with, and descended from Shem, one of the eight persons who escaped in the Ark? Could Shem be ignorant of what passed before the Flood, when Adam, the first man, lived so near the time of Noah? and could Noah be ignorant of the creation and fall of man, when he was contemporary with those who conversed with Adam ?"*

Oral tradition is fairly admissible when its subject contains nothing improbable or inconsistent with Scripture or reason; and the traditions of Masonry, tried by this standard, will be possessed of irresistible claims to our belief. But in matters of religion, as we possess a book of revelation to regulate our faith and practice, it must be carefully rejected, because the Scriptures contain every thing necessary to salvation; and the passions and contending interests of men would induce such numerous perversions, as would place our hopes on too precarious a basis. A most remarkable instance of this perversion occurs in the extraordinary oblivion of God's power and providences, as well as the degeneracy of man, which so rapidly succeeded the Deluge amongst the posterity of Ham. It appears from the testimony of Sanchoniatho, whom Eusebius and Theodoret speak of as an accurate and faithful historian, that in the time of Thoth, the son of Mizraim, an acknowledgment of the

* El. of Theol., part 1, chap. 1.

power of God in the creation of the world, and of his vengeance against idolatrous pursuits displayed in the universal Deluge, was disallowed and prohibited. In his Cosmogony, which was professedly compiled from the records of the Cabiri, the sons of (Ex) Melchizedek or Shem, the production of the world is described as proceeding from a heterogeneous mixture of wind, air and mud, or putrefaction. After a visionary account of the creation, the secretaries of Thoth are wholly silent about the Deluge, which creates a suspicion that their silence is rather the effect of design than ignorance; for they acknowledge that Cronus (Ham) was living after the death of his son Misor (Mizraim); and placed Thoth, the reputed author of these Records, on the throne of his father, in Egypt. Now as Ham was one of those who miraculously escaped the general destruction, it can scarcely be supposed that he would conceal so remarkable an event from Thoth, who was his private and confidential adviser. But as they intended to erect themselves into objects of divine adoration,* they erased that great event from their Records, lest mankind should be confirmed in their adherence to the true worship, by the recollection of

* "Cronus begat on Rhea seven sons, the youngest of which was consecrated a God as soon as he was born!"-Sanch. in Euseb. de Præp., 1. 1, c. 10. This infant deity, according to the best authorities, was Muth, whom the Phoenicians call Pluto.

so fearful a display of vengeance inflicted on the human race for idolatrous practices.

The facts of the Creation, and the destruction of mankind by a general Deluge, were however too important to be buried in utter oblivion, even by apostate nations; and therefore, as they were unequivocal testimonies of God's infinite power and justice, they were hid under the impenetrable veil of mystery, which overshadowed the knowledge of the one true God. Thus the elevation of a ship formed a prominent ceremony in these mysteries, which, though not explicitly applied to that event, could have no significant reference to any thing but Noah's salvation in the ark: and to involve the subject still deeper in mystery and darkness, innumerable fables were invented and engrafted on the true account of that memorable occurrence, which perplexed even the Epoptai themselves; and by directing their inquiries into a false channel, prevented a discovery of the truth.*

"A coin of Philip the elder, which was struck at Apamea, or Cibotus, contained, on its reverse, an epitome of this history. The reverse of most Asiatic coins relate to the religion and mythology of the places they were struck at. On the reverse of this coin is delineated a kind of square machine floating upon water. Through an opening in it are seen two persons, a man and a woman, as low as the breast, and upon the head of the woman is a veil. Over this ark is a triangular kind of pediment, on which there sits a dove; and below it another, which seems to flutter its wings, and hold in its mouth B 3

a small

Thus was the knowledge of this event obscurely transmitted in the heathen world. The Deluge was a circumstance, which, though omitted in the public records of many nations, was never wholly lost. Their theories were indeed much varied as to the attendant circumstances, but oral tradition was sufficient to preserve its memory alive. Not only the Egyptians, with all the caution of their early monarchs to suppress it, and, after them, the Grecians and Romans, and all other nations who adopted their theology; but the Chinese, the Japanese, the Persians, the Hindoos, and even the Indians of North and South America, have abundant theories sufficiently circumstantial to evince that they possess a traditional account of the Deluge of Noah. Their respective theories are too copious to be cited here; I must therefore refer the curious Mason to "Bryant's System of Mythology," "Perron's Zendavesta," "Nieuhoff's Voyage to Brazil," "Acasta's History of the Indies," and "Faber's Dissertation on the Mysteries of the Cabiri," where he will find this subject fully treated on.

Antediluvian Masonry depending in a great

a small branch of a tree. Before the machine is a man following a woman, who, by their attitude, seem to have just quitted it, and to have got upon dry land. Upon the Ark itself, underneath the persons there inclosed, is to be read, in distinct characters, NNE."

Bryant's Myth.

measure upon oral tradition, from the paucity of records ascending to these ages, some degree of conjecture must necessarily be used; but these conjectures, at all times, however distinguishable from fact, being founded on the strongest and most irrefragable supposition, will amount to nearly. the same thing as direct proof.

The knowledge of the ancient philosophers was all traditionary. Even Pythagoras and Plato, eminent as they were in those dark ages, can scarcely be said to have broken the trammels, and. delivered any thing but what they received on the authority of others; for it was an industrious and indefatigable collection of ancient traditions, which distinguished them from the rest of the world.

Tradition ought to be received as genuine, when the parties delivering it are not suspected of being themselves deceived, or of a wish to deceive their successors. And this may be presumed of the Hebrew Patriarchs, through whom alone Masonry is asserted to have been truly transmitted; for its deterioration and ultimate oblivion amongst idolaters is unequivocally admitted. But if the Patriarchs believed Masonry to contain some truths inseparably connected with their religion, it is scarcely possible to suppose they could be deceived in its application; nor can they be reasonably accused of a desire to deceive poste