of experiments on the pendulum. 83 
disputably correct, may sometimes afford a very strong 
evidence of the accuracy and veracity of a historian. If the 
number were indefinitely large, the probability that it eould 
not have been suggested by accident would amount to an 
absolute certaint)' : but where it must naturally have been 
confined within certain moderate limits, the confirmation, 
though somewhat less absolute, may still be very strong. 
For example, if the subject were the number of persons 
collected together for transacting business, it would be a fair 
presumption that it must be between 2 or 3 and 100, and the 
chances must be about 100 to 1 that a person reporting it 
truly must have some good information ; especially if it were 
not an integral number of tens or dozens, which may be con- 
sidered as a species of units. Now it happens that there is a 
manuscript of Diodorus Siculus, which, in describing the 
funerals of the Egyptians, gives 42 for the number of persons 
who had to sit in judgment on the merits of the deceased: 
and in a multitude of ancient rolls of papyrus, lately found in 
Egypt, it may be observed, that 42 personages are delineated, 
and enumerated, as the judges assisting Osiris in a similar 
ceremony. It is therefore perfectly fair to conclude from 
this undeniable coincidence, that we might venture to bet 100 
to 1, that the manuscript in question is in general more accu- 
rate than the others which have been collated ; that Diodorus 
Siculus was a well informed and faithful historian ; that the 
graphical representations and inscriptions in question do relate 
to some kind of judgment ; and lastly, that the hieroglyphical 
numbers, found in the rolls of papyrus, have been truly 
interpreted. 
