NA LORE 361 
THURSDAY, AUGUST 14, 1902. 
THE ENCYCLOPA:DIA BRITANNICA. 
The Encyclopedia Britannica. The Third of the New 
Volumes, being vol. xxvii. of the Complete Work. 
Chi-Eld. Pp. xx + 744. (London: A. and C. Black, 
and The Times, 1902.) 
ie is impossible within the limits of a short notice to 
describe even briefly more than a few of the scien- 
tific articles in this new volume of the “ Encyclopzdia 
Britannica.” Many subjects of interest to men of 
science are dealt with, the following being among the 
contributions :—Cholera, Dr. A. Shadwell ; chronograph, 
Rey. F. J. Jervis-Smith ; biblical chronology, Prof. S. R. 
Driver and Mr. C. H. Turner; coal, Mr. H. Bauerman ; 
Ccelentera, Dr. G. H. Fowler ; colours of animals, Prof. 
E. B. Poulton, F.R.S.; combinatorial analysis, Major 
P. A. MacMahon, F.R.S. ; comets, Dr. E. S. Holden ; 
compass, Captain E. W. Creak ; condensation of gases, 
Prof. J. D. van der Waals ; conduction of heat, Prof, 
H. L. Callendar, F.R.S.; copper, Dr. J. Douglas ; 
cremation, Sir Henry Thompson, Bart. ; Crustacea, Rev. 
T. R. R. Stebbing, F.R.S.; Ctenophora, Dr. G. H. 
Fowler ; cuttlefish, Rev. J. F. Blake; cytology, Mr. 
Harold W. T. Wager; dairy, Dr. W. Fream ; Darwin, 
Prof. E. B. Poulton, F.R.S.; dietetics, Dr. W. O. Atwater ; 
differential equations, Mr. H. F. Baker, F.R.S. ; diffrac- 
tion gratings, the late Prof. H. A. Rowland ; diffusion of 
gases, Prof. G. H. Bryan, F.R.S.; dimensions of units, 
Dr. J. Larmor, F.R.S.; diphtheria, Dr. A. Shadwell ; 
du Bois-Reymond, Sir Michael Foster, K.C.B., F.R.S. ; 
dyeing, Prof. J. J. Hummel; dynamo, Mr. C. C. 
Hawkins; analytical dynamics, Prof. Horace Lamb, 
F.R.S. ; dynamometer, Prof. W. E. Dalby ; figure of the 
earth, M. R. Radau ; earthquakes, Prof. J. Milne, F.R.S. ; 
-Echinodermata, Dr. F. A. Bather ; Echiuroidea, Mr. A. E. 
Shipley ; eclipse, Prof. Simon Newcomb; economic 
entomology, Prof. F. V. Theobald; education, Sir 
‘Joshua Fitch and Dr. N. M. Butler; eel, Mr. J. T. 
Cunningham ; Egypt (physical geography), Major H. G. 
Lyons ; and Egyptology, Prof. W. M. Flinders Petrie, 
F.R.S., and Mr. F. Ll. Griffith ; and elastic systems, Prof. 
A. E. H. Love, F-.R.S. 
It will be evident from this selected list of subjects and 
authors that science is well represented in the volume, 
and that the editors have endeavoured to secure authorita- 
tive statements of the position of knowledge of many de- 
partments of scientific study. In general, the articles 
contain good accounts of advances in the departments of 
intellectual activity with which the writers deal, but there 
are some in which the view described is not so compre- 
hensive as it might have been. 
Take, for instance, the article on eclipse, which is sup- 
posed to bring the information up to the present position 
of knowledge of the subject as regards eclipses of the 
sun. We find various details referring to the extent 
and structure of the corona, and the number of lines 
photographed during various eclipses, but there is no 
clear view of the subject as a whole. Significant observ- 
ations are overlooked, while others are catalogued with- 
out any attempt at analysis of the material. The article 
NO 1711, VOL. 66] 
on comets is just as unsatisfactory, and the only value it 
has to a student of the subject lies in the catalogues of 
elements of these bodies. Nothing is said about such im- 
portant points as the distribution of orbits, the origin 
of comets or their spectroscopic history. 
The article on education, by Sir J. G. Fitch, is worthy 
of the “ Encyclopedia.” Its main purpose is 
“to trace the gradual growth of what may be called the 
English system, the forces which have controlled it, and 
the results it effected during the last quarter of the 
nineteenth century.” 
For purposes of comparison, a brief account is also 
given of the provision made for education in three or four 
nations of Europe in which the people are less hampered 
by tradition and the leaders are animated by a pro- 
gressive spirit. Towards the close of his valuable paper, 
Sir Joshua Fitch points out some of the problems of the 
future. 
“The motive force which we need,” he remarks, “ must 
be found in a higher and truer popular conception of a 
liberal education, and of its relation to the formation of 
character and to the duties of industrial, civic and family 
life. That the acquisition of knowledge, though obviously 
the prominent business of a school, is not the whole of 
education, and that knowledge consciously directed to 
the special professional and industrial needs of life is of 
far less real value than the knowledge which helps to 
bring out the best powers of the reflective and accom- 
plished man, are truths which are yet imperfectly 
recognised.” 
The scientific study of Egyptian antiquities is reviewed 
in the article “Egyptology” by Prof. W. M. Flinders 
Petrie and Mr. F. LI. Griffith. The latter confines his 
attention to the ancient language. 
Egyptology is a science in the making, and as yet no 
general scientific systems of Egyptian archzological or 
linguistic study which command the allegiance of all 
Egyptologists have been worked out, although in the 
archeological field great progress has been made in this 
direction, owing chiefly to the work of Prof. Petrie. 
Any general article dealing with Egyptological study 
must, therefore, be in great measure a statement of 
personal opinion on the subject. So in these two 
articles by Messrs. Petrie and Griffith we have not 
so much general reviews of Egyptian archzological 
and linguistic study as ev-cathedrad statements of the 
opinions held by two distinguished Egyptologists. 
These, however, are stated without any hint being given 
to the reader that many other equally distinguished 
Egyptologists disagree with them. For instance, Prof. 
Petrie’s whole reconstruction of the first two Egyptian 
dynasties, based on the results of his excavations at 
Abydos, has recently been challenged in almost every 
point by Prof. Naville, the distinguished Egyptologist of 
Geneva, in the Recueil de Travaux. 
Now we do not think that the Genevan professor’s 
challenge is by any means altogether successful, but the 
fact that it could be made at allis a proof of the uncertainty 
of the whole matter. But no hint of uncertainty is given 
by Prof. Petrie on pp. 720, 722 of the “ Encyclopedia” 
where he deals with it.! Similarly, the description of the 
1 Prof. Petrie’s article was no doubt already set up in type before the 
publication of that of Prof. Naville, but this. makes no difference to the 
argument ; the uncertainty existed from the first. 
R 
