On this page

• Text (2)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    capacityA&devfoted , he-reads off a page oiHhe J&osefcta stone ; and i £ Mecogl « piacft'f ^ li *»> b / a&ietreateupoeL ccwgeeture , and mounts into- the air even snore courageously tha ** he . burrowsinto the sand ! Wfee »» anj arcbseologist pronousnces the inscriptions on the Rosetta stone to fee untranslatable , Mr . Os&urn answers by translating it . When the OhevaHerrBunsen confesses-that the Book of the Dead is a record in . , a l ost lan ^ ua ^ e , Mr . Osbum not only interprets , but analyses the . document . Wlien JMEr . Kenrick says that no one can read , with much certainty , a hieroglyphic writing of any l ength , Mr . Osburn offers versions , as long and as numerous as you please , of the graven lines of men who " hung their mute

    thoughts on the mate walls around" twenty centuries before the Onrjstian era . However , it is not only because be is an intrepid translator that we suspect the philosophy of his conclusions . When he affects to peruse with facility records which the most learned among his predecessors have not only failed to- decipher themselves ^ but- have affirmed to be beyond the Eower of" mortal beings to decipher , we may at l east impute to him much ardihood and little caution ; but when a considerable , part of hia . reasoning is upon ., a basis , entirely new , and opposed , to the . ogwubns of the . greatest scholars : —of i » epsius , of Bunseo , and Champollion-Aw . e are led to expe&t thafc . whichv . we : actually findT-dogtnatisro founded on conjectures ,. pifr . ados . es iind inferences that are quite gratuitous .

    Ijt . is at once apparent iu what style- Mr . Osbrurn intends to deal with adversaries * " That the fertility . of Egypt is dependent altogether upon the Nile , " everyone will readily admit ; .. hut . wby add , " there is no understanding , sa . grovelling * no intellect so debased * . among ,, the sons of men , that he casoaot perceiveit ? " If by " thesonsof men ' Mr . Osburn . means human bowigs generally , . we do « fet wfaetbar : there are not some intelligent people , neither debased nor groveUinf * , who would require a little further teaching before- they became so familiar with the natural history of Egypt . This is a trivial point ; yet it is characteristic of -Mn Osburn ia his doctrinal mood . Tiie same method is adopted soon- afterwards ^ on a more important subject , though with less success . Says Mr . Osburn , concerning the Copts v

    That they really are the lineal descendants of the inhabitants of Egypt who first embraced Christianity ^ and that the language of their sacred books is really the Egyptian language , there never -was the remotest ground for a doubt at any time , inxwgjr a long and learned controversy was raised upon the point by the frivolous and ^ i » iant pedflntty = <> f the seholarahip of the last century . And yet he shortly tells us , with respect to the Coptic language , that only a "high probability that it is the language of ancient Egypt" has now been " proved . " If nothing more than a " probability" has been " proved , " there "teas .- surely _ n © necessity for denying that there was ever a doubt on the question , or for accusiBg . of igaoxance- and frivolity the philologists who argued it ; Mr . Osburn next advances his own theory of the process by ¦ which the hieroglyphic writing was constructed . ^ This theory he confesses to be unsupported by the authority-of any ~* other student on the subject , for it inverts the'method of reasoning that has hitherto been adopted . Instead of choosing , the progression from pietures-to symbols , and thence to phonetic characters , he begins with the-phonetic , and though he ascribes the invention to ¦ ¦ " a company of men of ; ihe same generation , " suggests a , distinction , the of time know

    which we cannot understand ^ between order ( we nothing of that , he says , ) and the order of indnction . Nevertheless * ' ^ previous Ottlture- and experience"' had prepared the minds of the Egyptian hieroglyphtsts ; for the task they undertook . We have not yet learned to be so positive as Mr . Osburn , especiall y as his logic is no less unintelligible to ms than the inscriptions , werare afraid , are to him ; but we prefer to read with CharopoUioo until a better light is thrown on the mysteries of Egyptian fttae 3 ^ 'Wi 4 j <> » iN > ' _ .. _ ¦ ' , „ , , Thai ) the ancient language ot Egypt-. indirectly . relatedtothe Hebrew ,, that tbe Egyptian people originally came from the Eu ' plmites , and that the pyramids were suggested by memories of the Tower of Babel * , are other points , on friri ^ k the opinions of Mr . Osburn contradict the views of moat scholars . His chronology , also , is wrought upon a peculiar plan , and all this is usually accompanied by a triumphant reference to the . Scriptural records . Students who differ from him he accuses of ' a malieious desire to undermine

    the historical authority of the Bible . Throughout all ages and countries are these or similar aspersions scattered : to Manetho he imputes sinister motives ; toJkepsius and Bunsen > hostility to the Scriptures ; to the Hebrew , Sfluwritan , and Greek chronologists , carelessness , if not dishonesty ; and yet he himself abandons the dates of" tho Bible , . and assures us that its chronology needs critical correction quite as much as that of the kin ^ s of Egypt . Even the hieroglyphists themselves do not escape . He finds in a tomb _ at Gournou a picture about which , in a previous work , he wrote , descanting on the shepherd invaders who came into Egypt from the land of Canaan . But now , though positive enough in his former account , he l'efutes it all , and describes the entire record as a gross fabrication . The historians of old Egypt forged a tale , and painted on the walls their " precious piece of partisan writing . " But is it certain , that they were guilty of this imposture ? May thay not , have set Mr . Osbum an example , and " conjecturally restored" circumstances in favour of their own ideas ? Mr . Osburn invents ho ia at

    coincidences and synchronisms enough ^ even clever derivations , and can trace a Greek word to the Hebrew ; he raises " shapeless blots '' to their full significance ; he- assumes the meaning of illegible lines , and , where the translation contradicts him , suggests an " emendation" in the text ! Why Herodotus should be supposed to have had a Phrygian servantwh y the personal character of Manetho should be destroyed by an oblique ittsiuuation— why SoyfTarth ' s papyrus should be ridiculed as waste-paper , aadw . hy it should bo said that " not a trace or vestige of anything belonging

    to the age of . Mones is known to exist in Egypt , " when it is aiterwards affirmed . that his . waUa and canals remain , ore all questions to which Mr . Qaburn alone con reply . It seems to us that he is determined to work his ¦ wuy through satire , anomalies , contradictions , and dogmas , to a foregone conclusion . His next great point is the Universal Flood , which gives him an- opportunity , on the strength of one doubtful hieroglyphic , to talk of Waving " ground to powder" the foundation-stone v of an opinion Held by E'epsius , that no momorial of the Deluge is to be found among tho records of ancient Egypt . Tho discussion is more open than Mr . Osburn chooses

    to allow ; but it is his habit , when a hypothesis has been JijghtlyASHpportedi to hurry on and draw off our attention : by sorae stupendous paradox , coarr ceived with equal facility , and defended with equal assumptiesu It is now time , our readers will think ,. that w * j should allow ; Mr , Ogburn to say a little for himself . We will , therefore , quote some . .. of his observations on the religious beliefs of Egypt . He thus alludes to the mystic poetry which wrapped their idea of the sou ^ and its passag e out of life ¦ : —• They supposed that -the Kile and the sun met together at the western horizon , and there plunged into an abyss or cave , which led to the invisible world , or place of separate spirits . Traversing this region during the night , the Nile and the : sun . again rose together to the upper and visible world from the cave of the east ; These notions seem- to have originated in the circumstance that the whole of the desert to the west- ? ward of the first settlement was a marsh when the immigrants arrived in Egypt , ; and that , as the sun and the river seemed . to them to sink down together , they assumed that appearance to be a reality .

    , The symbol of the soul was , the white ibis , or crane ( ardea intermedia ) , which is to this day very abundant in Lower Egypt . The ministers oti vengeance in their Hadeswere apes . "We feel persuaded that these notions also originated in the same strange mystification of natural objects . They had conjectured or been taught ,-that the soul after death went underground . They assumed that it -went thither in the bark of tho setting sun , and together with the Nile . The travellers who first ventuared to explore the pathless marshes to the westward of the primitive settlements , would doubtless see on all side * of them flocks of these beautiful but silent ghost-like bixds , standing motionless , and apparently-pensive , on the sand-flats . It was a probable mistake , in . minds thus predisposed , to imagine that these were the souls of the departed , -waiting until the completion ( probably ) of certain funeral ceremonies gave them the power-to descend with the sum into Hades . The groves of tamarisk and other trees which now abound Ja the Delta would , then be there also , upon every spot sufficiently raised above the level of the river to be not absolutely marshy ; and in their branches droves of the common Barbary ape would make their habitations . These animals abounded in ancient Egypt .

    Mr . Osburn ' s inductive method , as well as his critical vigilance , is exhibited in the following , on Sesostris : — The monumental pre-eminence of the king , whose name is thus identified , over all those that went before and that followed him on the throne of . Egypt , is the next point which we have to establish . This statement is easy to verify . The number of kings w&o have inscribed their names on monuments , from the foundation of the monarchy to its final absorption in the Macedonian empire , under Ptolemy Lagos * amounts to upwards of 150 , and they ruled Egypt for very nearly 2000 years . The memorials of the reign of Sesostris-Bamses exceed in number those of the whole of them collectively . This will be found true , whether the reckoning is made from the mom *? ments now in the museums of Europe , or those that still remain scattered over the surface of .-all that eves / was called Egypt . The enormous preponderance of thememor

    rials of the reign of Sesostris-Ramses over those of any other Pharoah appears at once , wherever the remains- of Ancient Egypt are indiscriminately collected togethe So that no fact can be easier of proof than that he was , monumentally , by far the greatest king ; that ever sat on , the throne of that kingdom . - — Allowing that Sesostris is not altogether a myth , as fabulous ^ as Sir Gardiner Wilkinson ' s ^ xpeditions of Semirsmis int o Bactria , we think that Mr . Osburn i gnoresjoo freely the idea that this monarch obliterated the names of hislmcestors , to inscribe his own , on many of those splendid dedications . However , it is a dubious point , and we must now leave Mr ,. Osburn . We have great respect for his zeal , for his long studies in Egvpt , and for his courage ; but we question whether his theory will meet with acceptance , even from , the lovers of novelty , while we are sure that so bad a . critic wul never be considered a good historian .

    Untitled Article

    A NEW BOOKSELLING DODGE . Both 3 aU : AJOomes % Tfde of ' the Present Time . By Fanny Fern . " ¦" ' ¦ - * - - — - — - - - Houlston and Stoneman . Ii * we had examined this book solely on its own merits , we should have laid it aside as utterly unworthy of review . We believe it , however , to be the fair representative of . a , new system of puffing , which certain , English publishers are now endeavouring , to import successfully from America to England ; and against whicfa . we think it our duty to assist in warning the public . This consideration iaduces us to regard llutii Hall in . the light of a useful text-to speak from ; and , for that reason only , we now select the book for

    All our-respeofc and admiration—often and frankly expressed in these columns—for wh « t is noblest and best ia America and her institutions , must not blind , us to the , palpable fact that the public of the United Stutea allows itself , at this day , to be more lamentably imposed on by shameless and systematic puflery than the public of any 6 ther civilised country in the universe . Of the general truth of this remark , that monument of cynical effrontery , Barnum ' s Autobiography , affords , of itself , the most startling and irresistible of : aJI proofs . Of-. the particular truth of our assertion , as regards literary puffery ( the matter-it * hand just now ) , similarly indisputable proofe may be obtained by any ona who will look over the literary advertisement of an American newspaper , and who will compare them , by way of specunenfl i with the literary advertisements of any English or French newspaper . VVG have plenty of impudent book-puffing to he ashamed of ia this country . Wo ot

    have citations of garbled critical opinions , announcements new euwum which are not new editions , assertions of immense circulation , which really 1 mean anything but immense sale , and so on ; but , until lately , we had not reached that climax of audacity which consists in printing a book , with tuo publisher ' s opinion of his own speculation placed at tho beginning , ov , way of preface , for the reader ' s benefit . Just as a quack-doctor at a iuir tries to sell the « infallible German corn-plaster , " the » Oordial J lixir . rffctejaol Youth , ' * by stating-his own . opinion of the inestimable virtuesi of the > oinfc * most or the drug , so do American publishers try to soil books , wh . cfci are quite as useless as the corn-plaster , and not by any means as harmless M tho Elisir of Youth : and so , wo are now obliged , aud ashamed , to add , do

    aft ! ± 5 fe £ E ^? i = SMS of " Mesar * . Houlston and Stononuut , " the namea o £ Meaera , Orr and Co .,

    Untitled Article

    Eskb ^ AB ^ 10 , 1855 , ] WB ItJEjiABIB , 109

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), Feb. 10, 1855, page 139, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2077/page/19/