Page images

from the comparison made by Josephus between the ond of 24, according to the more common and natural ordinary cubit of the Jews and the Attic cubit: for definition ; and the third, forming nearly the mean this cubit, being deduced from the proportion natural between the two, is reckoned at 27 fingers. The first to it in common with the Greek foot, consisting of is formed by the addition of two palms to the six 1,360 parts or tenths of a line of the Paris foot, makes which compose the second, and which it has in com2,040 of the same parts, or 204 lines or 17 inches. mon with the Egyptian and Hebrew cubit. These Let us recollect moreover what has been quoted definitions are furnished by an extract from an Orienabove from Ezekiel, in treating of the measure of the tal land surveyor, for which we are indebted to Golitemple, when he directs the Jews of Babylon to em us, in the notes with which he has illustrated the Elploy a cubit longer by a hand breadth than the ordi ements of Astronomy of Alferganes. nary one, in rebuilding the temple. This hand breadth Of these three cubits, that which seems most enbeing no other than the smaller palm or tophach, titled to our attention, especially in regard to use and have we not here a formal distinction between two a greater conformity with the nature of the cubit in cubits, the shorter of which appears to have been in general, is the comnion one. As a circumstance of common use. But, in allowing that the smaller cubit essential importance, to enable us to determine its was introduced during the time of the second temple, length, I shall observe that the cubit deduced from we might, from delicacy, and to shun any violation of the analysis of the measure of the earth, taken by the divine precept, which enjoins but one weight and command of the calif Al Mamoun in the plains of one measure, be willing to reject the cubit in question Sinjar in Mesopotamia, cannot so well refer to any as for the time preceding the captivity ; which, however, to that denominated the common or ordinary cubit. we should be absolutely authorized to do by the si. According to Abulfeda's account of the measure of lence of Scripture, since, in Deut. iii. 11. the meas. Al Mamoun, tbe terrestrial degree upon the meridian ure of the bedstead of Og, king of Bashan, is given in was calculated at 56; Arabian miles; and Alfercubits taken from the natural proportion of the human ganes, chap. viii. says that the mile in this measure body, after the cubit of a man, or, according to the was composed of 4,000 cubits. Taking the degree Vulgate, ad mensuram cubiti virilis manus. Though in round numbers at 57,000 fathoms, for the reason we an indefinite number of measures, which enlarge upon have given in treating of the measure of the temple, their natural principles; for example, all that bear the Arabian mile consists as nearly as possible of 1,006. the name of a foot, without entering into further de The thousand fathoms make the cubit of 18 inches; tails; sufficiently authorize the denomination of cubit, and if we take into the account the six fathoms orer, in a measure of such length as the Hebrew and we shall have a line and about sths of a line to add to Egyptian cubit appear to have been; still the consid- each. eration of those principles is frequently essential in The learned Golius conceived that the black cubit the discussion of measures, and ought not to be lost was alluded to in Al Mamoun's measure, because Alsight of. It was to this that I owed the discovery ferganes has made use of the term royal cubit, to deof the natural foot, the measure and use of which I note that which be considered adapted to this meashave discussed in my Treatise on Itinerary Measures. It must be admitted to be the general opinion We have then, in this memoir, an analysis of the

that this cubit owed its establishment to Al Mamoun, Hebrew measures, which, though independent of all and that it was thus denominated because it was taken particular application, nevertheless agrees with the from the breadth of the hand or natural palm of an measure of the circumference of Jerusalem and the Ethiopian slave belonging to that prince, because it extent of the temple, according to the deduction of was found to surpass any other. Be it remarked, that measure from the various indications of antiquity however, that not only does the surveyor quoted by compared with local circumstances. There appears Golius apply the use of the black cubit to the measure to be such a connection between the different objects of various costly stuffs at Bagdad, but that the prohere brought together, that they seemn dependent on portion established between the different Arabian cueach other, and to afford, as far as they are concern bits is extremely inconvenient for the application of ed, a mutual confirmation.

the black cubit to the measure of the earth under Al

Mamoun. Be it further remarked: 1st, that the black DISCUSSION OF THE ARABIAN CUBIT.

cubit, with the advantage of three fingers over the I promised, in treating of an article relative to the common cubit, would still not have any striking exmeasure of the temple, to enter into a discussion of cess beyond the ordinary standard, if it amounted to the Arabian cubit after I had finished with the He no more than 18 inches ; 2dly, that the common cubrew measures.

bit, which would be two inches less, would conseThis cubit, deraga or derah, is of three kinds ; the quently appear small, since we have seen that the ancient, the common, and the black. The first, which cubit in use among the Jews, notwithstanding its infe. is thus named from having existed, as it is said, in the

is said, in the riority to the legal cubit, contained at least 17 inches; time of the Persians, consists of 32 fingers; the sec 3dly, that the ancient cubit, called the hashemide,


amounted in proportion to no more than 21 inches and ten in Persian, that the finger, the fourth part of the a few lines, though reasons might be adduced for sup- palin, and the twenty-fourth part of the cubit, was de. posing it to have been longer : for, according to Ma- fined to be equal to six barley corns placed by the rufides, the beight of the church of St. Sophia, which side of each other, a definition which is in fact univerfrom the floor to the dome is 78 hashemide cubits, is sal among Oriental authors, says that he found the computed by Evagrius at 180 Greek feet; and accord- measure of six barley corns, multiplied eight times, to ing to the proportion which exists between the Greek amount to six inches of our foot; from which he confoot and ours, the cubit in question will amount to 26 cludes that the cubit, composed of 144 grains, must inches and about 2 lines. Even this is not enough if have been equal to a foot and a half. Now is not this we follow the standard of the hashemide cubit, which, the same thing that results not only from the measure according to Edward Bernard, is marked upon a man of the terrestrial degree by order of Al Mamoun, but uscript in the library at Oxford, and which he repre- likewise of the special application which we make of sents as measuring 28 inches 9 lines of the English the common cubit to that measure? I remark that the foot, equal, within a trifle, to 27 inches of the Paris black cubit, in proportion to the analyzed measure of foot. The measures of the length and breadth of St. the common one, will be 20 inches and 4 or 5 lines, Sophia, given by Marufides, namely, 101 cubits for which, be it observed by the way, comes very near the one and 934 for the other, will make the cubits to the Egyptian and Hebrew cubit. Now, as this still longer, if we compare them with Grelot's diinen. black cubit exceeded the common measure only besions of 42 and 38 fathoms. The comparison not be cause the breadth of the Ethiopian's hand, or the ing perfectly consistent, the result given by the length palm which was taken for a standard, surpassed the will be near 30 inches to the cubit, and by the breadth ordinary measure; not because there was any inten29 inches 3 lines, good measure.

tion of altering the cubit calculated at six palms; I am aware that persons might think themselves would it not be making too great a change in the natjustified in supposing that the length, whatever it may ural proportion, to extend it to 20 inches and almost be, of the ancient or hashemide cubit, has an influence a hall, while the six Greek palms, though proportionover the proportions of the other cubits; and that it ed to the stature of a man of 5 feet 8 inches, amount would make the common one amount to 20 inches 3 to no more than 17 inches? If these consonances and lines, if we adhere to the standard itself of the hash- probabilities do not extend to the comparison which emide cubit: since the apparent comparison between has been made of the ancient or hashemide cubit with them is as 4 to 3. But as such an argument is not suffi- the other cubits, we observe that this comparison cient to sappress and render null the analysis of the cu- is probably but numerary in regard to the palms and bit resulting from the positive measure of the terres- fingers, without being proportional as to the effective trial degree under Al Mamoun, even though this length. Do we not see the same difference between measure should not be judged to possess the utmost the measures of a foot, though they are all composed degree of precision; it must be natural to presume of twelve inches ? And, to take an example for the that there is no proportion among the different Ara- very subject before us, though the black cubit exbian cubits better calculated to suit this analysis of ceeded the common by 3 inches in the 24 of that comthe cubit than the common cubit. The black cubit mon cubit, were more than six palms taken to coinwill be the less fit for this purpose, as, according to pose it? the hashemide measure, it must have amounted to In this discussion of the Arabian cubit, which re22 inches 9 lines.

lates only to one particular point in what forms the Thevenot, whose accuracy and sagacity, so supe- subject of our dissertation ; I have the more willingly rior to those of the generality of travellers, are well entered, as I am not aware that the result deduced known, having remarked, in a geographical work writ- from it has hitherto been developed.

The following extracts, which were not contemplated while the selection was making from Valencia, Cha

teaubriand, and Clarke's Travels, have been since furnished through the politeness of a literary friend.



I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by his name Jehovah; though he had exJacob, by (the name of God Almighty, but by my pressly said to the first of those patriarchs, I am Jename JEŇOVAH was I not known to them.

hovah, who brought thee from Ur of the Chaldees ; In this passage, which is part of a conference be- although Abraham himself says to the king of Sodom, tween the God of the Hebrews and their great legis- I have lift up my hands unto Jehovah, the Most High, lator, the former, according to most translations, de- the possessor of heaven and earth; and although Moses clares that he was not known to Abraham, Isaac, and speaks of it as known in the days of Seth, Gen, iv. 26.



sage before

I shall not here mention all the reasonings used by little nation for his own peculiar people, to plant and divines to adjust this contradiction; but observe that to preserve amongst them the worship of himself it has been proposed to render the Hebrew particle alone, in opposition to the polytheism and idolatry of NS, Lo, interrogatively, as it is Exod. viii. 26. and Lam. the nations around tbem. i. 12. and which is equivalent to the strongest and If any one doubt whether the verb yr ido, to know, most positive affirmation: the passage would then be ever used in Scripture in the sense of a distinread, was not I even known to them by my name Jeho- guishing knowledge, I need only point out to bim vah? This is the idea of the author of the Essay for Amos iii. 2. where God says to the Jews, You only a new translation of the Bible. But what has this to have I known of all the families of the earth ; that is, do with the context ? If we take a view of the state you only have I DISTINGUISHED, &c. of religion at that time, we shall probably see cause We find the same language used in the New Testafor another rendering of the words.

ment; If any man love God, saith St. Paul, 1 Cor. It seems to have been a prevalent custom among viii. 3. the same is known of him ; i.e. so as to be the heathen to give proper names to their respective distinguished ; and in this sense, probably, he speaks gods. This was particularly the case with the peo when he says, 1 Cor. ii. 2. I determined not lo Know ple among whom the Hebrews then resided : they had any thing among you save Jesus Christ, even him their Apis, their Mnevis, their Osiris, their Isis, &c. crucified ; i.e. so far from going among the Corinthians and all the gods of the nations had their peculiar, with those things which would captivate and amuse proper, and significant names. The true God oppos- them, that he was determined that his distinguishing ed these gods of the nations; but how was he to be topic should be the exaltation of Christ, even of him distinguished, if he had not his peculiar and signifi- that was crucified as a malefactor. And so in the pascant proper name?

us, By my name Jehovah was I not distir. Let us now turn to Exod. ii. 21. which tends to GUISHED; i.e. I was not distinguished by it as my establish the particular idea contained in this criti- proper and peculiar name, as I now intend to be for cism. God was engaging Moses to deliver the He the future; This shall be my name for ever, and this brews out of Egypt: and Moses said unto God, Be my memorial unto all generations. By referring to a hold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and say Concordance the reader will probably find other pasunto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me sages elucidated by this sense of the word. unto you, and they shali say unto me, What is his The foregoing illustration is derived from Mr. PeNAME? what shall I say unto them ?.....And God said ters's preface to his Critical Dissertation on the Book unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Job; it gives so apt and easy a seuse to the test, of Israel, JEROVAH, the God of your fathers, the God and at the same time establishes the propriety and of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob even the necessity of retaining the name wherever it hath sent me unto you. This 18 MY NAME for ever, is to be found in the Hebrew Bible, that it is remarkand THIS IS MY MEMORIAL unto all generations. able it should be overlooked.

It is now time to return to the verse under consid. Every body knows the childish and superstitious eration. God says to Moses, I appeared unto Abra- scruple of the Jews, the Greek and Latin fathers, and han, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by (the name of) of several modern divines, as to the name Jebovah, God Almighty, but by my name Jehovah was I not which they thought was unlawful to be pronounced, known unto them. If we take the word known in its because they read in their translations, Levit. xxiv. general acceptation, it will contradict the sense in 11-16. that the son of the Israelitish woman had many places; and to set up one passage against a hun- pronounced the name Jehovah, and he that did prodred, would be a very hazardous way of interpreting nounce the name Jehovah should surely be put to Scripture. What then can be the meaning of this death. The Jews aggravate this threatening, Tr. last clause, By my name Jehovah was I not KNOWN Sanbedr. c. iv. 91. excluding from eternal life any unto them? Plainly this: By my name Jehovah was that shall be guilty of that pretended crime; and it I not distINGUISHED by them.

is in consequence of that law that they call this name It is evident, from the foregoing history, that the ineffable, and that they read adonai and elohim in all true God was known to bis worshippers by this and the places where Jehovah is found. many other names; but by none was he known as his But besides that they make no scruple to pronounce one peculiar name; a name which he had appropri- those two other names of God, which they pretend to ated to himself in preference to the others, and by be synonymous, or at least equivalent, to that of Jewhich he now declares he would be distinguished for hovah, they charge God with making a law directly the time to come.

contrary to that which he gave the Israelites, with Grammarians observe, that, of all the names of God, respect to murder committed by an unknown hand. this seems to be the most appropriate to him, as it For he expressly orders the elders of the next city, denotes continuance of existence, or self existence. No Deut. xxi. 8. after some ceremonies prescribed to time could be more seasonable for God to give to him- them, to say, Jehovah be merciful to thy people Isself such a name, than when he was about to take this rael; and he commanded the Israelites several ages

daughter of Jepthah, the Gileadite, four days in a the common translation will often find that the maryear.

ginal note is better than the body of the text. It is truly strange to consider that translators, Part of these remarks are taken from An Essay for when a text is capable of two different senses, do a New Translation of the Bible, the author of which generally choose that which is least agreeable to rea refers to J. and D. Kimchi, Levi, Ben-Gerson, and son and the analogy of faith, and that they should so Solomon Ben Melech among the Jews, and De Lyra, warmly contend for that sense which is liable to a Junius and Tremellius, Zeigler, Brentius, Chytræus, great many exceptions, and is sometimes impious and Osiander, Frantius, Capellus, Marsham, Saubertus, profane, when the words do very well admit a very and Schedius among the Christians, as agreeing with rational meaning ; as they have done in this and sev- this mode of interpretation. . eral other passages of Scripture. Those who read

JOHN V. 2, 3, 4.

There is at Jerusalem by the sheep [market] a be said they were informed of those virtues by the pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, deity, we demand the proof thereof. It likewise rehaving five porches : in these luy a great multitude of mains to be proved that the warm blood washed from impotent folk, of blind, halt

, withered, waiting for the reeking sacrifices, would possess virtues capable the moving of the water : for an angel went down at of effecting the cure of those diseases enumerated in a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water; the third verse: still more difficult would it be to whosoever then first after the troubling of the water prove, if such power existed in the pool, that it was stepped in, the same was made whole of whatsoever capable of curing only one person. This latter redisease he had.

mark, perhaps, is sufficient to overthrow what the The difficulties attending this passage of Scripture Dr. suggests concerning the name of the house and have been ingenuously confessed by several learned the return of the period for performing the solitary men, particularly by the late Dr. Doddridge, who calls cure, vis. that it was only once a year; for certainly it “the greatest of difficullies in the history of the it must be a pompous display of mercy to name an ed. evangelists.” Mr. Fleming also acknowledged the ifice the house of mercy, because one sick person was same; but he supposed, in order to obviate that dif- cured there annually ! Again, is it to be supposed that ficulty, that part of the account is interpolated : it is the five porches were built on purpose for the accomtrue, the latter part of the third verse, and all the modation of those who resorted there, since only one fourth, are wanting in the Greek and Latin manuscript person could receive benefit therefrom? It seems inpresented by Theodore Beza to the University of deed to us, that such accommodation could not be the Cambridge; and are added in a later hand to a manu result of much wisdom, whatever mercy the founders script formerly in the possession of the kings of France. might possess. Let us further observe that when the

This may not be sufficient evidence to the gener account concerning the building of the temple and its ality of readers that the passage is spurious, especially appurtenances is given, we have not the least notice when it is considered that reference is made to the of this house of mercy; we have no account of the efficacy of the waters in other parts of the chapter. origin of its name, or the purpose for which it was

We mean to notice generally the various ideas that built. Once more ; would not the effect of so much have been given concerning the Pool of Bethesda, and blood corrupting in the water bave been dreadful to the cures said to be performed there, and then to of those who abode or sat near it, in a climate less warm fer our own conjectures.

than that of Judea ? It has been supposed by Dr. Hammond, that the Dr. Doddridge imagines that “ sometime before this blood washed from the sacrifices in the pool at that passover, an extraordinary commotion was probably season, the passover, communicated a healing quality observed in the water; and Providence so ordered it to the water upon its being stirred up by a messenger, that the next person who bathed there, being under aggedos angelos, sent thither for that purpose, im some great disorder, found an immediate and unexmediately after which the persons afflicted went in, pected cure: the like phenomenon, in some other deswhile the particles of blood were warm and agitated. perate case, was probably observed on a second com. The Dr. likewise supposed the name of the house to motion; and these commotions and cures might hapbe 7770n n'), Bith chesdeh, a house of mercy, from pen periodically, perhaps every sabbath, for that it the cures performed there.

was yearly none can prove, for some weeks and months. We doubt, considering the strict prohibitions con This the Jews would naturally ascribe to some antained in the Mosaic laws concerning blood, whether gelic power, as they did afterward the voice from the Jews might lawfully try experiments with it, even heaven, John xii. 29. though no angel appeared..... On for medical purposes; not to mention the improba- their making so ungrateful a return to Christ for this bility of their making such experiments. And if it miracle, and those wrought at the former passover,



and in the intermediate space, this celestial visitant, 2dly, Not to insist on the contradiction which approbably, from this time, returned no more."

pears between the supposition that the upper spring The reader may observe, after reading the above was the medicinal water which was troubled at the quotation, that, if the miracle was performed by the season,” and the historical account which says, “ the power of Christ, or by an angel, for him, or on behalf angel went down into the water, and troubled it,the of the religion he was propagating, yet, as the Jews water in the pool, and the author bimself, who supwere not informed it was so, their “ingratitude” does poses the upper spring to be the angel, or “providennot appear, for knowledge is the criterion which con tial agent of God,” which troubled the water, we redemns for transgression. And if it was a hidden or mark that, although the cures are supposed to be efsecret miracle by Christ or an angel, the Jews are fected by mere natural means, yet those very means not consequently guilty, in this instance, in rejecting are called “ a PROVIDENtial agent of God.” It apChrist; for in order that a miracle should be consid- pears to us, where any agent is employed by God, it ered as a public interference of the Deity confirming proves a divine interference, and that is what constithe truth of any doctrine taught, it should certainly tutes a miracle. be performed publicly, by the person teaching, in or 3dly, In another instance this mode of interpretader to have its desired effect.

tion favours the idea of miraculous interposition. It Again, if it was a standing miracle, it proved noth is little less than miraculous that no more water should ing; for had Jesus referred to his miracles as proofs run from the rock than was exactly sufficient to cure of the divinity of his doctrines and mission, the Jews one person! And it is equally wonderful that enough could have answered him on his own ground, and

prov. should run to cure one! In order to make such a coned the divinity of their existing polity by referring, in jecture feasible, we must further suppose that the uptheir turn, to the cures performed at the Pool of Beth per spring ran not only at a certain season, but in a esda. We conceive, therefore, that this mode of ex certain quantity; but as the consideration of this planation, for the above reasons, is not consistent with would introduce more of the marvellous, we observe, The nature of the circumstances then existing.

4thly, With respect to the query whether, “had Another conjecture is, vide FRAGMENT, No. 66, the pool itself been the water moved, would not the vol. iii. that there were two distinct waters ; 1st, sheep have been prohibited from being washed in it, the constant body of water, the pool, wherein the because its being troubled could not be distinguished sheep were washed; 2dly, an occasional and in from the commotion occasioned by the sheep?" it constant issue of water, whose source was on one side may be replied, that, to be consistent with the account of the pool, falling from a crevice of the rock, into the in the Gospel, we only have to suppose the afflicted pool: what if this was the medicinal water which was persons were themselves satisfied as to the time about s troubled at the season?” This writer then gives a which the troubling of the waters generally took place, description of the pool from the travels of Sandys, and that they only had to wait till the sheep were which corresponds with his conjecture as to the ex taken out, and then go in; for the tradition was, that istence of an upper spring. The angel is supposed whoever went in "FIRST AFTER the troubling of to mean “a providential agent of God."

the water was made whole." Notwithstanding this conjecture appears to us far Having gone thus far through troubled waters, we more ingenious than the preceding ones, we object to observe, that the commentators above quoted are cerit on the following grounds. 1st, The idea that the tainly commendable for their labours and the general upper spring was that under which the patients wish- light which they bave thrown on the Scriptures, yet ed to be conveyed, is very different from the account we think they here have failed. In our examination given by John; for according to him, it was a lower of their various hypotheses we have acted conscien. water by which they expected to be healed; for an tiously; desiring the same impartiality to be exercisangel went down and troubled the water....whosoedered toward ourselves, we proceed to show our opinion. then first after the troubling of the water stepped in, We conjecture that the Pool of Bethesda, on the into the water that was troubled, was made whole. account of some peculiarity in its waters, was chosen The reader will observe that the whole efficacy of by the ancient Canaanites as a convenient and desirthe water consists in the circumstance of its first able situation for a temple sacred to the sun, the great being troubled; which circumstance is of no conse and universal object of adoration in the Eastern world; quence, and had better not be mentioned, in the con that the porches which the evangelist mentions were jecture which we are now examining; for if the upper remains of the building; that the troubling of the water alone possessed the healing quality, its falling waters was probably caused by the introduction of into and troubling water which did not possess any of water, the effect of the periodical rains, or of an under its qualities, is of too trifling a nature to be so partic. spring, by a subterranean channel, which the Jews ularly and minutely insisted on by an historian as this not knowing, and the cause of the ebulition being unevidently is; it must therefore be of greater import- seen, they attributed to the agency of an angel, as they ance in the story than is above supposed.

did the voice from heaven, John xii. 29. although

« PreviousContinue »