An instance of the confusion produced by the different uses of the term Canaan is supplied by Gen. x. 15-18, where the list of Phoenician cities is interrupted by the five Palestinian nations, the Hittites, Jebusites, &c. As De Goeje has pointed out, the original writer of the Table of Nations understood Canaan in the sense of Phoenicia—he had probably used a Phoenician chart; the interpolator, in that of Palestine (Theologisch Tijdschrift, 1870, p. 241).

Why Canaan is placed among the descendants of Ham could only be shown by a chart of the world as known to the Phoenicians. Clearly there was a misunderstanding as to the coasts of the Red Sea.

Compare Movers, Die Phönizier, vol. ii. (1), pp. 4-6; Knobel, Die Völkertafel der Genesis, pp. 307-310; De Goeje, Over de Namen Phoenicie in Kanaän, Amst. 1870.

LAND OF. In the map it presents the appearance of a narrow slip of country, extending along the eastern coast of the Mediterranean; from which, to the river Jordan, the utmost width does not exceed fifty miles. This river was the eastern boundary of the land of Canaan, or Palestine, properly so called, which derived its name from the Philistines or Palestines originally inhabiting the coast. To three of the twelve tribes, however, Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh, portions of territory were assigned on the eastern side of the river, which were afterward extended by the subjugation of the neighbouring nations. The territory of Tyre and Sidon was its ancient border on the north-west; the range of the Libanus and Antilibanus forms a natural boundary on the north and north-east; while in the south it is pressed upon by the Syrian and Arabian deserts. Within this circumscribed district, such were the physical advantages of the soil and climate, there existed, in the happiest periods of the Jewish nation, an immense population. The kingdom of David and Solomon, however, extended far beyond these narrow limits. In a north-eastern direction, it was bounded only by the river Euphrates, and included a considerable part of Syria. It is stated that Solomon had dominion over all the region on the western side of the Euphrates, from Thiphsah, or Thapsacus, on that river, in latitude 25° 20´, to Azzah, or Gaza. “Tadmore in the wilderness,” (Palmyra,) which the Jewish monarch is stated to have built, (that is, either founded or fortified,) is considerably to the north-east of Damascus, being only a day’s journey from the Euphrates; and Hamath, the Epiphania of the Greeks, (still called Hamah,) in the territory belonging to which city Solomon had several “store cities,” is seated on the Orontes, in latitude 34° 45´ N. On the east and south-east, the kingdom of Solomon was extended by the conquest of the country of Moab, that of the Ammonites, and Edom; and tracts which were either inhabited or pastured by the Israelites, lay still farther eastward. Maon, which belonged to the tribe of Judah, and was situated in or near the desert of Paran, is described by Abulfeda as the farthest city of Syria toward Arabia, being two days’ journey beyond Zoar. In the time of David, the people of Israel, women and children included, amounted, on the lowest computation, to five millions; beside the tributary Canaanites, and other conquered nations. The vast resources of the country, and the power of the Jewish monarch, may be estimated not only by the consideration in which he was held by the contemporary sovereigns of Egypt, Tyre, and Assyria, but by the strength of the several kingdoms into which the dominions of David were subsequently divided. Damascus revolted during the reign of Solomon, and shook off the Jewish yoke. At his death, ten of the tribes revolted under Jeroboam, and the country became divided into the two rival kingdoms of Judah and Israel, having for their capitals Jerusalem and Samaria. The kingdom of Israel fell before the Assyrian conqueror, in the year B. C. 721, after it had subsisted about two hundred and fifty years. That of Judah survived about one hundred and thirty years, Judea being finally subdued and laid waste by Nebuchadnezzar, and the temple burned B. C. 588. Idumea was conquered a few years after. From this period till the æra of Alexander the Great, Palestine remained subject to the Chaldean, Median, and Persian dynasties. At his death, Judea fell under the dominion of the kings of Syria, and, with some short and troubled intervals, remained subject either to the kings of Syria or of Egypt, till John Hyrcanus shook off the Syrian yoke, and assumed the diadem, B. C. 130. The Asmonean dynasty, which united, in the person of the monarch, the functions of king and pontiff, though tributary to Roman conquerors, lasted one hundred and twenty-six years, till the kingdom was given by Anthony to Herod the Great, of an Idumean family, B. C. 39.

At the time of the Christian æra, Palestine was divided into five provinces; Judea, Samaria, Galilee, Perea, and Idumea. On the death of Herod, Archelaus, his eldest son, succeeded to the government of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea, with the title of tetrarch; Galilee being assigned to Herod Antipas; and Perea, or the country beyond Jordan, to the third brother, Philip. But in less than ten years the dominions of Archelaus became annexed, on his disgrace, to the Roman province of Syria; and Judea was thenceforth governed by Roman procurators. Jerusalem, after its final destruction by Titus, A. D. 71, remained desolate and almost uninhabited, till the emperor Hadrian colonized it, and erected temples to Jupiter and Venus on its site. The empress Helena, in the fourth century, set the example of repairing in pilgrimage to the Holy Land, to visit the scenes consecrated by the Gospel narrative; and the country became enriched by the crowds of devotees who flocked there. In the beginning of the seventh century, it was overrun by the Saracens, who held it till Jerusalem was taken by the crusaders in the twelfth. The Latin kingdom of Jerusalem continued for about eighty years, during which the Holy Land streamed continually with Christian and Saracen blood. In 1187, Judea was conquered by the illustrious Saladin, on the decline of whose kingdom it passed through various revolutions, and at length, in 1317, was finally swallowed up in the Turkish empire. Palestine is now distributed into pashalics. That of Acre or Akka extends from Djebail nearly to Jaffa; that of Gaza comprehends Jaffa and the adjacent plains; and these two being now united, all the coast is under the jurisdiction of the pasha of Acre. Jerusalem, Hebron, Nablous, Tiberias, and in fact, the greater part of Palestine, are included in the pashalic of Damascus, now held in conjunction with that of Aleppo; which renders the present pasha, in effect, the viceroy of Syria. Though both pashas continue to be dutiful subjects to the Grand Seignior in appearance, and annually transmit considerable sums to Constantinople to insure the yearly renewal of their office, they are to be considered as tributaries, rather than subjects of the Porte; and it is supposed to be the religious supremacy of the Sultan, as caliph and vicar of Mohammed, more than any apprehension of his power, which prevents them from declaring themselves independent. The reverence shown for the firmauns of the Porte throughout Syria attests the strong hold which the Sultan maintains, in this character, on the Turkish population. The pashas of Egypt and Bagdad are attached to the Turkish sovereign by the same ecclesiastical tie, which alone has kept the ill-compacted and feeble empire from crumbling to ruin.

A few additional remarks upon the topography and climate will tend to elucidate the force of many of those parts of Scripture which contain allusions to these topics. Dr. E. D. Clarke, after stating his resolve to make the Scriptures his only guide throughout this interesting territory, says, “The delight afforded by the internal evidences of truth, in every instance where their fidelity of description was proved by a comparison of existing documents, surpassed even all we had anticipated. Such extraordinary instances of coincidence even with the customs of the country as they are now exhibited, and so many wonderful examples of illustration afforded by contrasting the simple narrative with the appearances presented, made us only regret the shortness of our time, and the limited sphere of our abilities for the comparison.” Judea is beautifully diversified with hills and plains--hills now barren and gloomy, but once cultivated to their summits, and smiling in the variety of their produce, chiefly the olive and the vine; and plains, over which the Bedouin now roves to collect a scanty herbage for his cattle, but once yielding an abundance of which the inhabitants of a northern climate can form no idea. Rich in its soil; glowing in the sunshine of an almost perpetual summer; and abounding in scenery of the grandest, as well as of the most beautiful kind; this happy country was indeed a land which the Lord had blessed: but Mohammedan sloth and despotism, as the instruments employed to execute the curse of Heaven, have converted it into a waste of rock and desert, with the exception of some few spots, which remain to attest the veracity of the accounts formerly given of it. The hills of Judea frequently rise into mountains; the most considerable of which are those of Lebanon and Hermon, on the north; those which surround the sea of Galilee, and the Dead Sea, also attain a respectable elevation. The other mountains of note are, Carmel, Tabor, Ebal, and Gerizim, and the mountains of Gilboa, Gilead, and Abarim; with the summits of the latter, Nebo and Pisgah: a description of which will be found under their respective heads. Many of the hills and rocks abound in caverns, the refuge of the distressed, or the resorts of robbers.

From the paucity of rain which falls in Judea, and the heat and dryness of the atmosphere for the greater part of the year, it possesses but few rivers; and as these, have all their rise within its boundaries, their course is short, and their size inconsiderable: the principal is the Jordan, which runs about a hundred miles. The other remarkable streams are, the Arnon, the Jabbok, the Kishon, the Kedron, the Besor, the Sorek, and the stream called the river of Egypt. These, also, will be found described under their respective heads. This country was once adorned with woods and forests: as we read of the forest of cedars in Lebanon, the forest of oaks in Bashan, the forest or wood of Ephraim, and the forest of Hareth in the tribe of Judah. Of these, the woods of Bashan alone remain; the rest have been swept away by the ravages of time and of armies, and by the gradual consumption of the inhabitants, whose indolence and ignorance have prevented their planting others.

There are no volcanoes now existing in Judea or its vicinity: nor is mention made of any in history, although volcanic traces are found in many parts on its eastern side, as they are also in the mountains of Edom on the south, the Djebel Shera and Hesma, as noticed by Burckhardt. There can be no doubt that many of the sacred writers were familiarly acquainted with the phenomena of volcanoes; whence it may be inferred that they were presented to their observation at no great distance, and from which they drew some of their sublimest imagery. Mr. Horne has adduced the following instances: “The mountains quake at him, and the hills _melt_, and the earth is _burned_ at his presence. His fury is _poured out like fire_, and the rocks are thrown down by him,” Nahum i, 5, 6. “Behold, the Lord cometh forth out of his place, and will come down and tread upon the high places of the earth. And _the mountains shall be molten_ under him, and the valleys shall be _cleft as wax before the fire_, and as the waters that are poured down a steep place,” Micah i, 3, 4. “O that thou wouldest rend the heavens, that thou wouldest come down, that the _mountains might flow down_ at thy presence. As when _the melting fire burneth, the fire causeth the waters to boil_, to make thy name known to thine adversaries, that the nations may tremble at thy presence. When thou didst terrible things which we looked not for, thou camest down, the mountains flowed down at thy presence,” Isa. lxiv, 1–3.

The climate of Judea, from the southern latitude of the country, is necessarily warm. The cold of winter is, indeed, sometimes greater than in European climates situated some degrees farther to the north; but it is of short duration, and the general character of the climate is that of heat. Both heat and cold are, however, tempered by the nature of the surface; the winter being scarcely felt in the valleys, while in the summer the heat is almost insupportable; and, on the contrary, in the more elevated parts, during the winter months, or rather weeks, frosts frequently occur, and snow sometimes falls, while the air in summer is comparatively cool and refreshing. Many winters pass without either snow or frost; and in the coldest weather which ever occurs, the sun in the middle of the day is generally warm, and often hot; so that the pain of cold is in reality but little felt, and the poor who cannot afford fires may enjoy, during several hours of the day, the more genial and invigorating influence of the sun. This is the ordinary character of the winters; though in some years, as will be seen presently, the cold is more severely felt during the short time that it prevails, which is never more than two months, and more frequently not so much as one. Toward the end of November, or beginning of December, domestic fires become agreeable. It was at this time that Jehoiakim, king of Judah, is represented by Jeremiah as sitting in his winter house, with a fire burning on the hearth before him, Jer. xxxvi, 22. The same luxury, though frequently by no means necessary, is used by the wealthy till the end of March.

Rain only falls during the autumn, winter, and spring, when it sometimes descends with great violence: the greatest quantity, and that which properly constitutes the rainy season, happening between the autumnal equinox, or somewhat later, and the beginning of December; during which period, heavy clouds often obscure the sky, and several days of violent rain sometimes succeed each other with winds. This is what in Scripture is termed the early or the former rain. Showers continue to fall at uncertain intervals, with some cloudy but more fair weather, till toward the vernal equinox, when they become again more frequent and copious till the middle of April. These are the latter rains, Joel ii, 23. From this time to the end of May, showers come on at irregular intervals, gradually decreasing as the season advances; the sky being for the most part serene, and the temperature of the air agreeable, though sometimes acquiring a high degree of heat. From the end of May, or beginning of June, to the end of September, or middle of October, scarce a drop of rain falls, the sky being constantly unclouded, and the heat generally oppressive. During this period, the inhabitants commonly sleep on the tops of their houses. The storms, especially in the autumn, are preceded by short but violent gusts of wind, which, from the surface of a parched soil, raise great clouds of dust; which explains what is meant by, “Ye shall not _see_ wind,” 2 Kings iii, 7. The continuation of the same passage likewise implies, that such circumscribed whirlwinds were generally considered as the precursors of rain: a circumstance likewise alluded to by Solomon, who says, “Whoso boasteth himself of a false gift, is like clouds and wind without rain,” Prov. xxv, 14. Another prognostic of an approaching storm is a small cloud rising in the west, and increasing until it overspreads the whole heavens. Such was the cloud, “like a man’s hand,” which appeared to Elijah, on mount Carmel; which spread “till the heaven was black with clouds and wind, and there was a great rain,” 1 Kings xviii, 44. To this phenomenon, and the certainty of the prognostic, our Saviour alludes: “When ye see a cloud” (or _the_ cloud, την νεφελην) “rise out of the west, straightway ye say, There cometh a shower; and so it is,” Luke xii, 54. The same appearance is noticed by Homer:-- Ὡς δ’ ὄτ’ ἀπὸ σκοπιῆς εῖδεν νεφος αιπολος ανηρ Ἐρχόμενον κατὰ ϖόντον ὑπὸ Ζεφύροιο ἰωῆς, Τῷ δε τ’, ἄνευθεν ἐόντι, μελάντερον, ἠΰτι ϖὶσσα, Φαίνετ’ ἰὸν κατὰ ϖόντον, ἄγεί δέ τέ λαίλαπα ϖολλην. Ῥίγησεν τε ἰδὼν. κ. τ. λ. _Il._ lib. iv, 275. “Slow from the main the heavy vapours rise, Spread in dim streams, and sail along the skies, Till black as night the swelling tempest shows, The cloud condensing as the west wind blows. He dreads the impending storm,” &c. POPE. Hail frequently falls in the winter and spring in very heavy storms, and with hailstones of an enormous size. Dr. Russel says that he has seen some at Aleppo which measured two inches in diameter; but sometimes they are found to consist of irregularly shaped pieces, weighing near three ounces. The copious dew forms another peculiarity of this climate, frequently alluded to in Scripture: so copious, indeed, is it sometimes, as to resemble small rain, and to supply the wants of superficial vegetation. Mr. Maundrell, when travelling near mount Hermon, says, “We were instructed by experience what the Psalmist means by ‘the dew of Hermon,’ Psalm cxxxiii, 3; our tents being as wet with it, as if it had rained all night.”

The seasons are often adverted to in Scripture, under the terms “seed time and harvest.” The former, for wheat, is about the middle of October to the middle or end of November: barley is put into the ground two and sometimes three months later. The wheat harvest commences about the twentieth of May, and early in June the whole is off the ground. The barley harvest, it is to be observed, is generally a fortnight earlier. A survey of the astonishing produce of this country, and of the manner in which its most rocky and, to appearance, insuperably sterile parts, are made to yield to the wants of man, will be sufficient to refute the objections raised by skeptical writers against the possibility of its furnishing subsistence to the multitude of its former inhabitants recorded in Scripture. Dr. Clarke, when travelling from Napolose to Jerusalem, relates, “The road was mountainous, rocky, and full of loose stones; yet the cultivation was every where marvellous: it afforded one of the most striking pictures of human industry which it is possible to behold. The limestone rocks and stony valleys of Judea were entirely covered with plantations of figs, vines, and olive trees: not a single spot seemed to be neglected. The hills, from their bases to their upmost summits, were entirely covered with gardens: all of these were free from weeds, and in the highest state of agricultural perfection. Even the sides of the most barren mountains had been rendered fertile, by being divided into terraces, like steps rising one above another, whereon soil had been accumulated with astonishing labour. Among the standing crops, we noticed millet, cotton, linseed, and tobacco; and occasionally small fields of barley. A sight of this territory can alone convey any adequate idea of its surprising produce: it is truly the Eden of the east, rejoicing in the abundance of its wealth. Under a wise and a beneficent government, the produce of the Holy Land would exceed all calculation. Its perennial harvest; the salubrity of its air; its limpid springs; its rivers, lakes, and matchless plains; its hills and dales;--all these, added to the serenity of its climate, prove this land to be indeed ‘a field which the Lord hath blessed: God hath given it of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine.’” An oriental’s ideas of fertility differ, however, from ours; for to him, plantations of figs, vines, and olives, with which the limestone rocks of Judea were once covered, would suggest the same associations of plenty and opulence that are called up in the mind of an Englishman by rich tracts of corn land. The land of Canaan is characterized as flowing with milk and honey; and it still answers to this description; for it contains extensive pasture lands of the richest quality, and the rocky country is covered with aromatic plants, yielding to the wild bees, who hive in the hollow of the rocks, such abundance of honey as to supply the poorer classes with an article of food. Honey from the rocks is repeatedly referred to in the Scriptures, as a delicious food, and an emblem of plenty, 1 Sam. xiv, 25; Psa. lxxxi, 16. Dates are another important article of consumption; and the neighbourhood of Judea was famous for its numerous palm trees, which are found springing up from chance-sown kernels in the midst of the most arid districts. When to these wild productions we add the oil extracted from the olive, so essential an article to an oriental, we shall be at no loss to account for the ancient fertility of the most barren districts of Judea, or for the adequacy of the soil to the support of so numerous a population, notwithstanding the comparatively small proportion of arable land. There is no reason to doubt, however, that corn and rice would be imported by the Tyrian merchants; which the Israelites would have no difficulty in exchanging for the produce of the olive ground and the vineyard, or for their flocks and herds. Delicious wine is still produced in some districts, and the valleys bear plentiful crops of tobacco, wheat, barley, and millet. Tacitus compares both the climate and the soil, indeed, to those of Italy; and he particularly specifies the palm tree and balsam tree as productions which gave the country an advantage over his own. Among other indigenous productions may be enumerated the cedar and other varieties of the pine, the cypress, the oak, the sycamore, the mulberry tree, the fig tree, the willow, the turpentine tree, the acacia, the aspen, the arbutus, the myrtle, the almond tree, the tamarisk, the oleander, the peach tree, the chaste tree, the carob or locust tree, the oskar, the doom, the mustard plant, the aloe, the citron, the apple, the pomegranate, and many flowering shrubs. The country about Jericho was celebrated for its balsam, as well as for its palm trees; and two plantations of it existed during the last war between the Jews and the Romans, for which both parties fought desperately. But Gilead appears to have been the country in which it chiefly abounded: hence the name, “balm of Gilead.” Since the country has fallen under the Turkish dominion, it has ceased to be cultivated in Palestine, but is still found in Arabia. Other indigenous productions have either disappeared or are now confined to circumscribed districts. Iron is found in the mountain range of Libanus, and silk is produced in abundance in the plains of Samaria.

The grand distinction of Canaan, however, is, that it was the only part of the earth made, by divine institution, a type of heaven. So it was exhibited to Abraham, and also to the Jews. It pointed to the eternal rest which the spiritual seed of the father of the faithful were to enjoy after the pilgrimage of life; its holy city was the figure of the “Jerusalem above;” and Zion, with its solemn and joyful services represented that “hill of the Lord” to which the redeemed shall come with songs, and everlasting joy upon their heads; where they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall fly away.

I. It is extremely difficult to draw any distinction between the remaining members of the Canaanitish group. As described in the early books of the Old Testament, they have a general family likeness. They are described as living in a state of political disintegration, the combined result of the Semitic love of independence and of the varied conformation of the soil. Thirty-one of their petty kings are mentioned in Josh. xii. 9-24, including the king of Hazor (afterwards reckoned to Naphtali), whose realm, in Judg. xi. 10, is called “the chief of all those kingdoms.” We find, indeed,*a king of Bezek claiming to have enslaved “seventy” of the surrounding reguli (Judg. i. 7), but this is an altogether exceptional event, for which the loosening of authority produced by the guerilla warfare of the Israelites sufficiently accounts. Yet the isolation of the Canaanites can never have been complete. Like the Phoenicians, they will have had their federations, as appears to be implied by the title Baal-berith, or “Baal of the Covenant” (Judg. viii. 33); and hieroglyphic inscriptions tell of their alliances with the Khita or Hittites against their Egyptian suzerains. Indeed, the rebellious tendencies of the Syrian states will partly explain the inaction of the Pharaohs during the Israelitish conquest. The only injury Joshua could do to the latter would consist in blocking up the military coast-road to the north of Syria, but this was well secured by Egyptian garrisons, which Joshua did not venture to attack; while to get the Canaanites humbled without any trouble was a clear gain. That the Israelites were not immediately and at all points successful is now universally recognized. The work of many years was concentrated by tradition on a single great name; yet the Old Testament itself corrects by numberless indications the error of the more imaginative narrative. Thus the kingdom of Hazor, which had been utterly destroyed, according to Josh. xi. 10, 11, emerges again in the more accurate account of Judges (iv. 2, 3). And both Joshua and Judges (not to descend later—see Amorites) supply evidence for the continued Canaanitish occupation of many parts of the country (Josh. xiii. 13, xv. 63, xvi. 10, xvii. 12, 13; Judg. i. 19-36). The immediate result of the invasion was, not the extinction of the old, but the addition of a new (and yet not wholly new) element, of stronger stuff but less advanced culture.

II. No doubt the Israelites a⅛ first put an end to much of which they could not discern the value, or, to use their own phrase, made it a lcherem, a thing consecrated to God by destruction. The origin of Hebrew literature would not be such a blank if the sacred archives of Kiryath-sépher, or “the Book-city,” otherwise called Kiryath-sannah, or “the Law-city (?)” (Josh. xv. 15, 49), had been preserved. Still the attractions of culture were superior in the long run to the dictates of religious zeal. Goodly houses, vineyards, and oliveyards (Deut. vi. 10, 11) were agents more powerful even than chariots of iron. The secrets of agriculture had to be learned from the Canaanites; intercourse naturally led to intermarriage, and so a new strife arose in the field of religion, in which half the Jewish nation perished utterly, and the other half was only saved by its voluntary submission to a spiritual despotism.

III. The pages of the book of Judges are full of complaints of Israelitish infidelity, which is rightly ascribed by the compiler to mixture of blood (Judg. iii. 6). It is true that expressions like this of infidelity have only a limited accuracy. As Ewald and Kuenen have pointed out, the final editor of Judges lived in the age of the Exile, when the religion of Yahveh (miscalled Jehovah) had attained its full development. From his point of view, religious approximation to the Canaanites was wilful apostasy, because it involved the effacement of the distinction between physical and moral religion. But of this distinction the Israelites were hardly more conscious than the Canaanites.

The religions of both nations were based, on a feeling for the powers of nature, whether regarded as destructive and awful, as by the one, or as favourable and lovely, as by the other. Thus the one religion was stern and in tendency moral; the other soft and in tendency immoral: there was indeed a difference, but not a clear-cut distinction between them. To come to particulars,—the chief object of Canaanitish worship was the dual-natured god of life and fruitfulness, viz., Baal, or rather the Baal, ⅛.e., “the lord,” and his consort Ashérah, z.e., “the happy,” and so “happy-making, favourable” (as in Assyrian, Salmanu-âsir, “Salman is favourable’'). The masculine form is also probably a divine title, and has given its name to the tribe of Asher, as Gad (“good fortune”) to the Gadites. As Movers long ago pointed out, Ashérah is not identical with Ashtoreth or Astarte, whose name is philologically different, and who belongs to another type of Semitic religion. Her symbol was the stem of a tree (Deut. xvi. 21; Judg. vi. 25), though this may have been sometimes carved into an image; that of the Baal probably had the form of a cone, arid represented the rays of the sun. It is these symbols which are referred to in the phrase, “the Baals and the Ashérahs” (Judg. iii. 7); the “groves” of the authorized version is an evident mistranslation (see in the Hebrew or some accurate modern version, Judg. vi. 25; 1 Kings xv. 13; 2 Kings xxiii. 6). The licensed harlotry which formed part of the worship of Ashérah was profoundly obnoxious to the later Hebrew writers (Num. xxv.; Deut, xxiii. 18), though, indeed, even the folk-lore of the Israelites showstraces of aversion to its attendant immorality. An illustration of this is furnished in the narrative of Sodom (Gen. xviii., xix.), which can only refer to the later Canaanites. Similarly, another writer (Gen. xv. 16) describes “the iniquity of the Amorites” as the divine justification of the Israelitish conquest. It is also the subject of a threatening passage in the Levitical legislation (Lev. xviii.), which if composed during the Babylonian exile, as is held by Graf and Kalisch, is a remarkable evidence of the tenacity of pre-Israelitish customs.

Another characteristic of Canaanitish religion, though far from peculiar to this, was soothsaying. After Israelite prophecy had broken its shell, and taken its daring flight into a more spiritual region, its first anxiety was to destroy that rival phenomenon which enslaved the minds of men to gross superstition. Hence the earnest dehortations of Isaiah (it 6), and of the writer of Deuteronomy (xviii. 10-14).

There was only one relic of Canaanitish times which the disciples of prophetic religion could not or would not throw aside—the old traditions. For it can hardly be doubted by uncompromising historical critics that some, perhaps many, of the narratives of Genesis are but purified versions of Canaanitish myths and legends. The most obvious examples will naturally be those stories which are attached to localities in Canaan, e.g., Luz and Beersheba. Of course the story of Melchizedek, “the king of Salem,” and “priest of the most high God” (Gen. xiv. 17-24), is not one of these, being out of harmony with all our other notices of the Canaanites. It is also easily separable from the rest of the narrative, and may possibly be as late as the Maccabean period, and written in honour of the temple and its priesthood, which are glorified by being, as it were, prefigured in the patriarchal age.

IV. The question has been asked of late, whether a remnant of the old population of Palestine may not still be in existence. Μ. Clermont-Ganneau, following Prof. E. H. Palmer (History of the Jewish Nation, p. 64), answers it confidently in the affirmative. In the fellahín or peasants of the Holy Land he sees the descendants of the Canaanites, who, having en reduced to a state of serfdom, were contemntuously overlooked by the successive hordes of conquerors. Their strange superstitious customs have been remarked by every close observer, and are evidently survivals of some early form of religion. Μ. Ganneau also mentions some curious legendary parallels to Biblical narratives existing among them. Dr Thomson (The Land and the Book, pp. 226-8) holds a similar theory about the sect of the Nusairîeh in northern Syria, who are equally bad Moslems, but more probably represent the debris of the later Syrian paganism.

V. We have yet to speak of the ethnological relation of the Canaanites and the Israelites. The linguistic evidence points to a kinship as close as that of both to the Phoenicians. Not only are the personal names of the Canaanites (Melchizedek, Adonibezek, Adonizedek, Oman or Aranyah, of which Araunah seems to be a corruption) pure Hebrew, but so too are the names of their cities, an evidence of still greater value, as given both in the Old Testament and in the lists of the places conquered by Thothmes III. The latter have been discovered by Mariette-Bey on a kind of triumphal arch at Karnak; they include 119 names belonging to Canaan, of which 75 have been identified with known Hebrew names of places (Mariette-Bey, in Comptes Rendus de l ’ Academie des Inscriptions, 1874, p. 243, &c.). The same Hebraic character is apparent in the names given in the “Travels of a Mohar” (see the Records of the Past, vol. ii. pp. 107-116), tvhich have been illustrated, we understand, by the recent explorations of Lieutenant Conder. How, it has been asked, is this community of language to be accounted for? The problem is a real one to those who regard the Table of Nations (Gen. X.) as an ethnological authority, for in that document the Canaanites are classed separately from the Hebrews among the descendants of Ham. From this, as we believe, antiquated point of view, it becomes necessary to assume that the Canaanites borrowed their language from some of the genuine descendants of Shem. From the Israelites? But they spoke the language long before the Israelite immigration. From an aboriginal Semiticspeaking race? But there is no historical evidence for the existence of such a people. We are thus driven to accept the view that the Table of Nations is arranged not on an ethnological but on a geographical principle. The Canaanites will then be classed among the descendants of Ham as belonging, according to the compilers, to the southern terrestrial zone—not, however, the Canaanites, in our sense of the word, for these formed no part of the original Table (see Canaan), but the Phoenicians. Apart from this misunderstood document there is no difficulty in admitting the affinity of the three nations, the Israelites, the Canaanites, and the Phoenicians, who all appear to have migrated successively from a Babylonian centre (see Phoenicians). The last to move westward were probably the Hebrews They are generally supposed to have originally spoken an Aramaic dialect, but after entering Palestine to have adopted that of the more civilized Canaanites (see Introductions of Bleek and De Wette-Schrader). The only evidence, however, offered in support of this view is Gen. xxxi. 47, where the “cairn of witness” receives a Hebrew name from Jacob, an Aramaic from Laban. From this it is inferred that Laban’s great-uncle Abraham must, according to tradition, have spoken Aramaic, as if Aramaic were as early a development as Hebrew, and as if the writer in Genesis had any thought of illustrating philological problems! Of any such event in the history of the Hebrews we have simply no evidence whatever.

Compare Ewald, History of the People of Israel, Eng. trans., vol. i. pp. 232-242; Kuenen, Religion of Israel, Eng. trans., vol. i. chap. 1 (with note) and 4; Movers, Die Phönizier, vol. ii. (1), pp. 61-82; Knobel, Die Völkertafel der Genesis, pp. 202, 321, 332-338; Clermont-Ganneau, “The Arabs in Palestine,”in Macmillan's Magazine, August 1875

But we learn from the Scripture history, that the Hittites in particular were become degenerate in the time of Isaac and Rebekah; for they could not endure the thoughts of Jacob’s marrying one of the daughters of Heth, as Esau had done. From this time, then, we may date the prevalence of those abominations which subjected them to the divine displeasure, and made them unworthy of the land which they possessed. In the days of Moses, they were become incorrigible idolaters; for he commands his people to destroy their altars, and break down their images, (statues or pillars,) and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. And lest they should pervert the Israelites, the latter were strictly enjoined not to intermarry with them; but “to smite them, and utterly destroy them, nor show mercy upon them,” Deut. vii, 1–5. They are accused of the cruel custom of sacrificing men, and are said to have made their seed pass through the fire to Moloch, Lev. xviii, 21. Their morals were as corrupt as their doctrine: adultery, bestiality of all sorts, profanation, incest, and all manner of uncleanness, are the sins laid to their charge. “The Canaanites,” says Mr. Bryant, “as they were a sister tribe of the Mizraim, resembled them in their rites and religion. They held a heifer, or cow, in high veneration, agreeably to the customs of Egypt. Their chief deity was the sun, whom they worshipped, together with the Baalim, under the titles of Ourchol, Adonis, or Thamuz.”

When the measure of the idolatries and abominations of the Canaanites was filled up, God delivered their country into the hands of the Israelites, who conquered it under Joshua. However, they resisted with obstinate valour, and kept Joshua employed six years from the time of his passing the river Jordan, and entering Canaan, in the year B. C. 1451, to the year B. C. 1445, the sabbatical year beginning from the autumnal equinox; when he made a division of the land among the tribes of Israel, and rested from his conquests. As God had commanded this people, long before, to be treated with rigour, see Deut. vii, 2, Joshua extirpated great numbers, and obliged the rest to fly, some of them into Africa, and others into Greece. Procopius says, they first retreated into Egypt, but advanced into Africa, where they built many cities, and spread themselves over those vast regions which reach to the straits, preserving their old language with little alteration. In the time of Athanasius, the Africans still said they were descended from the Canaanites; and when asked their origin, they answered, “Canani.” It is agreed, that the Punic tongue was nearly the same as the Canaanitish or Hebrew.

On the rigorous treatment of the nations of Canaan by the Israelites, to which infidels have taken so many exceptions, the following remarks of Paley are a sufficient reply: The first thing to be observed is, that the nations of Canaan were destroyed for their wickedness. This is plain from Lev. xviii, 24, &c. Now the facts disclosed in this passage sufficiently testify, that the Canaanites were a wicked people; that detestable practices were general among them, and even habitual; that it was for these enormities the nations of Canaan were destroyed. It was not, as some have imagined, to make way for the Israelites; nor was it simply to make away with their idolatry; but it was because of the abominable crimes which usually accompanied the latter. And we may farther learn from the passage, that God’s abhorrence of these crimes and his indignation against them are regulated by the rules of strict impartiality, since Moses solemnly warns the Israelites against falling into the like wicked courses, “that the land,” says he, “cast not you out also, when you defile it, as it cast out the nations that were before you; for whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people,” Lev. xviii, 28, 29. Now, when God, for the wickedness of a people, sends an earthquake, or a fire, or a plague among them, there is no complaint of injustice, especially when the calamity is known, or expressly declared beforehand, to be inflicted for the wickedness of such people. It is rather regarded as an act of exemplary penal justice, and, as such, consistent with the character of the moral Governor of the universe. The objection, therefore, is not to the Canaanitish nations being destroyed; (for when their national wickedness is considered, and when that is expressly stated as the cause of their destruction, the dispensation, however severe, will not be questioned;) but the objection is solely to the manner of destroying them. I mean there is nothing but the manner left to be objected to: their wickedness accounts for the thing itself. To which objection it may be replied, that if the thing itself be just, the manner is of little signification, of little signification even to the sufferers themselves. For where is the great difference, even to them, whether they were destroyed by an earthquake, a pestilence, a famine, or by the hands of an enemy? Where is the difference, even to our imperfect apprehensions of divine justice, provided it be, and is known to be, for their wickedness that they are destroyed? But this destruction, you say, confounded the innocent with the guilty. The sword of Joshua, and of the Jews spared neither women nor children. Is it not the same with all other national visitations? Would not an earthquake, or a fire, or a plague, or a famine among them have done the same? Even in an ordinary and natural death the same thing happens; God takes away the life he lends, without regard, that we can perceive, to age, or sex, or character. “But, after all, promiscuous massacres, the burning of cities, the laying waste of countries, are things dreadful to reflect upon.” Who doubts it? so are all the judgments of Almighty God. The effect, in whatever way it shows itself, must necessarily be tremendous, when the Lord, as the Psalmist expresses it, “moveth out of his place to punish the wicked.” But it ought to satisfy us; at least this is the point upon which we ought to rest and fix our attention; that it was for excessive, wilful, and forewarned wickedness, that all this befel them, and that it is all along so declared in the history which recites it. But, farther, if punishing them by the hands of the Israelites rather than by a pestilence, an earthquake, a fire, or any such calamity, be still an objection, we may perceive, I think, some reasons for this method of punishment in preference to any other whatever; always bearing in our mind, that the question is not concerning the justice of the punishment, but the mode of it. It is well known, that the people of those ages were affected by no proof of the power of the gods which they worshipped, so deeply as by their giving them victory in war. It was by this species of evidence that the superiority of their own gods above the gods of the nations which they conquered, was, in their opinion, evinced. This being the actual persuasion which then prevailed in the world, no matter whether well or ill founded, how were the neighbouring nations, for whose admonition this dreadful example was intended, how were they to be convinced of the supreme power of the God of Israel above the pretended gods of other nations; and of the righteous character of Jehovah, that is, of his abhorrence of the vices which prevailed in the land of Canaan? How, I say, were they to be convinced so well, or at all indeed, as by enabling the Israelites, whose God he was known and acknowledged to be, to conquer under his banner, and drive out before them, those who resisted the execution of that commission with which the Israelites declared themselves to be invested, namely, the expulsion and extermination of the Canaanitish nations? This convinced surrounding countries, and all who were observers or spectators of what passed, first, that the God of Israel was a real God; secondly, that the gods which other nations worshipped, were either no gods, or had no power against the God of Israel; and thirdly, that it was he, and he alone, who possessed both the power and the will, to punish, to destroy, and to exterminate from before his face, both nations and individuals, who gave themselves up to the crimes and wickedness for which the Canaanites were notorious. Nothing of this sort would have appeared, or with the same evidence, from an earthquake, or a plague, or any natural calamity. These might not have been attributed to divine agency at all, or not to the interposition of the God of Israel. Another reason which made this destruction both more necessary, and more general, than it would have otherwise been, was the consideration, that if any of the old inhabitants were left, they would prove a snare to those who succeeded them in the country; would draw and seduce them by degrees into the vices and corruptions which prevailed among themselves. Vices of all kinds, but vices most particularly of the licentious kind, are astonishingly infectious. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. A small number of persons addicted to them, and allowed to practise them with impunity or encouragement, will spread them through the whole mass. This reason is formally and expressly assigned, not simply for the punishment, but for the extent to which it was carried; namely, extermination: “Thou shalt utterly destroy them, that they teach you not to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods.” In reading the Old Testament account, therefore, of the Jewish wars and conquests in Canaan, and the terrible destruction brought upon the inhabitants thereof, we are always to remember that we are reading the execution of a dreadful but just sentence, pronounced by Jehovah against the intolerable and incorrigible crimes of these nations; that they were intended to be made an example to the whole world of God’s avenging wrath against sins, which, if they had been suffered to continue, might have polluted the whole ancient world, and which could only be checked by the signal and public overthrow of nations notoriously addicted to them, and so addicted as even to have incorporated them into their religion and their public institutions; and that the Israelites were mere instruments in the hands of a righteous Providence for effecting the extirpation of a people, of whom it was necessary to make a public example to the rest of mankind; that this extermination, which might have been accomplished by a pestilence, by fire, by earthquakes, was appointed to be done by the hands of the Israelites, as being the clearest and most intelligible method of displaying the power and the righteousness of the God of Israel; his power over the pretended gods of other nations; and his righteous indignation against the crimes into which they were fallen.

On the cession of Canada to Great Britain in 1763, its French colonists were guaranteed the free exercise of the Roman Catholic religion, and equal civil and commercial privileges with British subjects. Further privileges were secured by “the Quebec Act” of 1774, whereby the old French laws, including the custom of Paris, the royal edicts, and those of the colonial intendants under the French regime, were declared binding in relation to all property and civil rights; while the criminal law was superseded by that of England with its trial by jury. The seignories, with their feudal rights and immunities, were also perpetuated; and thus, under the fostering protection of England, the colonial life of the France of Louis XV. and the regency survived in the “New France” of Canada, unaffected by the Revolution of 1792. But the whole French population at the date of the conquest did not exceed 65,000. From Great Britain, and still more from the older colonies, emigrants hastened to occupy the new territory to the north of the St Lawrence. On the declaration of independence by the revolted colonies in 1776, the loyalist refugees were welcomed by the Provincial Government, settled on land in Upper Canada, and aided with funds and farming implements; and these were followed by emigrants from Great Britain. But it was not till 1791 that the rule of a governor, aided solely by a council appointed by the Crown, was superseded by the grant of a constitution establishing the Government with an elective legislature. At the same time Upper Canada, with its purely British settlers, was made a separate province from the old French colony of Lower Canada. At this date the population of Lower Canada had increased to upwards of 130,000, and that of Upper Canada was about 50,000. According to the first strictly reliable census of 1811 it amounted to 77,000. But the increase of population of Lower Canada was in part due to the immigration of British settlers. In 1793 a Protestant bishop of Quebec was appointed by the home Government; and in 1804 a cathedral was erected for him at Quebec, on the site of the old Recollet church. Dr Jacob Mountain, the Anglican bishop, exerted himself in the cause of education. Parliament enacted the establishment of free schools throughout the parishes of Lower Canada, but to this the Roman Catholic clergy gave resolute opposition; and in various other ways a spirit of antagonism began to manifest itself between the French inhabitants and the British population.

The war of 1812 followed; and during the protracted struggle on the Canadian frontier till the signing of the treaty of Ghent in 1814, the French and British colonists were united in loyalty to England; but with the restoration of peace internal political difficulties revived. The legislative and executive councils were at open variance with the popular representative assemblies; and a new element of strife created antagonism between Upper and Lower Canada. The position of Quebec and Montreal gave to Lower Canada a control over the exports and imports of the country; financial misunderstandings arose between the two provinces respecting their rightful share of import duties; and a proposal, first made in 1822, for a legis ]ative union between Upper and Lower Canada, was at length carried out in 1841, accompanied by important concessions designed to confer on the majority of the representatives of the people that influence over the executive Government which constituted the essential element of responsible government in England. But while the British colonists were divided by the old English party lines, the French Lower Canadians, united by local interests, race, and religion, were able to hold the balance of power whenever the two British parties divided on points of sufficient importance to preclude a compromise. Thus while the advantages of soil and climate, the industry, and the consequent wealth of Upper Canada, enabled it to contribute an ever-increasing proportion of the revenue of the united provinces, it frequently received a very partial share in their distribution, and was liable to be outvoted on questions in which both local feeling and local interests were largely involved. This condition of things was turned to account in the party contests of the time with an ever-increasing irritation and sense of wrong on the part of the British colonists of Upper Canada, until a common feeling overrode party lines, and matters were brought practically to a deadlock.

This it was which led to the idea of a legislative union among the various British American colonies, while reserving to each the control of its own local government; and the common dangers to which they were exposed by results springing out of the great American civil war furnished additional motives to such a union. The leaders of different parties representing the various interests of the provinces, after mature deliberation, agreed to the principles of the proposed confederation, and the Imperial Government responded by giving it the requisite force of parliamentary authority. The Imperial Act, known as “the British North American Act, 1867,” provided for the voluntary union of the whole of British North America into one legislative confederation, under the name of the Dominion of Canada. Thus the older provinces have preceded, even by centuries, the Dominion within which they are now embraced, and have a separate history of their own. The Dominion thus constituted consists at present of the old provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, now designated respectively Ontario and Quebec, along with Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Manitoba, and British Columbia. To it also pertain the territories in the north-west still unsettled, with power to receive them into the confederacy when they acquire the requisite population and organization of provinces. Provision is also made in the Imperial Act for the admission of Newfoundland into the confederacy. It is further provided that the constitution of the Dominion shall be “similar in principle to that of the United Kingdom;” that the executive authority shall be vested in the sovereign of Great Britain and Ireland, and carried on in his name by a governor-general and privy council; and that the legislative power shall be exercised by a parliament consisting of an Upper House, or “Senate,” the members of which are nominated for life, by summons under the great seal of Canada, and a “House of Commons,” duly elected by the several constituencies of the various provinces in proportion to the relative population of each.

The Act of Confederation came into operation on the 1st of July 1867, at which date the provinces of Ontario and Quebec were united to the maritime provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. In 1870 the newly created province of Manitoba, in 1871 that of British Columbia, and in 1872 that of Prince Edward Island, were successively admitted into the confederation. A lieutenant-governor and council are to be appointed to administer the affairs of the north-west territories, not yet settled or organized into provinces; and thus the whole of British North America has been organized into a united political confederacy under the name of the Dominion of Canada.

Previous to the confederation of the provinces, Labrador E. of a line drawn due N. of Anse au Sablon, was independent of Lower Canada, and it still remains politically attached to Newfoundland. The tract of country known as Canada till 1867 extended from Labrador westward to the high land beyond Lake Superior, and from the St Lawrence Valley and the great lakes northward to the watershed between them and the Hudson Bay, and embraced an area of 331,220 square miles, lying between the parallels of 41° 7Γ and 50° N. lat., and the meridians of 57° 50' and 117° W. long. This extensive region, which constituted the most important colony of England, is now included in a Dominion which stretches across the North American continent from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean, and embraces an area of about 3,500,000 square miles. The vast prairie lands of the great north-west, thus embraced within the Dominion, and out of which the province of Manitoba has been already formed, include the most fertile region of the whole continent. Already immigration is setting steadily in that direction; nor can it be doubted that what has remained till recently a desert, traversed annually by migratory herds of buffalo, and only available as a hunting ground for wild Indians and the trappers of the Hudson’s Bay Company, is destined to become the seat of populous provinces, and to constitute one of the chief granaries of the world.

By the addition of the maritime British provinces, included originally within the Acadie of the old French régime, Canada has acquired an extensive line of sea-coast, indented with bays and harbours, offering the most admirable facilities for every branch of maritime enterprise; and to these will, no doubt, be added ere long the island of Newfoundland, with the command of fisheries unequalled in value either in the Old World or the New. The peninsula of Nova Scotia and the island of Newfoundland form the eastern barriers of British North America, closing the Gulf of St Lawrence, and commanding the Atlantic coast, with its ocean trade and its inexhaustible fisheries; while Vancouver Island, and the shores of the neighbouring mainland, stretch along the Pacific coast, with estuaries, inlets, and well-sheltered harbours, awaiting the development of the growing trade of the Pacific. There the rivers abound in salmon; the whale fisheries of the neighbouring ocean already yield valuable returns; and the cod, haddock, and other deep-sea fish invite the enterprise of the young province, and guarantee an inexhaustible source of future wealth.

The people by whom the maritime advantages of the eastern provinces have thus far been enjoyed are peculiarly fitted by origin and training to turn them to the best account. In the early years of the 16th century, when France was striving to outrival Spain in the occupation of the New World beyond the Atlantic, hardy adventurers of Basque, Breton, and Norman blood sailed from Dieppe, St Malo, Rochelle, and other French seaports, and divided among them the traffic in fish and furs of the Newfoundland banks and the Gulf and the River St Lawrence. The discovery of Canada, and, indeed, of the American continent, is justly assigned to John and Sebastian Cabot, who set out from Bristol under the auspices of Henry VII. of England in 1497, and landed on the coast of Labrador seventeen months before Columbus reached the American mainland. But England was slow to avail herself of the advantages of the discovery. In 1524 Verazzano, a Florentine navigator, sailing under the French flag, coasted the new found continent from Florida to Cape Breton, and the whole vaguely defined region was appropriated in the name of Francis I. as “La Nouvelle France.” Ten years later Jacques Cartier sailed from St Malo, explored the coasts of Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick; and for a time the Norman and Breton adventurers enjoyed a monopoly of fish, peltries, and whatever else could reward those pioneers of civilization for their adventurous daring and enterprise.

By such hardy adventurers the maritime provinces were originally settled, before Britain awoke to the importance of the fisheries and other valuable resources of the New World. But she in her turn contributed an energetic body of colonists, including many of Scottish origin; and the war of independence led to a considerable influx of loyalist immigrants from the revolted colonies. War, both then and in 1812, had its usual effect in depressing native industry. But with the return of peace the British provinces entered on a prolonged course of prosperity, very partially affected by the political troubles of 1836-7, or even by the American civil war of 1862 and subsequent years. Half a century ago the population of the whole of British North America was less than 1,000,000; in 1872 that of the four provinces of Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia, amounted to 3,485,761; and the population of the Dominion now exceeds 4,000,000 of souls.

So long as Canada was detached in government and all political relations from the maritime provinces, and embraced only Quebec and Ontario, with access to the ocean solely by the St Lawrence, which is closed for fully five months in the year, it constituted an inland province, subject to many restrictions, and was to a considerable extent dependent on reciprocal relations with the United States for its foreign trade.

In a “Memorandum on the Commercial Relations, Past and Present, of the British North American Provinces with the United States,” submitted to the Government at Washington in April 1874, by Sir Edward Thornton and the Hon. George Brown, as joint plenipotentiaries of Her Britannic Majesty, it is shown that, in the interval from 1845, when a more liberal policy gave encouragement to intimate commercial relations between Canada and the United States, till 1853, the aggregate export and import trade between the two countries rose from $8,074,291 to $20,691,360; and at the same time a large amount of the import and export traffic between Great Britain and the provinces was carried in bond over the canals and railways of the United States. The Reciprocity Treaty was negotiated by the late Earl of Elgin, as governor-general of Canada, and signed on the 5th of June 1854; and it was abrogated in 1866. In the later years of its continuance the civil war in the United States gave a great advantage to Canada, so that in the last year of the treaty the exports to the States amounted to $54,714,383. Yet even then the balance of trade continued to be in favour of the United States; and under the operation of the treaty, New York, Portland, Boston, and other American seaports, were so largely used for the trade of the British provinces, that the transportation traffic sent to and brought from foreign countries, in bond, over the railways and canals, and in the ocean ships and steamers, of the United States, became an important element of revenue to their chief lines of transport The effect of all this, at a time when jealousies and heartburnings had arisen out of the American civil war, led American statesmen to over-estimate the value of such facilities to the British Provinces, and even to conceive that the abrogation of the Reciprocity Treaty, and the restriction of such facilities, would suffice to create a desire for annexation. Happily, experience has led to very different results. In the “Memorandum on Commercial Relations,” already referred to, it is remarked :—

“The industry of Canada had been largely directed to the supply of the American market with commodities for home consumption, as well as for foreign exportation, and the repeal in 1866 of the Reciprocity Treaty, under which so vast a trade had grown up, rendered imperatively necessary prompt measures to open new markets for the sale of Canadian produce. These measures were at once taken. Under the influence of the formal notice given by the United States in 1865, of their intention to terminate the treaty, federation of the provinces, then under discussion, was hurried on, and became a fait accompli within fifteen months after its repeal. The Intercolonial Railway was at once ιmdertaken, at a cost of over $20,000,000, at the national expense, to secure direct connection to and from the Atlantic ocean, at Halifax and St John, on Canadian soil. Commissioners were despatched to the British and other West India Islands, and to South American States, to promote the extension of direct trade between them and the Dominion. The enlargement of the canals, the improvement of the navigation of the lakes and river St Lawrence, the construction of the Bay Verte canal, to connect the waters of the Bay of Fundy and the St Lawrence, the subsidizing of ocean and river steamship lines, and the promotion of the great shipbuilding and fishery interests, all received a new and vigorous impetus.

“These measures were attended with remarkable success. Only seven fiscal years have passed since the repeal of the treaty, but already the loss inflicted by it has been more than made up, and exceUent outlets in new directions opened for Canadian commerce; with an increasing annual proportion of the vast carrying trade formerly done for the provinces by the railways, canals, and steamships of the Republic transferred to Canadian hands. The traffic between the United States and the Provinces at once fell, from an average during the three years before the repeal (according to American official statistics) of nearly $75,000,000 per annum, to an average of $57,000,000 per annum during the first three years following repeal;—the Act of Confederation, too, removed from the category of foreign commerce to that of home consumption the large interchanges of commodities between the several sections of the Dominion; and the aggregate foreign commerce of the provinces consequently fell in the first year after the repeal of the treaty to $139,202,615 from $160,409,455 in the previous year. As will be seen from the following statement, however, the trade of the Dominion speedily recovered from the blow, and the volume of its foreign commerce gradually increased until, in the seventh year from the repeal of the treaty, it reached the great sum (for a people of four millions) of $235,301,203,—being seventy-five millions higher than it had ever reached in any year of the treaty’s existence :— [table]

Thus the immediate effect of the repeal of the Reciprocity Treaty was to draw the British provinces into closer union; while, as appears from official returns, the interchange of traffic, which from 1820 to 1866 had been largely in favour of the States, underwent so great a change from 1866 to 1873 as to show a balance against the United States, and in favour of Canada, in value $51,875,008. Wheat, flour, provisions, and other articles, which were formerly sold to New York and Boston houses, are now sent through Canadian channels, direct to the maritime provinces, to Newfoundland, the West Indies, South America, and to Great Britain; and Canada thus enters into competition with the United States in its own foreign markets. Mr E. H. Derby, special commissioner of the United States Treasury, makes this admission as to the effect of the treaty on a single port;—“The commerce of Boston affected by the Reciprocity Treaty exceeds $27,000,000 annually, namely,—imports from and exports to the maritime provinces, $6,000,000; outfits and returns in deep-sea fisheries, $11,000,000; imports of wool, grain, and animals across the frontier of Canada and entered there, with returns, at least $10,000,000.” With the union of the maritime provinces to those on the St Lawrence, Canada has passed from the condition of an inland colony, dependent on the good will or the interested aims of a foreign rival, to the position of the fifth maritime nation of the world. The fisheries more than all else have laid the foundation of the industrial progress of the eastern provinces; and in the men who now sail their fishing fleets Canada has acquired the elements of a powerful marine, which, in any national exigency, will be found to add no less to the defensive strength of the Dominion, than it now does to its commercial enterprise.

By right of seniority the province of Quebec claims the first place among the sister provinces of the Dominion, though Nova Scotia may dispute with her the claim of earliest settlement. Among the cities of the Dominion it is probable also that Montreal will retain the pre-eminence by reason of the unparalleled advantages of her geographical position for commercial purposes. In numbers, wealth, and productive industry, however, the foremost rank is at present due to the province of Ontario. Referring to separate articles for a detailed description of each province, we confine ourselves here to what concerns the Dominion as a whole.

Extent. — The Dominion of Canada extends from 45° N. lat. northward to the Hudson Bay, and reaches from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. In superficial extent it is nearly equal to the whole of Europe, and comprises an area of about 3,500,000 square miles. The larger moiety of this, including the territory formerly held by the Hudson’s Bay Company, is the property of the Dominion Government. Of this about 120,000 square miles consist of prairie lands with occasional scattered groves and belts...

In speaking, however, of the earliest of these works, it is not to be supposed that they resembled the modern canals now constructed in our own and other countries. Early as inland navigation was introduced, it was not until the invention of canal-locks, by which boats could be transferred from one level to another, that inland navigation became generally applicable and useful, and it has been truly remarked “that to us, living in an age of steam-engines and daguerreotypes, it might appear strange that an invention so simple in itself as the canal-lock, and founded on properties of fluids little recondite, should have escaped the acuteness of Egypt, Greece, and Rome.” Not only, however, had the invention escaped the notice of the ancients, but what is more striking, the several gradations made towards the attainment of that simple but valuable improvement appear to have been so gradual that, like many discoveries of importance, great doubts exist as to the person and even the nation that was the first to introduce canal-locks. One class of writers attributes the discovery to the Dutch, and Messrs Telford and Nimmo, who wrote the article “Inland Navigation” in Brewster’s Edinburgh Encydopaedia, adopt the conclusion that locks were used in Holland nearly a century before their application in Italy; while, on the other hand, the invention has been strongly and not unreasonably claimed for engineers of the Italian school, and in particular for Leonardo da Vinci, the celebrated engineer and painter. Without, however, entering into a discussion of this question, which it is now perhaps impossible to solve, we may safely state that during the 14th century the introduction of locks, whether of Dutch or Italian origin, gave a new character to inland navigation, and laid the basis of its rapid and successful extension. And here it may be proper to remark, that the early canals of China and Egypt, although destitute of locks, do not appear to have been on that account formed on a uniformly level line, unadapted to varying heights. It is very doubtful, indeed, if the use of locks has even yet been introduced into China, intersected as it is by many canals of great antiquity and extent, the imperial canal being about 1000 miles in length. “This canal appears to have been completed in 1289, and is said to extend fora distance of forty days’ navigation, and is provided with many sluices, and when vessels arrive at these sluices they are hoisted by means of machinery, whatever be their size, and let down on the other side into the water.” 1 Nevertheless the invention of locks was, as has been stated, a most important step in the history of canals; and that mode of surmounting elevations may be said to be almost universally adopted throughout Europe and America. Inclined planes and perpendicular lifts have, it is true, been employed in those countries, as will be noticed hereafter; but the instances of their application are undoubtedly rare.

But without tracing the gradual introduction of canals from country to country, we remark at once that we find the French at the end of the 17th century, in the reign of Louis XIV., forming the Languedoc Canal, designed by Biquet, between the Bay of Biscay and the Mediterranean, a gigantic work, which was finished in 1681. It is 148 miles in length, and the summit level is 600 feet above the sea, while the works on its line embrace upwards of one hundred locks and fifty aqueducts, an undertaking which is a lasting monument of the skill and enterprize of its projectors; and with this work as a model it seems strange that Britain should not, till nearly a century after its execution, have been engaged in vigorously following so laudable an example. This seems the more extraordinary, as the Romans in early times had executed works in England, which, whatever might have been their original use, whether for the purposes of navigation or drainage, were ultimately, and that even at an early period, converted into navigable canals. Of these works we particularly specify the Caer Dyke and Foss Dyke cuts in Lincolnshire, which are by general consent admitted to have been of Roman origin. The former extends from Peterborough to the River Witham near the city of Lincoln, a distance of about 40 miles; and the latter extends from Lincoln to the River Trent, near Torksey, a distance of 11 miles.

Of the Caer Dyke the name only now remains; but the Foss Dyke, though of Roman origin, still exists, and as it is the oldest British canal, the reader may be interested to ]earn the following facts as to its history. Camden in his Britannia states that the Foss Dyke was a cut originally made by the Romans, probably for water supply or drainage, and that it was deepened and rendered in some measure navigable in the year 1121 by Henry I. In 1762 it was reported on by Smeaton and Grundy, who found the depth at that time to be about 2 feet 8 inches. 2 They, however, discouraged the idea of deepening by excavation. They say they found “the bottom to be either a rotten peat earth, or else a running sand,” and that though the deepening of the navigation is in “nature possible,” yet it “cannot be effected without removing one of the banks in order to widen the same,” which would not only turn out expensive, but would “occasion much loss of time and profit to the proprietor while the work is executing.” Nothing followed on this report; but in 1782 Smeaton was again called in, and deepened the navigation to 3 feet 6 inches, not, however, by widening the canal or dredging, but by raising the water-level 10 inches. 3 From that period nothing more was done to enlarge the water-way, or adapt it to increased traffic. Meantime the adjoining Witham navigation having been improved, the defects of old Foss became more apparent, and in 1838 Mr Vignoles was consulted, and made an elaborate report on alternative schemes for increasing the depth to 4 and 6 feet; nothing, however, was done till 1840, when Messrs Stevenson were employed to design works for assimilating the Foss Dyke as far as practicable, both as regards width and depth, to the navigable channel of the Witham. The depth w as found to be 3 feet 10 inches, and its breadth in many places was insufficient to admit of two boats passing each other, and for their convenience occasional passing places had been provided. It was resolved to increase the dimensions of the canal, and to repair the whole work. Accordingly it was widened to the minimum breadth of 45 feet, and deepened to the extent of 6 feet throughout. The entrance lock communicating with the River Trent at Torksey was renewed, and a pumping engine was erected for supplying water from the Trent during dry seasons, and thus that ancient canal, which is quoted by Telford and Nimmo as “the oldest artificial canal in Britain,” was restored to a state of perfect efficiency, at a cost of £40,000, and now forms an important connecting link between the Trent and Witham navigations.

Notwithstanding the existence of this early work, however, and of some others in the country, particularly the Sankey Brook navigation, opened in 1760, it cannot be doubted that the formation of the Bridgewater Canal in Lancashire, the Act for which was obtained in 1759, was the commencement of British Barge Canal Navigation, of which we propose first to treat, and that Francis, duke of Bridgewater, and Brindley the engineer, who were its projectors, were the first to give a practical impulse to a class of works which, under the guidance mainly of Smeaton, Watt, Jessop, Nimmo, Rennie, and Telford, has been very generally adopted throughout the country, and has undoubtedly been of vast importance in promoting its commercial prosperity. 4

According to Mr Smiles, the barge-canals laid out by Brindley, although not all executed by him, were: 5 — [table]

It is believed that the length of the inland boat navigations constructed in Britain exceeds 4700 miles, and the system has been extensively carried out both in Europe and America. Many of them were made at great cost through hills and over valleys. The Harecastle tunnel on the Grand Trunk Canal, made by Brindley, and afterwards doubled by Telford, is nearly a mile and a half in length, and the Pont-y-Cyssylte aqueduct, on the Ellesmere Canal, over the Dee, constructed by Telford at a cost of £47,000, has nineteen openings 45 feet span, and is elevated 126

1 Travels of Marco Polo, by Col. Yule, C.B.

2 Smeaton’s Reports, vol. i. p. 55, London, 1812.

3 Smeaton’s Reports, vol. i. p. 74, London, 1812.

4 History of Inland Navigation, particularly those of the Duke of Bridgewater, London, 1768; Hughes’s Memoir of Brindley ; Weale’s Quarterly Papers, London, 1843.

δ Smiles’s Lives of the Engineers.

feet above the river, the canal being carried across in a cast-iron trough.

It must be obvious, that to construct a navigable channel through a country varying in level, and affording, perhaps, no great facilities for obtaining a supply of water, infers high engineering skill. Vast reservoirs must in some cases be formed for storing the water necessary to supply, during dry seasons, the loss by lockage, leakage, and evaporation. Feeders must be made to lead this water to the canal, hills must be pierced by tunnels, valleys must be crossed on lofty embankments, or spanned by spacious aqueducts, and, above all, the whole must be conceived and laid out with scrupulous regard to the all-impcιtant object of securing the works against injury from an overflow of water during floods, and a consequent inundation of the surrounding country. Moreover, the necessity of laying out the canal in level stretches, and surmounting elevations by means of locks or inclined planes, occurring at intervals, often occasions much difficulty and greatly restricts the resources of the engineer. Taking, then, all these circumstances into consideration, and bearing in mind that canals were the pioneers of railways, we think it may safely be affirmed that the canal engineers of former days had more serious physical difficulties to contend with than are experienced in carrying out the railways of modern times, if we except such works as the Britannia Bridge, the high-level bridge of Newcastle, the Boxhill tunnel, and some other kindred works. But, indeed, their mechanical difficulties were also greater, for the introduction of steam, and its wide-spread application to all engineering operations, afford facilities to the engineers of the present day which Smeaton at the Eddystone, Stevenson at the Bell Rock, and Rennie and Telford in their early navigation works, did not enjoy. The distinguished merits of the engineers who practised in the former and at the commencement of the present century, cannot indeed be over-estimated, and had it been within the scope of this article it would have been profitable and instructive to have described in detail some, of the grand aqueducts and other works on the lines of our canals. For this reference is made to the articles Aqueduct, Bridge, Tunnel, and Reservoir, all of which are more or less applicable to the formation of canals. We shall only therefore offer to the student the following summary of engineering principles generally applicable to all cases.

A canal cannot be properly worked without a supply of water calculated to last over the driest season of the year, and in that respect, except as to the quality of the water, demands all the care requisite in investigating the sources of water for supplying towns. If there be no natural lake in the district, available for supply and storage, the engineer must select situations suitable for artificial reservoirs, and the conditions to be attended to in selecting their positions are the same as those for water-works. They must command a sufficient area of drainage to supply the loss by leakage, evaporation, and lockage, due to the length of canal, number and size of the locks, and probable amount of traffic. The capability of the district to afford this supply will depend on the area of the basin drained and the annual amount of rainfall. The offlets from the reservoirs must be at such an elevation as to convey water to the summit-level of the canal. The embankments for retaining the water must be erected on sites affording a favourable foundation, and, if possible, in situations where an embankment of small height and length may dam up a large amount of water. It is further necessary to consider whether the subsoil of the valley forming the reservoirs is throughout of so retentive a nature as to prevent leakage, and it is essential to provide, by means of waste weirs, for the discharge of floods. The Caledonian Canal, to be afterwards noticed, is in this respect very favourably situated, the whole supply being obtained from natural lochs. In other cases, such as the Union, Forth and Clyde, Crinan, Birmingham, and other canals, it was necessary to construct large reservoirs in which the water is stored in winter and led in feeders to points convenient for supplying the canal in summer. Where the canal communicates with the sea or a tidal river, and where the natural supply is small, as at the Foss Dyke already referred to, the water is raised by pumping engines. It will readily be seen, therefore, how important it is to reduce to a minimum the loss of water due to leakage from deficient workmanship, as well as to lockage of the traffic through the canal, and (while on this subject) it may be stated that the up consumes a greater amount of water than the down traffic, for an ascending boat on entering a lock displaces a volume of water equal to its submerged capacity; the water so displaced flows into the lower reach of the canal and the lower gates are closed, the boat is then raised, and on passing into the higher reach of the canal its displacement lost on entering is supplied by water withdrawn from the higher reach. A descending boat, on the other hand, on entering a lock likewise displaces a volume of water equal to its submerged capacity, but the water in this case flows back into the higher reach of the canal, where it is retained when the gates are closed. Mr Fulton gives the consumption of 25-ton boats through locks of 8 feet lift as about 163 tons of water in ascending, and 103 in descending. Several proposals have been made for reducing the loss of water by side ponds to receive part of the water, but all such plans delay the traffic and have not come into general use.

The barge-canals constructed in this country are between 4 and 5 feet in depth. When the soil in which they were made was retentive, they were formed as shown in the cross-section, fig. 1. But when the soil was porous, clay puddle was introduced, as shown in fig. 2. Professor Rankine says the depth of water and sectional area of water-way should be such as not to cause any material increase of the resistance to the motion of the boats beyond what it would encounter in open water, and gives the following rules as fulfilling these conditions :—

Least breadth at bottom = 2 × greatest breadth of boat.

Least depth of water — 1⅛ foot + greatest draught of boat.

Least area of water-way = 6 × greatest midship section of boat.

In laying out a line of canal the engineer is more restricted than in forming the route of a road or. railway, where gradients can be introduced to suit the undulating surface of the country. A canal, on the contrary, must follow rigidly the bases of hills and windings of valleys, to preserve a uniform level, accommodation being made for the road traffic by erecting suitable “fixed” and “movable” bridges. It is important, as already stated, to lay out the work in long level reaches, and to overcome elevations in cumulo by groups of locks at places where it can be most advantageously done. This leads to a saving of attendance and expense in working the canal, and causes fewer stoppages to the traffic. But to prevent waste of water the locks must be placed sufficiently far apart, say 100 yards, or an intervening pond or increased width of canal must be formed, so that a descending boat does not let off more water than the area below will receive without raising its surface so much as to lose the surplus water over the waste weirs. The mode of overcoming the difference of level between the various level reaches is, with few exceptions, by locks, which generally have a lift of 8 or 10 feet, though in some cases it is somewhat greater. The dimensions of the locks ought to be regulated by the traffic; but they should, in order to save water, be as nearly as possible the size of the craft to be passed through them, allowing from 6 inches to a foot of extra breadth and draught of water. The barge-canals in England have locks about 8 feet in breadth, and from 70 to 80 feet long, and their use in raising or lowering boats from the different reaches is so well known as not to require explanation; and for details as to the construction of the masonry of the chamber and walls, and the timber and iron work of the gates and sluices, reference is made to “Rankine’s Engineering” The water is generally admitted into and flows from each lock by sluices formed in the gates, and the passage of a boat occupies from three to six minutes, depending on the lift. Sir William Cubitt, on the Severn navigation, introduced the water through a culvert parallel to the side wall of the lock, and opening in the centre by means of a tunnel, which admits of 16,000 cubic feet of water flowing into or out of the lock in 1½ minute; and in little more than that time loaded vessels can be passed through.

Inclined planes and perpendicular lifts, which have the advantage of saving water, were adopted so long ago as 1789 on the Ketling Canal in Shropshire, and afterwards on the duke of Bridgewater’s canal. Mr Douglas of New York constructed the Morris Canal in the United States with 23 inclined planes, having gradients of about 1 in 10, with an average lift of 58 feet. The boats weighed, when loaded, 50 tons, and after being grounded on a carriage, were raised by water-power up the inclines with great ease and expedition. The length of the Morris Canal, between the rivers Hudson and Delaware, is 101 miles, and the whole rise and fall is 1557 feet, of which 223 were overcome by locks, and the remaining 1334 by inclined planes. When first describing this work the author stated that the principal objection to the inclined planes for moving boats was the injury they were apt to sustain in supporting great weights while resting on the cradle. A slimly-built canal boat, 80 feet long, and loaded with 30 tons, could not be grounded on a smooth surface without straining her timbers, but this objection has to some extent been overcome on an inclined plane constructed by Mr Leslie and Mr Bateman on the Monkland Canal, where the boats are not wholly grounded on the carriage, but are transported in a caisson of boiler-plate containing 2 feet of water, and are thus τvatcr-borne. This inclined plane is wrought by two high-pressure steam-engines of 25 horse-power each. The height...