The Project Gutenberg eBook of An account of some recent discoveries in hieroglyphical literature, and Egyptian antiquities
    
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: An account of some recent discoveries in hieroglyphical literature, and Egyptian antiquities
        including the author's original alphabet, as extended by Mr. Champollion, with a translation of five unpublished Greek and Egyptian manuscripts

Author: Thomas Young

Release date: September 1, 2024 [eBook #74347]

Language: English

Original publication: UK: John Murray

Credits: The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AN ACCOUNT OF SOME RECENT DISCOVERIES IN HIEROGLYPHICAL LITERATURE, AND EGYPTIAN ANTIQUITIES ***






    DISCOVERIES

    IN

    HIEROGLYPHICAL LITERATURE.


    HOWLETT and BRIMMER, PRINTERS,
    FRITH STREET, SOHO.




    AN ACCOUNT

    OF

    SOME RECENT DISCOVERIES

    IN

    HIEROGLYPHICAL LITERATURE,

    AND

    EGYPTIAN ANTIQUITIES.

    INCLUDING

    THE AUTHOR’S ORIGINAL ALPHABET,

    AS EXTENDED BY MR. CHAMPOLLION,

    WITH A

    TRANSLATION OF FIVE UNPUBLISHED GREEK AND
    EGYPTIAN MANUSCRIPTS.

    BY THOMAS YOUNG, M.D.F.R.S.

    FELLOW OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS.


    LONDON:

    JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.

    1823.




    TO ALEXANDER BARON VON HUMBOLDT,

    AS A MARK OF THE HIGHEST RESPECT,
    FOR THE EXTENT OF HIS KNOWLEDGE
    AND THE ACCURACY OF HIS RESEARCH,
    AS WELL AS
    FOR HIS ARDENT ZEAL IN THE PROMOTION OF SCIENCE,
    AND FOR HIS CANDOUR AND VIGILANCE
    IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF LITERARY JUSTICE,
    THIS WORK IS DEDICATED
    BY HIS OBLIGED FRIEND,

    THE AUTHOR.


VOLVENDA DIES EN ATTULIT ULTRO!




CONTENTS.


                                                                    Page

    PREFACE                                                           IX


    CHAPTER I.

    _Introductory Sketch of the prevalent Opinions respecting
    Hieroglyphics_                                                     1


    CHAPTER II.

    _Investigations founded on the Pillar of Rosetta_                  8


    CHAPTER III.

    _Additional Inferences, deduced from the Egyptian
    Manuscripts, and from other Monuments_                            15


    CHAPTER IV.

    _Collections of the French.--Mr. Drovetti.--Mr. Champollion’s
    Discoveries_                                                      34


    CHAPTER V.

    _Illustrations of the Manuscripts brought from Egypt
    by Mr. Grey_                                                      55


    CHAPTER VI.

    _Extracts from Diodorus and Herodotus; relating to
    Mummies_                                                          87


    CHAPTER VII.

    _Extracts from Strabo; Alphabet of Champollion;
    Hieroglyphical and Enchorial Names_                              116


    CHAPTER VIII.

    _Chronological History of the Ptolemies, extracted from
    various Authors_                                                 130


    APPENDIX I.

    _Greek text of the Manuscripts and Registries_                   145


    APPENDIX II.

    _Specimens of Hieroglyphics_                                     153




PREFACE.


A complete confirmation of the principal results, which I had some
years since deduced, from an examination of the hieroglyphical
monuments of ancient Egypt, having been very unexpectedly derived from
the ulterior researches of Mr. Champollion, and from the singular good
fortune of Mr. George Grey, I cannot resist the natural inclination, to
make a public claim to whatever credit may be my due, for the labour
that I have bestowed, on an attempt to unveil the mystery, in which
Egyptian literature has been involved for nearly twenty centuries.

If, indeed, I have not hitherto wholly withheld from the public the
results of my inquiries, it has not been from the love of authorship
only, nor from an impatience of being the sole possessor of a secret
treasure; but because I was desirous of securing, at least, for my
country, what is justly considered as a desirable acquisition to every
country, the reputation of having enlarged the boundaries of human
knowledge, and of having contributed to extend the dominion of the mind
of man over time, and space, and neglect, and obscurity. _Corona in_
SACRIS CERTAMINIBUS _non victori datur, sed_ PATRIA _ab eo coronari
pronuntiatur_. And whatever vanity or enthusiasm there might be in this
sentiment, it was at least sincere and unaffected.

In the mean time my Egyptian investigations had been as laborious as
they had been persevering: and like many other pursuits, in which I
have been engaged, they had been so little enlivened by any fortunate
coincidences, or unexpected facilities, that having occasion to adopt
a motto for the signatures of some anonymous communications, I had
chosen the words FORTUNAM EX ALIIS, as appropriate to my own history.
But the new lights, which Mr. Champollion has obtained, and the
marvellous accident of the existence of a Greek manuscript, in perfect
preservation, which I found, when Mr. Grey had obligingly left it for
my examination, to be the translation of a unique hieroglyphic papyrus,
lately purchased by the King of France; these circumstances have so far
changed the complexion of my literary adventures, that if I remained
any longer in masquerade, I should certainly be compelled to adopt the
character of POLYCRATES or of ALADDIN.

It would indeed have been a little hard, that the only single step,
which leads at once to an extensive result, should have been made by
a Foreigner, upon the very ground which I had undergone the drudgery
of quietly raising, while he advanced rapidly and firmly, without
denying his obligations to his predecessor, but very naturally, under
all circumstances, without exaggerating them, or indeed very fully
enumerating them. I should not have repined, even if no counterpart
to his good fortune had occurred for my own advantage and assistance;
but the exhilaration of a success, so unexpected, has brought me more
immediately and more openly before the public, than it was previously
my intention to appear, in relation to a pursuit so remote from the
nature of many other duties which I am bound to fulfil.

It may naturally be expected that I should make some apology, for
what is generally considered as a violation of professional decorum;
for presuming to appear again before the public, without absolute
necessity, in any other capacity than that of a practical physician.
I have indeed myself observed, on a former occasion, that the public
is inclined to think, and not without something like reason, that the
abilities of different individuals are pretty nearly equal; and that if
any one has distinguished himself in a particular department of study,
he must have bestowed so much the less time and attention on other
departments: that, of course, if he excelled in more than one line, out
of his profession, the natural inference would be so much the stronger:
and that whether this may be fair or not, it is at least fair, that
direct evidence should be produced or imagined of a devotion to medical
pursuits, before medical confidence can reasonably be expected.

My explanation then is, that I consider myself as having already
produced to the public _more than sufficient_ “evidence” of my claim
to this “medical confidence”; and that, having now acquired the right
to celebrate a YEAR of JUBILEE, I think myself fully justified in
endeavouring, without further regard to the strict etiquette of my
profession, to obtain, while I have yet a few years more to live and
to learn, whatever respect may be thought due to the discoveries, which
have constituted the amusement of a few of my leisure hours.

In addition to this apology, perhaps already too long, I will venture
to state, as a matter of anecdote, the train of occurrences that has
accidentally led me to engage in these pursuits. To begin therefore
with the beginning, or rather before the beginning, as the subject
of a preface may very naturally do: I had been induced by motives
both of private friendship, and of professional obligation, to offer,
to the editors of a periodical publication, an article, which I
thought would be of some advantage to their collection, containing an
abstract of Adelung’s Mithridates, a work then lately received from
the continent. In reading this elaborate compilation, my curiosity
was excited by a note of the editor, Professor Vater, in which he
asserted that the unknown language of the Stone of Rosetta, and of the
bandages often found with the mummies, was capable of being analysed
into an alphabet consisting of little more than thirty letters: but
having merely retained this general impression, I thought no more of
these inscriptions, until they were recalled to my attention, by the
examination of some fragments of a papyrus, which had been brought
home from Egypt by my friend Sir William Rouse Boughton, then lately
returned from his travels in the East. With this accidental occurrence
my Egyptian researches began: their progress and termination will be
the subject of the present volume.

                                                                   T. Y.

    _Welbeck Street,
    1 March, 1823._




WORKS OF THE AUTHOR;

TO BE HAD OF THE PUBLISHER.


    1. A Course of Lectures on Natural Philosophy and the Mechanical
    Arts, 2 vols. 4to. 1807.

    2. An Introduction to Medical Literature, including a System of
    Practical Nosology, 8vo. Second edition, 1823.

    3. A Practical and Historical Treatise on Consumptive Diseases,
    8vo. 1815.

    4. Elementary Illustrations of the Celestial Mechanics of
    Laplace, 8vo. 1821.




DISCOVERIES

IN

HIEROGLYPHICAL LITERATURE.




CHAPTER I.

INTRODUCTORY SKETCH OF THE PREVALENT OPINIONS RESPECTING HIEROGLYPHICS.


The Greeks and Romans, either from national pride, or from a want
of philological talent, were extremely deficient in their knowledge
of all such languages as they called barbarous, and they frequently
made up for their ignorance by the positiveness of their assertions,
with regard to facts which were created by their own imagination. It
was very currently believed, on their authority, not only that Egypt
was the parent of all arts and sciences, but that the hieroglyphical
inscriptions, on its public monuments, contained a summary of the most
important mysteries of nature, and of the most sublime inventions
of man: but that the interpretation of these characters had been so
studiously concealed by the priests, from the knowledge of the vulgar,
and had indeed been so imperfectly understood by themselves, that it
was wholly lost and forgotten in the days of the later Roman Emperors.
The story, however, of a reward, supposed to have been offered in
vain by one of the first of the Caesars, for an interpretation of the
inscription on an obelisc, then lately brought from Egypt to Rome,
appears to rest on no authentic foundation.

Among the works of more modern authors, who had employed themselves in
the study of the hieroglyphics, it is difficult to say whether those
were the more discouraging, which, like the productions of Father
Kircher and the Chevalier Palin, professed to contain explanations
of every thing, or which, like the ponderous volume of Zoëga on the
Obeliscs, confessed, after collecting all that was really on record,
that the sum and substance of the whole amounted absolutely to nothing.

Father Kircher’s six folios contain some tolerably faithful, though
inelegant, representations of the principal monuments of Egyptian art,
which had before his days been brought to Europe: and, according to his
interpretation, which succeeded equally well, whether he happened to
begin at the beginning, or at the end, of each of the lines, they all
contain some mysterious doctrines of religion or of metaphysics. With
equal sagacity, but with much less appearance of laborious research,
the Chevalier Palin, beginning, in one instance at least, by way of
variety, in the middle, has more recently discovered, that Hebrew
translations of many of the Egyptian consecrated rolls of papyrus are
to be found, in the Bible, under the name of the Psalms of David.
Whatever may be thought of the judgment of these antiquaries, their
opinions are not particularly discreditable to their talents and
ingenuity: for having once allowed themselves to set out with the
mistaken notion, that it was possible to determine the sense of the
hieroglyphics, by internal evidence and by the force of reasoning
only, the imperfections of their superstructures were the unavoidable
consequences of the unsubstantial nature of the foundations, on which
they were raised.

There was indeed a traditional record of the true sense of one
single character, denoting LIFE, which had been handed down by the
ecclesiastical writers, and had been generally received as correct by
scholars and antiquaries: although I cannot help suspecting that Sir
Archibald Edmonstone’s memory deceives him when he remarks, that the
same symbol is often substituted, in Christian inscriptions, for the
simpler sign of the cross, with which they more commonly begin. We
also find some imperfect hints of a partial knowledge of the sense of
the hieroglyphics in the puerile work of Horapollo, which is much more
like a collection of conceits and enigmas than an explanation of a real
system of serious literature: and while such scattered truths were
confounded with a multitude of false assertions, it was impossible to
profit by any of them, without some clue to assist us in the selection.
For my own part, if I had ever read of the true signification of the
handled cross, it had entirely escaped my recollection.

The French expedition to Egypt was most liberally provided, by
the government of the day, with a select body of antiquaries, and
architects, and surveyors, and naturalists, and draughtsmen, whose
business it was to investigate all that was interesting to science or
to literature in that singular country. Their labours have been made
public, with all the advantages of chalcographical and typographical
elegance, in the splendid collection, entitled _Description de
l’Égypte_. But it is scarcely too much to say, that the only real
benefit, conferred on Egyptian literature, by that expedition, was
the discovery of a huge broken block, of black stone, in digging for
the foundations of Fort St. Julian, near Rosetta, which the British
army had afterwards the honour of bringing to this country, as a
proud trophy of their gallantry and success. It is not to a want of
ability, nor of industry, nor of accuracy, nor of fidelity, in the
Egyptian Commission, that so total a failure is to be attributed; but
partly to the real difficulty of the subject, and still more to the
preconceived opinion, which was very generally entertained by their
men of letters, of the exorbitant antiquity of the Egyptian works of
art, which caused them to neglect the lights, that might have been
derived, from a comparison of Greek and Roman inscriptions, with the
hieroglyphics in their neighbourhood; and to suppose, that whatever
bore the date of less than thirty or forty centuries must necessarily
be an interpolation, unconnected with the original architecture and
decorations of the edifice, to which it belonged: and when a strong
prejudice has once been imbibed, we all know that the senses themselves
are perpetually blunted and perverted by it, even without the consent
of the reasoning powers. Mr. William Hamilton had, however, very
successfully brought forwards a variety of evidence, in favour of the
utility of the various inscriptions of the Greeks and Romans, for
ascertaining the date of many of the buildings to which they belong;
and the question, thus agitated between the French and the English
travellers, had already assumed somewhat of a national character.

A cursory inspection of the Greek inscription, contained in the
pillar of Rosetta, was sufficient to establish, as incontrovertible,
the opinion, which had been very ably maintained by our acute and
learned countryman Bishop Warburton, that the hieroglyphics, or sacred
characters, were not so denominated, as being exclusively appropriated
to sacred subjects, but that they constituted a real written language,
applicable to the purposes of history and common life, as well as
to those of religion and mythology; since this inscription speaks of
the three divisions of the pillar, as containing different versions
of the same decree, in the sacred and the vulgar character, and in
the Greek language, respectively: and, that there was no fraud in
this description, was at once made evident by the just observation
of Akerblad, who pointed out, at the end of the hieroglyphical
inscription, the three first numerals, indicated by I, II, and III,
respectively, where the Greek has “the first and the second ...”; the
end being broken off. It was also evident, that the hieroglyphical
language continued to be understood and employed in the time of Ptolemy
Epiphanes: but here the matter rested for several years; no single
representation of an existing object having been so identified, on
this or any other monument among the hieroglyphics, as to have its
signification determined, even by a probable conjecture.

In the mean time, the enterprising and enlightened Baron Alexander Von
Humboldt was contributing to illustrate the nature of hieroglyphical
languages, by his account of the Mexican drawings, contained in his
Views of the Cordilleras and Monuments of the American nations. The
symbols, however, of the Americans appear to have had little or nothing
in common with those of the Egyptians. The written language of the
Chinese, on the contrary, exhibits, in some cases, a much closer
analogy with that of ancient Egypt: and Mr. Barrow, by his clear and
concise explanation of the peculiar nature of the Chinese characters,
has contributed very materially to assist us in tracing the gradual
progress of the Egyptian symbols through their various forms; although
the resemblance is certainly far less complete than has been supposed
by Mr. Palin, who tells us, that we have only to translate the Psalms
of David into Chinese, and to write them in the ancient character of
that language, in order to reproduce the Egyptian papyri, that are
found with the mummies.




CHAPTER II.

INVESTIGATIONS FOUNDED ON THE PILLAR OF ROSETTA.


The pillar of Rosetta was now safely and quietly deposited in the
British Museum; the Society of Antiquaries had engraved, and very
generally circulated, a correct copy of its three inscriptions; and
several of the best scholars of the age, in particular Porson and
Heyne, had employed themselves in completing and illustrating the
Greek text, which constituted the third part of the inscription: and
it so happened that, although no person acquainted with both these
critics could hesitate to give the general preference, for acuteness
of observation, and felicity of conjecture, and soundness of judgment,
to the English professor, yet in this instance the superior industry
and vigilance of the German had given him decidedly the advantage, with
respect to two or three passages, in which their translations happen to
differ.

But Greek was already sufficiently understood, both in London and
at Gottingen, to make this part of the investigation comparatively
insignificant. Mr. Akerblad, a diplomatic gentleman, then at Paris,
but afterwards the Swedish resident at Rome, had begun to decipher
the middle division of the inscription; after De Sacy had given up
the pursuit as hopeless, notwithstanding that he had made out very
satisfactorily the names of Ptolemy and Alexander. But both he and
Mr. Akerblad proceeded upon the erroneous, or, at least imperfect,
evidence of the Greek authors, who have pretended to explain the
different modes of writing among the ancient Egyptians, and who have
asserted very distinctly that they employed, on many occasions,
an alphabetical system, composed of twenty five letters only. The
characters of the second part of the inscription being called in the
Greek ENCHORIA GRAMMATA, or letters of the country, it was natural to
look among these for the alphabet in question: and Mr. Akerblad, having
principally deduced his conclusions from the preamble of the decree,
which consists in great measure of foreign proper names, persisted, to
the time of his death, in believing, that this part of the inscription
was throughout alphabetical. I have called these characters enchoric,
or rather _enchorial_: Mr. Champollion has chosen to distinguish them
by the term _demotic_, or popular; perhaps from having been in the
habit of employing it before he was acquainted with the denomination
which I had appropriated to them: in my opinion, the priority of my
publication ought to have induced him to adopt my term, and to suppress
his own, rather than to add another useless synonym, for what the
ancients, when speaking with accuracy, would probably have described as
the “epistolographic” form of writing employed by the Egyptians: for
we have no means of determining the precise nature of the characters
called _popular_ by Herodotus.

Mr. Akerblad was far from having completed his examination of the whole
enchorial inscription, apparently from the want of some collateral
encouragement or cooperation, to induce him to continue so laborious an
inquiry; and he had made little or no effort to understand the first
inscription of the pillar, which is professedly engraved in the sacred
character, except the detached observation, respecting the numerals at
the end: he was even disposed to acquiesce in the correctness of Mr.
Palin’s interpretation, which proceeds on the supposition, that parts
of the first lines of the hieroglyphics are still remaining on the
stone.

It was natural to expect, that, after the possibility of a partial
success, in this part of the undertaking, had been almost demonstrated
by what Mr. Akerblad had cursorily observed, the critics and
chronologists of all civilised countries would have united, heart and
hand, in a common effort to obtain a legitimate solution of all the
doubts and difficulties, in which the early antiquities of Egypt had
long remained involved. But, excepting Mr. Champollion and myself, they
have all chosen to amuse themselves with their own speculations and
conjectures: the mathematicians of France have continued to calculate,
and the metaphysicians of England have continued to argue, upon
elements which it was impossible either to prove or disprove; while the
fortuitous coincidences of some accidental results, with the collateral
testimony of history or of astronomy, have been forced into the service
of the delusion, as evidences of the truth of the hypotheses from which
they had been deduced. Nor are these amusements even at this moment
discontinued, by some persons, who have shown themselves capable of
doing better things.

It was early in the year 1814, that I had been examining the fragments
of papyrus brought from Egypt by Mr. Boughton; and that, after looking
over Mr. Akerblad’s pamphlet in a hasty manner, I communicated a few
anonymous remarks on them to the Society of Antiquaries. In the summer
of that year, I took the triple inscription with me to Worthing,
and there proceeded to examine first the enchorial inscription, and
afterwards the sacred characters. By an attentive and methodical
comparison of the different parts with each other, I had sufficiently
deciphered the whole, in the course of a few months, to be able
to send, as an appendix to the paper printed in the Archaeologia,
a translation of each of the Egyptian inscriptions considered
separately, distinguishing the contents of the different lines, with
as much precision as my materials would enable me to obtain. It is
evident that this division of the translation supposes, in general, a
distinction of the significations of the single words; and that any
person, with a little attention, might retrace my steps, with regard to
the sense that I attributed to each part of the two inscriptions. I was
obliged to leave many important passages still subject to some doubt,
and I hoped to acquire additional information, before I attempted to
determine their signification with accuracy; but, having made the
first great step, I concluded that many others might be added with
facility and with rapidity. In this conclusion, however, I was somewhat
mistaken; and when we reflect that, in the case of the Chinese, the
only hieroglyphical language now extant, it is considered as a task
requiring the whole labour of a learned life, to become acquainted
with the greater part of the words, even among those who are in the
habit of employing the same language for the ordinary purposes of
life, and who have the assistance of accurate and voluminous grammars
and dictionaries: we shall then be at no loss to understand that a
hieroglyphical language, to be acquired by means of the precarious aid
of a few monuments, which have accidentally escaped the ravages of time
and of barbarism, must exhibit a combination of difficulties almost
insurmountable to human industry.

I had thought it necessary, in the pursuit of the inquiry, to make
myself in some measure familiar with the remains of the old Egyptian
language, as they are preserved in the Coptic and Thebaic versions
of the Scriptures; and I had hoped, with the assistance of this
knowledge, to be able to find an alphabet, which would enable me to
read the enchorial inscription at least into a kindred dialect. But,
in the progress of the investigation, I had gradually been compelled
to abandon this expectation, and to admit the conviction, that no
such alphabet would ever be discovered, because it had never been in
existence.

I was led to this conclusion, not only by the untractable nature of
the inscription itself, which might have depended on my own want of
information or of address, but still more decidedly by the manifest
occurrence of a multitude of characters, which were obviously imperfect
imitations of the more intelligible pictures, that were observable
among the distinct hieroglyphics of the first inscription: such as
a Priest, a Statue, and a Mattock or Plough, which were evidently,
in their primitive state, delineations of the objects intended to be
denoted by them, and which were as evidently introduced among the
enchorial characters. But whether or no any other significant words
were expressed, in the same inscription, by means of the alphabet
employed in it for foreign names, I could not very satisfactorily
determine.

A cursory examination of the few well identified characters, amounting
to about 90 or 100, which the hieroglyphical inscription, in its
mutilated state, had enabled me to ascertain, was however sufficient
to prove, first, that many simple objects were represented, as might
naturally be supposed, by their actual delineations; secondly, that
many other objects, represented graphically, were used in a figurative
sense only, while a great number of the symbols, in frequent use,
could be considered as the pictures of no existing objects whatever;
thirdly, that, in order to express a plurality of objects, a dual was
denoted by a repetition of the character, but that three characters of
the same kind, following each other, implied an indefinite plurality,
which was likewise more compendiously represented by means of three
lines or bars attached to a single character; fourthly, that definite
numbers were expressed by dashes for units, and arches, either round
or square, for tens; fifthly, that all hieroglyphical inscriptions
were read from front to rear, as the objects naturally follow each
other; sixthly, that proper names were included by the oval ring, or
border, or _cartouche_, of the sacred characters, and often between
two fragments of a similar border in the running hand; and, seventhly,
that the name of Ptolemy alone existed on this pillar, having only
been completely identified by the assistance of the analysis of the
enchorial inscription. And, as far as I have ever heard or read, _not
one_ of these particulars had ever been established and placed on
record, by _any other_ person, dead or alive.




CHAPTER III.

ADDITIONAL INFERENCES, DEDUCED FROM THE EGYPTIAN MANUSCRIPTS, AND FROM
OTHER MONUMENTS.


My full conviction respecting the nature and origin of the enchorial
character I expressed at the end of a collection of letters, inserted
in the MUSEUM CRITICUM, and published in 1815. It was not, however,
till the next year, that I obtained the most complete evidence of
the truth of my opinion: having been obligingly accommodated, by Mr.
William Hamilton, with the use of his copy of the great _Description
de l’Égypte_, as far as it was then published, I proceeded to study
its contents: and I discovered, at length, that several of the
manuscripts on papyrus, which had been carefully published in that
work, exhibited very frequently the same text in different forms,
deviating more or less from the perfect resemblance of the objects
intended to be delineated, till they became, in many cases, mere lines
and curves, and dashes and flourishes; but still answering, character
for character, to the hieroglyphical or hieratic writing of the same
chapters, found in other manuscripts, and of which the identity was
sufficiently indicated, besides this coincidence, by the similarity of
the larger tablets, or pictural representations, at the head of each
chapter or column, which are almost universally found on the margins
of manuscripts of a mythological nature. And the enchorial inscription
of the pillar of Rosetta resembled very accurately, in its general
appearance, the most unpicturesque of these manuscripts. It did not,
however, by any means agree, character for character, with the “sacred
letters” of the first inscription, though in many instances, by means
of some intermediate steps derived from the manuscripts on papyrus, the
characters could be traced into each other with sufficient accuracy,
to supersede every idea of any essential diversity in the principles
of representation employed. The want of a more perfect correspondence
could only be explained, by considering the sacred characters as the
remains of a more ancient and solemn mode of expression, which had been
superseded, in common life, by other words and phrases; and, in several
cases, it seemed probable, that the forms of the characters had been
so far degraded and confused, that the addition of a greater number of
distinguishing epithets had become necessary, in order that the sense
might be rendered intelligible.

A particular account of this comparison of the different modes of
writing, and a detailed reference to the passages of the respective
manuscripts from which they were derived, is contained in two letters,
printed in 1816, as a part of the seventh number of the Museum
Criticum, and of which several copies were immediately sent to Paris,
and to other parts of the Continent, although the actual publication of
the number was retarded till 1821.

The principal contents of these letters were, however, incorporated
with other matter into a more extensive article, which I contributed
in 1819 to the Supplement of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. I had made
drawings of the plates, which were engraved with great fidelity by
Mr. Turrell, about a year before; and having been favoured by the
proprietors with a few separate copies, I had sent them to some of my
friends, in the summer of 1818, with a cover, on which was printed the
title Hieroglyphical Vocabulary: these plates, however, were precisely
the same that were afterwards contained in the fourth volume of the
Supplement, as belonging to the article Egypt.

The characters explained, with confidence, in this vocabulary, amounted
to about 200; the number which had been immediately obtained from the
pillar of Rosetta having been somewhat more than doubled by means of
a careful examination of other monuments, on which the terms god, and
king, and other epithets, already ascertained, were so applied as to
furnish either certain or probable conclusions respecting the principal
deities of the Egyptians, and respecting several of the latest and the
most celebrated of their sovereigns. The higher numerals were readily
obtained, by a comparison of some inscriptions, in which they stood
combined with units and with tens. The hieratic manuscripts assisted
also in this identification, by facilitating the determination of
the hieroglyphic corresponding to a given enchorial character. The
names of Phthah and of Apis were still left on the pillar: to these
I was now enabled to add, with tolerable certainty, those of Ammon,
or Jupiter, Phre, or the Sun, Rhea, or Urania, Ioh, or the Moon,
Thoth, or Hermes, Osiris, Arueris, or Apollo, Isis, Nephthe, Buto,
Horus, and Mneuis; besides a multitude of others, to whom I found it
convenient to appropriate fictitious or temporary appellations, for
the greater convenience of reference. Thus I have called Cerexochus, a
figure whose real name was perhaps Amonrasonther, and my Hyperion and
Platypterus are supposed by Mr. Champollion to belong to Horus and to
Hercules. Of the kings, I have ascertained, as far as the testimony
of the Greek and Latin historians and inscriptions would enable
me, the names of Mesphres, Memnon, Sesostris, Nechao, Psammis, and
Amasis; and having obtained the distinction of Ptolemy Soter from the
pillar, I afterwards determined, by its assistance, the name of his
queen Berenice. The termination indicating the female sex was another
important result of this comparison of various monuments.

I must acknowledge that my respect for the good sense and
accomplishments of my Egyptian allies by no means became more profound
as our acquaintance became more intimate: on the contrary, all that
Juvenal, in a moment, as might have been supposed, of discontent,
had held up to ridicule of their superstitions and their depravity,
became, as it were, displayed before my eyes, as the details of their
mythology became more intelligible. That Plato professed to have
learned much during a long residence in Egypt I can easily believe: he
may very probably have derived from thence some hints, that led to his
own purer doctrines of the immortality of the soul, although he may
have been tempted to exaggerate a little the other advantages of his
travels in search of truth; but that Pythagoras ever professed to have
acquired any solid knowledge from the Egyptians, appears to me to be
very inconsistent with what we know of the history of this illustrious
philosopher, speculative and visionary as some of his arithmetical
metaphysics seem to have been. I shall enter into some further details
of my conclusions, in the words which I have already employed in the
article EGYPT.

“By means of the knowledge of the hieroglyphical characters, which has
been already obtained, we are fully competent to form a general idea of
the nature of the inscriptions on the principal Egyptian monuments that
are extant. Numerous as they are, there is scarcely one of them which
we are not able to refer to the class either of sepulchral or of votive
inscriptions; astronomical and chronological there seem to be none,
since the numerical characters, which have been perfectly ascertained,
have not yet been found to occur in such a form as they necessarily
must have assumed in the records of this description: of a historical
nature, we can only find the triumphal, which are often sufficiently
distinguishable, but they may also always be referred to the votive;
since whoever, related his own exploits thought it wisest to attribute
the glory of them to some deity, and whoever recorded those of another
was generally disposed to intermix divine honours with his panegyric.
It has, indeed, been asserted, that the Egyptians were not in the habit
of deifying any mortal persons; but the inscription of Rosetta is by
no means the only one in which the sovereigns of Egypt are inserted in
the number of its deities; the custom is observable in monuments of a
much earlier age: indeed, in such a country, it might be considered as
a kind of dilemma of degradation, whether it was most ridiculous to be
made a divinity, or to be excluded from so plebeian an assemblage;
but flattery is more prone to err by commission than by omission,
and, consequently, we find the terms king and god very generally
inseparable. The sepulchral inscriptions, from the attention that was
paid in Egypt to the obsequies of the dead, appear, on the whole,
to constitute the most considerable part of the Egyptian literature
which remains, and they afford us, upon a comparative examination,
some very remarkable peculiarities. The general tenor of all these
inscriptions appears to be, as might be expected from the testimony of
Herodotus, the identification of the deceased with the god Osiris, and
probably, if a female, with Isis; and the subject of the most usual
representations seems to be the reception of this new personage by the
principal deities, to whom he now stands in a relation expressed in
the respective inscriptions; the honour of an apotheosis, reserved by
the ancient Romans for emperors, and by the modern for saints, having
been apparently extended by the old Egyptians to private individuals
of all descriptions[; as indeed appears to be partially hinted in the
concluding line of the golden verses of the Pythagoreans]. It required
an extensive comparison of these inscriptions to recognise their
precise nature, since they seldom contain a name surrounded by a ring
in its usual form: sometimes, however, as in the green sarcophagus
of the British Museum, a distinct name is very often repeated, and
preceded by that of Osiris; while, in most other instances, there
is a certain combination of characters, bearing evident relation to
the personage delineated, which occurs, after the symbols of Osiris,
instead of the name; so that either the ring was simply omitted on
this occasion, or a new and perhaps a mysterious name was employed,
consisting frequently of the appellations of several distinct deities,
and probably analogous to the real name[, which will, indeed, hereafter
appear to have consisted not uncommonly of a similar combination]. That
the characteristic phrase[, or group], so repeated, must have had some
relation to the deceased, is proved by its scarcely ever being alike
in any two monuments that have been compared, while almost every other
part of the manuscripts and inscriptions are the same in many different
instances, and some of them in almost all; and this same phrase
maybe observed in Lord Mountnorris’s and Mr. Bankes’s manuscripts,
placed over the head of the person who is brought up between the two
goddesses, to make his appearance before the true Osiris, in his own
person, and in his judicial capacity, with his counsellors about him,
and the balance of justice before him.” ...

“The tablet of the last judgment, which is so well illustrated by
the testimony of Diodorus concerning the funerals of the Egyptians,
is found near the end of almost all the manuscripts upon papyrus,
that are so frequently discovered in the coffins of the mummies, and
among others in Lord Mountnorris’s hieratic manuscript, printed in the
collection of the Egyptian Society. The great deity sits on the left,
holding the hook and the whip or fan; his name and titles are generally
placed over him; but this part of the present manuscript is a little
injured. Before him is a kind of mace, supporting something like the
skin of a leopard; then a female Cerberus, and on a shelf over her
head, the tetrad of termini, which have been already distinguished by
the names “Tetrarcha,” Anubis, Macedo, and “Hieracion,” each having
had his appropriate denomination written over his head. Behind the
Cerberis stands Thoth, with his style and tablet, having just begun
to write. Over his head, in two columns, we find his name and titles,
including his designation as a scribe. The balance follows, with a
little baboon as a kind of genius, sitting on it. Under the beam stand
“Cteristes” and “Hyperion” [supposed by Mr. Champollion to be Anubis
and Horus], who are employed in adjusting the equipoise; but their
names in this manuscript are omitted. The five columns over the balance
are only remarkable as containing, in this instance, the characteristic
phrase, or the name of the deceased, intermixed with other characters.
Beyond the balance stands a female, holding the sceptre of Isis, who
seems to be called Rhea, the wife of the Sun. She is looking back at
the personage, who holds up his hand as a mark of respect, and who
is identified as the deceased by the name simply placed over him,
without any exordium. He is followed by a second goddess, who is also
holding up her hands, in token of respect; and whose name looks like
a personification of honour or glory, unless it is simply intended to
signify “a divine priestess,” belonging to the order of the Pterophori,
mentioned on the Rosetta stone. The forty two assessors, [noticed by
Diodorus and by these manuscripts], are wanting in this tablet; and,
in many other manuscripts their number is curtailed, to make room for
other subjects; but, in several of those which are engraved in the
_Déscription de l’Egypte_, they are all represented, sometimes as
sitting figures, and sometimes standing as termini, with their feet
united.”

“The principal part of the text of all these manuscripts appears
to consist of a collection of hymns, or rather homages, to certain
deities, generally expressed in the name of the deceased, with his
title of Osiris, although the true Osiris is not excluded from the
groups that are introduced. The upper part of each manuscript is
occupied by a series of pictural tablets; under them are vertical
columns of distinct hieroglyphics, or, in the epistolographic
manuscripts, pages of the text, which are commonly divided into
paragraphs, with a tablet at the head of each; the first words being
constantly written with red ink, made of a kind of ochre, as the black
is of a carbonaceous substance. The beginning of the manuscripts
is seldom entire, being always at the outside of the roll; as the
_umbilicus_ of the Romans was synonymous with the end.” ...

“The coffins of the mummies, and the larger sarcophagi of stone, are
generally covered with representations extremely similar to some of
those which are found in the manuscripts. The judicial tablet is
frequently delineated on the middle of the coffins; above it are
Isis and Nephthe, at the sides, and apparently Rhea in the middle,
with outspread wings. The space below is chiefly occupied by figures
of twenty or thirty of the principal deities, to whom the deceased,
in his mystical character, is doing homage; each of them being
probably designated by the relationship in which he stands to the new
representative of Osiris. In the sculptures, the figures are generally
less numerous; the same deities are commonly represented as on the
painted coffins, but without the repetition of the suppliant, and
in an order subject to some little variation. The large sarcophagus
of granite, in the British Museum, brought from Cairo, and formerly
called the Lover’s Fountain, has the name of Apis, as a part of the
characteristic denomination. This circumstance, at first sight, seemed
to make it evident that it must have been intended to contain the mummy
of an Apis, for which its magnitude renders it well calculated; but
when the symbols of other deities were found in the mystic names upon
various other monuments, this inference could no longer be considered
as absolutely conclusive.” ...

“Of the triumphal monuments, the most magnificent are the obeliscs,
which are reported by Pliny to have been dedicated to the Sun; and
there is every reason to suppose, that the translation of one of these
inscriptions, preserved by Ammianus Marcellinus, after Hermapion,
contains a true representation of a part of its contents, more
especially as ‘the mighty Apollo’ of Hermapion agrees completely with
the hawk, the bull, and the arm, which usually occupy the beginning of
each inscription. These symbols are generally followed by a number of
pompous titles, not always very intimately connected with each other,
and among them we often find that of ‘Lord of the asp bearing diadems,’
with some others, immediately preceding the name and parentage of the
sovereign, who is the principal subject of the inscription. The obelisc
at Heliopolis is without the bull; and the whole inscription may be
supposed to have signified something of this kind.

    “THIS APOLLINEAN TROPHY IS CONSECRATED TO THE HONOUR OF
    KING ‘REMESSES,’ CROWNED WITH AN ASP BEARING DIADEM; IT IS
    CONSECRATED TO THE HONOUR OF THE SON OF ‘HERON,’ THE ORNAMENT
    OF HIS COUNTRY, BELOVED BY PHTHAH, LIVING FOR EVER; IT IS
    CONSECRATED TO THE HONOUR OF THE REVERED AND BENEFICIENT DEITY
    ‘REMESSES,’ GREAT IN GLORY, SUPERIOR TO HIS ENEMIES; BY THE
    DECREE OF AN ASSEMBLY, TO THE POWERFUL AND THE FLOURISHING, WHOSE
    LIFE SHALL BE WITHOUT END.”

“It is true, that some parts of this interpretation are in great
measure conjectural; but none of it is altogether arbitrary, or
unsupported by some probable analogy: and the spirit and tenor of the
inscription is probably unimpaired by the alterations, which this
approximation to the sense may unavoidably have introduced.

“Of the obeliscs, still in existence, there are perhaps about thirty,
larger and smaller, which may be considered as genuine. Several others
are decidedly spurious, having been chiefly sculptured at Rome, in
imitation of the Egyptian style, but so negligently and unskilfully,
as to have exhibited a striking difference even in the character of
the workmanship. Such are the Pamphilian, in explanation of which the
laborious Kircher has published a folio volume, and the Barberinian
or Veranian: in both of these the emblems are put together in a
manner wholly arbitrary; and when an attempt is made to imitate the
appearance of a name, the characters are completely different at each
repetition. The Sallustian obelisc has also been broken, and joined
inaccurately, and some modern restitutions have been very awkwardly
introduced, as becomes evident upon comparing with each other the
figures of Kircher and of Zoëga. [A similar restitution has been rather
better executed at one corner of the Lateran obelisc, as I observed
in the course of a few weeks that I passed at Rome in the summer of
1821: the block of granite, which has been employed, still exhibits
some words of a Latin inscription, turned upside down, but not effaced,
although the hieroglyphics belonging to the place have been imitated
with tolerable fidelity]. Another very celebrated monument, the Isiac
table, which has been the subject of much profound discussion, and
has given birth to many refined mythological speculations, is equally
incapable of supporting a minute examination upon solid grounds; for
the inscriptions neither bear any relation to the figures near which
they are placed, nor form any connected sense of their own; and the
whole is undoubtedly the work of a Roman sculptor, imitating only the
general style and the separate delineations of the Egyptian tablets; as
indeed some of the most learned and acute of our critical antiquaries
had already asserted, notwithstanding the contrary opinion of several
foreigners, of the highest reputation for their intimate acquaintance
with the works of Greek and Roman art. We may hope, however, that in
future these unprofitable discussions and disputes will become less and
less frequent, and that our knowledge of the antiquities of Egypt will
gain as much in the solidity and sufficiency of its evidence, as it may
probably lose in its hypothetical symmetry and its imaginary extent;
and while we allow every latitude to legitimate reasoning and cautious
conjecture, in the search after historical truths, we must peremptorily
exclude from our investigations an attachment to fanciful systems and
presupposed analogies on the one hand, and a too implicit deference to
traditional authority on the other.”

A few general remarks, that I had taken the liberty of sending out to
Mr. William Bankes, for his assistance in his Egyptian researches, had
been found of some utility in directing his attention to points of
the most material importance for the promotion of the investigation:
and even before the actual publication of the Supplement of the
Encyclopaedia, I had received from Egypt a very agreeable confirmation
of my opinions, in a letter addressed by Mr. Salt to Mr. William
Hamilton, of which I shall here insert an extract.

                                              “_Cairo, 1st May, 1819._

    “At Dakki in Nubia there is an inscription of the Ptolemies,
    over the principal entrance, that occupies a place evidently
    connected with the architecture; and on each side of this is a
    tablet of hieroglyphics, nearly similar one to the other. Now
    it struck me on the spot, that these, being nearly of the same
    length as the Greek tablet, might possibly contain a translation.
    I therefore referred to a letter in Mr. Bankes’s possession,
    containing some fifty explanations of hieroglyphics from Dr.
    Young, and was certainly gratified to find that in the oval
    [ring], conspicuous on each side, was the name of the “immortal
    Ptolemy”: and immediately afterwards the name of Hermes on one
    side, and of Isis on the other, to whom, by numerous Greek
    inscriptions, it is certain that the temple was dedicated. In
    following up this idea, I found, in other parts of the temple,
    the name of “Ptolemy“ without the “immortal,” over offering
    figures; and also those hieroglyphics which Dr. Young supposes
    to represent the names of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, as well as
    Hermes, over their respective figures, invariably, I may say,
    throughout the numerous representations on the walls....

                                                                 H.S.”

Upon Mr. Bankes’s return to England, he had the kindness and liberality
to allow me free access to the unequalled treasures of drawings
and inscriptions, that he had accumulated and brought home; and I
soon obtained a knowledge of several additional characters from the
comparison of these valuable documents. The most useful of these
was the symbol for BROTHER or SISTER, which appears to be the crook
generally seen in the hands of Osiris, and which is closely imitated
in the enchorial character that I had already ascertained. I found,
also, that the emblem which I had taken for MOTHER could only be
translated WIFE, as it was applied to Cleopatra with relation to her
husband Ptolemy; and that a FATHER was denoted by a bird with an
arm, as I had at first inferred from the pillar of Rosetta, though
I afterwards abandoned the opinion, from supposing that I had found
another emblem for Ptolemy Philopator. It happened, however, by mere
accident, that the advantage which I derived from this source was
much less considerable than might have been expected, both from its
abundance and from its uncontaminated purity; but I had been rather
disposed to defer the ultimate study of Mr. Bankes’s collections, till
their publication should give me a free right to employ them in any
manner that I might think proper. Some remarks, however, that occurred
to me in consequence of looking them over, I incorporated in a little
essay which I gave to Mr. Belzoni, and which makes the appendix to the
second edition of his travels. I have here observed, in speaking of the
reference of the supposed Jewish captives, exhibited in the catacomb
of my “Psammis,” to the expeditions of Necho to Jerusalem, in the
time of King Josiah and Jehoahaz, “that there are some difficulties
in reconciling the name of Psammis with some other monuments, and in
particular with a most important fragment of an enumeration of the
kings of Egypt, discovered by Mr. Bankes, at Abydos. In this there are
only two kings intervening between this Psammis and the Memnon of the
ancients: so that, if Pliny is right in his account of this obelisc,
the popular tradition respecting the colossus, supposed to represent
Memnon, must be erroneous. This, indeed, it would not be difficult
to admit, as very likely to have happened in the case of any popular
tradition; but there is a still greater difficulty in the inscription
found by Mr. Bankes on the leg of the colossus at Ebsambul, in which
Psammetichus is mentioned; and if this was the first Psammetichus, as
appears in some respects to be the more probable, it would follow that
the king who founded that temple was more ancient than Psammetichus.
But it is abundantly certain that our Psammis was prior to the founder
of that temple: so that either that Psammetichus must be of much later
date, as the employment of the Greek Ψ in the inscription would indeed
appear to indicate, or this catacomb was not constructed in honour of
the son of Pharaoh Necho. It has also been observed by an accomplished
scholar, who is much attached to the pursuit of Egyptian antiquities,
that, according to the testimony of Herodotus, all the kings of this
dynasty were buried at Saïs, and that we must either reject this
evidence, or admit that neither Psammis nor Necho can be the personage
here represented. We may, however, hope, that future researches will
furnish us with materials, that may enable us to remove this and many
other difficulties, which at present envelope the chronology of the
kings of Egypt.”




CHAPTER IV

COLLECTIONS OF THE FRENCH. MR. DROVETTI. MR. CHAMPOLLION’S DISCOVERIES.


Although the discovery of the general import of the hieroglyphics
has by no means excited any great sensation in this country, yet the
activity of the various collectors resident in Egypt seems to have been
in some measure stimulated by it. Important additions have been made,
or are about to be made, to the Egyptian department of the British
Museum; and in France, the magnificent liberality of the Government,
together with the insatiable curiosity of some affluent individuals,
has held out ample encouragement to the commercial antiquarian.

I thought myself extremely fortunate, in my return from the short
excursion to Rome and Naples, that I made in the autumn of 1821, to
have discovered at Leghorn, among a multitude of Egyptian antiquities,
belonging to Mr. Drovetti, the French consul at Alexandria, which had
long lain warehoused there, a stone containing an enchorial and a Greek
inscription, which was known to have existed formerly at Menouf, but
which had been lost and almost forgotten by European travellers in
Egypt, and I believe by Mr. Drovetti himself; for I am informed that
it is not mentioned in the catalogue of his Museum, which has been
sent to Paris and elsewhere. Although both the inscriptions appeared
to be almost illegible, yet I did not despair of being able, in a
proper light, and with sufficient patience, to decipher the greater
part; and I should have been tempted to remain a few days at Leghorn,
in order to make the experiment, if I could have obtained permission
from the merchants, to whose care the collection was entrusted. The
more, however, that I considered the importance of the only supplement
to the pillar of Rosetta, that then appeared to be in existence, the
more anxiety I felt to make some effort, to secure it from oblivion or
destruction; and with more simplicity, perhaps, than good policy, when
I returned to Pisa in the evening, I wrote a letter to MM. Mompurgo, of
which I shall here insert a translation.

    “_Gentlemen_,

    “Having fully reflected on the singular importance of the Greek
    inscription, which I mentioned to you this morning, and the
    irreparable misfortune that would be incurred, in case that the
    pillar containing it should ever be lost by shipwreck, I have
    determined to make you a proposal, which I hope you will not find
    any impropriety in accepting.

    “I am very desirous of sending an experienced artist from
    Florence, in order to make two impressions in plaster, and two
    tracings on paper, of this stone; upon condition, that they be
    considered as the property of Mr. Drovetti, and remain in your
    possession, until you have received his answer to the inquiry,
    whether he will permit them to be sent to London, either for
    myself or for the British Museum, and what price he would expect
    to receive for them. And in case that he should not think proper
    to fix such a price on them, as we might agree to pay, I am
    willing to consent, that they should remain in his collection,
    upon condition, however, that if this collection should ever
    be reembarked, for conveyance by sea, they should be kept at
    Leghorn, until the original stone should have arrived safely at
    the place of its destination, in order to avoid the chance of
    wholly losing this literary treasure by shipwreck.

    “Whatever may be Mr. Drovetti’s decision, I trust that this
    application, from one who flatters himself that he is the only
    person living, that can fully appreciate the value of the object
    in question, will at least not be disagreeable to him. I will
    beg of you to send me an early answer, directed to Schneiderff’s
    Hotel at Florence.

                                                T. Y. Sec. R. S. Lond.

    _Pisa, 5th Sept. 1821._”

MM. Mompurgo readily agreed to my proposal, and I engaged a
distinguished artist of Florence to undertake the performance of my
plan; but I believe he was accidentally prevented from fulfilling his
engagement. It appears, however, that his labour, as far as I was
concerned, would have been wholly lost; for Mr. Drovetti’s cupidity
seems to have been roused by the discovery of an unknown treasure,
and he has given me to understand, that nothing should induce him to
separate it from the remainder of his extensive and truly valuable
collection, of which he thinks it so well calculated to enhance the
price; and he refuses to allow any kind of copy of it to be taken.

But, as it often happens to those who are too eager to monopolize,
he has now outstood his market, and the pearl of great price, which
six months ago I would have purchased for much more than its value,
is now become scarcely worth my acceptance. I was principally anxious
to obtain from it a collateral confirmation of my interpretation of
the enchorial inscription of Rosetta; but having fortunately acquired
materials, from other sources, which are amply sufficient for this
purpose, I can wait, with great patience, for any little extension,
which my enchorial vocabulary might receive from this source. I had
inferred from a note, that had been sent me several years before,
respecting the stone of Menouf, by Mr. Jomard, that the first words of
the Greek inscription must have been ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙ ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΩΙ ΝΕΩΙ ΔΙΟΝΥΣΩΙ,
but this was all that the gentleman, who described it, had even
attempted to copy.

The first circumstance, that repressed my eagerness to obtain a copy
of Drovetti’s inscriptions, was the arrival of Mr. Casati at Paris,
with a parcel of manuscripts, among which Mr. Champollion discovered
one that considerably resembled, in its preamble, the enchorial text of
the pillar of Rosetta: and the value of this discovery was afterwards
almost miraculously multiplied, by the existence of a Greek translation
of the same manuscript, which has been brought to London by Mr. Grey.

Having had occasion, in the month of September last, to accompany some
friends in a short visit to Paris, I was very agreeably surprised with
several literary and scientific novelties of uncommon interest, and all
of them such as either had originated, or might have originated, from
my own pursuits. I had first the pleasure of hearing, at a meeting of
the Academy of Sciences, an optical paper read by Mr. Fresnel; who,
though he appears to have rediscovered, by his own efforts, the laws
of the interference of light, and though he has applied them, by some
very refined calculations, to cases which I had almost despaired of
being able to explain by them, has, on all occasions, and particularly
in a very luminous statement of the theory, lately inserted in a
translation of Thomson’s Chemistry, acknowledged, with the most
scrupulous justice, and the most liberal candour, the indisputable
priority of my investigations. In the course of the same week, I was
invited to sit next to Mr. Champollion junior, while he was reading,
to the Academy of Belles Lettres, a Memoir on the Analysis of the
Inscription of Rosetta: he, also, had been partly anticipated in his
results by what had been done in this country: though I could not help
fancying, that he had not so completely forgiven the injury, as his
countryman Mr. Fresnel appeared to have done. But Mr. Fresnel is the
friend of Arago, and nothing more requires to be said of his character
and sentiments.

I must, however, at once beg to be understood, that I fully and
sincerely acquit Mr. Champollion of any intentions actually
dishonourable: and if I have hinted, that I have received an impression
of something like a want of liberality in his conduct, I have only
thrown out this intimation, as an apology for being obliged to plead
my own cause, and not as having any right to complain of his silence,
or as having any desire or occasion to profit by his indulgence: at
the same time I am far from wishing to renounce his friendship, or to
forego the pleasure and advantage of his future correspondence.

At the beginning of my Egyptian researches, I had accidentally received
a letter from Mr. Champollion, which accompanied a copy of his work on
the state of Egypt under the Pharaohs, sent as a present to the Royal
Society: and as he requested some particular information respecting
several parts of the enchorial inscription of Rosetta, which were
imperfectly represented in the engraved copies, I readily answered his
inquiries from a reference to the original monument in the British
Museum: and a short time afterwards I sent him a copy of my conjectural
translation of the inscriptions, as it was inserted in the Archaeologia.

Of Mr. Champollion’s _Egypte sous les Pharaons_, the two volumes,
that have hitherto appeared, relate only to the geography of ancient
Egypt, and especially to the determination of the old Egyptian names of
places, as compared with the Greek and the Arabic, by the assistance of
Coptic manuscripts, and other intermediate documents. The work exhibits
considerable research, and some ingenuity: the author had devoted his
life to one very extensive pursuit, and he proposed to illustrate
every part of his subject, by the most minute investigation of every
circumstance, that could be brought to bear upon it. The undertaking,
commenced on so large a scale, appears to have proceeded but slowly;
nor is it probable that the life of any man would be sufficient for its
complete execution.

With regard to the enchorial Inscription, Mr. Champollion appeared
to me to have done at that time but little. A few of the references,
that he made to it, seemed to depend entirely upon Mr. Akerblad’s
investigations, although, as I have formerly had occasion to remark, it
was _tacitly_ that he adopted Mr. Akerblad’s conclusions. I imagine,
however, that he even now retains some erroneous prepossessions, which
he had imbibed from Mr. Akerblad, although, very possibly, without
recollecting their exact origin; in particular respecting the adoption
of some Greek epithets, without translation, into the enchorial
inscription: this question, however, I trust is now set at rest, by
means of some later discoveries.

Mr. Champollion continued to reside at Grenoble, where he had some
employment in the public library, till the beginning of 1821. I had not
a convenient opportunity of sending him any of my later papers; and
it was not till after he had left Grenoble, that he read the Article
EGYPT of the Supplement of the Encyclopaedia, into which their contents
were condensed. He had been devoting himself, in the mean time, to
the uninterrupted study of the enchorial inscription, and he appears
to have discovered, before he came to Paris, the original identity of
these characters with the imperfect imitations of the more distinct
hieroglyphics. Whether he made this discovery before I had printed my
letters in the Museum Criticum, I have no means of ascertaining: I have
never asked him the question, nor is it of much consequence, either to
the world at large or to ourselves. It may not be strictly just, to
say, that a man has no right to claim any discovery as his own, till he
has printed and published it: but the rule is at least a very useful
one. It is always easy to publish such an account of a discovery, as to
establish the right of originality, without affording much facility to
the pursuits of a competitor: although it is generally true, that not
only honesty, but even liberality, is the best policy.

Passing by, however, what I had already done, by far the most important
to me was what I had not done, and there was enough of this to satisfy
me, that Mr. Champollion was at least capable of doing many things,
with respect to which his claim of actual priority might appear more
than doubtful.

He had found, in the first place, among the multitude of Egyptian
papyri, which he had taken the trouble to copy at length, with the
permission of their various possessors, one in particular, of which a
series of the chapters were pretty obviously numbered in the enchorial
character, the series extending, with a few interruptions, from 1
to 20. He had already applied this discovery to the illustration of
some parts of the pillar of Rosetta: and I have since derived at least
equal advantage from it, in the examination of the enchorial papyrus of
Casati.

He had also discovered a fragment of a pillar formerly in the
possession of the Duc de Choiseul, which exhibited the character for
a month, followed by several various groups, together with different
numbers, evidently indicative of days; so that to the names of the
three months, which I had discovered, he was enabled to add at least
four more, though without completely ascertaining to which of the
months these new symbols belonged.

Mr. Champollion had ascertained, in the third place, the analogy of one
of the manuscripts, purchased of Casati, to the enchorial inscription
of Rosetta, and he had obtained from it, without difficulty, the mode
of writing the name Cleopatra in that character. He did not, however,
then mention to me the important consequences which he had derived from
this discovery; these, it seems, were the subject of a short paper read
to the Academy the succeeding Friday; and it will be proper to extract
a more particular account of them, from his Letter to Mr. Dacier, since
printed; in which I did certainly expect to find the chronology of my
own researches a little mere distinctly stated.

“The hieroglyphical text of the inscription of Rosetta,” he observes,
(p. 6), “exhibited, on account of its fractures, _only the name
of Ptolemy_. The obelisc found in the Isle of Philae, and lately
removed to London, contains also the hieroglyphical name of _one
of the Ptolemies_, expressed by the same characters that occur in
the inscription of Rosetta, surrounded by a ring or border, and it
is followed by a second border, which must necessarily contain the
proper name of a woman, and of a queen of the family of the Lagidae,
since this group is terminated by the hieroglyphics expressive of the
_feminine_ gender; characters which are found at the end of the names
of all the Egyptian goddesses without exception. The obelisc was fixed,
it is said, to a basis bearing a Greek inscription, which is a petition
of the priests of Isis at Philae, addressed to King Ptolemy, to
Cleopatra his sister, and to Cleopatra his wife. Now, if this obelisc,
and the hieroglyphical inscription engraved on it, were the result of
this petition, which in fact adverts to the consecration of a monument
of the kind, the border, with the feminine proper name, can only be
that of one of the Cleopatras. This name, and that of Ptolemy, which
in the Greek have several letters in common, were capable of being
employed for a comparison of the hieroglyphical characters composing
them; and if the similar characters in these names expressed in both
the same sounds, it followed that their nature must be entirely
phonetic.”

This course of investigation appears, indeed, to be so simple and so
natural, that the reader must naturally be inclined to forget that any
preliminary steps were required: and to take it for granted, either
that it had long been known and admitted, that the rings on the pillar
of Rosetta contained the name of Ptolemy, and that the semicircle and
the oval constituted the female termination, or that Mr. Champollion
himself had been the author of these discoveries.

It had, however, been one of the greatest difficulties attending the
translation of the hieroglyphics of Rosetta, to explain how the groups
within the rings, which varied considerably in different parts of
the pillar, and which occurred in several places where there was no
corresponding name in the Greek, while they were not to be found in
others where they ought to have appeared, could possibly represent the
name of Ptolemy; and it was not without considerable labour that I had
been able to overcome this difficulty. The interpretation of the female
termination had never, I believe, been suspected by any but myself: nor
had the name of a single god or goddess, out of more than five hundred
that I have collected, been clearly pointed out by any person.

But, however Mr. Champollion may have arrived at his conclusions,
I admit them, with the greatest pleasure and gratitude, not by
any means as superseding my system, but as fully confirming and
extending it. And here I am compelled to advert to a note of Mr.
Champollion’s, which I fear will be thought to go a little beyond
a _tacit adoption_ of my opinions, and to approach very near to an
unintentional misrepresentation. “It must, without doubt, (p. 15,)
have been by the form of this symbol, which has some resemblance to
the figure of a basket, that Dr. Young was led to recognise the name
of Berenice in the border that actually contains it. But he was of
opinion that the hieroglyphics constituting proper names were employed
as expressing whole syllables, that they were therefore a sort of
_rebuses_, and that the first character of the name of Berenice, for
example, represented the syllable BIR, which means a _basket_ in
the Egyptian language. This mistaken supposition has vitiated, in
great measure, the phonetic analysis which he has attempted of the
names of _Ptolemy_ and _Berenice_, in which, notwithstanding, he has
recognised the phonetic values of four of the characters: these are
the P, one of the forms of the T, one of the forms of the M, and the
I; but the whole of his syllabic alphabet, established from these two
names only, was completely inapplicable to the great number of proper
names phonetically expressed on the various monuments of Egypt ...
Encyclopaedia Britannica, Supplement, IV. Pt. i. Edinb. Dec. 1819.”

Now, if Mr. Champollion had attended to my expressions, he must have
perceived that it was _not_ by any _resemblance_ of an imaginary nature
that I was “led to recognise the name of Berenice;” but by external
evidence only. “The appellation SOTERES,” I have observed, Art. 57,
“as a dual, is well marked in the inscription of Rosetta, and the
character, thus determined, explains a long name in the temple at
Edfou ... 58. The wife of Ptolemy Soter, and mother of Philadelphus,
was BERENICE, whose name is found on a ceiling at KARNAK, in the
phrase, “Ptolemy and ... Berenice, the _saviour gods_.” In this name we
appear to have another specimen of syllabic _and alphabetical_ writing
combined, in a manner not extremely unlike the ludicrous mixtures of
words and things with which children are sometimes amused; for however
Warburton’s indignation might be excited by such a comparison, it
is perfectly true that, occasionally, “the sublime differs from the
ridiculous by a single step only.” ... I have then proceeded to state,
as conjectural _inferences_, the syllabic analogies: but instead of
_four_ letters which Mr. Champollion is pleased to allow me, I have
marked, in a subsequent chapter of this Essay, _nine_, which I have
actually specified in different parts of my paper in the Supplement:
and to these he has certainly added _three_ new ones; or _four_, if he
chooses to reckon the E as a fourth. I allow that I suspected the B,
the L, and the S, to be sometimes used syllabically: but the analogy
of these characters with the enchorial alphabet was so well marked,
that my attempt to refine upon it could not easily have embarrassed
any one in making the application. Mr. Champollion has never been led,
in any one instance, from the Egyptian name of an object, to infer
the phonetic interpretation, that is, the alphabetical power of its
symbol: but the letters having once been ascertained, he has ransacked
his memory or his dictionary for some name that he thought capable
of being applied to the symbol: and not always, as it appears to me,
in the most natural manner: I should prefer, for instance, the word
HRERI, a flower, as making the R, to the name of pomegranate, which,
it seems, was sometimes called ROMAN or ERMAN. I must also observe
that my intention, in placing the Coptic names in my vocabulary of
hieroglyphics, was to assist in tracing any such analogies that
might suggest themselves: and in the instance of AM or EM, N. 123,
the reading approaches very near to one of the letters, added by Mr.
Champollion to my alphabet.

With respect to the diversity of characters representing the same
letter, it will be observed that I have marked _three_ forms of the
M, _three_ of the N, with a fourth that was suggested to me by Mr.
Bankes, _two_ of the P or PH, and _two_ of the S. Of these last, I
cannot omit to observe, that Mr. Champollion has devoted at least a
page of his letter (p. 13, 14) to the demonstration of the identity
of _these same_ forms: and that it would not have been unnatural to
refer, in a single line of that page, to the assertion of the same
identity, which I had made in the article EGYPT, No. 102. “The bent
line is often exchanged in the manuscripts for the divided staff, and
both are represented in the running hand by a figure like a 9 or a 4.”
The remainder of the forms, assigned to the letters, are all due to Mr.
Champollion’s ingenious and successful investigations.

It so happens, that in the lithographical sketch of the obelisc of
Philae, which had been put into my hands by its adventurous and
liberal possessor, the artist has expressed the first letter of the
name of Cleopatra by a T instead of a K, and as I had not leisure
at the time to enter into a very minute comparison of the name with
other authorities, I suffered myself to be discouraged with respect to
the application of my alphabet to its analysis, and contented myself
with observing, that if the steps of the formation of an alphabet
were not exactly such as I had pointed out, they must at least have
been very nearly of the same nature. In return, I was complimented
for my candour, while I ought, perhaps, to have been reproved for
my timidity. If, however, I may judge from my late correspondence
with Mr. Champollion, he does not appear to be altogether so averse
to the admission of syllabic characters on some occasions, as his
note upon my “false point of departure” appears to imply: and I think
he will find, in the evidence now first made public, respecting the
enchorial character, some additional grounds for enforcing the opinion.
I shall insert a specimen of one variety of each of the names which
he has succeeded in deciphering: observing only, that his alphabet
could scarcely have agreed so well with the various combinations
of these names, as it appears to do, if it had not been in great
measure correct: and that I also fully agree with Mr. Champollion in
his interpretation of the phrase of the Pamfilian obelisc, which he
translates, WHO HAS RECEIVED THE KINGDOM FROM VESPASIAN HIS FATHER:
the same phrase occurring on the pillar of Rosetta, as well as on
the obelisc of Philae, where it had served to correct my later
opinion respecting the symbol for FATHER. It is here evident that the
expression cannot relate, as Mr. St. Martin imagines it must have done
in the inscriptions of Rosetta, to the immediate installation of a son
by _the hands_ of his father; but that the right of inheritance only
was implied by it. I am not however convinced, by the coherence of
this passage, that the greater part of the obelisc was ever intended
by the sculptor to convey a connected meaning; and at any rate the
explanation confirms the opinion, that I had expressed, respecting the
Roman origin of the workmanship. There are a few of the busts, now
placed in the magical gallery of the Vatican, which appeared to me, on
the contrary, to have been brought from Egypt with their genuine and
ancient inscriptions, and to have had their features newly formed, and
more highly polished, by Roman artists of the age of Adrian, in whose
villa at Tivoli they were principally found.

Mr. Champollion has lately had the goodness to communicate to me, by
letter, some suggestions, which, I conclude, he is on the point of
making public, and I therefore take the liberty of mentioning them,
as far as I think them at all admissible, though, perhaps, a little
prematurely. He is disposed to refer the name, which I consider
as that of the father of Amasis, to SESOSTRIS, as synonymous with
RAMESSES, which he thinks the characters are probably intended to
express phonetically. Now I readily allow, that where this name
is written fully and accurately, as it is repeatedly found in Mr.
Bankes’s great catalogue of Abydos, it may without much violence be
read nearly as Mr. Champollion proposes, “the approved by Phthah,
Ramesses,” or “the counterpart of Phthah, Ramesses;” the first part
of the group undergoing several synonymous variations, while the end
remains unchanged; although, if this reading were established, I
should refer the first name to Amenophis or MEMNON, who was the son
of Ramesses, or of Armesses called Miamun; and to whom the tomb of my
Amasis is said to be attributed in the Greek and Latin inscriptions
which are found in it; who is also said to have built the palace of
Abydos, on which my Amasis evidently appears as the founder; who is
more easily understood than Amasis to be prior to the Psammetichus
mentioned at Ebsambul; and, who is more likely than Amasis to have been
at Berýtus, or Nahr el Kelb, where Mr. Wyse, as I am informed by Sir
William Gell, has distinctly observed this name, accompanied by the
nail-headed characters. All these reasons are more than sufficient to
counterbalance the single assertion of Pliny; and we should be obliged
to change my Psammis, according to his place in Mr. Bankes’s table of
kings, into the Armais of Manetho; though the _vocal_ Memnon of the
numerous inscriptions would be converted by this comparison into Queen
Rathotis, or we should be obliged to leave out three of Manetho’s
list, to bring him up to the Amenophis who is called the Trojan Memnon
by that author. All this is, indeed, a little alluring, and several
suppositions might be introduced to overcome the difficulties: but
unfortunately the fundamental supposition appears to be liable to
an insurmountable objection; that the circle, which Mr. Champollion
considers as equivalent to the RE or RA of Ramesses, is also the first
character of each of the seventeen names immediately preceding it, and
indeed of every other in the catalogue, that remains unmutilated at the
beginning.

I am therefore sorry to say that I cannot hitherto congratulate Mr.
Champollion on the success of his attempts to carry his system of
phonetic characters into the very remotest antiquity of Egypt: he
appears, however, to have a better prospect of elucidating some of the
Persian names, having, as he informs me, been able to identify that of
XERXES, both in the hieroglyphics, and in the nail-headed characters,
by means of a vase of alabaster, on which both are found together. This
is, indeed, a wonderful opening for literary enterprise; and I am even
inclined to hope, from Mr. Champollion’s latest communications, that he
will find some means of overcoming the difficulties that I have stated
respecting the Pharaohs, for he assures me, that he has identified the
names of no less than THIRTY of them, and that they accord with the
traditions of Manetho, and, as far as he can judge, with the notes
that I had sent him of an attempt that I had formerly made to assign
temporary names to the kings enumerated at Abydos, in which those of
all the later ones began with the syllable RE. He will easily believe
that I wish for a satisfactory answer to my own objections: and, in
fact, the further that he advances by the exertion of his own talents
and ingenuity, the more easily he will be able to admit, without any
exorbitant sacrifice of his fame, the claim that I have advanced to a
priority with respect to the first elements of all his researches; and
I cannot help thinking that he will ultimately feel it most for his own
substantial honour and reputation, to be more anxious to admit the just
claims of others than they can be to advance them.




CHAPTER V.

ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE MANUSCRIPTS BROUGHT FROM EGYPT BY MR. GREY.


I am impatient to turn, from every thing of a polemical or personal
nature, to a field that has hitherto been exclusively in my own
possession, in consequence of an event, which is the most important,
considered as a single occurrence, that has taken place since the
commencement of my Egyptian researches. It was very soon after my
return from France, that George Francis Grey, Esq. of University
College, Oxford, having been at Naples upon his return from Egypt,
was so good as to bring me a few lines from my old friend Sir William
Gell, himself a very successful traveller, and who has always pursued
with ardour the last vestiges of the interesting remains of antiquity,
both by his personal exertions, and by assisting and directing the
enterprises of others.

Mr. Grey had the kindness, on the 22d of November last, to leave
with me a box, containing several fine specimens of writing and
drawing on papyrus; they were chiefly in hieroglyphics, and of a
mythological nature: but the two which he had before described to me,
as particularly deserving attention, and which were brought, through
his judicious precautions, in excellent preservation, both contained
some Greek characters, written apparently in a pretty legible hand.
He had purchased them of an Arab at Thebes, in January 1820; and that
which was most intelligible had appeared, at first sight, to contain
some words relating to the service of the Christian church. Mr. Grey
was so good as to give me leave to make any use of these manuscripts
that I pleased; and he readily consented to their insertion among the
lithographic copies of the “Hieroglyphics, collected by the Egyptian
Society,” which I had undertaken to superintend from time to time, in
great measure for the private use of an association of my own friends,
not sufficiently numerous to insure any permanent stability to its
continuance.

Mr. Champollion had done me the favour, while I was at Paris, to copy
for me some parts of the very important papyrus, which I have before
mentioned as having given him the name of Cleopatra; and of which the
discovery was certainly a great event in Egyptian literature, since it
was the first time that any intelligible characters, of the enchorial
form, had been discovered among the many manuscripts and inscriptions
that had been examined, and since it furnished Mr. Champollion at the
same time with a name, which materially advanced, if I understood him
rightly, the steps that have led him to his very important extension of
the hieroglyphical alphabet. He had mentioned to me, in conversation,
the names of Apollonius, “Antiochus,” and Antigonus, as occurring
among the witnesses; and I easily recognised the groups which he had
deciphered: although, instead of _Antiochus_, I read _Antimachus_; and
I did not recollect at the time that he had omitted the M.

In the evening of the day that Mr. Grey had brought me his manuscripts,
I proceeded impatiently to examine that which was in Greek only: and I
could scarcely believe that I was awake, and in my sober senses, when
I observed, among the names of the witnesses, ANTIMACHUS ANTIGENIS:
and, a few lines further back, PORTIS APOLLONII; although the last word
could not have been very easily deciphered, without the assistance of
the conjecture, which immediately occurred to me, that this manuscript
might perhaps be a translation of the enchorial manuscript of Casati:
I found that its beginning was, “A copy of an Egyptian writing ...;”
and I proceeded to ascertain, that there were the same number of names,
intervening between the Greek, and the Egyptian signatures, that I had
identified, and that the same number followed the last of them; and
the whole number of witnesses appeared to be sixteen in each. The last
paragraph in the Greek began with the words, “Copy of the Registry;”
for such must be the signification of the word ΠΤΩΜΑΤΟΣ, employed in
this papyrus, though it does not appear to occur any where else in a
similar signification. I could not, therefore, but conclude, that a
most extraordinary chance had brought into my possession a document
which was not very likely, in the first place, ever to have existed,
still less to have been preserved uninjured, for my information,
through a period of near two thousand years: but that this very
extraordinary translation should have been brought safely to Europe,
to England, and to me, at the very moment when it was most of all
desirable to me to possess it, as the illustration of an original which
I was then studying, but without any other reasonable hope of being
able fully to comprehend it; this combination would, in other times,
have been considered as affording ample evidence of my having become an
Egyptian sorcerer.

Mr. Champollion had not thought it worth while to give me a transcript
of the original Greek endorsement: he seemed to consider it as not
fully agreeing with the Egyptian text, or, at any rate, as not
materially assisting in its interpretation: perhaps, also, he thought
it best for me to try my strength upon the original, without any little
assistance that might have been derived from it with respect to two
or three of the names: or, as I am more disposed to believe, he was
fearful of offending some of his countrymen, by making too public
what he had no right to communicate without their leave: for after an
accidental delay of a month, the answer that I received from Paris was
only such as to enable me to state, that my opinion of the identity
of the two endorsements is fully confirmed. I have lost, however, no
time in sending to the Conservators of the King’s cabinet a copy of
my registry; with a request to be favoured with theirs in return, in
order that I might have the same advantage from the comparison, which
I voluntarily afforded the Parisian critics, without any reserve or
delay; and in order that the duplicates may stand side by side in the
lithographical copy, which has only waited for their answer, to have
a vacant space filled up, and to be sent to them entire. In the mean
time, I have only to wish, that the philologists of Paris may do as
ample justice to these papyri, as one of the most distinguished of
their number, Mr. Letronne, has lately done to the inscriptions of the
Oasis, of which I had made a very hasty translation from a single copy
only, not having had the means of comparing it properly with the second.

My application for the copy of the Registry has been received with
the liberality which was to be expected from the directors of a great
institution, and I have to return my best thanks to Mr. Raoul Rochette,
for a correct copy of the whole of this highly important manuscript,
which I am happy to find that it is his intention to publish in a
short time. I am most anxious to avoid anticipating him, in the
gratification of the public curiosity, with regard to this interesting
relic: but as I find that some account of the Registry has already been
made public by Mr. St. Martin, I conceive myself at liberty to make
use, at least, of this part of the manuscript: and I do not imagine
that Mr. Raoul Rochette means to employ himself on the enchorial
conveyance.

The contents of Mr. Grey’s Greek manuscript are of a nature scarcely
less remarkable than its preservation and discovery: it relates to the
sale, not of a house or a field, but of a portion of the Collections
and Offerings made from time to time on account, or for the benefit, of
a certain number of MUMMIES, of persons described at length, in very
bad Greek, with their children and all their households. The price is
not very clearly expressed; but as the portion sold is only a moiety of
a third part of the whole, and as the testimony of sixteen witnesses
was thought necessary on the occasion, it is probable that the revenue,
thus obtained by the priests, was by no means inconsiderable.

The result, derived at once from this comparison, is the identification
of more than thirty proper names as they were written in the running
hand of the country. It might appear, upon a superficial consideration,
that a mere catalogue of proper names would be of little comparative
value in assisting us to recover the lost elements of a language. But,
in fact, they possess a considerable advantage, in the early stages
of such an investigation, from the greater facility and certainty
with which they are identified, and from their independence of any
grammatical inflexions, at least in the present case; by means of which
they lead us immediately to a full understanding of the orthographical
system of the language, where any such system can be traced.

The general inference, to be derived from an examination of the names
now discovered, is somewhat more in favour of an extensive employment
of an alphabetical mode of writing, than any that could have been
deduced from the pillar of Rosetta, which exhibits, indeed, only
foreign names, and affords us therefore little or no information
respecting the mode of writing the original Egyptian names of the
inhabitants. Several of the words, which occur in these documents, and
more especially in those which are hereafter to be mentioned, might be
read pretty correctly, by means of the alphabet originally made out
by Mr. Akerblad from the foreign names of the enchorial inscription;
but there are many more which appear to be rather syllabically than
alphabetically constituted: and the names of the different deities
seem to be very commonly employed in writing them; for instance, those
of Horus, Ammon, and Isis; and perhaps in the same way that they
are often composed, in the mythological manuscripts, found with the
mummies: in which, for want of the occurrence of a ring or border,
or of the corresponding enchorial marks, I had concluded that the
groups could not be intended to represent the ordinary names of the
individuals. But these marks are, in fact, by no means constantly
employed in the enchorial papyri; and they seem only to have been
inserted when either great precision, or some distinguished mark of
respect was required.

Important, however, as are the additions that are likely to be made
to our knowledge by means of this “Antigraph”, it is by no means the
only valuable acquisition for which we are indebted to the enterprise
and the diligence of Mr. Grey: a second papyrus, of considerably
greater magnitude, contains three Egyptian conveyances in the enchorial
character, with separate registries on the margin, in very legible
Greek. These are not only of use for the illustration of other similar
documents, but they afford us also many additional examples of
enchorial proper names, besides a general idea of the subjects of the
respective manuscripts, all of which relate to the sale of lands in the
neighbourhood of Thebes. It will be most convenient to consider them as
parts of a series, of which those are the first to be examined, that
are the most capable of affording an independent testimony; beginning
with the Greek papyrus in the possession of Mr. Anastasy, the Swedish
consul at Alexandria, and proceeding to the Antigraph and its original,
and thence to the three enchorial manuscripts, which are also the
property of Mr. Grey. It is scarcely conceivable, by a person who has
not made the experiment; how much the difficulty of reading a depraved
character is almost universally diminished by the comparison of two
or three copies of the same or of similar passages; the words, which
would be wholly unintelligible in either taken singly, being often very
easily legible when both are at once under the eye; and, still more
commonly, a word which is confused or contracted in one, being written
clearly or at length in another.

It is in this manner, that several of the deficiencies of the
manuscript of Anastasy, as edited by the learned and ingenious
Professor Böckh of Berlin, have been in some measure supplied, in
the late republication at Paris, by the care of Mr. Jomard, from a
comparison with the Greek manuscripts purchased of Mr. Casati, in order
to be added to the unrivalled treasures of literature contained in the
King’s library and cabinet. Several more of the obscurities of this
manuscript, if not the whole, I flatter myself are now removed, by the
further comparison, which I have attempted to make, by means of Mr.
Grey’s indulgence in allowing me the use of his manuscripts; and by
means of the duplicate which I have received from Paris in exchange
for the registry of his Antigraph.

The manuscript of Anastasy, besides its curiosity as a subject of
antiquarian and historical research, becomes of great importance,
in this inquiry, as affording a more complete specimen, than the
Antigraph, of the usual form of a contract in Egypt under the
Ptolemies; and as assisting in the investigation of the sense of
the preamble of the enchorial manuscript, which is omitted in the
Antigraph. I shall therefore insert here a translation of this
document, and shall reprint the original in an appendix, with such
corrections as I have thought it appeared to require; in order to
restore it to the form intended by the writer. The registries, in their
original language, I shall print side by side, and in the order of time
which I attribute to them.


TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK PAPYRUS OF ANASTASY.

_See Appendix_ I.

(1) In the reign of Cleopatra and Ptolemy her son surnamed Alexander,
the Gods Philometores Soteres, in the year XII, otherwise IX; in the
priesthood of the existing priests (2) in Alexandria, [the priest]
of Alexander and of the Gods Soteres, and of the Gods Adelphi, and
of the Gods Evergetae, and of the Gods Philopatores, and of the Gods
Epiphanes, and of the God (3) Philometor, and of the God Eupator, and
of the Gods Evergetae: the Prize bearer of Berenice Evergetis, the
Basket bearer of Arsinoe Philadelphus and the priestess of Arsinoe
(4) Eupator at present in Alexandria: and, in the Thebaic Ptolemais,
in the priesthood of the existing priests and priestesses of Ptolemy
Soter, [and of ...] (5) in Ptolemais; on the 29th of the month Tybi
[v; February]: Apollonius being President of the Exchange of the
Memnonians, and of the lower government of the Pathyritic nome.

(6) There was sold by Pamonthes, aged about 45, of middle size, dark
complexion, and handsome figure, bald, round faced, and straight
nosed; and by Snachomneus, aged about 20, of middle size, sallow
complexion, (7) likewise round faced and straight nosed; and by
Semmuthis Persineï, aged about 22, of middle size, sallow complexion,
round faced, flat nosed, and of quiet demeanour; and by Tathlyt (8)
Persineï, aged about 30, of middle size, sallow complexion, round face,
and straight nose, with their principal Pamonthes, a party in the sale;
the four (9) being of the children of Petepsais of the leather cutters
of the Memnonia; out of the piece of level ground which belongs to
them in the southern part of the Memnonia, (10) eight thousand cubits
of open field, one fourth [of the whole?] bounded on the south by
the Royal Street; on the north and east by the land of Pamonthes and
Boconsiemis, who is his brother, (11) and the common land [or wall] of
the city; on the west by the house of Tages the son of Chalome: a canal
running through, the middle, leading from the river: these are the
neighbours on all sides. It was bought by Nechutes the less, (12) the
son of Asos, aged about 40, of middle size, sallow complexion, cheerful
countenance, long face, and straight nose, with a scar upon the middle
of his forehead; for 601 pieces of brass: the sellers standing as
(13) brokers, and as securities for the validity of the sale. It was
accepted by Nechutes the purchaser.

                                                    APOLLONIUS Pr. Exch?


[REGISTRY.]

In the year XII, otherwise IX; the 20th of Pharmuthi [VIII; May],
[transacted] at the table in Hermopolis, at which Dionysius presides,
over the 20th department; in the account of the partners receiving the
duties on sales, of which Heraclides is the subscribing clerk, the
acceptor in the sale is Nechutes the less, the son of Asos; an open
field of eight thousand cubits, one fourth portion; in the southern
part of the Memnonia: which he bought of Pamonthes and Snachomneus, the
sons of Petepsais, with their sisters: 601 pieces? The end....

                                                   Dionysius subscribes.


The beginning of this preamble may be illustrated by that of the
inscription of ROSETTA, which runs nearly thus:

In the reign of the young king ... Ptolemy Epiphanes the munificent
... the son of Ptolemy and Arsinoe, the gods Philopatores ... in the
year IX; the priest of Alexander and of the gods Soteres, and of the
gods Adelphi, and of the gods Evergetae, and of the gods Philopatores,
and of the god Epiphanes the munificent being Aëtus, the son of Aëtus:
the prize bearer of Berenice Evergetis being Pyrrha the daughter
of Philinus: the basket bearer of Arsinoe Philadelphus being Areia
daughter of Diogenes; and the priestess of Arsinoe Philopator, Irene
the daughter of Ptolemy: on the 4th day of Xanthicus, or the 18th of
Mechir: it was decreed....

In comparing the preamble of the deed of sale with this monument,
we have first to observe the successive addition of the names of
Philometor, Eupator, and the Evergetae, to the titles of the priests
of Alexander and his successors. Eupator, it seems, according to other
authorities, cited by Böckh, was Ptolemy Evergetes II, the successor
of Philometor, called also Cacergetes and Physcon; and the Evergetae,
named after him, can only have been the reigning sovereigns, before
called Philometores Soteres: and Cleopatra, at least, had some right to
the name Evergetis, as having derived it from her husband, so that she
may easily be supposed to have shared it occasionally with her son. The
remaining part of the preamble varies but little, except that Arsinoe,
instead of Philopator, is called Eupator: but this diversity is not
more material than the substitution of Adelphi for Philadelphi, which
frequently occurs. The double date is well known to have been adopted
by Cleopatra and Alexander, and its origin is sufficiently explained
by Eusebius and Porphyry. Professor Böckh makes the year, 104 B. C.;
but from a comparison of different authorities it seems rather more
probable that it was 106 B. C., at least so I have been obliged to
arrange it in a table, formed from a comparison of the chronologies of
Porphyry, Champollion Figeac, and St. Martin, which I have inserted in
an Appendix.


TRANSLATION OF MR. GREY’S GREEK ANTIGRAPH.

(1) _Copy of an Egyptian Writing respecting the Dead Bodies in Thyn.
having been_ (2) _ratif_....

(3) In the XXXVIth year; Athyr [III] 20, after the usual preamble,
this writing witnesses: that the ¿Dresser? (4) among the servants of
the great goddess [Isis?] Onnophris the son of Horus and of Senpoeris,
[aged about] forty, lively, tall, of a sallow complexion, hollow eyed,
(5) and bald, has ceded voluntarily for the price of ... to Horus the
son of Horus and of Senpoeris, (6) one moiety of the third part of
the Collection for the dead (7) lying in Thynabunun, on the Libyan
side of the Theban suburb, (8) in the Memnonia: likewise one moiety of
the third part of the Services or Liturgies (9) and so forth: their
names being | Muthes the son of Spotus, with (10) his children (10)
and all his household; Chapocrates the son of Nechthmonthes, with
his children and all; Arsiesis the son of Nechthmonthes; likewise
Petemestus the son of (11) Nechthmonthes; likewise Arsiesis the son of
Zminis; likewise (12) Osoroeris the son of [Horus]; likewise Spotus
the son of Chapochonsis; likewise (13) Zoglyphus: from which there
belongs to Asos the son of Horus and of Senpoeris (14) “thy” younger
brother, one of [or, the younger brother of] the same ¿Dressers? a
moiety of the (15) aforesaid third part of the services and fruits
and (16) so forth. He has sold it to him in the year XXXVI; 20 Athyr,
in the reign of the everlasting (17) king, for the completion of
the third part. Also a moiety of the fruits (18) ¿and so forth? of
the ¿other? dead bodies in Thy. that is to say, Pateutemis with his
children and (19) all; and a moiety of the fruits belonging to me from
the property of (20) Petechonsis the milk bearer, and from a place on
the Asiatic side, called (21) Phrecages, with the dead bodies in it;
of which a moiety belongs to the (22) same Asos: all these things I
have sold to him. They are thine, (23) and I have received their price
from thee, and I make no demand upon thee (24) for them from this
day: and if any person disturb thee (25) in the possession of them, I
will withstand the attempt, and if I do not [otherwise] repel it (26)
I will use compulsory means. Written by Horus the son of Phabis, the
writer of the (27) [priests] of Amonrasonther, and the other gods of
the temple. (28) Witnesses: Erieus the son of Phanres. Peteartres the
son of Pateutemis. (29) Petearpocrates the son of [Horus]. Snachomneus
the son of Peteuris. Snachomes (30) the son of Psenchonsis. Totoes the
son of Phibis. Portis the son of APOLLONIUS. Zminis (31) the son of
Petemestus. Peteutemis the son of Arsiesis. Amonorytius (32) the son
of Pacemis. Horus the son of Chimnaraus. Armenis the son of Zthenaetis
(33). Maësis the son of Mirsis. ANTIMACHUS the son of ANTIGENES.
Petophois the son of Phibis. (34) Panas the son of Petosiris. Witnesses
16.

Copy of the Registry. In the year XXXVI; the ninth of Choeak [IV].
Transacted at the table in Diospolis, at which Lysimachus is the
President of the 20th department; in the account of Asclepiades
and Zminis, farmers of the tax, in which the subscribing clerk is
Ptolemaeus: the purchaser Horus the son of Horus the ¿Dresser? a part
of the sum, collected by them, on account of the dead bodies lying in
Thynabunun, in the Memnonian tombs of the Libyan suburb of Thebes, for
the services which are performed. Bought of Onnophris the son of Horus,
Pieces of brass 400 . Z . . The end.

                                                   Lysimach. subscribes.


TRANSLATION OF THE ENCHORIAL PAPYRUS OF PARIS, CONTAINING THE ORIGINAL
DEED RELATING TO THE MUMMIES.

(1) This writing, dated in the year XXXVI; Athyr 20, in the reign
of our Sovereigns Ptolemy and Cleopatra his sister, the children of
Ptolemy and Cleopatra, the divine, (2) the Gods Illustrious: and the
Priest of Alexander, and of the Saviour Gods, of the Brother Gods, of
the [Beneficent Gods], of the Father loving Gods, of the Illustrious
Gods, of the Paternal God, and (3) of the Mother loving Gods being [as
by law appointed]: and the Prize bearer of Berenice the Beneficent,
and the Basket bearer of Arsinoe the Brother loving, and the Priestess
of (4) Arsinoe the Father loving, being as appointed in the metropolis
[of Alexandria]; and in [Ptolemaïs] the Royal City ¿of the Thebaid? the
Guardian Priest ¿for the year? of Ptolemy Soter, and the Priest of King
Ptolemy the Father loving, (5) and the Priest of Ptolemy the Brother
loving, and the Priest of Ptolemy the Beneficent, and the Priest of
Ptolemy the Mother loving; and the Priestess of Queen Cleopatra,
and the Priestess (6) of the Princess Cleopatra, and the Priestess
of Cleopatra the [Queen] Mother, deceased, the Illustrious; and the
Basket bearer of Arsinoe the Brother loving, [being as appointed]:
declares: The ¿Dresser? in the temple (7) of the Goddess, Onnophris
the son of Horus, and of Senpoeris ¿daughter of Spotus? [“aged about
forty, lively”], tall, [“of a sallow complexion, hollow eyed, and
bald”]: in the temple of the goddess (8) to [Horus] ¿his brother? the
son of Horus and of Senpoeris, has sold, for a price in money, half
of one third of the Collections for the dead, “Priests of Osiris?”
lying (9) in Thynabunun ... in the Libyan suburb of Thebes, in the
Memnonia ... likewise half of one third of the Liturgies: their names
being, Muthes the son of Spotus, with his children and his household;
Chapocrates (10) the son of Nechthmonthes, with his children and his
household; Arsiesis the son of Nechthmonthes, with his children and
his household; Petemestus the son of Nechthmonthes, Arsiesis the son
of Zminis, with his children and his household; Osoroeris (11) the
son of Horus, with his children and his household; Spotus the son of
Chapochonsis ¿surnamed? Zoglyphus [the Sculptor,] with his children
and his household: while there belonged also to Asos the son of Horus
and of Senpoeris ¿daughter of Spotus? (12) in the same manner one half
of a third of the collections for the dead, and of the fruits and
so forth ...: he sold it on the 20th of Athyr, in the reign of the
king everliving, to [complete] the third part: likewise the half ¿of
one third? of the collections relating to (13) Peteutemis, with his
household and ...: likewise the half ¿of one third? of the collections
and fruits for Petechonsis the bearer of milk, and of the ... place
on the Asian side called Phrecages (14), and ... and the dead bodies
in it: there having belonged to Asos the son of Horus one half of the
same: he has sold to him in the month of ... the half of one third of
the collections (15) for the Priests ¿of Osiris? lying in Thynabunun,
with their children and their households: likewise the half of one
third of the collections for Peteutemis, and also for (16) Petechonsis
the bearer of milk, in the place Phrecages on the Asian side: I have
received for them their price in silver: ... and gold: ... and I make
no further demand on thee for them from the present day, ... (17) ...
before the authorities ... [and if any one shall disturb thee in the
possession of them, I will resist him, and if I do not succeed, I will
indemnify thee?] ... (18) Executed and confirmed: Written by Horus the
son of Phabis, clerk to the chief priests of Amonrasonther and of the
¿contemplar? Gods, of the Beneficent Gods, of the Father loving Gods,
of the Paternal God, and of the (19) Mother loving Gods. Amen. (20)
Names of the witnesses present....

[_Column at the edge of the paper._] (1) Names of the authorities.
(2) Erieus the son of Phanres ¿Erieus? (3) Peteartres the son of
Peteutemis. (4) Petearpocrates the son of Horus. (5) Snachomneus the
son of Peteuris. (6) Snachomes the son of Psenchonsis. (7) Totoes the
son of Phibis. (8) Portis the son of APOLLONIUS. (9) Zminis the son of
Petemestus. (10) Peteutemis the son of Arsiesis. (11) Amonorytius the
son of Pacemis. (12) Horus the son of Chimnaraus. (13) Armenia [rather
Arbais,] the son of Zthenaetis. (14) Maesis the son of Mirsis. (15)
ANTIMACHUS the son of ANTIGENES. (16) Petophois the son of Phibis. (17)
Panas the son of Petosiris. (18) Were present [as witnesses.]

The additions to the Sovereigns, named in the preamble of the stone
of Rosetta, are here the Paternal God and the Mother loving Gods, or
Eupator and the Philometores, and we want only the Evergetae of the
papyrus of Anastasy. We can, therefore, only refer the date to one of
the two preceding reigns, of Philometor or Evergetes Eupator, which
it is very difficult to distinguish from each other with precision.
We have, however, no evidence that Philometor’s dates extended beyond
35, and we must naturally consider this 36 as belonging to Eupator,
corresponding to 135 B. C. which was 11 years after the death of
Philometor. If we judged from this manuscript alone, we should infer
that Eupator was canonized, by some accident, during his temporary
reign, before his brother, and that the order of the names remained
undisturbed through the different changes of their governments. The
epithet “Illustrious” in this preamble is not easily recognised; but
it is distinguished by the termination from “Beneficent,” for which
I had in the first instance mistaken it: an epithet so placed is
almost always referred to the person last mentioned. The enchorial
name of the divinity here called Amonrasonther considerably resembles
that of the “Cerexochus” of the Article Egypt. The epithet, which I
have conjecturally translated “Dresser”, was at first supposed to
mean Brazier, and was read Chalchytes: but the Parisian Registry has
distinctly Cholchytes: which may possibly be a derivative of DCHOLH or
JOLH, to dress, to put on, and may have been applied to some of the
Hierostolists, or Tire men, of the temple.


TRANSLATION OF MR. GREY’S ENCHORIAL PAPYRUS. REGISTRY IN GREEK (A).

In the year XXVIII; the 28 Mesore [XII]. Transacted at the table in
Hermopolis, at which Dio.[nysius] is President of the 20th department,
in the Account of Asclepiades [contractor for the tax] on sales; of
which Ptolemaeus is the subscribing clerk: the purchaser being Teephbis
the son of Amenothes ¿for 300 pieces of brass? ¿of 7000? cubits, at
the southern end of the whole open field, which is at the south of
Diospolis the Great; of which the boundaries are given in the annexed
agreement: which he bought of Alecis and Lubais and Tbaeais the sons of
Erieus, and of Senerieus the daughter of Petenephotes, and Erieus the
son of Amenothes, and Senosorphibis the daughter of Amenothes, and of
Spois also ¿the son? of Erieus the son of Amenothes. In the XXVIIIth
year, Pachon [IX] 20. ¿Pieces? ... End of the record.

                                               Dionysius has subscribed.


ENCHORIAL AGREEMENT (A).

Year XXVIII; Month.... In the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra his
sister, the children of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, the Illustrious Gods:
and the Priest of Alexander, of the Saviour Gods, of the ¿Maternal?
[Brother] Gods, of the Beneficent Gods, of the Father loving Gods,
of the Illustrious Gods, of the Mother loving Gods: and the Prize
bearer of Berenice the Beneficent, and the Basket bearer of Arsinoe
the Brother loving, and the Priest of Arsinoe the Father loving, being
as appointed in the metropolis [of Alexandria; and in Ptolemais], the
Royal City ¿of the Thebaid? the Guardian Priest ¿for the year? of
Ptolemy Soter, and the Priest of Ptolemy the Mother loving, and the
Priest of Ptolemy the Brother loving, and the Priest of Ptolemy the
Beneficent, and the Priest of Ptolemy the Father loving, and the Priest
of Ptolemy the Illustrious and Munificent, and the Priest of Queen
Cleopatra, and the Priest of Cleopatra the Mother, the late Goddess
Illustrious; and the Basket bearer of Arsinoe the Brother loving, being
[all as by law appointed]: The brothers, Alecis the son of Erieus,
Lubais the son of Erieus, and Tbaeais the son of Erieus, their mother
being Senerieus the daughter of Petenephotes son of Lubais; Erieus the
son of Amenothes, and Senosorphibis daughter of Amenothes, whose mother
was Senamunis, and Spois the son of Erieus, the son of Amenothes, his
mother being ¿Senchonsis? coming into the temple of ¿Thebes? agreed
with Teephbis son of Amenothes, to sell for a sum of money ... α ... α
... α ... α ... of the city ... in the year and month and day [above
mentioned] of the King everliving ... α ... ¿Alecis Phaïne? ... α ...
(16) α ... Asos the son of Horus and of Senpoeris ... the Royal Street
(HIR = ῥύμη) ... ¿vineyard? ... α ... α ... (19) ... (20) ... place
... (21) given up ... month ... time ... (22) ... (23) ... (24) ...
Executed and confirmed. Written by Erieus the son of Phanres, clerk to
the chief Priests of Amonrasonther and the contemplar Gods ... Amen.


It is sufficiently obvious that this deed must belong to the same
period as the sale of the collections for the mummies, and that it must
consequently have been at least eight years earlier. The “God Eupator”
is here omitted, perhaps accidentally, or perhaps because he had not
been canonized at the time. The date 28 is equally applicable to the
reigns of Philometor and of Eupator: and several names occur in this
deed which are also found in the preceding: for example, Erieus the
son of Phanres, who is the first witness in that deed, is the clerk
that drew up the present. Asos the son of Horus and Senpoeris, who is
one of the “Dressers” of the temple, appears here as the possessor,
probably of a neighbouring piece of land, and in the next deed as a
purchaser. The question remains whether we should assign to this deed a
date 19 years earlier than the former, or only 8, that is, whether 154
B. C. or 143; and there appears to be no evidence at present existing
that is sufficient to decide it: except that the omission of the name
of Eupator was less likely to happen in his own reign than in his
predecessor’s. The priesthoods of Ptolemais are somewhat negligently
arranged at the end of this preamble, but they present no essential
discordances. The Registry affords us a remarkable instance of a double
contraction for the word ΠΟΛΙΣ or city, it is first represented by a
semicircle with a central point, 𝄐, and then by a figure of 2, in the
names of Hermopolis, and Diospolis, or Thebes. The contraction for
Hermopolis, in the papyrus of Anastasy, would not easily have been
explained without the aid of these manuscripts. The Dionysius of the
reign of Ptolemy Alexander, being near fifty years later, may perhaps
have been a son of this Dionysius, and may have succeeded him in his
office.


TRANSLATION OF THE SECOND DEED (B).

REGISTRY, IN GREEK.

In the year XXIX; Phamenoth [VII] 9. Transacted at the table in
Hermopolis, at which Dionysius is president of the 20th department;
in the account of Asclepiades and Crates [contractors for the duties]
on sales, of which Ptolemaeus is the subscribing clerk: Asus, the son
of Horus, purchaser of an open field of ¿2000? [square cubits], lying
in the southern part of Diospolis the Great; of which the boundaries
are given in the present agreement: which he bought of Alecis the son
of Erieus, and Lubais and Tbaeais the sons of Erieus, and Senerieus
the daughter of Petenephotes, and Erieus the son of Amenothes, and
Senosorphibis the daughter of Amenothes, and Spois [or Spoetus] also
the son of Erieus the son of Amenothes ... ¿Pieces ... 1004? The end....

                                             Diony[sius] has subscribed.


ENCHORIAL AGREEMENT (B).

Year XXIX. In the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, the children of
Ptolemy and Cleopatra the Gods Illustrious and Munificent: living
for ever. The brothers, Alecis the son of Erieus, Lubais the son of
Erieus, and Tbaeais the son of Erieus, their mother being Senerieus the
daughter of Petenephotes, son of Lubais; Erieus the son of Amenothes,
and Senosorphibis daughter of Amenothes, her mother being Senamunis,
and ¿Spois? the son of Erieus, the son of Amenothes, his mother being
¿Senchonsis? coming into the temple of ¿Thebes? agreed with Asus the
son of Horus to sell for a sum of money ... α ... α ... α ... α ...
of the city ... in the year and month and day [above mentioned] of
the king everliving ... α ... ¿Phaine? ... α ... the Royal Street;
¿the sister of Alecis, Phaine? ... α ... α ... place ... has released
... months ... time.... Executed and confirmed. Written by Erieus the
son of Phanres, clerk to the chief priests of Amonrasonther and the
contemplar Gods.... Amen.

The preamble is here abridged, which was perhaps the safer, as the deed
stands by the side of the preceding on the same papyrus. The phrase “α”
is the same in both deeds, and probably means “a piece of open field
bounded by,” or something of a similar nature: for forms of this kind
appear to be repeated without limit in the old Egyptian language.


TRANSLATION OF THE THIRD DEED (C).

REGISTRY IN GREEK.

In the year XXXV; Pharmuthi [VIII] 20. Transacted at the table in
Diospolis the Great, at which Lysim[achus] [is president]; in the
account of Sarapion and his partners [contractors for the duties] on
sales, in which the subscribing clerks are Hermophilus and Sarapion:
the purchaser being Pechytes the son of Arsiesis; of the fourth part of
an open field of ¿3000 square cubits? in the southern part of Diospolis
the Great; on the western side of the canal of Her[cules], leading to
the river; of which the boundaries are given in the present agreement;
which he bought of Ammonius the son of Pyrrhius, and Psenamunis the son
of Pyrrhius. ¿Pieces 3000? The end. Of which ...

                                               Lysimach. has subscribed.


ENCHORIAL AGREEMENT (C).

¿XXXV? Month.... In the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra his sister,
the children of Ptolemy and Cleopatra the Gods Illustrious; and the
Priest of Alexander and of the Saviour Gods, of the Brother Gods, of
the Beneficent Gods, of the Father loving Gods, of the Illustrious
Gods, of the ¿hostile? Paternal God, and of the Mother loving Gods:
and the Prize bearer of Berenice the Beneficent, and the [Gold and
Silver] Basket bearer of Arsinoe the Brother loving, and the Priest of
Arsinoe the Father loving, being [as appointed in the metropolis]: the
bargain was made by the men of the family of Alecis: Ammonius the son
of Pyrrhius, and Psenamunis the son of Pyrrhius, coming into the temple
... agreed with Pechytes the son of Arsiesis and ¿Oenone? to sell for
a sum of money ...       ... (14) Royal Street ... month ... time
...      . Executed and confirmed. Written by ... clerk to the chief
priests of Amonrasonther and the contemplar Gods, the Gods ¿Beneficent?
the Father loving Gods and the Gods Illustrious, the ¿hostile? Paternal
God, and the Mother loving Gods. Amen.

The name of Eupator appears here to contain, in two different places,
the characters which in the Rosetta inscription denote hostile or
turbulent; and this circumstance would incline us to prefer the date of
the last year of the reign of Philometor: but it is possible that the
same epithets may have been intended to mean warlike, in a favourable
sense.

There remains a fourth enchorial manuscript, of some importance,
at present in the British Museum, but still belonging to Mr. Salt,
without whose permission it would be improper to make public its whole
contents, even if they were perfectly intelligible. But, in fact, the
preamble of this manuscript has been lost, and the registry is nearly
illegible, except that the date is clearly XLVII, and the signature of
the President at the table of Hermopolis appears to be Dionysius. The
names of Horus and Erieus and Arsiesis are also distinguishable in the
body of the deed, and the word “two thousand” is written at length, at
the end of the registry. Now the year 47 can only belong to the reign
of Philadelphus, or to that of Eupator, and the style of the registry
too much resembles that of all the other deeds, including Anastasy’s,
to allow us to assign it to the former reign: it must, therefore,
belong, not to 277, but to 124 B. C. This date will not indeed give
us any certain evidence respecting that of Mr. Grey’s deeds; though
it might rather incline us to take the later than the earlier, of two
periods, equally probable in other respects. On the whole, we can only
leave the alternative open for future decision between the dates, as
thus contrasted:

    Mr. Grey’s enchorial
      deed                       (A), XXVIII  154 or 143 B. C.
                                 (B), XXIX    153    142
                                 (C), XXXV    147    136
    Mr. Grey’s Greek Antigraph,
      or rather
      the enchorial deed
      of Paris                        XXXVI   146    135
    Mr. Salt’s enchorial
      deed                            XLVII          124
    Anastasy’s Greek conveyance       XII-IX         106.

The registry of Mr. Grey’s first deed is therefore at least 37, and,
on the whole, most probably 48 years more ancient, than any other
writing with a pen and ink that exists; and it still remains in the
most perfect preservation. Mr. Jomard has compared the manuscript of
Anastasy, for its importance, to the pillar of Rosetta: but it can in
no respect whatever be put in competition with the Antigraph of Mr.
Grey.

[Illustration: SPECIMEN OF MR. GREY’S ENCHORIAL PAPYRUS.]




CHAPTER VI.

EXTRACTS FROM DIODORUS AND HERODOTUS; RELATING TO MUMMIES.


It is rather as being illustrated by the discovery of Mr. Grey’s Greek
papyrus, than as contributing much to its illustration, that I shall
here introduce such passages of Diodorus Siculus and of Herodotus, as
tend to explain the customs of the Egyptians respecting the honours
shown to the dead bodies of their relations.

“The inhabitants of this country,” says Diodorus, Book I. § 51, Wess.,
in the language of Booth, p. 26, “little value the short time of this
present life; but put a high esteem upon the name and reputation
of a virtuous life after death; and they call the houses of the
living, _Inns_, because they stay in them but a little while; but the
sepulchres of the dead they call _Everlasting habitations_, because
they abide in the graves to infinite generations. Therefore they are
not very curious in the building of their houses; but in beautifying
their sepulchres they leave nothing undone that [the excess of
magnificence can suggest].”

§ 72. W. “What the Egyptians performed, after the deaths of every one
of their kings, clearly evidences the great love they bore to them. For
honour done to him that cannot possibly know it, in a grateful return
of a former benefit, carries along with it a testimony of sincerity,
without the least colour of dissimulation.” Booth, p. 37.

§ 73. W. The whole of Egypt being divided into a number of parts,
called Nomes by the Greeks, each of these is governed by a Nomarcha, to
whom the care of all its public concerns is entrusted. The land being
every where divided into three portions, the first is occupied by the
priesthood, who are held in the greatest respect by the inhabitants,
as being devoted to the worship of the gods, and as possessing the
greatest power of understanding, from the superiority of their
education: and from the revenues of these lands they perform all
sacrifices throughout Egypt, and support the servants of the temples
as well as their own families: for they hold that the administration
of the honours of the gods ought not to be fluctuating, but to be
conducted always by the same persons, and in the same manner: and that
those, who are above all their fellow citizens in wisdom and knowledge,
ought not to be below any of them in the comforts and conveniences of
life: and the priests are in the habit of associating very generally
with the kings, partly as counsellors, partly as assistants, and partly
as expounders and instructors: foretelling future events by means
of astronomy and of augury, and reading the most useful lessons from
the past, out of the records of their sacred volumes: for it is not
the custom, as in Greece, for one man, or one woman, to be appointed
to each priesthood, but there are many who are employed together in
the sacrifices and in other ceremonies; and these transmit the same
professional occupation to their descendants. The whole of the families
of the priests are exempt from taxes, and they come immediately after
the king in rank and authority. The second portion of the land is
retained in the power of the king for his own revenue, out of which
he has to provide for all military expenses, and for the support of
his own splendour and dignity, as well as for the liberal remuneration
of those who have distinguished themselves by their virtues and their
valour: so that being amply supplied from this territory, they are
not obliged to burden their subjects with oppressive taxes. The last
of the three portions is assigned to the military population, who are
subject to the duties attending on a state of warfare: in order that
those, who are exposed to danger in battle, may be the more ready to
undergo the hazards of the field, from the interest that they feel in
the country as occupiers of the soil: for it would be thought absurd to
commit the common safety to the care of those, who possessed nothing in
the country that was worthy of preservation: and this system had the
still greater advantage of acting as an encouragement to population,
in order that the country might not be in want of foreign auxiliaries:
and their descendants, in like manner, receiving the constitution
thus transmitted to them from their forefathers, are excited by
the emulation of the valiant deeds of their ancestors, and become
invincible by the courage and experience which they acquire.

§ 74. There are also three other classes that enter into the political
system of Egypt; those of the Shepherds, the Husbandmen, and the
Artisans. The husbandmen, occupying, at a low rent, the arable land
belonging to the king, and the priests, and the military, employ their
whole time in cultivating it: and being educated from their infancy
in agricultural pursuits, they are superior, from their experience,
to the husbandmen of other countries: for they are perfectly well
acquainted, partly from the knowledge derived from their ancestors, and
partly from their own observation, with the nature of the soil, and
its irrigation, and with the times and seasons for sowing and reaping,
and for collecting all kinds of fruits. The same advantages are
possessed by the shepherds, who receive the charge of the flocks from
their forefathers as by inheritance, and pass their whole lives in the
care of their cattle: and having derived much information from their
ancestors, respecting the best modes of treatment and fattening of
the different animals, they also add not a little from their own zeal
and industry in their occupations: and, what is most remarkable, from
their excessive refinement in these pursuits, the poulterers and geese
feeders, besides the natural modes of breeding birds, which are common
in other countries, have procured an infinite multitude of poultry by
their own ingenuity: for they do not hatch their eggs by the incubation
of the hens, but, by means of an artificial operation, derived from
their own talents and invention, they are enabled to rival, if not to
exceed, the activity of nature: and the arts in general are carried to
a very elaborate degree of perfection by the Egyptians; for in this
country no artist is allowed to meddle either with political affairs,
or with any other employment, besides that which he has received
from his parents, and to which he is confined by the law: so that
neither the jealousy of a master, nor any public business, can ever
divert him from the exclusive study of his profession: for in other
countries we often observe that an artist is diverted by a variety of
pursuits, and is too avaricious to confine himself to his own work;
some employing themselves in husbandry, some in commerce, and some in
two or three different arts at once; and in democratical countries,
many are constantly frequenting popular assemblies, and doing mischief
to the government, while they are receiving bribes from the leaders
of parties: but among the Egyptians, if any artisan should meddle with
politics, or should employ himself in any other concerns besides that
in which he has been educated, a severe punishment would be inflicted
on him. Such then were the institutions of the ancient Egyptians with
regard to their public and private occupations.

§ 75. For the regulation of judicial proceedings, they also took
no common pains: since they held that the sentences, pronounced by
the legal tribunals, had the greatest possible influence, whether
beneficial or injurious, on the concerns of common life: and they saw
that the punishment of offenders, and the relief of oppressed persons,
were the most effectual remedies for the evils of a state: and that if
the terror, that arises from the condemnation of the guilty, were to be
superseded by money or by favour, there would be nothing but confusion
in all ranks of society: and they attained the end they desired, by
the selection of the best men out of the most considerable cities as
Common Judges: taking ten from Heliopolis, and the same number from
Thebes and from Memphis: and the Bench, thus assembled, did not appear
to be inferior either to the Areopagites at Athens, or to the Elders
among the Lacedaemonians. When these thirty had met, they proceeded
to elect the most distinguished of their number as their President,
with the title of Arch judge: and his place among themselves was
supplied by another person, sent by the same city. The judges all
received allowances from the king, sufficient for their support, and
the arch judge received a manifold portion. He was distinguished by
wearing round his neck a golden chain, suspending a figure adorned with
precious stones, which was called Alethía, or Truth: and the trial
began when the arch judge put on this image of Truth. Now the whole
of the laws of the country being written in eight books, and these
books being placed near the judges, it was the custom for the accuser
to write down in detail the offense to be proved, and the manner in
which the action was committed, and the estimated amount of the damage
or the injury: the accused party then, taking the depositions of his
opponents, wrote his answer to each of them, either denying the facts,
or maintaining that they were not illegal; or, if they were illegal,
that the damages were appreciated too highly: the accuser replied again
in writing, and the accused party rejoined: and both having given in
their writings to the judges, the thirty proceeded to declare their
opinions among themselves; and lastly, the arch judge touched one of
the contending parties, who was to be successful, with the figure of
Truth which he wore.... And this was done, in order to supersede the
influence of artificial eloquence, and the fascination of personal
appearance, which too often pervert the distribution of justice....

§ 80. The Priests of the Egyptians are allowed to marry but one wife:
other persons marry as many as they please: but they are obliged to
rear all their children, since a numerous population is esteemed
highly conducive to the happiness of every country and state: and none
of their children are accounted illegitimate, even if the mother has
been purchased as a slave: for the children are supposed to belong
more particularly to the father, the mother being considered as little
more than a nurse. They feed their children very lightly, and at an
incredibly small expense: giving them a little meal of the coarsest
and cheapest kind, the pith of the papyrus, baked under the ashes,
with the roots and stalks of some marsh weeds, either raw, or boiled,
or roasted: and since most of them are brought up, on account of the
mildness of the climate, without shoes, and indeed without any other
clothing; the whole of the expense, incurred by the parents, till
they come to years of maturity, does not exceed about 20 drachmas, or
13 shillings, each. This frugality is the true reason of the great
populousness of Egypt, and of the magnificence of the public works,
with which the country is adorned.

§ 81. The children of the priests, however, are instructed in two
descriptions of literature; the sacred and the more general: and
they apply themselves with diligence to geometry and arithmetic: for
the river, changing the appearance of the country very materially
every year, is the cause of many and various discussions among the
neighbouring proprietors: and these it would be difficult for any
person to decide, without geometrical reasoning, founded upon actual
observation: and for arithmetic they have frequent occasion both in
their domestic economy, and in the application of geometrical theorems,
besides its utility in the cultivation of astronomical studies: for the
orders and motions of the stars are observed at least as industriously
by the Egyptians as by any other people whatever: and they keep
records of the motions of each for an incredible number of years;
the study of this science having been, from the remotest times, an
object of national ambition with them: they have also most punctually
observed the motions and periods and stations of the planets, as well
as the powers which they possess, with respect to the nativities
of animals, and what good or evil influences they exert: and they
frequently foretel what is to happen to a man throughout his life, and
not uncommonly predict a failure of crops, or an abundance, and the
occurrence of epidemic diseases among men or beasts: they foresee also
earthquakes and floods, and the appearances of comets, and a variety of
other things which appear impossible to the multitude. It is said also
that the Chaldaeans in Babylon are derived from an Egyptian colony,
and have acquired their reputation for astrology by means of the
information obtained from the priests in Egypt: but the generality of
the common people in Egypt learn only, from their parents or relations,
that which is required for the exercise of their peculiar professions,
as we have already seen: a few of them only teach them something of
literature, especially those who cultivate the more refined of the
arts: wrestling and music it is not their custom to practice: for they
conceive that, by exercise in the palaestra, young men acquire not
solid health, but a temporary increase of strength, which is by no
means free from danger; and music they esteem not only useless, but
even injurious, as rendering the minds of men effeminate....

§ 83. W. The customs of the Egyptians with regard to their sacred
animals are exceedingly surprising, and worthy to be examined; for
they venerate some of these animals in an extraordinary degree, not
only while they are living, but even after their death: for example,
cats, and ichneumons, and dogs; and besides these, the hawk and the
ibis; furthermore, wolves and crocodiles, and other beasts of prey....
Now each kind of the animals, that are held sacred, has a piece of
ground appropriated to them, affording a rent sufficient for the care
and the food that they require: the Egyptians are also in the habit of
making vows to some of their divinities on behalf of their children;
and if they recover from the disease, they shave off their hair, and
counterpoising it with silver or with gold, they give the money to
the priests, who have the care of these animals: the priests expend
this money in articles of food; and cutting up the meat for the hawks,
call out to them with a loud voice, and throw it to them as they fly
near: and for the oats and the ichneumons they soften the bread in
milk, and lay it before them with the proper calls and signals; or
give them some of the fishes of the Nile cut in pieces: and in the
same manner they furnish to every other kind of animal its appropriate
food: nor do they attempt to perform these services with any degree of
privacy, or to avoid the sight of the multitude; but on the contrary
they value themselves, as being the ministers of the highest honours
of the Gods, and travel through the cities and the country with their
appropriate standards: showing obviously at a distance to what deities
they are attached; and receiving the universal respect and homage of
those who meet them: and when any one of these animals dies, they roll
it up in fine linen, and bewail themselves, and beat their breasts,
as they carry it to be embalmed: and then they embalm it with resins,
and with substances fit to perfume and to preserve it, and bury it in
the sacred vaults: and if any one voluntarily destroys one of these
animals, he suffers death: with the exception of the cat and the
ibis; for if a person kills either of these, even involuntarily, he
infallibly loses his life, a multitude immediately collecting and
tearing him in pieces, often without any form of trial; so that, for
fear of such a calamity, if any one finds one of these animals dead,
he stands at a distance, and calls out with a loud voice, lamenting,
and protesting that the animal has been found dead. This superstitious
regard to the sacred animals is so thoroughly rooted in their minds,
and every one of them has his passions so strongly bent upon their
honour, that at the time when Ptolemy had not yet been called a king by
the Romans, and the people were using every possible effort to flatter
the Italians, who were visiting the country as strangers, and studious
to avoid every thing that could excite disputes, or lead to war, on
account of their dread of the consequences; a Roman having killed a
cat, and a crowd being collected about his residence, neither the
magistrates, who were sent by the king to appease their rage, nor the
general terror of the Roman name, were able to save the offender from
vengeance, although he had done it unintentionally: and this we relate,
not from the testimony of others, but from what we ourselves had an
opportunity of seeing, upon our journey to Egypt.

§ 84. If these things appear to many incredible and almost fabulous,
what remains to be told will be thought still more extraordinary. In
the time of a great famine in Egypt, it is related that many of the
inhabitants were compelled by hunger to devour each other, but that
nobody was even accused of having touched the flesh of any of the
sacred animals. Indeed whenever a dog has died in a house, the whole
of the persons, residing in it, shave their whole bodies, and go into
mourning: and what is still more remarkable, if there was either wine
or corn, or any other provisions, in the house, in which the animal
died, they would not dare to make any use of it whatever: and if they
lose these animals, while they are absent upon any military expedition,
they carry back their cats and their hawks in sorrow to Egypt: this
they will do even if they are themselves in want of the means of
returning with convenience. The manner in which they treat their Apis
in Memphis, and Mneuis in Heliopolis, and the Goat in Mendes, and the
Crocodile in the Lake Moeris, and the Lion that is kept at Leontopolis,
with many other things of the same kind, is easily narrated, but not
easily credited, except by an eye witness: for all these animals are
kept in sacred inclosures, and attended by many of the most respectable
persons, who supply them with the most delicate food; fine flour or
prepared corn, boiled in milk, and all kinds of cakes mixed with honey,
and geese, either boiled or roasted, are continually provided for
them; and for those which are carnivorous, various birds are caught,
and given to them alive: and their whole establishments are arranged
on a very expensive scale, for they are furnished with warm baths,
and anointed with the finest ointments, and the choicest perfumes
are burned before them: they have also rich carpets and ornamented
furniture, and care is taken to provide them with female companions of
the greatest beauty, who are also fed in the most luxurious manner:
and when they die, they are lamented like favourite children, and
are buried not according to the means of their attendants only, but
often much more magnificently: for after the death of Alexander, when
Ptolemy the son of Lagus had lately become King of Egypt, the Apis at
Memphis happened to die of old age; and the person, who had the care
of him, not only spent the whole of the allowances, which were very
considerable, upon the funeral, but borrowed also fifty talents, or
twelve thousand pounds, more of Ptolemy, to defray the expense: and
within our own memory it has happened, that the guardians of these
animals have spent not less than a hundred talents at their funeral.

§ 85. Besides these ceremonies, there are many other customs at the
death of the sacred bull named Apis; for after he has been splendidly
interred, the priests seek for a calf who is marked as nearly as
possible in the same manner: and having found him, they release the
public from their mourning, and the appointed persons carry the calf
first to Nilopolis, where they feed him for forty days; and then
embarking him on board of a yacht with a gilded cabin, they conduct him
as a god to the sacred grove of Vulcan, at Memphis. In these forty days
only, he is allowed to be seen by women, who perform certain evolutions
before him, which are probably more amusing to his attendants than to
himself: and at no other time are women allowed to see him. The reason
of the honours paid to him is said to be, that at the death of Osiris,
his soul transmigrated into this animal, and that it is continually
transferred to his successors, when he dies: others however inform us,
that when Osiris was killed by Typhon, his limbs were collected by
Isis, and thrown into a wooden cow, covered with cotton cloths, and
that the city was thence called Busiris. [It seems however that this
must have been a Grecian fiction, for in Egyptian BUSIRIS must have
meant the _tomb_ of Osiris, and not the _cow_.] For the deification
of the other animals, as well as of their kings, a variety of reasons
are assigned[; all as uninteresting as they are absurd; except the
story of a hawk having brought, to the priest at Thebes, a book of laws
and religious observances, tied up with purple; and that hence the
Hierogrammates, or sacred scribes, were distinguished by a purple sash,
and by wearing a hawk’s feather on their heads: that the crocodile
is said to be venerated as the watchman of the Nile, preventing the
predatory excursions, which would be undertaken, if the thieves could
swim across the river in safety; and that the diversity of deities,
worshipped in neighbouring parts of the country, is supposed by some to
have originated in a political contrivance of the government, to keep
the people in subjection, by preventing their too intimate union].

§ 91. The customs of the Egyptians, with regard to their funerals,
are not the least wonderful of their peculiar institutions. For when
any one dies among them, the whole of his family and all his friends
cover their heads with clay, and go about the city lamenting, until the
body is buried; partaking neither of baths, nor of wine, nor of any
abundant food, nor putting on rich clothing. The funerals are conducted
upon three different scales, the most expensive, the moderate, and
the humblest: the first costs a talent of silver [£250]; the second
twenty minae [£60]; the third is extremely cheap. Now the persons, that
undertake this office, are artists, who exercise the profession from
generation to generation: and they bring to the friends of the deceased
an estimate of the expenses of the funeral, and ask them in what manner
they wish that it should be performed. When the agreement is made, the
operations are commenced by the proper persons: and first the scribe
marks out how the dissection is to be performed, upon the left side of
the body; the dissector then cuts it with a sharp Ethiopian stone, and
immediately betakes himself to flight, and is pursued and beaten, as
if he had committed an inhuman action; the embalmers, on the contrary,
are held in all honour and respect, associating with the priests, and
having free access to the temples, as sacred persons: these embalmers
commence their office by removing such parts as are most susceptible
of decay, and, washing the rest with palm wine, and spices, apply
various kinds of resins for more than thirty days, and then impregnate
the whole with myrrh and cinnamon, and other substances calculated not
only to preserve it, but to communicate to it an agreeable smell: and
finally they return the body to the relations, so perfectly preserved
in every part, that even the hairs of the eyelids and eyebrows remain
undisturbed, and the whole appearance of the person is unchanged, and
the features are capable of being recognised: so that the Egyptians,
very commonly, keeping the bodies of their ancestors in magnificent
apartments, are able to see the very faces of those, who have died
several generations before them: each of whom being distinguishable,
not only by his height, and the outline of his figure, but even by the
character of his countenance, they enjoy a wonderful gratification, as
if they lived in the society of those whom they see before them. [It is
indeed related by Damascenus, Orat. 1, that they placed them on seats
at their tables, as if they wished to eat and drink in their society:
and Lucian, in his Essay on Grief, declares, that he has been an eye
witness of the custom. Wessel. It is not however probable that such
a practice should have been continued in the times of the Ptolemies:
although Lucian, who had an appointment in Egypt under Marcus Aurelius,
may be considered as pretty good authority, when he speaks seriously.]

§ 92. But when the body is about to be finally buried, the relations
announce the appointed day to the judges, and to all the friends of the
deceased, declaring that he is about to pass the lake of the Nome: and
forty two judges being collected, and placed in a semicircle, which is
prepared beyond the lake, a boat is brought up, which had been provided
for the purpose, conducted by a boatman who is called, in their
language, Charon, [the Silent]: whence they say that Orpheus, in former
times, having travelled into Egypt, and seen this custom, invented the
fable of Hades, partly from imitating what he saw, and partly from his
own imagination: but when the boat was brought into the lake, before
the coffin with the dead body was put on board, it was lawful, for any
person who thought proper, to bring forwards his accusation against
the deceased: and if he showed that the deceased had led an evil life,
the judges declared accordingly, and the body was deprived of the
accustomed sepulture: but if the accuser failed of establishing what
he advanced, he was subject to very heavy penalties. When there had
been no accuser, or when the accusation had been repelled as unjust,
the relations, laying aside their mourning, pronounced encomiums on
the deceased: not enlarging upon his descent, as is usual among the
Greeks, for they hold that all the Egyptians are equally noble: but
relating his earliest education and the course of his studies, and
then his piety and justice in manhood, and his temperance, and the
other virtues that he possessed, they supplicated the infernal deities
to receive him as a companion of the pious: the multitude in the mean
time applauded, and joined in extolling the glory of the deceased, as
being about to remain to eternity with the virtuous in the regions of
Hades. The body is then placed, by those who have family catacombs
already prepared, in the compartment allotted to it: those who are not
possessed of catacombs construct a new apartment for the purpose, in
their own houses, and set the coffin upright against the firmest of
the walls. Those who are debarred of the rites of burial, on account
of the accusation which has been brought forwards against them, or on
account of debts which they have contracted, are placed in their own
houses: and then, if their children’s children happen to be prosperous,
they are frequently released from the impediments of their creditors
and their accusers, and at length obtain the ceremony of a magnificent
funeral.

§ 93. It is most solemnly established in Egypt, to pay a more marked
respect to their parents and their ancestors, when they are removed to
their everlasting habitations. It is also usual among them to deposit
the bodies of their deceased parents, as pledges for the payment of
money that they borrow: and those who do not redeem these pledges are
subject to the heaviest disgrace, and are deprived of burial after
their death....

§ 96. We must now enumerate such of the Greeks as have visited Egypt in
ancient times, for the acquirement of knowledge and wisdom. The priests
of the Egyptians relate, from the records preserved in their sacred
volumes, that they were visited by Orpheus and Musaeus, and Melampus
and Daedalus; by Homer, the poet, and Lycurgus, the Spartan: by Solon,
the Athenian, and Plato, the philosopher: and that Pythagoras, of
Samos, also came there, and the mathematician Eudoxus: and Democritus
of Abdera, and Oenopides of Chius. All these they identify by some
distinct marks, either portraits, or appellations derived from their
residences or their works: and they produce evidence from the branches
of knowledge, which they respectively cultivated, that they had only
borrowed, from the Egyptians, all that acquired them the admiration
of their countrymen. That Orpheus had learned of them the greatest
part of his mystical ceremonies, and the orgies that celebrate the
wanderings [of Ceres], and the mythology of the shades below: for that
the rites of Osiris and of Bacchus are the same: and those of Isis
extremely resemble those of Ceres, with the change of name only: and
the punishments of the impious in Tartarus, and the Elysian plains of
the virtuous, and the common imagery of fiction, were all copied from
the ceremonies of the Egyptian funerals: that Hermes, the conductor
of souls, was, according to the old institution of Egypt, to convey
the body of Apis to an appointed place, where it was received by a
man wearing the mask of Cerberus, [probably the _Cteristes_ of the
temporary nomenclature;] and that Orpheus having related this among the
Greeks, the fable was adopted by Homer, who makes the Cyllenian Hermes
call forth the souls of the suitors, holding his staff in his hand:

    Cyllenius now to Pluto’s dreary reign
    Conveys the dead, a lamentable train!
    The golden wand that causes sleep to fly,
    Or in soft slumber seals the wakeful eye,
    That drives the ghosts to realms of night or day,
    Points out the long, uncomfortable way.
    Trembling the spectres glide, and plaintive vent
    Thin, hollow screams, along the deep descent ...
    And now they reached the Earth’s remotest ends.
    And now the gates where evening Sol descends,
    And Leucas’ rock, and Ocean’s utmost streams,
    And now pervade the dusky land of dreams;
    And rest at last where souls unbodied dwell
    In ever flowery meads of Asphodel,
    The empty forms of men inhabit there,
    Impassive semblance, images of air!

                                                                   POPE.

The river he calls Ocean, as they say, because the Egyptians call the
Nile Oceanus in their own language [??]: the gates of the Sun are
derived from Heliopolis: and the meadow is so called, from the lake
which is named Acherusian, and which is near Memphis, being surrounded
by beautiful meadows, and canals, with lotus and flowering rushes: and
that it is consistent with the imitation to make the deceased inhabit
these places: because the greater number and the most considerable
of the Egyptian catacombs are there, the bodies being ferried over
the river and the Acherusian lake, and the mummies being deposited in
the catacombs there situated. And the rest of the Grecian mythology
respecting Hades agrees also with the present practice in Egypt: the
boat which carries over the bodies, and is called BARIS; and the penny
that is given for the fare to the boatman, who is called CHARON in the
language of the country. They say there is also, in the neighbourhood
of the same place, a temple of the nocturnal Hecate, with the gates
of Cocytus and of Lethe, fastened with brazen bars; and that there
are, besides, other gates of Truth; and near them a figure of Justice
without a head.

§ 97. In the city of Acanthae, on the Libyan side of the Nile, 120
stadia from Memphis, they say there is a barrel pierced with holes,
to which 360 of the priests carry water from the Nile: and that a
mystery is acted in an assembly in that neighbourhood, in which a
man is made to twist one end of a long rope, while other persons
untwist the other end; an allusion to which has become proverbial
in Greece. Melampus, they say, brought from Egypt the mysteries of
Bacchus, and the stories of Saturn, and the battles of the Titans:
and Daedalus imitated the Egyptian labyrinth, in that which he built
for king Minos: the Egyptian labyrinth having been constructed by
Mendes, or by Marus, an ancient king, many years before his time; and
that the style of the ancient statues in Egypt is the same with that
of the statues sculptured in Greece: but that the very fine Propylon
of Vulcan in Memphis was the work of Daedalus as an architect: and
that being admired for this work, he had the honour of obtaining a
place, in the same temple, for a wooden statue of himself, which was
the work of his own hands: that his talents and inventive faculties
at last acquired him even divine honours, and that there is to this
day a temple of Daedalus, on one of the islands near Memphis, which
is honoured by the neighbouring inhabitants. That Homer had been in
Egypt, they argue, among other reasons, from the administration of the
Nepenthes by Helen to Telemachus, which occasioned a forgetfulness
of the evils that had befallen him: for he seems to have perfectly
understood the nature of this remedy, which he says Helen received in
the Egyptian Thebes, of Polydamne the wife of Thon, for that the women
of the same place still make use of it, for a similar purpose, and
it is only among the Diospolitan women, that it is known as a remedy
for anger and for sorrow, and that Diospolis is the Thebes of the
ancients; and that Venus is called golden by its inhabitants from an
old tradition, and that there is a field belonging to the golden Venus
in the neighbourhood of Momemphis: and that he has copied from them the
history of the embraces of Jupiter and Juno, and of Jove’s absence in
Ethiopia: for that they have an annual ceremony, in which the temple
or shrine of Jupiter is carried across the river into Libya, and is
brought back in a few days, as if the deity returned from Ethiopia:
and that the embraces of the deities are found (§ 346) in their
assemblies, when both of their shrines are carried to a mountain which
is strewed by the priest with flowers. [Analogies all too slight to be
admitted as any thing like evidence.]

§ 98. They say also that Lycurgus and Plato and Solon transferred many
of the customs of the Egyptians into their own establishments. And
that Pythagoras learned in Egypt both his divinity and his geometrical
theorems, and his arithmetic, and the transmigration of the soul into
all kinds of animals. They believe too that Democritus spent five years
among them, and was taught by them many things relating to astronomy.
And that Oenopides [of Chius] in the same way, by living with their
priests and astronomers, learned of them, among many other things,
the position of the sun’s orbit, that it moved obliquely, and in a
direction contrary to that of the other stars. And that Eudoxus, in the
same manner, gained great reputation among his countrymen, by having
studied astronomy among them, and made known many of their useful
discoveries among the Greeks: and the most celebrated of the ancient
statuaries had lived among them, Telecles and Theodorus, the sons of
Rhoecus, who made for the Samians the image of the Pythian Apollo:
for it is said that one half of the image was executed in Samos by
Telecles, and the other half at Ephesus by his brother Theodorus; and
that both parts, when put together, agreed so well with each other, as
to appear precisely as if they had been the work of one person: and
that this kind of workmanship was never practised by the Greeks, but
was very common among the Egyptians: for that with them it was not
usual to judge of the symmetry of a figure by the sight of the whole,
as with the Greeks; but that when the stones were quarried and properly
cut out, they then proceeded by proportion from the smallest to the
greatest; and dividing the whole fabric of the body into one and twenty
parts, and a quarter, they arranged the whole symmetry, accordingly:
and hence, when their artists consult with each other about the
magnitude of any figure, although separated from each other, they still
make the results agree so well, that this peculiarity of their practice
excites the greatest astonishment: and that the image in Samos,
according to this refinement of the Egyptians, being divided from
the summit of the head, and as far as the middle, is still perfectly
consistent with itself, and in all parts alike: they also observe
that it extremely resembles the Egyptian figures as having the hands
stretched out, and the legs separated, as in walking. And enough has
now been said of what is most celebrated and remarkable in the country
and customs of the Egyptians: [the greater part of which is of much
more value, as occasionally furnishing anecdotes from the arguments
that were advanced by the priests in their discussions, than as by any
means rendered fully credible by the application of these anecdotes.]

The process of embalming is described very nearly in the same manner
by Herodotus. “Their customs,” he says, Book II. §. 85, “relating to
mourning and to funerals are these. When any person of consequence
dies, the females of his family cover their heads and faces with clay,
and leaving the dead body at home, wander through the city, beating
themselves, wearing a close girdle, and having their bosoms bare,
accompanied by all their intimate friends: the men also make similar
lamentations in a separate company: they then proceed to embalm the
body.

“(86). This service is performed by persons appointed to exercise the
art, as their business: and when a dead body is brought to them, they
show their patterns of mummies in wood, imitated by sculpture: and the
most elaborate of these they say belongs to the character of [Osiris]
one, whose name I do not think it pious to mention on such an occasion:
the second, that they show, is simpler and less costly: the third,
the cheapest of all: and having shown them these, they inquire in
which way the service shall be performed: the parties then make their
agreement, and the body is left for preparation. The interior soft
parts being removed both from the head and from the trunk, the cavities
are washed with palm wine and fragrant gums, and partly filled up with
myrrh and cassia and other spices; the whole is then steeped in a
solution of soda for seventy days, which is the longest time permitted;
and then, having been washed, the body is rolled up with bandages
of cotton cloth, being first smeared with gum, instead of glue. The
relations then, receiving the body, procure a wooden case for it in a
human shape, and inclose the dead body in it: and when thus inclosed,
they treasure it up in an appropriate building or apartment, placing
it upright against the wall. And this is the most expensive mode of
preparation.

“(87). For those who prefer the middle class, in order to avoid
expense, the process is simplified by omitting the actual removal of
the interior parts, and introducing a corrosive liquid to melt them
down: the soda consumes the flesh, so that skin and bone only is left,
when the body is restored to the friends.

“(88). The third and simplest process is merely to cleanse the body
well, within and without, by means of some vegetable decoctions, and to
keep it in the alkaline solution for the seventy days, without further
precautions.”

It is difficult to say, according to these statements, what part of the
ceremony might be considered as actually constituting the burial. But
we find in a Greek inscription on the coffin of a mummy, found by Mr.
Grey, which he has had the goodness to communicate to me, “The tomb of
Tphuto (or Tphus) the daughter of Heracléus Soter and Sarapus. She was
born in the Vth year of Adrian our Lord, the 2d Athyr [III], and died
in the XIth year, Tybi [V] the 10th. Aged six years, two months, and
eight days. She was buried in the XIIth year, the 12th of Athyr.” So
that here the burial took place a full year after the death; and there
was time enough for every imaginable luxury of the embalmer’s art.
The coffin is not, in this instance, made in imitation “of the human
form,” as the coffins of the more ancient mummies, but it is merely an
oblong trunk, with an arched cover, and a pillar rising a little at
each angle. We have no precise account of the liturgies, or services,
performed to these canonized personages, but they were probably some
forms of adoration, combined with offerings of flowers and fruit, which
were placed before or beside them, and it is well known that some corn
and some cakes have been found still standing in baskets, in some of
the catacombs lately opened; and that specimens of them have been
brought to the British Museum.

To administer these rites, and to renew these offerings, at least as
often as could be required, was apparently the duty of the priests,
and they were no doubt amply remunerated for their attentions, by the
families of the deceased, in the form of the “collections,” which are
the objects of sale in Mr. Grey’s papyrus. The deed was registered 19
days after its execution.




CHAPTER VII.

EXTRACTS FROM STRABO; ALPHABET OF CHAMPOLLION; HIEROGLYPHICAL AND
ENCHORIAL NAMES.


The manner in which the Hieroglyphical alphabet was employed, in the
time of the Roman emperors, may be understood from the examination of
the specimens inserted in this chapter; they comprehend an example of
each of the names and titles, which Mr. Champollion has included in
his catalogue. In order to illustrate the veneration paid to the Roman
emperors in Egypt, I shall subjoin an extract from Strabo, relating to
the administration of that country, in the days of the earlier Caesars,
for he was a contemporary and a subject of Tiberius.

Book XVII. “The whole of Egypt was divided into Nomes, the Thebaid
containing ten, the Delta ten, and the intermediate parts sixteen,
making in all 36.... The nomes were generally divided into Toparchiae,
or local governments: and these again into other portions.... At
Alexandria, the Necropolis is a separate suburb, containing gardens,
and sepulchres, and subterraneous passages, employed for preserving the
dead.”

“After the death of Julius Caesar, and after the battle of Philippi,
Antony went into Asia, and paid extravagant honours to Cleopatra, even
making her his wife, and having several children by her. He carried
on, in concert with her, the war that was terminated at Actium, and
accompanied her, as is well known, in her flight. Augustus following
them, destroyed them both, and set Egypt at rest from the revels of
a drunkard. It is now governed as a province, or an Eparchia, paying
considerable taxes, but being always administered by moderate men,
who are sent as Governors, and who hold the rank of a king. Under the
governor is the Dicaeodotes, that is the lawgiver, or chancellor:
another officer is called the Privy purse, or private accountant, whose
business it is to take charge of every thing which is left without an
owner, and which falls of right to the Emperor. These two are also
attended by Freedmen and Stewards of Caesar, who are intrusted with
affairs of greater or less magnitude. There are also three battalions
of soldiers, one in the city of Alexandria, the others in the country.
Besides these, there are nine companies of Romans; three in the city,
three in garrison at Syene, upon the frontiers of Ethiopia, and three
in other parts of the country. There are also three regiments of
cavalry, similarly distributed, among the fittest places. But of the
natives, who are employed in the government of the different cities,
the principal are the Exegétes, or Expounder, who is dressed in purple,
and is honoured according to the usages of the country, and takes care
of what is necessary for the welfare of the city; and the Register,
or writer of commentaries; and the Archidicastes, or chief judge; and
fourthly, the Captain of the Night. These same magistracies existed
in the time of the kings: but the kings governed so ill, that the
welfare of the state was disturbed by all kinds of irregularities.
Polybius, who was in Egypt, expresses his horror of the condition of
the country at that time: he says there were three kinds of inhabitants
in Alexandria; the Egyptians, or the people of the country, a keen
and civilised race, and the mercenary troops, who were numerous and
turbulent; for it was the custom to keep foreign soldiers in their
pay, who, having arms in their hands, were more ready to govern than
to obey: the third description of people were the Alexandrians, not
very decidedly tractable, for similar reasons, but still, better
than the last: for those, who had mixed with them, were originally
Greeks, and remembered the habits of their country. This part of the
population was however then dwindling away, more especially through
Evergetes Physcon, in whose reign Polybius came to Alexandria: for
on several occasions, when there had been some seditious proceedings
he attacked this plebeian multitude with his troops, and destroyed
great numbers of them. Polybius could not therefore help exclaiming,
that he had “To Egypt come, a long and weary way,” with but little
pleasure or comfort. The subsequent sovereigns administered their
governments as ill, or still worse. The Romans may be said to have
effected a great reformation in many respects, and to have regulated
the city very effectually; and in the country they appointed persons
as Commanders, and Monarchae, and Ethnarchae, that is, masters of
single places, and of districts, without very extensive powers....
With respect to the revenues of the country, we may judge of them from
Cicero, who mentions, in one of his orations, that Auletes, the father
of Cleopatra, had an income, from the taxes, of twelve thousand five
hundred talents, [between three and four millions sterling]. If then a
king, who administered his government in the worst and most negligent
manner possible, received so large a revenue, what are we to suppose
it must be at present, when it is managed with so much care, and when
it has been so much increased by the enlargement of the Indian and
African commerce? In former times, there were not twenty vessels, that
ventured to navigate the Red Sea, so as to pass out of the Straights:
but now there are great fleets, that make the voyage to India, and to
the remotest parts of Ethiopia, returning, laden with very valuable
cargos, to Egypt, whence they are distributed to other parts; so
that they are subjected to a double duty, first upon importation, and
then upon exportation: and the customs upon these valuable articles
are themselves proportionally valuable; besides that they have the
advantages of a monopoly: since Alexandria alone is so situated, as
to afford, in general, the only warehouse for receiving them, and for
supplying other places with them.”

From a comparison of the Enchorial names, which are here inserted, we
may confidently add to the alphabet a semicircle, open above, as a
form of the P; we have also several variations of the T, and perhaps
of the TH; and the character, which is sometimes represented by Z,
and sometimes by S, must, in all probability, be the Coptic SH; so
that ZMINIS ought rather to be written SHMINIS, meaning OCTAVIUS, from
SHMEN, _eight_. The same character is found in the phrase of the Pillar
of Rosetta, “who has _received_ the kingdom from his father;” and may
probably have belonged to the word SHEP, if it is allowable to pursue
the analogy so far: it is also remarkable, that the hieroglyphic, which
corresponds to this character, has very nearly the same form with that,
to which Mr. Champollion attributes the power of SH or X in the name of
Xerxes. His Enchorial form of the CH is wholly unsupported by any of
these names.


ALPHABET OF CHAMPOLLION.

[Illustration: Α]

[Illustration: Β*]

[Illustration: Κ, Γ]

[Illustration: Τ, Δ*]

[Illustration: Ε]

[Illustration: Ι, Η*]

[Illustration: Λ*]

[Illustration: Μ*]

[Illustration: Ν*]

[Illustration: Ω, Ο*]

[Illustration: Φ, Π*]

[Illustration: Ρ]

[Illustration: Σ*]

[Illustration: ΤΟ]

*Y: †B.


HIEROGLYPHICAL NAMES

[Illustration: ADRIANUS: CAESAR.]

[Illustration: ALEXANDRUS.]

[Illustration: ANTONINUS: (_c. sempiternus_.)]

[Illustration: AUTOCRATOR CAESARIS.]

[Illustration: DOMITIANUS: SEBASTUS.]

[Illustration: CLEOPATRA.]

[Illustration: CAESARIS.]

[Illustration: BERENICES.]

[Illustration: NERVA: TRAJANUS: _sempit._]

[Illustration: PTOLEMAEUS: _c._ NEOCAESARIS: _semp: dii: Is. Phth._]

[Illustration: SABINA.]

[Illustration: SEBASTE: _sempiterna_.]

[Illustration: SEBASTUS: _semp. Is: Phth._]

[Illustration: TIBERIUS: CAESARIS: _semp._]

[Illustration: TRAJANUS: CAESARIS: _semp._]

[Illustration: TRAJANUS: C. GERMANICUS: DACICUS.]

[Illustration: VESPASIANUS: PIUS?]

[Illustration: COGNOMINE.]


ENCHORIAL PROPER NAMES.

[Illustration: AËTUS]

[Illustration: ALECIS, LECIS?]

[Illustration:

    ALEXANDER  }
               }
    ALEXANDRIA }
]

[Illustration: AMENOTHES]

[Illustration: AMMON, JUPITER]

[Illustration: AMMONIUS]

[Illustration: AMONORYTIUS]

[Illustration: AMONRASONTHER]

[Illustration: ANTIGENES]

[Illustration: ANTIMACHUS]

[Illustration: APOLLONIUS]

[Illustration: AREIA]

[Illustration: ARM“ENIS”]

[Illustration: ARSIESIS]

[Illustration: ARSINOE]

[Illustration: ASUS, ASYS, ASOS]

[Illustration: ATHYR]

[Illustration: BERENICE]

[Illustration: BUSIRITES]

[Illustration: CHAPOCHONSIS]

[Illustration: CHAPOCRATES]

[Illustration: CHIMNARAUS]

[Illustration: CLEOPATRA]

[Illustration: DIOGENES]

[Illustration: EIRENE, IRENE]

[Illustration: ERIEUS]

[Illustration: HORUS]

[Illustration: ISIS]

[Illustration: LUBAIS]

[Illustration: LYCOPOLIS]

[Illustration: MAËSIS]

[Illustration: MECHIR]

[Illustration: MESORE]

[Illustration: MIRSIS]

[Illustration: MUTHES]

[Illustration: NECHTHMONTHES]

[Illustration: ONNOPHRIS]

[Illustration: OSIRIS]

[Illustration: OSOROERIS]

[Illustration: PACEMIS]

[Illustration: PANAS]

[Illustration:

    PATEUTEMIS }
               }
    PETEUTEMIS }
]

[Illustration: PECHYTES]

[Illustration: PETEARPOCRATES]

[Illustration: PETEARTRES]

[Illustration: PETECHONSIS]

[Illustration: PETEMESTUS]

[Illustration: PETENEPHOTES]

[Illustration: PETEURIS]

[Illustration: PETOPHOIS]

[Illustration: PETOSIRIS]

[Illustration: PHABIS]

[Illustration: PHANRES]

[Illustration: PHIBIS]

[Illustration: PHILINUS]

[Illustration: PORTIS]

[Illustration: PSENAMUNIS]

[Illustration: PSENCHONSIS]

[Illustration: PTOLEMAEUS]

[Illustration: PYRRHA]

[Illustration: PYRRHIUS]

[Illustration: SENERIEUS]

[Illustration: SENOSOR]

[Illustration: SENPOERIS]

[Illustration: SNACHOMES]

[Illustration: SNACHOMNEUS]

[Illustration: SOTER]

[Illustration: SPOTUS]

[Illustration: TBAEAIS]

[Illustration: TEEPHBIS]

[Illustration: THOTH, HERMES]

[Illustration: THOYTH]

[Illustration: THYNABUNUN]

[Illustration: TOTOES]

[Illustration: ZMINIS]

[Illustration: ZTHENAËTES]

[Illustration: ZOGLYPHUS]

From these specimens, we are also enabled to make some further
inferences respecting the “popular” system of writing among the
Egyptians. They show incontestably, that the employment of the
alphabet, discovered by Akerblad, is not altogether confined to
foreign, or at least to Grecian names: it is applicable, for example,
very readily, to the words Lubais, Tbaeais, Phabis, and perhaps to some
others. But they exhibit also unequivocal traces of a kind of syllabic
writing, in which the names of some of the deities seem to have been
principally employed, in order to compose that of the individual
concerned: thus it appears, that wherever both M and N occur, either
together, or separated by a vowel, the symbol of the god Ammon or Amun
is almost uniformly employed: for example in AMENothes, AMONorytius,
AMONrasonther, ChiMNaraus, PsenAMUNis, and SnachoMNeus, in which we
find neither M nor N, but the symbol for AMMON, or Jupiter. It follows
therefore, that such must have been the original pronunciation of the
word, and that this deity was not called either HO or NO, as Akerblad
was disposed to imagine. In the same manner we have traces of Osiris,
Arueris, Isis, and Re; in _Osoroeris_, _Petosiris_, _Senpoeris_,
_Arsiesis_, _Maesis_, and _Peteartres_. The SE, in PSEnamunis and
SEnerieus, is the symbol for a child, and is probably a contraction
of SHERI: the gender seems to be distinguished in the enchorial name,
while the distinction is lost in the alphabetical mode of writing.




CHAPTER VIII.

CHRONOLOGICAL HISTORY OF THE PTOLEMIES, EXTRACTED FROM VARIOUS AUTHORS.


i. _EXTRACT from_ PORPHYRY, _an author of the age of Diocletian, as
quoted in Scaliger’s_ EUSEBIUS, _and probably thence in the Armenian
translation_.

Alexander, the Macedonian, died in the CXIVth Olympiad, after a reign
of 12 years in the whole: and was succeeded in his kingdom by Aridaeus,
whose name was changed to Philip, being brother to Alexander, by
another mother; for he was the son of Philip by Philinna of Larissa:
and after a reign of seven years, he was killed in Macedonia, by
Polysperchon the son of Antipater.

Now Ptolemy the son of Arsinoe and of Lagus, after one year of this
reign, by an appointment derived from Philip, was sent as a Satrap into
Egypt; which he governed in this capacity for 17 years, and afterwards,
with Royal authority, for 23; so that the number of all the years of
his government, to the time of his death, became 40; but since he
retired from the government two years before, in favour of his son
Ptolemy Philadelphus, and considered himself as a subject of his son,
who had been crowned in his place, the years of this first Ptolemy,
called Soter, are reckoned not 40, but 38 only.

He was succeeded by his son, surnamed, as already mentioned,
Philadelphus, who reigned two years during his fathers’ life, and
thirty [six] afterwards, so that his whole reign occupied, like his
father’s, 38 years.

In the third place, the throne was ascended by Ptolemy surnamed
Evergetes, who reigned 25 years.

In the fourth by Ptolemy called Philopator, whose reign was in the
whole 17 years.

After him, the fifth Ptolemy was surnamed Epiphanes, and reigned 24
years.

Epiphanes had two sons, both named Ptolemy, who reigned after him; the
elder was surnamed Philometor, and the younger Evergetes the second;
their reigns together occupy a period of 64 years. We have placed
this as a single number, because, as they were at variance with each
other, and reigned alternately, the dates were necessarily confounded.
For Philometor first reigned eleven years alone; but when Antiochus
made war upon Egypt, and deprived him of his crown, the Alexandrians
committed the government to the charge of his younger brother; and,
having driven back Antiochus, set Philometor at liberty. They then
numbered the year the [twelfth] of Philometor and the first of
Evergetes; and this system was continued till the seventeenth: but from
the eighteenth forwards, the years are attributed to Philometor alone.

For the elder, having been expelled from his kingdom by the younger,
was restored by the Romans; and he retained the crown of Egypt,
leaving his brother the dominion of Libya, and continued to reign
alone for 18 years. He died in Syria, having conquered that country:
Evergetes being then recalled from Cyrene, and proclaimed King,
continued to number the years of his reign from his first accession to
the crown; so that having reigned [29] years after the death of his
brother, he extended his dates to 54: for the 36th year of Philometor,
which should have been called his 1st, he determined to make the 25th.
In the whole therefore we have 64: first 35 of Philometor, and the
remainder of Evergetes: but the subdivision may lead to confusion.

Now Ptolemy Evergetes the second had two sons, called Ptolemy, by
Cleopatra; the elder Soter, and the younger [Alexander]. The elder
was proclaimed king by his mother: and appearing to be obsequious to
her wishes, he was beloved for a certain time: but when, in the tenth
year of his reign, he put to death the friends of his parents, he was
deposed by his mother for his cruelty, and driven as a fugitive into
Cyprus.

The mother then sent for her younger son from Pelusium, and proclaimed
him sovereign together with herself; so that they reigned in common,
the dates of public acts being referred to both: and the year was
called the eleventh of Cleopatra, and the eighth of Ptolemy Alexander:
comprehending the time as a part of his reign, which began with the
fourth year of his brother; during which he reigned in Cyprus: and
this custom continued during the whole of the life of Cleopatra: but
after her death the epoch of Alexander alone was employed; and, though
he actually held the sceptre for eighteen years only, from the time of
his return to Alexandria, he appears, in his public records, as having
reigned twenty six. In his nineteenth year, having quarrelled with
his troops, he went out into the country in order to raise a force to
control them; but they pursuing him, under the command of Tyrrhus, a
relation of the royal family, engaged him by sea, and compelled him
to fly, with his wife and daughter, to Myrae, a city of Lycia: whence
crossing over to Cyprus, and being attacked by Chaereas, who had the
command of the hostile fleet, he was killed in battle.

The Alexandrians, after his flight, sent an embassy to the elder
Ptolemy, Soter [or Lathurus], inviting him back from Cyprus, to take
possession of the kingdom. During the seven years and six months that
he survived, after his return, the whole time that had elapsed since
the death of his father was attributed to his reign: so that the number
of years became 35, and six months, of which, however, only 17 and
six months properly belonged to him, in the two separate portions of
his reign: while the second brother, Alexander, had reigned 18 in the
intermediate time: and although these could not be effaced from the
annals, they suppressed them as far as it was in their power; since he
had offended them by some alliance with the Jews. They do not therefore
reckon these years separately, but attribute the whole 36 to the elder
brother, omitting again to assign to Cleopatra, the daughter of the
elder, and wife of the younger brother, who took possession of the
government after her father’s death, the six months that she reigned,
which were a part of the 36th year. Nor did they distinguish by the
name of the Alexander, that succeeded her, the nineteen days that he
retained the crown.

This Alexander was the son of the younger brother, Ptolemy Alexander,
and the step son of Cleopatra; he was residing at Rome, and the
Egyptian dynasty failing of male heirs, he came by invitation to
Alexandria, and married this same Cleopatra [his step mother]; and
having deprived her by force of her authority, he put her to death
after 19 days, and was himself killed in the Gymnasium, by the guards,
whom his barbarity had disgusted.

Alexander the second was succeeded by Ptolemy, who was called Neus
Dionysus, or the young Bacchus, the son of Ptolemy Soter, and the
brother of the Cleopatra last mentioned: his reign continued for 29
years.

His daughter Cleopatra was the last of the family of the Lagidae, and
the years assigned to her reign are 22.

Neither did these different reigns fill up the whole series of years
from beginning to end in a regular order, but several of them were
intermixed with the others. For, in the time of Dionysus, three years
are attributed to his two daughters, Cleopatra Tryphaena, and Berenice;
a year conjointly, and two years, after the death of Cleopatra
Tryphaena, to Berenice alone; because in this interval Ptolemy was
gone to Rome, and was spending his time there, while his daughters, as
if he were not about to return, took possession of the government for
themselves; Berenice having also called in to a share of her dominion
some men who were her relations: until Ptolemy, returning from Rome,
and forgetting the indulgence due to a daughter, took offence at her
conduct, and deprived her of life.

The first years of the reign of his successor Cleopatra were also
referred to her in common with her elder brother Ptolemy; and the
following to other persons, for this reason: Ptolemy Neus Dionysus,
[or Auletes], left at his death four children, two Ptolemies, and
Cleopatra, and Arsinoe; appointing as his successors his two elder
children, Ptolemy and Cleopatra; they were considered as joint
sovereigns for four years, and would have remained so; but that
Ptolemy, having departed from his father’s commands, and resolved to
keep the whole power in his own hands, it was his fate to be slain in
a sea fight near the coasts of Egypt, by Julius Caesar, who took part
with Cleopatra.

After the destruction of this Ptolemy, Cleopatra’s younger brother,
also named Ptolemy, was placed on the throne with his sister, by
Caesar’s decree, and the year was called the fifth of Cleopatra, and
the first of Ptolemy: and this custom continued till his death, for two
more years. But when he had been destroyed by the arts of Cleopatra, in
his fourth year and in the eighth of his sister, the subsequent years
were distinguished by the name of Cleopatra alone, as far as fifteen.
The sixteenth was named also the first, since, after the death of
Lysimachus, king of Chalcis in Syria, the “Autocrator” Marc Antony gave
Chalcis and all the neighbouring country to Cleopatra; and from this
time the remaining years of her reign, as far as the 22nd, which was
the last, were reckoned in the same manner, with an additional number,
the 22nd having been called also the 7th, [as the Armenian has very
properly read, for the 27th].

From Cleopatra the government devolved to Octavius Caesar, called also
Augustus, who overcame the power of Egypt in the battle of Actium, the
second year of the CLXXXIVth Olympiad. And from the first year of the
CXIth Olympiad, when Aridaeus Philippus [or rather Alexander], the son
of Philip, took possession of the government, to the second of the
CLXXXIVth, there are 73 Olympiads and a year, or 293 years. And so many
are the years of the sovereigns that reigned in Alexandria, to the time
of the death of Cleopatra.


ii. _Blair’s Chronology of the Ptolemies._

     Year
    of Nab.    Olympiad.    B. C.
      413   CXI, year     1 336      Aug. Alexander succeeds Philip.
      426   CXIV,         2 323      Apr. 21; Alexander dies: Ptolemy S. 1.
      464   CXXIII,       4 285 39   Ptolemy Soter.
      465   CXXIV,        1 284  1}  Ptolemy Philadelphus.
      502   CXXXIII,      2 247 38}
      503                 3 246  1 } Ptolemy Evergetes.
      527   CXXXIX,       3 222 25 }
      528                 4 221  1}  Ptolemy Philopator.
      544   CXLIII,       4 205 17}
      545   CXLIV,        1 204  1 } Ptolemy Epiphanes.
      568   CXLIX,        4 181 24 }
      569   CL,           1 180  1}  Ptolemy Philometor.
      579   CLII,         3 170 11}
      580                 4 169 12   Ptolemy [Eupator.]
      600   CLVII,        4 149 35   Ptolemy Philometor.
      604   CLVIII,       4 145  1}  Ptolemy [Eupator.]
      632   CLXV,         4 117 21}
      633   CLXVI,        1 116  9 } Ptolemy Lathurus and Cleopatra.
      642   CLXVIII,      2 107 10 }
      643                 2 106  1}  Cleopatra and Alexander.
      660   CLXXII,       4  89 18}
      661   CLXXIII,      1  88  1 } Ptolemy Lathurus.
      667   CLXXIV,       3  82  7 }
      668                 4  81 [1]  Cleopatra II, 6 months:
                                        Alexander II, 19 days.
      669   CLXXV,        1  80  1 } Ptolemy Alexander III.
      683   CLXXVIII,     3  66 15 }
      684                 4  65  1}  Ptolemy Auletes.
      697   CLXXXII,      1  52 14}
      698                 2  51  1 } Ptolemy Dionysius II, and Cleopatra III.
      702   CLXXXIII,     2  47  5 }
      703                 3  46  1}  Cleopatra III, Ptolemy, jun.
      704                 4  45  2}
      705   CLXXXIV,      1  44  3   Ptolemy dies, leaving Cleopatra III.
      719   CLXXXVII,     3  30 17   Sept. 2. Battle of Actium.
                                       Augustus makes Egypt a Roman Province.


iii. _Chronology of the Ptolemies, according to Champollion Figeac._
Annales des Lagides, 2 v. 8. Par. 1819.

    B. C.
    323 May 30,         Death of Alexander, Nab. 424 Ol. CXIII, 4.
    323 Oct.            Ptolemy Soter arrives in Egypt.
    285 End.      39    Ptolemy places Philadelphus on the throne.
    284 Nov. 2        1 Philadelphus.
    246 Sum.      38: 1 of Evergetes.
    221 Sum.      25: 1 of Philopator.
    204 March 29, 17: 1 of Epiphanes.
    180 March     24: 1 of Philometor.
    146 Aut.      35: 1 of Evergetes II. [Eupator.]
    117 Oct.      29: 1 of Lathurus.
    107 Sum.      10    Lathurus expelled; Alexander reigns.
     88 Sum.      29    Lathurus restored: Alexander dies.
     81 Middle    36: 1 Lathurus dies, Berenice reigns 6 months: Alexander II.
     72 Beg.       8: 1 Ptolemy Auletes, “22 years” only.
     51 Spr.    “22”: 1 Cleopatra with her brother Ptolemy.
     47 July       5    of Cleopatra: 1 of Ptolemy the younger.
     44 July       8    Ptolemy poisoned early in the year.
     41 Jul       11    Caesarion takes the title of king; [the Neocaesar
                           of the Hieroglyphical alphabet.]
     30 Sept. 2   22    Battle of Actium.
     29 Aug.  1   22    Cleopatra kills herself. Egypt a Roman Province.


iv. _Mr. St. Martin’s Chronology of the Ptolemies._ Recherches sur la
Mort d’Alexandre, 8 Par. 1820.

    Nabon· B. C.
     424   324 June  22  Death of Alexander Ol. CXIII, 4.
           323 Nov.   8  Ptolemy Soter governor of Egypt, 17 years.
           306 Nov.   1  Ptolemy Soter king; reigns 21 years.
           285 Nov.   7  Soter and his son Philadelphus reign, 2 years.
           283 Oct.  17  Philadelphus; reigns alone 36 years.
           247 Nov.   8  Ptolemy Evergetes; reigns 25 years.
           222 Nov.   2  Ptolemy Philopator; reigns 17 years.
          “210 Oct.   9  Ptolemy Epiphanes associated in the crown.”
          “208 Oct.  28  First year named after Epiphanes with his father.”
           205 Oct.  13  Epiphanes reigns alone, 24 years.
           199 March 28  Anticipated coronation of Epiphanes.
           181 Oct.  28  Ptolemy Philometor reigns alone 11 years.
           170 Oct.  29  With Evergetes II. [Eupator] 6 years.
           164 Oct.  21  Alone again, 18 years; Evergetes at Cyrene.
           146 Nov.   2  Evergetes II. alone 29 years.
           117 Nov.  10  Soter II. [Lathurus] with Cleopatra 10 years.
           114 Nov.   8  Alexander I. reigns 7 years in Cyprus.
           107 Oct.  21  Alexander reigns 18 years: Soter in Cyprus.
            89 Nov.   1  Soter II. restored, reigns 8 years.
            82 Oct.  17  Last of Soter: Berenice reigns 6 months; Alexander
                           II. 19 days.
            81 Nov.   4  Ptolemy Auletes; reigns 29 years.
            59 Feb.  24  In the Roman year beginning this day, Auletes was
                           acknowledged king by the Senate.
            58 Feb.  14  He was driven out of Egypt after this day, which was
                           the beginning of a Roman year.
            58 Oct.  21  Cleopatra Tryphaena and Berenice; 1 year.
            57 Nov.   7  Berenice; 2 years with Cybiosactes and Archelaus.
            55 May    2  Auletes had been re-established.
            52 Nov.  12  Cleopatra with the elder Ptolemy; 4 years.
            48 June  29  Battle of Pharsalia.
            47 Feb.   6  Alexandria taken by Caesar; death of Ptolemy.
            47 Oct.  18  Cleopatra with the younger Ptolemy.
            44 Oct.  15  Cleopatra alone; 14 years.
            31 Sept.  2  Battle of Actium.
               Oct.  21  Last year of Cleopatra begins.
            30 Aug.   1  Alexandria taken by Augustus: end of the Lagidae.

Mr. St. Martin being the latest chronologist, that has examined these
dates, I have thought it right to insert his table, which I suppose to
be correct in the principal part of its foundation, although I cannot
readily believe that he is right in attributing to the Ptolemies the
observance of the Macedonian year rather than of the Egyptian. He says
that in Egypt, as all the world knows, the years of the sovereigns were
reckoned from the first day of the year, in which they took the reins
of government: meaning by this the first day of the Macedonian year:
it appears, however, unquestionable from almost every inscription and
manuscript found in Egypt, which exhibits a date, that the Egyptian
months and years were employed almost exclusively in that country.
It happens, however, that about the time in question, the beginning
of these years did not vary very exorbitantly from each other: the
Egyptian year having begun in September, October, November or December:
and the Macedonian, according to Mr. St. Martin, in October or
November.


v. _Genealogy of the Ptolemies, from Champollion Figeac I, p. 231._

 _Reigns._   _Names and    _Reigned._ _Death._     _Wives._     _Children._
           Descriptions._

  I.      SOTER. Son of   39y. 5m.   Natural.    1.
          Lagos and                              2.              [Arsinoe.]
          Arsinoe, first                         3. Eurydice, d. Ceraunus:
          governor, then                         of Antipater.   seized the
          King.                                                  crown of
                                                                 Macedonia.
                                                 4. Berenice     Philadelphus:
                                                 died old.       succeeded
                                                                 him.

  II.     PHILADELPHUS.   37y. 11m.  Natural.    1. Arsinoe      Evergetes.
          Son of Soter                           d. of Lysimachus,
          and Berenice.                          and
                                                 of his sister.
                                                 2. Arsinoe,     None.
                                                 her mother.

  III.    EVERGETES:      25y.       Poisoned    Berenice,       Philopator.
          Tryphon; son of            by his son. daughter of     Magas: put to
          Philadelphus                           Magas.          death by his
          and Arsinoe.                                           brother.
                                                                 Arsinoe.

  IV.     PHILOPATOR:     16y. 5m.   Natural.    Arsinoe         Epiphanes.
          Gallus; son of                         his sister:
          Evergetes and                          killed by her
          Berenice.                              husband.

  V.      EPIPHANES. Son  24y.       Poisoned.   Cleopatra, d.   Philometor.
          of Philopator                          of the king of  Cacergetes.
          and Arsinoe.                           Syria, survived Cleopatra.
                                                 him 8y.

  VI.     PHILOMETOR.     11y.
          Son of Epiphanes
          and Cleopatra.

  VII.    EVERGETES II:    4y.
          Physcon Cacergetes.
          Philologus. [Eupator.]
          Brother of
          Philometor.

  VIII.   PHILOMETOR       2 y.
          and EVERGETES.

  IX.     PHILOMETOR.     18 y.      Fall from   Cleopatra       A son: killed
                                     his horse.  his sister.     by his uncle.
                                                                 Cleop. Cocce.

  X.      EVERGETES II.   29 y.      Natural.    1. Cleopatra,   Memphites
                                                 his brother’s   killed by his
                                                 widow,          father.
                                                 repudiated.     Lathurus.
                                                 2. Cleopatra    Alexander
                                                 Cocce, her      Tryphaena:
                                                 daughter.       married
                                                                 Antiochus.
                                                                 Cleopatra: m.
                                                                 Lathurus, k.
                                                                 by Tryph.
                                                                 Selene: m.
                                                                 Lathurus;
                                                                 afterwards
                                                                 Antiochus.

  XI.    SOTER II:        10 y.      (Deposed.)  1. Cleopatra,   Berenice.
         Lathurus: Pothinus.                     his sister.
         With Cleopatra                          repudiated.
         Cocce, his mother.                      2. Selene:
                                                 repudiated,
                                                 and given to
                                                 Antiochus.
                                                 3. A concubine. Auletes.
                                                                 Another son,
                                                                 who reigned in
                                                                 Cyprus, and
                                                                 killed himself.
                                                                 Cleopatra.

  XII.   ALEXANDER.       17y. 6m.   Killed      Uncertain.      Alexander II.
         Parisactes; his             in battle,
         brother. With               after                       A daughter:
         Cleopatra Cocce.            killing                     killed with
                                     his mother.                 him.

  XIII.  SOTER II, again.  8y.       Natural.

  XIV.   BERENICE,         6m.       Killed by
         daughter of                 Alexander II.
         Soter.

  XV.    ALEXANDER II.    “8y. 3m.”  “Dies at    Berenice;
         Son of Alexander.   [19 d.] Tyre.”      whom he
                                                 killed.

  XVI.   NEUS DIONYSUS:   “16y.”                 Cleopatra.      Berenice.
         Auletes. Natural                                        Cleopatra.
         son of Lathurus.                                        Ptolemy: dr.
                                                                 Ptolemy: pois.
                                                                 Arsinoe, left
                                                                 Egypt.

  XVII.  BERENICE,         2y.       Killed
         daughter of                 by her
         Auletes.                    father.

  XVIII. AULETES.          2y.       Natural.

  XIX.   PTOLEMY the       3y.       Drowned     Cleopatra
         elder and                   after       his sister.
         Cleopatra,                  a battle.
         children of Auletes.

  XX.    PTOLEMY the       4y. 6m.   Poisoned    Cleopatra
         younger and                 by his      his sister.
         Cleopatra.                  wife.

  XXI.   CLEOPATRA,       14y. 3m.   Killed      By Julius
         alone.                      herself.    Caesar.         Caesarion.
                                                 By Antony.      A son.
                                                                 A son.
                                                                 A daughter:
                                                                 carried in
                                                                 triumph by
                                                                 Augustus.


vi. _Approximate dates of the various Reigns; according to Porphyry and
to the Medals._

  B. C.  Ptolemy Soter.
  323    1
  322    2
  321    3
  320    4
  319    5
  318    6
  317    7
  316    8
  315    9
  314    10
  313    11
  312    12
  311    13
  310    14
  309    15
  308    16
  307    17
  306    18
  305    19
  304    20
  303    21
  302    22
  301    23
  300    24
  299    25
  298    26
  297    27
  296    28
  295    29
  294    30
  293    31
  292    32
  291    33
  290    34
  289    35
  288    36
  287    37
  286    38
         Soter and Philadelphus
  285    39
  284    40
         Philadelphus
  283    41
  282    42
  281    43
  280    44
  279    45
  278    46
  277    47
  276    48
  275    49
  274    50
  273    51
  272    52
  271    53
  270    54
  269    55
  268    56
         {57?
  267    {19?
  266    20
  265    21
  264    22
  263    23
  262    24
  261    25
  260    26
  259    27
  258    28
  257    29
  256    30
  255    31
  254    32
  253    33
  252    34
  251    35
  250    36
  249    37
  248    38
         Evergetes.
  247    1
  246    2
  245    3
  244    4
  243    5
  242    6
  241    7
  240    8
  239    9
  238    11
  237    10
  236    12
  235    13
  234    14
  233    15
  232    16
  231    17
  230    18
  229    19
  228    20
  227    21
  226    22
  225    23
  224    24
  223    25
         Philopator.
  222    1
  221    2
  220    3
  219    4
  218    5
  217    6
  216    7
  215    8
  214    9
  213    10
  212    11
  211    12
  210    13
  209    14
         Philopator and Epiphanes.
  208    15
  207    16
  206    17
         Epiphanes.
  205    1
  204    2
  203    3
  202    4
  201    5
  200    6
  199    7
  198    8
  197    9
  196    10
  195    11
  194    12
  193    13
  192    14
  191    15
  190    16
  189    17
  188    18
  187    19
  186    20
  185    21
  184    22
  183    23
  182    24
         Philometor.
  181    1
  180    2
  179    3
  178    4
  177    5
  176    6
  175    7
  174    8
  173    9
  172    10
  171    11
         Philometor and Evergetes II.
  170    12-1
  169    13-2
  168    14-3
  167    15-4
  166    16-5
  165    17-6
         Philometor.
  164    18
  163    19
  162    20
  161    21
  160    22
  159    23
  158    24
  157    25
  156    26
  155    27
  154    28
  153    29
  152    30
  151    31
  150    32
  149    33
  148    34
  147    35
  146    36
         Evergetes II.
  146    25
  145    26
  144    27
  143    28
  142    29
  141    30
  140    31
  139    32
  138    33
  137    34
  136    35
  135    36
  134    37
  133    38
  132    39
  131    40
  130    41
  129    42
  128    43
  127    44
  126    45
  125    46
  124    47
  123    48
  122    49
  121    50
  120    51
  119    52
  118    53
  117    54
         Lathurus and Cleopatra.
  117    1
  116    2
  115    3
  114    4
  113    5
  112    6
  111    7
  110    8
  109    9
  108    10
         Cleopatra and Alexander.
  107    11-8
  106    12-9
  105    13-10
  104    14-11
  103    15-12
  102    16-13
  101    17-14
  100    18-15
  99     19-16
  98     20-17
  97     21-18
  96     22-19
  95     23-20
  94     24-21
  93     25-22
  92     26-23
  91     27-24
  90     28-25
         Alexander.
  89     26
  88     27
         Lathurus.
  88     30
  87     31
  86     32
  85     33
  84     34
  83     35
  82     36
  81     37?
         Berenice.
  81     1
         Alexander II.
  81     1
         Auletes.
  81     1
  80     2
  79     3
  78     4
  77     5
  76     6
  75     7
  74     8
  73     9
  72     10
  71     11
  70     12
  69     13
  68     14
  67     15
  66     16
  65     17
  64     18
  63     19
  62     20
  61     21
  60     22
  59     23
  58     24
         Cleopatra and Berenice.
  57     1
         Berenice.
  56     1
  55     2
         Auletes.
  54     28
  53     29
         Cleopatra and Ptolemy.
  52     1
  51     2
  50     3
  49     4
         Cleopatra and Ptolemy, jun.
  48     5-1
  47     6-2
  46     7-3
  45     8-4
  44     9
  43     10
  42     11
  41     12
  40     13
  39     14
  38     15
  37     16-1
  36     17-2
  35     18-3
  34     19-4
  33     20-5
  32     21-6
  31     22-7



OMISSION IN CHAPTER VI.

_Page 115. At the end, add._ To administer these rites, and to renew
these offerings, at least as often as could be required, was apparently
the duty of the priests, and they were no doubt amply remunerated for
their attentions, by the families of the deceased, in the form of the
“collections,” which are the objects of sale in Mr. Grey’s papyrus. The
deed was registered 19 days after its execution.




APPENDIX I.


I. GREEK PAPYRUS OF MR. GREY.

(1) ΑΝΤΙΓΡΑΦον συΝΓΡΑΦΗΣ ΑΙΓΥΠΤΙΑΣ περι νεκΡΩΝ εν ΘΥν̅. γενοΜΕΝΗΣ (2)
ΚΑΤΑΔ Υ...

(3) ΕΤΟΥΣ Λϛ αθυΡ|Κ̅ ΜΕΤΑ ΤΑ ΚΟΙΝΑ ΤΑΔΕ ΛΕΓΕΙ ΧΟΛΧΥΤΗΣ (4) ΤΩΝ Δουλων
ισιδος ΤΗΣ ΜΕΓΑΛΗΣ ΟΝΝΩΦΡΙΣ ΩΡΟΥ ΜΗΤΡΟΣ (5) ΣΕΝΠΟΗΡις ως ∟ Μ ΕΥΠΕΤΕΣΙΟΣ
ΜΕΓας μεΛΙΧΡΩΣ ΚΟΙΛΟΦΘΑΛΜΟΣ (6) ΑΝΑΦΑΛΑΝτος ΩΡΩΙ ΩΡΟΥ ΜΗΤΡΟΣ ΣΕΝΠΟΗΡΙΣ
ΗΥΔΟΚΗσΕ ΑΣΜΕ [νως?] (7) ΤΗΣ ΤΙΜης του ΗΜΙΣΟΥΣ ΤΟΥ ΤΡΙΤΟΥ της ΛΟΓΕΙΑΣ
ΤΩΝ ΚΕΙΜΕΝΩΝ (8) ΝΕΚΡΩΝ εν ΘΥΝΑΒΟΥΝΟΥΝ ΕΝ τηι ΛΙΒΥΗΙ ΤΟΥ ΠΕΡΙΘΗΒΑΣ
(9) ΕΝ ΤΟΙΣ ΜΕΜΝΟΝΕΙΟΙΣ ΟΜΟΙΩΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΟΥ ΗΜΙΣΟΥΣ ΤΟΥ ΤΡΙΤΟΥ ΛΕΙΤΟΥΡΓΙΩΝ
(10) ΚΑΙ ΤΩΝ ΑΛΛΩΝ ΩΝ ΤΑ ΟΝΟΜΑΤΑ | ΜΟΥθΗΣ ΣΠΟΤΟΥΤΟΣ ΣΥΝ (11) ΤΕΚΝΟΙΣ
ΚΑΙ πΑΝΤΩΝ ΧΑΠΟΧΡΑΤΗΣ ΝΕΧΘΜΩΝΘΟΥ ΣΥΝ ΤΕΚΝΟΙΣ (12) ΚΑΙ ΠΑΝΤΩν αΡΣΙΗΣΙΣ
ΝΕΧΘΜΩΝΘΟΥ ΟΜΟΙΩΣ ΠΕΤΕΜΕΣΤΟΥΣ (13) ΝΕΧΘΜωνθου ΩΣΑΥΤΩΣ ΑΡΣΙΗΣΙΣ ΖΜΙΝΙΟΣ
ΟΜΟΙΩΣ (14) ΟΣΟΡΟΗΡΙΣ ωρου οΜΟΙΩΣ ΣΠΟΤΟΥΣ ΧΑΠΟΧΩΝΣΙΟΣ ΩΣΑΥΤΩΣ (15)
ΖΩΓΛΥΦΟΣ ΑΦ ΩΝ ΕΠΙΒΑΛΛΕΙ ΑΣΩΤΙ ΩΡΟΥ ΜΗΤΡΟΣ ΣΕΝΠΟΗΡΙΣ (16) ΤΩΙ ΝΕωτΕΡΟΥ
ΣΟΥ ΑΔΕΛΦΩΙ ΤΩΝ ΑΥΤΩΝ ΧΟΛΧΥΤωΝ ΤΟ ΗΜΙΣΥ (17) ΤΟΥ ΠΡΟΕΙρηΜΕνΟΥ ΤΡΙΤΟΥ
ΜΕΡΟΥΣ ΛΕΙΤΟΥΡΓΙΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΚΑΡΠΕΙΩΝ ΚΑΙ (18) ΤΩΝ ΑΛΛΩν
αΠΕΔΟΤΟ ΑΥΤΩΙ ΕΝ ΤΩΙ λϛ .̅.̅ αθΥΡ ΕΠΙ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ (19) ΑΙΩΝΟΒιΟΥ εις
ΠΛΗΡΩΣΙΝ ΤΟΥ ΤΡΙΤΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΤΟΥ ΗΜΙΣΟΥΣ ΚΑΡΠΕΙΩΝ (20) ΚΑΙ ΤΩΝ ΑΛΛΩν
νεΚΡΩΝ ΕΝ ΘΥ. ΠΑΤΕΥΤΗΜΕΙ ΣΥΝ ΤΕΚΝΟΙΣ ΚΑΙ (21) ΠΑΝΤΩΝ Και ηΜΙΣΟΥΣ
ΚΑΡΠΕΙΩΝ ΕΠΙΒΑΛΛΟΝΤΩΝ ΜΟΙ ΕΝ ΤΟΙΣ (22) ΠΕΤΕΧΩνσΙΟΣ ΓΑΛΑΚΤΟΦΟΡΟΥ ΚΑΙ
ΤΟΠΟΥ ΑΣΙΗΤΟΣ ΚΑΛΟΥΜΕΝΟΥ (23) ΦΡΕΚΑΓΗΣ ΣΥΝ ΤΩΝ ΕΝ ΑΥΤωι ΝΕΚΡΩΝ ΑΦ ΩΝ
ΕΠΙΒΑΛΛΕΙ (24) ΤΩΙ ΑΥΤΩΙ ασΩΤΙ ΤΟ ΗΜΙΣΥ ΑΠΕΔΟΜΗΝ ΑΥΤΩΙ ΣΑ ΕΙΣΙΝ (25)
ΚΑΙ ΕΧΩ ΑΥτΩΝ ΠΑΡΑ ΣΟΥ ΤΗΝ ΤΙΜΗΝ ΚΟΥΘΕΝ ΣΟΙ ΕΓΚΑΛΩ (26) ΠΕΡΙ ΑΥΤΩΝ
αΠΟ ΤΗΣΗΜΕΡΟΝ ΕΑΝ ΔΕ ΤΙΣ ΣΟΙ ΕΠΕΛΘΗΙ (27) ΠΕΡΙ ΑΥΤΩΝ υΠΟΣΤΗΣΩ ΑΥΤΟΝ
ΕΑΝ ΔΕ ΜΗ ΑΠΟΣΤΗΣΩΙ (28) ΑΠΟΣΤΗΣΩ ΕΠΑΝΑΓΚΟΝ ΕΓΡΑΨΕΝ ΩΡΟΣ ΦΑΒΙΤΟΣ Ο
ΠΑΡΑ ΤΩΝ (29) ΙΕΡΕΙΩΝ του ΑμοΝΡΑΣΟΝΘΗΡ ΚΑΙ ΤΩΝ ΣΥΝΝΑΩΝ ΘΕΩΝ
ΜΟΝΟ(30)ΓΡΑΦΟΣ ΜαρτυΡΕΣ ΕΡΙΕΥΣ ΦΑΝΡΕΟΥΣ ΠΕΤΕΑΡΤΡΗΣ ΠΑΤΕΥΤΗΜΙΟΣ (31)
ΠΕΤΕΑΡΠΟΧΡΑΤΗΣ ωροΥ ΣΝΑΧΟΜΝΕΥΣ ΠΕΤΕΥΡΙΟΣ ΣΝΑΧΟΜΗΣ (32) ΨΕΝΧΩΝΣΙΟΣ
ΤΟΤΟΗΣ ΦΙΒΙΟΣ ΠΟΡΤΙΣ ΑΠΟΛΛΩΝΙΟΥ ΖΜΙΝΙΣ (33) ΠΕΤΕΜΕΣΤΟΥΤΟΣ ΠΕΤΕΥΤΗΜΙΣ
ΑΡΣΙΗΣΙΟΣ ΑΜΟΝΟΡΥΤΙΟΣ (34) ΠΑΚΗΜΙΟΣ ΩΡΟΣ ΧΙΜΝΑΡΑΥΤΟΣ ΑΡΜΗΝΙΣ ΖΘΕΝΑΗΤΙΟΣ
(35) ΜΑΗΣΙΣ ΜΙΡΣΙΟΣ ΑΝΤΙΜΑΧΟΣ ΑΝΤΙΓΕΝΟΥΣ ΠΕΤΟΦΩΙΣ ΦΙΒΙΟΣ (36) ΠΑΝΑΣ
ΠΕΤΟΣΙΡΙΟΣ      ΜΑΡΤΥΡΕΣ Ιϛ

(37) ΑΝΤΙΓΡΑΦΟΝ ΠΤΩΜΑΤΟΣ/ ΕΤΟΥΣ Λϛ ΧΟΙΑΧ θ̅̅ τ ΕΠΙ ΤΗΝ ΕΝ ΔΙΟΣ𝄐 (38)
ΤΡΑΠΕΖΑΝ ΕΦ ΗΣ ΛΥΣΙΜΑΧΟΣ Κ ΕΓΚ ΚΑΤΑ ΔΙΑΓΡΑΦηΝ ΑΣΚΛΗΠΙΑΔΟΥ (19) ΚΑΙ
ΖΜΙΝΙΟΣ ΤΕΛΩΝΩΝ ΕΦ ΗΝ ΥΠΟΓΡ ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΟΣ ΑΝΤΙΓΡ ΩΡΟΣ ΩΡΟΥ (40) ΧΟΛΧΥΤΗΣ
ο π. ΤΩΝ ΛΟΓΕΙΟΜΕΝΩΝ Δι αυΤΩΝ ΧΑΡΙΝ ΤΩΝ ΚΕΙΜΕΝΩΝ (41) ΝΕΚΡΩΝ ΕΝ
ΘΥΝΑΒΟΥΝΟΥΝ ΕΝ ΤΟΙΣ ΜΕΜΝΟΝΕΙΟΙΣ ΤΗΣ λΙβυΗΣ (42) Της ΠΕΡΙΘ̅ ΤΑΦΟΙΣ ΑΝΘ
ΗΣ ΠΟΙΟΥΝΤΑΙ ΛΕΙΤΟΥΡΓΙΑΣ Α ΕΩΝΗΣΑΤΟ (43) ΠΑΡΑ ΟΝΝΩΦΡΙΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΩΡΟΥ ΧΑΛΚοΥ
         ΖΓ Τ̅       Τ,Τ

                                                     (44) ΛΥΣΙΜΑΧ . ΥΓΡ̅


II. PAPYRUS OF ANASTASY AND BÖCKH.

(1) ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΟΝΤΩΝ ΚΛΕΟΠΑΤΡΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙοΥ ΥΙΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΕΠΙΚΑΛΟΥΜΕΝΟΥ
ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΥ ΘΕΩΝ ΦΙΛΟΜΗΤΟΡΩΝ ΣΩΤΗΡΩΝ ΕΤΟΥΣ ΙΒ ΤΟΥ ΚΑΙ Θ ΕΦ ΙΕΡΕΩΣ ΤΟΥ
ΟΝΤΟΣ (2) ΕΝ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΕΙΑΙ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΘΕΩΝ ΣΩΤΗΡΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΘΕΩΝ ΑΔΕΛΦΩΝ
ΚΑΙ ΘΕΩΝ ΕΥΕΡΓΕΤΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΘΕΩΝ ΦΙΛΟΠΑΤΟΡΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΘΕΩΝ ΕΠΙΦΑΝΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΘΕΟΥ (3)
ΦΙΛΟΜΗΤΟΡΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΘΕΟΥ ΕΥΠΑΤΟΡΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΘΕΩΝ ΕΥΕΡΓΕΤΩΝ ΑΘΛΟΦΟΡΟΥ ΒΕΡΕΝΙΚΗΣ
ΕΥΕΡΓΕΤΙΔΟΣ ΚΑΝΗΦΟΡΟΥ ΑΡΣΙΝΟΗΣ ΦΙΛΑΔΕΛΦΟΥ ΚΑΙ [ΙΕΡΕΙ]ΑΣ ΑΡΣΙΝΟΗΣ (4)
ΕΥΠΑΤΟΡΟΣ ΤΩΝ ΟΝΤΩΝ ΕΝ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΕΙΑΙ ΕΝ ΔΕ ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΔΙ ΤΗΣ ΘΗΒΑΙΔΟΣ ΕΦ
ΙΕΡΕΩΝ ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΜΕΝ ΣΩΤΗΡΟΣ ΤΩΝ ΟΝΤΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΟΥΣΩΝ (5) ΕΝ ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΔΙ
ΜΗΝΟΣ ΤΥΒΙ Κ̅Θ̅  ΕΠ ΑΠΟΛΛΩΝΙΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΗΙ ΑΓΟΡΑΝΟΜΙΑΙ ΤΩΝ ΜΕ̅ ΚΑΙ ΤΗΣ
ΚΑΤΩ ΤΟΠΑΡΧΙΑΣ ΤΟΥ ΠΑΘΥΡΙΤΟΥ (6) ΑΠΕΔΟΤΟ ΠΑΜΩΝΘΗΣ ΩΣ ∟ ΜΕ ΜΕΣΟΣ
ΜΕΛΑΝΧΡΩΣ ΚΑΛΟΣ ΤΟ ΣΩΜΑ ΦΑΛΑΚΡΟΣ ΣΤΡΟΓΓΥΛΟΠΡΟΣΩΠΟΣ ΕΥΘΥΡΙΝ ΚΑΙ
ΣΝΑΧΟΜΝΕΥΣ ΩΣ ∟ Κ ΜΕΣΟΣ ΜΕΛΙΧΡΩΣ (7) ΚΑΙ ΟΥΤΟΣ ΣΤΡΟΓΓΥΛΟΠΡΟΣΩΠΟΣ
ΕΥΘΥΡΙΝ ΚΑΙ ΣΕΜΜΟΥΘΙΣ ΠΕΡΣΙΝΗΙ ΩΣ ∟ ΚΒ ΜΕΣΗΙ ΜΕΛΙΧΡΩΣ ΣΤΡΟΓΓΥΛΟΠΡΟΣΩΠΟΣ
ΕΝΣΙΜΟΣ ΗΣΥΧΗ ΚΑΙ ΤΑΘΛΥΤ (8) ΠΕΡΣΙΝΗΙ ΩΣ ∟ Λ ΜΕΣΗΙ ΜΕΛΙΧΡΩΣ
ΣΤΡΟΓΓΥΛΟΠΡΟΣΩΠΟΣ ΕΥΘΥΡΙΝ ΜΕΤΑ ΚΥΡΙΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΕΑΥΤΩΝ ΠΑΜΩΝΘΟΥ ΤΟΥ
ΣΥΝΑΠΟΔΟΜΕΝΟΥ ΟΙ ΤΕΣΣΑΡΕΣ (9) ΤΩΝ ΠΕΤΕΨΑΙΤΟΣ ΤΩΝ ΕΚ ΤΩΝ ΜΕΜΝΟΝΕΙΩΝ
ΣΚΥΤΕΩΝ ΑΠΟ ΤΟΥ ΥΠΑΡΧΟΝΤΟΣ ΑΥΤΟΙΣ ΕΝ ΤΩΙ ΑΠΟ ΝΟΤΟΥ ΜΕΡΕΙ ΜΕΜΝΟΝΕΩΝ
ΠΛΑΚΟ“Υ”Σ (10) ΨΙΛΟΥ ΤΟΠΟΥ ΠΗΧΕΙΣ ΕΝ ΤΕΤΑΡΤΟΝ Η ΓΕΙΤΟΝΕΣ ΝΟΤΟΥ ΡΥΜΗ
ΒΑΣΙΛΙΚΗ ΒΟΡΡΑ ΚΑΙ ΑΠΗΛΙΩΤΟΥ ΠΑΜΩΝΘΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΒΟΚΟΝΣΙΗΜΙΟΣ ΑΔΕΛΦΟΣ (11) ΚΑΙ
ΚΟΙΝΟΣ ΠΟΛΕΩΣ [or ΤΟΙΧΟΣ]    ΛΙΒΟΣ ΟΙΚΙΑ ΤΑΓΗΤΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΧΑΛΟΜΗ ΡΕΟΥΣΗΣ
ΑΝΑ ΜΕΣΟΝ ΔΙ̅ ΦΕρΟΥΣΗΣ ΑΠΟ ΤΟΥ ΠΟ̅ ΓΕΙΤΟΝΕΣ ΠΑΝΤΟΘΕΝ ΕΠΡΙΑΤΟ ΝΕΧΟΥΤΗΣ
ΜΙΚΡΟΣ (12) ΑΣΩΤΟΣ ΩΣ ∟ Μ ΜΕΣΟΣ ΜΕΛΙΧΡΩΣ ΤΕΡΠΝΟΣ ΜΑΚΡΟΠΡΟΣΩΠΟΣ ΕΥΘΥΡΙΝ
ΟΥΑΗ ΜΕΤΩΠΩΙ ΜΕΣΩΙ ΧΑΛΚΟΥ ΝΟΜΙΣΜΑΤΟΣ Χ̅Α̅ ΠΡΟΠΩΛΗΤΑΙ ΚΑΙ (13) ΒΕΒΑΙΩΤΑΙ
ΤΩΝ ΚΑΤΑ ΤΗΝ ΩΝΗΝ ΤΑΥΤΗΝ ΟΙ ΑΠΟΔΟΜΕΝΟΙ ΕΝΕΔΕΞΑΤΟ ΝΕΧΟΥΤΗΣ Ο ΠΡΙΑΜΕΝΟΣ  .

                                                      ΑΠΟΛ . Κ . Αγ̅ρ̅ .

L. 9. ΠΛΑΚΟΥΣ for ΠΛΑΚΟΣ. L. 10. ΑΔΕΛΦΟΣ seems inserted
parenthetically. L. 11. ΔΙ for ΔΙΩΡΥΓΟΣ. L. 13. Possibly Ο ΕΔΕΞΑΤΟ,
but not ΟΝ. L. 14. The signature somewhat resembles the Κʹ ΕΓΚυ,
which occurs in almost all the registers; but from the interpretation
of that contraction, afforded by the Parisian manuscript, it would
be unapplicable here; and these characters may probably be part of
κατ’ ἀγοράν. The term λόγεια, or λογία, of the former manuscript,
was afterwards applied to the collections made for the poor, in the
Christian Churches.


III. VARIOUS REGISTRIES COMPARED.

    1. GREY. A.         ΕΤΟΥΣ ΚΗ ΜΕΣΟΡΗ ΚΗ̅
    2.       B.         ΕΤΟΥΣ ΚΘ ΦΑΜ^ε Θ̅
    3.       C.         ΕΤΟΥΣ ΛΕ ΦΑΡΜΟ^υ Κ̅
    4. PARIS. ENCH.     ΕΤΟΥΣ Λϛ ΧΟΙΑΧ Θ̅
    5. GREY ANT.        ΕΤΟΥΣ Λϛ ΧΟΙΑΧ Θ̅
    6. ANASTASY.        ΕΤΟΥΣ ΙΒ ΤΟΥ ΚΑΙ Θ ΦΑΡΜΟΥΘΙ Κ̅

    1. ΓΕΓ̅      ΕΠΙ ΤΗΝ  ΕΝ ΕΡΜΩ2ΕΙ
    2. ΓΕΓ̅      ΕΠΙ ΤΗΝ  ΕΝ ΕΡΜ^ω
    3. ΤΕΤ̅      ΕΠΙ ΤΗΝ  ΕΝ ΔΙΟΣ𝄐 ΤΗΙ Μ^ε
    4. ΤΕΤΑΚΤΑΙ ΕΠΙ ΤΗΝ  ΕΝ ΔΙΟΣΠΟΛΕΙ ΤΗΙ ΜΕΓΑΛΗΙ
    5. Τ        ΕΠΙ ΤΗΝ  ΕΝ ΔΙΟΣ𝄐
    6. ...      ΕΠΙ ΤΗΝ  ΕΝ ΕΡ̅2

                                       υ
    1. ΤΡ̅       ΕΦ ΗΣ ΔΙΌ        Κ́   ΕΓΚ
                                       υ
    2. ΤΡ̅       ΕΦ ΗΣ ΔΙΟΝ̅       Κ́   ΕΓΚ
    3. ΤΡ̅       ΕΦ ΗΣ ΛΥΣΙΜ
    4. ΤΡΑΠΕΖΑΝ ΕΦ ΗΣ ΛΥΣΙΜΑΧΟΣ ΕΙΚΟΣΤΗΣ ΕΓΚΥΚΛΙΟΥ
                                       υ
    5. ΤΡΑΠΕΖΑΝ ΕΦ ΗΣ ΛΥΣΙΜΑΧΟΣ  Κ́   ΕΓΚ
                         υ             υ
    6. ΤΡ̅       ΕΦ ΗΣ ΔΙΟΝ       Κ̅   ΕΓΚ

    1. ΚΑΤΑ ΤΗΝ ΠΑΡ ΑΣΚΛ^Η
    2. ΚΑΤΑ ΤΗΝ ΠΑΡ ΑΣΚΛ̅ ΚΑΙ ΚΡΑΤΟΥ
    3. ΚΑΤΑ ΤΗΝ ΠΑΡΑ ΣΑΡΑΠΙΩΝΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΩΝ ΜΕΤΟΧΩΝ
    4. ΚΑΤΑ ΔΙΑΓΡΑΦΗΝ ΑΣΚΛΗΠΙΑΔΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΖΜΙΝΙΟΣ
    5. ΚΑΤΑ ΔΙΑΓΡΑΦηΝ ΑΣΚΛΗΠΙΑΔΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΖΜΙΝΙΟΣ
                                       ω
    6. ΚΑΤΑ ΔΙΑΓΡ̅                  μετοχ

    1. ΤΟΥ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΗΙ ΩΝΗΙ ΔΙΑΓΡ̅ ΥΦ ΗΝ ΥΠΟΓΡ ΠΤΟΛ^ε
    2. ΤΩΝ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΗΙ ΩΝΗ  ΔΙΑΓΡ̅ ΥΦ ΗΝ ΥΠΟΓΡ̅ Π̅ΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΟΣ
    3. ΤΩΝ ΠΡΟΣ ΤΗΙ ΩΝΗΙ ΔΙΑΓΡ̅ ΥΦ ΗΝ ΥΠΟΓΡ̅ ΕΡΜΟΦΙΛΟΣ
    4. ΤΕΛΩΝΩΝ                 ΥΦ ΗΝ ΥΠΟΓΡ̅ ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΟΣ
    5. ΤΕΛΩΝΩΝ                 ΥΦ ΗΝ ΥΠΟΓΡ̅ ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΟΣ
        λ
    6. ΤΕ                    ΥΦ ΗΝ ΥΠΟΓΡ̅ ΗΡ̅ΚΛΕΙΔΗΣ

    1.             ΑΝΤΙΓΡ̅    ΩΝΗΣ ΤΕΕΦΒΙΣ ΑΜΕΝ^ω
    2.          Ο  ΑΝΤΙΓΡ̅         ΑΣΥΣ ΩΡΟΥ      ΩΝΗΣ
    3. ΚΑΙ ΣΑΡ̅  ΟΙ ΑΝΤΙΓΡ̅    ΩΝΗΣ ΠΕΧΥΤΗΣ ΑΡΣΙΗΣΙΟΣ
    4.          Ο  ΑΝΤΙΓΡ̅         ασωΣ ΩΡΟΥ ΧΟΛΧΥΤΟΥ
    5.             ΑΝΤΙΓΡ̅         ΩΡΟΣ ΩΡΟΥ ΧοΛΧΥΤΗΣ
    6.          Ο  ΑΝΤΙΓΡ̅ ΤΗ̂ ΩΝΗΣ ΝΕΧΟΥΤΗΣ ΜΙΚΡΟΣ ΑΣΩΤΟΣ

                              ο                ο
    1. ΤΧΧ | ΑΠΟ Π́^2 ⊥ Ζ̑ ΑΠΟ Ν ΤΟΥ ΟΛΟΥ ΨΙΛΟΥ Τ
             ο
    2. ΨΙΛΟΥ Τ Β̑_
                       ο
    3. Δ´ ΜΕΡΟΥΣ ΨΙΛΟΥ Τ Γ̑ ∠
    4. ΕΝ Η: ΤΩΝ ΛΟΓΕΙΟΜΕΝΩΝ ΔΙ ΑΥΤΩΝ ΧΑΡΙΝ ΤΩΝ
    5. εΝ η. ΤΩΝ ΛΟΓΕΙΟΜΕΝΩΝ ΔΙ ΑΥΤΩΝ ΧΑΡΙΝ ΤΩΝ
    6. ΨΙΛΟΝ ΤΟΠΟΝ Η̑ ΕΝ ΤΕΤΑΡΤον

    1. ΤΟΥ ΟΝΤΟΣ ΑΠΟ ΝΟΤΟΥ   ΔΙΟΣ𝄐 ΤΗΣ Μ^ε
                     ο
    2. ΤΟΥ ΟΝΤΟΣ ΑΠΟ Ν       ΔΙΟΣ𝄐 ΤΗΣ Μ^ε
                  ο
    3. ΕΝ ΤΩΙ ΑΠΟ Ν Μ^ε      ΔΙΟΣ𝄐 ΤΗΣ Μ ΑΠΟ ΛΙΒΟΣ
    4. ΚΕΙΜΕΝΩΝ ΝΕΚΡΩΝ ΕΝ ΟΙΣ ΕΧΟΥΣΙΝ ΕΝ ΤΟΙΣ
    5. ΚΕΙΜΕΝΩΝ ΝΕΚΡΩΝ ΕΝ ΘΥΝΑΒΟΥΝΟΥΝ ΕΝ ΤΟΙΣ
    6. ΕΝ ΤΩΙ ΑΠΟ ΝΟΤΟΥ ΜΕΡΕΙ ΜΕΜΝΟΝΕΩΝ

    3. ΤΟΥ ωΡ^ο ΤΟΥ ΗΡ ΤΟΥ ΑΓΟΝΤΟΣ ΕΠΙ ΠΟΤ̅
    4. ΜΕΜΝΟΝΕΙΟΙΣ ΤΗΣ ΛΙΒΥΗΣ ΤΟΥ ΠΕΡΙΘΗΒαΣ ΤΑΦΟΙΣ
    5. ΜΕΜΝΟΝΕΙΟΙΣ ΤΗΣ ΛΙβυΗΣ Του ΠΕΡΙΘ̅     ΤΑΦΟΙΣ

    1. ΩΝ ΑΙ ΓΕΙΤΝΙΑΙ ΔΕΔ ΔΙΑ ΤΗΣ ΠΡΟΚ^ε        ΣΥΝΓΡ
                                   ο
    2. ΟΥ ΑΙ ΓΕΙΤΝΙΑΙ ΔΕΔ ΔΙΑ ΤΗΣ ΠΡ            ΣΥΝΓΡ̅
    3. ΟΥ ΑΙ ΓΕΙΤΝΙΑΙ ΔΕΔ ΔΙΑ ΤΗΣ ΠΡΟΚΕΙΜΕ      ΣΥΝΓΡ̅
    4. ΑΝΘ ΗΣ ΠΟΙΕΙΤΑΙ  ΛΕΙΤΟΥΡΓΙΑΣ
    5. ΑΝΘ ΗΣ ΠΟΙΟΥΝΤΑΙ ΛΕΙΤΟΥΡΓΙΑΣ

    1. ΟΝ ΗΓΟΡ̅    ΠΑΡ ΑΛΗΚΙΟΣ                      ΚΑΙ
           ο
    2. Ον ΗΓ             ΠΑΡ ΑΛΗΚΙΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΕΡΙΕΩΣ    ΚΑΙ
    3. ΟΝ ΗΓΟΡΑΣΕΝ       ΠΑΡ ΑΜΜΩΝΙΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΠΥΡΡΙΟΥ  ΚΑΙ
    4. Α ΕΩΝ^η           ΠΑΡ ΟΝΝΩΦΡΙΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΩΡΟΥ
    5. Α ΕΩΝΗΣΑΤΟ        ΠΑΡΑ ΟΝΝΩΦΡΙΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΩΡΟΥ
    6. ΟΝ ΕΩΝΗΘΗ         ΠΑΡ̅ ΠΑΜΩΝΘΗΣΤΟΥ           ΚΑΙ

    1. ΛΟΥΒΑΙΤΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΒΑΙΑΙΤΟΣ ΤΩΝ ΕΡΙΕΩΣ ΚΑΙ
    2. ΛΟΥΒΑΙΤΟΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΒΑΙΑΙΤΟΣ ΤΩΝ ΕΡΙΕΩΣ ΚΑΙ
    3. ΨΕΝΑΜΟΥΝΙΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΠΥΡΡΙΟΥ
    6. ΣΝΑΧΟΜΝΕΩΣ ΤΩΝ ΠΕΤΕΨΑΙΤΟΣ ΣΥΝ ΤΑΙΣ ΑΔΕΛΦΑΙΣ

    1. ΣΕΝΕΡΙΕΥΤΟΣ ΤΗΣ ΠΕΤΕΝΕΦΩΤΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΕΡΙΕΩΣ ΤΟΥ
    2. ΣΕΝΕΡΙΕΩΣ   ΤΗΣ ΠΕΤΕΝΕΦΩΤΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΕΡΙΕΩΣ ΤΟΥ

    1. ΑΜΕΝΩΘΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΣΕΝΟΣΟΡΦΙΒΙΟΣ ΤΗΣ ΑΜΕΝΩΘΟΥ
    2. ΑΜΕΝΩΘΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΣΕΝΟΣΟΡΦΙΒΙΟΣ ΤΗΣ ΑΜΕΝΩΘΟΥ

    1. ΚΑΙ ΣΠΟΙΤΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΕΡΙΕΩΣ ΤΟΥ ΑΜΕΝΩΘΟΥ
    2. ΚΑΙ ΣΠΟΙΤΟΣ     ΚΑΙ ΕΡΙΕΩΣ ΤΟΥ ΑΜΕΝΩΘΟΥ

    1. ΕΝ ΤΩΙ ΚΗ ΠΑΧΩΝ|Κ̅
    4. ΕΝΤΩΙ Λϛ ∟ ΑΘΥΡ Κης

    1.                Χ̅Χ̅          τελος
    2.                χ̅ χ̅ α δ     τελος
                                  ς
    3.                ΧΑλκ ΓιΒ    Τ
    4. ΣΥΙΝΕΤΡΑΠΗΣΘΗΙ ΧΑΛΚΟΥ ¿ΧΣ? ΤΕΛΟΣ
    5.                ΧΑΛΚΟΥ ΖΓ   Τ̅
    6.                Χ̅     Ζ  α

    1. της δ         Ρ | Ρ ΔΙΟΝ    Υ̅Ρ̅
    2. ου ακ̅         Φ     ΔΙΟΝ^υ  ΥΡ
    3. ου Λ̂          R / R ΛΥΣΙΜΑΧ ΥΓ̅Ρ̅
                                      ε
    4. ΕΝΑΚοιΟΥΣ       | Ι̂  ΛΥΣΙΜΑΧΟΣ Υγρ
    5.               Τ | Τ ΛΥΣΙΜΑΧ ΥΓΡ̅
    6.  η̂   = χ           Δ   ΥΓΡ̅
                          |




APPENDIX II.

SPECIMENS OF HIEROGLYPHICS:

_From the Article_ EGYPT.


[Illustration: 1. GOD; _powerful_]

[Illustration: 2. GOD; _judge_]

[Illustration: 3. GODDESS]

[Illustration: 4. GODS]

[Illustration: 5. AGATHODAEMON]

[Illustration: 6. PHTHAH]

[Illustration: 7. AMMON]

[Illustration: 8. PHRE]

[Illustration: 9. RHEA]

[Illustration: 10. IOH]

[Illustration: 11. THOTH]

[Illustration: 12. OSIRIS]

[Illustration: 13. ARUERIS]

[Illustration: 14. ISIS]

[Illustration: 15. NEPHTHE]

[Illustration: 16. BUTO]

[Illustration: 17. HORUS]

[Illustration: 20. APIS]

[Illustration: 22. Hyperion]

[Illustration: 23. Cteristes [or Cerberus]]

[Illustration: 24. TETRARCHA]

[Illustration: 25. ANUBIS]

[Illustration: 26. MACEDO]

[Illustration: 27. Hieracion]

[Illustration: 28. Cerexochus]

[Illustration: 30. Platypterus]

[Illustration: 38. MEMNON]

[Illustration: 50. PSAMMIS]

[Illustration: 52. AMASIS]

[Illustration: 57. SOTERES]

[Illustration: 72. Ramuneus]

[Illustration: 80. EGYPT]

[Illustration: 81. MEMPHIS]

[Illustration: 83. GREEK]

[Illustration: 84. COUNTRY]

[Illustration: 85. LAND]

[Illustration: 87. TEMPLE]

[Illustration: 88. SHRINE]

[Illustration: 91. COLUMN]

[Illustration: 92. DIADEM]

[Illustration: 100. TEAR]

[Illustration: 101. IMAGE]

[Illustration: 102. STATUE]

[Illustration: 103. LETTERS]

[Illustration: 108. LIFE]

[Illustration: 109. ETERNITY]

[Illustration: 110. IMMORTAL]

[Illustration: 111. JOY]

[Illustration: 112. POWER]

[Illustration: 113. STABILITY]

[Illustration: 114. ESTABLISHED]

[Illustration: 116. MIGHTY]

[Illustration: 117. VICTORY]

[Illustration: 118. FORTUNE]

[Illustration: 119. SPLENDOUR]

[Illustration: 120. BEARING]

[Illustration: 121. ILLUSTRIOUS]

[Illustration: 122. HONOUR]

[Illustration: 123. RESPECTABLE]

[Illustration: 125. RITE]

[Illustration: 126. WORSHIP]

[Illustration: 127. FATHER]

[Illustration: 129. SON]

[Illustration: 133. CHILD]

[Illustration: (128.) [WIFE]]

[Illustration: [BROTHER; SISTER]]

[Illustration: 134. DIRECTOR]

[Illustration: 135. STEERSMAN]

[Illustration: 137. KING]

[Illustration: 138. CONDITION]

[Illustration: 139. KINGDOM]

[Illustration: 140. LIBATION]

[Illustration: 142. PRIEST]

[Illustration: 143. PRIESTHOOD]

[Illustration: 145. ASSEMBLY]

[Illustration: 146. SACRED]

[Illustration: 147. CONSECRATED]

[Illustration: 148. GIVE]

[Illustration: 149. OFFER]

[Illustration: 151. LAWFUL]

[Illustration: 152. GOOD]

[Illustration: 153. BESTOWING]

[Illustration: 154. MUNIFICENT]

[Illustration: 155. UPPER; LOWER]

[Illustration: 156. OTHERS]

[Illustration: 160. ENLIGHTENING]

[Illustration: 162. LOVING]

[Illustration: 164. SET UP]

[Illustration: 165. PREPARE]

[Illustration: 166. IN ORDER THAT]

[Illustration: 167. WHEREVER]

[Illustration: 168. AND        }
               169. ALSO, WITH } ]

[Illustration: 170. MOREOVER]

[Illustration: 171. LIKEWISE]

[Illustration: 172. IN]

[Illustration: 173. UPON, AT]

[Illustration: 174. OVER, ON]

[Illustration: 175. FOR]

[Illustration: 176. BY THE]

[Illustration: 177. OF, TO]

[Illustration: 178. DAY]

[Illustration: 179. MONTH]

[Illustration: 180. YEAR]

[Illustration: 181. THOYTH]

[Illustration: 182. MECHIR]

[Illustration: 183. MESORE]

[Illustration: 184. FIRST DAY]

[Illustration: 185. THIRTIETH]

[Illustration: 186. ONE]

[Illustration: 187. FIRST]

[Illustration: 188. TWO]

[Illustration: 192. THRICE]

[Illustration: 197. TEN]

[Illustration: 200. FORTY TWO]

[Illustration: 201. A HUNDRED]

[Illustration: 202. A THOUSAND]




Transcriber’s Notes

Obvious punctuation errors have been silently corrected. All other
spelling and punctuation remains unchanged, except as noted below:

    Page 4 & 15 - corrected “Déscription de l’Egypte” to
                  “Description de l’Égypte”.
    Page 29 - corrected “hyothetical” to “hypothetical”.
    Page 67 - corrected “in in the sale” to “in the sale”
    Page 92 - corrected “Lacedaemonins” to “Lacedaemonians”.
    Page 113 - corrected “there” to “their”.
    Page 143 - corrected “179” to “119”.
    Page 147 - ΑΛΕΧΑΝΔΡΕΙΑΙ ΑΛΕΞΑΝ ΔΡΟΥ is believed to be a typo, and has
               been corrected to ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΕΙΑΙ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΥ

The omission noted on page 144 has been corrected by adding the
indicated paragraph to page 115.

Italics are represented thus _italic_, superscripts thus y^n,
subscripts as y_{n}.







*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AN ACCOUNT OF SOME RECENT DISCOVERIES IN HIEROGLYPHICAL LITERATURE, AND EGYPTIAN ANTIQUITIES ***


    

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.


START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
    other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
    whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
    of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
    at www.gutenberg.org. If you
    are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
    of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
  
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

    • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
        the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
        you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
        to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
        agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
        within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
        legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
        payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
        Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
        Literary Archive Foundation.”
    
    • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
        you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
        does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
        License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
        copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
        all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
        works.
    
    • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
        any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
        electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
        receipt of the work.
    
    • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
        distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
    

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.