142 
If Formicus used the word chemia in the second, third, or 
fourth century, and if chemistry were meant, we have a 
good starting point ; hut Formicus was an astrologer, and 
he gives no definition. 
The tract by “ Democritus” speaks of several chemical 
subjects, and he is said to have treated of metals and purple 
dyeing, having learnt Egyptian and other Eastern wisdom. 
Dr. Kopp considers that he may be referred to the fourth 
century. No criticism of any point of Kopp’s enquiries was 
proposed ; it was intended to begin where he had ended his 
enquiries, and to go into earlier times. 
The old belief that chemistry has something to do with 
the soil of Egypt was not considered just. Brugsch says 
that Egypt is called black in contradistinction to the Desert, 
which is called red in hieroglyphic inscriptions. But the 
soil is not really black, and even if it were so, chemistry can 
have no direct relation to it. Still an art might receive 
the name of the country it came from, as Japan gives us 
japanning, &c. But so much came from Egypt to the West 
that we have little reason to suppose that such an obscure 
subject as chemistry would be the only one to take up the 
name of such an illustrious country and carry it to the 
West, whilst only those outside who foresaw tlie greatness 
of the Science would give it a great name. The Egyptians 
themselves would scarcely do so. Why should they choose 
this as peculiarly characteristic of their country ? 
Dr. Angus Smith came to the idea that the word UpH 
Hema or Khema, meaning heat in Hebrew, was much 
more likely to be the origin of the name chemia than 
any hitherto fixed upon, and hoped by the later re- 
searches in Egypt and Assyria to have some light thrown 
upon it. Professor Theodores, of Owens College, being 
asked, gave information which confirmed him in the 
belief, and also showed that the word was not an Arabic 
one. “ If Kimia be an Arabic word the attempt to graft it 
