_Why Moses represented with Horns._--You may inform your querist "L.C."
(No. 24 p. 383.), that the strange practice of making Moses appear
horned, which is not confined to statues, arose from the mistranslation
of Exod. xxxiv. 30. & 35. in the Vulgate, which is to the Romanist his
authenticated scripture. For there he reads "faciem Moysi cornutum,"
instead of "the skin of Moses' face shone." The Hebrew verb put into our
type is _coran_, very possibly the root of the Latin _cornu_: and its
primary signification is to put forth horns; its secondary, to shoot
forth rays, to shine. The participle is used in its primary sense in
Psalms, xix. 31.; but the Greek Septuagint, and all translators _from
the Hebrew_ into modern European languages, have assigned to the verb
its secondary meaning in Exod. xxxiv. In that chapter the nominative to
_coran_ is, in both verses, undeniably _skin_, not _head_ nor _face_.
Now it would obviously be absurd to write "his skin was horned," so that
common sense, and the authority of the Septuagint, supported by the
language of St. Paul in his paraphrase and comment on this passage in 2
Cor. iii. 7-13., ought to have been sufficient to guide any Christian
translator as to the sense to be attached to _coran_ in the mention of
Moses.
H.W.
Oxford, April 16, 1850.
[We have since received replies to a similar effect, from "SIR
EDMUND FILMER," "J.E.," &c. "R.G." refers our Querist to Leigh's
_Critica Særa_, part I. p. 219. London, 1662; and "M." refers
him to the note on this passage in Exodus in M. Polus' _Synopsis
Criticorum_. To "T.E." we are indebted for Notes on other
portions of "L.C.'s" Queries.]
_The Temple or A Temple._--"Mr. Foss" says (No. 21. p. 335.) that in
Tyrwhitt's edition of Chaucer and in all other copies he has seen, the
reading is--
"A gentil manciple was there of a temple."
In an imperfect black-letter folio copy of Chaucer in my possession
(with curious wood-cuts, but without title-page, or any indications of
its date, printer, &c.), the reading is--
"A gentyl mancyple was there of _the_ temple."
That the above is the true reading ("the real passage"), and that it is
to be applied to _the_ temple, appears to me from what follows, in the
description of the manciple.
"Of maysters had he moo than thryes ten
That were of lawe expirte and curyous,
Of whyche there were a dosen in that hous
Worthy to be," &c.;
P.H.F.
March 23, 1850.
_Ecclesiastical Year_ (No. 24. p. 381.).--The following note on the
calendar is authority for the statement respecting the beginning of the
ecclesiastical year:--
"Note that the Golden Number and the Dominicall letter doeth
change euery yeere the first day of January. Note also, that the
yeere of our Lord beginneth the xxv. day of March, the same
supposed to be the first day upon which the world was created,
and the day when Christ was conceived in the womb of the Virgin
Mary."
As in the Book of Common Prayer, Lond. 1614, p. 2. Bishop Cosins
remarks, "beginneth the 25th day of March."
"Romani annum suum auspicantur ad calendas Januarias. Idem
faciunt hodierni Romani et qui in aliis regnis papæ authoritatem
agnoseunt. Ecclesia autem Anglicana sequitur suppotationem
antiquam a Dionysio Exiguo inchoatum, anno Christi 532."
Nicholl's Commentary on the Book of Common Prayer, additional notes, p.
10. Fol. Lond. 1712, vid. loe.