1803. | 
fourteen lines, the fides of which are ra- 
‘ther damaged. The fecond appears to 
be in the running charaéter of the old 
Egyptian language, fich as has been fome- 
times feen on the bands or f{ycamore cales 
with which the mummié€s were furrounded. 
Jt is contained-in thirty-two lines 5 and, 
in one part of the Greek in{cription, its 
eharaéters are termed eyuuerorc, oF local ; 
this laft circumfance throws fome light on 
a paflage of Herodotus, the faith of which 
has frequently been called in queftion, He 
mentions the Egyptians as having two 
kinds of writing in ufe, the one called 
spa, the facred ; and the other, which an- 
fwers to the eyxwpsois of the infcription 
AHMOTIKA, the vulgar. And here I 
take the liberty to obferve, that the spe of 
Herodotus does not appear to mean the 
hieroglyphic, but a Jefs perfect kind of 
writing much ufed by the hierogramma- 
tifts, and diftincuifhed by Clemens Alex- 
andrinus from the perfeétly fymbolical by 
the name of the dieratic. Clemens, befides 
the two kinds of writing juft mentioned, 
notices a third, and calls it the epi/fologra- 
phic, probably anfwering to the eyzwpross 
of the infcription, and the dyuorima of 
Herodotus. The Jaft of the three in{crip- 
tions is a Greek one,- having many words 
which are not Greek intermixed ; it oc- 
cupies fifty-four lines, and, from its pofi- 
tion on the ftone, has received confiderable 
injury, both from time and violence, One 
of the chafins towards its clofe Mr. Aker- 
blad has endeavoured, with fome probabi- 
lity, to fill up; and I hope the new vo- 
lume of the Archeologia, which is at pre- 
fentin a forward ftate, wii] communicate 
fomething on the fubjeét from Proteffor 
Porfon, At the time Alexandria was 
taken by Lord Hutchinfon, the ftone in 
queftion was claimed by General Menou 
@S private property. 
I fhail now offer you a few remarks 
on the hieroglyphics, feme of which may 
be found particularly applicable to the 
firft of the infcriptions from Roféetta. If, 
as your laft obferves, the facred fyinbols of 
Egyptian learning gave, even to thofe 
who were initiated among the priefts, but 
dark hints, and obfcure allufions to the 
truth, furely we, ata diftant period, left 
to collect our materials from a ravaged 
country, ignorant of molt of the old po- 
pular cuftoms, but flightly acquainted 
with the external ceremonies, and exclud- 
ed even from thofe dark hints, and ob- 
{cure allufions, which the hierophants 
communicated to their pupils, can form 
not even the diftant glimmer of a hope, 
that we fhall ever complete the end of our 
Account of Egyptian Antiquities. 
599 
refearches into the recondite do&trines con - 
cealed under the myfteries of ancient 
Egypt. Iam not difcouraging the fearch, 
Sir, but merely delivering an opinion, 
which has had its rife in the moft iabo- 
rious enquiries. That there are fome 
truths vihbly manifefted in the hierogly- 
phics, I readily own, Much of the learn- 
igg in which they were difplayed, no 
doubt, concerned the doétrine, which the 
priefts of Egypt continually promulgated, 
of the tran{migration of the foul of man; 
which, they were wont to fay, nailed fuc- 
ceffively, after death, into the bodies of 
animals, terreflrial, aquatic, and aérial, 
whence, having completed its circuit in 
three thouland years, it riturned to ani- 
mate the body of aman. In other cafes, 
they muft, undoubtedly, have relation to a 
fable, of which the priefis of Egypt feem 
to have been particularly fond. §* That 
the gods, having been once puffued by 
Typhon, concealed them{felves. under the 
ficures of different animals,”? . Theear- 
lieft and the belt writers affure us, that 
the hieroglyphics bore very frequently a 
triple meaning ; and it is on fuch ground , 
only, that the confufed and inexplicable 
nature of the Egyptian mythology can be - 
accounted for. There are many points 
in the explanation of thefecharaciers which 
defy the moft acute examination. For, 
as the modes of worfhip varied in different 
places, fo the fame fymbols were diffe- 
rently applied. And the influence both of 
the fame and different gods was fuppofed 
to have refided in different animals. The 
black ox that was confecrated to the fun, 
was alfo facred to Ofiris, by whom the 
Nile, as well as the fun, was fabled; 
Apis, likewife, was a name given, as Plu- 
tarch (De Ifide & Ofiride, c. 73.) aflures 
us, not only to the bull, but alfo to the 
Mendefian goat. Nor is it beyond the 
line of probability, that we may fome-. 
times take the animals, which the hiero- 
phants have délineated, for beings very. 
different from thofe which the facred 
{cribes defigned to reprefent. ‘The pecu- 
liar- attributes or properties. too, which 
were reprefented by ‘particular animals, 
were fometimes only appropriate.to fuch 
fpecies of the animal as inhabited Egypt. 
The dog, it is probable, would have been 
celebrated for attachment, rather than vi- 
gilance, had not the crocodile accuitomed 
him-to drink the waters of the Nile while 
runbing. 7 
Thete, however, Bre but few of the dif- 
ficulties that baffle the labours of the ftu- 
dent.’ Many of the fymbolic doctrines 
have, no doubt, an immediate relation to 
; 3F 2 parti- 
