were still recognised by the learned as the basis of their religious system.'

The 4th book commences with the ceremonies connected with the worship of animals in Egypt, which forms a remarkable feature in the superstition of that country. It was remarked by Clemens and Origen, that those who visited Egypt approached with delight its sacred groves and splendid temples, adorned with superb vestibules and lofty porticos, the scene of many solemn and mysterious rites. The walls, says Clemens, shine with gold and silver, and with amber, and sparkle with the various gems of India and Ethiopia; and the recesses are concealed by splendid curtains. But if you enter the penetralia, and inquire for the image of the god, for whose sake the fane was built; one of the Pastaphori, or some other attendant on the temple, approaches with a solemn and mysterious aspect, and putting aside the veil, suffers you to peep in, and obtain a glimpse of the divinity. There you behold a snake, a crocodile, or a cat, or some other beast, a fitter inhabitant of a cavern or bog, than of a temple.'

After some general observations on the worship of animals, the author proceeds under each head to collect the accounts which the ancients have left.-Section 3d, on the worship of quadrupeds of the ox-kind; including the rites of Apis, Mnevis, and other sacred bulls, and of the cow dedicated to Isis-2dly, the worship of dogs-3dly, of cats-4th of the wolf-5th of the ram-6th of the goat-7th of the worship of the deer-8th of monkeys and apes-9th of the ichneumon10th of the shrew mouse-11th of the lion-12th of the hippopotamus-13th of impure animals.

Section 4th-of the worship of birds: 1st, of the hawk2d, of the crow-3dly, of the vulture-4th of the eagle-5th, of the ibis-6th, of the goose.

Section 5th, on fabulous birds, which are traced in the Egyptian Mythology, contains remarks on the phoenix, and in a note, a citation from Bede, which proves that that author understood the phoenix, in a passage of Job, which has often been referred to of late, fieri ergo potest ut Beatus Job in similitudinem avis illius dicat, se post mortem in carnis cinere velut in nido pro tempore futurum et inde resurrecturum in gloriam, atque hos æternos esse dies quos multiplicandos sibi fidelis Dei cultor expectet. Ita enim et superius locutus est dicens. 'Et rursum circumdabor pelle mea, et in carne mea videbo Deum !"

Section 6th includes the worship of fishes, reptiles, insects,

plants and stones. From the latter superstition is derived the doctrine of talismans. In section 7th, the motives which gave rise to the worship of animals are investigated: the conjectures of Plutarch and Diodorus, who fancied that animals were worshipped out of gratitude for the benefits which men derive from their use, and that of Lucian, who connected the veneration paid to animals with astrolatry, are considered, but the author endeavours to prove from some passages of Porphyry and other writers, that this practice was derived from the doctrine of emanation, and the incarnation of the superior beings in the forms of animals. He concludes with notices of several Egyptian Avatans very much according to the style of the celebrated fictions of the Hindoos. Section 8th, on the worship of men who received at Anabis divine honors, analagous to those paid to brutes, concludes with some remarks on the deification of the Egyptian kings, a practice derived from the same superstition. Section 9th, on the antiquity of the worship of animals in Egypt. The chapter concludes with a note, comparing the above-mentioned rites with the customs of the Hindoos, as connected with metaphysical ideas of a similar kind.

In the following chapter, the author describes the sacrifices and festivals of the Egyptians-the sacrifices of human victims -of swine-sheep-goats-the ceremonies relating to Typhon; the annual festivals: under each topic the statements left by the ancient writers are collected.

In the 3d chapter the civil institutions of this nation are analysed: the different classes into which the community was divided are described, and an account is given of the subdivisions of the sacerdotal class, and the religious duties, abstinences, &c. enjoined to them. These customs are in a note compared, and found remarkably to coincide with those of the Hindoos.

The last book concludes with a minute comparison of the ordinances of Moses, with the rites of his Egyptian instructors of the mode in which this important subject is treated, we have not room to give our readers an adequate idea. Each topic is discussed singly: first, the theological doctrine of Moses is compared with that of the Egyptians-secondly, the political and civil institutions-thirdly, the ceremonies and ritual laws. The last section is on the origin of circumcision, and in this instance the opinion of Michaelis is adopted.

The critical examination of the remains of Egyptian chronology which is appended to the work on mythology, cannot at present be fully analysed. The object of the author is to determine whether the records of Egyptian chronology really assert VOL. XXVI. Cl. Jl. NO. LI. G

a claim to so vast a period of antiquity, as the tables compiled by Manethon and other writers seem at first sight to evince. It was long ago conjectured by Sir John Marsham, that several of the 30 dynasties were coeval, and not as it had been presumed, successive; this writer and his numerous followers have supposed that Egypt was divided into a number of petty states. Such an hypothesis, as the author of the present work contends, is contradictory to the general voice of history, sacred and profane, which ever represents Egypt as one kingdom, and speaks of the Pharaohs as monarchs of the whole realm; of which Thebes, at the era of the Trojan war, and subsequently Memphis, was the capital. Marsham has succeeded in bringing down the age of Menes, the founder of this monarchy, within the limits of the real age of the world, and of genuine history; but he has done it by violent means; he has cut the knot, instead of unloosing it. The author of this work informs us in his preface, that he believes himself to have fallen by chance upon the clue by which this enigma is to be solved. He says, "In repeatedly examining the fragments of these chronicles, I thought I perceived some phænomena that explained the principle upon which they were originally constructed, and promised to connect the whole into one system. The more I investigated the matter, the more I became convinced that I was not deceived by fallacious coincidences. Of this, however, my readers will now judge. I shall only premise that, if I am correct, there is in reality no want of harmony between the historical records of the ancient Egyptians, and those contained in the sacred Scriptures.

The author's hypothesis is, that the tables of Memphite and Diopolitan kings were not different and coeval successions, but that they are in many instances different copies of the same identical series of kings, derived from the records of different temples, and with variations arising from the practice of giving several appellations to the same prince, or from the occasional insertion of the names of monarchs or provincial governors in the place of the hereditary sovereigns of all Egypt. The proofs of this position are to be found in the comparison of different tables with each other: we shall conclude by giving the reader a specimen that may enable him to form an idea of the kind of evidence adduced.

The three first dynasties of Memphite kings, which occur in Manethon's tables, happen to be preserved without any lacunæ. The whole period of time ascribed to these 3 dynasties is 691 years. On the author's supposition respecting the formation of these tables, it is probable that this is the Memphite re

cord of the first seven centuries of the Egyptian monarchy. The names and reigns of these kings are accordingly set down in one column, and opposite to them are placed the kings of Diospolis from the laterculus of Eratosthenes, which are professedly taken from the temples of Thebes. Menes, the first king, is set down at the head of the column, and it terminates at the end of an equal portion of time with that occupied by the three Memphite dynasties. Here, the author considers the coincidences that display themselves to be sufficient to demonstrate the truth of his hypothesis.

The coincidences here sufficiently speak for themselves. Some of the discrepancies are explained by the author, and in one or two instances, synchronisms are established by historical testimony where the tables give no evidence to this effect. In particular, it is proved by a collateral authority, that Tosorthros, or the Esculapius of Memphis, was contemporary with the Thoth of Diopolis, who is, as the name appears to indicate, the Hathoth or Athothes of the tables.

The asterisks are meant to point out the more remarkable coincidences.

NOTICE OF

ITINERARY OF EL HAGE BOUBEKER ANZANI, an African, from Seno-Palel in Senegal to Mekka, published at Fort Louis, Senegal, in 1820; and translated from the Arabic by M. P. ROUZEE.

THIS Itinerary gives a description of a pilgrim's journey across Africa, from the French possessions on the western coast of Africa, to the Arabian gulf, performed in the years 1810, 1811, &c.

Europeans have no authentic intelligence respecting the districts situated between Housa and Darfour. Uncertain notices, collected in different places, have given place to various hypotheses respecting those countries, so that no part of the world is represented on our maps with such varying uncertainty as we perceive in the vague description of these countries.

Where Rennel places a merja' or morass, other geographers place a desert; some again substitute a chain of mountains, whilst others describe a lake or Mediterranean sea: among all this uncertainty, although the Itinerary of Boubeker does not resolve all these doubts, yet his narrative contains, at least, the information that may lead to the most useful explications, as he crossed Africa from west to east, and passed through those countries that lie between Housa and Darfour.

لحاج

و مرجه

merjah, is an Arabic word signifying a large sheet of water, lake, or morass; it is spelt by the French translators, as well as the word , El Hage, with a D : but there is no D in either of the words, as will appear to any one who can read Arabic: moreover, the pronunciation has not the sound of D: there is no reason, therefore, why this word should be encumbered with a superfluous letter.