few of the words in succession, and show the wretchedness of the attempts that Mr. Forster has made at their interpretation. We shall take those on the first page.

66

66

The first word is, according to the alphabet, Smac, or Smak. He gives, as the translation of this, from Golius, (we should have thought he might have referred to a better authority,) tectum, domus;" and he translates it we dwelt." Here is a double blunder; for, first, the pronoun "we" is not expressed, as it ought to have been, by an afformative; and secondly, the meaning of the Arabic root, Samaka, is not to dwell," but "to elevate," or "be high." One of its derived nouns signifies, among other things, not "a house," as Mr. Forster's quotation would seem to imply, but tectum domus," the roof, or ceiling of a house. This is no authority for assigning to the verb the signification of dwelling.

Here again, the "translation" differs from the "original." Mr. Forster translates the "corresponding" Arabic word" courts." It is, however, none of the other forms given by Freytag, for either the singular or plural of the noun, 'arssat," a court;" and we think it by no means improbable, that there should have been a diacritical point over the third letter, and that the meaning of the poet was, "the parts adjacent to this castle." We have next Waib (wa'ib,)" ampla domus," rendered" of this spacious mansion." The two first of these four words have certainly nothing to correspond to them; and neither has the fourth; for "domus" is no part of the explanation. Wa'ib is an adjective. Freytag explains it, "amplus, de domo," and afterwards he gives it as an epithet of "saltus." Mr. Forster has indeed made a wide jump here.

Next comes Dzal (Dhal) Mr. Forster translates this "our condition;" (why "our?" no pronoun has hitherto appeared in the sentence) because Adhlâl is interpreted "conditio, status." The prevailing meaning of the root is, however, "vileness, humility, submission;" and this is the meaning which Adhlal itself most properly has. Adhlâlo 'Inâsi is not "the condition of mankind," but "the vileness of mankind," i. e. "men of the vilest and lowest conditon."-See Freytag, II. 92, a.

The next word is given by Mr. Forster as Wasa (Was'a); but, according to his "alphabet," the second letter is not a Sin, but a Shin, Ta or Tta. This he interprets, "Commode comprehensus fuit, atque laxe satis consedit in aliquo loco;" and he renders it in English, "living long, luxuriously." Mr. Forster forgets to state, that the meaning which he gives to the root belongs to it in the fifth conjugation, which has Ta prefixed to the radical letters, and We have thought it better to make a full the second radical doubled. This, how- exposure of the absurdity of this "glosever, is a trifle. If the change in the sary" in a few instances, than to write with second letter be admissable; and if the less detail of a greater number. We will simple root can be considered the plural tire the patience of our readers no longer. form of the participle, we will not quarrel We shall only say, that we are willing to back with this rendering on any other grounds. Sir William Betham at two to one, for bringBut, it should be recollected, that, in the ing the presupposed meaning of the inscripcorresponding place, the pretended trans- tion out of it, by the help of an Irish dictionlation gives a quite different word-Ze-ary, in a better manner than Mr. Forster has mânân," for a long time."

done by the help of "Golius." Of course, Sir William will be at liberty to assign his own values to the letters.

Next comes i, the equivalent of the Arabic preposition fi, “in." It will be quite sufficient to observe here, that Mr. But we have now to show, in the third Forster considers the vowel to be the "rad-place, that Mr. Forster was quite wrong in ical element of the preposition;" the consonant is only a digamma.

Znan is the fourth word, which is rendered "the Zenanas." This ancient Adite word has disappeared from the Arabic language; but has been retained, (or, query, revived?) by the Persians, who apply it to their women's apartments. The learned men of Persia are ignorant enough to account it a native word, and to suppose that it is derived from a root in their own language.

supposing that the inscription at Hissan Ghorab could be the original from which the first poem of Schultens was translated. If it be a translation at all, which is highly improbable, and if the original be still in existence, it will have to be sought for at some other castle.

After the confident statements made by Mr. Forster on this subject, and after the implicit credence given to them by the Quarterly Reviewer, this will probably ap pear to many of our readers a bold asser

num.'"

tion. It is one, nevertheless, which we corrections of diacritical points, which he have not the slightest hesitation in making. was told that it would be necessary to make; Mr. Forster has stated, that, after he had he should not have relied on his own judg not only completed his deciphering of the ment; biassed as that was by the convicinscriptions at Hissan Ghorâb and else- tion which he entertained, that the castle, where, but had actually received proofs of where the ten-line inscription was said to his alphabet and glossary, he applied for "a have been found, must be Hissan Ghorâb. fresh collation and a corrected copy of the Mr. Forster has not published the text as two Arabic poems, which Schultens informs he received it from Leyden. We are, thereus he took from the Leyden manuscripts of fore, unable to say in how many instances the work, 'Kitab al Belad wa Akbar al he has disguised it, by improper insertion Abad, Liber regionum cum historiis homi- of diacritical points. We shall presently He added a request for a copy of notice a few obvious ones, in which he has, the context. Both requests were complied by a slight change in the diacritical points, with by the authorities at Leyden, with a substituted words which have no meaning, zeal and promptness which are highly com- (though he attempts to find meaning for mendable; and we regret that Mr. Forster them,) in place of good Arabic words, should, however unintentionally, have made which conveyed a meaning opposed to his them so bad a return for their courtesy. He wishes. There are other instances besides has held them forth to the public as to a cer- these, in which we think it probable that tain degree accomplices with him, in what he has erred in a similar way; but in we must pronounce to be one of the gross- which we only venture to guess at the est literary impositions that has been prac- sense. It is, however, not the diacritical ticed for many years. We might almost call points only, with which Mr. Forster has it a forgery; but we refrain from the word, tampered. He admits having substituted as it implies subjectivity. We regret that, four words for others. He says: as Locke justly remarked, there are often no other names to express mixed modes, than those which express moral relations also. We want to express on this occasion the mixed mode alone; to speak objectively only. We have no doubt whatever that Mr. Forster has acted with perfect good faith, and that he himself was the first person imposed on; but, looking to his sixth appendix, which is now lying before us, the mildest term which we can apply to it, is a gross imposition on the public.- Now, it so happens, that the four words When Mr. Forster received from Leyden a which Mr. Forster has substituted for four copy of an Arabic manuscript, bearing on others, are some of the most important the subject, to one view of which he had words in the whole passage; and that three, already so deeply committed himself-we at least, of the four words which have been think that it was clearly his duty, not to cashiered, convey a clear meaning, but one, have relied on his own knowledge of Ara- which is decidedly at variance with Mr. bic, and his own soberness of judgment, for Forster's hypothesis. They were, therethe translation. He should have consulted fore, in that gentleman's opinion, to be resome other Arabic scholar as to the mean-jected as abridgements and corruptions of ing of his text. He should have done this words, which better suited the favorite the more especially, as he was told by the hypothesis. We will venture to say, that librarian at Leyden, that he had " transcrib- no unprejudiced Arabic scholar would have ed all the vowels and diacritical points, as acquiesced in these changes. But, over they occurred in the MS., though a great and above his falsifications of the diacritinumber of them were decidedly errors;" cal points, and of these four words, we have that "he had omitted them, where he found to accuse Mr. Forster of a series of misthem omitted;" thus complying with Mr. Forster's desire to have the passage without any corrections. We repeat, that Mr. Forster should have taken council with some other Arabic scholar as to the additions and

"On the other side will be seen an exact (!) representation of the two inscriptions, with the notices by which they are prefaced, as they stand in the Leyden MS.; the only alterations admitted being the insertion and correction of the diacritic points essential to the sense; the insertion between brackets of two words abridged, and of two more corrected by between the prefatory notice and the inscripthe Persian copyist; and sufficient spacing

tions."

translations, such as we could scarcely have supposed it possible that any one could commit. By all these means, he has totally altered the sense of the passages which treat of the castles, where the poems are

upon the ascent of the height, a great rock, partly washed away, on which was engraven a song. "[Here follows in the MS. the ten-line inscription.] Then he proceeded to the other held its state, battered by winds and men. He castle, distant four [forty] parasanga. He besays they approached the south side of the castle, when it proved of stone. And the waves of the sea had left violent vestiges upon it. And he saw over its gate a great stone, and engraven on it-[Here follows, in the MS., the seven-line inscrsption]."

We have not marked the errors in the latter passage, because they do not affect the question at issue, as to the identity of Hissan Ghorâb with the first of the castles. We will content ourselves with giving, without comment, what we believe to be a corWe will do the same with

said to have been found. He has made the first of these passages to convey a meaning in harmony with the description of Hissan Ghorâb, which he found in Mr. Wellsted's book; whereas its real meaning is totally different! He has removed the castle in question from the interior of the country to the coast; and he has brought down the inscription from a stone over the gate of the castle, to a rock on the side of the ascent to the castle! Then, because there was no second castle on the coast, within four parasangs of Hissan Ghorâb, he has removed the one spoken of by Al-kazwini to a distance of forty parasangs. Of this change he has condescended to inform his readers; and he has justified it as well as he could; but he has given them no inti-rect version. mation of the other "abridged and cor- respect to the unimportant clauses of the rupted" words, which he has corrected by first passage. But, where the error which conjecture. We will supply this emission. Mr. Forster has committed has any bearing We will copy Mr. Forster's translations of on the above question, we will refer to the the account of these two castles, bracket- great work of Freytag, which does so much ing the three first words, which he has in- honor to the University of Halle, and to troduced, in the same manner as he has De Sacy's grammar. The latter will be himself bracketed the fourth, and placing quoted by the volume and paragraph; the outside the brackets translations of the former by the volume, page, and column. words found in the MS., according to the "He arrived at." It is hard to conceive plan pursued by himself. We will also dis- how Mr. Forster could imagine this to be tinguish by italics those parts of the trans- the meaning of the Arabic words here used, lation which we impeach as incorrect. We disguised as the former of them is by the shall follow this by brief notices, explana- improper addition of two diacritical points tory of the various blunders which Mr. to the pronoun of the third person. The Forster has made, giving references to the pronoun, (ho), as an affix, cannot be, as Mr. best authorities, namely, De Sacy's Gram- Forster makes it, the subject of the verb; mar, and Freytag's Dictionary. We shall it is always its object or complement. The then give a true version of the passages subject is the following sentence, beginning which Mr. Forster has so shamefully per- with the conjunction, an, that.-De S. I. verted; and it will be seen that there is 1232. Mr. Forster has not translated nothing in it which gives the slightest countenance to his hypothesis. All the sentences on which he relies, as having reference to Hissan Ghorâb, are the offspring of his own imagination exclusively.

The following is Mr. Forster's version, as given in page 450 of his second vol

ume:

"And in that region are two castles of the castles of Ad; and when Moawiyah sent Abderrahman, the son of Al Hakem, into Yemen as viceroy, he arrived, on the shore [i. e., says Mr. Forster, in a progress along the southern coast] at two castles of the castles of Ad. (In that sea are treasures hidden and gold, for the space of a hundred horsemen [parasangs] along the shore of Aden, as far as the neigh borhood of the two castles [Keswin].) He saw also the quality of the soil, whose saltness made the palms most fruitful: and he saw a casupon the rock, and lime [two ports]; and

tle built

this conjunction at all; and he has introduced the preposition at, to which there is nothing corresponding in his original. The verb here used, with the affix of the first person instead of the third, is rendered by Freytag (I. 154 a) mihi relatum est. It appears from what he says in the next column, that it is used of reports which have good foundation, and are credited, in opposition to flying rumors. As for the explanatory clause, which Mr. Forster has inserted, we will only observe, that it is a pure fiction. The viceroy went to these castles by land.

omitted to translate the conjunction, waan, "In that sea are." Mr. Forster has and that, which connects this clause with the preceding, as the subject of the verb, or the tidings which reached the viceroy. Not knowing what to do with it, or with the following sentence, he has put them

he saw the wretched state thereof, by reason of the soil, the saltness of which spoiled the wells. And he saw a castle, built with stones and lime, and upon one of its gates a great stone was elevated, on which was engraved a poem. [Then follows the first poem, contain ing ten couplets.] Afterwards he passed on to the other castle, which was at the distance of four parasangs; and he saw its wretched state, being ruined by the dæmons and neglect. He desired them to approach the south side of the castle; and behold! it was of stone and lime, and the waters of the sea filled it. And we saw upon the gate of it a great stone, upon which was engraved-" [Then follows the second poem, consisting of seven couplets.]

Here we have nothing about "the two ports," or "the rock partly washed away on the ascent of the height." Mr. Forster found these in Mr. Wellsted's description of Hissan Ghorâb, and he would have his readers suppose that they occur also in Alkazwini's description of the first Adite castle. They are, however, the mere dreams of his own excited imagination.

inscription and the supposed original of an Arabic poem. In order to establish this assumed identity, he has falsified the account of the place, where this poem is said to have been found, in the processes of both transcription and translation, to an extent that is, we believe, without a parallel in the annals of literary imposture. He has next attempted, on the supposition that this pretended identity was real, to resolve the inscription into its component words and letters. He has done this in a manner that no orientalist or etymologist can tolerate for a moment; his alphabet is an impossible one; his glossary is a tissue of absurdities. And, lastly, he has gone on to interpret other inscriptions, without having any known principles from which to start, or any settled method on which to proceed. Or, if he have principles, they are such as can be proved false; if he have method, it is what past experience has shown to be absurd. We have no doubt that he is a sincere believer in the reality of his discoveries; and the same lively imagination which makes him to be so, will naturally cause him to give credit to other discoveries of the same sort. If not checked, he will, we fear, go on from one absurd interpretation to another, till he perhaps lights upon something which is calculated to bring contempt on divine revelation, of which he fondly imagines that his pretended discoveries are a confirmation.

Mr. Forster is anxious that the second inscription should be sought for at the eastern one of the two messana'ats, castles so called on the southern coast of Arabia, one hundred and eight, and one hundred and fifty-five miles eastward of Hissan Ghoràb, or from three hundred and fifty to four hundred of 'Aden. There can be no harm in a search being made here, or any where else, for inscriptions; but we have no expectation that either of these inscriptions We are sorry to be compelled to pass so will be found there. If it be, it would be unfavorable a judgment on the work of a necessary to look for the other at some ruin countryman; but, for the sake of the literaabout fifteen miles distant. We believe, ture of our common country, which we do however, that both the castles, if they exist not wish to see exposed to the contempt of at all, would be found in the neighborhood the German universities, as it will be, if the of 'Aden-one of them probably at the judgment of the Quarterly Review goes town itself; as it appears to us quite evident forth, without a protest, as that of the nathat the author of the above narrative iden- tion; and for the sake of what is far dearer tified the 'Ad of Arabian fable with the to us, religion, whose sacred cause can 'Aden of reality. As for the inscriptions only receive injury, when supported, as it at the castles, we have already expressed is in this instance, by arguments based on our conviction that they never existed at delusion; we have felt it an absolute duty all; but that those given by Al-kazwini to expose the true character of that part of were the original compositions of some Mr. Forster's book, which treats of these Arabic poet. inscriptions. Against the remainder of it, We have now performed the unpleasant let it be observed, we say nothing. There task to which we felt ourselves called. We is much in it of which we approve; and, if have shown that in all that Mr. Forster has it had not come before us in such bad comadvanced respecting the pretended patri-pany, we might have pointed out its merits; archal inscriptions of Arabia, which he but, to do so after what we have been comboasts of having translated, there is, from pelled to say on the subject of the inscripfirst to last, not one particle of truth. He tions, would, we fear, be considered out of has begun with assuming an identity, which place. certainly does not exist, between the real

We have been favored with the following