and the supposition is more than plausible, that, in the earliest ages, the lunar measure of time would prevail.

Besides, if this mode of explaining the immense periods of Egyptian chronology be rejected, what is the true one? Let those who sneer at this tell us what those periods do mean. Do those thirteen thousand nine hundred years of the reign of the gods signify a real condition of men and things on earth? Did the twelve hundred and fifty-five years' sway of the demigods

ee

beings whose fathers were

cover

gods and mothers women, or vice versa an actual state of affairs in this world? So with the fifty-eight hundred and thirteen years attributed to the demigods and manes. What is the practical meaning of these? Perhaps our friends the spiritualists" can explain them. I cannot. Perhaps they may find in these old Egyptian legends evidence of the actual participation of departed spirits in the affairs of men. Be it so. But a sober student of history and chronology, when confronted with myths like these, cannot help asking some questions in regard to them which are not so easily disposed of. And the only rational conclusion he can reach is, that as to determining the actual existence of man on earth, unless upon the supposition that they involve other than the usual modes of reckoning, they are utterly worthless.

It has been sometimes said that ancient nations have forged the large periods of their early annals for the express purpose of gratifying their pride of a high antiquity. But I doubt the assertion. Such a motive would imply an appreciation of the value of history in the true sense of the term. And when such an appreciation is reached by any people, it is too late to falsify it; or, if falsification were attempted, it could not be perpetuated. Still, if any one should maintain that, in remote prehistoric times, some bard or story-teller invented these large Egyptian numbers, and gave them currency before the true idea and value of history had been attained, I should have no controversy with him. But I have a controversy with those who accept these numbers as any part of authenticated history, and weave them into systems of chronology claiming our confidence or respect.

Before leaving the prehistoric times of Egypt, I should allude to certain evidence supposed to be derived from astronomical inscriptions upon the temples corroborative of the alleged extreme antiquity of that people. Among these was the famous Zodiac of Denderah, which attracted so much attention a few years ago.* The following narrative concern

* Though the pretensions based upon this zodiac are now so completely exploded, yet it is still adduced by some as proving a

and the supposition is more than plausible, that, in the earliest ages, the lunar measure of time would prevail.

cover

Besides, if this mode of explaining the immense periods of Egyptian chronology be rejected, what is the true one? Let those who sneer at this tell us what those periods do mean. Do those thirteen thousand nine hundred years of the reign of the gods signify a real condition of men and things on earth? Did the twelve hundred and fifty-five years' sway of the demigods beings whose fathers were gods and mothers women, or vice versa an actual state of affairs in this world? So with the fifty-eight hundred and thirteen years attributed to the demigods and manes. What is the practical meaning of these? Perhaps our friends the 'spiritualists" can explain them. I cannot. Perhaps they may find in these old Egyptian legends evidence of the actual participation of departed spirits in the affairs of men. Be it so. But a sober student of history and chronology, when confronted with myths like these, cannot help asking some questions in regard to them which are not so easily disposed of. And the only rational conclusion he can reach is, that as to determining the actual existence of man on earth, unless upon the supposition that they involve other than the usual modes of reckoning, they are utterly worthless.

It has been sometimes said that ancient nations have forged the large periods of their early annals for the express purpose of gratifying their pride of a high antiquity. But I doubt the assertion. Such a motive would imply an appreciation of the value of history in the true sense of the term. And when such an appreciation is reached by any people, it is too late to falsify it; or, if falsification were attempted, it could not be perpetuated. Still, if any one should maintain that, in remote prehistoric times, some bard or story-teller invented these large Egyptian numbers, and gave them currency before the true idea and value of history had been attained, I should have no controversy with him. But I have a controversy with those who accept these numbers as any part of authenticated history, and weave them into systems of chronology claiming our confidence or respect.

Before leaving the prehistoric times of Egypt, I should allude to certain evidence supposed to be derived from astronomical inscriptions upon the temples corroborative of the alleged extreme antiquity of that people. Among these was the famous Zodiac of Denderah, which attracted so much attention a few years ago.* The following narrative concern

* Though the pretensions based upon this zodiac are now so completely exploded, yet it is still adduced by some as proving a

ing it is from the pen of a learned writer, who had a personal knowledge of some of the things of which he speaks, and was familiar with the whole subject:

"Some time about the year 179S, General Bonaparte, with his host of French soldiery and a number of literary men, entered the small town of Denderah, in Central Egypt, and found there a large and small temple, in a good state of preservation, both of which were decorated with images of deities and hieroglyphics. The literary men copied the drawings as well as their time would permit, but they secured the whole ceiling of the smaller, flat temple, by cutting out the stone slab by means of a saw. They were also fortunate enough in getting the old, black, and smoky stone-which, by the way, had the length and breadth of the ceiling of a middle-sized room

safe to Paris. Arrived here, the literati went to work in deciphering the inscriptions and figures of both temples. And what did they make of them?

"Why, they thought, from the inscriptions, that both temples must be at least 17,000 years old, and tried to prove this by their astronomical calculations · in short, made it mathematically sure. Volume after volume was then published on this subject. But in this case, as in many others, the reckoning had been made without their high date for the human occupancy of the Nile valley. Since these pages were written, a gentleman urged it to prove to me the incorrectness of the Mosaic chronology. For this reason I refer to it in this place.