The San Francisco call., 1899-05-07

reports about Ophir, because it is evident
that at the time when the word Ophir
was in everybody's mouth without anv
further explanation the colony of Ophir
could not possibly have been a matter of
the past. The result is that all the re-
norts of the Old Testament were written
IN the period between 600 and 164 B. c.
With this fact we have gained firm
basis for the discussion whether Ophir
was in India or Africa. Fortunately the
same period comprises the exploits of the
man who first explored India. viz. Alex
ander the Great. Among his followers
were many who would have collected
news about gold belt in India provided
that the latter was actually existing But
no gold country whatever existed there
On the contrary. all Indian tribes were
almost devoid of gold, and Arianus, our
best and most reliable source of informa-
ton about the campaigns of Alexander
the Great, states empha tically as pos
sible as follows:
Alexander and his army have refuted
most of the stories in this direction. with
the exception of some who have obviously
made incorrect statements. 1t has thus
been ascertained that all the Indians
through whose territory Alexander and
his army marched (and he marched
through many of them) have no gold"
possibly be the Ophir of antiquity.
Now, We know that with regard 70
Ophir only the coast countries of the In
dian Ocean can come into consideration,
and Arabia and Equatorial East Africa
have been mentioned in connection with
the Ophir problem. But against this as
sumption stands the clear text of the
three most reliable and Oldest passages in
the Old Testament, VIII Kings, ix:26-2s,
III t ot,-o
to me how any one who compares these
passages in a literal and critical trans
lation for instance, that by Professor
Kautsch) can assert that the passage in
chapter X, verse %. does not deal with
Ophir, as it is most emphatically stated
that we have to deal with a sea naviga-
tion which extended to remote countries
in fact. to the end of the then known
world, and it is therefore clear that this
gold land of antiquity could neither have
been on the coast of the Red Sea nor on
that of Equatorial Africa or Arabia. To
what extent, however, the Arabians, es-
peCially the Sabaeans, were engaged and
interested in the trade with Opfrr I have
shown in some of my previous publica-
tions, and it would lead too far to repeat
1t here.
Summing up, we have the following
facts:
/. An inscription OF undoubtedly ancient
Semitic characters.
2. Zimbabye was built about 100 B. G.
3. A Phoenician and Judaic trade with
Ophr is proved to have been in existence
(to take the narrowest limits between $50
and $50 B. C.
4. Between 600 and 164 B. c. more than
a dozen reports referring to Ophir are in
existence in the Old Testament. and Ophlr
is used in them as a household word.
5. The fact that Alexander found no
gold belt in India.
6. Herodotus, during the same period.
describes farthest Ethiopia as one of the
most extensive gold-producing centers In
the ancient world.
These are the facts, and on the present
occasion 1 will abstain from drawing more
detailed conclusions.
One thing. however. appears to me to
be established beyond doubt, through the
Investigations of Mauch, Bent and myself
viZ.-that the territories known to-day as
Southern Rhodesia were, 1000 years before
the commencement of the Christian era.
a gold producing country of a large ex-
tent and colonzed by the early Semitic
races round the Red Sea, why Jews:
Phoenicians and Western Arabians The
Rhodesia ruins are the first discovered
traces of an "Old World civilization on
as already Carl Ritter expressed 1t, one
of the most interesting links between an
cient and modern geography.