preacher was once king." (Midrash Rabba.) But according to the Babylonian version, it was not an angel, but the demon. Asmodai, who occupied the throne of Solomon. Both agree, however, that Solomon wandered about. From all this we perceive that Solomon was very different in his old age from what his youth had been; that he had exchanged his mode of life and manner of thought, so as no longer to be recognized. The Babylonian Talmud adds, that in his erratic wanderings, he presented himself before the Sanhedrim, as Solomon, but his assertion could not obtain credence. The Sanhedrim, perhaps, could not believe that this form, bent with age, repentance and sorrow, (for he had already penitently returned into the paths of virtue) could be the same king, once so haughty and licentious. But when the Sanhedrim held up before him the bond of faith and the ring of religion, the evil spirit immediately left him, and they at once recognized their king. This agrees with the Talmudist who first makes him king. then ex-king, and then king again. In Midrash Rabba to Eccle. i: 1, is added: "First a wise man, then a fool, then wise again." This goes to prove that Solomon lost his wisdom with his crown, or in the words of the Talmud, that the bonds of religion were taken away from him, whereby his wisdom was changed into folly, as he now only made a wicked use of it. This also confirms our view, that the traditions of Asmodai are taken from the life of Solomon. Compare Midr. Rab. Gen. § 30: "And king Solomon saw himself caught in a snare, as it is said in the Scripture. (Job v: 13.) He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.' How many spirits and demons had not Solomon subdued! and yet in his old age was overcome by them. Formerly he made the demons trenble, and now he was in dread of them." It is well known, that in Babylon they considered many men as real demons, sometimes called by ordinary names, and sometimes by appellations peculiar to demons. Of the latter class are the following, who were possessed of great renown for their prodigious exploits and wonderful feats. Says Rab ba bar bar Chana: "I once saw Hurmin, son of Lilith,* run on the top of the walls of Machusa, while a rider trotted along the foot of the wall at his utmost speed, without being able to overtake him. At another time, he had two mules saddled, on opposite sides of a brook. He kept leaping from one to the other, all the while holding a cup in each hand, and continually pouring the contents of the one into the other, without ever spilling a drop! He was brought before the king, charged with witchcraft, and was decapitated. Raschbam, in his comments on this passage, says, that this demon was of a mixed race, his father having been a man and his mother a demon; which is the reason of his having lived among men. But this demon does not seem to have been more or less than a common juggler or circus-rider. Rabba bar bar Chana appears to have seen such an one in the city of Machusa, who, on account of his supposed preternatural feats was called Hurmin; the Persian name of a well known prince of the demons; and bar Lilith, a well known female demon in the Talmud, and was believed to be a real demon. From different passages in the Babylonian Talmud, we also find that the souls of the departed sometimes were believed to become demons and evil spirits. In Berachoth 18 b, a story is told of a pious man who could not agree very well with his wife; he went to the graveyard, where he remained all night. Here he heard two spirits converse with each other. One of them said to the other: "Come let us wander about the world, and learn the future behind the curtain.'' The other answered, "I cannot because I am buried in a cane-mat." We perceive from this, that these beings formerly tenanted human bodies, but after death became spirits, and as such wandered about the world, and in heaven learned the future, as also Asmodai did. The belief that the spirits of the dead hovered about the place of burial, and scoffed and laughed at the affairs of mankind, as is said of Asmodai, dates back into remote anti *Lilith is the demon of night, and corresponds with Milton's demon of that name. The Jews say, that she was the wife of Adam before Eve was created, and gave birth to the various tribes of demons. quity. In Talmud Sanhedrim, 65 b, it is stated, that he is a necromancer, who, fasting, tarries about a graveyard in order to become possessed of an unclean spirit. Raschi supplies. this latter clause to Isaiah lxv: 4. 66 Those who remain among the graves," &c. So Aben Ezra, and even Gesenius, though he also adds another explanation. Matthew viii: 28, and some other passages in the New Testament, will support this interpretation. It was also believed that, the possession of a spirit of this sort rendered its subject insane. This we find in Chagiga 3 b; "Who is a lunatic? He who roams among the tombs; meaning, of course, for the purpose of having communion with the demons." The Arabs, as is well known, dread a lunatic, more especially for being possessed. According to Nidda 17 a, those demons that dwell among the tombs become very dangerous to men. It now only remains to give the etymology and definition of the word, Asmodai. It is doubtless derived from the Aramaic root, Shamad (vid. Daniel vii: 26.) The Aleph at the beginning shows it to be of the N form, and the word may thus be rendered, "the destroyer." The suffix is a sign of the plural. Some, indeed, think this plural, a plur. majest., and in Talmud Pesach, 110, we find that Asmodai signifies "king," and not "destroyer." In Gittin § 7, we see that Asmodai, sitting on the throne, and decked with the feathers of Solomon, was only found out, when he was seen to go to bed with his stockings on. Raschi tells, that this led to a closer examination, which resulted in the discovery of his "cloven foot.". Raschi has this on the authority of Talmud Berachoth, 6 a; "He who wishes to track a demon, should strew ashes before his bed, and in the morning he will find traces of cloven feet in them. These cloven feet may denote Asmodai's licentious character, as the Greek poets also painted their Fauns and Satyrs with goat's feet and horns. The Babylonian Asmodai formed the theme of many of the Byzantine Greek poets, long after the completion of the Babylonian Talmud. It has given rise to many tales and stories among the Arabs also. There is, moreover, a romance still extant in Hebrew, the subject of which is as follows: "A Jew came, by a train of fortuitious circumstances, into the palace of Asmodai, where he fell in love with his daughter and married her. She bore him a son, whom she named after king Solomon. But sometime afterward, he tried to return to his first wife; deserted Asmodai's daughter, and returned home again. The love-sick princess pursued him, to induce him to return with her, but in vain. Then she grew very angry, and strangled him, and threatened to kill every inhabitant of that town, if they did not make her son their chief. The people obeyed, however, and thus averted the threatened calamity." ART. III. JOHN FOSTER. 1. The Life and Correspondence of John Foster. Edited by J. E. Ryland. In two volumes. pp. 306 and 378. New York: Wiley & Putnam. 2. The Life and Thoughts of John Foster. By W. W. Everts. New York: Edward H. Fletcher. pp. 314. By JAS. H. CARLISLE, Columbia, S. C. John Foster was born in Yorkshire, England, September 17th, 1770. His parents were in humble circumstances, but of more than ordinary intelligence and piety. His only brother being several years younger, and his parents being sedate and reserved in their manners towards their children, he was left without any cordial or sympathizing companionship; a circumstance which contributed to form some of the most striking peculiarities of his character. He grew up with "a painful and awkward sense of entire individuality." He engaged for a short time in the occupation of weaving, but his VOL. VII.-33 attention having been turned towards the ministry, soon after making a religious profession, he entered the Classical Academy of Dr. Fawcett. Three years after, he entered the Baptist College, Bristol, where he spent one year, and then left it. "Quitting the seminary without any determinate prospects," according to his own language at this crisis in his life, "I humbly await that train of futurity through which superior wisdom may conduct me, firmly resolved at the same time, that every scene into which I may be introduced shall witness me actively alive in the cause of religion and of God." The first place in which he settled as a minister was Newcastle-on-Tyne, where he remained only three months, when he went to take charge of a church in Dublin. His description of this part of his ministry is characteristic; "a dull scene in which I preached with little interest and they heard with less." His views at this time were unsettled on many important points. He hesitated for some time with regard to the peculiarities of Calvinism, but afterwards embraced them. Doubts as to the eternity of future punishment also at this time, entered his mind, and were retained through life. He adopted, and with inconsiderable variations, held singular views with respect to church organizations. He was opposed to anything institutional in religion, except public worship and the Lord's supper. Many years after this, writing to a friend he says; "I have long felt an utter loathing of what bears the general denomination of the Church, with all its parties, contests, disgraces, or honors. My wish would be little less than the dissolution of all church institutions, of all orders and shapes: that religion might be set free as a grand spiritual and moral element, no longer clogged, perverted and prostituted by corporation forms and principles." After several removals, he was invited to take charge of a congregation in Frome, near Bristol. Robert Hall, in introducing his young friend to the church there, writes; "His manner is not popular but his conceptions are most extraordinary and original, his disposition very amiable, his piety unquestionable, and his sentiments moderately orthodox, about the level of Watts and |