« הקודםהמשך »
No. 1400.xxi. 19. And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones.] An extract from King's 'Munimenta Antiqua, vol. ii. p. 9. will clearly explain the description which St. John gives of the wall of the holy city. « The several alternate rows or courses of stone and brick, (here described) as appearing in this wall, were by the Greeks who lived in Roman times called Ofuisdior or Oeuedia, and are the kind of ornaments alluded to by St. John as being so highly beautiful, according to every one's apprehension, in his days; when in his emblematical representation of the walls of the holy city in the prophecy of the Revelation he speaks of such being formed of precious stones. The word euenoo is in our translation of the passage very improperly rendered, as far as relates to a consistency with our'modern ideas, foundations, instead of courses: and this mistranslation occasions much confusion in the minds of most persons who attempt to read the prophet's sublime description.
Nevertheless, the reason who these alternate rows of either bricks or smooth flat stones were anciently called OEMerco or Emericas foundations, (though the word seems now so uncouth and unapplicable in our ears) is yet apparent enough. For whoever examines Roman walls attentively will find that most usually the broader altere nate rows of rude stones, or flints, or rubble, and mortar, were evidently constructed merely by having the whole mass flung carelessly into a great caisson, or frame of wood, whose interior breadth was that of the wall ; and whose depth was that of the space between the alternate rows of bricks; and whose length was sometimes more, sometimes less, just as suited convenience: and that the parts thus reared, one at the end of another, on and over each row of bricks, were united together afterwards merely by means of very small loose stones and mortar thrown into the narrow space left at the ends between
them. As therefore these caissons were removed up from one row of bricks, or smooth stones, to another superior row, in constant repetition, according as the wall advanced in height, and were placed successively upon every row; these substantial rows of bricks regularly placed might very well be called Θεμελιοι or Θεμελιά, foundations, because indeed such they really were the whole way up to those identical building frames.” This article is inserted, because it contains a more particular account of the subject than was given in No. 600.
END OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
N O TE
NO. 5, vol. 1. PAGE 24.
İn the Memoirs of Sir William Jones, lately published by Lord Teignmouth, a circumstance has been disclosed which defeats the object of this article, a corroberation of the Mosaic history by distant tradition. It appears that the extract from the Padma-puran was a forgery of one of the Hindûs. Lord Teignmouth gives the follow: ing account of it. “I cannot conclude the preface without mentioné ing some information which materially affects an important pas. sage in the 367th page of the Memoirs, which I received from Ben. gal, long after it had been printed. The passage alluded to is stated to be an exact translation from one of the mythological works of the Hindus : it first appeared in a note annexed by Sir William Jones to an Essay on Egypt and the Nile, in the third volume of the Asiatic Researches, by Lieutenant now Captain Wilford, and relates to Noah (under the designation of Satyavrata) and his three sons. Captain Wilford, has since had the mortification and regret to dis. cover that he was imposed upon by a learned Hindû, who assisted his investigations ; that the Purana, in which he actually and care. fully read the passage which he communicated to Sir William Jones, as an extract from it, does not contain it, and that it was interpolated by the dexterous introduction of a forged sheet, discoloured, and prepared for the purpose of deception, and which having served this purpose was afterwards withdrawn.” Preface, p. 12. Upon discovering the fraud, 1 fully resolved to cancel the article, but fur. ther consideration determined me to let it retain its place, for the sake of avoiding confusion in the general arrangement of the work, apprizing the reader of the true state of the case.