1845; and translation of the _Lotus de la bonne Loi_.] [Footnote 5: J.BARTHELEMY SAINT-HILAIRE _Le Bouddha et sa Religion_.
8vo.Paris.

1800.] [Footnote 6: Introduction and Notes to the _Fo[)e] Kou[)e] Ki_ of FA HIAN.] [Footnote 7: Life and travels of HIOUEN THSANG.] [Footnote 8: Translation of _Lalitavistara_ by M.PH.ED.

FOUCAUX.] [Footnote 9: Author of the _Indische Alterthumskunde;_ &c.] [Footnote 10: Author of the _Indische Studien_; &c.] A writer in the _Saturday Review_[1], in alluding to the passage in which I have sought to establish the identity of the ancient Tarshish with the modern Point de Galle[2], admits the force of the coincidence adduced, that the Hebrew terms for "ivory, apes, and peacocks"[3] (the articles imported in the ships of Solomon) are identical with the Tamil names, by which these objects are known in Ceylon to the present day; and, to strengthen my argument on this point, he adds that, "these terms were so entirely foreign and alien from the common Hebrew language as to have driven the Ptolemaist authors of the Septuagint version into a blunder, by which the ivory, apes, and peacocks come out as '_hewn and carven stones_.'" The circumstance adverted to had not escaped my notice; but I forebore to avail myself of it; for, although the fact is accurately stated by the reviewer, so far as regards the Vatican MS., in which the translators have slurred over the passage and converted "_ibha, kapi_, and _tukeyim_" into [Greek: "lithon toreuton kai peleketon"] (literally, "stones hammered and carved in relief"); still, in the other great MS.

of the Septuagint, the _Codex Alexandrinus_, which is of equal antiquity, the passage is correctly rendered by "[Greek: odonton elephantinon kai pithekon kai taonon]." The editor of the Aldine edition[4] compromised the matter by inserting "the ivory and apes," and excluding the "peacocks," in order to introduce the Vatican reading of "stones."[5] I have not compared the Complutensian and other later versions.
[Footnote 1: Novemb.

19, 1859, p.