lake Mœris; and Mucianus[1], a perſon of great authority, and frequently cited by Pliny, ſays, that it is 450 mille paſſus. Now 450 × 8 = 3600.
I with to repeat here in ſome degree what I before mentioned curſorily reſpecting the Olympic foot and the Olympic ſtadium. We are told by Aulus Gellius, that theſe meaſures exceeded the others in the ſame proportion as the foot of Hercules did that of ordinary men. The foot, we ſhould recollect, was ſuppoſed to be one ſixth of the height of the perſon. But what muſt we think of the ſtature of Hercules, ſhould the length of his foot be reduced to eight Roman inches[2] What muſt we think of the common race of mortals at that time, when he who is deſcribed, "corpore excemorem quam alios[3]" was only of the diminutive ſize above deſcribed?
I agree with Mr. Barré, that it is probable that Pliny copied Herodotus in his account of the thickneſs and height of the walls of Babylon: but his account is very incorrect, and inconſiſtent with the original, as Mr. Barré, and before him Salmaiius, had obſerved. If the royal cubit was three digits longer than the
- ↑ Plin. lib. v. cap. 9.
- ↑ 8 × 6 = 48 inches, = 4 feet.
Ricciolus obſerves, that if the foot of Hercules, according to the common computation, was ⅛ of his height, he muſt have been ſix Roman feet three inches high, or rather more than ſix feet one inch and a half, Engliſh meaſure. Apollodorus makes Hercules to be four cubits high, which, according to Mr. Barré, is four feet only.
Τετραπηχυαῖον μὲν γὰρ εἴχε τὸ σῶμα.
Apollod. lib. ii. cap. 4. ſect. 9.If we even add eight inches, (or one foot more, as calculated by Mr. Bſrré,) to make up his height-ſeven feet, which is ſaid by an ancient writer, cited by Tzetzes, to be his height, it will not bring him to the pitch of what is now accounted an inferior ſtature. See Notes on Apollodorus, ed. Heyne, vol. iit p. 330
- ↑ Aulus Gellius.
