XX. At sight of these, and other monstrous inversions of both the old and new testament, which are very frequent in the alcoran, and the writings of the Mahometan commentators, I have been inclined to think, that it is probable some Mahometans, may have confounded John the Baptist with John the Evangelist, and may have made two distinct sayings of Christ, applicable to one and the same person, although one of them alludes to the Baptist, and the other to the Evangelist. Christ said of the Baptist (Matt. cap. ii.) _Ipse est Elias, qui venturus est_; and of the Evangelist (John cap. xxi.) _Sic eum volo manere, donec veniam_. Which words, the other disciples understood to amount to a decree of Christ’s, that he should continue alive to the final day of judgment. From this confounding different persons in one and the fame, might originate among the blind Mahometans, the fiction or belief, that Elias by the appointment of Christ, was to remain alive upon earth till the final day of judgment. XXI. The persuasion then, that Elias was the person of whom our Saviour pronounced, _Sic eum volo manere, donec veniam_, might possibly give rise to the Mahometan Nighiaristan story, which upon being published, might put it into the head of some artful fellow, to assume the character of a Wandering Jew, and under that disguise, to apply this prediction delivered by Christ to himself. XXII. But you will please to remember, that I observed before, there was no occasion to rummage disfigured histories to seek for the origin of numberless fables, as the imagination of man, is prodigiously fertile in bringing forth these productions, and is capable of creating the whole of a lie, without the auxiliary assistance of an atom of truth. GOD keep you. FINIS. FOOTNOTES [1] I apprehend this should not be understood in so extensive a sense as father Feyjoo represents it, for that the expression in Aulus Gellius is _a reviver of obsolete words_. [2] It seems as if the power and extent of these empires was not well calculated, when it is asserted that either of them exceeded that of the Roman empire. [3] Tamerlane’s extending his conquests further than ever Alexander did his, is very uncertain; and the enumeration the author immediately gives of them, differs from the account given us by Herbelot of this matter, who is a writer exceedingly well versed in Oriental history. [4] The author in this place is very hyperbolical; for, it is certain, that so far from the power of the Turks exceeding that of the Roman empire when it was at its height, the court of Constantinople does not now command a third part of the countries which were formerly subject to Rome. [5] There is no difficulty in supposing this heroic action was performed by different people, there having been innumerable instances of those who have found themselves in situations where it was laudable to exert it. [6] This last declaration savours strongly of a heathenish fiction.