4- EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE. 



Ramfden was P. S. I beg leave to add, that the machine for drawing in 



the inventor of perfpeaive, defcribed in your Journal for Odober, page 122, 

 ipcdtive inftru- was (I am almoft abfoluteiy certain) the invention of the late 

 »ient referred to. mo fj- eminent Mr. Ramfden, and was made by him full "25 

 years fince, for the Right Honourable Charles Greville. 



II. 



Account of an ancient Egyptian Sculpture xvith Hieroglyphics, 

 fuppofed to relate to Aftronomy. In a Letter from Mr, 

 H. Steinhauer. With un Engraving. ■ 



To Mr. NICHOLSON. 

 SIR, Fulneck, Oft. 25, 1804. 



Porphyry fculp- JL ERHAFS the liberty that I take in fubmitting the annexed 

 tured I in the form draught of an Egyptian antiquity, maybe an intrufion upon 

 and bearing hie- * ne P' an °'" } uur valuable Journal. The Egyptian hieroglyphic 

 roglyphirs. inferiptions are involved in fuch impenetrable darknefs, that 



every trifle contributed to their elucidation cannot but be ac- 

 ceptable, indeed equally acceptable to the antiquarian, the 

 hiftorian, and the aftronomer ; fince the greater part have pro- 

 bably a reference to that fcience. Stones fculptured in the 

 fhape of a fcarnb;eus are, I believe, (for I make no preten- 

 tions to the title of an antiquarian) well known; there are a 

 few in the Britiih Mufeum ; but I never yet faw either a fac- 

 fimile of the infeription, or any attempt at an explanation of 

 the fame. The drawings inclofed are taken from a itone 

 brought by the Swedifh conful at Aleppo to Stockholm, and 

 there prefented by him to a gentleman, who has favoured me 

 with the loan and permiffion to make drawings or impreffions 

 of it at pleafure. The upper part, of the fize of the fketch, 

 obvioufly reprefents a fcarabasus ; probably the S. Sacer, Lin. 

 & Fabr. though the indentures on the head are but flightly 

 marked, and a flight damage between the thorax and elytra 

 render it impoffib'e to di (cover whether a fcutellum be indi- 

 cated or not. It was perhaps the only beetle they reprefented 

 in (culplure, and the accuracy of a modern nomenclator is 

 confequently unnecelTary to determine it. If I recoUeft right, 



this 



