well enough explained by \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03b7 \u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03c1\u1f70, for\nwhich a suitable translation would seem to be _wicked_, _perverse_,\n_strong_, _numerous_, or _stubborn heathen_. They were probably the\n\u05d6\u05b7\u05de\u05b0\u05d6\u05bb\u05de\u05b2\u05d9\u05dd Zamzummims of _Deut._ ii. 20.\n\nThe word \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d4\u05b8\u0591\u05dd _be Ham_, unless a pronoun as above, against which much\ncan be said, is evidently used as in the _Psalms_ quoted. In all these\ncases _Ham_ is used somewhat as a synonyme of \u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05c1 _Cush_; and when\napplied to a country generally, meant whatever country was occupied by\nthe descendants of _Ham_. The sense of the sentence, _and Zuzims in\nHam_, will then be, _and the stubborn heathen in Ethiopia_, or, _the\nperverse tribes of Cush_, or _the wicked nations of Ham_; all meaning\nthe black tribes, descendants of Ham, or some one of them, when\nparticularity is intended, as probably in this case; and let it be\nnoticed, that Martindale, p. 241, gives \u201cblackness\u201d as his first\ndefinition of _Cush_. The descendants of Ham applying his name to\nthemselves and country, they being black, it necessarily became\nsignificant of that colour. We have Germans, Swedes, English; but if we\nsay \u201cNegroes,\u201d or if we say Africans, we mean black men, because those\nwords, as now used, mean men of colour; and in a sense analogous, the\nword _Ham_ seems to have been used in the passages quoted.\n\nThis view of the word _Ham_ we think elucidates the history of Esther\nand that of Haman \u05d4\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05a5\u05df the son of Hamadatha\u2014_Agagite_, _ha Agagi_. The\nword is a patronymic of \u05d0\u05b7\u05d2\u05b8\u05d2 _Agag_,\u2014hence he was an Amalekite: \u201cAgag,\nthe king of Amalek\u201d\u2014\u201cAgag, the king of the Amalekites.\u201d 1 _Sam._ xv. 20,\n32. \u201cNow there was one Haman, the son of Amadatha, by birth an\nAmalekite.\u201d _Josephus_, book ii. cap. vi. 5. This shows the cause of the\nextraordinary hatred that existed between her people and his. His very\nname shows that he was a descendant of _Ham_, and we think also proves\nthat the Amalekites were black; and which fact is confirmed by 1 _Sam._\nxv. 6: \u201cAnd Saul said unto the Kenites, Go, depart; get ye down from\namong the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them,\u201d\u2014evincing the fact\nthat by mere inspection he could not distinguish the one from the other.\nWe have before shown that the Kenites were black. The argument follows,\nthat the Amalekites were also.\n\nThe word _Ham_ is also used in 1 _Chron._iv. 40, in the same manner as\nit is in _Psalms_ and _Genesis_, thus: \u201cFor they of _Ham_ \u05d7\u05b8\u0594\u05dd had dwelt\nthere of old.\u201d This is said of Gedar, \u201c_even unto the east_ side of the\nvalley.\u201d Now Gedar was in the mountains of Judea, (see _Josh._ xv.\n48\u201360,) or in the valley, (see _Josh._ xv. 36;) and as that account of\nthe country of Judea closes (see _idem_, 63) by informing us whom the\ninhabitants of Judah could not drive out, and as the inhabitants of\nGedar are not included in such list, it is to be presumed that the\ninhabitants of Gedar were so driven out at the time of Joshua; and\nleaves us nothing else to conclude than that, whoever they were, they\nwho are spoken of in this passage, as having dwelt there of old, were\nthe people driven out by him. But _Josh._ xii. 7, 8 informs us who the\npeople were on the west side of Jordan, both in the mountains and\nvalleys, and names them as Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites,\nand Hivites, and Jebusites; and from the 9th to the 24th gives us an\naccount of their kings, among whom is named the king of Gedar, who was\nsmitten and driven out. It is immaterial which of the tribes they were.\nThey were inhabitants of Palestine, (see 2 _Chron._ xxviii. 18 and 1\n_Chron._ xxvii. 28,) of the land of Canaan, not of south, east, nor of\nnorthern Arabia, nor of Egypt or any part of Africa; yet they are\nemphatically spoken of as of _Ham_, clearly having reference to their\ndescent and colour. Here we have an additional key whereby to unlock the\nmeaning of this word as used in _Psalms_ and _Genesis_. There can be no\ndoubt these primitive inhabitants of Gedar were the descendants of\nCanaan. Yet they are described by the same term which in other places is\nused to describe the descendants of Cush and Mitsraim; a term which most\nunquestionably determines them to have been black.\n\nBut the Coptic word _chemi_, which we have seen had the same\nsignificancy as \u05d7\u05b8\u05dd _ham_ in Hebrew, opens to the view the real meaning\nof a few Hebrio-Coptic words that grew into common use among the Hebrews\nsubsequent to their bondage in Egypt. We allude solely to the\nderivatives of \u2cac\u2c8f\u2c99\u2c93 _Chemi_. \u05db\u05b9\u05bc\u05de\u05b6\u05e8 _Chemar_ is thus derived, and\noccasionally used by the holy writers to signify black; thus, _Lam._ v.\n10: \u201cOur skin was _black_\u201d \u05e0\u05b4\u05db\u05b0\u05de\u05b8\u0594\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc _ni chemaru_. True, some have\ndisputed the accuracy of this translation. They take a cognate meaning,\nand say _our skin was hot_, &c. We hope to be excused for adopting the\nreceived version. But either meaning proves the origin of the word from\nthe Coptic \u2cac\u2c8f\u2c99\u2c93 _chemi_, the same as the _ham_ of the Hebrews. The fact\nis, the cognate meaning, sometimes, necessarily forces itself into an\nEnglish translation, as in _Gen._ xliii. 30: \u201cFor his bowels did yearn,\u201d\n\u05e0\u05b4\u05db\u05b0\u05de\u05b0\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc _grew hot_, _warmed_, became agitated, &c. 1 _Kings_ iii. 26:\n\u201cHer bowels _yearned_,\u201d \u05e0\u05b4\u05db\u05b0\u05de\u05b0\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc _grew hot_, _troubled_, &c.; and also\n_Hosea_ xi. 8: \u201cMy repentings are kindled,\u201d \u05e0\u05b0\u05db\u05b0\u05de\u05b0\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc _became hot_, &c.\n\nBut in all these instances the figure of speech is more particularly\nAsiatic, and more obscure than is well suited to our modern dialect, as\nwe think will be seen by comparing them with _Job_ iii. 5, \u201cLet the\nblackness of the day terrify it.\u201d\n\nFrom this Coptic name of HAM has _also_ been derived the appellative\nterm of the Moabitish and Ammonitish god \u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05de\u05b9\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05c1 _Chemosh_. The\nSyrians applied this term to the fancied being who oppresses mankind\nduring the dark hours of their sleeping, and hence _distressing dreams_,\n_incubus_, &c. _Chemosh_ is ranked with the god of destruction among the\nHindoos, _Muha D\u0113v\u0101_. The worshippers of this god are in Scripture\ncalled \u05e2\u05b7\u05dd\u05be\u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05de\u05d5\u05b9\u05e9\u05c1 _am Chemosh_, the people of Chemosh, particularly\nthe Moabites and Ammonites. The image of this god was a _black stone_.\n\nThe term applied to the priesthood in this worship among the black\ntribes is also derivative from the same Coptic word to which we have\noften added in translation the word \u201cidolatrous.\u201d Thus, 2 _Kings_ xxiii.\n5, \u201cand he put down the _idolatrous_ priests \u05d4\u05b7\u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05de\u05b8\u05e8\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _ha chemarim_.\u201d\n_Hosea_ x. 5, \u201cAnd the _priests_ thereof\u201d \u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05de\u05b8\u05e8\u05b8\u05d9\u05d5. _Zeph._ i. 4, \u201cAnd\nthe name of the _Chemarims_,\u201d \u05d4\u05b7\u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05de\u05b8\u05e8\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _ha Chemarim_, i. e. the\n_priests_ of the Hamitic fire-worshippers, &c. Some commentators, not\nconnecting these words with the Coptic, and the _priest_, as the term\napplies, with the black families of Ham, have conceived that the idea\n_blackness_, as associated with these idolatrous priests, had reference\nto their apparel. Hence they conceive that these priests always wore\nblack apparel; whereas the fact is they were _black men_, and, as such,\nare described by a term indicating that fact, as well as that of their\nidolatry and descent; and here we find the foundation of that modern and\ncommon prejudice, that the appropriate dress of the clergy is _black_.\n\nBut we find another derivative from the word _Ham_, _Gen._ xxxviii. 13:\n\u201cAnd it was told Tamar, saying, Behold thy _father-in-law_ \u05d7\u05b8\u05de\u05b4\u05d9\u05da\u05b0 goeth\nup.\u201d 25: \u201cShe sent to her _father-in-law_,\u201d he\u1e25\u0101m\u00eeh\u0101 So also 1 _Sam._\niv. 19: \u201cAnd that her _father-in-law was dead_.\u201d 21. \u201cAnd because of her\nfather-in-law,\u201d \u05d7\u05b8\u05de\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d4\u05b8. This word is used in the feminine in _Micah_,\nvii. 6, thus: \u201cAgainst her _mother-in-law_,\u201d \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d7\u05b2\u05de\u05b2\u05b9\u05ea\u05b8\u0591\u05d4\u05bc _la hamtha_.\nWe notice the word is preceded by the word \u05db\u05b7\u05bc\u05dc\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4, which word, in\n_Gen._ xxxviii. 11, is applied to _Tamar_, and in _Jer._ ii. 32,\nevidently to a \u201cbride\u201d taken from the heathen, which was forbid; and is\nalso used in _Cant._ iv. 8, for the \u201cspouse,\u201d who is made to declare\nherself a _black woman_, giving evidence that the word in _Micah_ is\nused in character.\n\nThis word is also used in the feminine in _Ruth_ i. 14: \u201cAnd Orpah\nkissed her _mother-in-law_,\u201d \u05dc\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d7\u05b2\u05de\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea\u05b8\u0594\u05d4\u05bc _la hamotha_. ii. 11: \u201cAll\nthat thou hast done unto thy _mother-in-law_,\u201d \u05d7\u05b2\u05de\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea\u05b5\u05da\u05b0 _hamothek_. 18:\n\u201cAnd her _mother-in-law_ saw what she had done,\u201d _hamotha_. 19: \u201cAnd her\n_mother in-law_ (_hamotha_) said unto her;\u201d \u201cand she showed her\n_mother-in-law_,\u201d _la hamotha_. 23: \u201cAnd dwelt with her\n_mother-in-law_,\u201d _hamotha_. iii. 1: \u201cThen Naomi her _mother-in-law_,\u201d\n_hamotha_. 6: \u201cAll her _mother-in-law_ bade her,\u201d _hamotha_. 16: \u201cAnd\nwhen she came to her _mother-in-law_,\u201d _hamotha_. This is certainly not\nthe most usual word in Hebrew to express the idea of _parent-in-law_.\n\nBut these instances of its use are too frequent, its declination too\nvaried, and in both genders, to admit the idea that they are the result\nof error or casualty, although some lexicographers seem to reject it. It\nmay be noticed that the individual holding the junior position was a\nfemale\u2014that in each case the _parent-in-law_ was most unquestionably of\npure Shemitic race.\n\nBut suspicion may at least be allowed to such purity in these young\nfemales. Tamar\u2019s husbands were half of Canaanitish blood. It would be\nexpected that she was of that race, but if not, her intermarriage with\nthose sons of Judah placed her in that rank. The sons of Eli were\nnotoriously wicked and licentious, and although the widow of Phinehas\nappears to have been of a devout cast, yet God had determined to destroy\nthe house of Eli on their account, and to wrest the priesthood from the\nfamily. The suspicion as to her race grows out of these facts and the\ncharacter of her husband. Ruth was declaredly a Moabitess, and Orpah was\nof that country.\n\nMuch might be said in favour of the position that in these cases the\nparents-in-law on the husband\u2019s side were of pure Shemitic blood, and\nthe reverse as to the daughters-in-law. Now as this peculiar term is\nnowhere else used in the holy books, are we not to suppose that this\npeculiar state of facts is nowhere else thus described? In _Gen._\nxviii., when the _father-in-law_ of Moses is named, this term is not\nused, but the more usual one; and the reason is because the position of\nthe parties is changed. Had the father or mother of Moses been spoken of\nas the _parent-in-law_ of Zippora, then we may presume this peculiar\nterm would have been used and expressed the fact as to the distinction\nof races; that he would have been called \u05d7\u05b2\u05de\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05d4\u05b8, and she her \u05d7\u05b2\u05de\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea\u05b8\u05d4.\nAnd we now present the inquiry, how came the name of Ham to be thus\ncompounded and used to express this particular position of relationship\nand distinction of race, unless from the fact that he had placed his\nparents in a similar position, liable to have been called by these\npeculiar terms?\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XVII.\n\nHaving thus, at some length, passed these subjects in review, we present\nour reflections to the impartial mind.\n\nBut there are grown up upon this earth some men who would seem to be so\nholy and pure that even the providences of God are defective in their\nsight, and by their conduct seem to evince their opinion to be that\nJehovah could not well manage the government of the world without their\nespecial counsel and aid. And do such really mean to condemn God, unless\nhis government shall comport with their views? In kindness of heart, and\nfor the benefit of such poor fallen ones, we propose to close this our\npresent Study by reading to them the thirty-third chapter of\nEcclesiasticus, omitting the five verses irrelevant to the subject.\n\n\u201cThere shall no evil happen unto him that feareth the Lord, but in\ntemptation even again he will deliver him. A wise man hateth not the\nlaw; but he that is a hypocrite therein is as a ship in the storm. A man\nof understanding trusteth in the law; and the law is faithful unto him\nas an oracle. Prepare what to say, and so thou shalt be heard; and bind\nup instruction, and then make answer.\u201d \u201cWhy doth one day excel another,\nwhere as all the light of every day in the year is of the sun? By the\nknowledge of the Lord they were distinguished: and he altered seasons\nand feasts. Some of them hath he made high days, and hallowed them, and\nsome of them hath he made ordinary days. And all men are from the\nground, and Adam was created of earth. In much knowledge the Lord hath\ndivided them, and made their ways diverse. Some of them hath he blessed\nand exalted, and some of them hath he sanctified, and set near himself:\nbut some of them hath he cursed and brought low, and turned them out of\ntheir places. As the clay is in the potter\u2019s hand, to fashion it at his\npleasure, so is man in the hand of him that made him, to render to them\nas liketh him best. Good is set against evil, and life against death: so\nis the godly against the sinner, and the sinner against the godly. So\nlook upon all the works of the Most High; and there are two and two, one\nagainst another. I awaked up last of all, as one that gathereth after\nthe grape-gatherers; by the blessing of God I profited, and filled my\nwine-press, like a gatherer of grapes. Consider that I laboured not for\nmyself only, but for all them that seek learning. Hear me, O ye great\nmen of the people, and hearken with your ears, ye rulers of the\ncongregation.\u201d \u201cIn all thy works keep to thyself the pre-eminence; leave\nnot a stain on thy honour. At the time when thou shalt end thy days, and\nfinish thy life, distribute thine inheritance. Fodder, a wand and\nburdens, are for the ass; and bread, correction, and work, for a\nservant. If thou set thy servant to labour, thou shalt find rest, but if\nthou let him go idle, he shall seek liberty. A yoke and a collar to bow\nthe neck, so are tortures and torments for an evil servant. Send him to\nlabour, that he be not idle; for idleness teacheth much evil. Set him to\nwork, as is fit for him; if he be not obedient, put on more fetters. But\nbe not excessive toward any, and without discretion do nothing. If thou\nhave a servant, let him be unto thee as thyself, because thou hast\nbought him with a price. If thou have a servant, entreat him as a\nbrother: for thou hast need of him as thine own soul: if thou entreat\nhim evil, and he run from thee, which way wilt thou go to seek him.\u201d\n\nThe doctrine is, that man is not exempt from the general law, that\ngoverns the animal world; that among all the animated races upon this\nearth, certain causes produce deterioration; and that it may take a\nlonger course of time for the restoration of a degenerate race, under\nthe controlling influences of opposite causes, than even that occupied\nin a downward direction. \u201cQuickly is the descent made to hell; but to\nrecover from the fall, and regain our former standing, is a labour, a\ntask indeed.\u201d _Virgil._ In short, that sin has a tendency forcing\ndownward to moral and physical ruin; to deteriorate the mental powers,\nto rot, to blast, as with a mildew, all animal perfections; to fill life\nwith disease and pain, and its hours with misery and wo, and that it\nnever willingly ceases its iron hold until it can shake hands with\ndeath. That God, in mercy, by the wisdom of his providence, has\ncontrived as it were a shield, sheltering poor fallen man from the\naction of such portion of this deadly poison as would have destroyed\nevery hope of intercession, and for ever excluded from our view,\nperhaps, even the advent of a _Saviour_. When the patient is dead, the\nphysician is not called. The law which produced the deluge and\ndestruction of the antediluvian world was a law established from all\neternity, meet for just such a case as the moral and physical condition\nof man then was. For the sake of ten, Sodom would not have been\ndestroyed; but it was less than ten for whom the Ark was provided; and\nwe are to remember that quick upon the promise that all flesh were not\nagain to be cast off, the lowest grade of slavery was promulgated, and\nits subjects ordered into the protection of the master; and may we not\nhence infer that slavery is intended, to some extent, as a preventive,\nas a shield against sin? And do we not notice that this shield is more\nor less weighty, more or less heavy to be borne, as the safety of the\nindividual bearing it may require; and that it is so cunningly\ncontrived, that its weight and burden are diminished in proportion as\nthe danger abates?\n\n\u201cHe poureth contempt upon princes, and causeth them to wander in the\nwilderness where there is no way; yet setteth he the poor on high from\naffliction, and maketh him families like a flock. The righteous shall\nsee it and rejoice, and all iniquity shall stop her mouth. Whoso is\nwise, and will observe these things, even they shall understand the\nloving-kindness of the Lord.\u201d _Ps._ cvii. 40\u201343.\n\nIn close, we may everywhere notice that some among the family of man\nhave become so poisoned with sin, so destroyed, that they are no longer\nsafe guardians to themselves, even under the general interdict, that\nanimal wants enslave us all. That for such God provides, as the general\nsafety may seem to require. That, in the history of man, some races have\nbecome so deteriorated by a continued action in opposition to the laws\nof God, that he has seen fit to care for them, by placing them under the\ncontrol of others; or by placing them, in mercy, under the guidance of a\nless deteriorated race, whom, no doubt, he holds responsible for the\ngood he intends them. And may we be permitted of the humble Christian to\ninquire, if this position presents any thing contrary to the general law\nof benevolence of the Deity,\u2014contrary to the welfare of man on earth, or\nhis hopes of heaven? Will you reject the doctrine, saying the biblical\nproofs are too scattered, too deeply buried under the dust of time? or,\nbecause a prophet has not appeared, or one arisen from the dead? The\ngeologist, from a few fragments of bone, now dug from the deep bowels of\nthe earth, is able to set up the osseous frame, to clothe with muscle\nand sinew, and give character to the animals of ancient time. And shall\nit not be recollected by you, who are striving to make your descendants\nthe very princes of intellect and talent, that similar researches may be\nmade in the moral history of man?\n\nWe submit the foregoing, confident, although there may be obscurity and\ndarkness yet surrounding the subject, which we have not the ability to\ndispel, that the time will come, when it will be made plain to the\nunderstanding of all. We therefore resign the subject, touching the\ncolour of the descendants of Ham, of their relationship with the family\nof Cain, and the ordinances of God influencing their condition in the\nworld, to those more learned, more critical, and of more mental power,\nand into the hands of those whose lips have been touched by a more\nliving coal from the altar of the prophet.\n\n\n\n\n                  ------------------------------------\n\n                               Study VII.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON I.\n\nIn the inquiry into the scriptural views of slavery, by ALBERT BARNES,\nPhiladelphia, 1846, page 322, we find the following assertion: \u201cNo man\nhas a right to assume that when the word \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, occurs in the\nNew Testament, it means a slave, or that he to whom it was applied was a\nslave.\u201d\n\nOur object in our present study is to prove that this assertion is not\ntrue; and our object further is to prove that when the word \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n_doulos_, occurs in the New Testament, it means a slave, and that he to\nwhom it was applied, as an appropriate distinctive quality, was a slave.\n\nSuppose some infidel, a monomaniac in the study of infidelity, should\nput forth the proposition that when the words Jesus Christ occur in the\nNew Testament, no one had the right to assume that they meant the\nMessiah, the Son of God, the Saviour of the world. We should feel it a\nneedless labour to refute it; a foolish, false assertion often does not\nmerit or require refutation, but the falsity of propositions may not be\nequally obvious to all, as in the present case.\n\nThe premises include the observance of the constitution, idioms, and use\nof the Greek language.\n\nTo him whose mind can flash upon the volume of Greek literature, like\nthe well-read schoolboy upon the pages of Dilworth,\u2014our present study\nand argument will be unnecessary and useless; but, as unsavoury as it\nmay seem, from the evidence that reaches us, we doubt whether the great\nmass of those called learned, do not remember and practise their Greek\nonly as the old veterans in sin do the evening and morning prayers of\ntheir childhood.\n\nBut, however that may be, a great proportion of us know no language but\nour own, and take on trust what any Magnus Apollo may choose to assume\nconcerning others. The assertions of one man, unaccompanied by evidence,\nmay excite little or no attention; but we have seen the substance of\nthis assertion put forth by the abolition clergy in various small\npublications, no doubt having great weight in their immediate vicinage.\n\nWe fear those who sit under such teaching may grope in deep darkness;\nand may we humbly pray, that, like the stroke of Jove, the light of the\nAlmighty may reach them from afar.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON II.\n\nWhen the untruthfulness of the lesson taught involves a misconception of\nthe character and laws of God, its direct tendency is to create in the\nmind an idea of, we may say, an image of God and his laws, as decidedly\ndifferent from him and his law as is the lesson taught from the truth;\nand here, perhaps, through all time, has been the commencement of\nidolatry.\n\nIs it not as much idolatry to worship a false image of the mind, as it\nwould be an image of wood or stone?\n\nYou teach that \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, does not mean _slave_ in the word of\nGod; you consequently teach that God disapproves of it, and that his\nlaws forbid it. We say the exact contrary. It is therefore evident that\nthe idea, the image we form in the mind of our God, is quite different\nfrom the idea you form in your mind of your God. But God cannot possess\na contradiction in quality; therefore the God we worship must be a\ndifferent God from the God you worship. But there can be but one God;\ntherefore your God is a false God, or our God is a false God. You are an\nidolater, or we are one.\n\nAnd shall it be said that our language is too strong?\u2014unnecessarily\nextreme in its denunciation?\u2014unwarranted by the views, by the language\nheld by the advocates of abolition and the friends of the anti-slavery\nmovements now in action in the Northern sections of our country? Hear\nthe proclamation of Mr. Wright, an eloquent speaker, before the\nAnti-Slavery Society, as reported in the Boston papers, May 30th, 1850:\n\n\u201cDown with your Bible!\u2014down with your political parties!\u2014down with your\nGod that sanctions slavery! The God of Moses Stuart, the Andover God,\nthe God of William H. Rogers, which is worshipped in the Winter-street\nChurch, is a monster, composed of oppression, fraud, injustice,\npollution, and every crime, in the shape of slavery. To such a God I am\nan atheist.\u201d\n\nThus the enemies of Jehovah give rapid proof of their idolatry.\n\nIt may be well here to remark, that the doctrine thus strange and astray\nfrom truth, may be expected to engraft itself upon such intellects as\nare led to the conclusion that man possesses within himself an unerring\nguide between right and wrong,\u2014a doctrine which to us appears deeply\nfraught with ruin to the individual, and degradation to public morals.\n\nWe therefore condemn, most decidedly, the doctrine that man possesses a\nmental power called \u201cmoral sense,\u201d \u201cconscience,\u201d or the \u201clight within\nus,\u201d which enables him unerringly to decide on right and wrong. You may\nas well say it will always enable him to discern the truth. Nor do we\ncomprehend how the mind can entertain such a notion, unless the\nintellect is thus impressible that the mind can believe in the existence\nof what would be a sister faculty, clairvoyance, or a thousand other\nsuch fantasies.\n\nMan possesses no power by which he can know God, only as he has revealed\nhimself by inspiration and by the daily manifestations of his law. We\nprefer to worship the God of Abraham and Moses, who gave them directions\nhow slaves should be governed, and of whom they should be purchased:\u2014the\nGod of the Bible, in which he has plainly revealed the reason why they\nare slaves. The history of the human intellect gives proof that among\nits strong characteristics is a desire, a fondness to search into\nmystery. While this quality stimulates to inquiry after truth, in well\norganized minds, it is an important means of man\u2019s improvement and\nprogression. But in the absence of all guides which can direct the path\nto successful inquiry, or by the substitution of false lights, man has\never gone astray. Here idolatry commences her reign.\n\nThe condition of man, from the most exalted instance of mental power,\ndown to the most abject degradation of the African savage, is for ever\nmarked and located by the fact, whether the guides to truth in their\ninfluence on him and his race have been universal, or only occasional;\nwhether their influence has been obeyed only at distant periods, or at\nall times rejected. It is the law of God, man shall not progress to\ngreatness only under the guidance of truth; under the guidance of\nfalsehood, man degenerates to insignificance, crime, slavery, or to\ninglorious death.\n\nWe do not propose that any man or any race has, without exception, been\nunder the constant influence of those axioms that guide the mind along\nthe thread of truth; but that some men and some races have deviated far\nmore than others, and that the effect of such difference is quite\nperceptible. Some races have become highly improved, while others only\ngive evidence that they belong to the animal race of men.\n\nDistinctions from this source arose between Cain and Abel; between the\nsons of Noah, Abraham, and the fire-worshippers of his day; between\nJacob and Esau; and between the Israelites and the idolaters of the\nsurrounding Hamitic tribes. This love of searching into mystery without\nusing the aids to find truth, has at all times of the world, when\nsupreme power was the object of contemplation, led men to idolatry,\nsometimes of the grossest kind; to the belief in mysterious influences,\nsupernatural agencies, of spirits and demons, magic, witchcraft, &c.\n\nTo the same order of causes we are to attribute the sentiment\nentertained by some, that certain portions of Scripture and certain\nwords sometimes contain unknown, hidden, secret, or mysterious meanings\nor instructions. Such views involve the proposition that such words,\nwhen used in the Scripture, have a different meaning than when otherwise\nused by men, and are to be translated into another language by\nsubstituting different ideas than those expressed by such words when\nused by man in his own oral or written language.\n\nDo they forget that the language of man is the language of God? That\nrevelation is always adapted to the understanding of men? They forget to\nknow this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private\ninterpretation. It happens that men take their own circumscribed view of\nthe providence of God, as God\u2019s ordinance touching a matter, and if\nScripture is in contradiction, then they search for mysterious or\nunusual meaning, and give it such interpretation as they imagine suits\nthe case.\n\nHence theologians who deny that slavery is of Divine authority, are led\nto the necessity of also denying that the Greek word \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_,\nmeans slave; or that, in its verbal formation, it expresses a cognate\naction.\n\nThe frequency of the use of this word in the copies of the ancient Greek\nTestament, as left us in the evangelical writings of the apostles; the\nvaried manner in which they have applied the term, in figurative\nillustration, in comparison, in the most simple explanations, as well as\nin the expression of the primitive idea which they intended to convey by\nit, would seem to be sufficient proof that whatever such primitive idea\nmay have been, yet that it surely was in exact conformity to the common\nand received opinion of its signification among those who wrote in and\nused the Greek language. This is very clear, since it is often used and\naddressed to the Greeks themselves, insomuch that no temerity has ever\nyet asserted that this word is of different import when found in the\nwritings of the apostles than when found in the Greek authors generally.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON III.\n\nThe Greek noun \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, which we say means a slave\nunconditionally, so far as we have been able to examine, took its\norigin, both phonetically and literally, among the Greeks. Let us take\n\u03b4\u03bf\u1ff6, as theme for \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ce\u03bc\u03b9, and \u03bb\u03bf\u1f50\u03c9, or from the radical \u03bb\u03bf\u1ff6, l\u014f\u014d: both\nphonetically and significantly the word is complete. At the most ancient\nperiod of the Greeks, it is said they had no slaves, and it is a little\nremarkable that the word \u201c_doulos_\u201d is very seldom found in the most\nancient of the Greek writers: but other nations more advanced had\nslaves. The idea, slave, was then expressed by them by the term \u03b4\u03bc\u03ce\u03c2,\n_dmos_, evidently of foreign origin. This latter term was nearly or\nquite obsolete as early as the days of Alexander, when the word _doulos_\nis found to have taken its place.\n\nThe ancient and Eastern nations were particular in their custom of\nbathing their bodies and washing their feet, &c. One of the first and\nmost important uses to which the early Greeks seem to have applied\nslaves, was in these personal purifications; and hence the peculiar name\n\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 originated; \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5-\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c9, one whose office it was to bathe and wash\nthem, a bondman for that particular use.\n\nThere is no instance in which Homer has used the word incompatible with\nsuch an association. The most affecting, we may say afflicting,\ncircumstance in which he has introduced the word is the parting of\nHector and Andromache; when Hector, anticipating his own death, and the\nprobability of her being made a slave to the Greeks, emphatically\nlaments her being compelled to carry water for her master, as if that\nwas a particular employment in which the _doulos_ was engaged.\n\nBut it does not affect the force of our argument, even if it shall be\nthought that the origin we give the word is doubtful. All we at the\npresent moment propose is, that it is an original Greek term, all of\nwhich terms, either remotely or immediately, spring from particles\nhaving a significant and phonetic relation with the derivative. Such has\nbeen the doctrine of all who have written upon the philology and origin\nof the Greek language. Valckenaerus (the edition of Venice, published by\nColetos) says, p. 8\u2014\n\n\u201cVerba simplicia apud Gr\u00e6cos sunt vel \u2018primitiva,\u2019 vel a primitivis per\nvarios flexus \u2018derivata.\u2019\n\n\u201cPrimitiva verba admodum sunt \u2018pauca:\u2019 \u2018derivatorum\u2019 numerus est\ninfinitus.\n\n\u201c\u2018Bin\u00e6\u2019 literarum syllab\u00e6 verbum primitivum constituunt.\n\n\u201cVerba primitiva, secundum observationem tertiam, dissyllaba sunt vel\n\u2018bilittera,\u2019 vel trilittera, vel quadrilittera.\n\n\u201cPrimitiva \u2018bilittera,\u2019 per rei naturam, dari possunt in universum (si\nvel totam linguam perscrutemur) tantum quinque, nempe \u1f04\u03c9,\u1f14\u03c9, \u1f45\u03c9,\u1f34\u03c9, \u1f54\u03c9\nPrimitiva \u2018trilittera\u2019 sunt, qu\u00e6 a \u2018vocali,\u2019 \u2018quadrilittera\u2019 (pleraque\nsaltem) qu\u00e6 a \u2018consonante,\u2019 incipiunt. Hoc certum est: sed de eo\netiamnum addubito, an nonnulla verba \u2018quinque\u2019 litteris constantia pro\n\u2018primitivis\u2019 debeant haberi?\u201d &c.\n\nAnd Lennepius, de Anologia Lingu\u00e6 Gr\u00e6c\u00e6, (eadem editio,) p. 38:\n\n\u201cCognita literarum potestate, earumque antiquitate, ad primas lingu\u00e6\nGr\u00e6c\u00e6 origines indagandas progrediendum est. Videndum itaque primo loco,\nqu\u00e6nam voces pro \u2018simplicissimis originibus\u2019 haberi possint, qu\u00e6nam\nminus? Hoc autem ut rite peragatur, qu\u00e6dam de \u2018partibus orationis\u2019 ante\nsunt monenda.\n\n\u201cEx viii. partibus quas vulgo statuunt grammatici, \u2018Verbum et Nomen\u2019\nprincipem obtinent locum: quum reliqu\u00e6 omnes facillime ad harum partium\nalterutram referi possint. Quapropter etiam \u2018Aristoteles,\u2019 aliique de\nveteribus, revera \u2018duas\u2019 tantum esse \u2018partes orationis\u2019 voluerunt.\n\n\u201cAddunt quidem alii tertiam partem, utriusque, nempe et \u2018verbi et\nnominis, ligamentum,\u2019 sive particulas, quod, nempe, particul\u00e6 orationem\nin unum corpus veluti connectant et devinciant. Sed, qui attentius\n\u2018particularum\u2019 naturam inspexerit, facile animadvertat, omnia fere, qu\u00e6\n\u2018particularum\u2019 nomine insigniuntur, si \u2018exteriorem formam\u2019 eorumque\nnaturam grammaticam inspiciamus, referenda esse vel ad \u2018nomen\u2019 vel ad\n\u2018verbum.\u2019\n\n\u201cIta verbi gr.: particula \u1fbd\u0223\u0342\u03bd, Lat. igitur, revera participium est,\ncontracta pro \u1f10\u1f78\u03bd, quod neutrum a masculo \u1f10\u1f7c\u03bd est, quo modo participium\nverbi \u1f10\u1f7c, vel \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u1f76, pronuntiarunt Iones, quum Attici \u1f10\u1f78\u03bd contraxerint in\n\u1fbd\u0223\u0342\u03bd. Apparet itaque, Gr\u00e6cum \u1fbd\u0223\u0342\u03bd revera pertinere ad nomina\nparticipialia. Eadem ratio cernitur quoque in particulis \u03c0\u03bf\u1f76, \u03c0\u1fc6, \u03c0\u0223\u0342,\nqu\u00e6 \u2018adverbia loci\u2019 dicuntur, quorum duo priora proprie \u2018dativa antiqua\u2019\nsunt, postremum vero genitivus est; quemadmodum similis ratio cernitur\nin adverbiis qu\u00e6 dicuntur \u2018Loci\u2019 apud Latinos, _qu\u00f2_, _qu\u00e0_, et\nsimilibus.\n\n\u201cAd \u2018verba\u2019 porro referenda sunt \u1f04\u03b3\u03b5, \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5, \u1f30\u03b4\u0223\u0342, \u1f32\u03b8\u03b9, \u1f14\u03b9\u03b1 vel \u1f14\u03b1, et\nplura alia similia, id quod in aliis clarius, in aliis minus manifesto,\napparet. Horum tamen omnium rationem eandem fuisse in prima lingu\u00e6 Gr\u00e6c\u00e6\ninfantia, non est quod dubitemus.\n\n\u201cH\u00e6c igitur quum revera sic sese habeant, jam porro inquirendum est,\nutrum verba, an vero nomina, \u2018primas\u2019 lingu\u00e6 Gr\u00e6c\u00e6 stirpes nobis\nsubministrent.\n\n\u201cDocet autem ipsa rei natura, si de \u2018simplicissimis\u2019 verbis sermo fiat,\n\u2018nomina\u2019 a \u2018verbis,\u2019 non verba a nominibus, primum esse formata.\n\n\u201cQuum enim omnes res vocabulis, tanquam nominibus, signat\u00e6, ab usu qui\nsingulis adest, vel quacumque etiam actione, nomina, sua acceperint:\nclare apparet, sicut ipsam actionem unde res denominata sit, ita etiam\nverbum, quo actio designetur, pr\u00e6cedere nomini, quod ab actione aliqua\nrei sit inditum. Atque hoc adeo certum est, non solum in lingua Gr\u00e6ca,\nsed etiam omnibus omnino linguis, ut extra omnem controversiam positum\nesse videatur: nisi quis delabatur illuc, ut linguas integras, qua late\npatent, nullo artificio humano accedente, uno temporis articulo\nhominibus divinitus datas esse, eosque statim caluisse tot myriadas quot\nin singulis linguis sunt vocabulorum; tametsi res ipsas vocabulis istis\ndesignandas plerosque primos homines ignorasse certum est.\n\n\u201cHoc autem quam sit rationi contrarium, atque ipsi experienti\u00e6, facile\napparet, si modo consideremus, ea ratione multa vocabula existere jam\ndebuisse priusquam eorum utilitas inter homines ulla esset, qu\u00e6que\nproinde, non nisi vani et inutiles soni, facile et sine ulla jactura\ndediscenda fuissent.\n\n\u201cQuin imo experientia abunde docet, primum res ipsas inveniri hominum\nindustria, deinde autem inventis nomina imponi, sive ab utilitate sive\nalia qualitate ducta. Ex quo porro apparet, quo plures res ab aliquo\npopulo inveniantur, eo ditiorem et uberiorem eorum linguam fieri, ut\nadeo mirandum non sit tantam esse lingu\u00e6 Gr\u00e6c\u00e6 copiam et ubertatem, quum\nexculta ea fuerit a populo ingeniosissimo, cui omnes artes et disciplin\u00e6\nnon tantum primordia sua, sed etiam omnem fere splendorem, debent.\nLinguas itaque diligenter consideranti, idem quod in artibus, in iis\nquoque usu venire apparebit: eas nimirum a paucis simplicissimisque\ninitiis profectas, non nisi sensim et progressu temporis ad eam qua\npostea patuerunt amplitudinem pervenisse. Quum autem hominum natura ita\nsit comparata, ut primum eas res circumspiciat, qu\u00e6 necessario ad vitam\nsustentandam, et cum aliis quibuscum homo societatis vinculo conjunctus\nest secure agendam, requirantur, dein vero ea excogitat qu\u00e6 vitam\njucundiorem possint reddere, valde verisimile fit vocabula ea in linguis\nantiquissima esse quibus res designantur ad vitam degendam necessari\u00e6,\nsi recesseris ab iis vocabulis, qu\u00e6 in antiquissimorum vocabulorum locum\ndeinceps substitute sunt, ut revera hujus generis mult\u00e6 vocabulorum\nform\u00e6 inveniantur, qu\u00e6 verborum obsoletorum locum occupaverunt.\n\n\u201cPorro non alienum erit hic observasse non tantum ejusmodi vocabula\nantiquissima existimari debere, sed etiam \u2018ipsas\u2019 significationes verbis\nsubjectas tanto antiquioris usus esse, tantoque magis proprias esse\nhabendas, quanto sunt propiores iis rebus quas corporis sensibus\npercipimus. Ab iis enim semper servata quadam similitudine ad reliquas\nquascumque verborum significationes progrediendum est: ut adeo appareat,\npaucissimas revera esse proprias verborum \u2018significationes,\u2019 nec alias\nesse nisi corporeas, sive eas quibus res sensibus externis exposit\u00e6\ndesignantur.\n\n\u201cE contrario autem, translatarum significationum copiam immensam, qu\u00e6 ex\npropria notione, tanquam ex trunco arboris rami, quaquaversum pateant;\nmanente similitudine inter eas omnes et propriam seu primam stirpis\nsignificationem, similiter atque rami, utcumque dispersi, et communem et\ncommunis trunci naturam retinent.\n\n\u201cEx his pr\u00e6terea intelligitur ea verba, qu\u00e6 \u1f44\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1 a Gr\u00e6cis\nvocantur, sic dicta quia a \u2018nomine\u2019 vel \u2018sono\u2019 formentur, \u2018propriam\u2019 eam\nsignificationem qu\u00e6 soni, unde facta sunt, naturam referat. Quorum\nverborum numerus ingens revera in linguis est, et longe major quam vulgo\ncredi solet. Sed, ut ad propositum redeamus, ex iis qu\u00e6 supra dicta\nsunt, clare apparet, simplicissimas origines non posse repeti nisi ab\nejusmodi verbis, quibus actiones ips\u00e6 significentur; adeoque a verbis\nsic proprie dictis.\n\n\u201cQuumque actiones infinit\u00e6, sive nulli cert\u00e6 person\u00e6 adsignat\u00e6, per rei\nnaturam antecedere debeant iis qu\u00e6 cert\u00e6 person\u00e6 attribuuntur, verba\n\u2018infinitiva\u2019 simplicissima proprie primas lingu\u00e6 Gr\u00e6c\u00e6 origines\ncontinere certum est.\n\n\u201cHarum autem plurim\u00e6, quum jam a longissimis temporibus, una cum\nplerisque notionibus propriis, ex usu ceciderint, ac difficillima\u00e6 s\u00e6pe\nindagatu sint, quo certiores progredi possimus, id semper tenendum est,\nne quidquam admittamus quod constanti analogi\u00e6 lingu\u00e6 repugnet; dein\netiam, ut ex ipsis lingu\u00e6 reliquiis, rite inter se comparatis,\ninquiramus a quo verbo originali vocabulum quodque oriatur: etiam tum,\nquum minus ipsum verbum originale superstes sit.\n\n\u201cUbi enim in sequentibus agetur de \u2018simplicissimis\u2019 verbis \u2018primitivis,\u2019\nid non ita accipiendum est quasi ea omnia, sicut etiam multa derivata\nsimpliciora, florente lingua Gr\u00e6c\u00e6, in sermone Gra\u00e6corum adhuc\nexstitisse vellem; sed tantum, in primo lingu\u00e6 Gr\u00e6c\u00e6 ortu, aut\nexstitisse revera aut saltem existere potuisse. Neque enim, in hoc\nlingu\u00e6 Gr\u00e6c\u00e6 defectu, \u00e6que certo sciri potest, an tanta copia, quantam\nfingere verborum per lingu\u00e6 naturam constanti analogi\u00e6 ductu liceat,\nprima lingu\u00e6 Gr\u00e6c\u00e6 \u00e6tate reipsa viguerit.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nOur object is here to present the Greek scholar, who may not have\nreflected on the subject, such suggestions as will lead him to perceive\nthat \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, is an original Greek word, not borrowed; and\nalthough he may not agree with us in the derivation of the term, yet\nthat he may readily satisfy himself what is the true derivation. It is\ntrue, Scheidius, in his \u201cAnimadversiones ad analogiam lingu\u00e6 Gr\u00e6c\u00e6,\u201d has\ncriticized the views of Lennepius, and has devoted near thirty pages to\nthat which is our quotation from him; and we did fancy, upon its\nexamination, that he had rather established than weakened the argument\nof Lennepius: in fact we did propose to quote him as authority; but to\nthe most of us long quotations, in a language to us unknown, are quite\nobjectionable. We therefore refer to his work, pp. 246 to 275, apud\nPaddenburg et filium, 1790, \u201cTraiecti ad Rhenum.\u201d It has been said by\nsome of those who contend that \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, when found in the Greek\nTestament, does not mean slave, that the Greek, like all other languages\nof modern date, is a compilation from the more ancient ones; and since\nthe Greeks at an early day had no slaves, it is evident, it is good\nproof that the more ancient tribes, from whom they and their language\ndescended, had none; and in all such early periods of the world men\nnever had words in their language to express things which did not exist\namong them, of which they could have no idea.\n\nTherefore \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 could not have meant slave,\u2014\u201can idea of which they had\nno notion.\u201d Even if this statement were true, we do not perceive how it\nproves their proposition. To show the futility of such argument, we\nconsent, for the moment, that \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 is not an original Greek word, but\nwas borrowed from some other language, in which it meant something\ndistinct from the idea of slave: say, a freeman, if you choose.\nLanguage, and all its parts, has ever been found to conform itself to\nthe habits and wants of those who use it. Wherefore we often find a\nterm, which some centuries ago expressed a certain distinct idea, now to\nexpress quite a different one. We therefore cannot say, with any\npropriety, that, because the word \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 meant a \u201cfreeman,\u201d at the age\nof Noah, that it also meant the same thing at the age of Alexander. If\nit meant a \u201cfreeman\u201d at the age of Noah, we are to determine that fact\nby its use at that period; if otherwise, we should be able to prove that\nour word _slave_ does not mean a slave now, but a proud and lofty\ndistinction.\n\nIt is a term borrowed from the Schlavonic, where its significance was\n_fame_, _renown_, &c.; but the Schlavonians going into bondage to other\nnations, upon their inroads on Europe, the term implying _fame_ in their\nancient national distinctions came to signify in succeeding ages the\ncondition of bondage. But although, as we have seen, a language is\nmodified by the habits of those who apply it, yet this liability to\nchange ceases when the language ceases to be the common vehicle of\nthought. Such substantially has been the case with the ancient Hebrew,\nsince the era of the prophets; and such has, emphatically, been the case\nwith the ancient Greek since the breaking down of the Roman Empire.\n\nAnd even at the age of the apostles, the Greek had already arrived at\nthe very highest point of its cultivation. No history, no writer gives\nproof of any subsequent improvement. If, then, we desire with\nseriousness and truth to determine the significance of any term then in\nuse, the same is alone to be found by an investigation of the Greek\nliterature of that age.\n\nThere are two modes by which an idea expressed in one language is\nexplained in another. Where both languages contain words of synonymous\nmeaning, then the expressing the idea through the medium of the words in\nanother language, is properly what we mean by \u201ctranslation.\u201d But in many\ninstances, the second language contains no word or words which are\nsynonymes of the term by which the idea is expressed in the language\nwhich we wish to translate. In that case we can accomplish the object\nonly by transferring the term expressing the idea from the one language\nto the other. Example:\u2014When the French exhibited to the natives here a\npadlock, the natives associated the thing with their idea of the\ntortoise, from the fancied mechanical resemblance, and with them the\nname of the one became the name of the other also. But when we exhibited\nto them a steamboat, they found their language destitute of any word to\nexpress their idea of the thing exhibited; consequently, they\ntransferred into their own language the word steamboat, to express the\nnew idea.\n\nWith a view to be enabled to come to a truthful decision as to the\ndefiniteness of the idea intended to be conveyed by the word _doulos_,\nwhen used in the writings of the apostles, let us make a suitable\ninquiry among the Greek authors read and studied at their time,\nregardless of what may be the result as to the establishment of any\npeculiar theory or favourite notion. Let a development of the truth be\nthe sole object of the research, careless of what else may stand or fall\nthereby. And since all have not chosen to burden themselves with the\ntoilsome lesson necessary in a preparation for such examination, we\nconsent that such may pass it by with the same indifference with which\nthey regard the study.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IV.\n\nWe commence our quotations from the Greek authors with the Cebetis\nTabula, from the Gronovius edition, Glasgow, 1747:\n\nP. 17.\u2014\u2014\u03b4\u03b9\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u2019 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03b8\u2019 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f15\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76 \u03b2\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac.\n\nP. 34. \u03a4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b8\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b1, \u1f05 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b8\u03b9\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03ba\u03cc\u03bb\u03b1\u03b6\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b5\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_. \u03a4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bd\u03b5\u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03ba\u03b7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03ad\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b9\u03c8\u03b5\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u2019 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9_, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\u00c6schylus, Prometheus Chained. Line 463:\n\n                    \u03ba\u1f04\u03b6\u03b5\u03c5\u03be\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b6\u03c5\u03b3\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bd\u03ce\u03b4\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\n                    \u03b6\u03b5\u03cd\u03b3\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1_.\n\nIn his Ch\u0153phoroi line 75:\n\n                            \u1f12\u03ba \u03b3\u03b1\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f32\u03ba\u03c9\u03bd\n                  \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1ff4\u03c9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f10\u03c3\u1fb6\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f36\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd,\n                  \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03b1,\n                  \u03c0\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u2019 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03c5,\n                  \u03b2\u03af\u1fb3 \u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd \u03c6\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd\n                  \u03c3\u03c4\u03cd\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u1fc3.\n\nBurney translates this passage thus:\n\nEtenim e domo paterna servilem induxeram sortem, _stat_ juste et\ninjuste, convenienter origini me\u00e6, eorum qui vi agunt laudare acerbum\nmentis odium co\u00ebrcenti.\n\nLine 133. \u03ba\u1f04\u03b3\u03c9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd _\u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_\u2014which the same author translates, Et ego\nquidem pro serva habeor.\n\nAnacreon, _Sur l'Amour Esclave_:\n\n                        \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f21 \u039a\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\n                        \u0396\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6, \u03bb\u03cd\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1 \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1,\n                        \u039b\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u1f1c\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1.\n                        \u039a\u1f04\u03bd \u03bb\u03cd\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd,\n                        \u039f\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9, \u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b4\u03ad\u00b7\n                        _\u0394\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nLucian, Dialogues of the Gods\u2014Jove, \u00c6sculapius, and Hercules:\n\n          \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u03b5, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03c3\u03cd.\n\nTranslation: Ego vero, si nihil aliud, neque servivi quemadmodum tu, &c.\n\nMercury and Maia:\n\n                  \u2014\u2014\u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b3\u1fc7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2,\n\nUt in terris solent, qui malam servitutem serviunt.\n\nCharon sive Contemplantes. Mercury:\n\n\u039f\u1f50 \u03b3\u03b1\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f36\u03bf\u03b8\u03b1, \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bb\u1fc3\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03bf\u03c1\u03ba\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u1f70, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1\u03b9_\u00b7\n\nNescis enim quot propterea bella existant, et insidi\u00e6, latrocinia,\nperjuria, c\u00e6des, vincula, navigatio longinqua, mercatur\u00e6, servitutes\ndenique?\n\nCataplus sive Tyrannus:\n\nClotho \u2014 \u1f0c\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03b5 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b9\u03ac\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03ce\u03bd. \u03a4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03ac \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u039c\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f41\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f15\u03be\u03b5\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03ad \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nAudi, magis enim iis auditis lugebis: uxorem tuam Midas habebit, servus\nqui olim adulterio illi cognitus est.\n\nMegapenthes.\u2014\u039a\u1f04\u03bd \u1f30\u03b4\u03b9\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f66 \u039c\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c1\u03b1, \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f15\u03bd\u03b1, \u03ba\u1f84\u03bd\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_, \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03af \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nVel privatum me facito, Parca, pauperum unum, vel servum, pro eo, qui\nrex nuper fui.\n\nNecyomantia, Menippus:\n\n* * * \u1f10\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f05\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2, _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_, \u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2,\n\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03bc\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd. \u1f10\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u1f41\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03c7\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u00b7 \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03bd, \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03c1\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03c2_ \u03c4\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1, \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03b9, \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03bd;\n\nUn\u00e0 autem omnes puniebantur, reges, servi, satrap\u00e6, pauperes, divites,\nmendici; cunctosque p\u0153nitebat patratorum; nonnullos agnovimus etiam\nconspicati, eorum de numero scilicet qui nuper vitam finierant; illi\nvero pr\u00e6 pudore vultus tegebant seseque avertebant; quod si forte\nrespicerent, valde quidem _servilem_ in modum, atque adulatorie, illi\nipsi, qui fuerant qu\u00e0m putas graves et superbi aliorum contemtores in\nhac vita.\n\nDeorum Comitia:\n\nMomus: * * * \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b3\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03a3\u03ba\u03c5\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u0393\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f41\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\n\u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd,\n\u03bf\u1f55\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u1f10\u03b8\u03b5\u03bb\u1f74\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f45\u03bd\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u0396\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03be\u03b9\u03c2, _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f64\u03bd,\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03b7, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u2019 \u1f41\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b8\u03ce\u03bd.\n\nProinde Scyth\u00e6 ac Get\u00e6e h\u00e6c illorum videntes, longum nobis valere\njussis, immortalitati se donant, et deos quoscunque voluerint feris\nsuffragiis consalutant, eodem modo quo Zamolxis etiam, servus cum esset,\nin album nescio quomodo delitescens, irrepsit.\n\nDemosthenes. Leipsic Ed. 1829, in 4 vols. Vol. i.\n\nOlynthiac 2d. * * * \u1f24 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03be\u03af\u03b1\u03bd _\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9_ \u0398\u03b5\u03c4\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1f76\n\u03c5\u1fe6\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f04\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u1f00\u03c3\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u2014which Leland translates thus: * *\n* \u201cor that the Thessalians, who have been so basely, so undeservedly\n_enslaved_, would not gladly embrace their freedom.\u201d\n\nP. 70.\u2014\u2014\u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u039b\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_, &c.\n\nPhilippic 4th, p. 142.\u2014\u2014\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff3.\n\nP. 148.\u2014\u2014\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd, &c.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03ae\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u1f00\u03c0\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03ae\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b7 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6.\n\nIdem, p. 149.\u2014\u2014\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u1ff3 \u03b4\u1f72, \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03b3\u03b1\u1f76, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f41 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f34\u03ba\u03c5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 &c.\n\nIdem, p. 158. * * * \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03b5 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f51\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03b8\u03b5\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5.\n\nIdem, p. 159.\u2014\u2014\u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03b3\u03ac\u03b3\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u1f76\u03b1\u03bd_.\n\nOn the Treaty with Alexander, p. 227. * * * \u1f24 \u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nIdem, p. 229.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u1f04\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac \u03bc\u03b5, &c.\n\nDe Corona, p. 208.\u2014\u2014\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u2019 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c5, \u03a4\u03c1\u03cc\u03bc\u03b7\u03c2, _\u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b5_ \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u2019 \u1f18\u03bb\u03c0\u03af\u1fb3\n\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u0398\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03af\u1ff3 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, &c.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b7\u03c1\u03b1\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2 \u03a6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f41 \u0394\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c6\u03c1\u03b5\u03b1\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_,\n&c.\n\nIdem, p. 289.\u2014\u2014\u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5_, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76, &c.\n\nIdem, p. 309.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_.\n\nIdem, p. 315.\u2014\u2014\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u1f00\u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\nIdem, p. 316.\u2014\u2014\u03b4\u03b9\u2019 \u1f45\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd_ \u03b5\u1f50\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u1ff6\u03c2.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u1f41 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b9 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd_\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03b8\u03b5\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b5\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f21\u03b3\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03ac\u03c2 \u1f55\u03b2\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c2\n\u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f05\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u1fc3_ \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03ba\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nIdem, p. 343, (_in the Epitaph._)\u2014\u2014\u1f61\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b6\u03c5\u03b3\u1f78\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c7\u03ad\u03bd\u03b9 \u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2_, &c.\n\nIdem, p. 345.\u2014\u2014\u1f15\u03c9\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nOratio de Falsa Legatione, vol. ii. p. 37.\u2014\u2014\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u03b5\u03b8\u03bd\u1fb6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c6\u03cc\u03b2\u03c9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u0398\u03b7\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03a6\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, [\u1f41\u1f55\u03c2]\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b9\u03c9\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1fc3\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1.\n\nIdem, p. 54.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u0391\u03bc\u03c6\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u1f51\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd,\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd_ \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f23\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd \u1f12\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nIdem, p. 60.\u2014\u2014\u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f41 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd_ \u1f14\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n\u03b5\u1f30\u03c1\u03ae\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f51\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nIdem, p. 78.\u2014\u2014\u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u1fc4\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f26\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1fe5\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nIdem, p. 95. \u1f18\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03a3\u03bf\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n              \u0395\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u03c7\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f24\u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd_,\n            \u1f2d \u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03bc\u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd \u03b8\u2019 \u03b5\u1f55\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9,\n              \u1f4d\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f64\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u1f21\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03b7\u03bd.\n\nIdem, p. 97.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f31 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03ce\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f01\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2,\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03b8\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_, \u03a6\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03be\u03b5\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f11\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u1fe6\u03b8\u2019 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u03c1\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9.\n\nOratio adversus Leptinem, p. 174.\u2014\u2014\u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u2019\n\u1f04\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b8\u1f7c\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03a7\u03b1\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b7 \u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u039b\u03c5\u03c7\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03be\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f51\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u03b5\u1f30 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1f76\u03bd\u1ff3 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u03bf\u03b8\u1f72\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03c6\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf, \u03c7\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u1fc6;\n\nOratio contra Midiam, p. 207.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u1fc3 \u03b3\u2019 \u1f10\u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u1fc7, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5,\n\u03ba\u1f84\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f51\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u1fc3 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f12\u03b4\u03c9\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03ae\u03bd. * * *\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ae \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b5\u1f55\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03ae\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd. \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_, \u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u2019 \u1f45\u03bb\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03be\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nP. 208. _\u039d\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2_.\u2014\u1f18\u1f70\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03b5\u1f34\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1, \u1f24 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1, \u1f24 \u03b3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u1fe6\u03ba\u03b1, \u1f24 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1,\n\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f24 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_, \u1f24 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03b5\u1f34\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70,\n\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03c9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u1f14\u03be\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd. * * *\n\u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5, \u1f64 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f45\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u1f51\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u1fd6.\n\nP. 209.\u2014\u2014\u1f45\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019 \u1f45\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nP. 210.\u2014\u2014\u1f08\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u1ff3 \u03b2\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b8\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b7\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nIdem, p. 253.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03c0\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n\u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u1f7c\u03bd, \u1f00\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03c7\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nOratio adversus Androtionem, p. 293.\u2014\u2014\u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03ae \u03c4\u03cc \u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f01\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cc\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u03c9\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f15\u03bb\u03ba\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f24 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u1f00\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03af\u03b7, \u1f03 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd,\n\u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u1f76\u03bd \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1, &c.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c3\u03ba\u03ad\u03c8\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u03af _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_, \u1f24 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9,\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u1f72\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd \u1f15\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f01\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f01\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03c5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nIdem, p. 295.\u2014\u2014\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u2019 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03bf\u1f34\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f15\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03cd\u03c5\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd, \u1f24 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9, \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b4\u03ae\u03bc\u1ff3 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03ba _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03b5\u1f34\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ae\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7\n\u03c4\u1f78 \u1f15\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b9\u03c3\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03af\u03ba\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nIdem, p. 298.\u2014\u2014\u03b5\u1f30 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 _\u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f11\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f61\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f40\u03c5\u03ba \u1f04\u03bd, \u1f66 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f55\u03b2\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2\n\u1f20\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f05\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u1f55\u03b2\u03c1\u03b9\u03b6\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03af\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2,\n\u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03b4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f00\u03c0\u03ac\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd, \u03b2\u03bf\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03ba\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b2\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2,\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03ba _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b2\u03b5\u03bb\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03ba \u03b2\u03b5\u03bb\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd,\n\u1f10\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nIdem, p. 299.\u2014\u2014\u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2, \u1f45 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03b8\u2019 \u1f41\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2, \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c3\u03bf\u1f76\n\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f41\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u2019 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd,\n&c.\n\nOratio adversus Timocratem, vol. iii. p. 128.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f66 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76, \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f04\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u1f01\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\nIdem, p. 133.\u2014\u2014\u03b5\u1f30 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03c9\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f04\u03bd \u03c6\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03bb\u1fc6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bf\u03bd_. Idem, p. 141.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\n\u03c3\u03ba\u03ad\u03c8\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u2019 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u1f66 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u1f76, \u03c4\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_, \u1f24 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd \u1f15\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f01\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 _\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u1f52\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ae\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nOratio III. adversus Aphobum, p. 242.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f12\u03b9\u03b3\u2019 \u1f26\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fe6\u03c5\u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, &c.\n\nIdem, p. 243.\u2014\u2014\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nIdem, p. 247.\u2014\u2014\u03b4\u03b9\u03cc\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u1f70\u03c2, \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f20\u03be\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f45\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, &c.\n\nOratio I. adversus Onetorem, p. 266.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f50 \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\n\u03b5\u1f51\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd. * * * _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u2019\n\u1f10\u03be\u03b7\u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c7\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u1fc6 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u1f36\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nOratio in Phormionem, vol. iv. p. 13.\u2014\u2014\u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76, * * * \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f10\u03bd\n\u0392\u03bf\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c1\u1ff3, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b7\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f72\u1fa7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76, \u1fa7 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ad\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd,\n\u03bc\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd\u2019 \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nOratorio in Pantan\u00e6netum, p. 80.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c0\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u1fc3 \u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03ce\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5_ \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03b3\u03cc\u03c1\u03c9\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd;\n\nOratio in Macartatum, p.173.\u2014\u2014\u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03b3\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1ff6\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03c4\u1ff7\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u1fc3 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u2019 \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nOratio in Stephanum, I. p. 217.\u2014\u2014\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2, \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u1f51\u03b9\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03c5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5_ \u03bb\u03b5\u03bb\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd,\n\u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ae \u03b4\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd \u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nIdem, p. 231.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd \u03c0\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd, \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f37\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70, \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76, \u03bf\u1f30 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\n\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03c5\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf, \u03bf\u1f30 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5_ \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u00b7\n* * * \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f56 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f50\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u1f41 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03be\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nIdem, p.234.\u2014\u2014\u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c9\u03c5\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f41\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u1f7a\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03ac\u03c3\u1fc3\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9, \u03c3\u1f7a _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f26\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1.\n\nIdem, p. 235.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u1ff6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f31\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9, \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b7\u03c4\u03ad \u03bc\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b8\u03c5\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b4\u03b9\u2019 \u1f14\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bc\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03ba\u03cc\u03bb\u03b1\u03be\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. * * * _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_ \u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u03b4\u2019\n\u1f57\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4' \u1f51\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2, \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f26\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce.\n\nOratio in Timotheum, p. 312.\u2014\u2014\u1f41 \u03b4\u03ad \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf, \u03bf\u1f54\u03b8' \u1f61\u03c2\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0391\u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2, \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f14\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u1f20\u03be\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u1f04\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2,\n&c.\n\nSophocles, Electra, line 814:\n\n                          \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03bc\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd\n                  \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c7\u03b8\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u03af,\n                  \u03c6\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nThis Francklin translates thus: \u201cLeft at last, a slave to those whom\nmost on earth I hate.\u201d\n\nAntigone, line 202.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2_ \u1f04\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nFrancklin thus\u2014\u201cAnd made you slaves.\u201d\n\nIdem, line 478.\n\n                                  \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u03b1\u03c1 \u1f10\u03ba\u03c0\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\n              \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u03ad \u03b3\u2019 \u1f45\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03cc\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03ad\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nThus\u2014\u201c\u2019Tis not for slaves to be so haughty.\u201d\n\nIdem, line 517.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f00\u03b4\u03b5\u03bb\u03c6\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f64\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf.\n\nThus\u2014\u201cHe was a brother, not a slave.\u201d\n\nIdem, line 756.\u2014\u2014\u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f65\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1_, \u03bc\u1f74 \u03ba\u03ce\u03c4\u03b9\u03bb\u03bb\u03ad \u03bc\u03b5.\n\nThus\u2014\u201cThink not to make me thus thy scorn and laughter, thou woman\u2019s\nslave.\u201d\n\nAjax, line 489.\u2014\u2014\u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7_.\n\nThus\u2014\u201cThough now a wretched slave.\u201d\n\n499.\u2014\u2014\u03be\u03cd\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u1ff7 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1f76\u03b1\u03bd_ \u1f15\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03ae\u03bd.\n\nThus\u2014\u201cAnd thy loved son shall eat the bread of slavery.\u201d\n\n1020.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03c2.\n\nFrancklin thus\u2014\u2014\u201cAnd to slavery doomed.\u201d\n\n1235.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u2019 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03ac;\n\nThus\u2014\u2014\u201cShall we be thus insulted by our slaves?\u201d\n\n1289.\u2014\u2014\u1f41 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_, \u1f41 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03ce\u03c2.\n\nThus\u2014\u2014\u201cI am a slave, born of a barbarian mother.\u201d\n\nOedipus Tyrannus, line 1062\u2014\u2014\n\n                      \u03c3\u03cd \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019 \u1f04\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c\n                \u03c5\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff6 _\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_, \u1f10\u03ba\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03ae.\n\nThus\u2014\u2014\u201cWere I descended from a race of slaves, \u2019twould not dishonour\nthee.\u201d\n\n1123.\u2014\u2014\u1f26 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f60\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u03bf\u1f34\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b5\u03af\u03c2.\n\nThus\u2014\u2014\u201cAlthough I am a slave, yet I was not purchased, but born and\nreared up in his house.\u201d\n\n1168.\u2014\u2014\u1f26\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_, \u1f24 \u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u1f74\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03ce\u03c2;\n\nThus\u2014\u201cWas he the son of a slave; if not, of whom?\u201d\n\nOedipus Coloneus, line 917\u2014\n\n                \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f24 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd_ \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70\n                \u1f14\u03b4\u03bf\u03be\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFrancklin thus\u2014\u201cOr didst thou think I valued a desert land, or that my\npeople were a race of slaves?\u201d\n\nTrachini\u00e6, line 53.\u2014\u2014\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, _female slaves_.\n\nLine 63\u2014\n\n                                        \u1f25\u03b4\u03b5 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\n                _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7_ \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd, \u1f11\u03b9\u03c1\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nFrancklin thus\u2014\u201cThis woman, though a slave, hath spoken what would have\nwell become the mouth of freedom\u2019s self to utter.\u201d\n\n257.\u2014\u2014\u03be\u03cd\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c3\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nThus\u2014\u201cAnd bind in slavery his wife and all his race.\u201d\n\n267.\u2014\u2014\u03c6\u03c9\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03b4\u03ad, _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u1fe5\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf.\n\nFrancklin thus\u2014\u201cAnd said a slave like him should bend beneath a\nfreeman\u2019s power.\u201d\n\n283.\u2014\u2014\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ad _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7_.\n\n302.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f34\u03bf\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n367.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019 \u1f65\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd_.\n\n467.\u2014\u2014\u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03c3\u03b5 _\u03ba\u1fb3\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd_.\n\nPhiloctetes, line 995\u2014\u2014\n\n               \u03bf\u1f34 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2. \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f61\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03c3\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03c2\n               \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f04\u03c1\u2019 \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c6\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\nAristophanes, Ran\u00e6 (Batrachoi), line 191\u2014\u2014\n\n                                   _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f04\u03b3\u03c9,\n                 \u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03bd\u03b5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c5\u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\n531.\u2014\u2014\u1f61\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f64\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2.\n\n541.\u2014\u2014\u03b5\u1f30 \u039e\u03b1\u03bd\u03b8\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f64\u03bd.\n\n584.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f05\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b8\u03bd\u1f78\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f64\u03bd;\n\n632.\u2014\u2014\u1f00\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03bd\u03b1\u03af \u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03b9 \u0394\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_.\n\n694.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u1f80\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n742.\u2014\u2014\u1f45\u03c4\u03b9, _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f64\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n743.\u2014\u2014\n\n                         \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd\n                         \u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n949.\u2014\u2014\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b5\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd \u1f21 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae \u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u03c7\u1ff7 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f27\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nAves (Ornithes), line 69.\u2014\u2014\u1f44\u03c3\u03bd\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_.\n\nLine 763\u2014\n\n                           \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a6\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n                     \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b4\u03ad _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u039a\u1f70\u03c1, etc.\n\n911.\u2014\u2014\u1f14\u1f63\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f63\u03bd \u03ba\u03cc\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nEquites (Hyppes), line 44\u2014\n\n                            \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u1fb3 \u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03c5\u03b7\u03bd\u03af\u1fb3\n                  \u1f10\u03c0\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_.\n\nLysistrate, line 330.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd_ \u1f60\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7.\n\nAcharnenses, 401\u2014\n\n\u1f45\u03b8\u2019 \u1f41 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u03bf\u1f51\u03c4\u03c9\u03c3\u1f76 \u03c3\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf.\n\nVesp\u00e6 (Sphekes), 517\u2014\n\n                  \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03bb\u03ad\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b1\u03c2.\n                                \u03c0\u03b1\u1fe6\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd,\n                  \u1f45\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03c9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f01\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nLine 602\u2014\n\n\u1f25\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03bf\u1f56\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f14\u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c7\u1f50\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nLine 681\u2014\n\n\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2. \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1_ \u03c3\u03c4\u1f76\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2.\n\nThesmophoriazus\u00e6, line 537\u2014\n\n                    \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b1\u03af \u03b3\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1_, &c.\n\n564.\u2014\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u2019 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c3\u1f7a, \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2_ \u03c4\u03b5\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f04\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u2019.\n\nEcclesiazus\u00e6, line 651.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f31 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_.\n\nLine 721\u2014\n\n               \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03ac\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2_ \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03ba\u03bf\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2\n               \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c6\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u039a\u03cd\u03c0\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd,\n               \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9_ \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd,\n               \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\u03ac\u03ba\u1fc3 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03bb\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nHomer, Iliad iii. 407\u2014\n\n             \u039c\u03b7\u03b4\u2019 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c3\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c8\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f4c\u03bb\u03c5\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd,\n             \u0391\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u03b1\u1f30\u03b5\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f40\u0390\u03b6\u03c5\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f11 \u03c6\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5,\n             \u0395\u1f30\u03c3\u03cc\u03ba\u03b5 \u03c3\u2019 \u1f22 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bf\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f22 \u1f45\u03b3\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd_.\n\nWhich Pope has paraphrased thus\u2014\n\n          \u201cA handmaid goddess at his side to wait,\n          Renounce the glories of thy heavenly state,\n          Be fix\u2019d for ever to the Trojan shore,\n          His spouse, or slave, and mount the skies no more.\u201d\n\nIliad vi. 460\u2014\n\n            \u1f1d\u03be\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f25\u03b4\u03b5 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae, \u1f45\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5 \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\n            \u03a4\u03c1\u03ce\u03c9\u03bd \u1f31\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03ac\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f3c\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u03b5\u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf.\n            \u1f6d\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03ad\u03b5\u03b9\u00b7 \u03c3\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f56 \u03bd\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f04\u03bb\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2\n            \u03a7\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5\u03ca \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03b4\u2019 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bc\u03cd\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f27\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1.\n\nWe should be happy to see the exquisite tenderness of the original\ntransferred into English. We offer:\u2014\u201cThis is the wife of Hector, the\nbravest of the horse-taming Trojans, when our people fought about Ilion.\nThus perchance some one will say: and this will be to thee a fresh\nsorrow, to feel the want of thy husband to ward off the day of slavery.\u201d\n\nOdyssey xiv. 339\u2014\n\n             \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b3\u03b1\u03af\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f78\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03ad\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bd\u03b7\u1fe6\u03c2,\n             \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f27\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bc\u03b7\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf.\n\nPope thus\u2014\n\n            \u201cSoon as remote from shore they plough the wave,\n            With ready hands they rush to seize the slave.\u201d\n\nOdyssey xxii. 421\u2014\n\n             \u03a0\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac \u03c4\u03bf\u03af \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b5\u03c2\n             \u0394\u03bc\u03c9\u03b1\u03af, \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u2019 \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03be\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9,\n             \u0395\u1f30\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03be\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2_ \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03c7\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nPope thus\u2014\n\n             \u201cThen she: In these thy kingly walls remain\n             (My son) full fifty of the handmaid train;\n             Taught by my care to cull the fleece or weave,\n             And servitude with pleasing tasks deceive.\u201d\n\nEuripides, Iphigenia in Tauris, line 130\u2014\n\n                  \u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\n                  \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u1f41\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\n                  \u03ba\u03bb\u1fc3\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1_ (_a slave_) \u03c0\u03ad\u03bc\u03c0\u03c9.\n\nLine 451.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03bc\u03ad\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nPotter thus\u2014\u201cAnd bid the toils of slavery cease.\u201d\n\nTroades (Trojan Dames), line 140\u2014\n\n                   _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1_ \u03b4\u2019 \u1f04\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be \u03bf\u1f34\u03ba\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cI, an old woman, am led from my home a slave.\u201d\n\nIdem, 159. _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03b1\u1f30\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cBemoan their slavery.\u201d\n\n186.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1_ \u03c4\u03bb\u03ac\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cAssigned a slave,\u201d &c.\n\n197.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03c9_ \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c2.\n\n\u201cAn old woman enslaved.\u201d\n\n214.\u2014\u2014\u1f14\u03bd\u03b8\u2019 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c9 \u039c\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03bb\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1_.\n\n\u201cExposed me a slave to Menelaus.\u201d\n\nIdem, 235\u2014\n\n                                 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03b1\u03af_ \u03b3\u03b1\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f74\n                       \u0394\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd \u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7.\n\n\u201cWe are slaves of the Dorian land, even now.\u201d\n\n284.\u2014\u2014\u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cI am enslaved,\u201d &c.\n\n599.\u2014\u2014\u03b6\u03c5\u03b3\u03ac \u03b4\u2019 \u1f24\u03bd\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1_ \u03a4\u03c1\u03bf\u03af\u03b1.\n\n\u201cTroy yields to the yoke of slavery.\u201d\n\n615.\u2014\u2014\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f25\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9.\n\n\u201cIs sunk in slavery.\u201d\n\n661.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03c9_ \u03b4\u2019, &c.\n\nIdem, 678\u2014\n\n                             \u03bd\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03b8\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c\n               \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03b4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c7\u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u03b6\u03c5\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n\u201cI go by sea to Greece, a prisoner of war, to a yoke of _slavery_.\u201d\n\n957.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ad _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03cc\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9.\n\n\u201cBut is her slave.\u201d\n\n971.\u2014\u2014\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c2 _\u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c2_\u2019.\n\n\u201cHarshly _enslaved_.\u201d\n\n1341.\u2014\u2014\u1f34\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\n      _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f01\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nBacch\u00e6, 366.\u2014\u2014\u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd_.\n\n803.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03af \u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1; _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03bc\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2;\n\nPotter thus\u2014\u201cWhat should I do? be to my slaves a slave?\u201d\n\n1028.\u2014\u2014\u1f65\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b5 \u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03bd\u03ac\u03b6\u03c9, _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f64\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f45\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_\n        \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nPotter thus\u2014\n\n            \u201cHow I lament thee, though a slave; yet slaves,\n            If faithful, mourn the ruin of their lords.\u201d\n\nCyclops, 76\u2014\n\n                       \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u2019, \u1f41 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n                       \u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9 \u039a\u03cd\u03ba\u03bb\u03c9\u03c0\u03b9\n                       \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b4\u03ad\u03c1\u03ba\u03c4\u1fb3,\n                       _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f00\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u1f7a\u03bd \u03c4\u1fb7\u03b4\u03b5\n                       \u03c4\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c7\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u1fb3 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u1fb3\n                       \u03c3\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nHelena, 283\u2014\n\n                                 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7,\n               _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7_ \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u2019, \u03bf\u1f56\u03c2\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u1f04\u03c0\u03bf.\n               \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03b1_ \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, \u03c0\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f11\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2.\n\nPotter thus\u2014\n\n                                    \u201cOf friends deprived,\n              I, from the free who draw my generous blood,\n              Am made a _slave_; for \u2019mong barbarians all\n              Are slaves, save one.\u201d\n\n299.\u2014\u2014\u1f00\u03c3\u03c7\u03ae\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03c7\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9,\n      \u03ba\u1f80\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03b4\u03c5\u03c3\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u1f72\u03c2 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nPotter thus\u2014\n\n                                        \u201cThe pendent cord\n            Disgraces; even in _slaves_ it is deemed base.\u201d\n\nLine 728\u2014\n\n             \u1f10\u03b3\u03c9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b5\u1f30 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c6\u03c5\u03c7\u2019 \u1f45\u03bc\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2,\n             \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f20\u03c1\u03b9\u03b8\u03bc\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n             _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9_, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f54\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u2019 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f14\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd,\n             \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u00b7 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u03cc\u03b4\u2019 \u1f24 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bf\u1fd6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u1fd6\u03bd\n             \u1f15\u03bd \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c1\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u2019 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1f70\u03c2,\n             \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u2019 \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03ad\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nPotter thus\u2014\n\n                                       \u201cIt is my wish,\n             Though born a slave, among the generous slaves\n             To be accounted, bearing a free mind,\n             If not the name; for better this I deem,\n             Than two bad things, to harbour a base mind,\n             And hear from those around the name of slave.\u201d\n\nWe deem this translation defective, because it makes no distinction\nbetween the ideas conveyed by the words \u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2 and \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2. True, at this\nlate day, the passage is somewhat obscure. But the speaker was not a\nslave: he says he was born a \u03bb\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2\u2014a character far less elevated than\nthe \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, yet a freeman, but possessing a greater servility of mind\nthan even the _doulos_, and his condition often far more abject. The\nslave possessed the protection of his master; but the _latris_, with all\nthe destitution and degradation incident to the lowest conditions of the\nfreeman, often coveted the happier condition of the _doulos_. The idea\nconveyed by this messenger is literally this: \u201cAlthough born a _latris_,\nI had rather be considered among the home-born slaves, not having the\nname of freedom, than to have merely the name; for I consider this a\ngood choice between the two evils\u2014the being supposed to have the base\nmind of the _latris_, and the being truly called a slave by those near\nus.\u201d The substance is, he had rather be a _doulos_ than a _latris_.\n\nThat he was not a slave is evident from what follows in the 797th line,\nwhere Menelaus calls him emphatically his _prospolon_, merely an\nattendant.\n\n1630.\u2014\u2014\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2, _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f64\u03bd;\n\nPotter\u2014\u201cSlave as thou art, wilt thou control thy lord?\u201d\n\nIdem, 1640.\n\n                                      \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n            \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03b5\u1f50\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\n\u201cTo home-born slaves, it is glory to die for their masters.\u201d\n\nIon, line 132.\u2014\u2014\u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03c7\u03ad\u03c1\u2019 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cTo be a slave to the gods.\u201d\n\n182.\u2014\u2014\u03a6\u03bf\u03af\u03b2\u1ff7 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03c9_, &c.\n\n327.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03bf\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u2019, \u1fa7 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd_.\n\n556.\u2014\u2014\u1f10\u03ba\u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03b5\u03cd\u03b3\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_.\n\n761.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1_ \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd, &c.\n\n837.\u2014\u2014\u03b5\u03ba _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2_ \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03c2, &c.\n\n854.\u2014\u2014\u1f15\u03bd \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd_, &c.\n\n855.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03bf\u1f52\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03c9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_,\n\u1f45\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03b8\u03bb\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f96.\n\nPotter\u2014\n\n            \u201cIt is the name; in all else than the free\n            The slave is nothing worse, if he be virtuous.\u201d\n\n983.\u2014\u2014\u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c6\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c2.\n\nPotter\u2014\u201cAn open murder, and with coward _slaves_.\u201d\n\n1109.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03af \u03b4' \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f66 _\u03be\u03cd\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5_;\n\n\u201cWhat is the matter, my fellow-slave?\u201d\n\nHercules, 190.\u2014\u2014\u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 \u1f41\u03c0\u03bb\u03af\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f45\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nPotter\u2014\n\n                            \u201c\u2014\u2014the man array\u2019d in arms\n                  Is to his arms a _slave_.\u201d\n\nElectra, 110.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2_ \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2, _female slave_.\n\n633.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f34\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf, \u03c3\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nPotter\u2014\u201cSuch the slave\u2019s nature, but this favours thee.\u201d\n\nLine 898\u2014\n\n                               \u03c3\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b3\u03ac\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd\n                         _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_.\n\n\u201cHe is thy _slave_ now.\u201d\n\nMedea, line 54\u2014\n\n                \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03be\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n                \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03af\u03c4\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03ac\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cSlaves who are faithful, suffer in the afflictions of their masters.\u201d\n\nLine 65.\u2014\u2014\u03bc\u03ae, \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, \u03ba\u03c1\u03cd\u03c0\u03c4\u03b5 _\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u03c3\u03ad\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n\u201cNow by this beard, deceive not by secrecy thy fellow-slave.\u201d\n\nHecuba, line 234\u2014\n\n               \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9_ \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n               \u03bc\u1f74 \u03bb\u03c5\u03c0\u03c1\u1f70 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b7\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\n               \u1f10\u03be\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c3\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b5\u03ce\u03bd,\n               \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ac\u03b4\u03b5.\n\nPotter thus\u2014\n\n               \u201cBut may _slaves_ be permitted of the free\n               To ask\u2014I mean no rudeness, no reproach\u2014\n               But may we ask? And wilt thou answer us?\u201d\n\n247.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03af \u03b4\u1fc6\u03c4\u2019 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03c2, \u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f64\u03bd \u1f10\u03bc\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5;\n\nPotter\u2014\u201cWhat didst thou say, when thou wast then my _slave_?\u201d\n\nIdem, 291\u2014\n\n                \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u03b5\u03bd \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f34\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2\n                \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03b1\u1f35\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9.\n\nPotter thus\u2014\n\n                                 \u201cThe laws of blood\n             Are equal to us _slaves_, and you our lords.\u201d\n\n331.\u2014\u2014\u03b1\u1f30\u03b1\u1fd6\u00b7 \u03c4\u1f78 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f61\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03c5\u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cAh well, how great the evil to have become a _slave_!\u201d\n\n356.\u2014\u2014\u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u03b5\u1f30\u03bc\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7_.\n\n\u201cBut I am now a slave.\u201d\n\nIdem, 365\u2014\n\n                   \u03bb\u03ad\u03c7\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f00\u03bc\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f60\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\n                   \u03c7\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6.\n\n\u201cAnd then, a female stewardess, a slave purchased somewhere, shall\ndefile my bed.\u201d\n\nIdem, 444\u2014\n\n                     \u03b1\u1f54\u03c1\u03b1, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u1f70\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f54\u03c1\u03b1,\n                     \u1f05\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2\n                     \u03b8\u03bf\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f00\u03ba\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u2019 \u03bf\u1f36\u03b4\u03bc\u03b1 \u03bb\u03af\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2,\n                     \u03c0\u03bf\u1fd6 \u03bc\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f70\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2;\n                     \u03c4\u1ff7 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2_ \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f36\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\n                     \u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u2019 \u1f00\u03c6\u03af\u03be\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9;\n                     \u1f24 \u0394\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f45\u03c1\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03b1\u1f34\u03b1\u03c2,\n                     \u1f24 \u03a6\u03b8\u03b9\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nPotter\u2014\n\n          \u201cTell me, ye gales, ye rising gales,\n            That lightly sweep along the azure plain,\n          Whose soft breath fills the swelling sails,\n            And wafts the vessel dancing o'er the main;\n          Whither, ah! whither will ye bear\n          This sickening daughter of despair?\n          What proud lord\u2019s rigour shall the _slave_ deplore,\n          On Doric or on Phthian shore?\u201d\n\n495.\u2014\u2014\u03b1\u1f55\u03c4\u03b7 \u03b4\u1f72 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7_, \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c2, \u1f04\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c7\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c6\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\n\u03b4\u03cd\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03ac\u03c1\u03b1.\n\nPotter\u2014\n\n\u201cHerself a _slave_, old, childless, on the ground She lies, and soils\nher hoar head in the dust.\u201d\n\n741.\u2014\u2014\n\n               \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f14\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd_ \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03b8\u2019 \u1f21\u03b3\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n               \u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u2019, \u1f04\u03bb\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f56 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u2019 \u1f04\u03bd\n\nPotter\u2014\n\n             \u201cBut should he treat me as a _slave_, a foe,\n             And spurn me, I should add to my afflictions.\u201d\n\n757.\u2014\u2014\n\n                  \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b4\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b1\u00b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7,\n                  \u03b1\u1f30\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03be\u03cd\u03bc\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9_ \u03b8\u03ad\u03bb\u03c9.\n\nPotter\u2014\n\n            \u201cNot freedom, but revenge; revenge on baseness:\n            Grant me revenge, and let me die a _slave_.\u201d\n\n798.\u2014\u2014\u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03af_ \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f34\u03c3\u03c9\u03c2.\n\nPotter\u2014\u201cBut we are _slaves_, but we perchance are weak\n\n809.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u2019, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7_ \u03c3\u03ad\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nPotter\u2014\u201cErewhile I was a queen, but now a slave.\u201d\n\nIdem, 864\u2014\n\n                \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f15\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b8\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f45\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7\n                \u1f22 \u03c7\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f22 \u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2,\n                \u1f22 \u03c0\u03bb\u1fc6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f22 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u1f76\n                \u03b5\u1f34\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\n\nPotter\u2014\n\n              \u201cVain is the boast of liberty in man:\n              A slave to fortune or a slave to wealth,\n              Or by the people or the laws restrained,\n              He dares not act the dictates of his will.\u201d\n\n1252.\u2014\u2014\n\n                oimoi, gynaikos, h\u00f4s eoich', h\u00eass\u00f4menos\n                _doul\u00eas_, hyphex\u00f4 tois kakiosin dik\u00ean.\n\nPotter\u2014\n\n            \u201cWhat! from these wretches shall I suffer thus,\n            Defeated by a woman and a _slave_?\u201d\n\nPh\u0153niss\u00e6, line 94.\u2014\u2014\u1f61\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9_, _as a slave_.\n\n189.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03ce\u03bd.\n\n\u201cTo lead in _slavery_.\u201d\n\n192.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03c4\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03b7\u03bd.\n\n\u201cTo suffer slavery.\u201d\n\n205.\u2014\u2014\u03a6\u03bf\u03af\u03b2\u03c9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1_. \u201cSlave to Ph\u0153bus.\u201d\n\n1606.\u2014\u2014\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9_ \u03c4\u03ad \u03bc\u03b5\u2014\u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03cd\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd, &c.\n\n\u201cSlave to Polybus,\u201d &c.\n\nOrestes, line 221.\u2014\u2014\u1f30\u03b4\u03bf\u1f7a \u03c4\u1f78 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u2019_ \u1f21\u03b4\u03cd, \u03ba\u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nIdem, 715\u2014\n\n                         \u2014\u2014\u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\n               _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd_ \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n937.\u2014\u2014\u1f24 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03be\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u03c7\u03c1\u03b5\u03ce\u03bd.\n\nPotter\u2014\u201cVile _slaves_ to your wives.\u201d\n\n1115.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f74 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nSuch was the reply of Pylades to his friend Orestes, in reference to the\nPhrygian slave; and we shall close our quotations from this remarkable\ntragic poet, with an interview between Orestes and one of these Phrygian\nslaves.\n\nLine 1522\u2014\n\n_Orestes._ _\u0394\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f64\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f09\u0390\u03b4\u03b7\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c2 \u03c3\u2019 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd; \u0390\n_Slave._ \u03a0\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1, \u03ba\u1f02\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f96 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f25\u03b4\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c6\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f41\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nPotter\u2014\n\n_Orestes._ \u201cFears a _slave_ death, the end of all his ills?\n\n_Slave._ \u201cTo slave or free, sweet is the light of heaven.\u201d\n\nAlcestes, line 638\u2014\n\n                               _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03af\u03bf\u03c5_ \u03b4\u2019 \u1f00\u03c6\u2019 \u03b1\u1f35\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n                 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c3\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03b2\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd \u03bb\u03ac\u03b8\u03c1\u03b1.\n\nPotter\u2014\u201cBut, the base offspring of some _slave_, thy wife stole me, and\nput me to her breast.\u201d\n\nWe find the following in a short notice of the life of Isocrates, by\nDionysius of Halicarnassus.\n\nPage 23.\u2014\u2014\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50 \u039c\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b7\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u2019 \u03bf\u1f56\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u03b5\u1f35\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd_ \u1f41\u03c1\u03bc\u03b7\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c6\u03c5\u03b3\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ad\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nAlso, page 26.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b5\u03b9_ \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f21 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1fe5\u03c5\u03b8\u03bc\u1ff7 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bb\u03ad\u03be\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03bf\u03bc\u03c8\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd.\n\nIdem, 35.\u2014\u2014\u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9_, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f80\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nIdem, 36.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03ae\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03b5\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03bd\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u2019 \u1f45\u03c0\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nIsocrates, (Cantabrigigi\u00e6, 1686,) Orat. ad Demonicum, page 52\u2014 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03c0\u03bd\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2, \u1f04\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03b2\u1fc3\u03c2, \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019\n\u1f21\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\nAd Nicoclem, p. 74.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u1f21\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03ac\u03bd \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u03bc\u03af\u1fb3 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b7\u03c2_\n\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u1fc7\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f24 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd.\n\nPanegyricus, p. 121.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f35 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9_\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c6\u2019 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f30\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\nIdem, 133.\u2014\u2014\u1f27\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b5\u1f31\u03bb\u03ce\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd_ \u1f10\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2\n\u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f51\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\nIdem, 137.\u2014\u2014\u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ce\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_ \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03ac\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03b8\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\nIdem, 144.\u2014\u2014\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03bb\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_\n\u1f04\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u2019 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u1f05\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f51\u03b2\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2_.\n\nIdem, 150.\u2014\u2014\u03a3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9_.\n\nIdem, 151.\u2014\u2014\u1f61\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u1f20\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nIdem, 153.\u2014\u2014\u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c1\u1fb7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2_.\n\nOrat. ad Philippum, p. 161.\u2014\u2014\u03b6\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03c9\n\u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u03b5\u1f30\u03b8\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\nArchidamus, p. 235.\u2014\u2014\u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03c0\u03b1\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2\n\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nDe Pace, sive Socialis, page 281.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b5\u1f14 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03ae\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03b5\u03bd,\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03bd\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b5\u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03b1\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd.\n\nIdem, p. 280.\u2014\u2014\u1f51\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ad _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9_.\n\nIdem, p. 306.\u2014\u2014\u03bc\u1f74 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_ \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac \u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nEvagoras, p. 310.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd_.\n\nIdem, p. 320.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03b5\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u03b4\u03ad \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03af\u03b1 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2_.\n\nIdem, p. 326.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u03ad \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03af _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_ \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9\n\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\nPanathenaicus, p. 396.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f55\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f61\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf_\n\u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f25 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f35\u03bb\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nIdem, p. 400.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f24 \u03c6\u03b5\u03cd\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd, \u1f00\u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03c9\u03c2 \u039b\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\nIdem, p. 412.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9_ \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u1fe5\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5.\n\nIdem, p. 418.\u2014\u2014_\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_.\n\nPlataicus, p. 459.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f35 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u1f27\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_ \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9.\n\nIdem, p. 463.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u1f50\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\nIdem, p. 465.\u2014\u2014_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u1ff6\u03bd_.\n\nIdem, p. 466.\u2014\u2014\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bc\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f15\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2_,\n\u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f34\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nOrat. de Permutatione, p. 493.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u03bf\u1f56\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd.\n\nIdem, p. 494.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9_ \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nIdem, p. 502.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03b1\u1f31\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03c7\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f10\u03be \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u1f24 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2_ \u1f40\u03c6\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2.\n\nIdem.\u2014\u2014\u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f34\u03c4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03af _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_.\n\nIdem, p. 510.\u2014\u2014\u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ad _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9_.\n\nIdem, p. 511.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_.\n\nDe Bigis, p. 530.\u2014\u2014\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f30\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2_.\n\nEpistol\u00e6: to Philip, p. 611.\u2014\u2014\u1f05 \u039e\u03ad\u03c1\u03be\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff7 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9_ \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9.\n\nTo Jason, a freedman, p. 629.\u2014\u2014\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f21\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b1 \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f24 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd_.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON V.\n\nBut if it shall be objected, that by these writers the word \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n_doulos_, and its derivatives are used in a figurative sense, since\nthese writers all exhibit minds deeply excited, or used all language\nwith poetic license; we think such objection unfounded, so far as it\nalleges that they have used this word in an unusual manner, or have\nattributed to it any other sense than was attributed to it by all the\nGreeks.\n\nNevertheless, we propose now to present this word as it was used by\nThucydides, Herodotus, and Xenophon, against whose use no cavil can be\nmade; and we now fear not to assert that their use of this word will be\nin the most strict accordance with the authors already examined.\n\nPlutarch, who was somewhat disposed to criticize other authors, speaking\nof Thucydides, expresses the idea that he wrote in such a manner that\nthe reader saw the picture of what he represented. (See his _De Gloria\nAtheniensium_.) Plutarch was then clearly of opinion that the language\nof Thucydides was most appropriately accurate.\n\nWe here premise, that we shall not presume to offer our own translation\nto the extract we propose to make from Thucydides. From the many that\nhave been made, we have selected that of the Rev. Dr. William Smith, of\nthe cathedral of Chester, England, and concerning whom it may be proper\nto say a word. He translated Longinus with great accuracy and beauty.\nThe Weekly Miscellany of Dec. 8th, 1739, says of this translation, \u201cIt\njustly deserves the notice and thanks of the public.\u201d Father Phillips\nsays, 1756, \u201cA late English translation of the Greek critic, by Mr.\nSmith, is a credit to the author, and reflects lustre on Longinus\nhimself.\u201d Laudits of this work will fill a volume. In 1753 he translated\nThucydides, and was directly created a doctor of divinity,\u2014and we find\nin his epitaph now in the cathedral of Chester, \u201cas a scholar his\nreputation is perpetuated by his valuable publications, particularly his\ncorrect and eloquent translations of Longinus, Thucydides, and\nXenophon.\u201d We have been thus minute that it may be known with what\nspirit we prepare this work.\n\nTHE PELOPONNESIAN WAR, _by Thucydides_.\n\nBook i. chap. 8. \u039f\u1f35 \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f25\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cAnd the great, who had all needful supplies at hand, reduced less\npowerful cities into their own _subjection_.\u201d\n\nAt that age of the world, when one city was conquered by another, all\nwere reduced to slavery, unless by the especial favour of the conqueror.\nIn this instance it would have been more literal to our present idiom to\nhave used the term _slavery_, instead of _subjection_; because now there\nhas grown up a wide distinction between the mere subjugating and\nenslaving.\n\nChap. 16. \u039a\u1fe6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f21 \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u1f74 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1, \u039a\u03c1\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2\n\u1f0d\u03bb\u03c5\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b8\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f20\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03c9 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b5.\n\n\u201cFor Cyrus, after he had completed the conquest of Cr\u0153sus, and all the\ncountry which lieth between the river Halys and the sea, invaded them,\nand enslaved their towns upon the continent.\u201d\n\nChap. 18. \u0394\u03b5\u03ba\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b1\u1f56\u03b8\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9 \u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03bb\u1ff3 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f26\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5.\n\n\u201cAnd in the tenth year after that, the barbarian, with a vast armament,\ninvaded Greece in order to _enslave_ it.\u201d\n\nChap. 34. \u039f\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff7 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f45\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f10\u03ba\u03c0\u03ad\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cThey are not sent out to be the _slaves_, but to be the equals of those\nwho remain behind.\u201d\n\nChap. 55. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u039a\u03b5\u03c1\u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f40\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03c3\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f35 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_,\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03ad\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf.\n\n\u201cEight hundred of their Corcyrean prisoners, who were _slaves_, they\nsold at public sale.\u201d\n\nChap. 68. \u039d\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03af \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03c1\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f67\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd _\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u1f41\u03c0\u1fb6\u03c4\u03b5.\n\n\u201cBut now, what need can there be of multiplying words, when some you\nalready see _enslaved_.\u201d\n\nChap. 69. \u1f18\u03c2 \u03c4\u03cc\u03b4\u03b5 \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f00\u03b5\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u2019 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f51\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u03be\u03c5\u03bc\u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1\n\u1f41 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f41 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72, \u1f00\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u03c1\u1fb7.\n\n\u201cEver since you have connived at liberty overthrown, not only in\nwhatever communities they have proceeded to enslave, but now where even\nyour own confederates are concerned. For not to the men who rivet on the\nchains of _slavery_, but to such as, though able, yet neglect to prevent\nit, ought the sad event with truth to be imputed.\u201d\n\nChap. 74. \u03a4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd_, &c.\n\n\u201cAnd every state already _enslaved_,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 81. \u039f\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2, \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9, \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b3\u1fc7 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9_, \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5\n\u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u1ff3.\n\n\u201cIt is by no means consistent with the spirit of Athenians to be\n_slaves_ to their soil, or, like unpractised soldiers, to shudder at\nwar.\u201d\n\nChap. 98. \u03a0\u03c1\u03ce\u03c4\u03b7 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b1\u1f55\u03c4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u03be\u03c5\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2 _\u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7_.\n\n\u201cThis was the first confederate state which was _enslaved_ to gratify\ntheir aspiring ambition.\u201d\n\nChap. 101. \u03a0\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u0395\u1f31\u03bb\u03ce\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u039c\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b7\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd_ \u1f00\u03c0\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u00b7 \u1f97 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039c\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03ae\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03ba\u03bb\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\n\u201cMost Of the Helots were descendants of the ancient Messenians, then\nreduced to _slavery_, and on this account all of them in general were\ncalled Messenians.\u201d\n\nChap. 103. \u1f2c\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f01\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cWhat if any one of them be ever found there, he should be made the\n_slave_ of whoever apprehended him.\u201d\n\nChap. 121. \u0395\u1f30 \u03bf\u1f31 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03be\u03cd\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1_ \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cWhich rivet _slavery_ on themselves,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 122. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f27\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f34\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf \u03c4\u03b9\n\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f23 \u1f04\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03c1\u03c5\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cSuch a triumph, how grating soever the bare mention of it may be to any\nof your ears, yet be it known, can and is nothing else but plain and\nopen _slavery_.\u201d\n\nChap. 124. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n\u201cAnd shall immediately recover liberty for those Grecians who are\nalready _enslaved_.\u201d\n\nChap. 138. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03bb\u03c0\u03af\u03b4\u03b1, \u1f23\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03af\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cAs the hope be suggested to him of _enslaving_ Greece.\u201d\n\nChap. 141. \u03a4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cThe very same tendency to make them _slaves_.\u201d\n\nBook ii. chap. 61. _\u0394\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6_ \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c6\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c6\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3 \u03be\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd.\n\n\u201cAccidents sudden and unforeseen, and so opposite to that event you\nmight reasonably have expected, _enslave_ the mind.\u201d\n\nChap. 63. \u039c\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f11\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5, _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u03c2_ \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\u201cThink not you have only one point at stake, the alternative of\n_slavery_ instead of freedom.\u201d\n\nIdem. \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u1fc3 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9 \u03be\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f10\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u1ff3 \u1f00\u03c3\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cSlavery is never to be endured by a state that once hath governed. Such\na situation can be tolerable only to that which has ever been\ndependent.\u201d\n\nChap. 71. \u03a3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u03c0\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2, \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3_.\n\n\u201cThat no one should unjustly make war on them, or endeavour to _enslave_\nthem.\u201d\n\nIdem. \u1f18\u03c0\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3_ \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1 \u1f25\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5.\n\n\u201cAre come hither to _enslave_ us,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 78. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f26\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c4\u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\u201cNor was there any other portion within the wall, either _slave_ or\nfree.\u201d\n\nBook iii. chap. 10. \u039e\u03cd\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9_ \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n\u201cWe made an alliance with the Athenians\u2014not to _enslave_ the rest of\nGreece to the Athenians.\u201d\n\nIdem. \u1f18\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u1f74 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f11\u03c9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u039c\u03ae\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b8\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b9\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72\n\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03be\u03c5\u03bc\u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03c9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd_ \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03b4\u03b5\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f15\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f26\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd. \u1f00\u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72\n\u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u2019 \u1f15\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03c8\u03b7\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03bc\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f31 \u03be\u03cd\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9\n_\u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd_, \u03c0\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a7\u03af\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cBut when we perceived that they relaxed in their zeal against the Mede,\nand were grown earnest in riveting _slavery_ upon allies, we then began\nto be alarmed. It was impossible, where so many parties were to be\nconsulted, to unite together in one body of defence; and thus all the\nallies fell into _slavery_ except ourselves and the Chians.\u201d\n\nChap. 38. _\u0394\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_ \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b5\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c4\u03cc\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c9\u03b8\u03cc\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cSlaves as you are to whatever trifles happen always to be in vogue, and\nlooking down with contempt on tried and experienced methods.\u201d\n\nChap. 56. \u1f18\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff7, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03c6\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd \u1f41\n\u03b2\u1f01\u03c1\u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f35\u03b4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\u201cBut at that season, when the barbarians struck at _enslaving_ us all,\nthese Thebans were then the barbarians\u2019 coadjutors.\u201d\n\nChap. 58. \u03a0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03bd, \u1f10\u03bd \u1f97 \u1f20\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2, \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5;\n\n\u201cWill you further _enslave_ the spot on which the Grecians earned their\nliberty?\u201d\n\nChap. 63. \u03a4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd, _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03b4\u03b1, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72,\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\u201cThe Athenians truly have _enslaved_ your country; and the others would\nregain its freedom.\u201d\n\nChap. 64. \u1f08\u03c0\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u1f70\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, _\u03be\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5_\n\u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u0391\u1f30\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ae\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f24 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03ba\u03c9\u03bb\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5.\n\n\u201cYou renounced, you violated first the oaths, which rather concurred to\n_enslave_ the \u00c6ginet\u00e6 and some other people of the same association,\nthan endeavoured to prevent it.\u201d\n\nChap. 70. \u1f59\u03c0\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd, \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u039a\u03ad\u03c1\u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cAnd therefore against him the accomplices prefer an accusation, as\nplotting how to subject Corcyra to Athenian _slavery_.\u201d\n\nChap. 71. \u0394\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03be\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u039a\u03b5\u03c1\u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f36\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9\n\u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b2\u03ad\u03bb\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f25\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u2019 \u1f04\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b5\u03bd_ \u1f51\u03c0\u2019 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cAfter this bold assassination, they summoned the Corcyreans to assemble\nimmediately, where they justified their proceedings as most highly for\nthe public good, and the only expedient of preventing Athenian\n_slavery_.\u201d\n\nChap. 73. \u03a4\u1fc7 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f51\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u1fb3 \u1f20\u03ba\u03c1\u03bf\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03cc \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b3\u03c1\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03bc\u03c6\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c7\u03bd\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9. \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u03ae\u03bc\u1ff3 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03bb\u1fc6\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\n\u03be\u03cd\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f20\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f40\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9.\n\n\u201cThe day following they skirmished a little with their missive weapons,\nand both parties sent out detachments into the field to invite\nconcurrence of the slaves, upon a promise of their freedom. A majority\nof the slaves came in to the assistance of the people, and the other\nparty got eight hundred auxiliaries from the continent.\u201d\n\nIt will be noticed that \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd in this passage is also translated\n_slave_; but the \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 was a slave whose condition was above the mere\n\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2. In English the word will imply a _house-slave_. The \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\nenjoyed a greater portion of his master\u2019s confidence, and consequently\nwas under a less rigorous government. The truth of what Thucydides\nstates is evident to those acquainted with the character: the higher\nclass of slaves ever take sides with their masters in such cases. It is\nthis word St. Paul uses, by which he describes the character of Onesimus\nin his letter to Philemon. He had acted as Paul\u2019s house-slave at Rome.\n\nBook iv. chap. 86. \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f50\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03be\u03c5\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\n\u201cBut, on the contrary, are to act in support of you, who are oppressed\nwith Athenian _bondage_.\u201d\n\nIdem. \u1f48\u03c5\u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03c3\u03b1\u03c6\u1fc6, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f30, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2, \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f40\u03bb\u03af\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u1f24 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f14\u03bb\u03b1\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03b9_.\n\n\u201cI am convinced that liberty can never be re-established by me, if,\ndisregarding ancient constitutions, I _enslave_ the multitude to the\nfew, or the few to the crowd.\u201d\n\nChap. 87. \u039f\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03ba\u03c9\u03bb\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f51\u03c6\u2019 \u1f51\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cFor the sake of the Grecians, that they may not be obstructed by you in\ntheir deliverance from _bondage_.\u201d\n\nChap. 92. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f74, \u03bf\u1f45 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u03b3\u1f7a\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n\u1f04\u03c0\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9_, \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c7\u03c1\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u1ff6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd;\n\n\u201cLet me add further, that when men are bent on _enslaving_, not\nneighbours only, but such people as are more remote, how can it be\njudged improper to encounter such, so long as we can find ground whereon\nto stand?\u201d\n\nIdem. \u039f\u1f37\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u03ae\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03b5\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u1fc3, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03bc\u1f74 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9_ \u1f00\u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03c9\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c0\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03c0\u03af\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n\u201cBut from men who were born to vindicate their own country for ever by\nthe _dint_ of arms, and never unjustly to _enslave_ another, that from\nsuch men they shall not get away without that struggle which honour\nenjoins.\u201d\n\nChap. 114. \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u1fb3_.\n\n\u201cThey had no _enslaving_ views.\u201d\n\nChap. 118. \u039c\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cWhether they be free men or _slaves_.\u201d\n\nBook v. chap. 9. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc7\u03b4\u03b5 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1, \u1f22 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u039b\u03b1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03be\u03c5\u03bc\u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b5\u03ba\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f22 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_, \u1f22 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f04\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5 _\u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6_ \u1f22 \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03be\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u03c9\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f22 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f76\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34\u03c7\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5.\n\n\u201cThat this very day, if you behave with valour, you are henceforth free,\nand will gain the honourable title of Laced\u00e6monian allies; otherwise you\nmust continue to be the _slaves_ of Athenians, where the best that can\nbefall you, if neither sold for _slaves_ nor put to death as rebels,\nwill be a heavier yoke of tyranny than you ever yet have felt, while the\nliberty of Greece must by you for ever be obstructed.\u201d\n\nChap. 23. \u1f2c\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f21 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1_ \u1f10\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n\u039b\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c3\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd.\n\n\u201cThat if there happen any insurrection among the _Helots_, the Athenians\nmarch to the succour of the Laced\u00e6monians with their whole strength, to\nthe full extent of their power.\u201d\n\nIn this instance the translator has substituted \u201c_Helots_\u201d for _slaves_,\nbecause the Helots were the slaves at Sparta, and the usual term by\nwhich slaves were designated in Laced\u00e6monia, _Helot_ and \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, were\nsynonymous terms there.\n\nChap. 27. \u1f69\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u1f74, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u1f74 \u039b\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03c0\u2019 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1ff7, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76\n_\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9_ \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03a0\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5.\n\n\u201cThat since the Laced\u00e6monians, not in order to serve, but to _enslave_\nPeloponnesus,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 29. \u039c\u1f74 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c6\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u039b\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9_.\n\n\u201cThat the Laced\u00e6monians might strike up a bargain with the Athenians to\n_enslave_ other states.\u201d\n\nChap. 69. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f05\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_.\n\n\u201cEither such on _slavery_.\u201d\n\nChap. 86. \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u1ff3, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9,\n\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72, _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cSince if, superior in debate, we for that reason refuse submission, our\nportion must be war and if we allow your plea, from that moment we\nbecome your _slaves_.\u201d\n\nChap. 92. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u1f02\u03bd \u03be\u03c5\u03bc\u03b2\u03b1\u03af\u03b7 \u1f21\u03bc\u03af\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9_, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd\n\u1f04\u03c1\u03be\u03b1\u03b9;\n\n\u201cAnd how can it turn as beneficial for us to become your _slaves_ as it\nwill be for you to be our masters?\u201d\n\nChap. 100. \u1f2c\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f04\u03c1\u03b1, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5 \u1f51\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5, \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2_ \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7, \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5,\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03b1, \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03be\u03b5\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\n\u201cIf this be, and if you, ye Athenians, can readily embark in so many\nperils to prevent the desolation of your empire; if states, by you\n_enslaved_, can do as much to throw off your yoke, must it not be\nwretchedly base and cowardly in us, who yet are free, to leave any\nmethod, even to the last extremity, untried of averting _slavery_.\u201d\n\nBook vi. chap. 20. \u1f18\u03c0\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f03 \u03b3\u03b9\u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9 \u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff6. \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2,\n\u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03b7 \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f30\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f54\u03b8\u2019 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b5\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bf\u03bb\u1fc6\u03c2, \u1f97 \u1f02\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03b2\u03b9\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u1f76\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_ \u1f04\u03c3\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03c2 \u1fe5\u1fb4\u03c9 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u03bf\u03af\u03b7.\n\n\u201cAccording to the last information I have been able to procure, we are\nnow going to invade a number of powerful cities; cities independent of\none another, nor standing in need of public revolutions; which people,\nwho cringe under the yoke of _slavery_, might easily embrace, in order\nto render their condition more supportable.\u201d\n\nChap. 27. \u039c\u03b7\u03bd\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03b4\u03b5\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03be\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cHe should boldly inform the public of it, whether he were a citizen, or\na foreigner, or a _slave_.\u201d\n\nChap. 76. _\u0394\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cThey hold fast riveted the yoke of _slavery_.\u201d\n\nIdem. _\u039a\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2_. \u201cBy _enslaving_,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 77. \u1f69\u03c2 _\u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd_. \u201cWho will be _slaves_,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 80. _\u0394\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u201c_Slave_,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 82. \u039f\u1f55\u03c2 \u03be\u03c5\u03b3\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03a3\u03c5\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9_.\n\n\u201cWhom the Syracusans say we thought proper to _enslave_, though\nconnected with us by ties of blood.\u201d\n\nIdem. _\u0394\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b3\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\n\u201cThey made _slavery_ their choice, and in the same miserable fate would\nhave been glad to envelop us.\u201d\n\nChap. 83. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f50 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9_, \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03c9\u03bb\u03cd\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\n\u201cSo far from the view of _enslaving_ them to ourselves, that we are\nsolely intent on preserving them from being enslaved by others.\u201d\n\nChap. 84. \u1f4d\u03bd \u1f00\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_.\n\n\u201cWhom, after unjustly _enslaving_,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 88. \u03a0\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03a3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b5\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1fa4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9_.\n\n\u201cSave only the ambition they showed of _enslaving_ Sicily.\u201d\n\nBook vii. chap. 75. \u039c\u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff7\n\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf, \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u1f25\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cFor a most cruel turn of fortune this really proved to a Grecian army;\nwho, coming hither to _enslave_ others, were departing now with the sad\nalternative of fearing to be made slaves themselves.\u201d\n\nBook viii. chap. 15. \u03a4\u03ac\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03a7\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1f11\u03c0\u03c4\u1f70 \u03bd\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c2, \u03b1\u1f33 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03be\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b9\u03cc\u03c1\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd\n\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03a0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff7, \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u03b1\u03b3\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03be \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f20\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd,\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03b4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\u201cHaving, moreover, fetched off the seven vessels belonging to the\nChians, which assisted in forming the blockade at Pir\u00e6us, they set at\nliberty the _slaves_ who were on board them, and threw all the freemen\ninto prison.\u201d\n\nChap. 43. \u1f18\u03bd\u1fc6\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f01\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cFor thus he might be enabled once more to _enslave_ all the islands.\u201d\n\nChap. 48. _\u0394\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, &c.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON VI.\n\nXENOPHON, _Memorabilia, &c._\n\nBook i. chap. 3, \u00a7 11. \u1f6e \u03c4\u03bb\u1fc6\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u03a3\u03c9\u03c7\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af \u1f02\u03bd \u03bf\u1f34\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f78\u03bd \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2; \u03b1\u03c1\u2019 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f02\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5;\n\n\u201cMiserum te, ait Socrates, quid eventurum tibi existimas, si formosum\nosculeris? annon subit\u00f2 pro libero _servus_ esses?\u201d _Leunclavius._\n\nChap. 5. \u00a7 2. _\u0394\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9_ \u03b4\u2019 \u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c8\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f02\u03bd \u1f22 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f22 \u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1 \u1f22\n\u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd;\n\n\u201cEt servo intemperanti num vel pecora, vel penum, vel ut operi pr\u00e6esset,\ncommitteremus?\u201d _Leunc._\n\n\u00a7 3. \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u03b5\u1f34 \u03b3\u1f72 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u1fc6 \u03b4\u03b5\u03be\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u2019 \u1f02\u03bd, \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f04\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5 \u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03be\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9;\n\n\u201cEnimvero si ne _servum_ quidem intemperantem accepturi simus, qu\u00ee non\noper\u00e6 pretium sit cavere ne quis ipse talis fiat?\u201d _Leunc._\n\n\u00a7 5. \u1f2a \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f02\u03bd, \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f21\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9\u03bd_, \u03b1\u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03c3\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03ae\u03bd;\n\n\u201cQuis voluptatibus _serviens_ non turpiter tum corpore tum animo\naffectus sit?\u201d _Leunc._\n\nIbid. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6, \u03bd\u1f74 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f2d\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f50\u03ba\u03c4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03bc\u1f74\n\u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5_ \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5, _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1_ \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f21\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2,\n\u1f31\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2, \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03c5\u03c7\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\n\u201cEquidem ita profect\u00f2 statuo, homini libero optandum esse, ut hujusmodi\n_servum_ non consequatur, atque illi qui voluptatibus ejusmodi servit\ndeos esse obsecrandos ut dominos bonos nanciscatur.\u201d _Leunc._\n\nBook ii. chap. 1. \u00a7 11. \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u1f08\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03c0\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03b1\u1f56 \u1f10\u03bc\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03c9\u00b7 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bf\u03b7 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f41\u03b4\u1f78\u03c2,\n\u1f23\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b2\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f25\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f04\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9. (12) \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u2019, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9,\n\u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u03a3\u03c9\u03ba\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2, \u1f65\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_ \u1f21 \u1f41\u03b4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f55\u03c4\u03b7\n\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f34\u03c3\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2.\n\n\u201cI surely, says Aristippus, do not place myself in slavery; but my\ndoctrine is, that the condition equally free from the objections of\nthose who govern and of those who are in _slavery_, is true liberty.\nBut, says Socrates, the condition of which you speak, beyond the\ninfluences affecting those who bear rule or those in _slavery_, can\nnever exist among men; for,\u201d &c. \u00a7 12. \u1f61\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u2014\u201cfor safety\nthey desire _slavery_.\u201d\n\n\u00a7 13. \u1f1d\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f11\u03bb\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_ \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b9;\n\n\u201cDonec persuaserint eis _servire_ poti\u00f9s qu\u00e0m bellum cum potioribus\ngerere?\u201d\n\n\u00a7 15. \u1f2e \u03b4\u03b9\u03cc\u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f02\u03bd \u03bf\u1f34\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f37\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u1fc3\n\u03bb\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd;\n\n\u201cAn qu\u00f2d talem te _servum_ esse putas, qui nulli domino prosit?\u201d\n\nChap. 6. \u00a7 9. \u03a7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cNeque min\u00f9s difficile vinctum retinere tanquam _servum_.\u201d _Leunc._\n\nChap. 7. \u00a7 3 and 4. \u1f4d\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bd\u1f74 \u0394\u03af\u2019, \u1f15\u03c6\u03b7, \u1f41 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9, \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b4\u1f72\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. (4) \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f12\u03c6\u03b7, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c3\u03bf\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f34\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b2\u03b5\u03bb\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n\u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f22 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u039a\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_;\n\n\u201cBy Jupiter, (says Aristarchus,) _the reason is obvious_. He (Ceramon)\nrears up _slaves_, while I only employ freemen. Well, then, truly, says\n(Socrates), which do you esteem the most valuable, your freemen or\nCeramon\u2019s _slaves_?\u201d\n\nChap. 8. \u00a7 4. \u03a7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7, \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c, \u1f66 \u03a3\u03ce\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03b9.\n\u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u03bf\u1f35 \u03bb\u03b5 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03c3\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9_ \u1f15\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\n\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cBut it is difficult, O Socrates, for me to submit to _slavery_. But\n(says Socrates) high political officers, and all those who have charge\nof public affairs, are not esteemed to be in a _slavish_ employment, but\nin that which is the most appropriate to the most elevated of freemen.\u201d\n\nBook iii. chap. 12. \u00a7 2. \u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b6\u1ff6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f01\u03bb\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f01\u03bb\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f24\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9_ \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u1f78\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f10\u1f70\u03bd \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u03c4\u03cd\u03c7\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n\u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u03c9\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cMany endure the most burdensome _slavery_, produced by their having\nbeen taken captives in war, and as captives, _slaves_ themselves through\nthe remainder of life.\u201d\n\nBook iv. chap. 2. \u00a7 33. \u03a4\u03af \u03b4\u03ad; \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u0394\u03b1\u03af\u03b4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f00\u03ba\u03ae\u03ba\u03bf\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9\n\u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u039c\u03af\u03bd\u03c9 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, \u1f20\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u1ff3 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f05\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c5\u1f31\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c4\u03cc\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03c0\u03ce\u03bb\u03b5\u03c3\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f20\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u03c3\u03c9\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6 _\u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b5_;\n\n\u201cIs it truly so? You have not heard (says Socrates) that D\u00e6dalus,\ncaptured, deprived of his liberty, and torn from his country and forced\ninto _slavery_, on account of his knowledge and wisdom was detained by\nMinos; and, when afterwards attempting to make his escape with his son,\nwho was slain in the attempt, was not able to save himself, but was\nseized by the barbarians and again forced into _slavery_.\u201d\n\nIbid. \u1f0c\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f34\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c1\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\n\u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_;\n\n\u201cHow many others are born and remain creeping, fawning about the king\n(of Persia); and because he deems them his, he there _enslaves_ them.\u201d\n\nChap 5. \u00a7 5. _\u0394\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9; \u1f18\u03b3\u1f7c \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7,\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2. \u03a4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd_ \u03bf\u1f31\n\u1f00\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd;\n\nOf which Leunclavius gives the following: \u201cPessimam _servitutem_. Et\nquam esse arbitraris? Eam ait, qu\u00e6 apud pessimos dominos _serviatur_.\nErgone intemperantes _servitutem_ pessimam _serviunt_?\u201d\n\nFor the benefit of the mere English scholar, we give it thus: \u201cNow,\nwhere do you esteem the most degraded slavery? Why, to be sure, says he,\nwhen the master is most degraded. It follows then, (says Socrates,) that\nthe slaves of intemperance are the most degraded of _slaves_.\u201d\n\nIn the 30th section of the defence of Socrates before his judges, by\nXenophon, we find thus:\u2014\n\n\u1f6d\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u1f76, \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc7 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6_ \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u1fc7, \u1f23\u03bd \u1f41 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u1f74\u03c1 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03cd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd.\n\nBy Leunclavius: \u201cItaque aio, non permansurum in illo _servili_ vit\u00e6\ngenere, quod pater ei pr\u00e6scripsit.\u201d\n\nWe offer: \u201cSo that, I said, it is not becoming that his son should\nremain in an occupation only proper for a _slave_, in which alone his\nfather educated him.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VII.\n\nAt the close of the 23d chapter of the first book of Xenophon\u2019s\nCyrop\u00e6dia, we find:\n\n\u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72, \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be\u1fc6\u03bd \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f22\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f22\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd,\n\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b7 \u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f51\u03c0\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd \u1f14\u03b4\u03bf\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\u201cThere are instances of many, who, when they might have used others as\ntheir friends in a mutual intercourse of good offices, and who, choosing\nto hold them rather as _slaves_ than as friends, have met with revenge\nand punishment at their hands.\u201d _Ashley._\n\nBook iii. \u00a7 2. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03b1\u03c1 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u039a\u1fe6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f78\u03bd \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\n\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\u00b7 \u1f22\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u1f74 \u1f22 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03ad\u03bc\u03c9 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2, \u1f22 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u03c4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2_, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\n\u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c3\u1f7a, \u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u1f72, \u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u1f78\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1f70\n\u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u1fb7\u03c2, \u1f22 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, \u1f22\u03bd \u03bb\u03ac\u03b2\u1fc3\u03c2, \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2; \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03b6\u03c9, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7, &c.\n\n\u201cIt is indeed noble, said Cyrus, to fight, in order not to be made a\nslave! But if a man be conquered in war, or by other means be reduced to\n_slavery_, and be found attempting to throw off his masters, do you\nyourself first pronounce whether you reward and honour such a one as an\nhonest man, and as one that does noble things, or, if you take him, do\nyou punish him as one that acts unjustly? I punish him, said he.\u201d\n_Ashley._\n\nIbid. \u1f2a\u03bd \u1f97, \u03bd\u1f74 \u0394\u03af\u2019, \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2, _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_\n\u03b4\u2019 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u03c0\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\u201cWhy, by Jupiter, being conscious of himself that, affecting his\nliberty, he has become by far much more of a slave than ever.\u201d\n\nIbid. \u039f\u1f34\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41 \u03a4\u03b9\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2, \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9_ \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03ce\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u1f30\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c6\u03cc\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5;\n\n\u201cCan you, said Tigranes, imagine what brings men into yielding to\n_slavery_ more effectually than very great fear?\u201d\n\nIbid. \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c3\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bf\u1f54\u03b8\u2019 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c6\u03cc\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c6\u03c5\u03b3\u03ac\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2, \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f21\u03c4\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f24\u03b4\u03b7 \u03b4\u1f72\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2_, \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd \u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03b8\u03af\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u03cd\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cThey that are at sea, and dread shipwreck, and they that fear servitude\nand chains, are neither able to eat nor sleep for fear: but they who are\nalready under banishment, who are already conquered, and already\n_slaves_, are often in a condition to eat and sleep better than the\nfortunate themselves.\u201d _Ashley._\n\nIbid. \u03a4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7, \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c0\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03b6\u1f74\u1f43\u03bd, \u1f43\u03c2\n\u03bf\u1f50 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1f78\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76\n\u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u03ad\u03ba\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2_ \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9;\n\n\u201cIn what state of mind then, said he, do you take my father to be, he\nwho fears not only for his own life, but that his wife, myself, and all\nhis children will be plunged into _slavery_?\u201d\n\nIbid. \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f70 \u0394\u03b9\u2019, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7, \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f10\u03b8\u03b5\u03ce\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd. \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c4\u03af\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f74\u03bd; \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7 \u1f41\n\u03a4\u03b9\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2. \u03a4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1, \u03bd\u1f74 \u0394\u03af\u03b1, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f51\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03ae \u03bc\u03b5\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cTruly, said she, I did not look at him. At whom then did you look? said\nTigranes. At him who said, that to save me from _servitude_ he would\nransom me at the expense of his own life.\u201d _Ashley._\n\nIbid. \u1f69\u03c2 \u1f40\u03bb\u03b9\u03b3\u03b1 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03bf\u03c1\u1fb7\u03bd \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd. \u039d\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bc\u03b7\u03c7\u03b1\u03bd\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2, _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u03c0\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03b4\u2019 \u1f11\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, \u03c3\u03b1\u03c6\u1ff6\u03c2\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c9\u03bb\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c6\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u03c3\u03b5\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u03c0\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5.\n\n\u201cHow few things in futurity are we men able to foresee! and how many\nprojects do we undertake! I have endeavoured upon this occasion to\nobtain liberty, and I have become more a _slave_ than ever: and, after\nhaving been made a captive, and thinking our destruction certain, we now\nagain appear to be in a condition of greater safety and security than\never.\u201d _Ashley._\n\nBook iv. chap. 8. \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1 \u1f44\u03c8\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5, \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf \u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f51\u03c1\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f31\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c6\u03b5\u03cd\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\n\u201cYou will see them, like _slaves_ that have run away and are discovered,\nsome supplicating for mercy, some flying, and some without presence of\nmind enough to do either.\u201d _Ashley._\n\nChap. 18. \u1f18\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f50\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f30\u1f7c\u03bd \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03bd\u03bf\u03ca\u03ba\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03ac\u03c3\u03ba\u03c9\u03bd \u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b5\u03c1\u03b3\u03ad\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f50\u03c7 \u1f61\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_,\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03ad\u03c8\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n\u201cBut, then, if you shall come to us, and shall appear to do any action,\nor give any information, in friendship and good-will to us, him will we\ntreat as a benefactor and a friend, not as a _slave_.\u201d\n\nChap. 23. \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u039a\u1fe6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, \u03b5\u1f34 \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f08\u03c3\u03c3\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f22 \u03a3\u03cd\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u1f22 \u1f08\u03c1\u03b1\u03b2\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_, \u1f22 \u039c\u03ae\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f22 \u03a0\u03b5\u03c1\u03c3\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f22\n\u0392\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f22 \u039a\u03b1\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd, \u1f22 \u039a\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03ba\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f22 \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f22 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u0392\u03b5\u03b2\u03b9\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2,\n\u1f10\u03ba\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cCyrus himself ordered them to make proclamation, that whatever _slave_\nthere might be, either in the Assyrian, Syrian, or Arabian armies,\nwhether he were Mede, Persian, Bactrian, Carian, Cilician, or Greek, or\nof any other country, forced to serve, that he should appear.\u201d _Ashley._\n\nChap. 24. \u1f1c\u03c7\u03b8\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f62\u03bd \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76, \u1f25\u03ba\u03c9 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c3\u1f72, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f31\u03ba\u03ad\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c0\u03af\u03c0\u03c4\u03c9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03bc\u03af \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bc\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03cd\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c3\u1f72 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03b9\u03bc\u03c9\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76\n\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cI bow myself at your feet, a suppliant, and give myself a _slave_ to\nyou, and a confederate in the war.\u201d\n\nBook v. chap. 1. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u03af\u03bd\u03c5\u03bd \u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03b5\u1f36\u03c7\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03c3\u03b8\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n\u201cAnd was clothed in the same manner as were her _female slaves_.\u201d\n\nIbid. \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7, \u1f11\u03ce\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03bb\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u2019 \u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03ac\u03c2_ \u03b3\u03b5 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2\u00b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u1f78\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, \u03c0\u03c1\u03af\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03c1\u1fb7\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f78 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cBut I have seen, says he, people in grief and tears when in love,\n_slaves_ to those with whom they were in love, yet they deemed _slavery_\na very great evil when not in love.\u201d\n\nChap. 32. \u039f\u1f50 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f00\u03b3\u03bd\u03bf\u1ff6 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u2019, \u1f14\u03c6\u03b7, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c3\u03cd \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_ \u03b9\u03c3\u03c7\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03ac\u03b6\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03af \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76, &c.\n\n\u201cI am not ignorant, says he, that you are above me, but that my own\n_slaves_ are above me in power,\u201d &c.\n\nBook vi. chap. 26. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u039a\u03cd\u03c1\u1ff3 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u1ff6 \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f70 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd \u1f40\u03c6\u03b5\u03af\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd,\n\u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b5, \u03b1\u1f30\u03c7\u03bc\u03ac\u03bb\u03c9\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03b9\u03c1\u03b5\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u1ff7, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b5 \u1f61\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd_\n\u1f20\u03be\u03af\u03c9\u03c3\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f00\u03c4\u03af\u03bc\u1ff3 \u1f40\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u00b7 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b5\u03c6\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03be\u03b5 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c3\u03bf\u03b9\n\u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u1f00\u03b4\u03b5\u03bb\u03c6\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b1 \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03ce\u03bd.\n\n\u201cThen I think we are both under great obligation to Cyrus, who, when I\nwas captured, and chosen and selected particularly for him, thought\nproper not to receive me as a _slave_, nor even as a free woman of low\nstanding, but detained me under such restraint as if I had been his\nbrother\u2019s wife.\u201d\n\nBook vii. chap. 20. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03cc\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03c3\u03c6\u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u1fb7\u03bd \u1f20\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03b6\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1fb7\u03bd, \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f45\u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd_ \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cAll those whom he conquered, he compelled to practise with the sling,\nwhich he deemed more suitable for _slaves_.\u201d\n\nChap. 30. \u039d\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b1\u03c1 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b9\u03b4\u03b9\u03cc\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f01\u03bb\u1ff7, \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f11\u03bb\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c3\u03ce\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1.\n\n\u201cFor it is a perpetual law among all men, that when a city is taken from\nan enemy, both the persons and treasures of the inhabitants belong to\nthe captors.\u201d _Ashley._\n\nIbid. \u0398\u03ac\u03bb\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f56\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c8\u03cd\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03af\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f55\u03c0\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ac\u03b3\u03ba\u03b7 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cIn heat, and in cold, in meat and drink, in work and rest, we\nnecessarily allow our _slaves_ a portion.\u201d\n\nIbid. \u1f4d\u03c4\u03b9, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_, \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, \u1f22\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u03bf\u1f76 \u1f66\u03c3\u03b9;\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ae\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f15\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1 \u03b7\u1f22 \u03b2\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2\n\u03ba\u03bf\u03bb\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd;\n\n\u201cWhen we acquire _slaves_, we punish them if they are slothful and\nvicious. But does it become him who is slothful and vicious himself, to\npunish others for vice and sloth?\u201d\n\nBook viii. chap. 1. \u03a4\u03bf\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_, \u1f45\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31\n\u03bc\u1f72\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_, \u1f04\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72, \u03b5\u1f34\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\n\u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f11\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f45 \u03c4\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f04\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cWe ought to distinguish ourselves so far from _slaves_, as that\n_slaves_ do service to their masters against their wills; and if we\ndesire to be free, we ought willingly to perform what appears to be most\nexcellent and worthy.\u201d _Ashley._\n\nChap. 14. \u039f\u1f53\u03c2 \u03b4' \u03b1\u1f56 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03cd\u03b1\u03b6\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_, \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1fb7\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ce\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f45\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n\u201cBut in the management of _slaves_,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 41. \u0392\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03af\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u1f02\u03bd \u1f51\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u1f67\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd\n\u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2_ \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u03c4\u03c9.\n\n\u201cAnd I desire likewise that you should observe, that of all these orders\nthat I now give you, I give none to those that are of _servile_\ncondition.\u201d\n\nChap. 47. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03b9\u2019 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2,\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03b5\u03bc\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u2019 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2_.\n\n\u201cBy my means my friends have been made happy, and my enemies\n_enslaved_.\u201d\n\n                  *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn Xenophon\u2019s Expedition of Cyrus, usually termed the _Anabasis_, book\ni. chap. 9, we find\u2014\n\n\u1f6d\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c6\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2\n_\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03be\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cSo that brave men were looked upon as most fortunate, and cowards as\ndeserving to be their _slaves_.\u201d _Spelman._\n\nIbid. \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u039a\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5, _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5_ \u1f44\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1fc4\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1.\n\n\u201cNo one, not even a _slave_, ever deserted Cyrus to go to the king.\u201d\n\nBook ii. chap. 3. _\u0394\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_ \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f35\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf.\n\n\u201cThey were attended by a great many _slaves_.\u201d\n\nChap. 5. \u039c\u03b5\u03c4\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b2\u03ac\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f72\u03c2 \u1f31\u03c0\u03c0\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd, \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u1fa7\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd\u03c4\u03c5\u03b3\u03c7\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03bd \u1f1d\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd\u03b9 \u1f22 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9_ \u1f22 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u1ff3, \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2\n\u1f14\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd. \u05f3 \u201cAfter this, some of the barbarian horse, scouring the\nplains, killed all the Greeks they met with, both freemen and _slaves_.\u201d\n_Spelman._\n\nIbid. \u1f19\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u039a\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f26\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5_.\n\n\u201cFor, he says, they are his, having belonged to his _slave_ Cyrus.\u201d\n\nBook iii. chap. 1. \u1f29\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72, \u03bf\u1f37\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u03bc\u1f7c\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd,\n\u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u2019 \u1f10\u03c0\u2019 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f61\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd_ \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u03b5\u1f30 \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1, \u03c4\u03af \u1f04\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd;\n\n\u201cHow then will he treat us, who have no support, and who have made war\non him, with the design to reduce him from the condition of a king to\nthat of a _slave_, and, if in our power, to put him to death?\u201d\n\nBook vii. chap. 4. \u1f49 \u03b4\u2019 \u03b5\u1f36\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f08\u03bb\u03bb\u2019 \u1f14\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03b5 \u1f31\u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u1f74\u03bd \u03bd\u03bf\u03bc\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd,\n\u03b5\u1f30 \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_ \u1f14\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cAnd then he said, but I think myself sufficiently revenged, if these\npeople, instead of _freemen_, are to be made _slaves_.\u201d\n\nChap. 7. \u03a3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1_ \u1f51\u03c0\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2\u00b7 \u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\n\u03b4\u1f72 \u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1.\n\n\u201cFor if you conquer, they are _slaves_,\u2014but if you are conquered, they\nare free.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VIII.\n\nHERODOTUS _of Halicarnassus_.\n\nWE often find the word \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, and its various derivatives, in the\nplain, the simple narrative of this author. His use of the term is as\nfollows:\n\nBook i. chap. 7. \u03a0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03ba \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f10\u03ba _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03c2_ \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f38\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03ac\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f29\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\u201cThe Heraclid\u00e6 are descended from Hercules and a _female slave_ of\nJardanus.\u201d\n\nChap. 27. \u039b\u03b1\u03b2\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c1\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u039b\u03c5\u03b4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03b7, \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f20\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03c9\n\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03b7\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03af \u03c3\u03b5, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c3\u1f7a _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2_ \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2;\n\n\u201cCan they wish for a better opportunity than to meet the Lydians on the\nOcean, to revenge those of the Greeks reduced by you to _slavery_ on the\ncontinent?\u201d\n\nChap. 94. \u039b\u03c5\u03b4\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf_.\n\n\u201cThus the Lydians were _enslaved_ by the Persians.\u201d\n\nChap. 95. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03c0\u03c9\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd_ \u1f20\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\u201cAnd rejecting _slavery_, they became _free_.\u201d\n\nChap. 114. \u1f6e \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6, \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5_.\n\n\u201cO king! by your _slave_.\u201d\n\nChap. 126. \u039f\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c0\u03ad\u03b1_ \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n\u201c_Slavish_ employment,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 129. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd \u1f10\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03b1\u03bb\u03b3\u03ad\u03b1 \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03b1, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f34\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03cc \u03bc\u03b9\u03bd\n\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f11\u03c9\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c0\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u03cc \u03bc\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03be\u1f76 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b8\u03bf\u03af\u03bd\u03b9\u03c3\u03b5, \u1f45 \u03c4\u03b9\n\u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u1f21 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7_ \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b7\u0390\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n\u201cAmong other things, he asked him what was his opinion of that supper,\nin which he had compelled a father to feed on the flesh of his child; a\nsupper which had reduced him from a monarch to a _slave_.\u201d _Beloe._\n\nIbid. \u1f08\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ce\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03c0\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u1f35\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u039c\u03ae\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 _\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03c3\u03b5_.\n\n\u201c(He said that he was) most wicked, on the account of the supper, to\n_enslave_ the Medes.\u201d\n\nIbid. \u039d\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u039c\u03ae\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u03af\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u1f10\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f76\u03bd \u039c\u03ae\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\u201cThe Medes, who were certainly not accessary to the provocation given,\nhad exchanged situations with their _slaves_. The Persians, who were\nformerly the _slaves_, were now the masters.\u201d\n\nChap. 170. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c6\u03ad\u03b1\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2_ \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cAnd thus, freed from _slavery_, deem themselves happy.\u201d\n\nChap. 173. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f22\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5 \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u1f74 \u1f00\u03c3\u03c4\u1f74 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9_ \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae\u03c3\u1fc3, \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03ad\u03ba\u03bd\u03b1\n\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cIf any free woman marries a _slave_, the children of such marriage are\nreputed free.\u201d _Beloe._\n\nChap. 174. \u039f\u1f31 \u03bc\u03ad\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u039a\u1fb6\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u1f72\u03bd \u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd \u1f14\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03be\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\n_\u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd_.\n\n\u201cThe Carians made little or no exertion, and were easily _enslaved_.\u201d\n\nChap. 210. \u1f4b\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u1f10\u03c0\u03bf\u03af\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03a0\u03ad\u03c1\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cYou have raised the Persians from _slavery_ to freedom.\u201d _Beloe._\n\nBook ii. chap. 1. \u1f69\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03c9\u0390\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b9\u03b6\u03b5.\n\n\u201cHe considered them as _slaves_ by right of inheritance.\u201d\n\nChap. 56. \u1f1c\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1_ \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03b8\u03b9 \u1f31\u03b4\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c6\u03b7\u03b3\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c6\u03c5\u03c7\u03c5\u03af\u1fc3 \u0394\u03b9\u1f78\u03c2\n\u1f31\u03c1\u1f78\u03bd.\n\n\u201cAlthough in a state of _slavery_, she there constructed, under a green\nspreading beech, a natural little temple to her god.\u201d\n\nBook iii. chap. 125. \u1f4d\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1fc7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03be\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_ \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f11\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd,\n\u1f10\u03bd _\u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f36\u03c7\u03b5.\n\n\u201cAll the strangers, and their _slaves_ accompanying them, were detained\nin _bondage_.\u201d See 1 _Tim._ i. 10.\n\nChap. 138. \u039a\u03b1\u03af \u03c3\u03c6\u03b5\u03b1\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2_ \u1f10\u03bd\u03b8\u03b1\u1fe6\u03c4\u03b1 \u0393\u03af\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\u201cAnd they being _enslaved_, Gillus immediately _ransomed them_,\u201d &c.\n\nChap. 140. \u1f18\u03bc\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c7\u03c1\u03c5\u03c3\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f66 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u1fe6, \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f04\u03c1\u03b3\u03c5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u03af\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u2019\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b4\u03b1 \u03a3\u03ac\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b4\u03b5\u03bb\u03c6\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03a0\u03bf\u03bb\u03c5\u03c7\u03c1\u03ac\u03c4\u03b5\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u1f78 \u1f48\u03c1\u03bf\u03af\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9 \u1f14\u03c7\u03b5\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2_ \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\n\u03b4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b5\u03c5 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c6\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2_.\n\n\u201cI would have neither gold nor silver; give me Samos, my country, and\ndeliver it from _servitude_. Since the death of Polycrates, my brother,\nwhom Or\u0153tes slew, it hath been in the hands of one of our _slaves_. Give\nme this, without any effusion of blood, or reducing my countrymen to\nservitude.\u201d (_Beloe._) See 1 _Tim._ i. 10.\n\nChap. 153. \u1f08\u03c0\u03b5\u03af\u03c0\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9_ \u03bc\u03b7\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd\u1f76 \u03c6\u03c1\u03ac\u03b6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2\n\u1f10\u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf.\n\n\u201cHe counselled _with himself about that_ which was foretold, that\n_Babylon_ should not be reduced to _slavery_ until this _prodigy_ should\nbe brought forth.\u201d\n\nBook iv. chap. 1. \u0391\u1f31 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03a3\u03ba\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03ba\u03b5\u03c2, \u1f65\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\n\u03c7\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f10\u03c6\u03bf\u03af\u03c4\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_.\n\n\u201cFor the women, deprived so long of their husbands, had associated with\ntheir _slaves_.\u201d _Beloe._\n\nChap. 2. \u03a4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03bf\u1f31 \u03a3\u03ba\u03cd\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c5\u03c6\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03b5\u1f35\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c0\u03af\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1ff7\u03b4\u03b5.\n\n\u201cIt is a custom with the Scythians, to deprive all the _slaves_ of\nsight, on the account of the milk, which is their customary drink.\u201d\n_Beloe._\n\nChap. 3. \u1f18\u03ba \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u1f66\u03bd \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03ba\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03b7\n\u03bd\u03b5\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n\u201cFrom the union of these _slaves_ with the Scythian women, a numerous\nprogeny was born.\u201d _Beloe._\n\nIbid. _\u0394\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9_ \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u1f11\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2\n\u03ba\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1.\n\n\u201cIn this contest with our _slaves_, every action diminishes our number.\u201d\n_Beloe._\n\nIbid. \u039c\u03b1\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f65\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u03ad\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_.\n\n\u201cThey will be impressed with a sense of their _servile_ condition.\u201d\n_Beloe._\n\nBook v. chap. 35. \u1f49 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03be\u03c5\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b5\u03c6\u03b1\u03bb\u1f74\u03bd \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03be\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c6\u1fe6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03c7\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\u201cHe therefore took one of the most faithful of his _slaves_, and\ninscribed what we have mentioned on his skull, being first shaved.\u201d\n_Beloe._\n\nChap. 49. \u1f38\u03ce\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u03b5\u1f36\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u2019 \u1f10\u03bb\u03ad\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u1f44\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f04\u03bb\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2\n\u03bc\u03ad\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c4\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c3\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n\u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2\u00b7 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u1f66\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f19\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03bd\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u1fe5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 \u1f3c\u03c9\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03c2_,\n\u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f41\u03bc\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2.\n\n\u201cThe Ionians, who ought to be free, are in a state of _servitude_; which\nis not only disgraceful, but also a source of the extremest sorrow to\nus, as it must be to you, who are so pre-eminent in Greece. I entreat\nyou therefore, by the gods of Greece, to _relieve_ the Ionians from\n_slavery_, who are connected with you by the ties of consanguinity.\u201d\n_Beloe._\n\nBook vi. chap. 83. \u1f0c\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c7\u03b7\u03c1\u03ce\u03b8\u03b5 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9 \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bf\u1f31 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_ \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ae\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f04\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03ad\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ad\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f43 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ae\u03b2\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2, \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c3\u03c6\u03b5\u03b1\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03c4\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u1f40\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c9 \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f11\u03c9\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78\n\u1f0c\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b6\u03ad\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f10\u03b6\u03c9\u03b8\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f31 _\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9_ \u03bc\u03ac\u03c7\u03b7 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd \u03a4\u03af\u03c1\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u03b1. \u03c4\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd\n\u03b4\u03ae \u03c3\u03c6\u03b9 \u1f26\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03b8\u03bc\u03b9\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u1f14\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_ \u1f26\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5 \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1\n\u03bc\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 \u039a\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u1f7c\u03bd \u03a6\u03b9\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c0\u2019 \u1f08\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1\u03b4\u03af\u03b7\u03c2\u00b7 \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2_\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03b3\u03bd\u03c9\u03c3\u03b5 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03ad\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u1fc3\u03c3\u03b9.\n\n\u201cArgos, however, was deprived of so many of its citizens, that the\n_slaves_ usurped the management of affairs, and executed the offices of\ngovernment; but when the sons of those who had been slain grew up, they\nobtained possession of the city, and after some contest expelled the\n_slaves_, who retired to Tyrinthe, which they seized. They for a time\nforebore to molest each other, till Cleander, a soothsayer, and an\nArcadian of the district of Phigalis, came among the _slaves_, when he\npersuaded the slaves to attack their masters.\u201d\n\nBook ix. chap. 48. \u1f18\u03bd \u1f08\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u03af\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2 \u03c4\u03b5\n\u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd_ \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\n\u201cWe see you delegating to the Athenians the more dangerous attempt of\nopposing us, and placing yourselves against our _slaves_.\u201d _Beloe._\n\nIn the \u201cLibellus de Vit\u00e2 Homeri,\u201d attributed to Herodotus, in the 23d\nsection we find the word \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u1ff3, used to mean a _fellow-slave_.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IX.\n\nWe now propose to notice the scriptural use of the word \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n_doulos_, and its derivatives, not only that its use may be compared\nwith the Greek writers, but that it may be seen, as we believe is true,\nthat its use in these carries with it abundant proof, even in the\nabsence of all other, that \u201cit means a slave,\u201d and \u201cthat he to whom it\nwas applied was a slave.\u201d\n\nWhenever a thing is made any part of discourse, it is necessarily placed\nin a position of commendation, reprehension, or of perfect indifference.\nOne of these conditions must unavoidably attend its mention. A little\nreflection will enable us to perceive these distinctive positions. For\ninstance, in the sentence, \u201cLay up treasures in heaven, where moth and\nrust doth not corrupt, nor thieves break through nor steal,\u201d who does\nnot feel the commendable position of the things, treasure and heaven,\nand the reverse of moth, rust, and thieves? Let us apply this view to\nthe word _servant_, selecting only those instances in the Christian\nScriptures, where the word is translated from the Greek word \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n_doulos_, and means nothing except what we mean by the word _slave_.\n\nSt. Paul commences his epistle to the Romans, to the Philippians, and to\nTitus, with the appellation of servant. In the two first cases he calls\nhimself the servant and apostle of Christ. In the last instance, he\nterms himself the servant of God and apostle of Jesus Christ. Peter, in\nhis second epistle, styles himself a _servant_ and apostle: Jude, the\nservant of Christ. In all these instances the word means _slave_, and is\nused commendatively, but figuratively, to signify their entire\ndevotedness to the cause in which they are engaged,\u2014devoted to the cause\nwholly, as a good slave is to his master. And it may be here remarked,\nthat the professing Christian is indebted to the institution for the\nlesson of humility and devotedness here plainly taught him, and without\nwhich, perhaps, he never could have been taught his duty in these\nparticulars so pertinently and clearly. The humility and devotedness of\nthe Christian are illustrated by this ordinance in _John_ xv. 20:\n\u201cRemember the words that I said unto you, the servant is not greater\nthan his Lord.\u201d\n\nIn the parable of the vineyard, _Luke_ 20 and _Matt._ 21, the _servant_\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, slave) is presented in a position evincing, the\ntrustworthiness, devotion, and obedience implied in that character,\nclearly indicating the idea that these qualities inspire the mind of the\nproprietor with a confidence surpassed only by that in his son and heir.\nAnd it may be well remarked, that the position of the slave is one of\ngreat facility for the generating of such confidence in the mind of the\nmaster. Between the good slave and the good master there can be no\ndissimilarity of interest, but not so with the _hired man_, see _Matt._\n20; for the very moment those hired in the morning for a penny a day\nperceived that those who had not laboured the whole day received the\nsame amount of wages, they commenced a quarrel with the proprietor.\n\nThis distinctive use of language we think also perceptible in the\nparable of the prodigal son, _Luke_ xv. 17: \u201c_How many hired servants_\n(\u03c0\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9, _posoi misthioi_) of my father have bread enough and to\nspare,\u201d \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f04\u03c1\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, _perisseuousin arton, an overflowing of\nbread_.\n\nHe is not made to say that his father\u2019s slaves had bread enough, but\nthat even his hired men had enough. \u201cMake me as one of thy _hired\nservants_,\u201d \u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03af\u03c9\u03bd, _misthion_. He does not ask to be received as a\nson, not even to be accounted as a slave,\u2014he feels unworthy of either.\n\u201cBut the father said to his servants,\u201d \u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, _doulous_, slaves,\n\u201cBring forth the best robe.\u201d Having slaves, it would have been quite out\nof place to have called one of his \u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, _misthous_, hired men. But\nthe elder son \u201ccalled one of the servants;\u201d nor would it have been\nnatural for him to have called a _hired-man_, nor yet one of the _common\nslaves_, but a confidential servant, whose position in the family would\nenable him to possess the information required, and so we find the fact\nby the expression \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, _ton paidon autou_, his young\nconfidential, favourite slave.\n\nBut the elder brother said to his father, \u201cLo, these many years do I\nserve thee;\u201d the verb used is \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9, _douleuo_, and expresses the\nfaithful and devoted service of a good slave, not of a _hired man_, who\nwould feel no real interest beyond his own personal benefit. And this\nword is put in the mouth of the angered son, whereby to show more\nforcibly his sense of his own merits.\n\nWhile we cast reflection back upon the incidents of this parable, let us\nsuppose the owner of slaves also to employ hired labourers: if from\nfamine or other cause he finds himself unable to supply them all with\nbread, which would he turn away, his slaves, or hired men? or, if they\nrefused to go, which would he feel disposed to put on small allowance?\n\nJesus Christ seems to have understood that if there was to be any\ndeficiency of bread, the hired-men might be expected first to feel it.\nOur Lord and Saviour, in pronouncing this parable, has given us the most\nexplicit assurance that he intimately understood the domestic relations\nof the _slave_, and has taught us the lesson by placing him side by side\nwith the _hired servant_.\n\nFrom the fact that the good slave was wholly devoted and faithful to his\nmaster, the idea was not only applied to Paul, Peter, and Jude, but also\nto Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, and David, and others, to\nexpress these qualities in them towards Jehovah; and we find it so used\nin the Christian Scriptures: \u201cHe hath holpen his servant Israel,\u201d \u1f38\u03c3\u03c1\u03b1\u1f74\u03bb\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6, _Israel paidos autou_, _Luke_ i. 54. It is noticed that\nwith the word \u201c_Israel_\u201d is associated the same term to mean _slave_\nwhich was applied to the slave called by the elder brother; and the\nreason seems to be because the name _Israel_ is supposed to be in higher\nregard than the word Jacob,\u2014the word in apposition should also be\nexpressive of such elevated regard. Therefore, if the word Jacob had\nbeen used, the word \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 would have followed it. This word \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2,\n_pais_, when applied to a _slave_, was a word of endearment, and hence\nwas used in the case of the centurion\u2019s servant. And we may here well\nremark that the case of the centurion is one in point, presenting an\ninstance where slave-holding was brought to the immediate and particular\nnotice of the Saviour, and the record shows his conduct and language\nupon the occasion.\n\n\u201cFor I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me, and I say to\nthis man, Go, and he goeth; and to another Come, and he cometh; and to\nmy servant, (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u1ff3, _doulo_, _slave_,) Do this, and he doeth it.\n\n\u201cWhen Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed,\nVerily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in\nIsrael.\u201d _Matt._ viii. 9, 10.\n\n\u201cAnd as he was now going down, his servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, _slaves_)\nmet him, and told him, saying, Thy son liveth.\u201d _John_ iv. 51.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON X.\n\nThe Christian Scriptures use the institution of slavery figuratively, in\nillustration of the Christian character and duty, and also in happy\nillustration of the providences of God to man.\n\n\u201cWho is that faithful and wise servant, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_,)\nwhom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in\ndue season? Blessed is that servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_,) whom\nhis lord, when he cometh, shall find so doing. But if that evil\n_servant_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_) shall say in his heart, My lord\ndelayeth his coming; and shall begin to smite his fellow-servants,\n(\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, _sundoulous_, _fellow-slaves_,) and to eat and drink with\nthe drunken, the lord of that servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5, _doulou_, _slave_) shall\ncome in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not\naware of.\u201d \u201cFor the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far\ncountry, who called his own servants, (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, _doulous_, _slaves_,)\nand delivered unto them his goods.\u201d \u201cHis Lord said unto him, Well done,\nthou good and faithful _servant_, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03b5, _doule_, _slave_,) thou hast\nbeen faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many\nthings: enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.\u201d \u201cHis lord answered and\nsaid unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03b5, _doule_,\n_slave_,) thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I\nhave not strewed,\u201d &c. \u201cAnd cast ye the unprofitable servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd,\n_doulon_, _slave_) into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and\ngnashing of teeth.\u201d _Matt._ xxiv. 45\u201350 xxv. 14, 30.\n\n\u201cAnd he called his servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, _doulous_, _slaves_), and\ndelivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come. And\nit came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom,\nthen he commanded these servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, _doulous_, _slaves_) to be\ncalled unto him, to whom he had given money, that he might know how much\nevery man had gained by trading.\u201d \u201cAnd he said unto him, Well, thou good\nservant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03b5, _doule_, _slave_), because thou hast been faithful in a\nvery little, have thou authority over ten cities.\u201d \u201cAnd he saith unto\nhim, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant,\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03b5, _doule, slave_.) Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking\nup that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow.\u201d _Luke_ xix.\n13\u201328.\n\n\u201cBlessed is that servant, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_) whom his lord,\nwhen he cometh, shall find so doing. But if that servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2,\n_doulos_, _slave_) say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and\nshall begin to beat the men-servants (\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1\u03c2, _male-slaves_) and\nmaidens, (\u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03c2, _female slaves_,) and to eat and drink and be\ndrunken; the lord of that servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _doulou_, _slave_,) will come\nin a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour when he is not\naware, and will cut him in sunder.\u201d \u201cAnd that servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _slave_)\nwhich knew his lord\u2019s will, and prepared not himself, neither did\naccording to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.\u201d _Luke_ xii.\n43\u201348.\n\nHere is an instance when the most favourite slave, called by the term\nexpressing such favouritism, when supposed to be disobedient, is\nimmediately designated by the term \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_.\n\n\u201cBlessed are those servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, _slaves_) whom the lord\nwhen he cometh shall find watching; and if he shall come in the second\nwatch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those\nservants,\u201d (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, _slaves_.) _Luke_ xii. 37, 38.\n\n\u201cAnd sent his servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_) at supper-time,\u201d &c. *\n* * \u201cSo that servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_) came and showed his\nlord these things. Then the master of the house being angry, said to his\nservant,\u201d (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u1ff3, _doulo_, _slave_.) \u201cAnd the servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_,\n_slave_) said, Lord, it is done. And the lord said unto the servant,\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _doulon_, _slave_,) Go out into the highway,\u201d &c. _Luke_ xiv.\n17\u201323.\n\n\u201cAnd ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free,\n(\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, _eleutherosei_, _free_.) They answered him, We be\nAbraham\u2019s seed, we were never in bondage (\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd,\n_dedouleukamen_, _slavery_) to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be\nmade free? Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you,\nwhosoever committeth sin, is the _servant_ of sin, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_,\n_slave_.) And the _servant_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_) abideth not in\nthe house for ever. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall\nbe free indeed.\u201d _John_ viii. 32\u201335.\n\n\u201cBut which of you, having a servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _doulon_, _slave_)\nploughing or feeding cattle, will say unto him by and by, when he is\ncome from the field, Go and sit down to meat? And will not rather say\nunto him, Make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself, and serve\nme, till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shall eat and\ndrink? Doth he thank that servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u1ff3, _slave_) because he did the\nthings that were commanded him? I trow not. So likewise ye, when ye\nshall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are\nunprofitable servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _slaves_): we have done that which was\nour duty to do.\u201d _Luke_ xvii. 7\u201310.\n\nIn all these instances slavery is made a lesson of instruction, and\nalways in the position commendable.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XI.\n\nThe Christian Scriptures recognise the force and application of the\ncommand, \u201cThou shalt not covet thy neighbour\u2019s man-servant, nor his\nmaid-servant,\u201d as applicable to slaves at the time of the apostles; and\nthat the act of \u201ccoveting,\u201d extended into action, becomes \u201cstealing,\u201d\nthe property named in the command. \u201cNow the end of the command is\ncharity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith\nunfeigned: from which some having swerved, have turned aside unto vain\njangling; desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what\nthey say, nor whereof they affirm. But we know that the law is good, if\na man use it lawfully, knowing this, that the law is not made for a\nrighteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, the ungodly, and for\nsinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers, and murderers\nof mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for them that defile\nthemselves with mankind, for _men-stealers_, (\u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2\n_andrapodistais_, _slave-stealers_,) for liars, for perjured persons,\nand if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,\naccording to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed\nto my trust.\u201d 1 _Tim._ i. 5\u201311.\n\nIt may be well remembered that the preceding third verse of this chapter\nbeseeches Timothy to still abide at Ephesus, that he may charge some\nthat they teach no other doctrine, &c.\n\nThe word _andrapodistais_, of the original Greek text, here translated\n_men-stealers_, means the stealing, or enticing away from the possession\nand ownership of their masters, their slaves. St. Paul speaks of it as a\npart of the law,\u2014speaks of the offence as one well known, and as too\nwell known to be a part of the law to require any explanation. When we\ncome to know that that act of the mind called _coveting_, indulged to\naction, becomes stealing,\u2014that the crime in action includes the crime in\nmind,\u2014we may readily perceive what particular law is referred to. Is it\ndifficult to decide that property, which the law forbids us to covet, it\nalso forbids us to steal, even if \u201cthou shalt not steal\u201d had not\npreceded?\n\nThe idea stealing was expressed by the Greeks by the word \u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03c4\u03bf,\n_klepto_, but the idea _stealing slaves_ was expressed by the word in\nthe text. The formation is \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1, _a man_, \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2, _a foot_, and signifies\nthe condition of slavery, as a man bound by the foot. A whole class of\nwords of this formation, all including the idea of slavery, were in use\nby the Greeks, and found in their authors. When used to express the\nsubstantive, the idea of slavery is associated with the idea of some\nchange of position or ownership; hence its use in this instance. The\nthing stolen involves the idea of a change of position, possession, &c.\nYet in many instances it may be difficult to perceive this distinction,\nit rather appearing to have been often used as a synonyme of _doulos_,\nboth as a verb and substantive.\n\nIn the 8th section of the 4th book of the Cyrop\u00e6dia, Xenophon uses this\nword to mean a slave, the quality growing out of the imputed change in\nthe condition of the soldier, thus: \u1f69\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba\u03ad\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f00\u03bd\u03ae\u03c1 \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd,\n\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c5\u03bf\u03c6\u03cc\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f14\u03be\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9 \u1f24\u03b4\u03b5 \u03c7\u03c1\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3 \u1f61\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u1ff3.\nWhich Ashley translates, \u201cAnd as he that does this can no longer be\nreckoned a man, but a mere bearer of baggage, so any one that will is\nfree to use him as a slave.\u201d The Romans so understood this word. In the\ntranslation of Xenophon into Latin by Amelburnus, we find this passage:\n\u201cNam qui hoc facit non miles et vir est, sed sarcinarius calo; quem uti\nmancipium tractare cuivis licet;\u201d nor can it be said that this learned\nman misunderstood his Greek, for we have before us the critical\ntranslations of Oxford and Cambridge, in which the sentence reads, \u201cNam\nqui hoc facit, non amplius vir est et miles, sed sarcinarius calo, atque\nhoc ade\u00f2 uti mancipium licet.\u201d They have made no change as to this word,\nnor as to the sense of the sentence.\n\nXenophon uses this word also in the 14th section of the 8th book, to\nmean slaves, and in the same passage with \u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, the adjective sense\nexisting in the presumed unwillingness in the slaves to seek freedom, on\nthe account of their happiness being probably better secured in a state\nof _slavery_ to Cyrus than it would be in a state of freedom. We give it\nentire:\n\n\u1f4b\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b4\u2019 \u03b1\u1f56 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03cd\u03b1\u03b6\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 _\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd_, \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u1fb7\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ce\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f45\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u00b7\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b4\u2019 \u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bc\u03ae\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f04\u03c3\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f04\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u1f72 \u1f14\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03c9\u03bd\n\u1f15\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b1 \u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03ac\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f41\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b1\u03cd\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u03b8\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03c0\u03c0\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2\n\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03af\u03b1, \u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03af\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b8\u03ae\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c0\u03b5, \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03c9\u03bd\n\u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5\u03bd\u03af. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f41\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7, \u1f24\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f51\u03b4\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u1f55\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03c4\u1f70\n\u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03b6\u03cd\u03b3\u03b9\u03b1. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f41\u03c0\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f65\u03c1\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f34\u03b7 \u1f00\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u2019 \u1f02\u03bd \u03c6\u03ac\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03ad\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03b9, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b9\u03bc\u03b9\u1ff7\u03b5\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f65\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f65\u03c3\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1 \u03bf\u1f31 \u1f04\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9, \u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\n\u1f10\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f45\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03c5\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b5\u1f76 _\u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1_\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nWhich may be translated thus: \u201cBut in rearing up his _slaves_, he never\npermitted them to practise the employment of the free, nor allowed them\nthe possession of arms, but took care that they would never be without\ntheir meat and drink for the sake of the practices of the free; for when\nwith their horses they drove out the wild beasts into the plains, he\nallowed meat and drink to be carried for the use of these people during\nthe hunt, but not for the free; and when he was upon a march, he led\nthem to water, as he did the beasts of burden; and when the time for\ndinner came, he waited till they had eaten something, that they might\nnot be distressed with hunger; so that these people, as likewise the\nmore elevated, called him their father; so he was careful, beyond a\ndoubt, that they would always remain his _slaves_,\u201d _\u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1_,\n_slaves_, _i. e._ they would have no desire to change their situation.\n\nAmelburnus translates it thus: \u201cQuos autem ad serviendum instruebat, eos\nnec ad labores ullos liberales excitabat, nec habere arma sinebat:\nstudios\u00e8que dabat operam, ne unquam liberalium exercitationum causa vel\ncibo vel potu carerent. Permittebat enim _servis_, quoties equitibus\nferas in campos adigerent, ut cibum ad venationem secum sumerent;\ningenuorum ver\u00f2 nemini. Quando item faciundum erat iter, ad aquas eos,\nperinde ac jumenta, ducebat. Quum prandii tempus erat, expectabat eos\ndonec aliquid comedissent, ne furcilla sive fames acrior eos affligeret.\nQuo fiebat ut, non aliter ac optimates, etiam hi Cyrum _patrem_\nappellarent, qui curam ipsorum gereret ut semper sine dubio _mancipia_\nmanerent.\u201d\n\nThe Oxford translation, which was published in 1737, has perhaps made\nthe Latin more classical, but has strictly adhered to the same meaning\nof the words \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd and \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1. We give their version also, that\nthe curious may compare, and have no doubt about this matter. It reads\nthus:\n\n\u201cQuos autem ad serviendum instruebat, eos nec ad se in laboribus ullis\nliberalibus exercendos excitabat, nec habere arma sinebat. Studios\u00e8que\ndabat operam, ne unquam liberalium exercitationum causa vel cibo vel\npotu carerent. Etenim his permittebat, ut cibum ad venationem secum\nsumerent, ingenuorum ver\u00f2 nemini: quando item faciendum erat iter, ad\naquas eos, perinde ac jumenta, ducebat. Et c\u00f9m prandii tempus erat,\nexpectabat eos donec aliquid comedissent ne fames ingens eos invaderet;\nquo fiebat ut etiam hi, non aliter ac optimates, Cyrum patrem\nappellarent, qui curam ipsorum gereret ut semper sine dubio _mancipia_\nmanerent.\u201d\n\nWe deem it proper to add a word concerning the use of this term,\nespecially as some, who claim to be learned divines, also claim that\nPaul by its use totally forbid slavery. See _Barnes, on Slavery_, p.\n355. He says? \u201c\u2018The law is made for _manstealers_,\u2019 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2, 1\n_Tim._ i. 9, 10. The meaning of this word has been before considered. It\nneeds only to be remarked here, that the _essential_ idea of the term is\n_that of converting a freeman into a slave_. Thus Passon defines the\nword \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2, _andrapodismos_: Verwandlung eines freyen Mannes in\neinen Sklaven, besonders durch Varkauf, Unterjochung, U.S.W.: a changing\nof a freeman into a slave, especially by traffic, subjection, &c. Now,\nsomehow this \u2018conversion of a freeman into a slave,\u2019 the sin forbidden\nin the passage before us, occurs essentially in the case of every one\nwho ever becomes a slave.\u201d\n\nWe know not why Mr. Barnes chose to go to a Dutch dictionary for his\nquotation, since he might have found the true signification in that of\nany schoolboy.\n\nBut we think it a singular argument that, because _andrapodismos_ means\nthe making or selling a slave, _andrapodistais_ means the exact same\nthing. The truth is, the essential idea conveyed by this word is\n_slave_, _slavery_, &c. If I wish to say \u201cstealing a slave,\u201d I use one\nform of it; if \u201cselling a slave,\u201d another, and so on; but the stealing a\n_freeman_ with the view to make _him a slave_ was not expressed by this\nword, or any form of it. The Greeks used the term _anthropokleptais_,\nbut the legal reduction of a man to slavery was quite a different\nmatter. St. Paul\u2019s animadversion comprehended the idea of slavery and\nstealing,\u2014what? a freeman, or a slave? Had it been a freeman that\noccupied the objective case, it is presumable that his language would\nhave had some analogy to that used in the Septuagint, _Deut._ xxiv. 7.\n\nThis word, or some form of it, is of most frequent occurrence in the\nGreek authors. We need quote but a few passages to show their use of the\nterm, whether it included the idea of a freeman, or only that of a\nslave. Thucydides, Leipsic edition, 1829:\n\n\u039f\u1f31 \u03b4\u2019 \u0391\u03b8\u03b7\u03bd\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03b9 \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03bf\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f54\u03c4\u03b5 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c8\u03ae\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u1fc4\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd,\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c0\u2019 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u039c\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f31\u03b5\u03c1\u1fb6\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f00\u03bf\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 _\u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd_ \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd.\n\n\u201cBut the Athenians listened to none of these demands, nor would revoke\nthe decree, but reproached the Megarians for tilling land that was\nsacred, land not marked out for culture, and for giving shelter to\nrunaway slaves.\u201d\n\nVol. ii. p. 138. \u0391\u1f31 \u03b4\u03ad \u03bd\u1fc6\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b5\u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd, \u03c4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9.\n\n\u201cBut the vessels came back along the coast, on board of which were the\n_slaves_.\u201d\n\nIdem. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03cc\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\u201cAnd here they offered the _slaves_ for sale.\u201d\n\nP. 118. \u1f08\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1 \u1f59\u03ba\u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u1f70\u2014\u201cHyccarian _slaves_.\u201d\n\nP. 201. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03ad\u03bf\u03bd \u1f22 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bf \u03bc\u03c5\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b7\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03bc\u03bf\u03bb\u03b7\u03ba\u03ad\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd.\n\n\u201cAnd more than twenty thousand slaves had deserted.\u201d\n\nP. 314. \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03cd\u03b7 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b1 \u1f00\u03c1\u03c0\u03b1\u03b3\u1f74\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1f72\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03ba\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2, \u1f10\u03c0\u2019 \u1f0c\u03b2\u03c5\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd \u1f26\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5.\n\n\u201cHe gave up all the effects and slaves to pillage, and after\nestablishing such as were free people in their old habitations, he went\nagainst Abydos.\u201d\n\nThe instances of the use of this word are so frequent that we know not\nwhether more of them should not be given; but may we not presume that\nthose who read the language have some knowledge of the matter? and we\ntherefore ask them to relieve us from that burden. We think it no hazard\nto maintain the fact that \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, its _cognates_ and _derivatives_,\nboth _nouns_ and _adjectives_, are never used in the Greek language\nunassociated with the idea of slavery. If so, then it follows that the\nidea _stealing_, as it existed in the mind of St. Paul, was not\nassociated with the idea \u201c_man_,\u201d but \u201c_slave_,\u201d and that he used the\nterm \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2, _andrapodistais_, to express the idea\n\u201cslave-stealers.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XII.\n\nBut as the verb \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, _andrapodizo_, and its conjugates, are\nsometimes used to express the action of subjecting to slavery, it is\nasked, how are we to know whether Paul did not mean such subjugation? It\nwas surely in the compass of the Greek language for Paul so to have used\nthe proper mood and tense of this verb, with other suitable words, and\neffectually forbid the subjecting of others to slavery. But is it\nprobable he could have consistently done so? Such forbidding would have\nbeen forbidding what the law prescribed. It would have been a rebellious\nteaching against the laws of the land, as well as against the laws\ndelivered to Moses for the civil government of the Israelites. \u201cWhen\nthou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, thou shalt proclaim\npeace unto it; and it shall be, if it make answer of peace, and open\nunto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that are found therein\nshall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee,\u201d\n(\u05d5\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05bd\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 _va abaduka, be slaves to thee\u2014and they shall be slaves to\nthee_.) \u201cBut if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war\nagainst thee, then thou shalt besiege it: and when the Lord thy God hath\ndelivered it into thy hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with\nthe edge of the sword. But the women, and the little ones, and the\ncattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt\nthou take to thyself.\u201d _Deut._ xx. 10\u201314.\n\nSuch, substantially, was the law of all nations at the very time Paul\nwrote to Timothy. The verb proposed the making of a _slave_ in a legal\nmanner, reducing to the condition alluded to by the prophet. \u201cShall the\nprey be taken from the mighty, or the lawful captive restored?\u201d _Isa._\nxlix. 24. The verb _andrapodizo_ expressed a lawful act. If individuals,\nwithout law, had seized upon the others with the view to make them\nslaves, such act would have been called by a different name. It would\nnot have been a name formed from \u1f00\u03bd\u1f74\u03c1 and \u03c0\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2, (_aner_ and _pous_,)\nunaccompanied by explanations. We have an example before us in _Deut._\nxxiv. 7: \u201cIf any man be found stealing any of his brethren of the\nchildren of Israel, and maketh merchandise of him, or selleth him, then\nthat thief shall die.\u201d Here the individual stolen was not a slave,\neither by the laws of God or man: and hence we find that the Septuagint\nuses no word to signify slave. The passage reads thus:\n\n\u1f18\u03b1\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f01\u03bb\u1ff7 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2 \u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u1f74\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03b4\u03b5\u03bb\u03c6\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f51\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f38\u03c3\u03c1\u03b1\u03ae\u03bb,\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f00\u03c5\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u1ff6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f41 \u03ba\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\nAnd had St. Paul merely in his mind the idea _man-stealing_, unconnected\nwith slavery, he would have used analogous language. In the passage in\nTimothy, he might well have used the term \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03ba\u03bb\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2,\n_anthropokleptais_, which would have expressed the same thing,\u2014an\nunlawful act, an act forbidden in the passage just quoted,\u2014the act of\nstealing a freeman, with an intention of making him a slave, contrary to\nlaw; and Paul would have probably added this offence, if the Ephesians\nhad been guilty of the crime. But Paul did not use a word even\nconjugated from \u1f00\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03b4\u03af\u03b6\u03c9, _andrapodizo_, but a cognate substantive,\nused almost technically to mean those who stole slaves, not _freemen_.\n\nThe word used by Paul is translated into Latin, in the Vulgate, by the\nword _plagiariis_, which also means those who stole slaves. It is formed\nfrom _plagiger_, _one born to be whipped_, (the Romans were cruel to\ntheir slaves,) and _areo_, _to be parched up_, _to be thirsty_, and\nhence _plagiarius_, from the notion that he who stole slaves _coveted_\nthe slave with such intensity that he thirsted for the slave, and\nappropriated _him_ to himself as a thirsty man does water. It originally\nwas a mere cant word. But it expressed the contempt the Romans\nentertained for the act of slave-stealing. Hence has come our word\n_plagiary_; only used now to mean the act of appropriating the literary\nproperty of another, but still retaining, to some extent, the expression\nof contempt. The learned men who translated the New Testament into Latin\nwell knew that Paul told Timothy that the law was made against those who\nstole slaves: and so we find it, _Thou shalt not steal_. Thou shalt not\neven _covet_ thy neighbour\u2019s _slave_. (See _Exod._ xx. 15, 17; also\n_Deut._ v. 19, 20.) Had Paul used the word _andrapodizo_, or some form\nof it, and had he really intended to have told Timothy that he or others\nshould no longer, under any circumstances, subject others to slavery, or\nunder the Christian dispensation he should not; that Christianity forbid\nit; yet he could not have been so shallow as to have added the sentiment\nthat it was against the law, for such addition, such part of his\ninstruction, Timothy would have at once known to be not true; and we\ntrust but few will entertain a position so full of gross consequences.\nThis discourse to Timothy was founded upon the fact that \u201csome had\nswerved\u201d from the end of the law, and turned to vain jangling, desiring\nto be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor\nwhereof they affirm,\u2014probably teaching doctrines that led essentially to\nthe crimes here exposed. Paul\u2019s object, in part, was to expose their\nignorance and wickedness, to sustain the supremacy of the law, and by\nhis counsel to warn him against a shipwreck of faith, as in the case of\nHymeneus and Alexander.\n\nCan it be supposed that under such circumstances he would have\nundertaken to have repealed a law, or to have asserted that the law\nprohibited what it sustained? In such case, he would have done the very\nact himself for which he condemned Hymeneus and Alexander, and have\nproved himself one of the lawless and disobedient, for whom the law was\nmade.\n\nThere is another consideration, which to our mind is of moment in the\nreview of this subject. The religion of Jesus Christ never undertook to\nmeddle with the civil institutions of the law. Its object was to make\nits devotees happy under and resigned to its adjudications, whatever\nthey may have been, by reason of the greater considerations of a\nhereafter; nor do we recollect an instance where either Christ or his\napostles even suggested any repeal. His kingdom was not of this world,\nand therefore his followers could not act in reference to the things of\nthis world. Peter in his zeal smote off the ear of the slave of the\nhigh-priest, but Christ immediately rebuked the act and restored the\ninjury done. Had Paul intended to have suggested that the subjecting to\nslavery, as that subject then existed and ever had from the time of\nMoses, was no longer to be countenanced, then, it seems to us, he would\nhave travelled beyond the mission of an apostle, the precepts of his\nMaster, and out of his kingdom into the problematical questions of civil\ngovernment.\n\nPaul, in the passage before us, enumerates a class of the breaches of\nthe law which came within the view of Timothy, which breaches of the law\nhe pronounces to be \u201ccontrary to sound doctrine,\u201d and \u201cto the glorious\ngospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust,\u201d having\npreviously notified him \u201cthat the law was good if a man use it\nlawfully.\u201d Now, one of the plain and well-known laws on the subject of\nslavery was, \u201cBoth thy bond-men and thy bond-maids which thou shalt\nhave, shall be of the heathen that are around about you; of them shall\nyou buy bond-men and bond-maids. Moreover, of the children of the\nstrangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and their\nfamilies that are with you, which they beget in your land, and they\nshall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for\nyour children after you, to inherit them for a possession. They shall be\nyour bond-men for ever.\u201d\n\nUnder such a state of facts can any thing be conceived more\ninconsistent, than that Paul should, under such circumstances, design to\nslip in a word repealing in fact this law, and directly producing all\nthe other ill effects which he so pointedly complained of in others.\nWhoever can believe such a thing, surely, whatever he may pretend, can\nhave no respect for the character of Paul, nor for his religion.\n\nBut the character of Paul remains consistent, his religion unblemished\nand spotless, and the preaching of Jesus Christ in relation to the\nmatter vindicated and supported, by giving to the word _andrapodistais_,\nas here used by Paul, its plain, legitimate, and usual meaning,\n_slave-stealers_, persons who steal, or entice away from the possession\nof their masters, individuals who according to the law are slaves.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIII.\n\nThe inquiry naturally occurs, how happened it that St. Paul found it\nnecessary to instruct and inform Timothy that the law forbid the\nstealing or enticing away other men\u2019s slaves. By an examination of his\nwritings and letters to the Gentile churches, the fact is plainly proven\nthat there had grown up among them some new doctrines, which his office\nas apostle made it his duty to reprehend. What these doctrines were we\nare enabled in some measure to discover, by examining the 7th of the\n_1st Corinthians_, which commences thus: \u201cNow concerning the things\nwhereof ye wrote unto me,\u201d disclosing the fact that the Corinthians had\nwritten to him for advice and counsel, whom he now answers with\ninstructions against the abolition of marriage, and against the\nabolition of slavery, &c.\n\nSome of the Gentile churches advocated the doctrine that if a man or a\nwoman of the faith were married to one not of the faith, that such\nmarriage should be abolished; so also, that a slave of the faith should\nbe set free, and especially from his believing master; so also, the\nbelieving child should be discharged from the authority of the\nunbelieving parents. The promulgation of these doctrines filled society\nwith disorder there, and the church with confusion.\n\nIn his lesson to _Timothy_, he complains of the doctrines taught by\nHymeneus and Alexander, as _blasphemous_. Now, in this same lesson, he\napplies this epithet to these new abolition doctrines, leaving us\nplainly to infer that these doctrines were also taught by them, and for\nwhich he \u201cdelivered\u201d them \u201cunto Satan.\u201d And here we have a connecting\nlink between this lesson to Timothy and his whole instruction to the\nGentile churches on this subject. But these doctrines, as taught by\nHymeneus and Alexander, or others analogous, have found advocates ever\nsince; for folly has never been so foolish nor wickedness so wicked as\nnot to find followers. These new doctrines Paul reprehended in many\nother places, and touching the subject of our present inquiry, let us\nexamine how he treated the matter during the time of his apostleship.\n\n\u201cLet every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called. Art thou\ncalled being a servant, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_,) care not for it;\nbut if thou mayest be _made free_, use it rather. For he that is called\nin the Lord, being a servant, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_,) is the Lord\u2019s\n_freeman_; likewise, also, he that is called, being free, is Christ\u2019s\n_servant_, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_.) Ye are bought with a price; be\nye not the servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_) of men. Brethren, let\nevery man, wherein he is called, therein abide with God.\u201d 1 _Cor._ vii.\n20\u201324. And this is consistent with his introduction to the subject in\nthe 17th verse: \u201cBut as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord\nhath called every one, so let him walk, and so ordain I in all\nchurches.\u201d Compare this with his instruction to _Titus_: \u201cExhort\nservants (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulous_, _slaves_,) to be obedient unto their own\nmasters, and to please them well in all things. Not answering again, not\npurloining, but showing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the\ndoctrine of God our Saviour in all things. For the grace of God that\nbringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying\nungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and\ngodly in this present world; looking for that blessed hope, and the\nglorious appearing of the great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ; who\ngave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and\npurify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. These\nthings speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man\ndespise thee.\u201d _Titus_ ii. 9\u201315.\n\nAnd to the _Colossians_: \u201cServants, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, _slaves_,) obey\nin all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye-service,\nas men-pleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God: and whatsoever\nye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; knowing that of\nthe Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5, _douleuete_, _ye slave yourselves to_) the Lord Christ. But\nhe that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and\nthere is no respect of persons. Masters, give unto your servants\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, _doulois_, _slaves_) that which is just and equal; knowing\nthat ye also have a Master in heaven.\u201d _Col._ iii. 22, 25; iv. 1.\n\nAnd to the Ephesians: \u201cServants, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, _slaves_,) be\nobedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear\nand trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; not with\neye-_service_ (\u1f40\u03c6\u03b8\u03b1\u03bb\u03bc\u03bf\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, _ophthalmodouleian_, _slavery to the\neye_) as men-pleasers; but as the servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, _slaves_)\nof Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; with good-will doing\nservice (\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, _douleuontes_, _slaving yourselves_) as to the\nLord, and not to men; knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth,\nthe same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be _bond_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n_doulos_, _slave_) or _free_ (\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, _eleutheros_, _a freeman_). And\nye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening:\nknowing that your Master is also in heaven, neither is there respect of\npersons with him.\u201d _Eph._ vi. 5\u20139.\n\nAnd, finally, to Timothy: \u201cLet as many servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_,\n_slaves_) as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all\nhonour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not _blasphemed_. And\nthey that have believing masters, let them not despise them because they\nare brethren; but rather do them service, (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03ad\u03c4\u03c9\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd, _do them\nslave-labour_,) because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the\nbenefit. These things teach and exhort. If any man teach otherwise, and\nconsent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ,\nand to the doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud,\nknowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words,\nwhereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse\ndisputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth,\nsupposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself. But\ngodliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into\nthis world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food\nand raiment, let us be therewith content. But they that will be rich\nfall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful\nlusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of\nmoney is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have\nerred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.\nBut thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after\nrighteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. Fight the\ngood fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also\ncalled, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses. I\ngive thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and\nbefore Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good\nconfession, that thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukable,\nuntil the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ.\u201d 1 _Tim._ vi. 1\u201314.\n\nFrom the arguments here presented to Timothy in support of the doctrine\nwhich Paul invariably taught in relation to slavery, we may well suppose\nhe felt a deep interest, even anxiety, to prevent these new doctrines\nfrom affecting Timothy\u2019s mind in their favour; and we cannot but notice,\nthat while, with the dignified authority of an apostolic teacher, his\ninstructions are full, distinct, and certain, yet they are accompanied\nwith a courteousness of explanation consolatory even to the slave, the\nsubject of them, and with a solemnity of attestation that fathoms the\nvery foundation of the Christian faith.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XIV.\n\nJesus Christ announced to the Jews that whosoever committeth sin is the\nservant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_) of sin; that the servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\n_doulos_, _slave_) abideth not in the house for ever, but the son\nabideth ever, &c.; therefore, if the son make them free, they shall be\nfree indeed, &c. Of the doctrine here inculcated by the Saviour himself,\nit seems to us St. Paul has given a full and happy illustration; and, by\nhis using the institution of slavery as a principal medium of his\nillustration, and by referring to facts well-known in the history of the\ninstitution of slavery, has not only recognised its existence, but also\nthat it existed in conformity with the ordinances of God: and we deem\nhis illustration not the less valuable, because it explains what is\nmeant by, and how we are to understand, the Christian equality of all in\nthat church. In addition to what we have already read from his writings,\nwe may also notice, \u201cIs the law then against the promises of God? God\nforbid; for if there had been a law given which could have given life,\nverily righteousness should have come by the law. But the scripture hath\nconcluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might\nbe given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under\nthe law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.\nWherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we\nmight be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no\nlonger under a schoolmaster. For ye are all the children of God by faith\nin Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ,\nhave put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither\nbond (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_) nor free, there is neither male nor\nfemale: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ\u2019s, then\nare ye Abraham\u2019s seed, and heirs according to the promise.\u201d _Gal._ iii.\n21\u201329.\n\n\u201cNow I say, that the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing\nfrom a servant, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_) though he be lord of all;\nbut is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the\nfather. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage\n(\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, _dedoulomenoi_, _a state of slavery_) under the elements\nof the world. But when the fulness of the _time_ was come, God sent\nforth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that\nwere under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And\nbecause ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your\nhearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant,\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, _slave_,) but a son; and if a son, then an heir of\nGod through Christ. Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service\n(\u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5, _edouleusate_, _did slave yourselves_) unto them which by\nnature are no gods. But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are\nknown of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements,\nwhereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?\u201d (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd, _douleuein_,\n_to be in slavery_.) Gal. iv. 1\u20139.\n\n\u201cTell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?\nFor it is written, that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond-maid,\n(\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, _paidiskes_, _a favourite female slave_,) and the other by a\nfree-woman. But he who was of the bond-woman (\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, _paidiskes_, _a\nfavourite female slave_) was born after the flesh, but he of the\nfree-woman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are\nthe two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai in Arabia, which\ngendereth to bondage, (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd, _douleian_, _slavery_,) which is Agar.\nFor this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which\nnow is, and is in bondage (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9, _douleuei_, _slavery_) with her\nchildren. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of\nus all.\u201d _Gal._ iv. 21\u201326.\n\n\u201cNow we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as\nthen he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after\nthe Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless, what saith the scripture?\nCast out the bond-woman (\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03bd, _paidisken_, _favourite female\nslave_) and her son: for the son of the bond-woman (\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2,\n_paidiskes_, _favourite female slave_) shall not be heir with the son of\nthe free-woman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the\nbond-woman, (\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, _paidiskes_, _favourite female slave_,) but of\nthe free. Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made\nus free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage,\u201d\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, _douleias_, _slavery_.) _Gal._ iv. 29\u201331, v. 1.\n\nIn these lessons of Paul we not only find the Greek use of the word\n\u201cdoulos,\u201d but we find also the doctrine that slavery is the quotient of\nsin. It is true he often uses the word figuratively to illustrate the\ndevotion and obedience of the humble followers of Jesus Christ; but in\nhim who spurns obedience to the laws of God, and rejects the faith of\nthe gospel, the character is fixed and permanent, as is the course of\nconduct that gives it.\n\nWhile in this portion of our present Study, we desire to bring to mind\nthe word _doulos_ and its cognates, as used in the ancient Greek\nScriptures, with the design that it may be easily compared with its use\nby the classical authors in that language. We shall be happy if\nsuccessful in the attempt to present it in such form that the mind may\nacknowledge the doctrine inculcated to be consistent with the justice of\nDivine providence and the mercy of a redeeming love; that the deduction\nshall be evident; that slavery is a creation of Divine justice upon the\nmodel of mercy, every way adapted to benefit the most degenerate and\nwicked races of mankind; and that its whole action manifests the\nprinciple, that he whom the Father loveth, him he chasteneth;\u2014and such,\nindeed, is the object of our entire study.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XV.\n\nFrom the writings of St. Paul, we deem the deduction clear, that he\nconsidered slavery to be a consequent of sin, and plainly set it forth\nin his address to the Romans. \u201cWherefore as by one man sin entered into\nthe world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that\nall have sinned. For until (\u1f04\u03c7\u03c1\u03b9, _achri_, _as far as_\u2014see Iliad, xvii.\n599) the law, sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed where there\nis no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over\nthem that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam\u2019s transgression,\nwho is the figure of him that was to come.\u201d _Rom._ v. 12\u201324.\n\n\u201cKnow ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2,\n_doulous_, slaves) to obey, his servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, slaves) ye\nare to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto\nrighteousness? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9,\n_douloi_, slaves) of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of\ndoctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye\nbecame the servants (\u1f10\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5 _edoulothete_, ye enslaved yourselves)\nto righteousness unto holiness. For when ye were the servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9es)\nof sin, ye were free from righteousness. What fruit had ye then, in\nthose things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is\ndeath. But now, being free from sin, and become servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03c9\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2,\n_doulothentes_, slaving yourselves) to God, ye have fruit unto holiness,\nand in the end everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death: but the\ngift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord.\u201d _Rom._ vi.\n16\u201323.\n\n\u201cFor as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.\nFor ye have not received the spirit of bondage (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, _douleias_,\nslavery) again to fear, but ye have received the spirit of adoption,\nwhereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our\nspirit, that we are the children of God; and if children, then heirs:\nheirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ: if so be that we suffer with\nhim, that we may be also glorified together. For I reckon, that the\nsufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the\nglory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the\ncreature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the\ncreature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him\nwho hath subjected the same in hope. Because the creature itself also\nshall be delivered from the bondage (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, _douleias_, slavery) of\ncorruption, into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we\nknow that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together\nuntil now: and not only they, but ourselves also, which have the\nfirstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves,\nwaiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.\u201d _Rom._\nviii. 14\u201323. \u201cSo then, with the mind I myself serve (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c9, _douleuo_,\nslave myself to) the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.\u201d\n_Rom._ vii. 25. \u201cFor they that are such serve (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd,\n_douleuousin_, slave themselves to) not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their\nown belly.\u201d _Rom._ xvi. 18.\n\nThe word \u201cdoulos\u201d is used by Peter in a similar manner: \u201cFor so is the\nwill of God, that with well-doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of\nfoolish men: as free, not using your liberty for a cloak of\nmaliciousness, but as the servants of God,\u201d (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, slaves.)\nIdem: \u201cWhile they promise them liberty, they themselves are the\nservants, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, slaves) of corruption: for of whom a man is\novercome, of the same is he brought in bondage,\u201d (\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9,\n_dedoulotai_, is he enslaved.)\n\nFurther instances of the use of the word \u201cdoulos\u201d in the original Greek\nScriptures will be found as follows:\u2014\u201cBut I keep under my body and bring\nit into subjection, (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u1ff6, _doulagogo_, and guide it as in\nslavery,) lest that by any means when I have preached to others, I\nmyself should be a castaway.\u201d 1 _Cor._ ix. 27. \u201cFor by one Spirit we are\nall baptized into one body, whether we are Jews or Gentiles, whether we\nare bond (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_, slaves) or free, and have been all made to\ndrink into one spirit.\u201d 1 _Cor._ xii. 13. \u201cWhere there is neither Greek\nnor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bond\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, slave) nor free.\u201d _Col._ iii. 11. \u201cAs ye also learned\nof Epaphras, our dear fellow-servant\u201d (\u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 _sundoulou_,\nfellow-slave.) _Col._ i. 7. \u201cBut if the unbelieving depart, let him\ndepart; a brother or a sister is not under bondage (\u03b4\u03b5\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9,\n_dedoulotai_, is enslaved) in such cases.\u201d 1 _Cor._ vii. 15. \u201cFor ye\nsuffer if a man bring you into bondage,\u201d (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6, _katadouloi_,\nreduce you to slavery,) &c. 2 _Cor._ xi. 20. \u201cFor he that in these\nthings serveth (doule\u03cdsei, _douleusei_, shall slave himself to) Christ\nis acceptable to God and approved of men.\u201d _Rom._ xiv. 18. \u201cIt was said\nunto her, the elder shall serve (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, shall _slave_ himself to)\nthe younger; for it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I\nhated.\u201d _Rom._ ix. 12, 13. \u201cAnd behold, one of them which were with\nJesus, stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _doulon_, slave) of the high-priest, and smote off his ear.\u201d\n_Matt._ xxvi. 51. \u201cAnd one of them that stood by drew his sword, and\nsmote a servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _doulon_, slave,) of the high-priest, and cut\noff his ear.\u201d _Mark_ xiv. 47. \u201cAnd one of them smote a servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd,\n_doulon_, slave) of the high-priest, and cut off his right ear.\u201d _Luke_\nxxii. 50. \u201cThen Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it, and smote the\nhigh-priest\u2019s servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _doulon_, slave,) and cut off his right\near. The servant\u2019s (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u1ff3, _doulo_, slave) name was Malchus.\u201d \u201cOne of\nthe servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd, _doulon_, slaves) of the high-priest (being his\nkinsman whose ear Peter cut off) saith, Did not I see thee in the garden\nwith him?\u201d _John_ xviii. 10, 26. \u201cAnd the servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_,\nslaves) and officers stood there, who had made a fire of coals, (for it\nwas cold,) and they warmed themselves: and Peter stood with them and\nwarmed himself.\u201d _John_ xviii. 18.\n\nThere are several instances where the word is used figuratively, as a\nsubmissive epithet, as an example of which we cite _Acts_ iv. 29: \u201cAnd\nnow, Lord, behold their threatenings, and grant unto thy servants\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, _doulois_, _slaves_) that with all boldness they may speak thy\nword.\u201d \u201cAnd God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a\nstrange land; and that they should bring them into bondage,\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ce\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, _doulosousin_, should enslave them,) and entreat them evil\nfour hundred years. And the nation to whom they shall be in bondage\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9, _douleusosi_, to whom they shall be enslaved) will I judge,\nsaid God.\u201d _Acts_ vii. 6, 7. \u201cNot now as a servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _doulon_,\nslave,) but above a servant, (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd, _doulon_, slave,) a brother\nbeloved,\u201d &c. _Philem._ 16. \u201cLord, now lettest thou thy servant (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd,\n_doulon_, slave) depart in peace.\u201d _Luke_ ii. 29.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XVI.\n\nThe English words _servant_, _to serve_, _service_, _servile_,\n_servilely_, _serving_, &c. have descended into the language from the\nLatin word _servus_, a slave, and these words, when first introduced\ninto the language, as distinctly carried with them the idea of slavery\nas does now our present term, and will continue to do so wherever the\nEnglish language and slavery prevail. In no slave-holding country will\nthe word servant be applied to a freeman as a legitimate term of\ndescription, but in non-slaveholding communities these words are\nsometimes used in a somewhat different sense, yet erroneously, because\nthey are then used without adherence to their derivation and analogy.\nThese words, when found in the received translation of the Christian\nScriptures, are in the most of instances translated from some Greek word\nthat signified or included the idea slavery. But notwithstanding the\nobvious error in giving the word _servant_, &c. as the translation of a\nword that did not carry with it the idea which was in unison with the\noriginal of these words, yet we find some few instances of such error.\nWe give a few examples.\n\n\u201cJesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of\nthis world, then would my _servants_ fight.\u201d _John_ xviii. 36.\n\nHere servants is translated from \u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, _huperetai_, and signifies a\nsubordinate. In English it sometimes requires attendants, assistants,\ninferior officers, &c., but never associates with the idea of slavery.\n\n\u201cPeter followed him afar off unto the high-priest\u2019s palace, and he sat\nwith the _servants_, (\u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd, _attendants_, &c.,) and warmed himself\nat the fire.\u201d _Mark_ xiv. 54. \u201cAnd the servants (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9, _douloi_,\n_slaves_) and officers (\u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, _huperetai_, _attendants_, _inferior\nofficers_, &c.) stood there, who had made a fire of coals, (for it was\ncold,) and they warmed themselves.\u201d _John_ xviii. 18.\n\nThat the word here used never conjugates with the idea slavery, we quote\nit as used in _Luke_ iv. 20, in proof: \u201cAnd he closed the book, and he\ngave it again to the minister,\u201d (\u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u1fc3, _huperete_, _attendant_,\n_inferior officer_, &c.) Also, _Acts_ xxvi. 16: \u201cBut rise and stand upon\nthy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a\n_minister_ (\u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd, _hupereten_, _attendant_, _assistant_, _minister_,\n&c.) and a _witness_ both of those things which thou hast seen and of\nthose things in the which I will appear unto thee.\u201d\n\nHere the requisites of the character required are totally incompatible\nwith the character of the _doulos_, proving with the greatest certainty\nthat these two words have no analogy whatever. For we may well here\nremark, that human learning has never arrived at a more nicely distinct\nand definite perfection in the use of language than is even now manifest\nin the sayings of Him \u201cwho spoke as never man spake.\u201d\n\nBesides, in the case of _John_ xviii. 18, servants, _douloi_, and\nofficers \u1f51\u03c0\u03b7\u03c1\u03ad\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, _huperetai_, being used consecutively and coupled\ntogether by a conjunction, is a strong proof that the idea appropriated\nhere severally to these terms could not be expressed by either term\nalternately by substitution, and that these terms were by no analogy\nsynonymous.\n\nThe word _servant_ has also in error been rendered from other terms: see\nHebrews iii. 5: \u201cAnd Moses verily was faithful in all his house as a\n_servant_,\u201d (\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03ac\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd, _therapon_.) We have not in English any single\nterm that fully expresses the idea conveyed by this. It means an\nassociate or companion who is voluntarily under the direction of one\nwhom he takes and acknowledges to be his superior. The old Roman\n_umbra_, when applied to an attendant, conveyed the idea more exactly\nthan any one term of ours. Thus, the warrior was called the _therapon_\nof Mars, and of the muses and kings of the gods generally. Thus,\nMenelaus is called the _therapon_ of his chief, &c. &c. (See _Iliad_,\nviii. 113, xviii. 244, xix. 143.)\n\nA similar error is occasionally found in the use of the terms _to\nserve_, _served_, _service_, &c., as if they were legitimately derived\nfrom some form of _doulos_. Thus, Luke ii. 37: \u201cBut _served_ God with\nfasting and prayers night and day,\u201d\u2014\u201cserved,\u201d \u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1, _latreuousa_,\nfrom _latreuo_. The more appropriate term is \u201cto worship,\u201d &c.\n\nThe term was used by the Greeks, \u201cto worship\u201d the gods by sacrifices and\nofferings. (See _Euripides_, _Electra_, 131; _Iphagenia in Tauris_,\n1115.) So in _Acts_ vii. 7: \u201cAnd after that shall they come forth and\n_serve_ me in this place,\u201d\u2014\u201cserve,\u201d \u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9, _latreusousi_. It\nshould have been, \u201cand worship me in this place.\u201d _Rom._ ix. 4: \u201cAnd the\n_service_ of God, and the promises,\u201d \u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1, _latreia_, worship, &c. So\nalso _Heb._ ix. 1: \u201cThen verily the first covenant had also ordinances\nof divine service,\u201d \u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, _latreias_, worship. So also _Heb._ xiii.\n10: \u201cWe have an altar whereof they have no right to eat which _serve_\nthe tabernacle,\u201d\u2014\u201cserve,\u201d \u03bb\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2, _latreuontes_, who are\nworshipping in the, &c. &c.\n\n\u0394\u03b9\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, _diakonos_, is also sometimes erroneously translated\n_servant_, _service_, _to serve_, &c. An instance occurs, _John_ ii. 5:\n\u201cAnd his mother saith unto the _servants_,\u201d \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, _diakonois_, from\n_diakonos_: as a verb, it means to minister unto, to wait upon, to\nmanage affairs, to perform some function to another; and hence, in\nEnglish, we may occasionally require some other term of cognate meaning.\nFrom this term our word \u201cdeacon\u201d has been legitimately derived. The word\nis of less elevated import in Greek than _therapon_ (see Aristophanes,\n_Ornithes_, line 1322, \u1f61\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bb\u03b1\u03c7\u03b9\u03c7\u1ff6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2,) but never consorts in the\nleast degree with the idea slavery. \u201cSaith unto\u201d them who ministered,\nwho waited upon the guests, &c. So also _John_ ii. 9: \u201cBut the\n_servants_ which drew the water knew,\u201d\u2014servants, \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, _diakonoi_,\n\u201cthey who ministered unto.\u201d See also _Rom._ xvi. 1: \u201cI commend unto you\nPhebe our sister, which is a _servant_ of the church,\u201d &c., \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd,\n_diakonon_, _one who ministers unto_, &c. So also _John_ xii. 26: \u201cIf\nany man _serve_,\u201d \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u1fc7, _diakone_, wait upon, minister unto me. \u201cAnd\nwhere I am there shall my _servant_ be,\u201d \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, _diakonos_, one who\nwaits upon, who ministers unto; \u201chim will my Father honour.\u201d It is not\nalways in English easy to select a phrase distinctly the best adapted to\nexpress the precise difference between the words _diakonos_ and\n_huperetes_, but it may be remarked that the _huperetes_ was of an\nemployment more of public character: hence those who in the ships held\ncertain banks of oars were called by that name; also those of a\nparticular rank in the army, or in civil government; but the word\n_diakonos_ was used as a term more applicable to domestic, personal, or\nprivate life. Keeping this distinction in mind, the same word may often,\nin English, give the sense of either; yet _huperetes_ will often appear\nin Greek where _diakonos_ would be ill used. A more correct use of this\nword than the preceding will be found in _Matt._ iv. 11: \u201cThen the devil\nleaveth him, and behold, angels came and _ministered_ unto him,\u201d\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, _diekonoun_, ministered unto, attended to.\n\n_Matt._ xx. 26: \u201cBut whosoever will be great among you, let him be your\n_minister_,\u201d \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, _diakonos_, minister, &c. And here is shown the\ndistinction between this word and _doulos_, a slave; for he proceeds,\n\u201cAnd whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your _servant_,\u201d\n\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _doulos_, slave. Also, _Luke_ viii. 3: \u201cAnd Joanna the wife of\nChuza, Herod\u2019s steward, and Susanna, and many others which ministered\nunto him of their substance,\u201d \u03b4\u03b9\u03b7\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, _diekonoun_, ministered, &c. We\nhave deemed it proper to notice these inaccuracies in our translation,\nto prevent the word _servant_, &c., when used to mean _slave_, &c.,\nbeing confounded with its use when given in translation as above; and it\nmay be proper also to notice that the _hired_ labourer, a freeman\n_hired_ into the employ of another, is never described by any term\nimplying _slavery_, or even having any analogy with it, as examples will\nshow:\n\n\u201cFor the kingdom of heaven is like a man that is a householder, which\nwent out early in the morning to _hire labourers_ (\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03ac\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2,\n_misthosasthai ergatas_, to hire labourers) into his vineyard.\u201d \u201cThey\nsay unto him, Because no man hath hired us,\u201d (\u1f10\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf, _emisthosato_,\nhath hired.) \u201cSo when the evening was come, the Lord of the vineyard\nsaith unto his steward, call the labourers and give them _their hire_,\u201d\n\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u1f78\u03bd, _misthon_, wages, &c. \u201cAnd when they had received it, they\nmurmured against the good man of the house.\u201d _Matt._ xx. 1, 7, 8, 11.\n\u201cAnd when he came to himself, he said, How many _hired servants_\n(\u03bc\u03af\u03c3\u03b8\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9, _misthioi_, hired persons) of my father\u2019s have bread,\u201d &c.\n_Luke_ xv. 17. \u201cBut he that is a hireling, (\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03c9\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2, _misthotos_, a\nperson hired,) and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth\nthe wolf, &c. and the wolf catcheth them and scattereth the sheep. The\n_hireling_ (\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03c9\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2, _misthotos_, a person hired) fleeth because he is\na _hireling_ (\u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03c9\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2, _misthotos_, a person hired,) and careth not for\nthe sheep.\u201d _John_ x. 12, 13. \u201cFor the labourer is worthy of his\n_hire_,\u201d \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u03bf\u1fe6 hire, wages, payment, &c. _Luke_ x. 7. \u201cBehold, the\nhire (\u1f41 \u03bc\u03b9\u03c3\u03b8\u1f78\u03c2, payment for being hired) of the labourers (\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c1\u03b3\u03b1\u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd,\n_ton ergaton_, the labourers, not slaves) who have reaped down your\nfields.\u201d _James_ v. 4.\n\nHe who is seeking to obtain a correct view of the truth will perceive\nthe propriety of keeping in mind the distinction between the different\ncharacters thus in our version called by the same name, \u201c_servants_,\u201d\nand not suffer his mind to be governed, or even influenced, by any bias\nwhich has been produced by an incomplete examination of the whole gospel\nof God.\n\n\n\n\n                  ------------------------------------\n\n                              Study VIII.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON I.\n\nThe Hebrew letters \u05e2 ain, \u05d1 beth, and \u05d3 daleth compose the word by which\nthe Hebrews meant what we mean by the word slave. There is some\nvariation among men of letters, even among the Jews themselves, as to\nthe pronunciation of this word, some following the Asiatic, some the\nPortuguese, and some the Polish method.\n\nOut of respect and in deference to King James\u2019s translators of the Old\nTestament, of the learned and critical Dr. Blany, and of that\nindefatigable biblical scholar, Dr. Bagster, we have adopted their\npronunciation of this word, and call it _ebed_.\n\nThis word, as left untranslated by them, will be found in _Jer._\nxxxviii. 7\u201312; also xxxix. 16, 17, thus:\u2014\u201cNow, when Ebed-melech the\nEthiopian, one of the eunuchs which was in the king\u2019s house.\u201d\n\u201cEbed-melech went forth out the king\u2019s house.\u201d \u201cWhen the king commanded\nEbed-melech the Ethiopian.\u201d \u201cSo Ebed-melech took the men with him.\u201d \u201cAnd\nEbed-melech the Ethiopian said to Jeremiah.\u201d \u201cGo, speak to Ebed-melech\nthe Ethiopian.\u201d The words Ebed-melech are here left untranslated,\nbecause we have not, in English, words to express the idea conveyed by\nthem, except by paraphrasis, as, for instance, they would have had to\nhave said, his majesty\u2019s private, or principal, and confidential\nbody-servant: and this is the exact meaning implied by the words\nEbed-melech, as here used: the word servant, meaning a slave. In\n_Judges_ ix. 26, 28, 30, 31, 35, the word Ebed is also left\nuntranslated. Also in _Ezra_ viii. 6: \u201cEbed, the son of Jonathan.\u201d And\nin some other places.\n\nWe trust that our authority for the pronunciation of the word \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3\n_ebed_, will be deemed sufficient: yet, we admit that, in Hebrew\npronunciation, it will be varied by suffix, affix, and points, as has\nbeen found by the learned rabbis long since to best agree with their\nrules of cantation and the idiomatic construction of the language.\n\nThis word _ebed_ is used as a _noun_, _verb_, _adjective_, participle,\nand adverb; but we make the proposition, that, however used, and in\nwhatever form, it is never used disconnected from the idea of slavery.\nPhilological history will develop to us, at least, one human\nweakness:\u2014pride to be thought learned, has more or less, among the\nEuropean nations and languages, had its effect in the compilation of\ndictionaries.\n\nIn some instances, men of learning have undertaken their compilation\nwithout using their ability to fathom the depths of language, or to\ndiscover the sources of its streams, or describe the qualities of their\ncombinations. And the world is full of servile imitations of former and\nold errors; and each one seems to think that the authority of a book\nwarrants their perpetuation.\n\nBut there will occasionally arise, in the walks of knowledge, some\nMoses, some Confucius, some Homer, some Euclid, some Socrates, some\nBacon, some Newton, some Franklin, some Champollion, before the fire of\nwhose genius and mental power, all imitations of error wither away.\n\nTouching the subject of the Asiatic languages generally, and the\ndarkness that has for ages overspread them, may we not fondly hope that\nsuch a luminary is now culminating in the region of the universities of\nEngland. Permit us, at least, to have some hope for the Regius Professor\nof Cambridge.\n\nBut to our subject:\u2014We sometimes find the philologist yield his sceptre\nand borrow his definitions from a bad translation. And we often find the\ntranslator sacrificing his original upon the altar of his own\nimperfections. Now, it is not uncommon that a word in one language may\nbe in such peculiar use, that, consistently with the constitution of\nsome other language, it cannot be translated therein by any one single\nterm and even if so, not always by the same word. Should all the\ndifferent terms and words that might thus be legitimately used in\ntranslation, be collected together, and put down as the descriptive\nmeaning of some foreign or ancient term, our lexicons would, of\nnecessity, contain some portions of error. For example, suppose we take\nthe Arabic word \u0639\u064e\u0628\u0652\u062f\u08e8 _abed_, which means absolutely a slave in that\nlanguage: we all know that an Arabian, speaking or writing to one far\nhis superior, would someway call himself by this term. He uses it to\nexpress great devotedness, honesty, and integrity of intentions to the\none addressed. If we were composing an Arabic lexicon, what would the\nscholar have good reason to say, if we should put as the definition of\nthis word,\u2014honesty, integrity of intention, &c.? This Arabic word is the\nsame as in Hebrew, and the word is used in both languages with great\nsimilarity: also in Chaldee, Syriac, and other Shemitic dialects.\n\nWhile we premise that the Koran is taken as the standard of Arabic\nliterature, we present this word, as used in that language, as a sample\nof its use in the other Shemitic dialects.\n\nThis word, as above, in Arabic, is composed of the letters _gain_, or\n_ain_, under point _jesm_, which is equivalent to the Hebrew _quiescent\nsheoa_, but really having the shortest possible trace of the sound of\nour short _\u0115_, and terminated by the letter _dhal_, or _dal_, under the\ndiacritical sign of nunnation.\n\nMr. Sale, who had great experience in Arabic literature, has left this\nword frequently untranslated in his notes, quoting BEIDAWI and\nIolalo'ddin, to his version of the Koran, and in Roman letters expressed\nit thus, _abda_, and, without annunation thus, _abd_. We confine\nourselves to this particular _form_ of the word. If, by long experience\nwe supply the shortest possible trace of our vowel _\u0115_ between the _b_\nand _d_, and in _annunation_ cause the terminating vowel to coalesce in\nsome trace of our consonant _n_, we should perhaps arrive at as correct\na pronunciation as could be attained by mere rules and it will be seen\nthat the _eb\u0115d_ of Jerusalem became _ab\u0115d_ at Mecca.\n\nWe copy from Sale\u2019s translation, without burthening our page with a\nrepetition of the original; our object is to show the precise idea for\nthe expression of which the Arabians appropriated this word.\n\n\u201cGod causeth some of you to excel in worldly possessions: yet, they who\nare caused to excel do not give their wealth unto the _slaves_ whom\ntheir right hands possess, that they may become equal sharers therein.\u201d\n_Koran_, chap. 16.\n\nAl Beidawi, an Arabian commentator on the Koran, upon this passage says\u2014\n\n\u201cA reproof to the idolatrous Meccans, who could admit created beings to\na share of the divine honour, though they suffered not their slaves to\nshare with themselves in what God had bestowed on them.\u201d\n\nThe expression of a thing done, held, or \u201cpossessed by the right hand,\u201d\nin Arabic, is a full concession that the doing, holding, or possessing,\nis just, rightful, and righteous.\n\n\u201cGod propoundeth, as a parable, a _possessed slave_, who hath power over\nnothing, and him on whom we have bestowed a good provision from us, and\nwho giveth alms thereout, both secretly and openly; shall these two be\nesteemed equal? God forbid.\u201d _Koran_, chap. 16.\n\nOf this, the above commentator says, \u201cThe idols, we have likened to a\n_slave_, who is so far from having any thing of his own, that he is\nhimself in the possession of another.\u201d _Idem._\n\n\u201cAnd this is the favour which thou hast bestowed on me, that thou hast\nenslaved the children of Israel.\u201d _Koran_, chap. 26.\n\n\u201cO prophet, we have allowed thee thy wives, unto whom thou hast given\ntheir dower, and also the _slaves_ which thy right hand possesseth, of\nthe booty which God hath granted to thee.\u201d _Koran_, chap. 33.\n\nYet, so it is, we find in our Hebrew lexicons, among the significations\nof this word \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _ebed_, not only its true signification,\u2014slave,\nslavery, &c.,\u2014but also, _to labour_, _cultivate_, _labour generally_,\n_worship_, _to make_, _to do, or deal with any one_, _to take place or\nhappen_, _work_, _business_, _tillage_, _cultivation of land_,\n_agriculture_, _implements_, _utensils_, _appurtenances_, _a worship of\nGod_ or _of idols_, _wearied_, _to be wearied with labour_, _complied\nwith_, _assented to_, _performed_, _religious service_, _a submissive\nepithet_, _a minister_, _to minister unto_, _any one employed in the\nservice of a king_, _any one who worships, adores God_, _one who is\ncommissioned by him for any purpose, benefit, employment of any kind_.\n\nBut we will desist from increasing this catalogue of definitions, for\nfear of being charged with slander on the Hebrew lexicons. Must not that\nbe a very strange language in which one little word of only three\nletters has so many varied and adverse meanings? Yet, in all sobriety,\nwe might double the number. If each and every Hebrew word were like\nthis, thus loaded with lexicographical learning, we beg to know who\nwould undertake and what would be the use of its study; for surely, from\nthe same page, there might be a very great number of adverse and\ncontradictory translations, all equally correct. But, if such catalogue\nis not legitimate, to what cause are we to look for its existence? to\nsome abiding influence, secret but persevering, in the minds of the\nlexicographers for the last thousand years? Or shall we rather confine\nour views to the casualities of hurried translations and bad readings,\nto the facility of the copyist in book-making, instead of the laborious\nstudy of the investigator?\n\nThis circumstance, from whatever cause it may have sprung, will impose\non us some labour to show the correctness of our proposition, to wit,\nthe word \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, however used, and in whatever form, is never used\nin Hebrew disconnected from the idea of slavery.\n\nWe first propose to show that the Hebrew is abundantly supplied with\nwords to express all these other meanings, _disconnected_ with the idea\nof slavery.\n\nAware that such examination may be extremely uninteresting to the most\nof us, yet, deeming it of great importance to our subject, we humbly ask\nindulgence, while we examine a few of the most leading _terms_ as\nexamples, whose significations have been appropriated to the word \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3\n_ebed_.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON II.\n\nBut, before we enter into such examination, it may be proper to remark\nthat the Hebrew, in common with all the Shemitic languages, makes\nabundant use of what we call rhetorical figures. The word \u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05df _ben_\nmeans a son; but by _prosopop\u0153ia_ it is made to mean an _arrow_. Thus,\n_Lam._ iii. 13, \u201cHe hath caused the _arrows of his quiver_,\u201d \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e0\u05b5\u05d9\u0596\n\u05d0\u05b7\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05ea\u05a5\u05d5\u05b9 _beney_, _ashpatho_\u2014literally, the _sons of his quiver_,\nfrom the notion that the arrow is the produce, issue, adjunct, &c. of\nthe quiver. We might quote a great number of instances where the word\n\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05df _ben_, by the same figure, is used to express some other idea than\n_son_, yet never unassociated with the primitive idea but, what would be\nthe value of the lexicographical assertion that this word in Hebrew\nmeant an arrow? The following fifteen verses are wholly of the same\ncharacter: \u201cHe hath filled me with bitterness, he hath made me drunk\nwith wormwood.\u201d\n\nThe Arabians have a common way of expressing \u201c_one of great\naffliction_,\u201d by saying that he is a \u201c_wormwood beater_.\u201d Yet the Arabic\nword that means _affliction_, by no means is synonymous of _wormwood_.\n\nThe figure of Lamentations is also used in _Ps._ cxxvii. 4, 5: \u201cAs\nawards are in the hand of a mighty man, so are children of the youth.\nHappy _is_ the _man_ that hath his quiver full of them.\u201d Yet, the word\n\u05d0\u05b6\u05ea\u05be\u05d0\u05b7\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05ea\u05b9\u05d5\u05b9 is in no sense a synonyme of whatever word for which it\nis here figuratively used. A singular instance of this figure is found\nin _Lam._ ii. 13: \u201cLet not _the apple of thine eye_ cease;\u201d\n\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea\u05be\u05e2\u05b5\u05d9\u05e0\u05b5\u05bd\u05da\u05b0 _bath eynek_, the _daughter of the eye_. The translators\nhave understood this to mean the \u201c_pupil_,\u201d otherwise called the apple\nof the eye; but, the word _bath_, _daughter_, shows that the thing meant\nis a _produce_ of the eye; hence, it cannot mean the _apple_ or _pupil_\nof the eye, but _tears_. But how stupid the page that shall put down as\na signification of the word \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea _bath_, an apple, or the apple of the\neye, or the pupil, or yet, what it here means, a tear?\n\nThese two words _ben_, a _son_, and _bath_, a _daughter_, sometimes\n_beth_, are associated in so many different forms of figure and in\nconnection or compound with other Hebrew words, to express some\ncomplex idea, that, if each different idea thus conveyed was to be\nconsidered a legitimate signification of these words, their\ndescription would be quite lengthy, and contradictory; for instance,\n_Gen._ xxiv. 16, \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05ea\u05d5\u05bc\u05dc\u05b8\u0595\u05d4 is used to mean a _virgin_. But, 1 _Sam._\ni. 16, \u05d1\u05b7\u05ea\u05be\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05dc is used to mean quite a different character, as\nif of different origin. In _Eccl._ xii. 4, \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e0\u05d5\u05b9\u05a5\u05ea \u05d4\u05b7\u05e9\u05b4\u05bc\u05c2\u05a5\u05d9\u05e8 is\ngenerally understood to mean the voice of an old man. But in _Dan._\nxi. 17, \u05d1\u05b7\u05a4\u05ea \u05d4\u05b7\u05e0\u05c7\u05bc\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05dd\u05a8 is understood to mean a princess. We might\nmultiply examples without number; yet, in all instances, the leading\nidea, a daughter, is ever present: other primitive words, whose\nsignification was an idea of great and leading interest, will be found\nin similar use. And it may be remarked, that, at one age of the world,\nwhen a large proportion of the children of men were slaves, that the\nword signifying that condition would be naturally and exceedingly\noften used in a figurative manner. Even among us, our word _servant_,\nwhich, from use, has become merely a milder term to express the same\nidea, is in the mouth of every devout man, while _slave_ is in\nconstant use among the moral and political agitators of the day.\n\nOne among the causes of our finding in the lexicons so many and\nadverse significations of the word _ebed_, is the fact, that the\nHebrew often expressed an adjective quality, by placing the\nsubstantive expressing the quality as if in apposition with the\nsubstantive qualified, thus, \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b6\u05d9\u05da\u05b8 \u05de\u05b0\u05e8\u05b7\u05d2\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _they_, slaves\n(not) spies; \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b6\u05a8\u05d9\u05da\u05b8 \u05d0\u05b7\u05d7\u05b4\u05a7\u05d9\u05dd _they slaves_, brethren, _Gen._ xlii.\n11\u201313, \u05dc\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 \u05dc\u05b0\u05d0\u05b8\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc _thy slave our father_, _Gen._ xliii. 28.\n\nIn an analogous sense the word \u05d0\u05a4\u05d9\u05b4\u05e9\u05c1 is used in 2 _Kings_ i. 9, 10, 11,\n12, 13. Also iv. 25 and 27, preceding \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05d0\u05b1\u05dc\u05b9\u05d4\u05b4\u05a4\u05d9\u05dd _a man of God_,\nmeaning one so wholly devoted to God as to partake of the divine nature.\nBut such use in no manner changes the meaning of the word \u05d0\u05b4\u05d9\u05e9\u05c1 or\n\u05d0\u05b1\u05dc\u05d4\u05d9\u05dd. This mode of expressing quality, by placing one of the\nsubstantives in the genitive, is quite common even in the modern\nlanguages. Grammarians will also inform us that substantives are often\nused adverbially, designating the time, place, and quality of the action\nof the verb.\n\nBut again, the Hebrew adjectives are in disproportional scarcity to the\nsubstantives, which the language remedies by a kind of circumlocution;\nthis, \u05d0\u05b4\u05a8\u05d9\u05e9\u05c1 \u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05d1\u05b8\u05e8\u05b4\u059c\u05d9\u05dd _a man_ (of) _words_, _i.e._ an eloquent man, as\nin _Ex._ iv. 10; _the son of strength_ \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\u05be\u05d7\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05dc _valiant_ or _worthy\nman_, 1 _Kings_ i. 52; \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e0\u05b5\u05d9\u05be\u05e7\u05b6\u05d3\u05b6\u05dd the sons of the East, _i.e._ the\norientals, _Gen._ xxix. 1; \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05df \u05de\u05b8\u05d5\u05b6\u05ea the son of death, _i.e._ doomed to\ndeath, 1 _Sam._ xx. 31; \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea\u05be\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05dc the daughter of baseness,\n_i.e._ a base woman, 1 _Sam._ i. 16.\n\nThis use of language is common to our word, _ebed_, _slave_: \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\n\u05d0\u05b1\u05dc\u05b8\u05d4\u05b8\u05d0 slaves of God, _i.e._ a man devoted to God, as a slave to a\nmaster, _i.e._ a man who most devotedly worships God, _Dan._ iii. 26;\n\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3 \u05d0\u05b1\u05dc\u05b8\u05d4\u05b8\u05d0 _slave of God_, _i.e._ devoted worshipper of God, &c.,\n_Dan._ vi. 21, the 20th of the English text; and to express this\nadjective quality, is thus compounded in _Ezra_ v. 11, \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05d5\u05b9\u05d4\u05b4\u05a9\u05d9\nslaves of God, _i.e._, devoted to God as slaves are to their masters.\n&c., to express the adjective qualities of devotion and obedience. This\nword is used and compounded with many other words in a great variety of\ninstances.\n\nBut, doubtless, another cause which has led the lexicographers into the\nalleged error, is the peculiar disposition of the Hebrew, (common to all\nthe Shemitic tongues) to express the idea intended, by expressing\nanother to which it has a real or supposed analogy, either in primitive\nrelation or in ultimate result. For example, let us take the word _ben_,\na son, thus: _Isa._ v. 1, _keren_, here used to mean the top of a\nmountain, because they fancied an analogy between the top of a mountain\nand a _horn_. _Ben_, a son, _shamen_, fat, son of fatness, is here used\nto mean a fruitful mountain. But, do these words acquire new\nsignifications from this figurative use of them? The sons of the quiver,\n_i.e._ arrows. _Lem._ iii. 13. Shall we say that _ben_, means an arrow?\n_Ben kasheth_, the son of the bow, (_cannot make him flee_,) _i.e._ the\narrow, _Job_ xli. 20, (the 28th of the English text.) Shall we indeed\nthen say that _ben_ means an arrow? _Ben shahor_, the son of\n_blackness_, here used to express night,\u2014_son of the night_,\u2014used to\nconvey our idea, the _morning star_. Shall we say that _ben_ means a\nstar? or, that _blackness_ means the morning? _Isa._ xiv., 12 \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\n\u05d9\u05d5\u05b9\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4 _ben yonah_, the _son of a dove_, _i.e._ a young dove, a squab?\n_Lev._ xii. 6. Shall we say that \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05df _ben_ means a squab? _Lev._ xii.\n8, _beni yonah_, sons of a dove, _i.e._ two young doves or squabs. Shall\nwe then, surely say that _beni_ means two squabs? But, in _Lev._ xiv.\n22, we have the same words used in the same sense: must we say that this\nword means squabs? \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05e0\u05b5\u05d9 \u05e2\u05b9\u059d\u05e8\u05b5\u05d1 _bene oreb, the sons of the raven_,\n_i.e._ young ravens, _Ps._ cxlvii. 9: does _beni_ then mean young ravens\nalso? \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05df \u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05e7\u05b8\u05e8 _ben baker_, xxix. 1. What, does _ben_ mean a calf?\n_Num._ xxix. 2\u20138, _son_ of an _ox_, also; _ben_ the son of an ox\u2014meaning\na calf, does _ben_ most surely mean a calf? _Job_ xxxix. 16, speaking of\nostrich-eggs, calls them, \u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05e0\u05b6\u05d9\u05d4\u05b8, the plural: what! does this word\nalso mean ostrich-eggs? But, _Eccl._ ii. 7, _canithi_, I purchased,\n_ebadim_, male slaves, _shepaphath_, and female slaves, and _sons,\nbayith_, of my house, _haya_, there were, _li_, to me:\u2014here \u05d1\u05b0\u05e0\u05b5\u05d9 _ben\u00e9_\nis used to express the idea \u201c_home-born slaves_.\u201d But, shall we say that\nthis word means such young slaves? Would such a catalogue of\nsignifications placed to the word _ben_, a son, be legitimate or\ntruthful?\n\nBut, in _Jer._ ii. 14, we again find this word _bayith_, preceded by\n_yelid, born of the house_, meaning a house-born slave. The same words\nare used to mean the same thing in _Gen._ xiv. 14, meaning _house-born\nslaves_; and again, _Gen._ xvii. 12, meaning a _house-born slave_; also,\n_idem._ 13, meaning a slave born in thy house\u2014thy _house-born slave_.\n\nGod did not speak to Abraham in an unintelligible language: every one\nknew what the idea was, even down to this day. Yet, are either of these\nwords a synonyme of _ebed_, a slave?\n\nBut we will close this portion of our remarks by stating that the\nlexicographers might, in the manner here pointed out, (which they have\npursued to great extent,) have still increased their catalogue of\nsignifications to the word _ebed_.\n\nLet us show an instance. It is well known that the ancient eastern\nnations punished great offenders by _cutting them in pieces_. The\nterm expressing and threatening this punishment was used somewhat\ntechnically, as is now the term _to guillotine_, meaning _to cut off\na man\u2019s head_. The term used by the ancients to express this\n_cutting in pieces_, as introduced in Hebrew, was, \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3 \u05d4\u05b7\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05de\u05b4\u05d9\u05df\n_abad haddamin_, which literally was \u201c_to enslave in pieces_.\u201d The\nterm is expressed thus in _Dan._ ii. 5: \u05d4\u05b7\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05de\u05b4\u05d9\u05df \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\u05df _in\npieces ye shall be enslaved_, _i.e._ \u201cYe shall be cut in pieces.\u201d\n\nThe lexicographers might have continued their catalogue with the same\ntruthfulness with which they have extended it to such length, and have\nsaid that \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _ebed_ also meant to hew, to cut, &c., and have cited this\ninstance in proof.\n\nBut in _Dan._ iii. 29, the term is used again thus \u05d4\u05b7\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05de\u05b4\u05a3\u05d9\u05df \u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\n_in pieces shall be enslaved_, _i.e._ \u201cshall be cut in pieces.\u201d Surely,\nthey should have added, that _ebed_ means _to cut_. It is true that the\nliteral meaning of this term cannot always be given in English so as to\nbe in pleasant accordance with our use of language.\n\nBut the same is true as to many other phrases and terms, and perhaps\napplicable to every other language. This form and use of this word as\nhere used by Daniel, is rather a Persian adulteration than pure Hebrew,\nof which several instances may be found in some of the later books. The\nBabylonian and Persian kings considered even _all their_ subjects as\nslaves to them, and this word was evidently used with greater latitude\namong them than it appears to have been among the Hebrews at the time of\nMoses.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON III.\n\nThe lexicons seem tenacious that a very usual signification of the word\n\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _ebed_ is labour, both as a _noun_ and _verb_; and inasmuch as to\nmany there may seem some relation between the ideas _slavery_ and\n_labour_, we wish to be particular in examining the Hebrew use of the\nterms expressive of these ideas. It appears to us that the Hebrew word\n\u05d9\u05b8\u05d2\u05b7\u05e2 _yaga_, it simply our idea of labour, more closely than any other\nword. Yet this word is never disconnected with the idea _fatigue_ and\n_weariness_, and perhaps something of the same character will be\nperceived to be attached to our word _labour_. In _Gen._ xxxi. 42, it is\nused and translated, \u201cthe \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9\u05bd\u05e2\u05b7 _labour_ of my hands.\u201d xxv. 18, \u201cand\nwhen thou wast faint and \u05d5\u05b0\u05d9\u05b8\u05d2\u05b4\u0591\u05e2\u05b7 weary.\u201d 3: \u201cAnd make not all the\npeople to \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05d9\u05b7\u05d2\u05b7\u05a5\u05e2 _labour_ thither.\u201d xxiv. 13: \u201cAnd I gave you a land\nfor which you did not \u05d9\u05b8\u05d2\u05b7\u05a3\u05e2\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc _labour_.\u201d 2 _Sam._ xvii. 2: \u201cAnd I\nwill come upon him while he is \u05d9\u05b8\u05d2\u05b5\u05e2\u05b7 weary.\u201d _Neh._ v. 13: \u201cSo shall\nGod shake out every man from his house and from his \u05d5\u05bc\u05de\u05b4\u05a3\u05d9\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2\u0594\u05d5\u05b9\nlabour.\u201d _Job_ iii. 17: \u201cAnd the \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05a3\u05d9\u05e2\u05b5\u05d9 weary be at rest.\u201d ix. 29:\n\u201cIf I be wicked, why then \u05d0\u05b4\u05d9\u05d2\u05b8\u05e2\u0596 labour I in vain.\u201d x. 13: * *\n\u201cdespised the \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05a3\u05d9\u05e2\u05b7 work of thy hands * *.\u201d xxviii. 18: \u201cThat which\nhe \u05d9\u05b8\u05d2\u05b8\u05e2 laboured for shall he restore.\u201d xxxix. 11: * * \u201cWilt thou leave\nthy \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2\u05b6\u05bd\u05da\u05b8\u0596 labour to him.\u201d 16: * * * \u201c her \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2\u05b8\u05a3\u05d4\u05bc labour is in\nvain without fear?\u201d _Ps._ lxix. 4: \u201cThey that _hate_ me without a\ncause;\u201d the idea is, they that labour to injure, &c. \u201cAnd their\n\u05d5\u05b4\u059c\u05d9\u05d2\u05b4\u05e2\u05b8\u05dd labour unto the locust.\u201d cix. 11: \u201clet the stranger spoil his\n\u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2\u05a5\u05d5\u05b9 labour.\u201d cxxviii. 2: \u201cFor thou shalt eat the \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05a3\u05d9\u05e2\u05b7 labour\nof thy hands.\u201d _Prov._ xxiii. 4: \u201c\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05d2\u05b7\u05e2\u05a5 _labour_ not to be rich.\u201d\n_Eccl._ xii. 12: \u201cMuch study is \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05e2\u05b7\u05a5\u05ea weariness to the flesh.\u201d _Isa._\nxliii. 22, 23, 24: \u201cBut thou hast been \u05d9\u05b8\u05d2\u05b7\u05a5\u05e2\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc \u05d4\u05bd\u05d5\u05b9\u05d2\u05b7\u05e2\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05da\u05b8 wearied\nthee with incense.\u201d \u201cThou hast \u05d4\u05bd\u05d5\u05b9\u05d2\u05b7\u05e2\u05b0\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u0596\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9 wearied me with thine\niniquities.\u201d xlv. 14: \u201cThe \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05a8\u05d9\u05e2\u05b7 labour of Egypt.\u201d xlvii. 15: \u201cwith\nwhom thou hast \u05d9\u05b8\u05d2\u05b8\u0591\u05e2\u05b7\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc _laboured_.\u201d lv. 2: \u201cAnd your \u05d5\u05b4\u05d9\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05db\u05b6\u05dd\u0596\n_labour_ for that which satisfieth not.\u201d lxv. 23: \u201cThey shall not\n\u05d9\u05b4\u05bd\u05d2\u05b0\u05e2\u05d5\u05bc\u05a8 labour in vain.\u201d _Jer._ iii. 24: \u201cFor shame hath devoured the\n\u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9\u05a5\u05e2\u05b7 labour.\u201d xx. 5: \u201cAnd all the \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2\u05b8\u0596\u05d4\u05bc labours thereof.\u201d xlv.\n3: \u201cI \u05d9\u05b8\u05d2\u05b7\u05e2\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9 _fainted_ in my sighing.\u201d The idea is, my sighing was a\nlabour of great weariness, &c. _Ezek._ xxiii. 29: \u201cAnd shall take away\nall thy \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9\u05e2\u05b5\u05da\u05b0 _labour_.\u201d _Hag._ i. 11: \u201cAnd upon all the \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9\u05a5\u05e2\u05b7\nlabour of thy hands.\u201d _Mal._ ii. 17: \u201cYe have \u05d4\u05bd\u05d5\u05b9\u05d2\u05b7\u05e2\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05dd\u05a4 wearied the\nLord with your words, yet ye say, Wherein have we \u05d4\u05d5\u05b9\u05d2\u05b8\u0591\u05e2\u05b0\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc wearied\nhim?\u201d _Eccl._ i. 8: \u201cAll things are full of \u05d9\u05b0\u05d2\u05b5\u05e2\u05b4\u0594\u05d9\u05dd labour.\u201d x. 15:\n\u201cThe (\u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05dc _amal_) _labour_ of the foolish (\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05d2\u05b8\u05e2\u05b6\u05e0\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc) every one of\nthem.\u201d The word _labour_ in this sentence is translated from _amal_,\nanother Hebrew word, which signifies _labour_, but in its signification\nis implied the association of the idea _grief_, _sorrow_, &c. The\nadjective quality of this word is mental\u2014in _yaga_, it is physical. This\nword _amal_ seems to be derived from the Arabic \u0639\u064e\u0645\u0644\u0645\u0646\u08e8 _amelan_, and\nfrom thence the Syriac \u0725\u0730\u0720\u0722\u0735\u0710, having nearly the same signification. In\nArabic the signification is put down by Castell, _operator_,\n_mercenarius_; and in Syriac, _labore defessus_. It is used in Hebrew as\nfollows: _Gen._ xli. 51: \u201cAnd Joseph called the name of his first-born\nManessa; for God, said he, hath made me forget all my \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9 toil,\u201d\n(_labour_, _sorrow_.) The word _manessa_ means to forget, to cause to\nforget, &c. _Num._ xxiii. 21: \u201cHe hath not beheld \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u0596\u05dc _iniquity_ in\nJacob,\u201d _i.e._ labour designed to give trouble, perplexity, or sorrow.\n_Deut._ xxvi. 7: \u201cThe Lord heard our voice and looked upon our\naffliction, and our \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u05b5\u05e0\u05ad\u05d5\u05bc labour and our oppression.\u201d _Judg._ v.\n26: \u201cAnd her right hand to the workman\u2019s (\u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b5\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\u0591\u05dd _labourer\u2019s_)\nhammer.\u201d _Job_ iii. 10: \u201cNor hid \u05e2\u05b8\u059c\u05de\u05b8\u05c4\u05dc sorrow from mine eyes.\u201d 20:\n\u201cWherefore is light given unto him that is in \u05dc\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b5\u05a3\u05dc _misery_.\u201d iv. 8:\n\u201cThey that plough iniquity and sow \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05a3\u05dc _wickedness_ shall reap the\nsame.\u201d v. 7: \u201cYet man is born to \u05dc\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05a3\u05dctrouble.\u201d vii. 3: \u201cSo I am made\nto possess months of vanity, and \u05e2\u05b8\u059d\u05de\u05b8\u05dc wearisome nights are appointed\nto me.\u201d xv. 35: \u201cThey conceive \u05e2\u05b8\u05ad\u05de\u05b8\u05dc mischief and bring forth vanity.\u201d\nxvi. 2: \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05a3\u05dc \u201cMiserable comforters are ye all.\u201d xx. 22: \u201cIn the\nfulness of his sufficiency he shall be in \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b5\u05a3\u05dc _straits_.\u201d But it\nshould be remembered that the Hebrew copy of Job is itself a\ntranslation. _Ps._ vii. 15: \u201cHe made a pit and digged it, and has fallen\ninto the \u05e2\u05b8\u059c\u05de\u05b8\u05c4\u05dc _ditch_ (sorrow bringing labour) which he made.\u201d 16:\n\u201cHis \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05a3\u05dc\u05d5\u05b9 _mischiefs_ shall return upon his own head.\u201d x. 7: \u201cUnder\nhis tongue is \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05dc mischief and vanity.\u201d 14: \u201cThou beholdest \u05e2\u05b8\u0598\u05de\u05b8\u05a4\u05dc\n_mischief_ and spite.\u201d xxv. 18: \u201cLook upon mine affliction and my\n\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u05b4\u0591\u05d9 pain, and forgive my sin.\u201d \u201cYet is their strength \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05a3\u05dc\n_labour_ and _sorrow_.\u201d cv. 44: \u201cAnd they inherit the \u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b7\u0596\u05dc _labour_\nof the people.\u201d cxxvii. 1: \u201cExcept the Lord build the house, they\n_labour_ in vain.\u201d _Prov._ xvi. 26: \u201cHe that \u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05a3\u05d5\u05bc _laboureth_\n\u05e2\u05b8\u05a3\u05de\u05b0\u05c4\u05dc\u05b8\u05d4 \u05e2\u05b8\u05ad\u05de\u05b5\u05dc _Isa._ liii. 11: \u201cHe shall see of the \u05de\u05b5\u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b7\u05dc _travail_\nof his soul,\u201d (labour producing sorrow, &c.) \u201cAnd that write \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\ngrievousness which they have prescribed,\u201d (a labour producing sorrow,\n&c.) _Jonah_ iv. 10: \u201cThou hast had pity on the gourd for which thou\nhast not \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b7\u05a5\u05dc\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc _laboured_.\u201d _Eccl._ i. 3: \u201cWhat profit hath a man\nof all his \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u05d5\u05b9 _labour_ which he taketh under the sun?\u201d ii. 10: \u201cFor\nmy heart rejoiced in all my \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9 _labour_.\u201d 11: \u201cAnd then I looked on\nall the work that my hands had wrought, and on all the \u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u0596\u05dc\n_labour_ that I had \u05e9\u05b6\u05bd\u05c1\u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b7\u05a3\u05dc\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05d9 _laboured_.\u201d I hated all my \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\n_labour_ which I had \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b5\u0596\u05dc _taken_ (laboured) under the sun.\u201d 19: \u201cYet\nshall he have rule over all my \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u05b4\u0594\u05d9 _labour_ wherein I have\n\u05e9\u05b6\u05bd\u05c1\u05e2\u05bd\u05de\u05b7\u05a5\u05dc\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9 _laboured_.\u201d 20: \u201cTherefore I went about to cause my\nheart to despair of all the \u05d4\u05b6\u05a3\u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05dc _labour_ which I \u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05a5\u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b7\u0596\u05dc\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\ntook (laboured) under the sun.\u201d 21: \u201cFor there is a man whose\n\u05e9\u05b6\u05bd\u05c1\u05e2\u05b2\u0597\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u059b\u05d5\u05b9 _labour_ is in wisdom, and in knowledge, and in equity\u2014yet\nto a man that hath not \u05e2\u05b8\u05a5\u05de\u05b7\u05dc _laboured_ herein shall he leave it for\nhis portion.\u201d 22: \u201cFor what hath man of all his \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u0594\u05d5\u05b9 _labour_ and of\nthe vexation of his heart, wherein he hath \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b5\u0596\u05dc _laboured_ under the\nsun?\u201d iv. 4: \u201cAgain I considered all \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05dc _travail_,\u201d (labour and\nsorrow.) 8: \u201cYet there is no end to all his \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u0594\u05d5\u05b9 _labour_, neither\nsaith he, For whom do I \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b5\u0597\u05dc _labour_.\u201d iii. 9: \u201cWhat profit hath he\nthat worketh in that wherein he \u05e2\u05b8\u05de\u05b5\u05a5\u05dc _laboureth_?\u201d v. 18: \u201cAnd to\nenjoy the good of all his \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u0591\u05d5\u05b9 _labour_.\u201d vi. 7: \u201cAll the \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b7\u05a5\u05dc\n_labour_ of a man is for his mouth.\u201d ix. 9: \u201cFor that is thy portion in\nthis life and in thy \u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05a3\u05dc\u05b0\u05da\u05b8\u0594 _labour_.\u201d x. 15: \u201cThe \u05e2\u05b2\u05de\u05b7\u05a5\u05dc\n_labour_ (_amal_) of the foolish \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05d9\u05b7\u05d2\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05b6\u0591\u05e0\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc _wearieth_ every one of them.\u201d\n\n\u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u05d4\u059c _melahkah_ is also quite analogous in its signification to our\nword _labour_, insomuch that our word _labour_ may be often used in\ntranslation without impairing the sense. _Gen._ ii. 2: \u201cOn the seventh\nday God ended his work,\u201d \u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b7\u05d0\u05db\u05b0\u05ea\u05bc\u0596\u05d5\u05b9 _labour_. xxxix. 11: \u201cJoseph went\ninto the house to do his _business_,\u201d (labour.) _Exod._ xx. 9: \u201cAnd do\nall thy _work_,\u201d \u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b7\u05d0\u05db\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05bd\u05da\u05b8 10: \u201cIn it thou shalt not do any _work_,\u201d\n(labour, \u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u059c\u05d4.) xxxi. 3: \u201cAll manner of _workmanship_,\u201d \u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u05bd\u05d4.\n14: \u201cFor whosoever doeth any _work_,\u201d \u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u0594\u05d4. 15: \u201cSix days may\n_work_ \u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u05d4\u0592 be done.\u201d _Lev._ xiii. 48: \u201cOf any thing _made_\n\u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b6\u05a5\u05d0\u05db\u05b6\u05ea of skin,\u201d (done, laboured, manufactured.) _Ezra_ iii. 8: \u201cTo\nset forward the _work_ of the house.\u201d 9: \u201cTo set forward the workman,\u201d\n\u05d4\u05b7\u05de\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u0596\u05d4. _Esther_ iii. 9: \u201cAnd those that have charge of the king\u2019s\n_business_,\u201d \u05d4\u05b7\u05de\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u0594\u05d4. ix. 3: \u201cAnd officers \u05d4\u05b7\u05de\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u05d4\u0599 of the\nking. Without multiplying examples, it may suffice to say, that this\nword, as expressive of _labour_, is ever associated with the idea of\nparticularity, or class of _labour_, _business_, _employment_ or _job_,\nwithout reference to any other adjective quality; and hence it came to\nmean a message, or one charged with a message, and is therefore\nsometimes used to mean an angel, because they were supposed to be\nmessengers, charged to do a particular labour; hence, also, applied to a\nprophet; and hence, also, the prophet Malachi\u2019s name.\n\n\u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05b8\u05c2\u05d4 _Asa_ properly means work or labour, as the result of _making_,\n_procreating_, _producing_, _doing_, _acting_, or _performing_, without\nany regard to the condition of the agent or actor. _Gen._ i. 7: \u201cGod\n_made_ \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05e9\u05c2 the firmament.\u201d 16: \u201cGod _made_ \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05e9\u05c2 two great\nlights.\u201d ii. 2: \u201cGod ended his _work_ \u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b7\u05d0\u05db\u05b0\u05ea\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9 which he had _made_,\u201d\n\u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05b8\u05c2\u05a5\u05d4. This word is also used to express the _result_ of labour in\nacquiring slaves and other property generally, as in _Gen._ xii. 5: \u201cAll\ntheir substance that they had gathered, and the souls they had gotten in\nHaran,\u201d _i. e._ all the property and slaves that they had _laboured_\nfor, &c. \u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05c2\u05a3\u05d5\u05bc. _Exod._ xxxi. 4: \u201cTo work in gold and silver.\u201d 5: It\nis used with _malabkah_, thus: \u201cto _work_ \u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05e9\u05c2\u0596\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea in all manner of\nworkmanship,\u201d (\u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u05bd\u05d4 malakah.) These two words occur together again\nin _Neh._ iv. 15, the iv. 21 of the English text: \u201cSo _we laboured_\n\u05e2\u05b9\u05e9\u05b4\u05c2\u05a3\u05d9\u05dd _in the work_,\u201d \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05de\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u0591\u05d4. _Ezek._ xxix. 20: \u201cI have given\nhim the land of Egypt for his _labour_,\u201d \u05e2\u05b8\u05a3\u05e9\u05c2\u05d5\u05bc. _Exod._ xxx. 25: \u201cAnd\nthou shalt make it (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05b4\u05c2\u05a3\u05d9\u05ea\u05b8 labour it) an oil of holy ointment, an\nointment composed after the art of the apothecary.\u201d Art is here\ntranslated from \u05de\u05b7\u05a5\u05e2\u05b2\u05e9\u05b5\u05c2\u05a3\u05d4 _maase_, which is another word of very\nsimilar import, and is derived from \u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05b8\u05d4, and expresses the idea of\nlabour, as of a _thing done_, or _wrought_, a _work_, _deed_, _action_,\n_concern_, _business_, _i. e._ a labour emanating from a habit, or an\noccupation of business. _Gen._ xliv. 15: \u201c_What deed_ \u05d4\u05b7\u05de\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b2\u05e9\u05b6\u05c2\u05a5\u05d4 is\nthis that ye have done?\u201d xlvii. 3: \u201cWhat is your _occupation_?\u201d\n\u05de\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05e9\u05b5\u05c2\u05d9\u05db\u05b6\u0591\u05dd. _Exod._ xxiii. 16: \u201cAnd the feast of the harvest, the\nfirstfruits of thy _labours_ \u05de\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05e9\u05b6\u05c2\u05d9\u05da\u05b8, which thou hast sown in the\nfield, and the first of the ingathering, which is the end of the year,\nwhen thou hast gathered in thy _labours_,\u201d \u05de\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05e9\u05b6\u05c2\u0596\u05d9\u05da\u05b8. _Hag._ ii. 17:\n\u201cAnd I smote you with blasting and with hail in all the _labours_\n\u05de\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05e9\u05b5\u05c2\u05a3\u05d4 of your hands.\u201d _Hab._ iii. 17: \u201cAlthough the fig-tree shall\nnot blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vine, the _labour_ \u05de\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05e9\u05b5\u05c2\u05d4\nof the olive shall fail.\u201d\n\n\u05e1\u05b5\u05d1\u05b6\u05dc _sebel_ is sometimes translated _labour_, but it more often means\nsomething consequent to labour, as the burthen of _labour_ is consequent\nto the labour: it is sometimes used to mean the produce of labour, and\nhence the Syrian Ephraimitish word \u05e1\u05b4\u05d1\u05b9\u05bc\u05dc\u05b6\u05d4 _siboleth_, which is said to\nmean an ear of corn, because an ear of corn was the produce of labour.\nHence, it is sometimes used to mean prolific and fruitful, because the\nproduce of labour is _prolific and fruitful_; and because to sustain a\nburthen, as of labour, carries with it the idea of physical ability and\nstrength, it is used in the sense of bearing up, to elevate, to deliver\nfrom, &c. A few instances of its use will suffice. _Exod._ i. 11: \u201cTo\nafflict them with their _burthens_,\u201d \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e1\u05b4\u05d1\u05b0\u05dc\u05b9\u05ea\u05b8\u0591\u05dd. _Ps._ lxxxi. 7: \u201cI\ndelivered \u05de\u05b4\u05e1\u05b6\u05bc\u05a3\u05d1\u05b6\u05dc thee.\u201d cxliv. 14: \u201cThat our oxen may be strong to\n_labour_,\u201d \u05de\u05b0\u05bd\u05e1\u05bb\u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05ab\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd. The Hebrews had thus several ways by which\nthey could express the idea _labour_ accompanied with different\nadjective qualities. So the word \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_ may express the idea\n_labour_; but when so, it is always _slave-labour_, the labour peculiar\nto, or performed by a slave as in _Isa._ xix. 9: \u201cThey that _work_\n\u05e2\u05b9\u05bd\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05a5\u05d9 in fine flax.\u201d The meaning is, they that _labour_ or slave\nthemselves in fine flax. The working in fine flax was _slave-labour_. If\nit were good English for us to say, _they that slave in fine flax_, it\nwould be exactly what the prophet did say in this passage. So in _Exod._\nxx. 9: \u201cSix days shalt thou _labour_ and _do all thy work_.\u201d Here labour\nis translated from _ebed_ \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u0594\u05d3\u05ae, as a verb \u201c_do_\u201d is from\n\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05b4\u05a3\u05ad\u05d9\u05ea\u05b8 and \u201c_work_\u201d from \u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b7\u05d0\u05d1\u05b0\u05ea\u05b0\u05a5\u05da\u05b8. The literal meaning of this\nis\u2014Six days shalt thou slave and labour all thy work;\u2014or, more\nplainly\u2014Six days shalt thou slave thyself (_i.e._ do slave labour) and\n\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05b4\u05a3\u05ad\u05d9\u05ea\u05b8 _labour_, or make all thy \u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b7\u05d0\u05d1\u05b0\u05ea\u05b0\u05a5\u05da\u05b8 particular,\naccustomed, professional or usual work or labour. This command is\naddressed to all mankind, and the propriety of it, as here explained,\nwill be seen in the succeeding verse. \u201cBut the seventh day is the\nSabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do \u05ea\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05e9\u05b6\u05c2\u05a3\u05d4 _any\nwork_ \u05db\u05b8\u05dc\u05be\u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b8\u05d0\u05db\u05b8\u059c\u05d4\u05a1 thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy\nman-servant, (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8, _ebeddeka_, _slave_.)\u201d So, then, if this\nparticular word had not been used, we could not have said that the\ncommand applied to slaves.\n\nBut the Hebrews had a way of expressing the idea of labour alone,\nassociated with the idea of industry as its adjective quality: Should I\nsay; By your hands you shall be sustained, the idea would be that you\nshall be sustained by your labour; that is, your personal industry. So\nthe Hebrews used the words \u05e2\u05b7\u05dc\u05be\u05d9\u05b8\u05d3 _el yod_, which means \u201c_by hand_,\u201d\nand is used to mean labour. Thus, _Prov._ xiii. 11: \u201cHe that gathereth\nby vanity shall be diminished, but he that gathereth by _labour_\n(\u05e2\u05b7\u05dc\u05be\u05d9\u05b8\u05a3\u05d3 _by hand_, _i. e._ by his own industry) shall increase.\u201d Is it\nnot clear, then, that the Hebrews stood in no need of the word _ebed_ to\nmean labour generally. They did use it to mean slave-labour, and\nslave-labour alone, as we shall more fully see hereafter.\n\nThis language enabled its writers to express the distinctive shades of\nmeaning\u2014those adjective qualities associated with the idea _labour_.\nThese facts may appear to the mere English scholar as matters of no\nimportance\u2014not worth investigation. But, touching the Hebrew use of this\nword \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _ebed_ and its compounds, as it affects and expresses the\ninstitution of slavery, amid the eras of Divine inspiration, we hope to\nbe sustained in the consideration of its very great importance.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IV.\n\nSome of the lexicons say that this root \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_ means also\n_worship_, to _worship_ God, or idols, &c., without any connection\nwith the idea of slavery. In _Gen._ xxii. 5: \u201cAnd I and the lad will\ngo yonder and _worship_;\u201d here, worship is from \u05d5\u05b0\u05e0\u05b4\u05a5\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05b6\u0596\u05d4,\nfrom the root \u05e9\u05c1\u05d7\u05d4 _shahah_, which means to bow down. xxiii. 12:\n\u201c_And_ Abraham _bowed down himself_ before the people of the Lord,\u201d\n_bowed down himself_ \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05d7\u05d5\u05bc\u0599. xlvii. 31: \u201c_And_ Israel bowed\nhimself upon the bed\u2019s head,\u201d \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05d5\u05bc. _Exod._ iv. 31: \u201cThen\nthey bowed their heads and worshipped,\u201d \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05a5\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc. This\nroot, like all others, takes upon itself a change of shape,\naccording to the condition in which it is used. We will present a\nfew instances of its application in Hebrew. _Exod._ xi. 8: \u201cAnd bow\ndown themselves unto me,\u201d \u05d5\u05b0\u05d4\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05d5\u05bc. xx. 5: \u201c_Thou shalt not\nbow down thyself_ \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05b6\u05a5\u05a3\u05d4 _unto them_.\u201d xxxiii. 10: \u201cAnd\nthe people rose up and _worshipped_,\u201d \u05d5\u05b0\u05d4\u05b4\u05a5\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u0594\u05d5\u05bc. _Deut._\nxxvi. 10: \u201cAnd _worship_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05d9\u05b4\u05b4\u05bc\u05bd\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05b4\u0594\u05d9\u05ea\u05b8 before the Lord thy\nGod.\u201d _Josh._ v. 14: \u201cAnd Joshua fell on his face to the earth and\ndid _worship_,\u201d \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u0594\u05d7\u0597\u05d5\u05bc. 1 _Sam._ xv. 30: \u201cThat I may\n_worship_ \u05d5\u05b4\u05d4\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05b5\u0596\u05d9\u05ea\u05b4\u05d9 the Lord thy God.\u201d 31: \u201cAnd Saul\nworshipped \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05d5\u05bc the Lord.\u201d 2 _Sam._ i. 2: \u201cThat he fell\nto the earth and did _obeisance_,\u201d \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05d5\u05bc. xiv. 33: \u201cAnd\n_bowed himself_ \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05d7\u05d5\u05bc on his face to the ground before the\nking.\u201d 1 _Kings_ i. 23: \u201cHe _bowed himself_ \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05d5\u05bc before\nthe king with his face to the ground.\u201d 2 _Kings_ v. 18: \u201cWhen my\n_master_ goeth into the house of Rimmon to _worship_\n\u05dc\u05b0\u05d4\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d7\u05b2\u0599\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea there, * * * and I bow myself \u05d5\u05b0\u05d4\u05b4\u05bd\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05b5\u05d9\u05ea\u05b4\u05d9\nin the house of Rimmon, * * * _when I bow myself down_\n\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d4\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05b8\u05d9\u05b8\u05ea\u05b4\u05d9 in the house of Rimmon.\u201d xviii. 22: \u201cYe shall\nworship \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u0596\u05d5\u05bc before the altar of Jerusalem.\u201d xix. 37:\n\u201cAnd it came to pass as he was _worshipping_ \u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05b6\u05d4 in the\nhouse of Nishrosh, his God.\u201d _Job_ i. 20: \u201cThen Job arose and fell\ndown upon the ground and _worshipped_,\u201d \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05d7\u05d5\u05bc. _Ezek._\nviii. 16: \u201cAnd they _worshipped_ \u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05d4\u05b2\u05d5\u05b4\u05d9\u05d4\u05b6\u05a5\u05dd the sun towards the east.\u201d\n\nBefore we close our examples, let us notice how the Hebrews applied this\nword in poetry. _Ps._ xlv. 12 (11 of the English text): \u201cWorship\n\u05d5\u05b0\u05d4\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05b4\u05d9 thou him,\u201d xcix. 5: \u201cExalt ye the Lord our God, and\n_worship_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05ad\u05d4\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05d5\u05bc at his footstool.\u201d cvi. 19: \u201cThey made a\ncalf in Horeb and worshipped \u05d4\u05b4\u05a5\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u0596\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05d5\u05bc the molten image.\u201d xcvii.\n7: \u201cConfounded be all they that _serve_ (\u05e2\u05b9\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9 slave themselves to)\ngraven images; that boast themselves of idols: _worship_ \u05d4\u05b4\u05bd\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05d5\u05bc\nhim, all ye gods.\u201d In this instance, the word _serve_ associates with\nthe idea of slavery, as does the original; but the _worship_ with that\nof reverence. Both words occurring in the same sentence, will give us\nsome idea of their different uses; yet some think this word in such\ninstances synonymous with the word worship, notwithstanding the Hebrew\nwriters thought differently; yet true it is, this word is sometimes used\n(as it were by figure) to express humility, subserviency, and\ndevotedness of the true _worshipper_. In the same manner, St. Paul\nexpresses the idea, when he says, that he is the _doulos_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2,\nslave) of Jesus Christ. In an analogous sense, the Arabic words \u0647\u064e\u0644\u064e\u0651\n_hel_ and \u0647\u064e\u0644\u0651\u0644\u064e _hallel_, Hebrew \u05d4\u05b7\u05dc\u05b5\u05bc\u05dc _hallal_, are used to mean\nworship, &c. _Ps._ cl.: \u201cPraise ye the Lord, praise God in his\nsanctuary,\u201d &c., where this word is in frequent use, and from which our\nword _hallelujah_ has arisen. Also the Arabic word \u0647\u064e\u0648\u0652\u062f\u064c _h\u014dd_, Hebrew\n\u05d4\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3 _h\u014dd_, is in somewhat similar use: _Ps._ cxxxvi. 1, 2, 3, all\ncommencing, \u201cO give thanks to the Lord,\u201d meaning glory, majesty, or\ndignity to the Lord, as the worship of the Almighty. We trust no one has\never found the word _ebed_ used in such a sense.\n\nBut it is said that \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u05b8\u05ea _avoda_ means implements, utensils,\nappurtenances, (see _Gessenius_,) and _Num._ iii. 26, 31, and 36, is\nquoted in proof: \u201cAnd the hangings of the court and the curtains for the\ndoor of the court, which is by the tabernacle, and by the altar round\nabout, and the cords of it, for all the _service_ thereof.\u201d _Service_ is\ntranslated from \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05bd\u05d3\u05b8\u05ea\u05d5\u05b9 _avodatho_. The word, as here used, means\n_slave-labour_, and might well have been translated, \u201cFor all the\nslave-labour thereof,\u201d _i. e._ of the tabernacle. We cannot perceive\nthat it means the hanging of the court, or the curtains, or cords. The\nother instances quoted are of the same character, and we dismiss their\nconsideration, asking the passages to be read.\n\nBut it is said, to _minister_, to _minister unto_, is sometimes\ntranslated to the word _ebed_. 1 _Kings_ xix. 21: \u201cThen he arose and\nwent unto Elijah, and _ministered_ \u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05d9\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05b5\u05bd\u05d4\u05d5\u05bc unto him.\u201d The\nword is from the root \u05e9\u05b5\u05c1\u05e8\u05b5\u05ea _shereth_, and means to wait upon, to\nattend to, &c., distinct from the idea of slavery. In _Matt._ iv. 11:\n\u201cThen the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and _ministered_\n(\u03b4\u03b9\u03b7\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03bd, _diekonoun_) unto him.\u201d This Greek word, we deem, would be\na good translation of this word from Hebrew into Greek. This word is\nused in _Num._ iii. 6: \u201cThat they may _minister_ unto him.\u201d 31:\n\u201cWherewith they may _minister_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05e9\u05b5\u05bd\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u0596\u05d5\u05bc unto it.\u201d iv. 12: \u201cAnd\nthey shall take all the instruments of ministry \u05d5\u05b0\u05e9\u05b5\u05bd\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05d5\u05bc wherewith\nthey _minister_.\u201d 14: \u201cWherewith they _minister_ about it.\u201d xviii. 2:\n\u201cThat they may be joined unto thee and _minister_ \u05d5\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05e9\u05b8\u05bd\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u0591\u05d5\u05bc\u05da\u05b8\u05a9\nunto thee.\u201d 1 _Kings_ i. 4: \u201cAnd the damsel was very fair, and\ncherished the king and _ministered_ \u05d5\u05b7\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05a3\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05b5\u0594\u05d4\u05d5\u05bc to him.\u201d 15:\n\u201cThe Shunammite _ministered_ \u05de\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b7\u0596\u05ea unto the king.\u201d If the word\n_ebed_ had been used, it would have shown that she was a _slave_. The\nsame word is continued to be used to mean _minister_. In 1 _Sam._ ii.\n11: \u201cAnd the child did _minister_ unto the Lord before Eli.\u201d 18: \u201cBut\nSamuel _ministered_ \u05de\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b5\u05ea before the Lord, being a child.\u201d iii. 1:\n\u201cAnd the child Samuel _ministered_ \u05de\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05a3\u05e8\u05b5\u05a5\u05ea unto the Lord before\nEli.\u201d 2 _Sam._ xiii. 17: \u201cThen he called his servant (\u05e0\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05e8\u05d5\u05b9 _his\nyoung man_) that _ministered_ \u05de\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05a3\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u0594\u05d5\u05b9 unto him.\u201d Now, had the\n_ebed_ been here used instead of this word, as a verb, in the required\nmood and tense, &c., it would have been proof that the young man was a\nslave. But, in case the word _ebed_, as a noun, had been used, instead\nof \u05e0\u05e2\u05e8 _nar_, then this word might have been used as it is, without\naffecting the slave character of the servant. 1 _Kings_ x. 5: \u201cAnd the\nsitting of his servants, (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05d9\u05d5\u05a9 _slaves_,) and the attendance of\nhis ministers,\u201d \u05de\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05d9\u059c\u05d5.\n\nThis passage shows with great distinctness the different use and meaning\nof the words _ebed_ and _shereth_, between those who _ministered_ unto\nhim, and those who did slave-labour, between the minister and the slave\nand so we ever find the distinct uses and meanings of these words. See\n_Exod._ xxviii. 43: \u201cOr when they come near unto the altar to _minister_\n\u05dc\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b5\u05a3\u05ea in the holy place.\u201d _Deut._ x. 8: \u201cTo stand before the Lord to\n_minister_ \u05dc\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05bd\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05d5\u05b9\u0599 unto him.\u201d xviii. 5: \u201cFor the Lord thy God hath\nchosen him out of all thy tribes to stand to _minister_ \u05dc\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b5\u05ea in the\nname of the Lord, him and his sons for ever.\u201d 1 _Kings_ viii. 11: \u201cSo\nthat the priests could not stand to _minister_ \u05dc\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b5\u0596\u05ea because of the\ncloud.\u201d 2 _Kings_ xxv. 14: \u201cAnd all the vessels of brass wherewith they\n_ministered_, \u05d9\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05bd\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05d5\u05bc, took they away.\u201d 2 _Chron._ xxiv. 14: \u201c Even\nvessels to _minister_,\u201d \u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b5\u05ea. _Neh._ x. 36 (the 27th of the Hebrew\ntext): \u201cUnto the priests that _minister_ in the house of God.\u201d 39 (the\n40th of the Hebrew text): \u201cAnd the priests that _minister_,\u201d\n\u05d4\u05b7\u05a5\u05de\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05a3\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u0594\u05d9\u05dd. _Isa._ lx. 7: \u201cThe rams of Nebaioth shall _minister_\n\u05d9\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05bd\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u0591\u05d5\u05bc\u05e0\u05b6\u05da\u05b0 unto thee.\u201d Let it be noticed that the word _strangers_\nis translated from the word \u05e0\u05b5\u05db\u05b8\u05e8 _nechar_. The word is of Arabic\nderivation from _eker_, and has a privative sense, as _nescivit_,\n_abrogavit_, _improbavit_. Hence, the Hebrews used it to mean _strange_,\n_foreign_, and sometimes _false_, as in _Deut._ xxxii. 12: \u201cNo strange\n(_false_) God with him.\u201d _Mal._ ii. 11: \u201cThe daughter of a _strange_\n(_false_) God.\u201d And this word was used to mean the _strangers_,\nidolaters, and rejected people, out of whom the Hebrews were allowed to\nmake slaves, and therefore it was used in _Gen._ xvii. 12: \u201cOr bought\nwith thy money of any stranger (\u05e0\u05b5\u05db\u05b8\u0594\u05e8 _neker_) which is not of thy\nseed.\u201d And therefore the propriety of the use of this word in the\ndescription of those who should be their drudges and slates, is\nbeautifully expressed by the idea of building up their walls, as here\nexpressed by the prophet. But the idea of the kings _ministering_, is as\nbefore, from the root, _shereth_. Many more examples of the use of this\nword might be quoted; but we trust the foregoing are sufficient to\nestablish its meaning to be altogether different and distinct from any\nuse of the word _ebed_. Yet, there are in the received translation of\nthe holy books, a few instances where this word is translated\nerroneously, as though it were a synonyme of the word _ebed_.\n\nIn _Num._ xi. 28, \u201cAnd Joshua the son of Nun, the _servant_ of Moses,\u201d\nthe word servant is translated from \u05de\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b5\u05a5\u05ea, and should have been the\n_minister_ of Moses. In _Exod._ xxiv. 13: \u201cMoses rose up and Joshua his\n_minister_\u201d \u05de\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05bd\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u0591\u05d5\u05b9. In this last quotation, _minister_ is\ncorrectly translated from the word as above, proving the error in\nNumbers. A similar error occurs also in _Ezek._ xx. 32; it reads thus:\n\u201cAnd that which cometh into your mind shall not be at all that ye say,\nWe will be as the heathen, as the families of the country to _serve_\n\u05dc\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05e8\u05b5\u0596\u05ea wood and stone.\u201d Serve is translated from as above, and should\nhave been _to minister unto wood and stone_. A like error occurs in\n_Exod._ xxxiii. 11: \u201cBut his _servant_ \u05d5\u05bc\u05de\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05bd\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05d5\u05b9 Joshua,\u201d should\nhave been rendered, \u201chis _minister_ Joshua.\u201d So, also, in _Num._ iv. 47,\nthe word _ebed_ is translated as a synonyme of _sherath_. The passage\nreads thus: \u201c_From thirty years old and upward, even unto fifty years\nold_, every one that comes to do the service of the ministry, and the\nservice of the burden in the tabernacle of the congregation.\u201d In this\npassage, the word _ebed_, with affixes, is used four times\nconsecutively, and immediately followed by the word _massa_, which we\nhave before seen means _labour_, with the idea of the burden of labour\naltogether predominating.\n\nIn the translation, it is plain to see that one of these words is\ntotally left out, which, we suppose, no one will pretend is not an\nerror. The translation made of these five words at the Theological\nCollege at Andover, is far more correct than the received version. It is\nthus: \u201c_to perform the business of the service and the business of the\nburden_,\u201d &c. Yet this is not the language of the original, which reads\nthus: \u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05a8\u05d3 \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u05b7\u05a7\u05ea \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u05b8\u059b\u05d4 \u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u05b7\u05a5\u05ea \u05de\u05b7\u05e9\u05b8\u05bc\u05c2\u0596\u05d0.\n\nIf our proposition is correct, that the word _ebed_ is never used in\nHebrew expression unassociated with the idea of slavery, then this\npassage from Numbers should read: \u201cFrom thirty years old and upwards,\neven to fifty years old, every one that comes to slave in the slavery of\nthe slave labour, and in the _slavery_ of the burdens of the tabernacle\nof the congregation.\u201d We agree that the passage is somewhat difficult to\nrender into English but because we may find some difficulty in making\ngood English, we are not to translate from other words of different\nmeaning from the ones used. The holy penmen said what they meant, and\nsurely meant what they said: there was no double dealing in the spirit\nof Jehovah, who dictated to them. But that translators should have, in\nsome few instances, mistaken or confounded the use of one word, is not\nto be thought strange. Taking into view the volume of the holy books, it\nis truly wonderful that greater errors were not committed. And we take\noccasion here to remark, that, of all the ideas, qualities, and actions,\ngiven in definition of the word _ebed_, unassociated with the idea of\nslavery, upon examination of the language, we shall find graphic symbols\nrepresenting their phonetic signs, distinct from the idea of _slavery_,\nas we have these already examined.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON V.\n\nTo show more clearly that the word \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_ is never used in Hebrew\nexpression unassociated with the idea of slavery, we now propose to\nexamine that word as used by the Hebrew writers in the holy books. Our\nwords SERVANT, servitude, service, &c. are all derived from the Roman\nword SERVUS, which meant a SLAVE; and our word _servant_, when first\nintroduced into our language, as absolutely meant a slave as now does\nthat term itself, and even now fully retains that meaning, where the\nEnglish language and slavery coexist. The oriental scholar (and let him\nbe invited to examine) will perceive that the word \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_ was\ncommon to all the Shemitic tribes, and almost with the same phonetic\nparticulars; but as their figures representing the same phonetic power\nwere quite dissimilar, we think it a proof, almost demonstration, that\nthe word \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_ was used as a phonetic symbol by them long before\nany of those languages were written. This circumstance shows the extreme\nantiquity of the word; and if we succeed to establish the fact, that\nthis word meant nothing but what is now meant by the word _slave_, we\nshall also have established the extreme antiquity of the thing itself. A\n_word_ means nothing, until it is by some means agreed what it shall\nrepresent, what idea, or association of ideas it shall excite in the\nmind. Hence, it not unfrequently occurs that a thing may be better\ndescribed by paraphrasis than by the expression of a single term. In\n_Gen._ xii. 5: \u201cAnd Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother\u2019s\nson, and their substance that they had gathered, and the _souls that\nthey had gotten in Haran_.\u201d The latter clause of this sentence is from\nthis Hebrew expression, \u05d5\u05b0\u05d0\u05b6\u05ea\u05be\u05d4\u05b7\u05e0\u05b6\u05bc\u0596\u05e4\u05b6\u05e9\u05c1 \u05d0\u05b2\u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05e8\u05be\u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05c2\u05a3\u05d5\u05bc \u05d1\u05b0\u05b9\u05d7\u05b8\u05e8\u05b8\u0591\u05df, which\nis correctly translated in the Andover lexicon, \u201cThe souls they had\nacquired in Haran.\u201d Every one knows that the things here meant are\n_slaves_. But, when the scholar comes to examine the power of the\nlanguage of this Hebrew paraphrasis, he will discover three incident\nattendants. \u05d4\u05b7\u05e0\u05b6\u05bc\u05e4\u05b6\u05e9\u05c1 _hannephesh_, translated souls, also carries with\nit the idea a living soul, to have life, the life itself, the living\nprinciple, and is so translated in many places. A slave, therefore, must\nhave life: when dead, the condition ceases. In the same way, the\nsentence expresses the idea of acquiring property by purchase, or any\nother way in which property may be acquired so as to be property. The\nthree incidents then are life, a capacity of being acquired, and, when\nso acquired, property. All this could not have been expressed by the\nsingle term \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, only as it is made the representative of this\ncomplex idea: and God has no doubt caused this passage to be on record\nat this early period, that these incidents should finally come to the\nknowledge of all men. A somewhat similar expression is used in _Rev._\nxviii. 13. Every one knows that Babylon had been a great slave-market.\nSt. John, after naming the various articles of her merchandise, adds \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\n\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd, \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b7\u03bd, _kai ton s\u014dmat\u014dn, kai t\u0113n psuch\u0113n_, which is\ntranslated, \u201c_slaves and souls of men_:\u201d \u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd does not mean slaves,\nbut a dead body, and is so used by Homer, Xenophon, and by the New\nTestament itself; but, when united with \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b7\u03bd \u03c8\u03c5\u03c7\u03b7\u03bd, means slaves\nalone. The phrase \u201csouls of men,\u201d therefore, in the translation, is\nsurplusage. But the xii. 16 of _Genesis_ is more particular in giving\nthe different kinds of property and their appropriate names. \u201cAnd he had\nsheep and oxen, and he-asses, and men-servants (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _abadim_), and\nmaid-servants, and she-asses, and camels.\u201d The word _men-servants_ is\ntranslated from the plural of \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_. Here we find the\nconventional term expressing the complex idea, previously expressed by\nthe phrase \u201c souls gotten,\u201d persons in life, subject to be purchased,\nand when purchased, property, as were sheep and oxen, and he-asses and\nshe-asses, and camels. In _Gen._ xvii. 9\u201313, we begin to find the law\ninfluencing the conduct of Abraham in the management of this property:\n\u201cAnd God said unto Abram, thou shalt,\u201d &c. 12: \u201cAnd he that is eight\ndays old shall be circumcised,\u201d &c.: \u201cHe that is born in thy house, or\n_bought with money_ of any stranger which is not of thy seed.\u201d 13: \u201cHe\nthat is born in thy house, and he that is _bought with thy money_, must\nneeds be circumcised.\u201d And let it here be remembered that God recognises\nthe possession of this property, by giving directions with his own voice\nconcerning its government. And in _Gen._ xx. 14, we have some account of\nthe origin of Abraham\u2019s title to some portion of this property: \u201cAnd\nAbimelech took sheep and oxen and _men-servants_ (\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9\u05dd _ebedim_, the\nplural of _ebed_), and gave them to Abraham.\u201d xxiv. 35: \u201cAnd the Lord\nhath blessed my master greatly, and he is become great; and he hath\ngiven him flocks and herds, and silver and gold, and _men-servants_ and\nmaid-servants, and camels and asses.\u201d Here the plural of _ebed_ is also\nused. _Such_ is the title by which he possessed this property, described\nas given to him by the Lord. But God had promised that he would bless\nAbraham, _Gen._ xvii. 1: \u201cThe Lord appeared unto Abraham, and said unto\nhim, _I am the Almighty God_.\u201d 2: \u201cAnd I will make my covenant between\nme and thee.\u201d 7: \u201cAnd I will establish my covenant between me and thee,\nand thy seed after thee in their generations, for an everlasting\ncovenant.\u201d 10: \u201cThis is my covenant.\u201d (This covenant extends from the\nbeginning of the 10th to the end of the 14th verse.) One part of this\ncovenant was, that these _ebeds_, translated _men-servants_, whether\nborn in his house or bought with his money of any stranger, should be\ncircumcised. Wherefore, the possession of these _ebeds_ as property\nbecame agreeable to the terms of the covenant, a part of the covenant\nitself\u2014a covenant first proposed and promulgated by the great Jehovah;\nas he styles himself in the covenant, the Almighty God! _Gen._ xxvi. 2:\n\u201cAnd the Lord appeared unto him (Isaac), and said, Go not down into\nEgypt: dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of: sojourn in this\nland, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee.\u201d 4: \u201cAnd I will make\nthy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and I will give unto thy\nseed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the\nearth be blessed.\u201d 13: \u201cAnd the man (Isaac) waxed great, and went\nforward and grew until he became very great.\u201d 14: \u201cFor he had possession\nof flocks, and possession of herds, and great store of _servants_\n(\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05bb\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05bd\u05d4 _abuddah_, _slaves_, a plural formation of _ebed_), and the\nPhilistines envied him.\u201d!!!\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON VI.\n\n_Gen._ xxvii. 29: \u201cLet people serve thee (\u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u05a3\u05d5\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 _be slaves to\nthee_), be lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother\u2019s sons bow down to\nthee; cursed be every one that curseth thee, and blessed be he that\nblesseth thee.\u201d Let us notice the conformity of this passage with _Gen._\nxxv. 23: \u201cAnd the Lord said unto her, two nations are in thy womb, and\ntwo manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels, and the one\npeople shall be stronger than the other people, and the elder shall\nserve (\u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05a5\u05d3 _be a slave to_) the younger.\u201d _Gen._ xxx. 43: \u201cAnd the\nman (Jacob) increased exceedingly, and had much cattle, and\nmaid-servants, and _men-servants_ (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u0594\u05d9\u05dd the plural of _ebed_),\nand camels and asses.\u201d _Exod._ xx. 1, 2, 9, 10, 17: \u201cAnd God spake all\nthese words, saying,\u201d 2: \u201cI am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee\nout of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage\u201d (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u0591\u05dd out\nof _slavery_): 5: \u201cThou shalt not _bow down_ (\u05ea\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05b6\u05d4\u05a3 _worship\nthem_) thyself to them, nor _serve_ (\u05ea\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u0591\u05dd _be a slave to them_)\nthem.\u201d 9: \u201cSix days shalt thou _labour_ (\u05ea\u05bc\u05bd\u05a5\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u0594\u05d3\u0598 _slave thyself_, or\ndo SLAVE-LABOUR) and do (_oso_, _labour or do work_) all thy work,\u201d\n(\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05b4\u05c2\u05d9\u05a3\u05ea\u05b8 all thy accustomed labours.) This command embraces all\nclasses, the slave as well as the most elevated. All men, by the fall of\nAdam, had become subject to slave-labour. 10: \u201cBut the seventh day is\nthe sabbath of the Lord thy God, in it thou shalt not do any work, thou,\nnor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy _man-servant_ (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 thy\n_slave_), this commandment we are directed not to covet any thing that\nis our neighbour\u2019s, including his man-servant and maid-servant. Here the\nsame word \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05a4\u05d5\u05b9 is also used. _Exod._ xxi. 1: \u201cNow these are the\njudgments which thou shalt set before them.\u201d 2: \u201cIf thou buy a Hebrew\n_servant_ (\u05e2\u05b6\u05a3\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_), (\u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u0591\u05d3 _shall slave himself_),\u201d 5: \u201cAnd\nif the _servant_ (\u05d4\u05b8\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ha ebed_, _slave_) shall plainly say, I\nlove,\u201d &c. _Exod._ xxi. 7: \u201cShe shall not go out as the _men-servants_\ndo.\u201d (\u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05dd the plural is here used.) 20: \u201cIf a man smite his\n_servant_ \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9 or his maid with a rod, and he die under his hand, he\nshall be surely punished: for he is his money.\u201d 26: \u201cIf a man smite the\neye of his _servant_,\u201d \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u059b\u05d5\u05b9. 27: \u201c If he smite out his\n_man-servant\u2019s_ tooth,\u201d \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u059b\u05d5\u05b9. 32 \u201cIf the ox shall push the\n_man-servant_ \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 or _maid-servant_, he shall give unto their master\nthirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.\u201d\n\n_Lev._ xxv. 44: \u201cBoth thy _bond-men_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05da\u05b8 and thy bond-maids which\nthou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you, of\nthem shall ye buy _bond-men_,\u201d (\u05e2\u05b6\u05a5\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_.) 45: \u201cMoreover, of the\nchildren of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye\nbuy, and of their families that are with you, which they beget in your\nland, and they shall be your possession.\u201d 46: \u201cAnd ye shall take them as\nan inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a\npossession they shall be your _bond-men_ \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u0596\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u0591\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc for ever.\u201d\n\n_Deut._ v. 14: \u201cBut the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God;\nin it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter,\nnor thy _man-servant_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8, nor thy maid-servant, that thy\n_man-servant_ and thy maid-servant may rest as well as thou.\u201d 15: \u201cAnd\nremember that thou wast a _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b6\u05a3\u05d1\u05b6\u05a5\u05d3 _ebed_) in the land of\nEgypt.\u201d 21 (18th of Hebrew text): \u201cNeither shalt thou covet thy\nneighbour\u2019s house, his field, or his _man-servant_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05b9\u05d5, or his\nmaid-servant.\u201d _Deut._ xii. 12: \u201cAnd ye shall rejoice before the Lord\nyour God, ye, and your sons, and your daughters, and your _men-servants_\n(\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9\u05db\u05b6\u05dd a plural form of _ebed_), thy son, and thy daughter, and\n_thy man-servant_,\u201d \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8. _Deut._ xv. 12: \u201cIf thy brother, a\nHebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and _serve_\n\u05d5\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05da\u05b8\u0596 thee six years.\u201d 15: \u201cAnd thou shalt remember that thou\nwast a _bond-man_ (\u05e2\u05b6\u05a3\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_) in the land of Egypt.\u201d 17: \u201cAnd he\nshall be thy servant (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_) for ever.\u201d _Deut._ xvi. 11: \u201cAnd\nthou shalt rejoice before the Lord thy God, thou, and thy son, and thy\ndaughter, and thy _man-servant_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8, and thy maid-servant, and\nthe Levite that is within thy gates, and the stranger, and the\nfatherless, and the widow, that are among you.\u201d 12: \u201cAnd thou shalt\nremember that thou wast a _bond-man_ (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_) in Egypt.\u201d 14: \u201cAnd\nthou shalt rejoice in thy feast, thou, and thy son, and thy daughter,\nand thy _man-servant_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8\u05a3, and thy _maid-servant_, and the\nLevite, the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow.\u201d _Deut._ xx.\n10: \u201cWhen thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then\nproclaim peace unto it.\u201d 11: \u201cAnd it shall be if it make thee an answer\nof peace and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people found\ntherein shall be _tributaries_ (\u05dc\u05b8\u05de\u05b7\u0596\u05e1 _lamas_, afflicted, cast down, to\npay tribute, &c.), and they shall _serve_ (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 _be thy\nslaves_) thee.\u201d _Deut._ xxiii. 9\u201317 contains certain laws to be observed\nin time of war with their enemies, &c., one of which is, that a slave\nescaped to them from the enemy should not be restored, &c. _Deut._\nxxiii. 16 (15th of the English text): \u201cThou shalt not deliver unto his\nmaster the _servant_,\u201d (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, _slave_.) xxiv. 18: \u201cBut thou\nshalt remember that thou wast a _bond-man_,\u201d (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, _slave_.)\nwast a bond-man,\u201d \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _Gen._ ix. 25: \u201cAnd he said, Cursed be Canaan, a\n_servant_ of _servants_ (_ebed-ebedim_) shall he be unto his brethren.\u201d\n26: \u201cAnd he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem, and Canaan shall be\nhis _servant_,\u201d (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_.) Many more instances of a similar use of\nthis word might be selected from the holy books; some of which we hope\nto notice in the progress of our study. Such, then, was the Hebrew use\nof the word, to mean slave, a person purchased or otherwise acquired,\nand the unquestionable _property_ of the master. Such then being the\ncondition of the _ebed_, slave, it is evident that he could not be\ncontented and happy, in case he had ambition to gratify, with hopes and\nprospects before him adverse from those of his master; his whole earthly\nfelicities are bound up in his master\u2019s welfare and prosperity; like an\nindividual of an army, he feels that the elevation, the brilliancy of\nthe commander is reflected upon him; and with a Christian spirit, he\nobeys his master in all things, \u201cnot with eye-service, but with\nsingleness of heart, fearing God.\u201d See _Col._ iii. 22. In such a state\nof mind, the slave finds no unhappiness in his condition, but joy and\ngladness; and with the slave of Abraham, he implores Jehovah: \u201c_O Lord\nGod of my master Abraham! I pray thee send me good speed this day, and\nshow kindness unto my master Abraham_: Blessed be the Lord God of my\nmaster Abraham, who hath not left destitute my master of his mercy and\ntruth.\u201d _Gen._ xxiv. 12 and 27. Expressive of a character of perfect\ndevotedness, humility, and obedience. The term _ebed_ might well be\nborrowed to express the earnest devotion of a worshipper of Jehovah, and\nis so often used in connection with the patriarchs, Moses, David, and\nthe prophets. The term thus used expresses the quality of their\ndevotedness and obedience, and not necessarily the quality of the\nindividual. In this sense, the apostles style themselves the (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9,\n_douloi_) slaves of Jesus Christ; not that they were personally\n_douloi_, but in their devotion and obedience to him, they were what the\n_doulos_ was or should be to his master. It is probable that, in some\nsense, all men feel that in the hand of God they are as clay in the\nhands of the potter; that the great Jehovah overrules and governs all\nthings; that, as existences, they are from and dependent on him: under\nsuch a sense, we sometimes find the term _ebed_ applied, as in the name\n_Obadiah_, _Obadyahu_, the slave of God, and used as a proper noun. But\nsuch compound words are dependent for their meaning upon the complex\nideas of what their primitives signified; and, in a somewhat analogous\nsense, the term _ebed_ is applied to Nebuchadnezzar, lie being in the\nhands of the Almighty, as clay in the hands of the potter, the mere\ninstrument, the fabrication of his hand. There is, however, in the books\nof Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel, a use of this word peculiar to them; but\nwe should recollect that they were educated in the Persian capital and\nemployed in high stations by the Persian monarch. We may therefore well\nexpect some variation in their dialect.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VII.\n\nAnd we may well bring to mind the fact that there are two distinctly\nmarked eras in the Hebrew language. The first ends at the Babylonish\ncaptivity. The Pentateuch and older prophets, Ruth, Samuel, Kings,\nPsalms, and Proverbs, come within this era. The second commences with\nthe return of the Israelites from that captivity, and extends to the\nintroduction of Greek into Palestine, subsequent to the conquests of\nAlexander. The first period may be emphatically called ancient Hebrew;\nand the latter, more modern. The Hebrew of this period is strongly\nmarked by an approximation to the Chaldee and Persian. To this period of\nthe language belong the books of Nehemiah, Ezra, Daniel, Esther, Jonah,\nHaggai, Malachi, Ecclesiastes, and a part of the Psalms; and these works\nwill ever be regarded by the oriental scholar as inferior in classical\nliterature to those of earlier date, notwithstanding their other merits\nof high excellence. But some of the peculiarities of the writings of the\nsecond period are not to be regarded as recent alterations, but as the\nphonetic, unwritten Hebrew of the more remote districts of Palestine\nitself. The variations of this more modern from the ancient Hebrew are\nextremely numerous, both as to the substitution of one word for another,\nbut also as to a change of meaning of the same word; as, for instance,\nthe more ancient would have used the word \u05de\u05b8\u05dc\u05b7\u05da\u05b0 _malak_ to signify a\nking, to rule, &c.; but the more modern have used a word, which, from\nits strong phonetic relation, has evidently been derived from it, \u05e9\u05b8\u05dc\u05b7\u05d8\n_shalat_, to mean _to rule_, &c., and so used _Ps._ cxix. 133, _Eccl._\nii. 19, _Esther_ ix. 1, _Neh._ v. 15, _Dan._ ii. 39, and in many other\nplaces. So also the ancient would use the word \u05d0\u05b8\u05de\u05b7\u05e8 _amar_, to signify\n_to speak_, _to say_; but the more modern uses the same word to signify\n_to command_. What we say is, that we cannot always learn the original\nmeaning of a word from the more modern use of it. We will now notice the\nuse of the ancient word _ebed_ in this more modern dialect of the\nHebrews. In _Ezra_ iv. 19, we find, \u201cAnd that rebellion and sedition\n_have been made_ therein\u201d is translated from \u05de\u05b4\u05d4\u05b0\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _mithabed_. Let\nus examine the circumstances under which this sentence was written.\nRehum had written to the monarch Artaxerxes in opposition to the\nbuilding of the walls of Jerusalem, informing him that it had ever been\na rebellious city, hurtful to kings, &c.; in answer to which, the king\nwrites, \u201cthat the records have been examined, and it is found that this\ncity of old time hath made insurrection against kings, and that\nrebellion and sedition _hath been made therein_.\u201d The Persian monarchs\nwere all absolute; they regarded those whom they conquered as slaves;\nand when they rebelled, they used this word to signify that it was\nslaves who rebelled. Our word _servile_ is somewhat analogous, and might\nvery properly be substituted for it in the foregoing text, thus: \u201cAnd it\nis found, this city of old time hath made insurrection against kings,\nand that there hath been servile rebellion and sedition therein.\u201d When\nwe speak of insurrection, sedition, rebellion, or war with slaves, we\ncall it _servile_, as Artaxerxes did in this case, to show the fact that\nthe war was with slaves. _Ezra_ iv. 24, this word \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9\u05d3\u05b7\u05a3\u05ea is\ntranslated _work_. So in v. 8, \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05a5\u05d9\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u05d0 _work_, vi. 7, \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05d5\u05c4\u05d3\u05b7\u05ad\u05ea\n_work_, to show that the labour was done by _slaves_, or, figuratively,\nthat the _labour_ was intense, devoted, and obedient, as of slaves. vi.\n8: \u05ea\u05b7\u05e2\u05b7\u05c4\u05d1\u05d3\u05b9\u05d5\u05bc\u05df \u201c_Ye shall do._\u201d 12: \u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u0596\u05d3 \u201cLet it be done with\nspeed.\u201d 13: \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc \u201c_So they did speedily._\u201d\n\n      vii. 18: \u05ea\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\u05df }   \u201c_That do_ after the will of your God.\u201d\n\n            and \u05dc\u05b0\u05de\u05b6\u05e2\u05b0\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u0591\u05d3 }   \u201c_To do_ with the rest of the silver and\n                          gold.\u201d\n\n21: \u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u0596\u05d3 \u201cIt be done speedily.\u201d 23: \u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3 \u201cLet it be\ndiligently _done_.\u201d 26: \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3 \u201cWill not _do_.\u201d \u05de\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u0596\u05d3 \u201cLet judgment\n_be executed_ speedily.\u201d These instances of the use of monarch of Persia\nis speaking, who regarded not only the Jews, but all his subjects, as\nslaves. It was the court manner of the eastern monarchs in such decrees\nto throw in occasionally an exclamation of the nature of an imperative\ninterjection, such as, _Slave, attend!_ _Pay attention, slaves!_\n_Listen, slaves!_ &c., all in substance meaning that those to whom the\ndecree is issued should perform it quickly and without further notice.\nAnd we find the same custom existing among them even at this day, and\nsuch is the true sense in which the term is here used. Let us exemplify\nit. _Ezra_ vi. 12: \u201cI, Darius, have made a decree;\u201d then follows the\nPersian adverb \u05d0\u05b8\u05e1\u05b0\u05e4\u05b7\u05bc\u0596\u05e8\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d0 _asepporna_, which means quickly, speedily,\ndiligently, &c.; then the word in question, as before noticed:\n\u201c_quickly, slaves_,\u201d is therefore the literal meaning, _i. e._ what he\nhad decreed they should instantly perform. We do not pretend to say that\ntranslating it _to do_, &c. gives a substantially wrong sense; but it\nseems it may have led lexicographers to an erroneous conception of the\nmeaning of the word. _Jer._ x. 11: \u201cThe gods that have not made the\nheavens and the earth:\u201d _made_ is translated from \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b7\u0591\u0597\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc. If this\nword is the correct reading, the idea of the prophet had regard to the\n_power_, not to the _act_ of a creator,\u2014the gods that have not\n_subjected_, have not placed in _subjection_, as if in slavery to, whose\nlaws do not govern the heavens and the earth. The gods who could not do\nthese things are _not_ gods, and they shall perish. This was the idea of\nthe prophet. But this word is marked in all the best copies with a keri,\nshowing that this reading was suspected by the Jewish scholars to be\nbad; and they supply in the margin the words \u05e4\u05ea\u05d7 \u05db\u05d0\u05ea\u05e0\u05d7, which is at\nleast some proof that they thought its use in this instance unusual; and\nKennecott and De Rossi found these words used instead of \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\u05d5\u05b9 in some\ncopies.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON VIII.\n\nBut we have a sure method by which we may discover what meaning Ezra did\naffix to this word\u2014by examining his use of it in those cases where its\nmeaning cannot be doubtful. See _Ezra_ iv. 11: \u201cThy servants,\u201d\n\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u059b\u05d9\u05af\u05da\u05b0\u05d9\u05da. v. 11: \u201cWe are the servants,\u201d \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05d5\u05b9\u05d4\u05b4\u05d9, having\nrelevance to their devotedness to God. vi. 16 commences with the word\n\u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b7\u05a3\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc, which is omitted in our translation. The sentence should\ncommence thus: \u201c_And the slaves_, the children of Israel, the priests,\u201d\n&c. ix. 9: \u201cFor we were _bondmen_ \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05a3\u05d9\u05dd, yet our God hath not\nforsaken _us in our bondage_,\u201d \u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bb\u05ea\u05b5\u0594\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc. These instances clearly\nshow how Ezra understood this word: notwithstanding his writings were\ntouched with the Persian and Chaldee idioms. A similar result will be\nfound upon the examination of Nehemiah and Daniel. _Neh._ ii. 10 and 19:\n\u201cAnd Tobiah the _servant_ \u05d4\u05b8\u05bc\u05e2\u05b6\u05a3\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3, the Ammonite heard of it\u201d\u2014\u201cAnd\nTobiah the _servant_ \u05d4\u05b8\u05e2\u05b6\u05a3\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3, the Ammonite.\u201d v. 5: \u201cYet now our flesh\nis as the flesh of our brethren, our children as their children: and lo,\nwe bring into _bondage_ (\u05db\u05b9\u05bd\u05a0\u05d1\u05b0\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05d9\u05dd _kovshim_) sons and our daughters\nto be _servants_ (\u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05b9\u05dd _slaves_), and some of our daughters are\nbrought into _bondage_ (\u05e0\u05b4\u05db\u05b0\u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea _subjections_, not necessarily\nslavery) already,\u201d (\u05db\u05b8\u05bc\u05d1\u05b7\u05e9 _kovash_.) The root from which these two\nwords are formed in no sense means slavery, but to reduce, to subdue, to\nhumble; and in this sense is used in _Esther_ vii. 8, and translated\n\u201c_force_.\u201d But this word aids very much in showing what idea was affixed\nto the word _ebed_; and we ask to compare this passage of Nehemiah with\n_Jer._ xxxiv. 8\u201316: \u201cThis is the word that came unto Jeremiah from the\nLord, after that king Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people\nwhich were at Jerusalem, to proclaim liberty unto them; * * * that every\nman should let his _man-servant_, (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u0594\u05d5\u05b9 _male slave_,) and every\nman his maid-servant \u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05e4\u05b0\u05d7\u05b8\u05ea\u059b\u05d5\u05b9, being a Hebrew or Hebrewess, go free;\nthat none should _serve_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05be _slave_) himself of them, to wit, of a\nJew his brother. Now, when all the princes, and all the people which had\nentered into the covenant, heard that every one should let his\n_man-servant_ (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u0594\u05d5\u05b9 _male slave_), and every one his maid-servant,\ngo free, that none _serve themselves_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05be _slave themselves_), of\nthem any more, then they obeyed and let them go. But afterwards they\nturned and caused the _servants_ (\u05d4\u05b8\u05a5\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _ha abadim_, _slaves_),\nand the _hand-maids_, whom they had let go free, to return. Therefore\nthe word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, from the Lord, saying, Thus saith\nthe Lord, the God of Israel, I made a covenant with your fathers in the\nday that I brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, out of the house\nof bond-men (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05dd _ebedim_, _slaves_), saying, At the end of seven\nyears, let go every man his brother a Hebrew, which hath been sold unto\nthee; and when he hath _served_ thee (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b8\u0596\u05d3\u05b0\u05da\u05b8 _slaved for thee_)\nsix years, thou shalt let him go free from thee; but your fathers\nhearkened not unto me, neither inclined their ear. And ye were now\nturned, and had done right in my sight, in proclaiming liberty every man\nto his neighbour; and ye had made a covenant before me in the house\nwhich is called by my name. But ye turned and polluted my name, and\ncaused every man his _servant_, (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9 _ebeddo_, _slave_,) and every\nman his _hand-maid_, whom he had set at liberty at their pleasure, to\nreturn, and brought them into _subjection_ (\u05d5\u05b7\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05db\u05b0\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e9\u05c1\u05a3\u05d5\u05bc) to be unto\nyou for _servants_ (\u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05dd _for slaves_), and for _hand-maids_.\u201d\nThe comparison of these passages proves the fact that Nehemiah and\nJeremiah used the word _ebed_ to mean a slave, without any variation of\nmeaning. Nor will we hold Nehemiah responsible for his word \u05db\u05b8\u05bc\u05d1\u05b7\u05e9\u05c1\n_kavash_, _subjection_, being translated _bondage_. _Neh._ vii. 66, 67,\ngives an account of the captive Israelites that returned from Susa and\nBabylon to Jerusalem. \u201cAnd the whole congregation together was forty and\ntwo thousand three hundred and threescore. Besides their _man-servants_\n(\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9\u05d4\u05b6\u05a4\u05dd _male slaves_), and their maid-servants, of whom there were\nseven thousand three hundred and thirty score.\u201d We trust that so varied,\nparticular, and descriptive are the records left in the holy books\nthrough which we may search out what the Hebrews meant by their use of\nthe word _ebed_ (\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3), that its certainty and definiteness must place\nthe inquiry beyond doubt. But as in this instance the word \u05db\u05b8\u05bc\u05d1\u05b7\u05e9\u05c1\n_kavash_ has been translated _bondage_, it may be well to give a few\nexamples of its use in the holy books, that all may see and know that\nits meaning is totally distinct from that of slavery. _Gen._ i. 28:\n\u201cMultiply and replenish the earth and subdue it,\u201d \u05d5\u05b0\u05db\u05b4\u05d1\u05b0\u05e9\u05bb\u05c1\u05d4\u05b8. _Num._\nxxxii. 22: \u201cAnd the land _be subdued_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05e0\u05b4\u05db\u05b0\u05d1\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05a5\u05d4 before the Lord.\u201d\n29: \u201cAnd the land _shall be subdued_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05e0\u05b4\u05db\u05b0\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05d4 before you.\u201d _Josh._\nxviii. 1: \u201cAnd the land _was subdued_ \u05e0\u05b4\u05db\u05b0\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u0596\u05d4 before them.\u201d 2\n_Sam._ viii. 1: \u201cWhich he _subdued_,\u201d \u05db\u05b4\u05bc\u05d1\u05b5\u05e9\u05c1. \u200e2 _Chron._ ix. 18: \u201cWith\na footstool,\u201d \u05d5\u05b0\u05db\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05e9\u05c1 because a footstool was in the place of\nsubjection. _Zech._ ix. 15: \u201cAnd _subdue_ \u05d5\u05b0\u05db\u05b8\u05a5\u05d1\u05b0\u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\u05bc with\nsling-stones.\u201d _Micah_ vii. 19: \u201cHe will _subdue_ \u05d9\u05b4\u05db\u05b0\u0596\u05d1\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05e9\u05c1 our\niniquities.\u201d The foregoing examples, we trust, are sufficient to\ndisabuse the mind of the idea of any synonyme of meaning of these two\nwords.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON IX.\n\nWE propose to examine the Hebrew use of the word _ebed_ in the 5th and\n15th of the second chapter of Genesis: \u201cIn that day the Lord God made\nthe earth, and the heavens, and every plant of the field before it grew;\nfor the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was\nnot a man _to till_ \u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u0596\u05d3 the ground.\u201d _To till_ is here translated\nfrom this word _ebed_, with the affix of the preposition \u05dc. This is the\nfirst instance in which the word is used in the holy book; and it may\nseem extremely strange that the writers of these books found its use\nnecessary in their description of events even before the creation of\nman. It is not our business to draw out theological doctrine unconnected\nwith the subject of our present inquiry; but we suppose it will not be\ndisputed that the great Jehovah as well knew, before he created the\nheavens and the earth, and man upon the earth, all and every particular\nof what would happen, as at any subsequent time: with him, a day is as a\nthousand years, and a thousand years as one day. _We_ may behold the\nbirth, maturity, and death of some animalcula, in a day or in an hour.\nBut, with him the succession of generations, of the animal life of a\nthousand years, pass in instantaneous and present view. _Time_\nappertains alone to mortals. _He_ saw the most ultimate condition of\nman; and the earth and the herb were made to suit it. But from the\nmanner of the expression of the text, may we not conclude that the herb,\nalthough made, would not grow until man was created, and in the\ncondition _to till_ (\u05dc\u05b7\u05a5\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u0596\u05d3 _to slave_) the ground? The support of\nthe animal world, independent of man, is spontaneously presented before\nthem: not so with man in his fallen state. \u201cHe sendeth the springs into\nthe valley, which run among the hills. They give drink to every beast of\nthe field: the wild asses quench their thirst. By them shall the fowls\nof heaven have their habitation, which sing among the branches. He\nwatereth the hills from his chambers; the earth is satisfied with the\nfruit of thy works. He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and\nherb _for the service_ (\u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u05b7\u05a3\u05ea _for the slavery_) of man: that he\nmay bring forth food out of the earth,\u201d _Ps._ civ. 10\u201314. The second\ninstance in which this word is used is in _Gen._ ii. 15: \u201cAnd the Lord\nGod took the man and put him into the garden of _Eden to dress it_, and\nto keep it.\u201d _To dress it_ is translated from this word \u05dc\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u0596\u05d4\u05bc.\nThere is certainly much obscurity in the use of the word in this\ninstance. Professor Stuart, of Andover, supposes that it inculcates the\ndoctrine that _labour_ was imposed on man in the paradisiacal state;\nconsequently, that labour was no part of the curse which followed the\napostacy. (See his Chreestomathy, page 105.) This view excludes the idea\nthat the word, as here used, is associated with the idea of slavery, and\nthat, if, in the interchange of language, although the idea of labour\nmay predominate, nevertheless, it must be _slave_ labour. Our mind does\nnot yield its assent to his position. We had associated with our idea of\nthis paradise the most perfect heaven, the dwelling-place of Jehovah!!\nand that the generations of man, when guided and governed by Divine\nmercy in such a manner that we could be happy therein, that it would yet\nbecome our ultimate home,\u2014(\u201cHe that hath an ear, let him hear what the\nSpirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to\neat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God,\u201d\n_Rev._ ii. 7,)\u2014and that the humble worshipper of Jehovah while in a\nstate of progressive preparedness, would therefore cry out with the\nPsalmist, \u201cUnto thee I lift mine eyes, O thou that dwellest in the\nheavens! Behold, as the eyes of _servants_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05a0\u05d9\u05dd _male slaves_)\nlook unto the hand of their master; and as the eyes of a _maiden_\n(\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05e4\u05b0\u05d7\u05b8\u05d4\u05ae _shiphhah_, _female slave_) unto the hand of her mistress, so\nour eyes wait upon the Lord our God until he have mercy upon us.\u201d _Ps._\ncxxiii. 1, 2. If then the paradise of old was the type of the paradise\neternal, it would seem that the labour of the _ebed_ was excluded\ntherefrom: \u201cBecause the creature itself also shall be delivered from the\n_bondage_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, _slavery_) of corruption into the glorious liberty\nof the children of God.\u201d _Rom._ viii. 21. And for this very good reason,\nthat slavery, the consequent of sin, could never find entrance there:\nregeneration is therefore indispensable.\n\n\u201cIt strikes me that the use of the verb (\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3 _abad_, presents no\ndifficulty that calls for explanation. The language of inspiration is\nman\u2019s language, though employed by God. The events, facts, things, acts,\nthat preceded man\u2019s creation, must still be described by language and\nterms that _had come into use after man\u2019s creation_. Man must first\nexist before there could be _words_ to be used in conveying knowledge to\nman. A word implying _slavery_ might therefore most reasonably be found\nin a _description_ of things _prior_ to the existence of man, or of\nslavery, which description was written long afterwards by Moses, and in\nlanguage which was in use amongst the men for whom he wrote. When Moses\nwrote, when God inspired him, \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_ was a familiar word.\u201d\n_Extract from manuscript letter of the Rev. J.B. Stratton to the\nauthor._\n\nBut in the pursuance of the chain of thought that first was impressed on\nour mind, we have to remark that the word _Eden_ meant pleasure,\nhappiness. It seems to have been derived from or cognate with the Arabic\nword \u0639\u064e\u062f\u0652\u0646\u064c _aden_, and means softness, gentleness, mildness,\ntenderness, and daintiness, in that language. The Hebrews had also\nanother word from this same root, \u05e2\u05b2\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9 _adi_, to mean ornaments, &c.,\nand \u05e2\u05b2\u05d3\u05b8\u05d9\u05b4\u05df _adain_, to mean luxuriousness and delicate. The word, as\nused in the text before, is applied to a district of country, and\nconfers the adjective qualities to said district, _i. e._ a district of\ncountry of great pleasure and delight. The general boundaries are given\nand described by the naming of its rivers. It was of considerable\nextent, embracing, perhaps, more than the whole of the ancient Armenia.\n\n\u201cAnd a garden was planted eastward in Eden.\u201d Garden is translated from\n\u05d2\u05b7\u05df _gan_. The word is derived from \u05d2\u05b7\u05e0\u05bc\u05df _ganan_. The word means, to\nprotect, protection, a thing protected. The idea expressed by it is\nnot confined to a single walled area; but the two words are often used\ntogether, as if it was intended to convey the idea of the fact that\nthe protection extended to the whole of Eden. And it may be well\nconceived that _innocency_ was its protection. Here cunning art never\nwove its web for the entanglement of its victim. Here no crocodile\ntears enticed sympathy within the reach of harm. Here no vile wretch\never betrayed a brother\u2019s confidence. Here the lion and the lamb might\nhave couched together, and the infant have played with the tiger\u2019s\npaw. We are aware that some modern scholars consider the description\nof the garden of Eden by Moses a mere picture of the mind. Rosenmaeler\nsays that it is on a par with Virgil\u2019s description of the Elysian\nfields. This class of philosophers consider the whole as a fiction:\nbut man had his commencement somewhere, and it is a fact that four\nlarge rivers, answering to the outlines of the general description of\nMoses, do flow from fountain-heads not more than thirty or forty miles\napart, in the central and most elevated region of Armenia. These\nstreams meander through the same countries described by him, and\nexhibit the same mineral productions: nor would it be any thing\nremarkable, if investigation should yet prove that they were all\nindebted to one and the same source. Let us consider then, whether it\nwas not a fact that the garden of Eden was not confined to a little\nplat of ground, but included a whole district of country, embracing\nthe visible sources of the rivers named: a district of country, from\nthe mildness of its climate, fruitfulness, and other causes of\npleasure and delight, exceedingly well adapted to the early residence\nof man. We have therefore no well founded reason to believe that the\naccount given by Moses of the garden of Eden was a fiction,\nindependent of Divine authority. But his account must be understood so\nas to be consistent with itself, and with the facts now existing of\nwhich it speaks. We are not under the necessity of supposing that the\nfelicity of our first parents was confined to the locality named: a\nparadise was to them anywhere. It was their innocence, not the\nlocation, that made it so; and thus they were driven out of paradise,\nperhaps, without a change of location. The use of the word _ebed_ \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3,\nin ii. 15 of _Genesis_, might then well be of the same foreshadowing\nimport as in the first instance of its use, even before the creation\nof man. For, who must not conclude, when man was first placed in\nparadise, that God did not as clearly see his apostasy then, as now?\nBy his wisdom, power, and mercy, all nature was ready-prepared for the\nchange, and poor fallen man, without change of habitation, found that\nhabitation no longer heaven, and commenced his first act of slavery by\nthe vain attempt to hide himself from God and his own contempt. And\nhere, let us remark, _we find the true commencement of slavery_. \u201cAnd\nJesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, whosoever\ncommitteth sin is the _servant_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, _slave_) of sin.\u201d _John_\nviii. 34. _Force_, _disease_, _ruin_, and _death_ were now introduced\nto man. For, \u201cA. _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b8\u0591\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _slave_) will not be corrected by\nwords.\u201d _Prov._ xxix. 19. God had mercifully contrived that he should\nbe forced to action. \u201cHe that _tilleth_ (\u05e2\u05b9\u05d1\u05b5\u05a3\u05d3 _slaveth_) of bread;\nbut he that followeth after vain persons shall have poverty enough.\u201d\n_Prov._ xxviii. 19. When God made \u201cevery plant of the field before it\nwas in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew,\u201d\nforeseeing the apostasy of man\u2014its poisonous effect upon his moral and\nphysical condition\u2014its direct influence to produce immediate ruin and\ndeath, he also provided, ordained, and decreed a relation, a law\nbetween man and his mental and physical wants, which must cleave unto\nhim, upon his apostasy, and be of the utmost value and efficacy in\nalleviating, removing, and preventing the final evils incident to his\npoisoned condition. This relation, law, institution, was the\n_ebeduth_, the _institution of slavery_, as expressed in _Ezra_ ix. 8,\n9: \u201cAnd give us a little reviving _in our bondage_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05d3\u05ea\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc\n_ebeduthenu_, _slavery_). For we were _bond-men_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05a3\u05d9\u05dd _abedim_,\n_slaves_), and yet our God hath not forsaken us in our bondage,\u201d\n\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\u05ea\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc. So in 2 _Chron._ xii. 8: \u201cNevertheless, ye shall be his\n_servants_ (\u05dc\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9\u05dd _le-obedim_, his _slaves_), that they may know my\n_service_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05a3\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3\u05b8\u05ea\u05b4\u0594\u05d9 _slavery_), and the _service_ (\u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b0\u05d1\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3\u05b7\u0596\u05ea\n_and the slavery_) of the kingdoms of the countries.\u201d So in _Esther_\nvii. 4: \u201cFor we are sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be\nslain, and to perish. But if we had been sold for _bond-men_\n(\u05d5\u05b0\u05dc\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05d7\u05a4\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea \u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05a8\u05d9\u05dd) and bond-women, I had held my tongue.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON X.\n\nTowards the close of the book of Deuteronomy, Moses, having delivered to\nthe children of Israel such of the laws of the Almighty as were then\ndeemed necessary for their government and guidance, proceeds to inform\nthem of the consequences of disobedience; and boldly informs them,\nxxviii. 15, \u201cBut, if it shall come to pass if thou wilt not hearken unto\nthe voice of the Lord thy God, to observe and to do all his\ncommandments, and his statutes which I command thee this day, that all\nthese curses shall come upon thee and overtake thee. 16: Cursed shalt\nthou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field. 17: Cursed\nshall be thy basket and thy store. 18: Cursed shall be the fruit of thy\nbody and the fruit of thy land, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks\nof thy sheep. 19: Cursed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and cursed\nshalt thou be when thou goest out. 20: The Lord shall send upon thee\ncursing, vexation, and rebuke, in all thou settest thy hand unto for to\ndo, until thou be destroyed, and until thou perish quickly, because of\nthe wickedness of thy doings whereby thou hast forsaken me.\u201d \u201cAnd the\nLord shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I\nspake unto thee. Thou shalt see it no more again, and there ye shall be\nsold unto your enemies for _bond-men_ (\u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05a5\u05d9\u05dd( for _slaves_), and\nbond-women, and no man shall buy you.\u201d They should be so trifling and\nworthless that no one would wish to buy them. _Josh._ ix. 23\u201327: \u201cNow,\ntherefore, ye are cursed, and there shall none of you be freed from\nbeing bond-men (\u05e2\u05b6\u0597\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _slaves_), and hewers of wood and drawers of\nwater,\u201d &c. \u201cAnd Joshua made them that day hewers of wood and drawers of\nwater, for the congregation, and for the altar of the Lord, even unto\nthis day.\u201d\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                               LESSON XI.\n\nBefore closing this subject we offer a few more examples of the Hebrew\nuse of this word. \u201cWho is David? and who is the son of Jesse? There be\nmany _servants_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u0594\u05d9\u05dd _slaves_) now-a-days that break away every\nman from his master.\u201d 1 _Sam._ xxv. 10. Nabal pretended in his\ndrunkenness, that he might be a runaway _slave_. 1 _Kings_ ii. 29, 40:\n\u201cAnd it came to pass at the end of three years, that two of the\n_servants_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd_ebedim_, _slaves_) of Shimei ran away unto Achish,\nson of Maachah king of Gath; and they told Shimei, saying, Behold thy\n_servants_ (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b6\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 _slaves_) be in Gath. And Shimei arose and saddled\nhis ass, and went to Gath to Achish to seek his _servants_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05d9\u05d5\n_slaves_), and Shimei went and brought his _servants_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u0596\u05d9\u05d5\n_slaves_) from Gath.\u201d 1 _Kings_ ix. 20, 21, and 22: \u201cAnd all the people\nthat were left of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and\nJebuzites, which were not of the children of Israel, their children that\nwere left after them in the land, whom the children of Israel also were\nnot able utterly to destroy, upon these did Solomon levy a tribute of\n_bond-service_ (\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _obed_, _slavery_) unto this day. But of the\nchildren of Israel did Solomon make no _bond-men_,\u201d (\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_,\n_slaves_.) 2 _Chron._ viii. 9: \u201cBut of the children of Israel did\nSolomon make no _servants_ (\u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05dd _la ebedim_, no _slaves_) for\nhis work, (\u05dc\u05b4\u05de\u05b0\u05dc\u05b7\u05d0\u05db\u05b0\u05ea\u05bc\u0591\u05d5\u05b9 _his works_, _labours_.) But they were men of\nwar, and chief of his captains, and captains of his chariots and\nhorsemen.\u201d 2 _Kings_ iv. 1: \u201cNow there cried a certain woman of the\nwives of the sons of the prophets unto Elisha, saying, Thy servant, my\nhusband, is dead, and thou knowest that thy servant did fear the Lord,\nand the creditor is come to take unto him my two sons to be _bond-men_,\u201d\n(\u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05dd _la ebedim_, for _slaves_.) In 1 _Chron._ xxvii. 26, this\nword is used in a sense quite analogous to slave-labour, thus: \u201cAnd over\nthem that did the _work_ (_meleketh_, _i.e._ the particular work or\nlabour) of the field for _tillage_ (\u05dc\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u05b7\u05ea _slave-labour_) of the\nground, was Ezra, the son of Chelub.\u201d _Job_ i. 2, 3: \u201cAnd there were\nborn unto him seven sons and three daughters. His substance also was\nseven thousand sheep, and three thousand camels, and five thousand yoke\nof oxen, and five hundred she-asses, and a very great _household_.\u201d The\nword \u201chousehold\u201d is here translated from \u05d5\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05bb\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 a body of slaves,\n_i. e._ a large family of slaves. _Job_ iii. 19: \u201cThe small and the\ngreat are there, and the _servant_ (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ve ebed_, master.\u201d _Job_\nxxxi. 13: \u201cIf I did _despise_ (\u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b7\u05bc\u05d8\u05b7 _misjudge_) the cause of my\n_man-servant_,\u201d (\u05e2\u05b7\u05bd\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9 my _slave_.) _Job_ xxxix. 9: \u201cWill the\nunicorn be willing to _serve_ thee?\u201d (\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b6\u05da\u05b8 be a _slave_ to thee.)\n_Ps._ cxvi. 16: \u201cO Lord, truly I am thy _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b6\u05da\u05b8 _obedeka_,\n_slave_); I am thy _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b6\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 _slave_), and the son of thy\n_hand-maid_ (\u05d0\u05b2\u05de\u05b8\u05ea\u05b6\u0591\u05da\u05b8 _amatheka_, _female slave_): thou hast loosed my\nbonds.\u201d It is a little remarkable how similar is this sentiment of David\nto one expressed by St. Paul. _Prov._ xii. 9: \u201cHe that is despised and\nhath a _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, _slave_) is better than he that\nhonoureth himself and lacketh bread.\u201d _Prov._ xvii. 2: \u201cA wise _servant_\n(\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, _slave_), shall rule over a son that causeth shame, and\nshall have part of the inheritance among the brethren.\u201d _Prov._ xxx. 21,\n22, 23: \u201cFor three things is the earth disquieted, and for four which it\ncannot bear: For a _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_, _slave_) when he _reigneth_\n(\u05d9\u05b4\u05de\u05b0\u0591\u05dc\u05d5\u05b9\u05da\u05b0 _imlok_), and a fool when he is filled with meat. For an\nodious woman when she is married, and a _hand-maid_ (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e9\u05b4\u05c1\u05e4\u05b0\u05d7\u05b8\u05d4 _female\nslave_) that is heir to her mistress.\u201d _Eccl._ ii. 7. \u201c_I got me_\n(\u05e7\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u05a8\u05d9\u05ea\u05b4\u05d9 _kanithi_, _I purchased_) _servants_ (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05a3\u05d9\u05dd _male\nslaves_) and _maidens_ (\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05d7\u0594\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea _female slaves_), and had servants\nborn in my house.\u201d _Eccl._ vii. 21: \u201cAlso take no heed unto all words\nthat are spoken, lest thou hear thy _servant_ (\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05da\u05b8 _slave_) curse\nthee.\u201d _Jer._ ii. 14: \u201cIs Israel a _servant_ (\u05d4\u05b8\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _slave_)? is he a\nhome-born _slave_? why is he spoiled?\u201d In the latter part of this\nquotation, the word \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _ebed_ is not expressed in Hebrew, but\n_understood_, as is often the case in English: yet King James\u2019s\ntranslators did not hesitate to supply it in English with the word\n_slave_, giving indisputable proof of what they understood the word\n_ebed_ to mean, and also, that they used the English word _servant_ as a\nsynonyme of the word _slave_. The omission to express the word \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3\n_ebed_ in Hebrew, in this instance, has the effect to make the idea\nconveyed by the prophet more emphatic; and hence the translators seem to\nhave felt the necessity of using the most forcible synonyme, in order\nthat they might truly and beyond doubt convey the full import of the\nprophet\u2019s meaning. _Mal._ i. 6: \u201cA son honoureth his father, and a\n_servant_ (\u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b6\u05a3\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _slave_) his master.\u201d This passage is a connecting\nlink in a chain of reasoning, and the prophet continues thus: \u201cIf then I\nbe a father, where is my honour? If I be a _master_, where is my fear?\nsaith the Lord of hosts unto you, O priests that despise my name. And ye\nsay, Wherein have we despised thy name?\u201d As though they were astonished\nat the accusation! And this is the answer\u20147: \u201cYe offer polluted bread\nupon mine altar.\u201d A figure, to show that they had become wholly\ndisobedient, and held in disregard the law of God. By their\ndisobedience, they were degenerating from the condition of the son to\nthat of the _ebed_. Instead of being influenced by love, they were about\nto be operated upon by fear, and hence the prophet continues, ii. 1:\n\u201cAnd now, O ye priests, this commandment is for you. If ye will not\nhear, and if ye will not lay it to heart, to give glory unto my name,\nsaith the Lord of hosts, I will even send a curse upon you, and I will\ncurse your blessings, yea, I have cursed them already, because ye do not\nlay it to heart. 3: Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung\nupon your faces.\u201d He would curse them with the hateful curse of Cain.\nAnd we beg to notice this scriptural glancing at the doctrine that a\ncourse of sin does produce some change upon the physical man,\u2014some\nchange of countenance, which is continued, degenerating and\ndeteriorating the succeeding generations,\u2014and ask, is not such a\ndoctrine alluded to in _Ezek._ xviii. 2, \u201cThe fathers have eaten sour\ngrapes, and the children\u2019s teeth are set on edge.\u201d And, again, in _Ps._\nlviii. 2, 3: \u201cThe wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as\nsoon as they are born, speaking lies. Their poison is like the poison of\na serpent.\u201d Again, in _Jer._ vii. 19: \u201cDo they provoke me to anger?\nsaith the Lord. Do they not provoke themselves to the confusion of their\nown faces?\u201d And, in _Isa._ iii. 9: \u201cThe show of their countenance doth\nwitness against them, and they declare their sin as Sodom. They hide it\nnot. Wo unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves.\u201d\n_Jer._ xiii. 22: \u201cIf thou say in thy heart, wherefore have these things\ncome upon me? for the greatness of thine iniquities are thy skirts\ndiscovered and thy heels made bare.\u201d And ii. 22: \u201cFor though thou wash\nthee with nitre, and take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked\nbefore me, saith the Lord God.\u201d We will not enter into the examination\nof this doctrine at present, but hasten to close our view of the Hebrew\nuse of the word \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _ebed_. In _Joel_ iii. 2 (ii. 29th of the English\ntext) is this remarkable passage: \u201cAnd also upon the _servants_\n(\u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05dd _ha ebedim_, the _male slaves_) and upon the _hand-maids_\n(\u05d4\u05b7\u05e9\u05b0\u05bc\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05d7\u0591\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea _hashshephahoth_, the _female slaves_) in those days will\nI pour out my Spirit.\u201d This passage was translated at Jerusalem by St.\nPeter, into Greek. See _Acts_ ii. 18: \u201cAnd on my _servants_, and _on my\nhand-maids_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b5\u03c0\u03b9 \u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2), will I pour out in those days\nmy Spirit,\u201d\u2014using those Greek words that most unconditionally mean a\n_slave_, and showing as effectually as language can show, and proving as\ndistinctly as language can prove, that St. Peter well understood these\nwords of Joel to mean _male_ and _female slaves_. He translates the\npassage, referring to it, and quoting it. There can have been no\nmistake. Besides, the passage is rendered definite by its particularity;\nfor the preceding sentence avers that his Spirit should be poured out\n\u201cupon all flesh,\u201d and goes on to particularize, \u201cyour sons\u201d and\n\u201cdaughters,\u201d \u201cyour old men,\u201d \u201cyour young men,\u201d and then in this passage\nincludes the _slaves_, thus explaining whom he means by \u201call flesh.\u201d It\nwas on the day of Pentecost, when the disciples of Jesus Christ \u201cwere\nall with one accord in one place, and suddenly there came a sound from\nheaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where\nthey were sitting; and there appeared upon them cloven tongues like as\nof fire, and it sat upon each of them, and they were all filled with the\nHoly Ghost.\u201d _Acts_ ii. 1, 2, 3.\n\nSuch were the circumstances under which this translation was made\u2014just\nafter the death of Jesus Christ. Circumstances more solemn, more\nimposing, more awful to the human mind cannot well be conceived. In the\nimmediate presence of God the Father, and the Holy Ghost operating upon\nthe mind of St. Peter!! Should any one, timorous, decline to believe\nmen, or mortals, permit us, in the name of that Jehovah whose work we\nall are, to call their reflection on what may be the nature of that sin\nwhich contemns, denies, or treats as untruth the very language of the\nHoly Ghost.\n\n\n                           ------------------\n\n                              LESSON XII.\n\nThe Hebrew noun _ebed_ belongs to the declension of _factitious_,\n_euphonic segholate_ nouns of two syllables, with the tone on the penult\nand a furtive vowel on the final:\n\n          _Singular absolute._            _Construct state._\n              \u05e2\u05b8\u0591\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3  or \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3                        \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3\n\n          _With light suffix._             _Grave suffix._\n                  \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9                          \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05db\u05b6\u05dd\n\n           _Plural absolute._             _Construct state._\n                 \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd                           \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9\n\n          _With light suffix._            _Grave suffix._[1]\n                  \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b7\u05d9                          \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9\u05db\u05b6\u05dd\n\n-----\n\nFootnote 1:\n\n  Termed grave, because they always have the tone accent.\n\n-----\n\nDeclined with the personal pronoun, thus:\n\n    _Absolute_ _singular_,             \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _a slave_.\n       _Suff._ 1.                    \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9 _my slave_.\n               2. m.                 \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 _thy slave_.\n               2. f.                 \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05da\u05b0 _thy slave_.\n               3. m.                 \u05e2\u05b7\u05db\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 _his slave_.\n               3. f.                 \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05d4\u05bc _her slave_.\n               1. (plur.)           \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc _our slave_.\n               2. m.                \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05db\u05b6\u05dd _your slave_.\n               2. f.                \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05db\u05b6\u05da _your slave_.\n               3. m.                 \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05dd _their slave_.\n               3. f.                 \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05da _their slave_.\n    _Absolute_ _plural_,            \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd _slaves_.\n       _Suff._ 1.                    \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b7\u05d9 _my slaves_.\n               2. m.                \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b6\u05d9\u05da\u05b8 _thy slaves_.\n               2. f.                \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05da\u05b0 _thy slaves_.\n               3. m.                \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05d9\u05d5 _his slaves_.\n               3. f.                \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b6\u05d9\u05d4\u05b8 _her slaves_.\n               1. (plur.)          \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc _our slaves_.\n               2. m.               \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9\u05db\u05b6\u05dd _your slaves_.\n               2. f.               \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9\u05db\u05b6\u05df _your slaves_.\n               3. m.               \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9\u05d4\u05b6\u05dd _their slaves_.\n               3. f.               \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9\u05d4\u05b6\u05df _their slaves_.\n\nPrefixed by a preposition, it will stand thus: \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _in_, _at_,\n_with_, &c. a slave; or with \u05dc thus, \u05dc\u05b0\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _to_, _at_, _in_, _towards_,\n_till_, _until_, &c. a slave; or, when the word \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 is used as a verb,\nit will stand in place of our infinitive mood, thus, \u05dc\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05a8\u05d3 _to\nslave_, as in _Num._ iv. 47. So this word \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 or any form of it may be\nprefixed by \u05de as a contraction of \u05df\u05de, a preposition of various meanings\nor applications, as _from_, _apart from_, _of_, _out of_, _by_, &c. &c.;\nand so it may be prefixed by any of the letters \u05d4\u05b6\u05a5\u05d0\u05b1\u05de\u05b7\u05e0\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u0596\u05d9 forming\nthe word _heemanti_, each prefixed letter giving to the _root word_ some\nshade of meaning, emphasis, or adjective quality. So, also, it may be\nprefixed by \u05db\u05bc, used both as a preposition, and as a conjunction, thus,\n\u05db\u05b4\u05bc\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _as_, _so_, _according to_, _after_, _about_, _nearly_,\n_almost_, &c. &c. _a slave_. Hebrew nouns may also be prefixed by\nparticles of old obsolete words, varying their form, and exceedingly so\ntheir phonetic representation; as for example, \u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05dc\u05b9\u05de\u05b9\u05d4 _Shelomah_ was\nthe son and successor of King David. Now \u05e9\u05c1, as the particle of some\nancient word, and followed by \u05dc, becomes the sign of the possessive\ncase; but when the word begins with these two letters, they then will be\nduplicated, as in _Canticles_ iii. 7, \u05de\u05b4\u05d8\u05b8\u05ea\u05d5\u05b9 \u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05dc\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05dc\u05b9\u05de\u05b9\u05d4 _mittatho\nshellishlomoh_, _Solomon\u2019s bed_, &c.\n\nPrepositions, sometimes two or more, are, or seem to be, compounded, yet\nused in the sense of the last in the compound, thus: \u05de\u05b4\u05df and \u05e2\u05b7\u05dc used\nthus, \u05de\u05b5\u05e2\u05b7\u05dc for \u05e2\u05b7\u05dc, or \u05dc\u05b0\u05de\u05b4\u05df for \u05de\u05b4\u05df, &c. &c.\n\nThe noun \u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b6\u05d3 _ebed_ may also be prefixed by a conjunction, thus, \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\n_and a slave_, &c. &c.\n\nIt may also often be compounded with other nouns. Thus, \u05e2\u05b9\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05d9\u05b8\u05d4\u05d5 _the\nslave of God_. In this manner the composition of significant terms, and\ntheir conversion into proper names, is unlimited: thus, \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05df _the\njudgment_, or _government of a slave_, and made the name of a city. See\n_Josh._ ii. 30; also 1 _Chron._ i. 59, the 74th of the English text; and\nhence the word _abaddon_ has been used by some to signify a place of\npunishment. We can give but a mere sketch of the grammatical formations\nand variations of the word _ebed_; aware that even such sketch, can be\nconsidered of value only by a few, we refrain from even a glimpse of its\nphonetic variations and peculiarities, deeming them only interesting to\nthe advanced and more critical of the proficients in the language; but\nwe cannot refrain from giving a sketch of its declension as a verb, for\nthe benefit of the Greek and Roman scholar.\n\nConjugation of the word \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3 as a verb, _to slave_, &c.\n\n                                IN KAL.\n     _Praet._                3. p. m.                           \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\n                             3. f.                             \u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05d4\u05bc\n                             2. m.                             \u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\n                             3. (plur.)                        \u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                             2. m.                            \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05dd\n     _Infinitive absolute_,                                    \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3\n     _Construct state_,                                         \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\n     _Future_,               3. m.                             \u05d9\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\n                             2. m.                             \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05d3\n                             3. (plur.)                       \u05d9\u05b7\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                             3. f.                           \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n     _Imperative_,           2. p. m.                           \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05d3\n                             2. f.                             \u05e2\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\n     _Participle_,           _act._                            \u05e2\u05d5\u05b9\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\n                             _pass._                           \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05d5\u05bc\u05d3\n\n                                NIPHAL.\n     _Praet._                3. m.                             \u05e0\u05b6\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\n                             2. m.                            \u05e0\u05b6\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05ab\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\n     _Infinitive_,                                             \u05d4\u05b5\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\n     _Future_,                                                 \u05d9\u05b5\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\n     _Imperative_,                                             \u05d4\u05b5\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\n     _Participle_,                                             \u05e0\u05b6\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\n\n                        PIEL, (_poel_, _polel_.)\n\n     _Praet._                                                   \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n     _Infinitive_,                                              \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n     _Future_,                                                 \u05d9\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n     _Participle_,                                             \u05de\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n\n                        PUAL, (_poal_, _polal_.)\n\n     _Praet._                                                   \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\n     _Infinitive_,                                              \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\n     _Future_,                                                 \u05d9\u05b0\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\n     _Participle_,                                             \u05de\u05b0\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05d3\n\n                                HIPHIL.\n\n     _Praet._                                                 \u05d4\u05b6\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9\u05d3\n                             2. m.                            \u05d4\u05b6\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05ab\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\n     _Infinitive_,                                            \u05d4\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9\u05d3\n     _Future_,                                                \u05d9\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9\u05d3\n     _Participle_,                                            \u05de\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9\u05d3\n\n                                HOPHAL.\n\n     _Praet._                                                  \u05d4\u05b8\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\n     _Infinitive_,                                             \u05d4\u05b8\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\n     _Future_,                                                 \u05d9\u05b8\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\n     _Participle_,                                             \u05de\u05b8\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\n\n                               HITHPAEL.\n\n     _Praet._                                                 \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n     _Infinitive_,                                            \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n     _Future_,                                                \u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n     _Participle_,                                            \u05de\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n\nThe unusual conjugations sometimes found in the form of some Hebrew\nwords, _hothpaal_, _pilel_, _pulal_, _hithpalel_, and the Arabic\n_iq-talla_, _pealal_, _pilpel_, and the Aramaen _tiphel_, and the Syriac\n_shaphel_, are not known to the writer to have an example in the Hebrew\nScriptures in the word \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3, and are therefore not exemplified.\n\nParadigm of the verb \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3 _to slave_, as a 1. guttural in KAL.\n\n    _Praeter_,              _singular_,  3. m.                  \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                 \u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05bd\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                 \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\n                                         2. f.                 \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\n                                         1. com.              \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    3. com.               \u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. m.                \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05dd\n                                         2. f.                \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05bd\u05df\n                                         1. com.              \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc\n    _Infinitive absolute_,                                     \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05bd\u05d5\u05b9\u05d3\n    _Infinitive construct_,                                     \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u0596\u05d3\n    _Imperative_,           _singular_,  m.                     \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05a5\u05d3\n                                         f.                    \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    m.                    \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u0596\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         f.                   \u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n    _Present_,              _singular_,  3. m.                 \u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                 \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         2. m.                 \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u0596\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         2. f.                \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u0596\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\n                                         1. com.               \u05d0\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b9\u05bd\u05d3\n                            _Plural_,    3. m.                \u05d9\u05b7\u05e2\u05b7\u05bd\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         3. f.               \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u0596\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. f.               \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u0596\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         1. com.               \u05e0\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05b9\u05d3\n    _Pres. apocope_,                                           \u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05bd\u05d3\n    _Participle_,                        _active_,              \u05e2\u05b9\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\n                                         _passive_,            \u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\u05d3\n\nParadigm of the verb \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _to slave_, as a 1. guttural in NIPHAL.\n\n    _Praeter_,              _singular_,  3. m.                 \u05e0\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                \u05e0\u05b6\u0596\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u0596\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                \u05e0\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u0596\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\n                                         2. f.                \u05e0\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u0596\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\n                                         1. com.             \u05e0\u05b6\u0596\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    3. com.              \u05e0\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b6\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05ad\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. m.               \u05e0\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05dd\n                                         2. f.               \u05e0\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\n                                         1. com.             \u05e0\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc\n    _Infinitive_,                                              \u05d4\u05b5\u05bc\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u05bd\u05d3\n    _Imperative_,           _singular_,  m.                    \u05d4\u05b5\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u0596\u05d3\n                                         f.                   \u05d4\u05b5\u05e2\u05b8\u0596\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    m.                   \u05d4\u05b5\u05bd\u05e2\u05b8\u0596\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         f.                  \u05d4\u05b5\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u0596\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n    _Present_,              _singular_,  3. m.                 \u05d9\u05b5\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                 \u05d4\u05b5\u05bc\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         2. m.                 \u05ea\u05b5\u05bc\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         2. f.                \u05ea\u05b5\u05bc\u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\n                                         1. com.               \u05d0\u05b5\u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b5\u05bd\u05d3\n                            _Plural_,    3. m.                \u05d9\u05b5\u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         3. f.               \u05ea\u05bc\u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b5\u0596\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                \u05ea\u05b5\u05bc\u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05ad\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. f.               \u05ea\u05b5\u05bc\u05a5\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         1. com.               \u05e0\u05b5\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b5\u0596\u05d3\n    _Participle_,                                              \u05e0\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b8\u05bd\u05d3\n\nParadigm of the verb \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _to slave_, as a 1. guttural in PIHEL or\n_piel_, (_poel_, _polel_.)\n\n    _Praeter_,              _singular_,  3. m.                  \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u0596\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                 \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                 \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\n                                         2. f.                 \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\n                                         1. com.              \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    3. com.               \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. m.                \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05dd\n                                         2. f.                \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\n                                         1. com.              \u05e2\u05b4\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc\n    _Infinitive_,                                               \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n    _Imperative_,           _singular_,  m.                     \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         f.                    \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    m.                    \u05e2\u05d1\u05bc\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         f.                   \u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n    _Present_,              _singular_,  3. m.                 \u05d9\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                 \u05ea\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n                                         2. m.                 \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n                                         2. f.                 \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         1. com.               \u05d0\u05b2\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n                            _Plural_,    3. m.                \u05d9\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         3. f.               \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. f.               \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         1. com.               \u05e0\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u0596\u05d3\n    _Participle_,                                              \u05de\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n\nParadigm of the verb \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _to slave_, as a 1. guttural in PUHAL, (_pual_,\n_poal_, _polal_.)\n\n    _Praeter_,              _singular_,  3. m.                  \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                 \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05b8\u05bd\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                 \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\n                                         2. f.                 \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\n                                         1. com.              \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    3. com.               \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. m.                \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05bd\u05dd\n                                         2. f.                \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\n                                         1. com.              \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc\n    _Infinitive_,                                               \u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n    _Present_,              _singular_,  3. m.                 \u05d9\u05b0\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                 \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         2. m.                 \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         2. f.                \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05bc\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\n                                         1. com.               \u05d0\u05b2\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n                            _Plural_,    3. m.                \u05d9\u05b0\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         3. f.               \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05bd\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. f.                \u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         1. com.               \u05e0\u05b0\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n    _Participle_,                                              \u05de\u05b0\u05e2\u05bb\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n\nParadigm of the verb \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _to slave_, as a 1. guttural in HIPHIL.\n\n    _Praeter_,              _singular_,  3. m.                \u05d4\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\n                                         3. f.               \u05d4\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9\u05d3\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                \u05d4\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\n                                         2. f.                \u05d4\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\n                                         1. com.             \u05d4\u05b6\u05bd\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    3. com.             \u05d4\u05b6\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. m.               \u05d4\u05b6\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05dd\n                                         2. f.               \u05d4\u05b6\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\n                                         1. com.             \u05d4\u05b6\u05e2\u05b1\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc\n    _Infinitive_,                                             \u05d4\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\n    _Imperative_,           _singular_,  m.                    \u05d4\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         f.                  \u05d4\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    m.                  \u05d4\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         f.                  \u05d4\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n    _Present_,              _singular_,  3. m.                \u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\n                                         2. m.                \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\n                                         2. f.               \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\n                                         1. com.              \u05d0\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\n                            _Plural_,    3. m.               \u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         3. f.               \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         2. m.               \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. f.               \u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         1. com.              \u05e0\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\n    _Pres. apocope_,                                           \u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u05d3\n    _Participle_,                                             \u05de\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b4\u05bd\u05d9\u05d3\n\nParadigm of the verb \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _to slave_, as a 1. guttural in HOPHAL.\n\n    _Praeter_,              _singular_,  3. m.                 \u05d4\u05b8\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05bd\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                \u05d4\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\n                                         2. f.                \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\n                                         1. com.             \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    3. com.              \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b4\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. m.               \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05dd\n                                         2. f.               \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\n                                         1. com.             \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc\n    _Infinitive_,                                              \u05d4\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\n    _Present_,              _singular_,  3. m.                 \u05d9\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                 \u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\n                                         2. m.                 \u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\n                                         2. f.                \u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b0\u05bd\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\n                                         1. com.               \u05d0\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\n                            _Plural_,    3. m.                \u05d9\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         3. f.               \u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         2. m.                \u05d4\u05b8\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. f.               \u05d4\u05b8\u05bc\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         1. com.               \u05e0\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05bd\u05d3\n    _Participle_,                                              \u05de\u05b8\u05bd\u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b8\u05bd\u05d3\n\nParadigm of the verb \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 _to slave_, as a 1. guttural in HITHPAEL.\n\n    _Praeter_,              _singular_,  3. m.                \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\n                                         3. f.               \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         2. m.               \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\n                                         2. f.               \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b0\u05bc\n                                         1. com.            \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    3. com.             \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. m.              \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05dd\n                                         2. f.              \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\n                                         1. com.            \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05d5\u05bc\n    _Infinitive_,                                             \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n    _Imperative_,           _singular_,  m.                   \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n                                         f.                  \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\n                            _Plural_,    m.                  \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         f.                 \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n    _Present_,              _singular_,  3. m.                \u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n                                         3. f.                \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n                                         2. m.                \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n                                         2. f.               \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\n                                         1. com.              \u05d0\u05b6\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n    _Present_,              _plural_,    3. m.               \u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         3. f.              \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         2. m.               \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05d3\u05d5\u05bc\n                                         2. f.              \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4\n                                         1. com.              \u05e0\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05bd\u05d3\n    _Participle_,                                             \u05de\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b5\u05bc\u05d3\n\nIn close, it may be remarked that there is perhaps no Hebrew verb found\nin all the forms of conjugation in the Holy Books.\n\n                                THE END.\n\n\n\n\n                        -----------------------\n\n                           Transcriber\u2019s Note\n\nErrors which are readily attributed to printer\u2019s lapses have been\ncorrected, as noted below. There are a number of lapses in the\npunctuation of quoted matter, which have been rectified as described in\nthe table below. Spelling has been retained, except where the printer\nseems most likely to be at fault.\n\nGreek words are sometimes given without diacritical marks including in\nquoted passages, or the marks are incorrect, based upon what we now have\nfor the Greek sources. The Greek is given here as printed.\n\nThe Greek \u2018ou\u2019 ligature is represented here using the Latin version \u2018\u0223\u2019.\n\nLikewise, the typesetting of Hebrew is problematic in many places,\nparticularly with the use of cantillation marks (tropes). In most\ncases, cantillation for single words or phrases are moot, but the\nauthor frequently includes them, not always accurately. Where modern\nfonts are unable to represent the printed characters, or where the\ntypesetting was faulty, the text will follow the currently accepted\nforms. Vowel marks are sometimes omitted in the original, and are\ngiven here as printed. <span class='htmlonly'>The combination\nhataf-patah is frequently reversed, and has been corrected everywhere\nwith no further notice. Likewise, the printer seems to have frequently\nconfused the trope merkha with the vowel point meteg, i.e. \u05d9\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05a5\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05d5\u05bc\nfor \u05d9\u05b0\u05e9\u05b8\u05bd\u05c1\u05e8\u05b0\u05ea\u05d5\u05bc. The standard Hebrew has been followed here, as noted\nbelow.</span> <span class='epubonly'>In this version, bidirectional\ntext cannot be reliably rendered. The author provided a\ntransliteration of most of the Hebrew words and phrases; however a\nseparate transliteration has been included here based on the scheme\nprovided by the Society of Biblical Literature. These appear in bold\nas =y\u0115\u0161\u0101r\u0115t\u00fb=. These transliterations necessarily lose the\ncantillation marks. (The same has been done for the Arabic and Syriac\nwords, which are also printed right-to-left.)</span>\n\nOn p. 461, the Hebrew word \u05d1\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05ea requires the vav as printed be a shuruk\n(\u05d5\u05bc) to be read as a vowel '\u00fb'. The character was printed without the\ndot, and is corrected here.\n\nArabic, Coptic, and Syriac scripts are rendered using the available\nUnicode characters. The script used by the author frequently could not\nbe confirmed to match either the stated translations or the\ntransliterations he provided. The Syriac script seems to be the\nso-called Western script. The Unicode characters follow the Estrangela,\nwhich was most widely used. Many of the Arabic words were either\nunrecognizable, did not match the transliterations given by the author,\nor both. Best guesses of the author\u2019s intent are provided in the text.\n\nOn p. 390, the Arabic word which appears to be \u0645\u062a\u0635\u064f\u0639\u064e\u0627\u062f\u08e8 <il\narabic_metsuad_390.jpg/>, seems incorrect. The most likely word is\n\u0645\u0650\u0635\u0639\u0627\u062f\u064c, which has the meaning given by the author. This has been\nsubstituted.\n\nOn p. 592, the maqqef (\u05be) in \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\u05b8\u05bc\u05be\u05e2\u05b7\u05dc is misplaced. The word,\nfrom 1. _Samuel_ i. 16, should be \u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05ea\u05be\u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05dc\u05b4\u05d9\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05dc, and has been corrected.\n\nOn p. 620, the Arabic \u063a\u0638\u0646\u064c does not exist; the\nauthor may have intended either \u0639\u064e\u062f\u0652\u0646\u064c which means Eden or \u063a\u064e\u062f\u064e\u0646, which\nmeans languor, softness, limpness. etc. The former was used here.\n\nProblematic cases with the original images and their replication here,\nare given below:\n\nOn p. 95, the quoted phrase from Ephesians 6:5, \u2018And ye masters, do the\n_same things_ unto them;[\u2019], is missing the closing single quotation\nmark. The words which follow the semicolon seem to be a paraphrase. The\npunctuation has been added.\n\nOn p. 141, the paragraph beginning \u2018In _Judg._ iii. 7, 8, we have as\nfollows:\u2019 has an unclosed double quotation. It is not clear where the\ncitation ends, and the text has been given here as printed.\n\nOn p. 486, the citation of Jeremiah li. 55 is misprinted as verse 15.\nImmediately following, the first of two citations of Isaiah li. 13\nshould have been to verse 15. These have been corrected. The second\nreference to verse 13 is correct.\n\nIn Lesson IV of Study VII (pp. 516\u2013536), the punctuation of the extracts\nis inconsistent, and, with just a few exceptions noted below, has been\nretained as printed.\n\nOn p. 630, the Praet. 2 m. conjugation of \u05e2\u05d1\u05d3 is printed as \u05e2\u05b0\u05b8\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc,\nwhich is an invalid combination of vowel marks on the leading ayin.\nEither \u05e2\u05b8\u05bd\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc or \u05e2\u05b3\u05d1\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc would be valid.\n\n         p. 10 Acorimus                            _sic._ Acosimus\n                                                   (p. 332).\n\n         p. 16 legis[l]ator                        Added.\n\n        p. 117 and heal his _servant_ (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd,     Added.\n               _slave_.)[\u201d]\n\n               \u201cAnd he called his ten _servants_   Added.\n               (\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, _slaves_),[\u201d] &c.\n\n               Ye shall be made free?[\u201d]           Added.\n\n        p. 119 commo[m/n]wealth                    Corrected.\n\n        p. 122 co[m/n]formity                      Corrected.\n\n        p. 125 [\u201c]And when the hand of thy God     Opening quote\n                                                   added.\n\n        p. 130 \u201cFor,[\u201d] says Olybius               Missing quotation\n                                                   mark added.\n\n        p. 131 multit[i]utudes                     Removed.\n\n        p. 141 the hand of _Chusan Rishathaim_,    Added.\n               (\u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e9\u05b8\u05c1\u05df \u05e8\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e2\u05b2\u05ea\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05dd )[\u201d]\n\n        p. 151 of four o[f/r] five years old       Corrected.\n\n        p. 183 property is an exclusive right.[\u201d]  Added.\n\n        p. 184 to the former.[\u201d]                   Added.\n\n        p. 201 \u201cI[s/t] is the great appointed      Corrected.\n               trial\n\n        p. 251 \u201cTheir visage is blacker than a     Corrected.\n               coal.[\u2019/\u201d]\n\n        p. 267 shows the [\u201c]sentence               Removed.\n\n        p. 390 \u05e8\u05b6\u05e0\u05bc\u05dc should be  \u05e8\u05b6\u05d2\u05bc\u05dc                  Corrected.\n\n        p. 405 \u201cthe spiritual power,[\u201d]            Added.\n\n        p. 436 \u201cHe should be a fugitive and a      Added.\n               vagabond.[\u201d]\n\n        p. 437 become black.[\u2019/\u201d]                  Corrected.\n\n        p. 439 Egypt[ai/ia]ns                      Transposed.\n\n        p. 451 di[c/s]tinct                        Corrected.\n\n        p. 456 offered infants and young children  _sic._ \u2018as\u2019\n               [a] sacrifice.                      missing?\n\n        p. 465 (\u05de\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05e8\u05b4\u0596\u05d9\u05ea _Mitsrith_[)] a              Removed.\n               descendant of Misraim,)\n\n        p. 475 \u0633\u064f\u0644\u064a\u0652\u0645\u064e\u0646\u08e8 should be  \u0634\u064f\u0644\u064a\u0652\u0645\u064e\u0646\u08e8              Corrected.\n\n        p. 484 co[n]gnisance                       Removed.\n\n        p. 485 \u0153stus                               _sic._ \u0153strus?\n                                                   castus?\n\n        p. 486 li. [15/55] \u201cWhen her waves do roar Corrected.\n\n               Isa. li. [13/15]: \u201cBut I am the     Corrected.\n               Lord...\n\n        p. 487 _Jer._ [xliv/xlvi].                 Corrected.\n\n        p. 530 \u201cSuch the slave\u2019s nature, but this  Corrected.\n               favours thee.[\u2019/\u201d]\n\n        p. 593 _L[e/a]m._iii. 13.                  Corrected.\n\n        p. 597 \u05e2\u05b8\u05a3\u05de\u05b0\u05c4\u05dc\u05b8\u05d4 \u05e2\u05b8\u05ad\u05de\u05b5\u05dc                            _sic._ Words are\n                                                   reversed.\n\n        p. 600 _Ps._ lxxxi. 7[0]: \u201cI delivered     \u20180\u2019 removed.\n               \u05de\u05b4\u05e1\u05b6\u05bc\u05a3\u05d1\u05b6\u05dc thee.\u201d\n\n        p. 602 \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05a5\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05b0\u05d5\u05bc should be  \u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05bc\u05a5\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05ea\u05b7\u05bc\u05a5\u05d7\u05b2\u05d5\u05bd\u05d5\u05bc          Corrected.\n\n        p. 610 \u05d9\u05b7\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b7\u05b9\u05a5\u05d3 should be  \u05d9\u05b7\u05bd\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b9\u05a5\u05d3                Corrected.","title":"Studies on Slavery, in Easy Lessons","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":255413}