simplicity of style and thought afford a voucher for the truth of their
narratives. Nor are Thevenot, Paul Lucas, and Careri, though less
frequently consulted, at all unworthy of confidence as depositaries of
historical fact. In more modern times we meet with equal fidelity,
recommended by an exalted tone of feeling, in the volumes of Chateaubriand
and Dr. Richardson. Clarke, Burckhardt, Buckingham, Legh, Henniker,
Jowett, Light, Macworth, Irby and Mangles, Carne, and Wilson, have not
only contributed valuable materials, but also lent the aid of their names
to correct or to conform the statements of some of the more apocryphal
among their predecessors.

The chapter on Natural History has no pretensions to scientific
arrangement or technical precision in its delineations. On the contrary,
it is calculated solely for the common reader, who would soon be disgusted
with the formal notation of the botanist, and could not understand the
learned terms in which the student of zoology too often finds the
knowledge of animal nature concealed. Its main object is to illustrate the
Scriptures, by giving an account of the quadrupeds, birds, serpents,
plants, and fruits which are mentioned from time to time by the inspired
writers of either Testament.

Edinburgh, _September_, 1831.




CONTENTS.


CHAPTER I.