tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post8717440968192039292..comments2024-03-01T04:59:47.946+00:00Comments on The Bible illustration blog: Drawing Adam and EveBible artisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11875939553176288499noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-89015605175170448572010-01-07T21:12:35.389+00:002010-01-07T21:12:35.389+00:00My thoughts exactly Patrick!
I've just had an...My thoughts exactly Patrick!<br /><br />I've just had an interesting email from a missionary in Pua Pua New Guinea who will be using our new pictures of Adam and Eve. In the tribe where he is based, the most attractive part of the female anatomy is the back, and so the women in the tribe wear capes made from tree bark to cover their backs. They would have no problems with Eve being seen topless from the front! This does mean though that I now need to add more foliage on picture two where Eve's back is seen!Bible artisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11875939553176288499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-6092716284454002862009-11-05T10:14:38.307+00:002009-11-05T10:14:38.307+00:00Again, to comment back on the cherubim:
It would ...Again, to comment back on the cherubim:<br /><br /><i>It would be true to say that Adam and Eve were the first to see cherubim, so it is very probable that they passed on the stories about these cherubim onto their offsprings and from generation to generation. It's possible too that they may have recorded in picture form, (to the best of their ability), what they looked like. It is likely, in that case, that these stories and pictures did influence ancient depictions of cherubs.</i><br /><br />I was thinking about this quote, when I just noticed something. In Mesopotamian culture, human-headed winged bulls or lions (popularly known as "shedu" or "lamassu") guard the entrances to buildings such as temples and palaces. Sphinxes served the same function in Egypt. Similar traditions are also known to exist in South Asia, AFAIK.<br /><br />I was kind of thinking: what if the core of these traditions (a sort of animal-human hybrid, sometimes depicted as guarding the entrances of sacred precincts) is actually a remnant of the memories of the cherubim that guarded Eden (Genesis 3:24)? It's just some random thought I had, but hey...<br /><br />As an aside, I just noticed something interesting: the Temple Institute's reconstruction of the cherubim on the Ark (<a rel="nofollow">http://www.templeinstitute.org/vessel_images/ark_2.jpg</a>) look something like human-headed winged cobras! (or is it birds? either way, the bodies don't really look human-like to me) :)Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05958467246648332083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-43882466676924786382009-10-22T23:50:51.678+01:002009-10-22T23:50:51.678+01:00Hi Anonymous
I did follow the biblical description...Hi Anonymous<br />I did follow the biblical description of the cherubim guarding the tree of life. The problem is there are a number of ways that you can interpret the description in Ekekiel, so even if ten artists followed the same description you would probably end up with ten very different versions. I've not had to draw a seraph as yet but when I do, it will be following the Biblical description!<br /><br />There are a number of Bible artists who I can think of who have stuck closely to the Bible when depicting both Cherubim and Seraphim. Use the search box to search for the 'Drawing Cherubs' post and you will see Robert Forrest's version. Also check out the interview with Diana Shimon to see her version.Bible artisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11875939553176288499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-58580265295497049442009-10-15T01:55:21.157+01:002009-10-15T01:55:21.157+01:00I've been searching all over the internet tryi...I've been searching all over the internet trying to find someone who shows a fairly accurate drawing of a cherub and a seraphim. I've been unable to find anything near how the Bible describes them. Cherubs are pictured as babies with wings-Baloney!<br /> Why can't someone who is an artist at least draw the seraphim with six wings, two that covered his feet, two that covered his face and two that flew and with hands perhaps holding a red hot coal touching the lips of Isaiah purging away his sin. Is that so difficult? I can't draw it because I'm not an artist but anyone who reads the biblical description ought to be able to render a seraphim accurately.<br /> The same is true of cherubs which have four faces, wings, feet, hands and wheels under them. Two faces could be shown clearly while the two could be shown reflecting on glass like mirror behind them.<br /> Also someone with artistic ability could show God riding on a cherub to rescue David as described in Psalm 18 and 2Samuel 22. Why not?<br /> Where is some artist out there with imagination but that can stick to the descriptions given in scripture? Thanks, DeanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-22437515731450227822009-09-04T14:21:53.680+01:002009-09-04T14:21:53.680+01:00Paul, LOL! Probably more painful than most of my ...Paul, LOL! Probably more painful than most of my blunders, and quite possibly not as hilarious. Smile. Deborawdeborawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379928023984310298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-9451665004335600552009-09-03T01:15:11.346+01:002009-09-03T01:15:11.346+01:00Don't even think about choosing the correct pl...Don't even think about choosing the correct plant Deboraw! Just walk away. :)))Paul Greenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13087250570346996589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-69391163597581041732009-09-02T14:02:57.702+01:002009-09-02T14:02:57.702+01:00Paul, Just curious, I have never needed to use it ...Paul, Just curious, I have never needed to use it personally. Supposedly it grows right next to the ivy, but as addle pated as I am, I'm afraid I'd pick the wrong one, and end up in worse condition than before. LOL I don't know why I get myself into such odd predicaments. And why so many folks want to run amuck with me. Ah, well such is life. (Just be careful if I'm treating you for poison ivy, right? ha!)Smile-- Deborawdeborawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379928023984310298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-28245217369486986322009-08-24T16:35:22.869+01:002009-08-24T16:35:22.869+01:00Yes, the jewelweed is used as a herbal remedy Debo...Yes, the jewelweed is used as a herbal remedy Deboraw. Haven't tried it myself though.Paul Greenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13087250570346996589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-89643071456709628632009-08-24T02:26:31.899+01:002009-08-24T02:26:31.899+01:00Paul, When I was a young whippersnapper we childr...Paul, When I was a young whippersnapper we children would roam our 'timber' continuously. (That was when the woods were still wild and free. Now they are still wild, but NOT free. Very sad face) Thankfully most of us never had a problem with the poison plants, a fact for which I am so thankful. I did have an older cousin that couldn't get downwind of the stuff without suffering--so she said. Have you ever heard of the 'jewel' plant that grows beside the ivy? I've heard it is supposed to be a ? cure. Deborawdeborawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379928023984310298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-61548768772888833772009-08-22T02:19:26.154+01:002009-08-22T02:19:26.154+01:00Sorry if I spooked you Deboraw. I sprayed our gard...Sorry if I spooked you Deboraw. I sprayed our garden this year with poison ivy killer (also kills poison oak and poison sumac). Amazing to see all the withered poisonous plants in our garden! These plants are rampant as they grow and crawl inside other non-poisonous plants. Reminds me of a parable. :)))Paul Greenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13087250570346996589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-64714669860431617472009-08-21T01:02:27.709+01:002009-08-21T01:02:27.709+01:00Graham, No, wouldn't think so, but odd how it...Graham, No, wouldn't think so, but odd how it comes back to where it began with uncovered/covered people. Also, funny how every time I'm at this box I reread Paul's experience with poison ivy. I'm prayerful I never have that experience. They say you can develop an allergy to it even if you never have had it before. Eekk! <br /><br /> Deborawdeborawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379928023984310298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-53553702282961635112009-08-20T15:02:26.499+01:002009-08-20T15:02:26.499+01:00Deboraw:
Don't worry Deboraw, no one on the B....Deboraw:<br />Don't worry Deboraw, no one on the B.I.B. would advocate nudity in Bible pictures!<br />It is interesting though how different cultures view this. I tried to give a free copy of our Esther book to a Rabbi on the street for his children. It was during the feast of Purim. He refused it though and told me that it was unclean! (although he didn't explain why).<br />I was later told by a deacon at our church who teaches in a strict orthodox school that it might have been because Esther's arms on the cover are bare. He seemed to think that this would render it unsuitable to a particular branch of Judaism. I'm not sure if this is true, I must ask Nahum.<br /><br />Patrick:<br />Many thanks for all this info Patrick! I will Google this and see what I can find that's available for sale via the internet.Bible artisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11875939553176288499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-68224421068313763652009-08-19T07:38:10.781+01:002009-08-19T07:38:10.781+01:00That last comment was me.That last comment was me.Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05958467246648332083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-7669953404506263202009-08-19T07:37:27.297+01:002009-08-19T07:37:27.297+01:00To Mr. Graham:
I'm sorry, but most children...To Mr. Graham:<br />I'm sorry, but most children's Bibles I encountered here are mostly either translations - the ratio of translations to native ones would look like 2:1 or perhaps even 4:1, I guess.<br /><br />As an aside, I am aware of some the Bible in manga form. I'll give two here: <i>Manga Seisho Monogatari</i> (Manga Stories of the Bible), by Masakazu Higuchi and Pastor Noboru Yamaguchi (uncolored, as most Japanese manga are). I own the New Testament, which as many comics do covers only mostly the Gospels and Acts with a few references to the Pauline Epistles thrown in. If you're ever familiar with the artstyle of those cartoons Superbook and Flying House - which incidentally were originally Japanese! ;) - you'll get an idea of how the artstyle looks like.<br /><br />The other is <i>Tezuka Osamu no Kyuuyaku Seisho Monogatari</i> (Osamu Tezuka's Stories of the Old Testament), a manga-ization of the animated series with the same name (in technical jargon: <i>ani-manga</i> or <i>anime komikkusu</i>/<i>anime comics</i>), bearing the English title <i>In the Beginning: The Bible Stories</i>. Both the anime and the manga just cover Genesis-Joshua (select episodes) and the lives of David and Solomon and the subsequent exile and return (1-2 Samuel and 1 Kings, with a bit of 2 Kings, Ezra, and some of the prophetic books thrown in), up to the birth of Jesus.*<br /><br />* A little trivia: Tezuka, the "Father of Anime", came up with the series 1984, when the Vatican asked him to create an anime based on the Old Testament. He spent two years working on a film based on Noah's Ark; but he died in 1989 (being 60 years of age) before the film was completed. Director Osamu Dezaki eventually supervised the completion of the film and the subsequent series. Despite this, the anime itself was not aired in Japan until 1997 (it was already aired in Italy in 1992)! Even today, the series still does not have an article in the Japanese wikipedia (hmm...).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-35080123445954860402009-08-17T12:53:38.603+01:002009-08-17T12:53:38.603+01:00Graham, (and Patrick), Lest we forget, no matter w...Graham, (and Patrick), Lest we forget, no matter what our thoughts on the subject of nudity, and no matter where nudity is found:<br /><br />Isa 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. <br /><br />Jer 10:23 O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps. <br /><br />Gen 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. <br /><br />We may not need the layers and layers of clothing that some of our past ancestors wore, but there probably is a reason that men are charged extra at nudist colonies. I read that somewhere--it was called the 'room with a view'. (Very shocked face here.) Perhaps that's only in the U.S., and it's been quite some time ago that I read it (or heard it). Deborawdeborawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379928023984310298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-124546074711142682009-08-16T16:21:39.388+01:002009-08-16T16:21:39.388+01:00Patrick:
I was wondering if there are any illustra...Patrick:<br />I was wondering if there are any illustrated children's Bibles (produced in Japan) other than the ones in a Manga style?Bible artisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11875939553176288499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-33063644811916706702009-08-15T01:55:56.939+01:002009-08-15T01:55:56.939+01:00The next interview sounds very interesting!
And ye...The next interview sounds very interesting!<br />And yes, I noticed another thing: Japan is a bit less uptight than some parts of the West about nudity and bodily functions.<br /><br />Historically, nakedness itself was not viewed as that discomforting and was actually pretty commonplace. In fact, in pre-modern Japan, many working men would only wear loincloths and many women would often go outside bare-breasted. Even so, while the lower masses could go about naked, the higher classes in society (as a symbol of their importance) stressed the importance of being properly dressed more than commoners do.<br /><br />This is the reason why many early visitors to Japan were shocked and quick to comment on the "degraded morals" of the Japanese. And of course bathing in Japan had always been a public, communal activity among the masses (the rich could afford their own baths) - the first record we have of it dates from the 7th century! In many ways sexuality was more closely associated with clothing than with bare skin, because of the imagination's appeal. It was such that almost all of the pornography dating from the Edo period (1603-1868) depict fully-clothed men and women - or so I've heard.<br /><br />It was actually starting only in the late 19th century (when Japan was opening up and eager to show how "civilized" they were in Western eyes - partly due to political reasons) when public nudity and mixed bathing started to be frowned upon and laws enforced in an attempt to discourage them.Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05958467246648332083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-73011542906410443632009-08-14T13:39:28.221+01:002009-08-14T13:39:28.221+01:00Yes Paul, that was definitely from my D.C.Thomson ...Yes Paul, that was definitely from my D.C.Thomson days!<br /><br />Deborah: <br />It's funny that you should mention Japanese ladies Deboraw because the next Bible artist interview is with Kozumi Shinozawa. She illustrated the very popular 'Manga Messiah'. Going back to the 'covering Adam and Eve' issue, Scott Eaton, who was one of the translators on the 'Manga Messiah' project, mentioned to me that <i>"Pictures that were edited in 'Manga Mutiny' (the third book in the series) were specifically scenes depicting Eve and Pharaoh's daughter. Eve actually gets more hair, not more leaves. Pharaoh's daughter is, in the Japanese version, depicted as bathing topless with her arm covering her breasts. In the Tyndale version, she is wearing a bath shirt. It really has to do with cultural things. Manga can get pretty graphic at times, so in Japan, those scenes are no big deal. In America, however, our target market is different, so we had to change things to suit them".</i>Bible artisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11875939553176288499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-19517403602228684842009-08-14T13:15:32.870+01:002009-08-14T13:15:32.870+01:00My apologies again Patrick! I was confusing the to...My apologies again Patrick! I was confusing the too Temples because both cherubim and palm tree designs decorate the interiors of both.<br /><br />Yes, Prof Ninan's article was interesting. The bit about how the different tribes of Israel, (represented by animals), were positioned around the Tabernacle corresponded to the four faces of the cherubim was something I hadn't thought about before.Bible artisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11875939553176288499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-9515826816143305902009-08-14T12:04:40.914+01:002009-08-14T12:04:40.914+01:00Good to have you back, Mr. Graham! :)
"the t...Good to have you back, Mr. Graham! :)<br /><br />"<i>the two faced Cherubs appear around the walls of Solomon's Temple. Ezekiel 41:18-19</i>"<br /><br />Yep, that part of Ezekiel does describe two-faced <i>kheruvim</i> in a Temple, however, it is not Solomon's. For one thing, Ezekiel receives the vision of a Temple "the fourteenth year after the city was struck down"; Jerusalem - and obviously, Solomon's Temple - was already in ruins for years then, so it could not be that!<br /><br />Plus, reading Ezekiel 40-48 as a whole (and comparing the descriptions with the ones given in 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles), you would notice another difference: Ezekiel's Temple is apparently more grand than the one Solomon built, and it sports things that are obviously absent from there (such as the water flowing from the Temple; Ezekiel 47:1-12).<br /><br />There are various conflicting interpretations as to what exactly Ezekiel's Temple is (whether it is a literal Temple to be built in the future or a symbolic vision), but one thing is certain: it is distinct from the edifice that King Solomon built and which the Babylonians razed. It also answers the mystery of the two-headed cherubs: since Ezekiel had seen the four-faced Living Creatures and had later identified them as "cherubim", it is now natural that he should see this form decorating the ideal Temple of his vision.<br /><br />Coincidentally, I also just read Professor Ninan's work yesterday! Very fascinating stuff. :)Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05958467246648332083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-85405196207918022452009-08-13T05:37:25.636+01:002009-08-13T05:37:25.636+01:00Graham, (and Paul), I'm not thinking that all ...Graham, (and Paul), I'm not thinking that all early folks were one color. I do think I heard a lecture once wherein the speaker said that within a short time all races could have been represented beginning with just the original pair(he named a specific time/generation). I am admittedly very short of much study on the subject of the frescoes and ancient art, and honestly since time is always limited, have to limit most of my study to Bible only. <br /><br />On the subject of lightening the complexion, even in this country, women did the same thing. And look at the Japanese ladies that used something very white on their faces--I don't think it actually changed the color underneath though. <br />A few years ago, at a baby shower, a little Hispanic boy was telling me, "My Mommy is 'white', but my Aunt and I are black." And I was thinking, 'boy, your mommy is not white (she is Hispanic), and you and your aunt aren't black either! But in pictures there is a definite difference in their colors, and in their culture his mother could have passed for 'white', and I didn't see him or his aunt as 'black', but, again, in their culture they were much darker than his mom--even though the aunt was his mother's sister. Just an odd twist on the way things are perceived. I'm afraid I don't see people as 'colors', but as people, which makes life... different. Deborawdeborawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379928023984310298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-90147315666583049472009-08-13T04:16:50.255+01:002009-08-13T04:16:50.255+01:00That joke must be from your days with D.C. Thomson...That joke must be from your days with D.C. Thomson Graham. LOL<br /><br />I agree you can't trust artistic depictions to reflect reality. But I do recall Roman women used lots of make-up and may have lightened their skins. However one of the Roman mosaics does contain one image of a striking woman with a darker Mediterranean complexion. The natural complexion was a ruddy skin colour but make-up may have lightened it.Paul Greenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13087250570346996589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-54410680763310920342009-08-12T23:36:36.826+01:002009-08-12T23:36:36.826+01:00Patrick:
Hi Patrick. Yes the two faced Cherubs app...Patrick:<br />Hi Patrick. Yes the two faced Cherubs appear around the walls of Solomon's Temple. Ezekiel 41:18-19<br /><br />It would be true to say that Adam and Eve were the first to see cherubim, so it is very probable that they passed on the stories about these cherubim onto their offsprings and from generation to generation. It's possible too that they may have recorded in picture form, (to the best of their ability), what they looked like. It is likely, in that case, that these stories and pictures did influence ancient depictions of cherubs.<br />I read in 'A Study on Cherubim' by Prof. M.M.Ninan that the earliest artistic representation of a sphinx like cherub appears on the walls of Zedekiah's cave.<br /> <br />Yes, we definitely cannot rule out Divine inspiration either. Divine inspiration was certainly given with the Tabernacle instructions regarding the design of certain things (including the cherubim on the veil) which were not recorded in detail .<br /><br />You are absolutely right Patrick, Calmet's Dictionary was first printed in French not Latin! I was just testing everyone to see who was paying attention. ;0)<br /><br />Deboraw:<br />Hope you had a nice break Deboraw!<br />I once knew someone who was half Cherokee and half Scottish. He was called 'Hawkeye the Noo'! (:0( bad joke!) Seriously though, yes, genes are remarkable. We are fearfully and wonderfully made! (Psalm 139).<br /><br />That's a good point Deboraw. Frescoes, along with mosaics, stone carvings and Egyptian paintings etc, are our earliest and most accurate sources of reference. We should spend more time studying them alongside the Bible. <br />It's hard to know whether the porcelain complexion existed in Rome or was just considered to be attractive by the artists painting them. I don't know.Bible artisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11875939553176288499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-83295889832852265232009-08-12T15:13:32.559+01:002009-08-12T15:13:32.559+01:00Graham, I've been 'gone' for a few day...Graham, I've been 'gone' for a few days...guess you had a reprieve. LOL. No, not something in ones face to challenge tradition. Illustration to shock or ? people isn't for the correct reason. I didn't know the outrageously ugly pictures had auburn hair, thought it was blond. I don't pay as close attention as I should I guess. Very embarrassed face here, aren't artists supposed to notice things? <br /><br />I have a daughter-in-law whose father was of black/Cherokee heritage. He was quite black with no real visible Cherokee, but my daughter-in-law has no obvious trace of the black, and the Cherokee is obvious, but only if you know that is part of her heritage. So, indeed genes are remarkable. <br /><br />What I was rambling about (on the subject of paintings of the Caesars etc.) the pictures of early folks are pictures that came from the same era that the folks lived in, not the pictures that were painted of them from distance. But maybe I should have written 'frescoes' instead of 'paintings'. It may be a bit of 'misinformation', however, some one informed me that the ? early Spanish culture, ? (it was quite some time ago, and my memory is not good, so some of the terminology is missing) the people were black haired, but very porcelain type complexion. Indeed, we tend to think of all Latinos as darker, but having experience with that culture, I can assure you there are light skinned, blond haired Hispanics. And not dyed blond either. The one trait that is an oddity is the blue eyes. They have brown and green, but blue is unusual. <br /><br />Thank you to Tim S. Those were excellent comments. Many of those things I struggle with as a Bible class teacher. I try to help my little people understand that 'we don't know what Jesus, (or whomever) looked like-- but I want my little people to understand also that these were 'real people', Jesus included. It is a real problem, as far as what is appropriate etc. Sorry, I've rambled on so long, Graham. The fault is this small box that I'm typing into doesn't look like I've said hardly anything! And rambling is therefore, much easier. Smile. Hope wife and grandbaby are doing better. Deborawdeborawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16379928023984310298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-35459855.post-38173266634583110992009-08-04T00:25:40.103+01:002009-08-04T00:25:40.103+01:00And, because no one's talked about Calmet yet,...And, because no one's talked about Calmet yet, here's a little bit about him:<br /><br />Dom Antoine Augustin Calmet O.S.B. (1672-1757) was a French Benedictine Biblical scholar. When he was ordained in March of 1696, he was appointed to teach philosophy and theology at Moyenmoutier Abbey. It was there that he began to compile material for his commentary on the Bible, which was published in French in 1707 and 1716 under the title <i>Commentaire litteral sur tous les livres de I'Ancien et du Nouveau Testament</i> ("Literal Commentary on All the Books of the Old and New Testament"). This twenty-three quarto volume work was rather groundbreaking for its time - as the title states, it was the first Biblical commentary to focus itself solely on the literal meaning of the passage rather than on the moral and allegorical meanings - and was highly praised by both Catholics and Protestants alike.<br /><br />Here is where I'll point out a slight mistake: Calmet's Dictionary, as with his other works, was not originally published in Latin, but in French. Calmet's <i>Histoire Sainte de l'Ancien et du Nouveau Testament, et des Juifs</i> (History of the Old and New Testaments, and the Jews) was published in 1718, and was translated into English in 1740 and in Latin in 1788. His Dictionary (<i>Dictionnaire historique, critique, chronologique, géographique et littéral de la Bible</i>) was published in Paris in 1720, with a supplement added in 1728. It, too, was later translated into Latin and the principal European languages.Patrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05958467246648332083noreply@blogger.com