NA TURE 



97 



THE MUMMY. 

 The Mummy. By E. A. Wallis-Budge, LL.D., F.S.A. 

 (Cambridge : University Press, 1S93.) 



TEN years ago, and even less, the English readers of 

 hieroglyphs might be counted on the fingers of 

 one hand, without the thumb. They may now be reckoned 

 by the score. The reasons for this movement — we can 

 hardly term it a revival — are partly the opening of the 

 Nile to any English tourist who can afford to travel at 

 all. This is chiefly due to the ubiquitous Mr. Cook. But 

 it would not be fair to mention it without also mentioning 

 such authors as Dr. Budge, who have made what 

 used to be a sort of secret knowledge, a sort of occult 

 science, into one of the easiest branches of learning any 

 one, especially an Englishman, can study. Hieroglyphs 

 appeal to several different kinds of minds. People 

 pictorially disposed find the representations of all kinds of 

 common objects easy to remember, and very interesting 

 to copy. The naturalist finds these curious old birds, 

 beasts, fishes, and reptiles well worth learning, if only to 

 find out why they stand for letters. The astronomer 

 must work a little at them, on account of the light they 

 throw upon the stars of a time so remote that a Draconis 

 was then the Pole Star, and not a Ursa M maris. To the 

 ordinary lover of languages the grammar of ancient 

 Egypt is full of delightful surprises, as well as pitfalls, 

 while he unravels a tongue spoken by Aryans, with Semitic 

 inflections and Hamitic roots. We might go through 

 the whole catalogue of 'isms and 'ologies, and yet find 

 none in which hieroglyphs would not give some help ; 

 and, above all, they are so absurdly easy. The ancient 

 Egyptian was quite determined that whensoever people 

 did learn to read his inscriptions, there should be no 

 kind of mistake as to his meaning, and one result is that 

 many beginners find it possible, without knowing the 

 pronunciation of more than a dozen words, to ascertain 

 the sense of whole passages. There is one thing more. 

 At the very root of all literary learning lies this marvel- 

 lous invention of the Egyptians. Hieroglyphs are the 

 parents of the writing of the Phenicians, Hebrews, 

 Syrians, Greeks, and Romans ; and consequently they are 

 the by no means remote ancestors of our own alphabet, 

 every letter of which is itself a modified hieroglyph. ., It 

 is therefore curious to remark that the printing and 

 publishing of Dr. Budge's book is the first effort 

 on the part of any university in the three kingdoms 

 to encourage the study of Egyptology. A kind of excep- 

 tion may be made in favour of University College in 

 Gower Street, which accepted a legacy left by the late 

 Miss Edwards to found the chair now occupied by Prof. 

 Flinders Petrie. But the work now accomplished by the 

 Syndics of the Cambridge University Press, must be 

 followed in the sister universities, and there are signs 

 already of a movement in this direction. Dr. Mahaffy 

 of Trinity Collepe, Dublin, is known to have acquired a 

 share in the wisdom of the Egyptians, and the university 

 of O.xford has given the honorary degree of D.C.L. to 

 Mr, Petrie. Under these circumstances, therefore the 

 appearance of Dr. Budge's book is opportune. Only a few 

 NO. 1257, VOL. 49] 



weeks ago a young gentleman was found trying to learn 

 hieroglyphs from Sir Gardiner Wilkinson's six volumes 

 of mingled learning and ignorance. Even in Dr. 

 Birch's great three-volume edition of Wilkinson, there 

 is nothing practical to be gleaned. From this time 

 there will always be a handy work, which can be 

 recommended to the would-be student, a work as 

 profound in linguistic learning as it is easy and simple in 

 communicating it. There are points in which we differ 

 with Dr. Budge, yet we cannot exactly impute them to 

 him as errors. For example, we do not always like his 

 transliterations, in which he is loyal to the system now 

 long in vogue among the best class of scholars on the 

 continent. He has not gone in for the recent French 

 absurdities in this respect, nor, on the other hand, has he 

 followed Herr Erman into his impossible quests after 

 exact pronunciation. This is not the only point on which 

 we are inclined to quarrel with that learned and whimsical 

 German ; but it must not for a moment be supposed that 

 there is anything controversial about the calm pages of 

 Dr. Budge's " Mummy." On the contrary, when we con- 

 sider that there ^is not a statement in the book that has 

 not at one tim.e or another been called in question, not a 

 chapter that has not been fiercely debated, we must con" 

 cede to the author a credit for moderation very re markable. 

 True, he has disdained even to mention the difficulties 

 to which such books as the French catalogue of the Gizeh 

 Museum, or M. Maspero's later works, expose a student. 

 The method pursued by Dr. Budge is the safest. Con- 

 ceivably, better systems may be constructed, but we must 

 remember that it is by the present system that the great 

 discoveries of Lieblein, Lepsius, Marriette, Birch, and so 

 many others have been made. 



Dr. Budge tells us in the preface that this volume was 

 originally written to form the introduction to the Cata- 

 logue of the Egyptian collection in the Fitzwilliam 

 Museum. It is, however, a complete book in itself, and 

 forms, in a series of condensed, but perfectly clear 

 essays, a very handy encyclopaedia of all branches of 

 Egyptology. The first five chapters are historical, and are 

 followed by a list of the dynasties and the dates assigned 

 to them by different authorities. The divergences here 

 are startling. Champollion Figeac placed the first dynasty 

 at B.C. 5867 ; Wilkinson at B.C. 2320. Dr. Budge evi- 

 dently prefers the B.C. 4400 of Brugsch. Lists of nomes 

 and of cartouches follow, and then we have one of the 

 most interesting chapters in the book, that on the 

 Rosetta stone and the recovery of the Egyptian alphabet. 

 The priority of Young to Champollion is clearly made 

 out, though Herr Erman is doubtful ; and Mr. Renouf 

 prefers the claims of Champollion. But Dr. Budge 

 clearly proves that, though Young has precedence of 

 Champollion, Akerblad, a Swede, has precedence of both. 

 Some fifty pages are occupied by this interesting dis- 

 cussion, and then we come to the "piece of resistance," 

 the title role of the whole book, namely, the Mummy. An 

 Egyptian funeral is minutely described. Next, we are 

 told how the mimimy was prepared ; a subject to which 

 we must briefly return when we have described the rest 

 of the contents. Mummy cloth, embroideries, canopic 

 jars and chests, come next. Eight pages are devoted to 

 the Book of the Dead, and then we have a careful 

 description of the different amulets, such as inscribed 



F 



