NOTE

TO ARTICLE IX. OF NUMBER 121.

We have received from Dr. Olin the following letter, in reply to the article in which his "Travels were reviewed in our

last Number.

"To the Editor of the N. A. Review. "DEAR SIR,

"THE brevity prescribed to this note so greatly enhances the difficulty of proving a negative, the task imposed on me by the criticism on my Travels' contained in your last Number, - that I shall attempt little more than to offer a full and unqualified denial of the charge of plagiarism and injustice towards Dr. Robinson's Biblical Researches,' preferred against me in that article.

"Dr. Robinson was in Jerusalem in 1838. I was there two

years later, in 1840. The Researches' were published in 1841. I saw them, for the first time, in January or February of 1842, when a large portion of my 'Travels' was ready for the press. Up to that time, I was entirely ignorant of their contents, the state of my health having compelled me to seclude myself from society, as well as from all intercourse with books and periodicals, during the fifteen months preceding November, 1841. I learned from Mr. Wheaton, in Berlin, in 1839, that Dr. Robinson had published a synopsis of the principal matters of the large work then in preparation; but neither he, nor Dr. Robinson himself, to whom I subsequently applied, could furnish me with a copy. To this moment, I am wholly uninformed as to the contents of that pamphlet. It was once handed to me by a fellow traveller, but under circumstances which compelled me to return it unread.

"A great part of my Travels' was written out, as they now appear, amid the scenes which they describe. The remainder, except when the contrary is avowed or manifest, was composed from full notes and observations always recorded on the spot. The numerous coincidences between Dr. Robinson's volumes and mine are only such as are natural or accidental, when writers, with similar ends in view, and the same guidebooks in their hands, describe precisely the same objects, and derive the information generally from the same sources, whether from natives, or resident foreigners, or prevalent traditions.

"I will now briefly notice the Reviewer's specifications, beginning with Mt. Sinai. I am charged with having adopted Dr. Robinson's arguments against the monkish Sinai, and in favor of

the true, and withholding all acknowledgment of his claims as the original discoverer of the holy mount. My account of Mt. Sinai, including these arguments, was written out in the convent of St. Catherine, nearly two years before I had any knowledge, that Dr. Robinson had argued the question at all. My subsequent perusal of the 'Researches' was so hasty as to leave on my mind no recollection of any claim to original discoveries in this region. The situation of the plain of the encampment, on which the whole argument turns, was described by Carne, Laborde, and Lord Lindsay, who preceded Dr. Robinson as well as me. Lord Lindsay's argument against the monkish Sinai, which was shown me at the convent by Mr. Humphrey of Boston, is substantially the same as mine, alleged to be a literal copy of Dr. Robinson's. He discusses at length the respective claims of Jebel Mennagia and the monkish Sinai to be the true Sinai, deciding in favor of the former, for reasons which seemed to me far more applicable to Jebel Shereyk, the Sooksafa of Dr. Robinson. The situation of this mountain, and the arguments, were forced upon my attention by the perusal of Lord Lindsay's book. I had heard from an Austrian gentleman, that Dr. Robinson believed Sooksafa to be the real Sinai, without one word as to its situation or the grounds of that belief; but I was unable to find any person who had heard of such a mountain; and it was not until two days after my own observations and Lord Lindsay's had satisfied my mind with regard to the subject, that I was told by the gentleman referred to, that a Bedouin boy had professed to know the Shereyk of Lord Lindsay by the name of Sooksafa. My account of Mt. Sinai is no more indebted to Dr. Robinson's, than his is to mine.

"I am next charged with doing injustice to Dr. Robinson's claims to the discovery of the true character of the arch of the bridge which connected the Temple with Mt. Zion, 'a discov. ery uniformly ascribed to him in Jerusalem both by residents and travellers.' I stated, on the authority of the Rev. Mr. Nicolayson, the English missionary, that its existence has long been known to European and other residents and travellers,' and that Mr. Catherwood recognized it seven years before. Mr. Nicolayson was my guide to this monument, and I recorded his statement and my own measurement at the time. I now declare, that I never saw or heard the name of Dr. Robinson connected with this subject in Jerusalem or elsewhere, until I read the Researches nearly two years after my visit. ing no reason to distrust my own information, I of course presumed Dr. Robinson was in an error in regarding himself as the original discoverer. Mr. Catherwood, who is a professional architect, and the author of Dr. Robinson's plan of Jerusalem, as

Hav

well as the one always in my hand, in which he had laid down the Temple, Mt. Zion, and the valley between them, across which the arch looks directly, could hardly have doubted or been mistaken with regard to its design. Mr. Catherwood has often told me since, that my account is strictly true, and that he, as well as several other gentlemen with whom he conversed in Jerusalem, regarded and spoke of this monument as the remains of an ancient bridge, that connected the Jewish Temple with Mt. Zion. My declaration, that I could not learn that this monument had been mentioned by any modern traveller, appears under date of April 23d, 1840, and is strictly true. I should have referred to Dr. Robinson's account, which I saw nearly two years afterwards, but for the discrepancy between it and mine, to which, for insufficient reasons it may be, but assuredly not from selfish ends, nor from any unfriendly feelings towards Dr. Robinson, I did not wish to attract attention.

"In my description of the Dead Sea, I borrowed nothing from the 'Researches.' I might have given Dr. Robinson's valuable account instead of my own, derived from personal observations and inquiries, and from later travellers; and so I might have done, no doubt, to the advantage of my readers, with regard to many other objects. I professedly gave the dimensions. of that sea as a conjecture merely, after repeating many discordant and irreconcilable accounts. Had I observed the alleged agreement of my statement with Dr. Robinson's estimate, I suppose I should have avoided the appearance of plagiarism by giving a different number, which would have satisfied my guess about as well. I read this portion of the Researches' without perceiving, that Dr. Robinson's account claims, and no doubt with a measure of justice, to rest on scientific data. I had noted one trigonometrical observation, which seemed to me not to be very satisfactory.

"With regard to the Tower of David, which I saw on my first entrance into Jerusalem, and very frequently afterwards, it being one of the most conspicuous objects in the holy city, my Trav els' contain the results of my own observations, and of my frequent conversations with Mr. Nicolayson and others, from whom I learned, that the monument was usually held to be the Hippicus of Josephus, whose account I also consulted. It is a question again, whether I should have substituted for my own, Dr. Robinson's account, to which mine owes nothing.

"My statement and conjectures about the pool of Bethesda are also objected to, not as being false, but as concurring with Dr. Robinson. A careful perusal of what I wrote on this doubtful topic will show, that I expressed no opinion of my own, but only recounted several contradictory opinions, traditions, and facts, not

one of which was derived from Dr. Robinson, without attempting to reconcile them.

"I erroneously referred to Pococke as my authority for what I understood to be an old tradition, as well as a prevalent opinion at Jerusalem, in regard to the subterranean connexion between the fountains concealed by Hezekiah and those of the Virgin and Siloam. I should have quoted Richardson, who says, that the pool called the fountain of the Stairs, the fountain of the Virgin, as I understood the passage, 'receives a strong current of water by a subterraneous passage, cut in the north side of Mount Zion, which seems as if it came by a conduit cut through the rock, from the pool of Hezekiah, on the west side of the city.' This statement, which I had in my hand, taken in connexion with what was told me by Mr. Lanneau and others, as reported in my 'Travels,' and the Scriptural accounts, which I also carefully consulted on the spot, was the basis, and is indeed the substance, of the opinions and conjectures which I ventured to offer to my readers on this point.

"I will only add, with regard to the several topics selected by the Reviewer for animadversion, that I have not knowingly derived either facts, arguments, or opinions from Dr. Robinson. What his views were on these points I had never an intimation, until I read the 'Researches' in 1842. I have not since referred to that able and learned work; but I had not supposed, that it laid claim to original discovery in connexion with these topics, except in the case of the ancient arch. My companions in the Desert and in Palestine, I think, would all certify, that I worked hard and examined every thing for myself. Every attentive reader will perceive, that I take all proper occasions to do justice to Dr. Robinson's excellent volumes. I certainly have seen no reasons for changing my opinions about the identity of the Holy Sepulchre; but my language on that subject was unguarded, if it led the Reviewer to think, that it was from superstitious reverence, I stood on my knees and had a taper in my hand,' in examining the place of the Cross. The room was dark, and this, or some more lowly, attitude was necessary for the attainment of my object. "STEPHEN OLIN.

"November 30th, 1843."

We are quite willing to place Dr. Olin's statement before our readers, leaving it for them to judge, after comparing those passages from the two works to which reference was made in our article, how far the explanation is a satisfactory one. We have no room for any other remarks at this time, but as there are some points in Dr. Olin's letter which require more particular comment, it is possible that we may return to the subject in another Number.

QUARTERLY LIST OF NEW PUBLICATIONS.

AGRICULTURE.

The American Agriculturist's Almanac for 1844. By A. B. Allen, Editor of "The American Agriculturist." New York: J. Winchester. 8vo. pp. 62.

The Farmer's Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Rural Affairs. By Cuthbert W. Johnson, Esq., F. R. S. Adapted to the United States, by Gouverneur Emerson. Philadelphia: Carey & Hart. 8vo. pp. 1165.

The Cultivator's Almanac, or Rural Calendar for the Year 1844. By Willis Gaylord and Luther Tucker. New York: M. H. Newman. 12mo. pp. 32.

ANNUALS.

The Gift; a Christmas and New Year's Present. M DCCC XLIV. Philadelphia: Carey & Hart. 8vo. pp. 296.

The New York State Register, for 1843. Containing an Almanac, Civil Divisions, and Census of the State, with Political, Statistical, and other Information. Edited by O. L. Holley. Albany: J. Disturnell. 12mo. pp. 432.

The American Almanac, and Repository of Useful Knowledge, for the Year 1844. Boston: David H. Williams. 12mo. pp. 342.

The United States Almanac; or Complete Ephemeris, for the Year 1844. Philadelphia: E. H. Butler. 12mo. pp. 316.

Statistical Almanac for the Year 1844, by Edward Delius. Philadelphia: Carey & Hart. 32mo. pp. 240.

Friendship's Offering, and Winter's Wreath. A Christmas and New Year's Present for M DCCC XLIV. Boston: Lewis & Sampson. 12mo. pp. 320.

The Drawing Room Annual; a Present for all Seasons. Philadelphia Lindsay & Blakiston. 4to. pp. 64.

The Rose: or Affection's Gift for 1844. Edited by Emily Marshall. Illustrated with ten highly finished Steel Engravings. New York: D. Appleton & Co. 12mo. pp. 256.

The Opal; a Pure Gift for the Holydays. With nine Illustrations, by J. G. Chapman. Riker. 12mo. pp. 264.

Edited by N. P. Willis.
New York: John C.

Diary for 1844; or Daily Register, for the Use of Private Families, and Persons of Business. Harrisburg, Pa.: Hickok & Cantine. 12mo. pp. 142.

The Literary Souvenir; a Christmas and New Year's Present for VOL. LVIII.-No. 122. 33