Shenir, and Hermon, places frequented by "the beloved," c. iv., v. 8, were but peaks of Libanus, or Lebanon. Gilead, too, appears to have been in sight of the residence of the bride, c. iv., v. 1; vi. 5, and furnished objects of comparison. So were Heshbon and Damascus in that vicinity. Indeed, of the ten places spoken of in this book whose locality we know, all but two were in the immediate vicinity of each other, and all near Lake Tiberias. The two places mentioned which were not in the same region are Carmel and Tirzah, proverbial for their beauty. These facts we think fully sustain the position with which we started-" that the Canticles was not written to celebrate the marriage of Solomon with the daughter of the king of Egypt that Solomon was not 'the beloved,'-nor the Egyptian princess 'the bride;' but, on the contrary, that the bridegroom was a rural swain residing in the northern part of Judea, that the bride was a shepherdess or vinedresser of the same region, and that the book is a regular drama, in the nature of a Comus, written to be recited (probably) at their wedding." Having ascertained the nature of the Canticles, our next enquiry will be-what was its design? On this point opinions have been quite as various as on the preceding, but to us it seems to have been written to inculcate monogamy, by celebrating the superior happiness and felicity of two young shepherds, ardently, devotedly attached exclusively to each other, over that enjoyed by the wisest and wealthiest of monarchs, with a harem filled with all the beauty of the East. Upon no other hypothesis can we explain several allusions

in it.

1. The whole description in chapters first and second seems intended as a picture of the peace and security of the pastoral life; while chapter third contains an evident contrast, by representing Solomon as surrounded by threescore of the most valiant of the sons of Israel, each lying on his sword for fear in the night. It is hardly possible to present for contemplation two situations more unlike than the restrained and restricted nature of the royal life, and the unrestrained and unrestricted licence of "the beloved," in the choice of a place where to spend his time; for while the king is surrounded by sixty experienced warriors, with a light heart he roams on the mountains, or feeds on the lilies of the garden, as his fancy pleases.

2. Chapter sixth contrasts the polygamy of the king with the monogamy of the rural swain.

"Threescore queens, and fourscore concubines

There are, and virgins without number,

But my dove, my undefiled is one-is only one," &c.

It is impossible to find language which shall make a stronger

contrast, and it is not possible that this language should have come from the mouth of a polygamist, as applicable to himself, whatever might have been the superior excellence of "the bride." It may seem somewhat singular, even, that language so unlike his practice should come from Solomon, but we all know that he preached much better than he practised. Besides, the idea here expressed is elsewhere advanced by Solomon. Thus, in Ecclesiastes ix. 9-"Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest, all the days of the life of thy vanity;" and still stronger in Prov. v. 18, 19

"Rejoice with the wife of thy youth,

Lovely-as the hind-the graceful roe;
Let her breasts at all times delight thee,
And with her love be thou ever satisfied."

3. Chapter eighth seems also to contrast the situation of the bride with that of Solomon in point of riches and wealth, expressing perfect contentment with her present lot, and not coveting any of his possessions which the narrative leads us to infer had probably at some time been offered by the monarch for her hand.

These facts, when considered in connection with the strong and ardent attachment expressed by the parties for each other, and the high satisfaction and great pleasure they took in each other's society, lead us almost necessarily to infer that the design of the Canticles was to celebrate the praises of monogamy over the practice of polygamy. If this opinion be well founded, it furnishes a satisfactory answer to the question which has been so often repeated—" why is it that the Scriptures of the Old Testament appear to sanction a practice evidently so much at variance with nature as polygamy"-by showing that the enquiry assumes that to be matter of fact which is not so.

To what we have already said, we add a few words in reference to the occasion on which this book was written. To celebrate a wedding, or to be recited at a wedding-is the universal reply; and yet there is nothing in the book which proves this to be the correct answer. The translating of the book, however, suggested to us the following hypothesis, which, if true, sustains this common opinion. The beauty and wisdom of the bride, who, as we have seen, resided in the northern part of Judea, having reached the ears of Solomon, and been praised by his queens and concubines, he desired to add her to the number of virgins who were training for his harem (vi. 8). But her affections were previously engaged by a rural swain who lived in her own neighbourhood, and she declined the princely offer, giving as a reason, her strong and ardent attachment to "the beloved," that is, to her first love, which is the

meaning of the original word. Not satisfied with this answer, Solomon undertook to purchase her hand; and hence the language of c. viii., v. 7.

"If a prince would give all the riches of his house,

It would be utterly contemned by love;"

as also that in v. 11, 12.

"Solomon had a vineyard at Baalhamon.

[Which he offered to me for my love, the fact being well known was not mentioned.]

He let it out to keepers,

Each for the fruit thereof

Was to give a thousand pieces of silver.
Solomon hath his thousand,

And they that keep the fruit thereof, two hundred.
My vineyard, which is mine, is before me ;"-

that is, my beloved, who is before me, he is my vineyard, and I covet not the vineyard of Solomon, nor the money which it produces. Upon this supposition it was very natural and proper for her to use the strong language of c. viii., v. 6.

"Set me as a seal on thine heart,

As a seal on thine arm;

For love is strong as death,

And jealousy cruel as the grave;"—

that is, I who have rejected the offer of the most powerful monarch, and despised his wealth for thee, have a right to demand in return that undeviating, undying love to which such acts justly entitle me; cautioning him at the same time that, as "love was strong," in that proportion was "jealousy cruel."

The arguments of "the bride" convinced the understanding of the Hebrew monarch, though they did not change his practice; and approving of her judgment, he not only relinquished his claim upon her, but wrote this book to celebrate her praises, in which he has inculcated the principles she professed, intending it, as seems most probable, to be recited at her wedding. Our readers will not understand us to say that this view of the subject is certainly the true one, but only that it is probable, which is more than we can say of any other hypothesis we have seen.

Concerning the time when it was written we know nothing, except that it was when Solomon had only "sixty wives and eighty concubines," besides a host of maidens training for admission into his harem, c. vi., v. 8. Now, as Solomon had before his death "seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines," (1 K. xi. 3,) it is reasonable to conclude that this book was written many years before his death, that is, when

the fact was, as is stated in it, in reference to the number of queens and concubines.

In the course of this examination we have made no allusion to a subordinate or spiritual sense, which is generally ascribed to this book; first, because we supposed it necessary that there should be a literal, to sustain a metaphorical sense; secondly, because, as the book is not referred to in any other part of the Bible, we are not in possession of a key which will unlock the mystery, if there be any; and, thirdly, because those who suppose themselves in possession of such a key are not agreed as to the nature of its allegorical meaning. We do not say there is no such secondary meaning, but we are free to confess that we have not been able to discover it. It will undoubtedly be asked why it was placed in the sacred canon, if it has not a spiritual meaning besides the literal one? We answer, that a good, and, as we apprehend, a sufficient reason has been given in this article why it is entitled to a place there, without attributing to it any other than the plain and obvious meaning. In conclusion, we have to say, that we are aware of the responsibility which rests upon every one who attempts to interpret and comment upon the holy scriptures, and are not insensible of the impiety. which is justly chargeable upon him who attempts it rashly; but we are, on the other hand, no less sensible of the great and manifest advantages which have already resulted from a free enquiry into the state and meaning of the Hebrew text, and we have therefore spoken freely, but not dogmatically, our opinions concerning it; and if this exhibition of the subject to the minds of our readers should throw as much light upon this book as it has shed upon ours, we shall consider ourselves amply repaid for our labours.

ART. IV.-1. De l'art du fontenier sondeur, et des puits Artesiens, par F. Garnier, Ingenieur au corps royal des mines, ancien élève de l'ecole polytechnique. A Paris, de l'imprimerie de Madame Huzard: 1822.

2. An Essay on the Art of Boring, with hints towards forming a new theory for the rise of waters. Rutgers press: New Brunswick, N. J., 1826.

Considering that philosophy is making such rapid strides in every branch of science, we are wonderfully slow in availing ourselves of what is within our reach. We study, we examine all that has been written on the subject of hydrostatics, and we are ingenious and expert in inventing and making hydraulic machines, but still many fair and extensive portions of our country are suffered to remain uninhabited, because we will not search deep for pure and wholesome water.

The French take advantage of every suggestion and improvement in the arts, and they are also very liberal in the ditfusion of knowledge. It is true, that many of our ingenious mechanics would gladly avail themselves of this willingness to communicate information, but they cannot profit by it, because of their ignorance of the French language. Our complaint, however, is not that all men engaged in the arts, or attached to experimental science, do not understand French, but that French works of unequivocal merit are not oftener translated. We remain for a long time in ignorance of what science is doing for us in France, and we only hear of the projection and completion of a work through the medium of foreign journals.

It is surprising, however, that the very curious and interesting book of M. Garnier, on the art of boring for water, should have remained so long unknown in this country. We were indebted for a knowledge of its existence to an English magazine, and having been so fortunate as to obtain a copy of the work, we found the subject of sufficient importance to call public attention to it, even at this late hour. We trust that it will meet with greater favour than was manifested four years after, when the American essay made its appearance.

In the year 1818, the society for the encouragement of national industry offered a prize of three thousand francs for the best essay, practical and theoretical, on the means of obtaining water by boring. In consequence of this, three memoirs were offered, of which M. Garnier's was preferred, as most particularly embracing the views of the society. The conditions exacted were as follows:

1st. To state where these Artesien wells, or bored wells, could be advantageously located, and to accompany the statement