translation enchorial, or writing of the country; the third is in Greek, and purports to be a translation of the other two inscriptions. The importance of this stone and its inscriptions was immediately perceived, and the attention of the greatest scholars of the age was directed to its critical investigation. The Greek text was deciphered by the celebrated scholars Porson and Heyne, and ascertained to be a decree of the priests of Egypt, conferring divine honours upon Ptolemy Epiphanes. In the meantime, several continental scholars were employed in examining the meaning of the other two inscriptions, and succeeded in demonstrating that the Greek was really a translation, and, consequently, that the ancients were mistaken in supposing that the hieroglyphic and other Egyptian characters had ceased to be employed, and their interpretation lost, since the conquest of Egypt by the Persians in 525 B.C. Still the key to these monumental legends seemed as far from being discovered as ever; and to our learned countryman, Dr Thomas Young, belongs the credit of having cast the first beam of true light on the peculiar method of writing adopted by the Egyptians. In the year 1819, he published in the Supplement to the Encyclopædia Britannica, an elaborate article on this subject, in which it was demonstrated that the two unknown inscriptions on the Rosetta stone (the hieroglyphic and enchorial or demotic*) were, as to their mode of expressing ideas, identical, the latter being in good measure an abridgment or running form of the former. The process which Dr Young followed in deciphering the hieroglyphic inscription is exceedingly simple and obvious. On all the Egyptian monuments there are certain groups of hieroglyphics, enclosed in an oblong frame or ring; and it had been conjectured, with great appearance of plausibility, by the learned Dane, George Zoega, that these groups of unknown characters were probably proper names.† With these, therefore, Dr Young resolved to begin, in the hope that if he could only obtain the knowledge of a single name contained in one of these rings, the decomposition of it into its primary elements or letters would give him the nucleus of an alphabet, which future investigations might easily extend. In the Greek version of the inscription, there occur the proper names, Alexander and Alexandria, and on examining the part of the hieroglyphic inscription corresponding in its relative situation, he found two well-marked groups of characters closely resembling each other, which he therefore considered as representing these names. Another group is repeated twenty-nine or thirty times; and as there is nothing which occurs so often in the Greek, except the word king, he supposed this must be the interpretation. A fourth assemblage of characters is found fourteen times in the hieroglyphic inscription agreeing in frequency with the name of Ptolemy in the Greek version, and generally occurring in passages corresponding in their relative situation, and by a similar comparison, the name of Egypt was identified. Dr Young was aided in these researches

*Demotic signifies "popular" or "belonging to the people," and is the term employed by Herodotus to designate the kind of writing employed by the Egyptians. +Zoega, "De Origine et Usu Obeliscorum."

It was precisely in the same way that Saint Martin deciphered the arrow-headed inscriptions of Persepolis, which had long perplexed the learned world.—See Wiseman's Lectures, vol. ii. p. 64; Journal Asiátique, tom. ii. p. 75-79.

by some most extraordinary combinations of circumstances, one of which, mentioned by himself, is especially worthy of notice. An individual of the name of Casati arrived at Paris in 1820 or 1821, bringing with him some Egyptian manuscripts, the preamble of one of which was discovered by Champollion to bear a considerable resemblance to the enchorial text of the Rosetta inscription. Dr Young having procured a copy of the papyrus in question, immediately proceeded to decipher and translate it. But when he was engaged in this difficult and laborious undertaking, Mr, afterwards Sir George, Grey, placed at his disposal a Greek papyrus, which he had purchased from an Arab at Thebes. Without losing a moment, he proceeded to explore this treasure, and, to use his own expression, he could scarcely believe that he was awake and in his sober senses, when he discovered it to be nothing less than a translation of the very manuscript of Casati. "I could not therefore but conclude," he says, "that a most extraordinary chance had brought into my possession a document which was not very likely, in the first place, even to have existed, still less to have been preserved uninjured, for my informatian, through a period of near 2000 years; but that this very extraordinary translation should have been brought safely to Europe, to England, and to us, at the very moment that it was most desirable to me to possess it, as the illustration of an original which I was then studying, but without any other reasonable hope of being fully able to comprehend it, this combination would in other times have been considered as affording ample evidence of my being an Egyptian sorcerer.” *

The discoveries of Dr Young were greatly extended and improved by the celebrated Champollion, and the next step in these interesting investigations added considerably to the knowledge already obtained respecting this ancient mode of expressing ideas. In the island of Philo, situated high up the Nile, an obelisk was found, and brought to England by Mr Bankes, on which were two frames or rings, containing hieroglyphics, joined together. One of these was found to contain the hieroglyphic name of one of the Ptolemies, expressed by the same characters which occur in the inscription of Rosetta. The other ring obviously contained a name composed in part of the same letters, and followed by the sign of the feminine gender. The obelisk had been originally placed on a pedestal, containing a Greek inscription, which proved to be a petition of the priests of Isis, addressed to King Ptolemy, to Cleopatra his sister, and to Cleopatra his wife. There was, therefore, every reason to suppose, that the obelisk bore the names of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, as the inscription on its base expressly referred to these two personages. On examination, it was found that the letters common to both, PTO and L, were represented in the female name by the same signs (a square, a feather, a flower with a curved stem, and a lion) as occurred for them in the king's. There could, therefore, be no reasonable ground to doubt that, as the one hieroglyphic group designated Ptolemy, so the other must contain the name of his consort. The entire merit of this ingenious analysis was claimed by Champol

An Account of some Discoveries in Hieroglyphical Literature, p. 38,

*

lion, but Mr Bankes has asserted his title to priority in this impor tant discovery.t

These laborious investigations elucidated not less than fourteen hieroglyphic characters; and subsequent discoveries, especially those made by Champollion, have gradually enlarged, and at length completed, the Egyptian alphabet, so that we are now in possession of the means of deciphering, not only the Greek and Latin names, hieroglyphically expressed, but also the names, titles, and exploits of the successive dynasties of Pharaohs who had ruled in Egypt from the days of Abraham and Moses. J.T.

THE HOLY COMMUNION. AN ADDRESS BEFORE ADMINISTERING THE LORD'S SUPPER. BY JOHN BROWN, D.D., EDINBURGH.

THE ordinance which we have met to observe to-day, was known by various descriptive names in the ancient church. The most common of these are the Lord's Supper, the Table of the Lord, the Love Feast, the Breaking of Bread, the Eucharist, the Oblation, the Mystery, and the COMMUNION. To the last of these names I wish to turn your attention for a little, before you engage in the solemn act of commemoration, in the hope that the remarks to be inade may be of use in guiding our thoughts and affections into a track which will render the exercise something more than bodily service, the vehicle and expression of enlightened holy thought and affection,-acceptable to God, useful to ourselves, edifying to the church of God. In the earliest times, ( koivwvia)" the communion or fellowship," was not a name of the Lord's Supper; it was the distinctive appellation of another institution which, along with the ordinances of "doctrine, breaking of bread and prayers," the primitive disciples seem always to have observed when they "came together," the common consecration of a portion of their property to the cause of their common Lord. The name, however, came soon to be given also to the Lord's Supper,-probably from these striking words of the Apostle," The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? the cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?" And it requires little consideration to see that the appellation is an appropriate one.

It

The word communion has two distinct, yet connected, meanings. It signifies COMMON PARTICIPATION, and it signifies also MUTUAL COMMUNICATION-giving and receiving. In both these related significations, it is applicable to the holy institution which we are about to observe. is an ordinance of common participation and of mutual communication ; and it is so in both cases-both in reference to the worshippers viewed by themselves and viewed in connexion with the great object of worship and the great subject of emblematical representation. There is common participation on the part of the observers of the ordinance, and there is also common participation on the part of the great object Champollion's "Lettre à M. Dacier," p. 6.

+Salt'sEssay on Dr Young's and M. Champollion's Phonetic System of Hieroglyphics," p. 7.

of worship, along with the observers of the ordinance. They feast together, and they feast together along with Him. There is mutual communication among the observers of the ordinance, and there is mutual communication also between the great object of worship and the observers of the ordinance.

I.

1st. In this holy ordinance there is COMMON PARTICIPATION on the part of those who rightly engage in it. Common participation in what? There is common participation in eating bread and drinking wine. All engage in these exercises-they all eat of the same loaf-they all drink out of the same cup. But this is but the emblem of a higher and a holier kind of common participation. Their minds and their hearts are occupied about the same objects, and they are of one mind and heart about them. The truth about Christ-Christ himself—the salvation he has procured and his saved peculiar people, these are the objects which the ordinance brings before the mind, and the views and feelings with regard to these, on the part of those who rightly observe it, are the same. They think and feel in common.

(1.) The primary object of the ordinance is the emblematical representation of the saving truth respecting Christ-that he, the onlybegotten of God, in human nature, suffered and died in the room of sinners to obtain their salvation; and that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life. With regard to this principle, there is but one sentiment at a properly filled communion table. The language of the common mind is just " Amen and amen. This is the very truth most sure; we know and are persuaded of it; we set, too, our seal that God is true."

(2.) And as all true communicants participate in the faith of this truth, so they all participate in the same affections towards the Saviour, plainly set forth crucified and slain, in their room, and for their salvation. They admire him, they love him, they confide in him as the Saviour the only Saviour-the all-sufficient Saviour-their Saviour; able and willing to save them to the uttermost. Let the question be put to every believing communicant-What think ye of Christ? and the answer will be, He is infinitely amiable and infinitely kind—he is "the chief of ten thousand and altogether lovely," he is "my beloved and my friend," he is "all my salvation and all my desire." None but Christ, none but Christ.

(3.) There is common participation, also, in reference to the blessings of the christian salvation. The ordinance presents not only an accomplished Saviour but a complete salvation; and all the believing observers of it cordially receive that salvation in the faith of the truth, and enjoy in the measure of their faith the holy happiness which is its sum and substance. They all gratefully acknowledge the measure of this salvation which they have received; they all earnestly desire to obtain, in all its extent, "the salvation which is in Christ with exceeding glory,"and they all, too, humbly hope for "the grace that is to be brought to them at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

(4.) Finally. There is a common participation of the same views and feelings in reference to the saved-the peculiar people of God. The

unity of mind and heart respecting the truth, and respecting the common Saviour and the common salvation, produces "brotherly kindness" -love to all the brethren " for the truth's sake, which is in them, and will abide in them for ever." The language of the heart is, "Since he so loved us all, we should, we do, love one another. How can we but love those who love him-those whom he loves? "Grace, mercy, and peace, be on all the Israel of God."

And this mutual participation is not confined to those who, at the same time, in the same place, surround the communion table. The communion of thought, and affection, and enjoyment, is as extensive as the true church of God; and the believing communicant rejoices to think that he sits at the same table and participates in the same rich provision with the whole family in heaven and earth" called by the

one name.

"One family we dwell in him,

One church above-beneath;
Though now divided by the stream,
The narrowed stream of death."

2d. But there is another, a still higher and holier sense in which the Lord's Supper deserves the name of the communion, in the meaning of common participation," We have an altar of which they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle." The Lord's Supper is a feast on an accepted sacrifice, and the worshippers are not the only partakers. They sit with Jehovah at his own table. They are of one mind and heart with Him. The great event emblematically represented on the ordinance is the most remarkable display ever made of holy love—of truth, righteousness, and benignity. In these Jehovah delights, and in these the enlightened believing communicant delights also. Jehovah, in his own divine manner, says, in reference to the completed atonement, "My justice can demand no more." "The Lord is well pleased for His righteousness sake. This is my righteous servant in whom my soul delights-my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased." And the happy believing communicant replies, "My heart can desire no more. He has finished transgression, He has made an end of sin, He has brought in an everlasting righteousness." This is my beloved Saviour in whom I am well pleased. This is the holy colloquy which, at the communion table, takes place between Jehovah and his delighted guest. "I love HIM," "and so do I."-" I trust Him," "and so do I."-"My will is that he should be honoured," " and so is mine.""He is worthy who hath done this."-"Yes, worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and blessing."" And the soul rejoices in a conscious union of mind and will, and enjoyment with God.

When we take this view of the Lord's Supper, it is easy to see who -who alone are fit for observing it. Men whose views and feelings respecting the truth-respecting the Saviour-respecting his salvation, are not in accordance with those which characterise the holy family, whose mind and will are not consentaneous with the mind and will of God respecting the person and work of Christ, cannot from the very nature of the case be either acceptable, or benefited communicants.