34 



KNOWLEDGE. 



[Febkuary 1, 1894. 



old or young, know that the gods hate impudence." 

 This inscription is ideographic throughout.* 



That the ideographic picture-writing method preceded 

 the phonetic and alphabetical is abundantly clear, and, 

 in the absence of all knowledge of the archaic period of 

 Egyptian writing, any hypothesis built simply upon the 

 presence or absence of an ideograph in a well-developed 

 system of writing, and made the basis for fixing a definite 

 date, and this without a shadow of other supporting 

 evidence, is scarcely adapted to receive serious notice at 

 the hands of our best Egyptologists. 



It is doubtful if the entire number of inscriptions existing 

 in the museums of the world, of jjeriods anterior to the 

 fourth dynasty, are sufficient to supply a satisfactory 

 conclusion on the use or omission of determinatives in 

 early writing. Bunsen writesf — " We may confidently 

 state that tlae principle of determinatives was in full 

 activity at the commenceinent of the chronologioed epoch." 

 According to Herr Sethe, they do not occur in general use 

 until the twenty-sixth dynasty, and, because the word 

 " Osiris " on the coffin-lid of Menkaura is written with the 

 determinative, he, on this ground, assumes the manufacture 

 of another coffin two thousand years afterwards. 



The hieroglyphic writing subseqirent to the fourth 

 dynasty, and dating from that period to the twenty-sixth 

 dynasty, when submitted to a perfunctory examination, 

 might lend an appearance of force to the contention. 

 But the conclusion vanishes on attentive comparison. In 

 the majority of pyramid texts, pubhshed by M. Maspero,J 

 the peccant determinative in the name of Osiris is more 

 frequently absent than otherwise, but closer study of other 

 monumental inscriptions forbids any inference to be 

 drawn, such as enunciated by Herr Sethe. In the long 

 era extending from the fourth to the twenty-sixth dynasties, 

 the word " Osiris " is found written both with and without 

 the determinative. Appended are a few examples : — 



Twelfth dynasty. — Liverpool Museum. Inscription on 

 sepulchral monument. Osiris written without determina- 

 tive. 



Twelfth dynasty. — Inscription on tomb of the reign of 

 Amenhat III. Osiris written icitli the determinative. 



Thirteenth dynasty. — Inscription on leaf-shaped dish of 

 green basalt. Osiris written witlioiit the determinative. 



Thirteenth dynasty.- — Fragment of dark wood, carved 

 with the inscription " Eoyal oblation to Osiris, dwelling 

 in Amenti." Osiris written with determinative. 



Eighteenth dynasty. — Inscription on stela in museum 

 of Marseilles. Osiris written nitli determinative. 



Nineteenth dynasty. — Monumental inscription to Piaai. 

 Osiris written without determinative. 



Nineteenth dynasty. — Monumental inscription to 

 Painchsi, scribe of the treasury under Kameses II. Osiris 

 written irith determinative. 



Nineteenth dynasty. — Monumental inscription to 

 Pamerau, a royal scribe. Osiris written with determinative. 



Twentieth dynasty. — Inscription on stela in museum of 

 Marseilles. Osiris written nith determinative. 



These examples should prove fatal to any theory of a 

 definite law observed in writing by the scribes. 



The Aztec picture-writers, who came down to the ships 

 of Cortez, could depict all they .«.«"', but could not represent 

 the sounds which they heard. At the time of Mena, b.c. 

 4400, the Egyptians could do both, and their writing tlien 

 marked a distant transition period, combining the systems 

 alphabetical and phonetic, with ideographs as determina- 



* Wilkinson's " Egypt." 



t ""Egyiit's riaco in Universal History," vdI. I. 



X ''Rccciiil >"e Travaux." jiiir ^[. ^ra^iuTo. 



tives, and these latter, with variants, were retained ever 

 after. We may, I think, relegate the hypothesis of Herr 

 Sethe to the same category as the non-historical existence 

 of Solomon, who, on philological grounds, received his 

 (jidetun at the hands of some critics, because Sol-om-on 

 is found to comprise the name of the sun in three 

 languages, forgetting that any name associated with the 

 great solar myth, so dear to many ancient peoples, would 

 naturally be treasured and handed down to posterity 

 centuries after its original meaning had been lost, and its 

 application passed into other forms. 



In conclusion, it should be shown that it was the practice 

 of the Egyptians to substitute new coffins at periods as 

 required. Moreover, should they in any solitary instance 

 be proved to have done so, it is inconceivable, with their 

 intense veneration for the past, that the slightest alteration, 

 even in form, should have been permitted in the re- 

 production. 



On a glass shelf, immediately over the coffin of Amamu, 

 are the remains of the mummy found by Colonel Vyse in 

 the third pyramid, lying by the coffin-lid of Menkaura. 

 That the fragments are portions of the body of Menkaura 

 there can be little doubt. The integrity of these remains 

 is in no way called in question by the contention of Herr 

 Sethe. The leg bone of the mummy reveals a badly 

 anchylosed knee, and, as tradition asserts that Menkaura 

 was a lame man, this, in itself, is indirect evidence in 

 their favour, apart from the fact of their discovery in the 

 heart of the pyramid erected by that Pharaoh. 



ON THE PROBABLE ENCOUNTER OF 



BROOKS' COMET WITH A DISTURBING 



MEDIUM ON OCTOBER 21, 1893. 



By Prof. E. E. Baknard, of the Lick Ohservatonj. 



THE photographs of Swift's comet made here in 

 April, 1802 (see Knowledge for December, 1892), 

 showed us what wonderful changes comets can 

 pass through in a comparatively short time. 

 Looking at these pictures, made on successive 

 dates, it would be hard to convince anyone not familiar with 

 the facts that they represent the same object at intervals 

 of twenty-four hours. These enormous and remarkable 

 changes, though they astonish us with their magnitude 

 and rapidity, are nevertheless suggestive only of actual 

 change in the comet itself, due to physical disturbances, 

 the cause of which we do not yet know. 



In examining these pictures, one looks to the comet 

 alone for an explanation of the phenomena. There is no 

 suggestion that any outside agency has had a hand in it, 

 excepting, of course, the sun itself. 



Another comet, however, has presented itself, of 

 which an excellent series of pictures has been taken with 

 the same lens used to take the photographs of Swift's comet 

 over a year ago. This comet has passed through a series of 

 changes that force one to adopt some other explanation to 

 account for them than the physical peculiarity of the comet 

 itself ; and looking at the pictures of it, I cannot avoid the 

 belief that the comet had nothing to do with the remark- 

 able condition its tail got into, unless, indeed, it was to 

 supply the tail to be interfered with by some outside and 

 invisible influence. 



The small comet discovered by Mr. Brooks, on 

 October 16th of this year, was to all appearance, as 

 examined with the telescope, a rather ordinary comet ; 

 a little below naked-eye visibility, and possessed of a tail 

 that at best could only be traced for a couple of degrees 

 with the aid of the telescope. 



