222 
self. The time has come for us not to place so much reliance, as some have 
done, upon extravagant theories on this subject, but to bring to it a little 
sober criticism, and to take the best evidence we can find, doing as De Rouge, 
in France, and others elsewhere have done, and endeavouring to get correct 
information. I wish to speak with all respect of Bunsen, who has been much 
misunderstood. That large-minded, God-fearing old German, though he 
differed from most of us, was a man of most extraordinary fancy. He was 
not a hieroglyphic scholar himself — he was only imperfectly acquainted with 
hieroglyphs ; but he used these monuments, not to tell men exactly what 
they told him, but to build hypotheses upon ; and in doing that he did great 
service. The man who raises hypotheses does a great service, because he 
exposes himself to attack, and a great deal more light is thrown upon the 
subject, even if his hypotheses are destroyed in the discussion. That is what 
Bunsen did, and I hope you will be careful always not to fall into the 
mistake of taking Bunsen as the type of Egyptologists. If you take the 
works of Lepsius and Reinisch in Germany, of De Rouge and Chabas in 
France, and of Birch in this country, you will find they have treated these 
Egyptian monuments as fairly, perhaps more fairly, than Greek and Roman 
authors have been treated by many historians. They labour over and over 
again in most difficult ground to arrive at the truth ; and if you examine 
their work, you will find that, chronologically, they carry back some of their 
inscriptions to 2,000 years before Christ. In support of that, you have a 
succession of monuments of different ages and of different styles, as in 
Greece you have work of the time of the temple of iEgina, of the time of 
Praxiteles, and of the time of Lysippus. So in Egypt you have a succes- 
sion of ages as well as a growth of art, which you see at once could not have 
been brought about in a day. I should warn you not to expect strict accuracy 
in these monuments, because there you get, for instance, typical colours 
representing the different races of men — the Negro, the White and the Brown 
man of Egypt standing between the Black and the White. That, however, 
would bear strongly, on the age of the different races, and also on the 
antiquity of the barbarous races, because there you have the Negroes re- 
presented in the matter of clothing in the same condition as in the present 
day. And now, in conclusion, let me beg you to treat with the greatest 
respect all attempts — I will not say to harmonize, because they must be in 
harmony — but to point out the connection between Scripture and science, 
when they are made in so thoroughly reverent and God-fearing a spirit as 
that which has been exhibited by Professor Macdonald. I think that every- 
thing he has said has been said in that true God-fearing spirit to which we 
must all arrive. 
The Chairman. — What is the length of the inscription on the new stone ? 
Mr. Poole. — It is somewhat shorter than the inscription on the Rosetta 
stone, but it is a very clear inscription. 
The Chairman. — Docs it contain any new words ? 
Mr. Poole. — Yes. 
Mr. Reddie. — I have a few words I would wish to add, in consequence 
of the concluding observations of the last speaker relating to the Scripture 
