as St. Paul describes him as “King of Righteousuess, priest of the most high 
God.” Nor do I agree with Professor Smith as to the animal names. Mr. 
Smith gives a number of names, and says they are connected with Totem 
worship, his argument being that those who used them were Totem worship- 
pers. I can hardly think he is right in this. We know that Jacob gave 
animal names to his sons on his death-bed — Judah being designated a lion’s 
whelp ; Issachar a strong ass ; Dan a serpent ; Naphthali a hind ; and Ben- 
jamin a wolf. This, however, has no connexion with Totem worship ; and 
suppose, taking another view, the names common in our own country were 
to form subjects of comment three or four thousand years hence, any one 
adopting Professor Smith’s argument would be inclined to say that such 
names as Bull and Bullock, Cow, Hart, Roe, Buck, Hind, Fox, Hare, Badger, 
Lion, Wolf, Bird, Cock, Hen, Duck, Drake, and so forth, indicated that 
those who bore them were Totem worshippers. I certainly cannot help 
thinking that Mr. Smith is wholly wrong in his argument. 
Rev. J. W. Ayre. — In the section of the paper referring to “ Some other 
Egyptian Names,” I observe the word “Hagar” is referred to as an 
Egyptian name. Now I have heard it suggested that as Hagar or Hadjar 
is the Arabic word for “ stone,” it was translated by Pliny as “ petra,” 
and the Romans, not 'understanding anything about Hagar, gave Arab el 
Hadjar the name of “ Arabia Petraea,” so that the name Petraea is really a 
witness to Hagar. There is a similar instance in the case of the Red Sea, 
or sea of Edopi, where Edom, not being recognised as a proper name, was 
translated “ Red and Esau, you may remember, was called Edom red”) 
because of the incident of the red pottage he received for his birthright. 
There is also a somewhat similar instance in the case of tlie sea of Ashkenaz, 
which by the transposition of a letter became “ Axeinos ” (inhospitable), 
the Greeks giving it afterwards another name, Euxine, which, if this genea- 
logy of the word be correct, stands as witness for Ashkenaz, the grandson of 
Japheth. I must leave it to the more learned to verify these suggested 
derivations. 
Mr. Trelawney Saunders. — I must apologise, and especially to the 
ladies, for rising at so late a period of the evening. However, I intend to 
pass rapidly over the notes which I have made during the meeting, and, as 
I have not come with any prepared discourse, I shall not detain you long. I 
observe a comparison between “ ’Aujeh” and “Og, King of Bashan.” Now 
“ ’Aujeh ” means ‘‘ crooked.” I wish to know whether the analogy to be 
drawn is that the King of Bashan was a crooked man, or hunchbacked ? It 
may be added that the initial letter of both names is the guttural “ ain,” 
making their pronunciation “Gaujeh” and “Gang.” Is not the English 
word “ gouge ” equivalent ? 
I now come to the word “am,” or “um,” as a name of God. This name 
has exercised very considerable influence, and not only among the ancients. 
On. page 7 of the paper it is said that the form Amon is purely Egyptian. I 
would here make the remark that the light acquired in recent years on these 
