by a strange perversion of principle, shown as linked with an admiration and practice publicly avowed of the grossest vices.

The author next descants upon the method of enforcing the acquirement of this species of knowledge. Bowing, as the masters of public schools do, to classical authorities, in almost every other instance, it is somewhat surprising that in this they persist in acting decidedly against the advice of one who was familiar with the business of tuition, and has conveyed his sentiments on the subject to posterity in a style of purity and eloquence well cálculated to set off the soundness of his arguments :-we mean Quintilian, who uniformly speaks in terms of reprehension against the use of the rod, as indiscriminately applied. Our author's statements on the subject are sufficiently strong and convincing, and it will not invalidate their force when we say that the only reason why we do not lay some of them before our readers, is that the theme itself is scarcely fit for public discussion.-Altogether many valuable hints may be taken from this small volume, and the author will, we doubt not, feel a conscious satisfaction in having rendered some service to society even by the acknowledgment of his own errors.

ON THE SCIENCE

OF THE EGYPTIANS AND CHALDEANS.

No. VI.

HAVING shown that the great Hebrew Lawgiver was as profoundly skilled in chemistry and metallurgy, as Philo Judæus and Clemens Alexandrinus assert him to have been in mathematics, arithmetic, and astronomy; and having assumed, what I suppose no one will deny, that Moses was indebted for his human learning to the Egyptians; I shall proceed to speak of some scientific discoveries which have been attributed to the sages of Egypt. I have no intention of vouching for the reality of all of these discoveries. My readers will judge for themselves of the credibility which is due to the different statements, which I shall have to make on the

authority of various writers. Upon the whole, however, I think that the examination of the subjects, which I propose to consider, may tend to throw light upon the early history of science.

OF THE TRANSMUTATION OF METALS.

I begin with the transmutation of metals; because of all the arts unknown to the moderns, and attributed to the Egyptians, the existence of this is the most doubtful and the most disputed. For my own part I am not inclined to put much faith in the assertions of alchemists; but since the really great Boerhaave has said, that the transmutation of the baser metals into gold ought not to be pronounced impossible, let us at least listen to the arguments of those who contend that the Egyptians possessed this art.

It is argued, that we have no just reason for concluding that this art never did, and never could exist, because it has never been practised in modern times. There were many persons, who on similar grounds questioned the effects of the burning glass, the invention of which was attributed to Archimedes by the Greeks, until M. de Buffon removed the doubt by constructing the instrument. The moderns laughed at the Greeks for saying that the Egyptians, by placing eggs in an oven, produced chickens from them; but at length M. Réaumur performed the same apparent miracle by the same simple means, and then it was acknowledged that there was no very good reason for laughing at a fact, which did honor to the ingenious industry of an ancient people. The chemists of our days have made some discoveries, but perhaps fewer than some of them think. Nature has many secrets.

He

must be a bold man who says he knows them all, and he can scarcely be a modest one, who fancies that of all the arts known to the ancients he is ignorant of none.

1. The Egyptians, it is contended, could not have possessed much gold, by any of the ordinary means by which that metal is obtained. The statements made by Diodorus Siculus are disputed. It is denied that much gold dust is brought down by the Nile, or that gold is found deposited in the slime. Neither is it true that Egypt was ever rich in mines of gold. The assertion of Ammian is absurd, when he says, aurum eliciebant Egyptii ex omnibus VOL. XIX. Cl. Jl. NO. XXXVIII.

U

fere materiis, potissimum vero ex saxis omnis generis, et ex limo Nilotico. It was the policy of the kings of Egypt, say the writers whose arguments I am stating, to make it be believed that the country abounded in mines of gold, in order to divert attention from the mighty mystery of the Hermetic art.

2. The Egyptians could not have collected much gold by war or by commerce. The history of Sesostris is a fable. All the countries bordering on Egypt were poor. A people who had no fleets of their own, who rarely quitted their native soil, and who avoided strangers, were not likely to enrich themselves either by commerce or by conquest.

3. Whence then, it is asked, came the amazing wealth of Egypt? See in Herodotus and Diodorus what is said of the building of the great pyramid: 360,000 men were employed during 30 years in raising that stupendous fabric. The expense of the work must have been enormous; and one very singular item is mentioned by the Greek historians. The charge for garlick and onions for the workmen amounted to 1600 silver talents, about 600,000 pounds sterling. What prodigious sums must have been expended on the temples, on the labyrinth, on the lake Moris? The golden circle which surrounded the spacious tomb of Osymandias, and which was one cubit in breadth and 365 in circumference, argues a profusion of wealth of which we cannot form any adequate idea. Such indeed was the abundance of gold and silver, that the hunter formed his weapons, and the laborer his tools of these metals. But the question still remains unanswered-whence came this abundance of gold and silver? It is in vain that the Greek historians talk of mines. Where did they exist? How does it happen that neither curiosity nor cupidity can discover any traces of them in the Egyptian territory ?

4. It appears that the Persian kings carried away all the gold which they could find in Egypt. When Herodotus was in that country during the reign of Artaxerxes, there seems to have been very little gold in the possession of the inhabitants. But the second Ptolemy had not been long upon the throne before the wealth of Egypt became again the wonder of the world. The treasures amassed by that Prince exceed all calculation, and he exhibited such riches on the day of his pomp, as Rome in all her

glory never beheld collected together. Athenæus has given us a very long and detailed account of this pomp. The golden plate, which was used for the feast, without counting any of the objects to be mentioned presently, amounted in weight to 10,000 talents, (about 1,130,000 Lib.) and was besides adorned with all sorts of precious stones. When the procession went forth through the streets of Alexandria, the attention of the spectators was attracted, from sun-rise to sun-set, by a continued blaze of gold and jewels. It would be much too long to enumerate the goblets, bowls, basons, vases, censers, thyrsi, trophies, images, statues, columns, and altars of gold, which succeeded each other in rapid and dazzling succession. We may however remark two golden eagles 15 cubits in height, 64 suits of armour, 20 shields, 100 beds, 200 tripods, all of gold; besides 3200 golden crowns, 80 of which were adorned with the most costly gems. Then came the most extraordinary object of this extraordinary pomp. If this object, 125 cubits in length, and six in thickness, were all cased in gold, as Athenæus indicates to have been the fact, it would be vain to calculate the value. The procession was closed by Ptolemy and his Queen, drawn in golden cars. Let us next hear what Josephus says of the price, which this same Ptolemy paid for the Greek translation of the Pentateuch. Besides the rewards bestowed on the High Priest and the 72 interpreters, the king of Egypt made such presents to the Jews for the service and decoration of their temple, as exceed all other examples of princely munificence. Among these presents may be remarked 100 golden talents (about 64,8007.,) for offering a sacrifice-20 golden basons adorned with jewels-a golden table for the show-bread. This table was two cubits in length, one in breadth, and one and a half in height, nor would it be easy to estimate the value, so beautiful were the ornaments, and so rich the materials. Here fruits and flowers were imitated by gems of every hue. A vine interwoven among the sculptured work hung round in festoons; and the tendrils of this vine, drawn out of the golden branches into curling wires, were so light and so fine that they trembled in the breeze. A golden crown was worked on the borders of the table; rods set with precious stones ran along the edges; and a zone of stars, that sent forth the rays of the ruby, the diamond, and the emerald,

encircled the whole. Josephus insinuates in vain, that Ptolemy was guided by piety alone in this singular transaction. No motive of religion, or even of policy, appears to have influenced his conduct. He wished to display his magnificence to Judea, to Egypt, and to the world. He gave as much for one book as would have purchased a million.

How, say the writers to whom I refer, did Ptolemy Philadelphus acquire these riches? The mines of Peru, of Mexico, and of India, would have scarcely supplied, within a period of less than fifty years, the treasures in gold and precious stones, which were amassed by the two first Ptolemies. There is no other way of accounting for this sudden accumulation of wealth, add the same authors, than by supposing, that the priests of Egypt had preserved by tradition the great secret of the Hermetic art, and had imparted it to the Greek monarchs, who relieved them from the Persian yoke.

5. It is well known, continue these authors, that the Egyptian priests concealed their knowledge from the vulgar, and that for this purpose they not only employed hieroglyphical writing and a sacred language, but communicated their scientific discoveries to the initiated through the medium of enigmas, fables, and allegories. With respect to the art of making gold, if such an art really existed, the wisdom of concealing it cannot be questioned; and it must be confessed that the singular care with which the Egyptians of the higher orders veiled their knowledge from the public, can hardly be accounted for, if it were only their object to hide their speculative opinions from the people. The Greeks and Romans, who rarely understood the mysterious mythology of the Egyptians, altered and embellished it after their own manner. Still however some of them saw through the cloud, and explained in a rational and philosophic manner those enigmatical fables, which the vulgar took in the literal sense, and considered as the recorded truths of sacred history. But most of these fables were nothing else than allegories, relating to various subjects, both physical and metaphysical-to astronomy, to agriculture, to chemistry, and to the nature of the gods. The absurd system of Euhemerus was invented to please the successors of the pretended son of Ammon; and it was probably adopted by later Pagans, who desired to flatter those Emperors of the Romans, who