[141] St. Jerome already says expressly the same thing, in adding to the words of Eusebius, _s.v._ Choreb:--“Mihi autem videtur, quod _duplici nomine idem mons nunc_ SINA, _nunc_ CHOREB _vocetur_.” Josephus already evidently took both mountains to be one, as he everywhere substitutes _Sinai_ where _Choreb_ occurs in the Bible; so also does the author of Acts (vii. 80); and likewise Syncellus (_Chron._ p. 190), who says of Elias:--ἐπορεύετο ἐν Χωρὴβ τῷ ὄρει ἤτοι Σιναίῳ. [The adjective termination of Σιναίῳ shows that Syncellus meant that Choreb was part of the Sinaitic range. Otherwise, he would have employed the Hebraic termination:--K. R. H. M.] Of late scholars, Ewald presents the same opinion concerning the identity of the two mounts. He says, (Gesch. des V. Isr., vol. ii. p. 84):--“The two names Sinai and Horeb do not change, because they denoted two peaks of the same mountain, lying close together, but the name Sinai is plainly older, which is also used by Deborah, (Judges v. 5), while the name Horeb is not to be found previous to the time of Numbers (cf. Exod. iii. 1, xvii. 6, xxxiii. 6), but then becomes very frequent, as is proved by Deuteronomy, and the passages, 1 Kings viii. 9, xix. 8, Mal. xii. 22, Psalm cvi. 19, while it does not mean anything to the contrary, when quite recent writers, for the sake of showing their acquaintance with ancient literature, re-introduce the original name of Sinai!” [142] If we omit the two verses xix. 12, the narrative in xix. 3 continues quite naturally that of xviii. 27; “and Moses let his father-in-law depart; so he went his way into his own land. And Moses went up unto God, and the Lord called unto him out of the mountain,” &c. [143] [See Note C. Appendix.] [144] [See Note A. Appendix.] [145] [Note D, Appendix.] [146] [Note E, Appendix.] [147] [Note F, Appendix.] [148] Ritter (p. 31), where he mentions that Sinai appears almost simultaneously, as Serbâl, with the Egyptian Cosmas, and as Gebel Mûsa with the Byzantine Procopius, broaches another conjecture, which I shall here quote:--“Was there, perhaps,” says he, “a different tradition or party opinion prevailing in Constantinople and Alexandria on this point among the convents and the monks, which might have arisen from a jealousy to vindicate the more sacred character of one or other of the places? It is curious that at the same time such different views of the question should exist among the most learned theologians of their time.” [149] This letter, which is here printed word for word, was addressed to the General-Director der K. Preuss. Museen, Herr Geh. Legations-Rath von Olfers. Perhaps its publication may serve at the same time to spread abroad a just respect for the principles on which the Egyptian Museum, that part of one of the most grand and newest creations of Berlin first accessible to the public, has been erected and decorated.