former's mission, as we are not told that they were nicknamed from a peculiar act they had committed. We might just as well imagine that there is a particular meaning to the names of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (Numbers xvi) because they had rebelled against God, or that there is a mysterious. signification to the name of Esau because he had sold his birthright for a mess of pottage (Gen. xxv, 33), whereas in that particular case we are plainly informed (Gen. xxv, 30) that Esau was nicknamed Edom (red) from the colour of the lentils of which the pottage was made.

With reference to the difference between the Booòp Bosor mentioned by St. Peter (2nd Epistle, ii, 15) and the Hebrew Baaor, it can easily be explained that the former was written in Greek, in which alphabet there is no guttural letter y as exists in the Semitic languages.

The supernatural power of Balaam has also been misunderstood by many commentators such as Philo, Ambrose, and Augustine, who have regarded him merely as a wizard and a worshipper of idols, compelled by God, against his will, to give utterance to blessings upon Israel instead of curses. It is incomprehensible to me how this opinion was arrived at after reading the 8th verse of the 22nd chapter of Numbers, when Balaam tells the Princes of Moab that he would inform them of what the Lord (Jehovah) commanded him to do; and in the 18th verse that follows he mentions the Lord (Jehovah) as his God. Moreover, a wizard or false propbet would not utter the words mentioned in the 16th verse of the 24th chapter of Numbers, wherein Balaam enumerates the attributes of God Almighty, and ends by uttering the remarkable prophecies that follow.

Balaam, no doubt, knew and acknowledged the Lord Jehovah as his God, the same as Abraham and Job, with this difference, that he chose the wages of sin in preference to placing implicit confidence in his God, as faithful Abraham and Job did, and sold his divine inheritance for the mammon of unrighteousness in lieu of depending on God's bounty, as his ultimate fate proved, when he preferred the enjoyment of voluptuous living with the Midianites for a season, rather than lean upon the omnipotent guidance of the Most High.

I have always entertained the belief that the Arameans and Assyrians possessed a knowledge of the true God, but worshipped Him under peculiar names and attributes. This is proved by the Divine mission of the prophet Jonah to Nineveh, and the way Laban and Bethuel spoke of the

existence of the Lord (Jehovah) and blest the future seed of Rebekah their sister (Gen. xxiv, 50 and 60). Moreover, in all our discoveries in Assyria we found no trace of any representation of revolting sacrifices, which were practised by other Gentile nations; but, on the contrary, on the bronze gate of Shalmanesar II, which I discovered at Balawat in 1878, there can only be seen offerings of bullocks and rams, the same as the animals offered by Balaam and those that were ordered for sacrifice in the Mosaic law,

It is probable that the wise men or Magi, mentioned in the second chapter of St. Matthew, who offered gifts of gold, and frankincense, and myrrh to our infant Saviour, were notable Aramean diviners of the same race as Nahor, Job, and Balaam, and held independent positions in the land. Of course the country, nationality, and position of those magnates have also been the element of much comment ever since the beginning of the Christian dispensation; but the majority of the critics bave agreed that those Magi were natives of Persia, on the mistaken supposition that the word Magi pertained solely to a certain priestcraft of that country. Why and wherefore such a notion was arrived at, it is beyond my comprehension to understand. We know of no other Gentile nation, excepting those whose language was Aramean, who have had any connexion with Divine measures such as the family of Terah, the repentance of the Ninevites, and the prophetic calling of Balaam. The very fact of the allusion made by St. Matthew that the Magi had gone to Jerusalem from the east, and not from any known country in particular, seems to me to accord with other passages of Scripture which point to a certain locality without referring to any point of the compass. It must have meant then as having, "seen his star in the east," the same as "Sephar a mount of the east (Gen. x, 30), Abraham sent the sons of the concubines "eastward into the east country" (Gen. xxv, 6), Jacob “ into the land of the children of the east (Gen. xxix, 1), Balaam was brought "out of the mountains of the east (Num. xxiii, 7), Job "was the greatest of all the children of the east" (Job i, 3), etc.

came

There is also another notable connexion between the prophecy of Balaam (Num. xxv, 17) and the star alluded to by the wise men (Matt. ii, 2) which they said they had seen in the east. The word east here, surely, could not have meant a point of the compass, as opposite to west? It must mean that part of Mesopotamia which was known to the Hebrews by repute as the east country, as we now call certain parts of

Turkey, the Levant and Asia Minor. It is very remarkable that the Turks term the latter province Anatoley

buil the same word avaroλń which is used in Greek in St. Matthew (ii, 2) for the east, the country of the Magi.

I am also of opinion that the prophecy alluded to in the 10th verse of the 72nd Psalm was fulfilled by the Magi; and although the exact land of Sheba is still shrouded in mystery it seems to me that it will not be extraordinary to suppose that, as one of the grandsons of Abraham by Keturah, named Sheba, was sent to the "east country" by his grandsire, a province in Northern Mesopotamia was called after him.

I may conclude my lecture with a few words on the subject of our Assyrian and Babylonian researches, as I know that this Institute has always taken a deep interest in them.

Since my explorations were stopped at the end of 1882, owing to the expiration of my firman, no excavations have been allowed to be carried on in Assyria and Babylonia on the same condition as I was permitted to enjoy. Consequently the four important sites which I was anxious to examine in Babylonia, Assyria, and elsewhere, are now lying dormant for want of proper representation at headquarters.

I am grieved beyond measure that the remainder of the palaces and temples which have been discovered by us, are now lying buried underground, and, worse than all, that in Babylonia, especially, valuable records are being destroyed daily, through the clandestine excavations of the Arab diggers for the sake of selling what they find to native brokers for European purchasers, who smuggle them out of the country.

The Porte does not permit now any antiquities to be exported, but those who wish to make researches are only allowed to take squeezes and copies of any object found. This proposal was made to me as far back as 1876, but I refused to have anything to do with such a one-sided benefit. When Sir Henry Layard was appointed ambassador at Constantinople, however, he at once used his influence with the Sultan, and I was then allowed to send to the British Museum all antiquities discovered, but gave all the duplicates to the Ottoman authorities.

I feel confident that if our ambassador at Constantinople would use his influence with the Sultan, His Majesty will not say No to a proper representation to him, especially when he

knows that what we want is not new sites, but merely the recovering the remnant of the collections which we have already discovered through his bounty and that of his father, Sultan Abd-Almajeed.

The French, Germans, and Americans have been excavating for the last two years in Babylonia, but without any material benefit either to themselves or to the Ottoman Government, but in a number of ancient sites unauthorised excavations are carried on by the natives without let or hindrance on the part of the local authorities. It is impossible to estimate the priceless records that have been and are being destroyed by the Arab diggers, who are obliged to carry on their nefarious practices at night, or in a hurry, for fear of being detected. I think it is a great shame that steps are not being taken to protect those valuable monuments from destruction. Both for the sake of literature and history the researches in Assyria, Babylonia, and the Holy Land ought to be conducted on an international principle, and without jealousy or clashing interests. I feel convinced that there are inestimable treasures still buried underground in Asiatic Turkey, which will, if unearthed, throw a great lustre on the already discovered records of the past.

The PRESIDENT, Sir G. G. STOKES, Bart., M.P., P.R.S.-I will ask you to return your thanks to Mr. Rassam for his very elaborate paper. Of course he being a native of and having long lived in the East, and studied all the features of the country himself, and engaged in the excavations, he is an authority on the subject of which he speaks. (Applause.) I will now call upon those who wish to make remarks upon the paper to do so.

Mr. THEOPHILUS G. PINCHES.-I feel that we ought all to be very much obliged to Mr. Rassam, who is a native of that country of the Assyrians spoken of in the Bible, for having given us his opinion upon the difficult question of the position of the Garden of Eden, a question upon which I myself have not a very clear idea; but this paper of Mr. Rassam's will, let us hope, help to settle the question. It agrees with a preconceived idea I had, and it also agrees, to a certain extent, with the views of the illustrious father of Friedrich Delitzsch (Professor Franz Delitzsch), who is now

dead. The tablets containing cuneiform inscriptions unfortunately give no information whatever upon the subject, although the present Professor Delitzsch (the son of the famous old Professor of Hebrew at Leipsic) claims to have founded his views about it upon them. Professor Delitzsch's opinion as to the position of the Garden of Eden, viz., that understood as Babylonia, rests on the fact that one of the Akkadian words for country is Edina, and the Assyrian form Edinu, the same as Eden.

There is an additional weight lent to this statement by a fragment of a tablet which was acquired by the Rev. Dr. Hayes Ward, in Mesopotamia, when exploring there some years ago. He allowed me the privilege of reading the fragment. It gave, in four lines, the words Sipar (or Sippar); Sipar (or Sippar) Edina, i.e., Sipar of Eden (to adopt Professor Delitzsch's translation); Sipar (or Sippar) Uldua; and Sipar (or Sippar) Šamaš (Sipar of the Sungod).

I am inclined to the view that Babylonia had some legend of the Garden of Eden, as the Hebrews had, but they tried to locate that Garden of Eden in their own country, and this is the Garden of Eden which Professor Delitzsch has discussed, or rather it is that of which he treats in his book entitled Wo lag das Paradies?

With regard to the Ur of the Chaldees, I am inclined to agree with Mr. Rassam. The position of Mugheir I regard as too far south—I may be wrong. Mr. Boscawen just now whispered to me that Mugheir must be Ur of the Chaldees because it was the city of the worship of the Moon-god, and so was Haran. I fail to see the exact reason for that-that is to say, I fail to see why, on that account, Mugheir should be the Ur of the Chaldees, but I hope to have an opportunity of examining the matter, and perhaps in an additional note on this paper I may be able to say something about it; but what Mr. Rassam says about the family of Abraham having to travel from the extreme south portion of Babylonia so far north-west has great weight, and if my suggestion be a correct onc, that Ur of the Chaldees is the same as Uri, the native name of Akkad, it would enable Ur of the Chaldees to be located from 120 to 150 or more miles higher up in the direction of Haran, and would shorten the distance to be traversed by the family of Abraham to that exent.

I may add that an additional argument in favour of Mr. Rassam's theory that Mugheir is not Ur of the Chaldees is, that the native