a country mentioned in scripture, from which Solomon had great quantities of gold brought home in ships which he sent out for that purpose; but where to fix its situation is the great difficulty, authors running into various opinions on that head. Some have gone to the West, others to the East Indies, and the eastern coasts of Africa, in search of it.—Mr Bruce the celebrated Abyssinian traveller has displayed much learning and ingenuity in settling this question of Biblical history. To the satisfaction of most of his readers he has determined Ophir to be Sofala, a kingdom of Africa, on the coast of Mozambique, near Zanguebar (see SOFALA). His reasons for this determination are so generally known, that it would be improper to repeat them here at length; because such as are not already acquainted with them may consult his book, which has been long in the hands of the public. He justly observes, that in order to come to a certainty where this Ophir was, it will be necessary to examine what scripture says of it, and to keep precisely to every thing like description which we can find there, without indulging our fancy farther. If, then, the trade to Ophir was carried on from the Elanitic gulf through the Indian ocean. 2dly. The returns were gold, silver, and ivory, but especially 1 Kings, silver*. 3dly. The time of the going and coming of the fleet was precisely three years†, at no period more nor less.

Now, if Solomon's fleet sailed from the Elanitic gulf to the Indian ocean, this voyage necessarily must have been made by monsoons, for no other winds reign in that ocean. And what certainly shows this was the case, is the precise term of three years in which the fleet went and came between Ophir and Ezion-gaber.

These mines of Ophir were probably what furnish-

ed the East with gold in the earliest times: great traces of excavation must therefore have appeared.

But John Dos Santos says, that he landed at Sofala in the year 1586; that he fell up the great river Cuama as far as Ite, where, always delirious to be in the neighbourhood of gold, his order had placed their convent. Thence he penetrated for above 200 leagues into the country, and saw the gold-mines then working at a mountain called Afura. At a considerable distance from these are the silver mines of Chicona; at both places there is a great appearance of ancient excavations; and at both places the houses of the kings are built with mud and straw, whilst there are large remains of masonry buildings of stone and lime.

Every thing then conspires to fix the Ophir of Solomon in the kingdom of Sofala, provided it would necessarily require neither more nor less than three years to make a voyage from Ezion-gaber to that place and Tarshish and return. To establish this important fact, our author observes, that the fleet or ship for Sofala, parting in June from Ezion-gaber (see EZION-GABER), would run down before the northern monsoon to Mocha (see MOCHA). Here, not the monsoon, but the direction of the gulph, changes; and the violence of the south-westers, which then reign in the Indian ocean, make themselves at times felt even in Mocha roads. The vessel therefore comes to an anchor in the harbour of Mocha; and here she waits for moderate weather and a fair wind, which carries her out of the straits of Babelmandeb, through the few leagues where the wind is variable.

Her course from this is nearly south-west, and she meets at cape Gardefan a strong south-wester that blows directly in her teeth. Being obliged to return into the gulph, she mistakes this for a trade-wind; because she is not able to make her voyage to Mocha but by the summer monsoon, which carries her no farther than the straits of Babelmandeb, and then leaves her in the face of a contrary wind, a strong current to the northward, and violent swell.

In attempting this voyage with sails, in these circumstances, was absolutely impossible, as their vessels went only before the wind: if it was performed at all, it must have been by oars; and great havoc and loss of men must have been the consequence of the several trials.

At last, philosophy and observation, together with the unwearied perseverance of man bent upon his own views and interest, removed these difficulties, and showed the mariners of the Arabian gulph, that these periodical winds, which in the beginning they looked upon as invincible barriers to the trading to Sofala, when once understood, were the very means of performing this voyage safely and expeditiously.

The vessel trading to Sofala failed from the bottom of the Arabian gulph in summer, with the monsoon at north, which carried her to Mocha. There the monsoon failed her by the change of the direction of the gulph. The south-west winds, which blow without cape Gardefan in the Indian ocean, forced themselves round the cape so as to be felt in the road of Mocha, and make it uneasy riding there. But these soon changed, the weather became moderate, and the vessel, we suppose in the month of August, was safe at anchor. anchor under cape Gardefan, where was the port which, many years afterwards, was called Promontorium Aromatum. Here the ship was obliged to stay all November, because all these summer months the wind south of the cape was a strong south-west, as hath been before said, directly in the teeth of the voyage to Sofala. But this time was not lost; part of the goods bought to be ready for the return was ivory, frankincense, and myrrh; and the ship was then at the principal mart for these.

Our author supposes, that in November the vessel failed with the wind at north-east, with which she would soon have made her voyage: but off the coast of Melinda, in the beginning of December, she there met an anomalous monsoon at south-west, in our days first observed by Dr Halley, which cut off her voyage to Sofala, and obliged her to put into the small harbour of Mocha, near Melinda, but nearer still to Tarshish, which we find here by accident, and which we think a strong corroboration that we are right as to the rest of the voyage. In the annals of Abyssinia, it is said that Amda Sion, making war upon that coast in the 14th century, in a list of the rebellious Moorish vassals, mentions the chief of Tarshish as one of them, in the very situation where we have now placed him.

Solomon's vessel, then, was obliged to stay at Tarshish till the month of April of the second year. In May, the wind set in at north-east, and probably carried her that same month to Sofala. All the time she spent at Tarshish was not lost, for part of her cargo was to be brought from that place; and she probably bought, beloak, or left it there. From May of the second year, to the end of that monsoon in October the vessel could not stir, the wind was north east. But this time, far from being lost, was necessary to the traders for getting in their cargo, which we shall suppose was ready for them.

The ship sails, on her return, in the month of November of the second year, with the monsoon south-west, which in a very few weeks would have carried her into the Arabian gulf. But off Mocha, near Melinda and Tarshish, she met the north-east monsoon, and was obliged to go into that port and stay there till the end of that monsoon; after which a south-west came to her relief in May of the third year. With the May monsoon she ran to Mocha within the straits, and was there confined by the summer monsoon blowing up the Arabian gulf from Suez, and meeting her. Here she lay till that monsoon, which in summer blows northerly from Suez, changed to a south-east one in October or November, and that very easily brought her up into the Elanitic gulf, the middle or end of December of the third year. She had no need of more time to complete her voyage, and it was not possible she could do it in less.

Such is a very short and imperfect abstract of our author's reasons for placing Ophir in Sofala. If it excite the curiosity of our readers to consult his work, it will answer the purpose for which we have made it.

We are now to give another ingenious conjecture concerning the situation of Ophir and Tarshish, with which we have been favoured by Dr Doig, the learned author of Letters on the Savage State, addressed to Lord Kames.

This respectable writer holds that Ophir was somewhere on the west coast of Africa, and that Tarshish was the ancient Bética in Spain. His essay is not yet published; but he authorizes us to give the following abstract of it: "The first time that Ophir, or rather Aufr, occurs in scripture, is in Gen. x. 29, where the sacred historian, enumerating the sons of Joktan, mentions Aufr as one of them." According to his account, the descendants of those 13 brothers settled all in a contiguous situation, from Mocha (the Mocha of the moderns) to Sepharah, a mountain of the east. Moses, as every one knows, denominates countries, and the inhabitants of countries, from the patriarch of whom those inhabitants descended. In describing the course of one of the branches of the river of paradise, the same Moses informs us that it encompassed the whole land of Havilah, &c., which abounded with fine gold, bdelium, and the ouyx stone; and this land had its name from Havilah the 12th son of the patriarch Joktan. Ophir or Aufr was Havilah's immediate elder brother; and of course the descendants of the former, in all probability, fixed their habitation in the neighbourhood of those of the latter. If, then, the land of Havilah abounded with gold and precious stones, the land of Ophir undoubtedly produced the very same articles.

Here then we have the original Ophir; here was the origin founded the primary gold of Ophir; and here lay the Ophir mentioned in Job xi. 24. But as navigation was then in its infant state, the native land of gold Solomon; mentioned by Job must have been much nearer home than that to which the fleets of Solomon and Hiram made their triennial voyages. That several countries on the south-east coast of Africa abounded with gold long after the era of Job, is evident from the testimony of Herodotus, Strabo, Diodorus Siculus, Ptolemy, Pomponius Mela, &c.; but that in these countries the Ophir of Solomon could not be situated, is plain, because his ships in the same voyage touched at Tarshish, which lay in a very different quarter.

The Abyssinian traveller has placed this regio aurifera in Sofala on the eastern coast of Africa, nearly opposite to the island of Madagascar. This hypothesis was current an hundred years before he was born; but I am persuaded (says our author) that it is not tenable. The Ophir of Solomon, in whatever part of Africa it lay, must have been well known, prior to his reign, both to the Phoenicians and the Edomites. These people navigated that monarch's fleet, and therefore could be no strangers to the port whither they were bound. That it was in Africa is certain; and that it was on the west coast of that immense peninsula, will appear more than probable, when we have ascertained the situation of Tarshish, and the usual course of Phoenician navigation. To these objects, therefore, we shall now direct our enquiries.

"Javan, the fourth son of the patriarch Japhet, had four sons, Eliab, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim or Rodanim; among whose descendants were the isles of the Gentiles divided." The city of Tarshish on the coast of Cilicia, at once ascertains the region colonized by the descendants of Tarshish. But as much depends... depends upon determining the position of this country, I shall endeavour (says the Doctor) to fix it with all possible precision.

"In the first place, I must beg leave to observe, that there is not a single passage in any ancient author, sacred or profane, that so much as alludes to any city, district, canton, or country, of the name of Tarshish in the eastern parts of the world. The descendants of Javan, of whom Tarshish was one, are agreed on all hands to have extended their settlements towards the north-west, i.e., into Asia Minor, Italy, and Spain. The inhabitants of Tarshish are everywhere in scripture said to be addicted to navigation and commerce, in which they seem to have been connected with the Tyrians and Phenicians*, who were always said by the Jews to inhabit the isles of the sea. Indeed, in Hebrew geography, all the countries toward the north and west, which were divided from Judea by the sea, were called the isles of the sea†. Thus Isaiah:

"The burden of Tyre. Howl ye ships of Tarshish, for it is laid waste, so that there is no house, no entering in: from the land Chittim it is revealed unto them. Be still ye inhabitants of the isle, thou whom the merchants of Zidon, that pass over the sea, have replenished." The land of Chittim was Macedonia, and often Greece, from which every one knows that the destruction of Tyre came; and that Tarshish was not an unconcerned spectator of that destruction, is obvious from the same prophet, who proceeds to say §: "As at the report concerning Egypt, so shall they be sorely pierced at the report concerning Tyre. Pass over to Tarshish; howl ye inhabitants of the isle. Is this thy joyous city?" It appears likewise from Ezekiel §, that Tarshish was the merchant with whom Tyre traded for silver, iron, tin, and lead, and that this trade was carried on in fairs.

"From all these passages, it seems to be evident, that the descendants of Tarshish settled on the western coast of Asia Minor; that these people were addicted to navigation and commerce; that in the course of their traffic they were connected with the Tyrians and Phenicians; that the commerce they carried on consisted of silver, iron, tin, and lead; that the people of Tarshish were connected with Kittim and the isles of the Gentiles, which are confessedly situated toward the north and west of Judea.

"But lest, after all, a fact so fully authenticated should still be called in question, I shall add one proof more, which will place the matter beyond the reach of doubt and controversy.

"When the prophet Jonah intended to flee from the presence of the Lord, in order to avoid preaching at Nineveh, let us see where the peevish defterer embarked. (Jonah i. 3.) 'And Jonah rose up to flee unto Tarshish, from the presence of the Lord, and went down to Joppa; and he found a ship going to Tarshish, and he paid the fare thereof, and went down into it, to go with them into Tarshish, from the presence of the Lord.' Every body knows that Joppa or Japhath stood upon the shore of the Mediterranean; of course the fugitive prophet had determined to go to some very distant region westward, and by that means to get as far from Nineveh as possible."

Having thus proved to a demonstration, that the original Tarshish was a region on the western coast of Asia Minor, where either the patriarch of that name, or some of his immediate descendants, planted a colony, it remains to determine whether this was actually the country from which Solomon imported the vast quantities of silver mentioned by the sacred historian. That it was not, our author frankly acknowledges; and therefore, says he, we must look out for Solomon's Tarshish in some other quarter of the globe.

"To pave the way for this discovery, he very justly observes, that it has at all times been a common practice to transfer the name of one country to another, in consequence of some analogy or resemblance between them. It has likewise often happened, that when a commodity was brought from a very distant country by a very distant people, the people to whom it was imported have taken it for granted that it was produced in the region from which it was immediately brought to them. Of the truth of this position no man acquainted with the Greek and Roman poets can for a moment entertain a doubt. Hence the Assyrium anomum of Virgil, and the Assyrium malabatrum of Horace, though these articles were the product not of Assyria but of India. The Jews, who were as little acquainted with foreign countries as the Greeks and Romans, had very probably the same notions with them respecting articles of commerce; and if so, they would undoubtedly suppose, that the silver sold by the merchants of Tarshish was the product of that country. When this mistake came to be discovered, they very naturally transferred the name Tarshish from one country of the merchants to that of the articles which they imported. Let us now, says our author, try if we cannot find out where that country was.

"It has been already shown, by quotations from Isaiah and Ezekiel, that the merchants of Tarshish traded in the markets of Tyre with silver, iron, lead, and tin. To these authorities, we shall add another from Jeremiah: "Silver (says that prophet) spread into plates is brought from Tarshish." But in Spain, continues our learned dissertator, all those commodities were found in the greatest abundance. All the ancient authors who describe that region dwell with rapture on its silver mines. This fact is too generally known to need to be supported by authorities. Spain was then the region which furnished Solomon's traders with the immense mass of silver he is said to have imported. This was, one might say, the modern Tarshish; and indeed both Josephus and Eusebius are positive that the posterity of Tarshish actually peopled that country. If this was an early opinion, as it certainly was, the Jews would of course denominate Spain from the patriarch in question.

"I have shown above, that the inhabitants of Tarshish were strictly connected with the Kittim, or Grecians: I shall here produce an authority which will prove to a demonstration that the Kittim had extended their commerce into that part of Africa now called Barbary.

"The Prophet Ezekiel, (xxvii. 6.) describing the splendor and magnificence of Tyre, tells us, 'that the company of the Ashurites made her benches of ivory, brought from the isles of Kittim.' In the first place, I must observe, that there is probably a small error in the orthography of the word Ashurites. This term is everywhere in scripture translated Assyrians, which which translation is certainly just. But how the Assyrians could export ivory from the isles of Kittim, and fashion it into benches for the Tyrian mariners, is, in my opinion, a problem of no easy solution. The fact is, Ashurim should be Asherim, that is, the company of the men of Asher. The tribe of Asher obtained its inheritance in the neighbourhood of Tyre; (see Josh. xix. 28.) 'And Hebron, and Rehob, and Hammon and Canah, unto Zidon the great.' The companies of the tribe of the Asherites then, and not the Ashurim, were the people who manufactured the benches in question.

"Be that as it may, the ivory of which these implements were formed was imported from the isles of Kittim, that is, from Greece and its neighbourhood. These islands, it is certain, never produced ivory. They must therefore have imported it from some other country; but no other country, to which the Greeks and their neighbours could have extended their commerce, except the north of Africa, produced that commodity. The conclusion then is, that the maritime states of Asia Minor, Greece, and probably the Etruscans on the west coast of Italy, carried on a gainful commerce with Spain and Barbary at a very early period.

"We have now seen that the original Tarshish on the coast of Asia Minor did not produce the metals imported by Solomon's fleet; that no Tarshish is to be found in the eastern parts of the globe; that the Tarshish we are in quest of was undoubtedly situated somewhere towards the west of Judea: we have shown that the mercantile people of Asia Minor, Greece, and probably of Italy, actually imported some of those articles from the coast of Africa; we have hazarded a conjecture, that Spain was the modern Tarshish, and that very country from which Solomon imported his silver, and the Tyrians their silver, iron, tin, and lead. Let us now make a trial whether we cannot exhibit some internal proofs in support of the hypothesis we have above adopted.

"The ancients divided Spain into three parts, Baetica, Lusitania, and Tarraconensis. Baetica is the modern Andalusia. It stretched along the Fretum Herculeum, or Straits of Gibraltar, to the mouth of Guadalquivir. This region is thought by some to have been the Elysian fields of the poets. The river Baetis, which divides it, is called Tartessus, by Aristotle, Stesichorus, Strabo, Pausanias, Steph. Byzant. and Avianus. Here too we have a city and a lake of the same name. But Tartessus is positively the very same with Tarshish. The Phoenicians, by changing sabin into thau, made it Tartish. The Greeks manufactured the rest, by changing Tartish into Tartis, and in process of time into Tartessus. That the Phoenicians actually changed sabin into thau is certain; for Plutarch tells us in the life of Sylla, that in their language an ox was called thau, which is, no doubt, the same with the Hebrew b'or.

"From this deduction, it appears highly probable at least, that the Spanish Baetica was originally called Tarshish. Indeed this similarity of names has operated so powerfully on the learned Bochart, and on some other moderns of no mean figure, that they have positively affirmed, as Josephus had done before them, that the patriarch Tarshish actually settled in that country. This I should think not altogether probable; but that his descendants who settled on the coast of Asia Minor colonized Baetica, and carried on an uninterrupted commerce to that country, along with the Phoenicians, for many centuries after it was peopled, and that from the circumstances above narrated, it was denominated Tarshish, are facts too palpable to admit of contradiction.

"Let us now see whether this Baetica, where I have endeavoured to fix the situation of the Tarshish of the scriptures, was actually furnished with those articles of commerce which are said to have been imported from that country. To enlarge on this topic would be altogether superfluous. Diodorus Siculus, Strabo, Polybius, Pliny, Solinus, and, in one word, all the Greek and Roman historians who have mentioned that region, have unanimously exhibited it as the native land of silver, iron, and tin: to these, contrary to the opinions of the celebrated modern traveller, they likewise add gold in very large quantities."

Our author having thus ascertained the situation of Tarshish, proceeds to prove, by a mass of evidence too large for our insertion, that the Edomites and Tyrians had doubled the Cape, and almost encompassed Africa, long before the era of Solomon. Then referring to 1 Kings, chap. ix. and x. 2 Chron. viii. ix. 2 Kings xxii. and 2 Chron. xx. he observes, that from these authorities it appears indubitable, that the fleets of Solomon and Hiram sailed from Eloth and Eziongeber; that the voyages to Ophir and Tarshish were exactly the same, performed at one and the same time, by the very same fleet; which must necessarily have encompassed the peninsula of Africa before it could arrive at the country of Tarshish. This being the case, the traders might easily enough collect the gold on the coast of Guinea, or on what is now vulgarly called the Gold Coast. The ivory they might readily enough procure on the Barbary coast, opposite to Tarshish. In Africa, too, they might hunt apes, monkeys, baboons, &c.; and peacocks, or rather parrots, and parroquets, they might surprize in the forests which abounded on the coast. In Spain, silver, iron, lead, and tin, were, one may say, the native produce of the soil. Even at this early period, the Phoenician navigators had discovered the Cassiterides, or Scilly islands and Cornwall; and from that region, in company with the merchants, may have supplied them with that rare commodity.

"I have supposed that the navy of Solomon and Hiram collected their gold in the course of their voyage somewheres on the coast of Africa, beyond the Cape, for the following reasons: Had they found the golden fleece at Sofala (a), or any part of the coast of Africa, they would have chosen to return and unlade at Eloth or Ezion-geber, rather than pursue a long and dangerous course, quite round Africa, to Tarshish; to which last country they might have shipped their

(a) That Sofala opposite to the island of Madagascar was Ophir, was an ancient conjecture. See Bocchart. Chan. i. 2. cap. 27. p. 160. 4to. course much more commodiously from Zidon, Tyre, Joppa, &c. But being obliged to double the Cape in quest of some of these articles which they were enjoined to import, they pushed onward to Tarshish, and returned by the pillars of Hercules to Tyre, or perhaps to Joppa, &c. Their next voyage commenced from one or other of these ports, from which they directed their course to Tarshish; and having taken part of their lading there, they afterwards coasted round Africa, and so arrived once more at Ezion-geber.

Let us now attend to the space of time in which these voyages were performed. We are told expressly (2 Chron ix. 21.) that once every three years came the ships of Tarshish, &c. This is exactly the time one would naturally imagine necessary to perform such a distant voyage, at a period when navigation was still in its infancy, and mariners seldom ventured to lose sight of the coast. Of this we have an irrefragable proof in the history of a voyage round the very same continent, undertaken and accomplished in the very same space of time, about two centuries after.

We learn from Herodotus, l. 2. cap. 149. that Necho, one of the later kings of Egypt, whom the scripture calls Pharaoh Necho, built a great number of ships, both on the Red Sea and the Mediterranean. The same historian, lib. iv. cap. 42., informs us, that this enterprising monarch projected a voyage round the continent of Africa, which was actually accomplished in the space of three years. In the conduct of this enterprise, he employed Phoenician mariners, as Solomon had done before him. These, we may suppose, were assisted in the course of this navigation by charts or journals, or at least by traditional accounts derived from their ancestors: "These navigators (says the historian) took their departure from a port on the Red Sea, and sailing from thence into the southern ocean, and, in the beginning of autumn, landing on the coast of Africa, there they sowed some grain which they had carried out with them on board their vessels. In this place they waited till the crop was ripened; and, having cut it down, they proceeded on their voyage. Having spent two years in this navigation, in the third they returned to Egypt, by the pillars of Hercules. These mariners, adds the author, reported a fact, which, for his part, he could by no means believe to be true; namely, that in one part of their course their shadows fell on their right; a circumstance which gives considerable weight to the truth of the relation."

Let it now be observed, that Phoenician mariners navigated the fleet of Solomon: the same people conducted that of Necho: the fleet of Necho spent three years in the course of its voyage; that of Solomon did the same in its course about two centuries before: the fleet of Necho sailed from a port on the Red sea; that of Solomon took its departure from Ezion-geber, situated on the same sea; the fleet of the former returned by the pillars of Hercules; that of the latter, according to the hypothesis, pursued the very same route. Such a coincidence of similar circumstances united with those adduced in the preceding part of this article, seem to prove almost to a demonstration, that the navy of Hiram and Solomon performed a voyage round Africa, in that age, in the same manner as that of Necho did two centuries after.

Upon the whole, I conclude, that the original Ophir, which is really Aufr or Aulr, was situated on the south of Arabia Felix, between Sheba and Havilah, which last was encompassed by one of the branches of the river of Paradise: that the name Ophir, i.e. Aufr, was, in consequence of its resemblance, in process of time transferred to a region on the coast of Africa; and that from it first Ajer and then Africa was denominated: that the primitive Tarshish was Cilicia, and that the Jews applied this name to all the commercial states on the coast of Asia Minor, and perhaps of Italy, there being strong presumptions that the Tyrrhenians were colonists from Tarshish; that Boetica, and perhaps some other regions of Spain, being planted with colonies from Tarshish, likewise acquired the name of Tarshish; that the Tyrians were strictly connected with the merchants of Tarshish in their commercial enterprises; that Tarshish was certainly situated westward from Judea, Phoenicia, &c.; that no other country in the western quarters produced the commodities imported by the two kings, except Spain and the opposite coasts; that this country, in those ages, produced not only silver, iron, tin, and lead, but likewise gold in great abundance; that the merchants of Kittim imported ivory, of which the Asherites made benches for the Tyrians; which commodity they must have purchased on the coast of Barbary, where the Jews and Phoenicians would find the same article; that Tarshish being situated in Spain, it was impossible for a fleet sailing from Ezion-geber, to arrive at that country without encompassing Africa; Ophir situated, of course, the fleet in question did actually end on the coast of that continent; that the Ophir of Solomon must have been situated somewhere on the coast of Africa, to the west of the Cape, because from it the course to Tarshish was more eligible than to return the same way back to Ezion-geber."

Our author supports this conclusion by many other arguments and authorities, which the limits prescribed will not permit us to detail; but perhaps the article might be deemed incomplete, if we did not show how he obviates an objection that will readily occur to his theory. "If the original Ophir was seated on the coast of Arabia Felix, and the modern region of the same name on the west coast of Africa, it may be made a question, how the latter country came to be denominated from the former? Nothing (says our author) can be more easy than to answer this question. The practice of adapting the name of an ancient country to a newly discovered one, resembling the other in appearance, in situation, in figure, in distance, in the nature of the climate, productions, &c. has ever been so common, that to produce instances would be altogether superfluous. The newly discovered region on the coast of Africa abounded with the same species of commodities by which the original one was distinguished; and, of course, the name of the latter was annexed to the former."

Whether Mr Bruce's hypothesis or Dr Doig's, respecting the long disputed situation of Solomon's Ophir, be the true one, it is not for us to decide. Both are plausible. Ophira plausible, both are supported by much ingenuity and uncommon erudition; but we do not think that the arguments of either writer furnish a complete confusion of those adduced by the other. Sub judice lis est.