Polybius, speaking of the way which Annibal marched into Italy, useth the word ßeßnuáriora, that is, saith Petrus Victorius, it was stored with devices for men to get upon their horses, which assents were termed bemata, and in the life of Caius Gracchus, Plutarch expresseth as much. For endeavouring to ingratiate himself with the people, besides the placing of stones at every mile's end, he made at nearer distances certain elevated places and scalary ascents, that by the help thereof they might with better ease ascend or mount their horses. Now if we demand how cavaliers, then destitute of stirrups, did usually mount their horses, as Lipsius informeth, the unable and softer sort of men had their ȧvaẞoxes, or stratores, which helped them upon horseback, as in the practice of Crassus, in Plutarch, and Caracalla, in Spartianus, and the later example of Valentinianus, who because his horse rose before, that he could not be settled on his back, cut of the right hand of his strator. But how the active and hardy persons mounted, Vegetius * resolves us, that they used to vault or leap up, and therefore they had wooden horses in their houses and abroad, that thereby young men might enable themselves in this action; wherein by instruction and practice they grew so perfect, that they could vault up on the right or left, and that with their sword in hand, according to that of Virgil,— Poscit equos atque arma simul, sultúque superbus And again, Infrænant alii currus, et corpora saltu So Julius Pollux adviseth to teach horses to incline, dimit, and bow down their bodies, that their riders may with better ease ascend them. And thus may it more causally be made out what Hippocrates affirmeth of the Scythians, that using continual riding they were generally molested with the sciatica or hip gout. Or what Suetonius delivereth of Germanicus, that he had slender legs, but increased them by riding after meals; that is, the humours descending upon *De re Milit. their pendulosity, they having no support or suppedaneous stability.3 Now if any shall say that these are petty errors and minor lapses, not considerably injurious unto truth, yet is it neither reasonable nor safe to contemn inferior falsities, but rather as between falsehood and truth there is no medium, so should they be maintained in their distances; nor the contagion of the one approach the sincerity of the other. 3 Or what Suetonius, &c.] Hippocrates observes, that the Scythians, who were much on horseback, were troubled with defluxions and swellings in their legs, occasioned by their dependent posture, and the want of something to sustain their feet. Had stirrups been known, this inconvenience could not have been urged, and on this fact, together with other arguments, Berenger much relies in his opinion that stirrups were not known to the ancients. See his History and Art of Horsemanship, 2 vols. 4to. Montfaucon attributes this ignorance to the absence of saddles, and to the impossibility of attaching stirrups to the horsecloths, or ephippia, which were anciently used for saddles. Beckman, in his chapter on stirrups (History of Inventions and Discoveries, vol. ii. 270), among other authorities, refers to the present chapter in the French translation. Nothing, he says, resembling stirrups, remains in ancient works of art or coins. Xenophon, in his chapter on horsemanship, makes no mention of them. Stone mounting-steps, he observes, were not only used among the Romans, but are still to be found even in England. Victorious generals used to compel the vanquished even of the highest rank, to stoop that they might mount by stepping on their backs. He mentions some spurious inscriptions and coins which exhibit the stirrup. He names Mauritius as the first writer who has expressly mentioned it, in the sixth century, and from Eustathius it appears that even in the 12th century, the use of stirrups had not become common. "Abdallah's friend found him with his foot in the stirrup, just mounting his camel." Sale's Koran, Prelim. Disc. p. 29. Abdallah lived in the sixth century.-Jeff. "Stirops. From the old English astige or stighe, to ascend or mount up, and ropes; being first devised with cords or ropes, before they were made with leather and iron fastened to it." Verstegan, p. 209. "To have styed up from the very centre of the earth." Bishop Hall's Contemplations on the Ascension, vol. ii. p. 285. Hinc Stigh-ropes.-Jeff. According to Sir John Carr's "Caledonian Sketches," in his account of a male equipage, that island is not yet "a land of bridles and saddles."-Mo. Rev. Sep. 1809.-Jeff. CHAPTER XIV. Of the Picture of Jephthah Sacrificing his Daughter. THE hand of the painter confidently setteth forth the picture of Jephthah in the posture of Abraham, sacrificing his only daughter. Thus is it commonly received, and hath had the attest of many worthy writers. Notwithstanding, upon enquiry we find the matter doubtful, and many upon probable grounds to have been of another opinion; conceiving in this oblation not a natural but a civil kind of death, and a separation only unto the Lord. For that he pursued not his vow unto a literal oblation, there want not arguments both from the text and reason.4 For first, it is evident that she deplored her virginity, and not her death: "Let me go up and down the mountains and bewail my virginity, I and my fellows." Secondly, when it is said, that Jephthah did unto her according unto his vow, it is immediately subjoined, et non For that he pursued not, &c.] The observations of Dr. Adam Clarke on this very interesting question, are so spirited and satisfactory, that I must insert them. Judg. xi. 31.-"The translation of which, according to the most accurate Hebrew scholars, is this-'I will consecrate it to the Lord; OR, I will offer it for a burnt-offering: that is, if it be a thing fit for a burnt-offering, it shall be made one: if fit for the service of God, it shall be consecrated to him.' That conditions of this kind must have been implied in the vow is evident enough; to have been made without them it must have been the vow of a heathen or a madman. If a dog had met him, this could not have been made a burnt-offering: and if his neighbour's or friend's wife, son, or daughter, &c. had been returning from a visit to his family, his vow gave him no right over them. Besides, human sacrifices were ever an abomination to the Lord; and this was one of the grand reasons why God drave out the Canaanites, &c. because they offered their sons and daughters to Moloch, in the fire; i. e. made burnt-offerings of them, as is generally supposed. That Jephthah was a deeply pious man, appears in the whole of his conduct; and that he was well acquainted with the law of Moses,—which prohibited such sacrifices, and stated what was to be offered in sacrifice,-is evident enough from his expostulation with the king and people of Ammon, verse 14 to 27. Therefore it must be granted that he never made that rash vow which several suppose he did; nor was he capable, if he had, of executing it in that most shocking manner which some Christian writers (tell it not in Gath) have contended for. He could not commit a crime which himself had just now been an executor of God's justice to punish in others." cognovit virum, and she knew no man; which, in words, was probably most near in sense unt Thirdly, it is said in the text, that the daugh went yearly to talk with the daughter of Jephth in the year; which had she been sacrificed they c done: for whereas the word is sometime translat yet doth it also signify to talk or have conferer and by Tremellius, who was well able to judge of it is in this sense translated: Ibant filia Israelit fabulandum cum filia Jepththaci, quatuor diebu and so it is also set down in the marginal notes lation. And from this annual concourse of the Israel, it is not improbable in future ages the Jephthah came to be worshipped as a deity, the Samaritans an annual festivity observed u nour, as Epiphanius hath left recorded in the h Melchisedecians. It is also repugnant unto reason; for the offe kind was against the law of God, who so abho sacrifice, that he admitted not the oblation of un and confined his altars but unto few kinds of ani the goat, the sheep, the pigeon, and its kinds. I ing of the leper, there is, I confess, mention sparrow; but great dispute may be made whethe perly rendered. And therefore the Scripture w tion ofttimes makes mention of human sacrifice Gentiles; whose oblations scarce made scruple mal, sacrificing not only man, but horses, lions, though they come not into holocausts, yet do Syrians did make oblations of fishes unto the g ceto. It being therefore a sacrifice so abominabl although he had pursued it, it is not probable the wisdom of Israel would have permitted it; and th in regard of the subject or sacrifice itself, but als ficator, which the picture makes to be Jephtha neither priest, nor capable of that office; for Gileadite, and as the text affirmeth, the son also o And how hardly the priesthood would endure end upon their function, a notable example there is in of Ozias. Secondly, the offering up of his daughter wa CHAP. XIV.] JEPHTHAH SACRIFICING HIS DAUGHTER. 49 unlawful and entrenched upon his religion, but had been a course that had much condemned his discretion; that is, to have punished himself in the strictest observance of his vow, when as the law of God had allowed an evasion; that is, by way of commutation or redemption, according as is determined, Levit. xxvii. Whereby if she were between the age of five and twenty, she was to be estimated but at ten shekels, and if between twenty and sixty, not above thirty. A sum that could never discourage an indulgent parent; it being but the value of a servant slain; the inconsiderable salary of Judas; and will make no greater noise than three pounds fifteen shillings with us. And therefore their conceit is not to be exploded, who say that from the story of Jephthah's sacrificing his own daughter, might spring the fable of Agamemnon, delivering unto sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia, who was also contemporary unto Jephthah; wherein to answer the ground that hinted it, Iphigenia was not sacrificed herself, but redeemed with an hart, which Diana accepted for her.5 Lastly, although his vow run generally for the words, "Whatsoever shall come forth, &c.," yet might it be restrained in the sense, for whatsoever was sacrificeable and justly subject to lawful immolation; and so would not have sacrificed either horse or dog, if they had come out upon him. Nor was he obliged by oath unto a strict observation of that which promissorily was unlawful; or could he be qualified by vow to commit a fact which naturally was abominable. Which doctrine had Herod understood, it might have saved John Baptist's head, when he promised by oath to give unto Herodias whatsoever she would ask; that is, if it were in the compass of things which he could lawfully grant. For his oath made not that lawful which was illegal before; and if it were unjust to murder John, the supervenient oath did not extenuate the fact, or oblige the juror unto it." Now the ground at least which much promoted the opinion, might be the dubious words of the text, which contain the sense of his vow; most men adhering unto Iphigenia, &c.] So the son of Idomeneus, on whose fate there is an interesting scene in Fenelon's Telemachus, book v.-Jeff. 6 Lastly, although his vow, &c.] First added in 2nd edition. |