180 Rey. Epwarp Hincxs on the Number, Names, and Powers 
to adduce other instances of the ignorance or carelessness of these scribes. In 
the construction of the alphabet I reject altogether any assistance that may be 
derived from collating copies of the Todtenbuch. While I make what use I 
fairly can of such interchanges of letters as I observe to have been made in 
Theban texts of the age of the papyri, or in these texts as compared with those 
of an earlier period, or even a later one, if they appear correctly written, I do 
not trouble myself with the manner in which words may be found spelled in 
manuscripts written with carelessness, no one knows in what age, or in what part 
of Egypt, but all probably subsequent to the Grecian conquest. Dr. Lepsius, 
with that prejudice in favour of the Turin MS. which is natural to its editor, 
imagines it to be of the age of the eighteenth dynasty! To me the only ques- 
tion is, whether it was written in Greek or in Roman times. It cannot, I think, 
be earlier than the second century B. C. 
Before I quit the subject of interchanges, I would offer two additional 
remarks. One is, that the fact of two letters not being interchanged, when they 
resemble one another in form to such a degree that they could be similarly 
grouped, is presumptive evidence (though, I admit, not conclusive) of their not 
being equivalent. Thus, the first and fourth characters, omitting expletives, in 
fig. 106, are capable of being similarly grouped, but they are never interchanged _ 
This affords a presumption that they have not both the power of T, as Chevalier 
Bunsen supposed ; and this presumption is strengthened by the fact that the 
Hebrew transcription is MHA¥, and not MA aM. Other instances will be given 
in the following part. 
My other remark is, that a mistake, even a gross one, committed by a scribe, 
if it were the result of his copying by the ear, and not the eye, may be good 
evidence of the value of a character, or the proper mode of vocalizing a word. 
Thus, in the Anastasi papyrus, No. 7, Pl. 137, 1. 9, the word saxt, “to catch,” 
or “ entrap,” is written as in fig. 75 (at least, so far as the phonoglyphs are con- 
cerned), in place of the past participle of the verb “to write,” as in fig. 130, 
which occurs in the corresponding passage of the Sallier MS. No. 2, Pl. 23, |. 1. 
From this we may infer, not only that the two forms of X which occur in these 
words are equivalent, but that the participle was read SaXuT or SaXT, and 
not SxaTU, the eagle and quail being bothexpletives. This accords with what 
J inferred in the first part, respecting the form of this past participle, from a 
