November io, 1910] 



NATURE 



41 



November .12, jh. 4501. ; secondary maximuin, November 

 12, 9h. 



Leonid epoch, November 17, 2ih., twenty-eighth order 

 of magnitude. Principal maximum, November 16, 

 i3h. 45m. ; secondary maxima, November 16, ijh. 20m. 

 and i5h. 30m. 



Epoch, November 19, gh., eighth order of magnitude. 

 Principal maximum, November 20, i5h. 15m. ; secondary 

 maxima, November 20, 6h. 30m. and i6h. 30m. 



Epoch, November 19, gh. 30m., fifth order of magnitude. 

 Principal maximum, November 20, i4h. 30m. ; secondary 

 maxima, November 19, 2oh. 30m., and November 21, 

 oh. 30m. 



Epoch, November 23, 22h., approximately second order of 

 magnitude. Principal maximum, November 21, 2oh. 30m. ; 

 secondary maximum, November 22, ih. 



Epoch, November 28, 6h., approximately second order 

 of magnitude. Principal maximum, November 30, 

 I4h. 30m. ; secondarj- maxima, November 30, 2h. 30m. 

 and iih. 30m. 



It may be seen from the foregoing that there are four 

 periods during the last three weeks of November that will 

 probably be characterised by an unusual degree of meteoric 

 activit)-, viz. November 12, 16, 20-21, and 30. The circum- 

 stance that the moon will be eclipsed in the night of 

 November 16 may favour and stimulate Leonid observa- 

 tions, but the former phenomenon will perhaps have nearly 

 ended before the latter may put in an appearance. 



November 7. John R. Henry. 



Early Bunal Customs in Egypt. 



It is suggested in Prof. Elliot Smith's letter (October 

 27. p. 529) that the burial customs in other countries 

 influenced our observation of the burials in Egypt. On 

 the contrary, the occasional practice of dismemberment in 

 Egypt was a surprise to myself and to others ; it is only 

 gradually that the evidence for the wide distribution of 

 such customs elsewhere has been brought forward as a 

 parallel. 



In place of all workers in Egypt finding " precisely the 

 same state of affairs," many entire differences of custom 

 are found in other material facts besides dismemberment, 

 as thirty years' experience has proved. 



The first principle for the archaeologist to realise in 

 Egvpt is the great diversity of thought and custom which 

 prevailed. With four totally incompatible beliefs about the 

 future life, shown by diverse funeral customs throughout 

 the history, it is quite natural that diversity should occur 

 In the treatment of the body in the earlier ages. When 

 the long-promised publication of Dr. Reisner on prehistoric 

 Egypt is accessible, we shall be in a position to define 

 some more localities where certain customs ruled. Dis- 

 cussion of these local variations before the fresh facts are 

 published is premature. 



W. M. Flinders Petrie. 



Stripped of all irrelevant considerations, the question at 

 Issue resolves itself into this, " Is there any real evidence 

 to prove, or even to suggest, that the ancient Egyptians 

 ever mutilated the bodies of their dead? " 



In reply, I maintain that there is no evidence whatso- 

 ever capable of being twisted into the semblance of sup- 

 port to Prof. Flinders Petrie's contention. 



Of all the multitudes of so-called " dissected burials " 

 recorded by him, there is only one (see " Deshasheh." 

 1898) which carries conviction to those familiar with 

 Egyptian conditions as a genuine case of secondarv burial. 

 Prof. Flinders Petrie says he has found two more cases 

 this year. That may well be so. We found more than 

 a score of such cases in Nubia. 



.But they are not evidence of deliberate mutilation of 

 the body. They are all of them instances of some un- 

 intentional damage to the corpse— either bv unskilled 

 embalmers or by accident. 



In reference to Prof. Flinders Petrie's closing remarks, I 

 may state that by the time this letter is printed there will 

 re published in Cairo Dr. Reisner's report (vol. i.) on the 

 Archaeological Sur\ev of Nubia, containing his observa- 

 tions on prehistoric Egypt and Nubia. 



G. Elliot Smith. 



Simulium and Pellagra. 



The interesting discovery by Dr. Louis Sambon that 

 pellagra is due to a protozoal parasite conveyed by flies of 

 the genus Simulium (Nature, October 27) is, we may 

 presume, merely the prelude to an energetic campaign of 

 extermination directed against the insect. 



It is well that medical men and sanitary officials should 

 realise at the outset of such a campaign that the destruc- 

 tion of Simulium flies in any given area is an infinitely 

 harder task than the destruction of mosquitoes. The larvae 

 of Simulium live in rapid streams, attached to submerged 

 rocks and stones, and it is difficult to see how these 

 streams can be drained drj- if they are numerous in any 

 particular district. Even if it were practicable to cover the 

 surface of these streams with a film of oil, such a pro- 

 cedure would have no effect on the Simulium larvas, for, 

 unlike mosquito larvae, the little creatures derive the 

 oxygen necessary for their existence from the water bath- 

 ing the gills situated at the anterior end of their bodies. 

 In other words, the Simulium larva cannot be suffocated 

 as can the mosquito larva. 



Finally, it may be noted that the species of Simulium 

 are very small flies, consequently to exclude them from 

 houses wire gauze or muslin screens of extremely fine 

 mesh must be employed. Such screens are bound to 

 interfere seriously with the circulation of air in a house, 

 and in a warm climate the discomfort entailed will be 

 almost intolerable; R. Shelford. 



Hope Department, Oxford University Museum. 



The Cocos-Kceling Atoll. 



Dlring a very short visit to these islands some years 

 ago I was taken across the lagoon in a light canoe, and 

 when wading to land, about a quarter of a mile distant, 

 over the rough surface of fresh coral branches, I suddenly 

 crashed downwards for about 2 feet into a mass of rotten 

 coral which spread over an irregular area some 20 or 30 

 yards across. I did not investigate this further, as a 

 shark's fin appeared above the water off shore, but Mr. 

 Ross informed me that a good deal of the coral in the 

 lagoon had been " killed " at various times by sulphurous 

 exhalations from below, and had become black and rotten 

 in consequence. Mr. Ross (the owner of the island group) 

 supposed that the wide and deep well-like holes and broad 

 irregular patches of varying depth in the lagoon were due 

 to this cause, which he compared to the sulphurous steam 

 constantly roaring from the crater of the Gedeh and other 

 mountains in Java. 



If this comparison be correct, as it doubtless is, the 

 Cocos ring is around the submerged summit of a volcanic 

 cone which has not quite lost its solfataric activity. I 

 have never seen it suggested that such poisonous exhala- 

 tions coming into the still water confined within the atoll 

 ring might account for the slower growth of the coral, 

 and the deepening of the lagoon by the degradation of the 

 coral branches where the polyps had been suddenly 

 poisoned. It is, however, possible that some such influence 

 may cooperate to prevent the coral flourishing as rapidlv 

 as it does outside the ring in the boisterous wash of the 

 fresher waves that are constantly stirred by the trades. 



I have not yet read Mr. Wood-Jones's book, but it was 

 the decided opinion of Mr. Ross, founded upon boat navi- 

 gation, that the lagoon was shallowing, because, as he 

 thought, the submerged summit was slowly rising. If 

 this be so something more than slower growth is necessary 

 to account for the continued existence of the lagoon, since, 

 however slow the growth, it must ultimately in a rising 

 area bring the summit up at least to water-level ; but if 

 there is this kind of active degradation, neither slow 

 upheaval nor slower growth could prevail against such 

 rapid destruction, and a comparatively deep atoll with 

 irregular bottom contours would result. 



Waterstock, Oxon, October 31. E. C. Spicer. 



NO. 2 141, VOL, 85] 



It would be ungenerous, after the frank admissions of 

 inaccuracy on the part of the reviewer (Natlre, 

 October 27), to criticise the substance of his review in anv 

 more detail ; but it is necessary to make some replv to 

 his assertions concerning the development of atolls. 



