doors barred, as I have just described in Herefordshire; only here their admittance is made contingent upon their guessing what is on the spit, "which is generally some nice little thing difficult to be hit on, and is the reward of him who first names it."* Mrs. Bray, however, when speaking of the same custom, wears her rue with a difference," as poor Ophelia phrases it. According to her, they throw " some of the cyder about the roots of the trees, placing bits of the toast on the branches; and then forming themselves into a ring, they like the bards of old set up their voices and sing a song."t

TWELFTH-DAY; EPIPHANY; January 6th.-This is called Twelfth Day because, being the twelfth from the Nativity, it is that on which the Magi came out of Persia and passed through Arabia into Bethlehem‡—rather a round-about way it must be owned-to offer homage to the infant in the manger. Collier, however, has given us one of Alfred's laws, which seems to point at another reason for this appellation. He says, "I shall mention one law with relation to holydays, by virtue of which the twelve days after the Nativity of our Saviour are made holydays."§ There is certainly nothing improbable in the idea that it might thus be named as being the twelfth and finishing day of the festivals.

In popular language these Magi are called the Three Kings of Cologne, the first of them being named Melchior,

* Idem: Idem.

+ DESCRIPTION of the Part of DEVONSHIRE BORDERING ON THE TAMAR AND THE TAVRY. By Mrs. Bray, 8vo. London, 1836.

+ "Venerunt itaque originaliter ex Persia; sed in hoc itinere transierunt per Arabiam; nam a Persia ad Judæam via directa est per medium Mesopotamia; et dein transmittendo Euphratem juxta Bîr per Arabiæ partem transeundum erat ad Judæam." Hyde; HISTORIA RELIGIONIS VETERUM PERSARUM, p. 376. 4to. Oxonii. 1700.

§ COLLIER'S ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY OF BRITAIN; vol. i.— Book iii. Cent. ix. n. 163.

an aged man with a long beard, who offered gold to our Saviour, as to a king in testimony of his regality; the second, Jasper, a beardless youth, who offered frankincense, as unto a God, in acknowledgement of his divinity; the third, Balthazar, a black, or Moor, with a large spreading beard, who offered myrrh as to a man, that was ready or fit for his sepulchre, thereby signifying his humanity.' Their skulls, or what is said to be their skulls, are preserved as reliques at Cologne.

Setting aside this idle legend, with the names that are evidently of monkish origin, let us inquire who the Magi really were, and to what country they belonged.

Without entering into a disquisition, that must of necessity be tedious, on the etymology of the word, it will be sufficient to observe that by the concurrent testimony of all ancient writers the Magi were Persians,† and that in the language of their country neither magia nor magus had the slightest reference to the black art as we now understand it. In that tongue the word Magus meant

FESTA ANGLO-ROMANA, p. 7,-12mo. London, 1677.

See Hyde; (HISTORIA RELIGIONIS VETERUM PERSARUM, cap. 31, p. 376), who gives a multitude of authorities for the fact. But at the same time it must not be concealed, that Origen (ORIGINES CONTRA CELSUM), and some others, maintained that the Magi were actual necromancers and cultivated an acquaintance with the devil. Hildebrand (DE DIEBUS FESTIS; p. 39), is very diffuse upon this subject. He says, "Magi apud Persas fuere, 1. Theologi, et ut plurimum sacerdotes Persici et sacrorum antistites. 2. Consiliarii, et tanto loco in aulis regum, ut nemini in Persia regem esse licuerit, quem non magi informassent, teste Cicer. de Divinat. Fuerunt, iii; Medici et Physici; et denique Philosophi, præsertim Mathematici, Astronomi, et Genethliaci (casters of nativities). Hinc versiculi:

Ille penes Persas magus est, qui sidera novit,

Quique scit herbarum vires cultumque Deorum.

Iidem quoque Magi fuerunt in Persia cum Brachmannibus in India, cum Druidibus Gallorum, et cum Philosophis Græcorum.

a philosopher and a priest, or at all events a philosopher who was particularly addicted to the study of religion; and who besides might be,—if he was not for the most part—a royal counsellor, a physician, an astrologer, and a mathematician. In fact they were the same in Persia, that the Brahmins were in India, the Druids amongst the Gauls, and the Philosophers amongst the Greeks.* We shall therefore the less wonder if we find strong reason for believing that Zoroaster was of their number, and that Pythagoras learnt his philosophy from them.

It was reckoned a high honour even for kings and princes to belong to this wise and influential body; so much so indeed that even Darius, the son of Hystaspes, took care to have it engraved upon his monument that he was a "magicorum doctor,"-an archimage or arch magician. Of these magicians, magi, or sophys, there were three classes; the first, which was the most learned, neither ate nor killed animals; the second ate of them, but never killed any of the tame kind; the third devoured every thing they could lay their hands upon.†

*

“ Persarum lingua Magus est, qui nostra sacerdos.” APULELI APOLOGIA, p. 446, 4to. Parisiis,, 1688. Here we have the priestly office distinctly assumed, while in Philo Judæus we find sufficient testimony to the philosophical pursuits of the Magi— Εν Πέρσαις μὲν τὸ Μάγων, οἱ τὰ φύσεως ἔργα διερευνώμενοι πρὸς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας, καθ ̓ ἡσυχίαν τὰς θείας ἀρετὰς τρανωτέραις ἐμφάσεσιν ἱεροφαντῦνται τε καὶ ἱεροφαντοῦσιν. PHILO JUDÆI OPERA.-Liber Quisquis Virtuti Studet, p. 456, Tom. ii. folio, Londini, 1742.

+“ Παρά γε μὲν τοῖς Πέρσαις, οἱ περὶ τὸ θεῖον σοφοὶ, καὶ τέτε θεράποντες, Μάγοι μὲν προσαγορεύονται, τᾶτο γὰρ δηλοῖ κατὰ τὴν ἐπιχώριον διάλεκτον ὁ Μάγος. ὅυτω δὲ μέγα καὶ σεβάσμιον γένος τοῦτο παρὰ Πέρσαις νενόμισται, ὥστε καὶ Δαρεῖον τὸν Ἰστάσπου ἐπιγράψαι τῷ μνήματι πρὸς τοῖς ἄλλοις, ὅτι καὶ μαγικῶν γένοιτο διδάσκαλος. Διήρηντο δε οὗτοι εις γένη τρία, ὥς φησι Σύμβουλος (Ευβουλος) ὅπερ τὴν τοῦ Μίθρα ἱστορίαν ἐν πολλοις βιβλίοις

It is difficult to understand, upon mere human grounds, why the Persian Magi, who had a distinct faith of their own should have travelled so far as Bethlehem to worship the future founder of a yet unexistent religion. Two circumstances however may help to throw a light upon this difficulty, and both of them so singular in themselves as to be well worthy of consideration.

There is a prophecy of Zoroaster, and which had even reached the ancient Irish, wherein we find him predicting in terms, not to be mistaken, the future birth of a Saviour and its announcement by a star. "He" says Abul-Pharajius, speaking of Zoroaster, or Zeradusht,†“taught the Persians the manifestation of the Lord Christ, commanding that they should bring him gifts; and revealed to them that it would happen in the latter time that a virgin would conceive without contact with a man, and that when her child was born a star would appear and shine by

ἀναγράψας· ὧν οἱ πρῶτοι καὶ λογιώτατοι, ὄυτ ̓ ἐσθίουσιν ἔμψυχον, οὔτε φονευουσιν, ἐμμένουσι δὲ τῇ παλαῖᾳ τῶν ζώων ἀποχῆ· οἱ δε δεύτεροι χρῶνται μὲν, οὐ μέντοι τῶν ἡμερων ζώων τι κτείνουσιν. οὐδ ̓ οἱ τρίτοι ὁμοίως τοῖς ἄλλοις ἑφάπτονται πάντων.”“ .mongst the Persians, those who are wise in divine matters, and serve the Deity, are called Magi; for such is the meaning of Magus in the language of the country. So highly is this class esteemed by the Persians that even Darius, the son of Hystaspes took care among other things to have it inscribed upon his monument that he had been a doctor of Magic. These Magi were divided into three kinds, as Symbulus (Eubulus) says, who wrote the history of Mithra in many books; of whom the first and most learned neither ate of animals, nor killed them, but persisted in the old abstinence from such food; the second class ate of them, but did not kill tame animals; the third class, like the rest of the people, laid their hands upon every thing." Porphyrius DE ABSTINENT AB ESU ANIMALIUM, p. 348, 4to. Trajecti ad Rhenum.

It has been a matter of much dispute whether these two names were identical, and if so, whether there was not more than one Zoroaster or Zeradusht. The discussion however, though highly interesting, would lead us much too far for the object now in view.

day, in the midst of which would be seen the figure of a virgin. But you, my children, will see its rising before all the nations. When, therefore ye shall behold it, go whither the star shall guide ye, and adore the child, and offer up to him your gifts, seeing that he is the WORD, which has created the Heavens."*

The second circumstance alluded to, and scarcely of less importance in the solution of this apparent difficulty, now remains to be explained. The Magi had long been accustomed to pay their annual visits to Bethlehem for the purpose of worshipping in the temple of Adonis on the 24th of December, at which time similar religious rites were celebrated throughout all the Mithratic caves of Persia in honour of the birth of their God Iao, who was supposed to have been born in a cave on the 25th of December, to have been put to death, and to have risen on the 25th of March.† Perhaps too we miss the spirit of the sacred text by taking it in too literal a sense. When it is said that the star went before the Magi, it is not to be understood that the light actually preceded them as the pillar of fire went before the Israelites. Any star would naturally seem to be moving before those who followed in its direction; and the Magi, who were astrologers even more than they were

* "Hic Persas docuit de manifestatione Domini Christi, jubens eos illi dona afferre; indicavitque futurum ut ultimis temporibus conciperet virgo fætum absque contactu viri, cùmque nasceretur apparituram stellam, quæ interdiu luceret, et in cujus medio conspiceretur figura puellæ virginis. "Vos autem, o filii mei, ante omnes gentes ortum ejus percepturi estis; cum ergo videritis stellam, abeuntes quò vos [illa] dirigat, istum adorate, offerentes ipsi munera vestra; est siquidem ille verbum quod cælum condidit." GREGORII ABUL-PHARAJII HISTORIA DYNASTIARUM, p. 54, 4to. Oxon. 1663. The above is quoted from Pocock's Latin version of the Arabic.

+ Higgin's Anacalypsis, v. ii. p. 99. Admitting the facts to be as stated by this author, it by no means follows that we are to agree with him in his inferences.

VOL. I.

C