Respecting this part of our subject, it is almost needless to repeat, that the whole of the resemblances to be considered are, from first to last, little else than studied and servile imitations: in which we are reminded of the divine original, only the more sensibly to perceive and feel, the gross disfigurements of its beauties, and the monstrous perversions of its truths, exhibited by the Koran.

At the same time it is unquestionable, that, in its general design and composition, as well as in its pretensions to inspiration, the latter volume presents a correspondence most circumstantial and extraordinary, with the Jewish and Christian Scriptures: a correspondence, at once, embracing several of the most prominent features of both Testaments, and descending to the minutest peculiarities of their order and distribution.

The groundwork of the proposed comparison has been laid by Mahomet himself: since it was in open and avowed imitation of Moses, and of the tables of the law, that the Arabian impostor pretended to have received, in the chapters of the Koran, a written revelation, sent down to him immediately from heaven. This pseudobible, he further constantly affirmed to have been modelled, by the Spirit of God, after the books of the Law and of the Gospel; and to have been

revealed, in order to complete the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. And so far did his scheme of plagiarism carry him forward, in perfecting this branch of the analogy, that, as we have elsewhere remarked *, he even went the studied length of shutting up the chapters of the Koran in a coffer, which he styled the chest of his apostleship; professing to do so after the example of Moses, who, by divine commandment, had enclosed, in the ark of the Lord, the tables of his law.

The identity of character with the Jewish lawgiver, thus, from the outset, affected by Mahomet, in the putting forth of his pretended revelation, is followed up by a close and literal coincidence in the several titles, divisions, and subdivisions, technically applied, by the Jews, on the one hand, to the volume of the Old Testament, and by Mahomet and his followers, on the other hand, to the Koran.

These external features of agreement are specimens of Mahometan plagiarism, too palpable to have been let pass without animadversion, by preceding writers. Notice, accordingly, has been taken of them, in the dissertation of Mill † ; and this part of the analogy between the Koran and

*Vol. I. p. 285.

De Mohammed. ante Mohamm. p. 361.

the Old Testament, has been very fully set forth by the learned English translator, in his Preliminary Discourse. We will submit the particulars in the words of Mr. Sale; beginning with the title Koran.

"The word Korán, derived from the verb karaa, to read, signifies, properly, in Arabic, the reading, or rather, that which ought to be read; by which name the Mohammedans denote, not only the entire book or volume of the Korân, but, also, any particular chapter or section of it: just as the Jews call either the whole Scripture, or any part of it, by the name of Karáh, or Mikra; words of the same origin and import.

"Besides this peculiar name, the Korân is also honoured with several appellations, common to other books of Scripture; as, Al Forkán, from the verb faraka, to divide or distinguish in the same notion that the Jews use the word Perek, or Pirka, from the same root, to denote a section or portion of Scripture.

"It is also called Al Moshaf, the Volume, and Al Kitáb, the Book, by way of eminence; which answers to the Biblia of the Greeks: and Al Dhikr, the admonition; which name is also given to the Pentateuch and Gospel.

"The Korân is divided into 114 larger por

tions, of very unequal length, which we call chapters, but the Arabians Sowar, in the singular Súra; a word rarely used on any other occasion, and properly signifying a row, order, or regular series; as a course of bricks, in building, or a rank of soldiers, in an army; and is the same, in use and import, with the Súra, or Tora, of the Jews; who also call the fifty-three sections of the Pentateuch, Sedárim, a word of the same signification. These chapters are not, in the manuscript copies, distinguished by their numerical order; but, usually, from the first word of note: exactly in the same manner as the Jews have named their Sedârim.

Every chapter is subdivided into smaller portions, of very unequal length also; which we customarily call verses; but the Arabic word is. Ayát, the same with the Hebrew Ototh, and signifies signs or wonders; such as are the secrets of God, his attributes, works, judgments, and ordinances, delivered in these verses.

"The Mohammedans have in this, also, imitated the Jews, that they have superstitiously numbered the very words, and letters, of their law; nay, they have taken the pains to compute the number of times each particular letter of the alphabet is contained in the Korân.

"Beside these unequal divisions of chapter

and verse, the Mohammedans have also divided their Korân into sixty equal portions, which they call Ahzháb, in the singular Hizb; each subdivided into four equal parts: which is also an imitation of the Jews; who have an ancient division of their Mishna, into sixty portions, called Massictoth.

"Next after the title, at the head of every chapter, except only the ninth, is prefixed the following solemn form, by the Mohammedans called the Bismillah, IN THE NAME OF THE MOST MERCIFUL GOD; which form they constantly place at the beginning of all their books and writings in general, as a peculiar mark, and distinguishing characteristic of their religion; it being counted a sort of impiety to omit it. The Jews, for the same purpose, make use of the form, IN THE NAME OF THE LORD, or IN THE NAME OF THE GREAT GOD. And the eastern Christians, that of, IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, AND OF THE Son, and oF THE HOLY GHOST."*

From the foregoing extracts it appears, that, in its several titles, divisions, and subdivisions, the volume of the Koran is constructed and distributed with the minutest attention to the titles, divisions, and subdivisions, which had been ap

*Prelim. Disc. Sect. iii. pp. 74-78.