520 



♦ KNOWLEDGE • 



[Apkil 14, 1882. 



to be fnuii)! in Dki Ijipr, in tlio intrcxtartion t<> Ilia " hivcii uf I'hilo- 

 ■oplisn," wlii'i-o, lii'rKi'i- ilcurrihinK tlioni indivitlnully, lie |OVp« n 

 •hort ftcr<iiint uf Kff^iptinn ductrinoR dorived from Miiiirtlui nnd thu 



vonnKT lli'cntt'uii, of Aluli'm. In lliiB, nfCt-r Miyin^ tliey nidpr 



till' true fonn of (IikI to tw unknown, ond tlnit tlio world lind ii 

 b(>ginninf(, and in porinlmblp, it Hnyn of tlir rnrtli, "It is in tlie Hliapo 

 vf a ball. Tlip stnni iirc fim, und the moon in ocliimwl wliun it 

 croMvs tlu' Bliiidon of tlio I'urth." 'Jiiiit wo linvo lioro no mixtaken 

 iitalcmpnt of K^^yplinn tlmuKlit not forth is cvrtnin from whut 

 PiodoniH Hiiyii, fi>r lici omplmtically tclU ua tlmt " tlie Kf^yptiana 

 knew that tlio earth wax round," und that the words are to be 

 taken liternlly ia evident from liia nniro comment, thai were tbia 

 Inio the Nile could not rise from tho other liomiaphere to flow 

 into thia. Whether it ia fact that Bomc Greek philoaophcra 

 gained their knowledge in Ejrypt ; the proofs that Pytlmgorug 

 did ao ore convincing, nnd althouf;h it may be doubted wc 

 hare any writinga of hia own, yet it is universally admitted 

 that his disciple Fhilolaus is u correct exponent of thcni. In 

 addition to tho common testimony that his PythnRoreiin aatro- 

 nomical system came from Efrypt, as was shown by liokh in 1819, 

 Wilkinson proves that his theories of traiisnii^'ration, eiuanation, 

 and music werw all derived from the Nile Valley. Now Plutarch 

 aayg : " WhilKtolhers consider thoearlli iinmivable, the Pythagorean 

 Philolaus believed that it movoj around the central tire in an 

 oblique circle in the same manner as the moon and the sun, and wc 

 have the evidence of Diogenes, Laertius, and Theophrastus, that 

 Bicctas of Syracu.se believed tho earth revolved in a circle around 

 its own axis. Philolaus here falls into the error of considering; the 

 ce itral firo round which the earth revolves to be distinct from the 

 sun, a mistake held, as Ari.stotle tells us, by tho Italian followers of 

 Pythagoras, but he may have been tho cause of the error by mis- 

 interpreting the Egyptian views ; and Aristarchus of Sanios, a 

 brother Pythagorean, has e.xidaiued them correctly when he says, 

 aa quoted by Archimedes, who, after alluding to his dcnyiiij; that the 

 eorth was imuiovablo in the centre of the universe, informs us he 

 considered the sun con.ititutcd thia centre, and was immovable, lH<e 

 the nther stare, whilst the earth rcvoh'ed around the sun. This great 

 thinker alludes to the twofold motion of the earth on its axis and 

 round the sun elsewhere ; and further, tho Egyptians, either 

 from having observed the passing of sun spots over the solar 

 disk, or for some other reason, conjectured that the sun also 

 revolves, for, according to Plutarch, " In the Egyptian Hermetic 

 books, when the sacred names are mentioned, Hermes is said to be 

 AjKiIlo, and to represent the lofaJori/ motion of the sun" (Bunsen's 

 " Egypt," vol. i., page 417). In conclusion, it may be said, there- 

 fore, that we have, as far as our knowledge enables us to judge, 

 every reason to believe that the Egyjitians understood the move- 

 ment of the earth in the heavens. We arrive at this from two 

 conrses of investigation — from what may be termed the purely 

 Egyptian, viz., authentic texts penned by themselves, and from the 

 information handed down to us by the Greeks, mostly in reference 

 to the doctrines of the Pythagoreans, which were, by everyone 

 qualified to know, looked upon as Egyptian, but sometimes these 

 correct ideas of astronomy are directly referred to Egypt herself. 



A Meubeb of the Society of Biblical ARcnj:oLOGT. 



MR. MATTIEU WILLIAMS ON COD "SOUNDS" 

 AND "SCIENTIFIC PRIVILEGE." 



I SHALL leave " Old Fossil " to settle with Mr. Mattieu Williams 

 the nature of the structure in the cod, concerning the proper 

 Dame of which Mr. Williams appears to be specially pertui'bed. 

 I might remind the disputants that post-mortem appearances, 

 both in men and fishes, are often deceptive. One thing, 

 however, is quite certain — namely, that no one nudortaking 

 tho dissection of a cod with any degree of care, could ever 

 mistake the "sound" or "swimming bladder" for the dorsal aorta, 

 or main arterial blood-vessel of the fish. The swimming-bladder 

 of tho cod contains air, not blood ; although there is a beautiful 

 network of blood-vcascls (relia mirahilia) closely connected with tho 

 air-bladder, lliat which concerns me in Mr. Williams's communica- 

 tion ia my former contention that whatever lishermen call the 

 " sound," tho term ia used in zoology as synonymous with the names 

 " air-bladder" und "swimming-bladder." As 1 do not find in Mr. 

 Williams's article a single word disproving this contention, I must 

 leave rhe matter where Mr. Williams's common sense is content to 

 let it toat. If ho jirefera, with the lishermen, to limit the name 

 " aonud " to another structure than the "air-bladder" he is very 

 welcome to continue the [iractice. Zoologists arc not likely to 

 follow hia lead. A. Wilson. 



J?: 



«£-^ ^-il^ > ^> 



acttrrd to tl)f (Cliitor, 



[TVtt E<titor dof» not hold hiimff{f r*0poru\blr for fJie opinions ofkU eorrtBpondmtta. 

 St eannot undertake to return manuacriplt w to corretvond ititk thwir wrU^rt. All 

 eommunirattonM tkould h» as »hori a* pouihlt, consuttntly with full and cUar ttait' 

 ment$ of the rriter't meaning.'} 



All Kditorial communinitionM thould be addretaed to /A« "Editor ^f ExovlhdoB; 

 all Bxitineat communicationt to Uu Fublishert, at U« Office, 74, Qrtai Qm«ii- 



$tre,t, vr.c. 



AH Semittancet, Chequtt, and Pott-Offic* Order$ thould ha wtad* pagabU to 

 UftTM. Wymitn 4* Sons. 



•,• All letter' to tht Editor will h« Numbered. For eontenienee of refortnee, 

 corr'npontieMta, vken rtj'erring to anjf Utter^ wiU oblige by mentioning its nuwtler 

 and the page on ichirh it appears. 



Ali Letters or Queries to the Editor lehirh require attention in the current issue 0/ 

 KvowLEDOK, tho uU reaoh the Publishii^ Office not UUer than the Saturday preeading 

 the day qf publication. ___^__ 



(I.) Letters to hare Bchance of appearine mtift be concise; they mtiitt be drawn 

 up in the form adopted for letters here, «o that they may go untoached to the 

 printers ; private communications, therefore, aa well as queries, or replies to 

 queries (intended to appear as such) nhould be written on nepanite leareM. 



(II.) Letters which (either becau<'e too iong, or ansuiiable, or dealing with 

 matters wliich others have discussed, or for any other rea«OD) cannot find place 

 hore, will either be briefly referred toinanswerstocorrespondentj, oracknowlcNlged 

 in a column reserved for the purpose. 



** In knowledge, that man only is to be contemned and despifled who is not in • 



state of transition Nor ia there anything more adverse to accuracj 



than fixity of opinion."— fararfuy, 



"There is no harm in making a mistake, bnt great harm in making none. Bhow 



rho makes no nustakea, and I will show you a 

 nothing." — JAebitj. 



'* God's Onhodoiy is Truth."— C^ar/^ Kingtley. 



who has done 



©m CoiTfgponifuct Columns. 



THE POTATO. 



[381] — I was pleased to see "Farmer's" contradiction in No. 20 

 to my article on the potato ; for it shows me that English farmers 

 are at last beginning to take some interest in agricultural research. 

 May the day be not far distant when we shall be able to look up 

 to our farmers as authorities on such matters, instead of having to 

 look abroad to see how to feed our cattle, manure our land, Ac, as 

 we have to do at present. 



I should, perhaps, have liked to have seen "Farmer's" letter a 

 little more to the point ; for as it now stands it is only " negative" 

 in its contradictions, and I think 1 said in my article that " nega- 

 tive " results were of no use in science unless accomjianied by 

 " positive " (when obtainable), to bear out the investigator's or 

 critic's assertions. For instance, " Farmer " should have told us 

 the difference in weight between the Victorias from which the 

 blossoms had been removed, and those on which the blossoms had 

 been allowed to remain. Perhaps he did not think it worth while 

 to give the weights, but they are really important in a matter of 

 this kind. 



" Farmer," I am sure, will excuse me for saying that I do not 

 quite see the point of his second remarks ; for he himself ends 

 them by saying, "and has none of the sweetness peculiar to a 

 frosted potato." 



Thirdly. "Farmer" alludes to the compost; and as the " nn- 

 manured plot," &c., is connected with the same contradiction, I will 

 answer tho two by saying, that the "compost" was one of six or 

 seven manures tried on the same kind of land (sandy, I believe), at 

 the same experiment, while the " nnmanured " was that plot which 

 did not receive any manure ; and so the deduction was fairly arrived 

 at, 1 think. Has " Farmer" tried the effect of the different 

 manures in this way ? If he has, his results will be valuable. 

 Fnrther, I may say that in this case my remarks about " Potatoes 

 grown," &c., do not exactly contradict the remarks about the " on- 

 manured plots." " Farmer " says. " one assertion flatly contradicts 

 the other, and both are contrary to his or any one else's experience." 

 Does his experience, or that of his friends, lie evenly between the 

 two points ? He does not say ! 



1 will now quote my authority for the various assertions I hare 

 made, and have much pleasure in doing so, especially if "Fanner" 

 intends to pursue the subject in the paper 1 shall name, for I am 

 sure another worker in the Field will be hailed with delight by all 

 scientists abroad. 



