RECENT MEASURES AT THE GREAT PYRAMID. 401 



What was the date then of the construction of this chamber of seven ? 

 Why, of course it was the same as that of the building of the Great Pyramid ; 

 and if you ask when that was built, the answer is strange for the exactness and 

 precision of some literary inquiries. Nearly fifty years ago the best writers 

 fixed the date at 1800 B.C.; but within twenty years since, 2400 b.c. was con- 

 sidered nearer the mark ; still more recently the German scholars who are so 

 highly thought of at present in most of our universities, extended the time to 

 3200 b.c, then to 3700 b.c, and at last M. Renan in France, has just announced 

 that the epoch cannot be less than 4500 or 4700 b.c. 



In the midst of all these contradictions then, what does the Pyramid say for 

 itself? If it deals in time measures at all, it ought to have some capable of 

 measuring large, as well as small intervals of time. In short, what of the 

 astronomy of the Pyramid ? 



Astronomy has been tried already to settle the age of the Great Pyramid, by 

 several eminent men ; there was the happy identification for instance in 1838 by 

 Sir John Herschel of the direction of the entrance passage with the once position 

 of a Draconis, giving a date of about 2160 b.c, which agreed perfectly with the 

 literary authorities of the time. But when these had grown in twenty years to 

 3400 b.c, then came Mahmoud Bey, the Egyptian astronomer, with a reference 

 of the star Sirius, the ancient Soth, or Sothis of the Siriadic land, to the southern 

 side of the Pyramid in a manner that brought out a date also of 3400 b.c; and 

 then too it was found that Sir John Herschel's idea of « Draconis admitted of a 

 second solution, which likewise gave 3400 b.c nearly. But since .then the literary 

 dates have gone up so much higher as to throw all astronomy into discredit. 



What then of the examination of the Pyramid last winter ? 



This shortly; 1st, The Great Pyramid's astronomy is not observing astronomy ; 

 the Pyramid was not intended to be used as an astronomical observatory ; it 

 symbolizes only. 



2d, Mahmoud Bey's idea of Sirius has nothing positive to connect it with the 

 Pyramid, and has three out of four possible features absolutely against it. 



3d, Sir John Herschel's idea of the entrance passage and a Draconis is very 

 good so far as it goes, but it was not conducted far enough to reach a positive 

 conclusion. 



As I may gratefully acknowledge to that eminent philosopher, he taught me 

 years ago the importance in scientific investigation of attending excessively to 

 all anomalies in results. And on that principle I was much troubled at the 

 Pyramid to see, that if a Draconis had been made such important use of as the 

 ancient Polar star, only one of its two daily meridian passages had been marked; 

 and that one, the lower and less important. 



Why such an anomaly ? Convinced by much experience at the Pyramid that 

 there is hardly anything there without a reason — I concluded, — " because, when 



VOL. XXIV. PART II. 5 Q 



