On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Febbuaby 10, 185,5.1 fgE LEADER. 139
-
A NEW BOOKSELLING DODGE. ButhHall: A Dom...
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.
-
-
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.
Monumental History Op Egypt. Tlit Monume...
rcapaftky is doubted , he reads off a page « if the ftosetta stone ; and if iueroclypfetcB * aa feiia , / fee reitoMits Tipon cowjectttre , * nd mounts into the air « ven Sore coterageousVy than he btfrrows into the "sand ! _ "W 1 i « n-an archseologi ^ pttjntnittces the inscriptions on the Kosetta stone to he orttranslatable , Mr . Osburn answers by translating it . When the Chevalier Biinsen confesses that the Book of the Dead is a record in > lost language , Mr . Osburn not only interprets , but analyses , the document . When Mr . Kearick says that no one can read , with much certainty , a hieroglyphic writing of any length , Mr . Osburn offers versions , as long and as Numerous as you please , the graven lines of men who " hung their mute thoughts on the mute walk around" twenty centuries ^ before the Christian era . However , it is not only because he is an intrepid translator that we with
s uspect the philosophy of his conclusions . When he . affects to peruse lenity records -which the most learned among his predecessors have not only failed to decipher themselves , but have affirmed to be beyond the power of mortal beings to decipher , we may at least impute to him xnuch Aardihood . and little caution ; but when a considerable part o his reasoning as upon a basis entirely new , and opposed to the opinions of the greatest scholars— -of Lepsius , of Bunsen , < and Chanapollkra—we are led to expect * hat which we actually find—dogmatism founded on conjectures , paradoxies , and inferences that are quite gratuitous . It is otonce apparent in what style Mr . Osbnrn intends to deal-with adversaries . " That the fertility of Egypt is dependent altogether upon the Nile" everyone will readily admits but why add , " there is no
understand-, wz ao grovelling , tio intellect so debased , among the-sons of men , that he AteaM 5 » erceive it ? " If by " the sons of saen . " Mr . Osburn means Iranian beings generally , we doubt ¦ whether there are not some intelligent peopjle , neither debased nor grdvefling , irho rrotild require a little further teaching before they became so familiar Tvith Hhe natural history of Egypt . This is a trivial point , yet it is characteristic of Mr . < 3 sburh in his doctrinal mood . The same method is adopted soon afterwards , on a more important subject , though with less success . Says Mr . Osburn , concerning the Copts , That they really are the lineal descendants of the inhabitants of Egypt who first <« flrbxaced ¦ Christianity , and that the language of their sacred books is really the "Egyptian language , there © ever was the remotest ground for a doubt at anytime , though a long and learned controversy was raised upon the point by tfbe frivolous and
ignorant pedantry of the scholarship of the last century . And 7 « t 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 * ras surely -no necessity ibr denying that there was « ver a doubt on the ^ Jaestion , or f or accusing of ignorance and frivolity the philologists "who « rgued it . Mr . Osbwrn 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
« f choosing the progression from pictures to symbols , and thence to phonetic characters , he begins -with the phonetic * and though he ascribes the invention to"" a ^ company ^ df » fen of the same generation , ? ' suggests a distinction , 'Wliich- 'ire cannot tmderstant ! , between the order of time C * know nothing « f thai , he says , ) and the vorder of induction . Nevertheless , ^ prev ious culture . ana ^ experience" had prepared the minds of the Egyptian hiero-, glyphist 8 for 43 ie task they undertook . We have not yet learned to be so positive as Mr . Osburn , especially as his logic is no less unintelligible it © us than the inscriptions , we are afraid , are to him ; but we pre to read with Ghampollion until a better light is thrown on the mysteries of Elgyptian iknes and tombs . is
..--aCbatitie ancient language of E ^ ypt directly related to the Hebrew , that 4 beIEgy © € an people originally came from thli ~ Euphrates , and that t ibepy raffias were Suggested Tsytaemories of the Tower of Babel , Are other pc » n ± son - * % 5 e % iihe opinions of Mr . Osburn contradict the views of most scholars . 5 fes 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 malicious desire to undermine -iSie historical authority of the T 3 ible . Throughout all ages and countries -are these or Similar aspersions scattered z to lHanetho -he imputes sinister -UKxrives ; * o iLepsius and Bauoen , hostility to ihe Scriptures ; to the Hebuew , tSamaritaa , and -Qveek . chronologiBts , -carelessness , if not dishonesty ; and yet toe iwmaelf abandons the dates of the Bible , and assures us that its
-chronology needs critical correction quite . as much as that of the kings 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 refutes it all , and describes the entire reoord as a gross fabrication . The historians of old Egypt forged a tale , * nd . painted on the walls their " precious piece of parfttflan . writing , " Bat is it contain that they were guilty of this imposture f M & y tbey , n » t hum -set Mr . Osburn an example , and " conjecturally rewtored" iciccnnwr tanoeB in ifavour of their own ideas ? Mr . Osburn invents « o * nciiden <« B « nd eynohroniwaaB euongh ; he is . even clever at derivations , and <« an trace a < 3 reek word to the Hebrew ; he raises " shapeleBfl blots' to iflioir fall significance $ he assumes the meaning of illegible lines , and , where ihe translation contradicts him , suggests an ** emendation" in the text ! Why Herodotus should be supposed to "have had a Phrygian
servantwhy the . personal character of Manetho should be destroyed oy an oonque onsinuation—why Seyffarth ' s papyrus should be ridiculed as ^ waste-paper , * pd . why it should be said that " not a trace or vestige of anything belonging * o < th « age « f Menes is known to exist in Egypt , *\ when it is afterwards ta & tomed tohat Jbis -walls and canak remain , ore all questions to which Mr . 'Osburn alone « an roply . It « eoms to us that he is determined to work his % ay through satire , anomalies , contradictions , and dogmas , to a foregone Conclusion . His next great point is the Universal Flood , which . gives hini an opportunity , on the strength of one doubtful hieroglyphic , to talk of taving " ground to powder" tho foundation-stone of an opinion held by "Lqpsius ; that no memorial of tho Deluge is to be found among the 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 lightlysupported , to hurry on and draw off our attention by some stupendous paradox , conceived with equal facility , and defended with equal assumption . It is now time , our readers will think , that we should allow Mr . Osburn 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 soul , and its passage out of life-- — They supposed that the Nile 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 westward 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 of vengeance in their Hades were 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 the setting sun , and together with the Nile . The travellers who first ventured to explore the pathless marshes to the westward of the primitive settlements , would doubtless see on all sides of them flocks of these beautiful but silent ghost-like birds , 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 sun into Hades . The groves of tamarisk and other trees which now abound in the Delta , would then be there also , upon every spot sufliciently raised above the lev « l 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 menumental 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 whidh we have to establish . This statement is easy to verify . The number of kings who have inscribed then- names on monuments , from the foundation of the monarchy to its final absorption in the Macedonian empire , under Ptolemy Lagos , amounts to upwards or 150 , and they ruled Egypt for very nearly 2000 years . . The memorials dfthe reign of Sesostris-Eamses exceed in number those of the whole of them collectively . ThisTvffl be found true , whether the reckoning is made from the monuments now in the mnseums of Europe , or those that still remain scattered over the surface of all that « Ver vasicsalled Egypt . The enormous preponderance of the memo-Eharoah at
rials of the reign -of fcesostris-Bamses over those of any other appears once , wherever the remains oi ^ ncienUEgypt are indiscriminately collected together So that no fact -ean be easier of proofs than that he was , monumentally , by far the greatest Tcw > g that fiver sat on the throne of that kingdom . _ 4 Jlowing _ that Sesostris is not altogether _ a myth , as fabulous as Sir Gardiner Wilkinson's . expeditions of Semiramis into Bactria , we think that Mr . Osburn ignores too freely the idea that-this ^ monarch obliterated the names of his ancestors , to inscribe his own , on many ^> f those splendid dedications . However , it is a dubious point , and we must now-leave Mr . Osburn . We have great rcspeet for his zeal , for his long studies in Egypt , and for his courage ; but we question whether his theory will meet with acceptance , . even lorn the lovers of novelty , while we are sure that so bad a critic will never be considered a good historian .
Febbuaby 10, 185,5.1 Fge Leader. 139
Febbuaby 10 , 185 , 5 . 1 fgE LEADER . 139
A New Bookselling Dodge. Buthhall: A Dom...
A NEW BOOKSELLING DODGE . ButhHall : A Domestic Tale of the Present Time ., By Fanny Fern . Houlston and Stonctnan . jp " " ^ qT feadexaim ' n ^^ it aside « s utterly 'unworthy of review . We believe it , however , to be the fair representative of » now system of puffing , which certain English publishersare now endeavouring to import successfull y from America to ^ ngland ; and againet wMcfa-we think it our duty to assist m warning the pubhc This consideration induces us to regard Ruth Hall in the light of a useful text to sneak from ; iartd , that reason only , we now select the book for
All- our respect and admiration—often and frankly expressed in these columns—for what is noblest and best in America and her institutions , must not blind ms to the palpable fact that the public of the United States allows itself , at this day , to be more lamentably imposed on by shameless and systematic puffery than the public of any other civilised country in the ¦ universe . Of * J * e general truth of . this'remark , that monument of cynical effrontery , Barnmn ' e Autobiograpfiy , aff ords , of itse , the most startling and irresistible « tf-all proofe . Of the particular truth of our assertion , as regards Wterary puffery / the matter in hand jmrt now ) , similarly indisputable proofs nray be obtained 'by any ow who will look over the literary : ad < vertiBeme « ts o an American newspaper , and who will compare them , b y way of specimens , with the literary advertisements of any English or French newspaper . We tins
have plenty of impudent book-puffing to bo ashamed ol in country , yvo have citations o garbled critical opinions , announcements of new editions which are not new editions , assertions of immense circulation , which really mean anything but hnmenee sale , and so on ; but , until lately , wo had not reached that climax of audacity which consists in printing a book , with tiio publisher ' s opinion of his own speculation placed at the beginning , oy way of preface , for the reader ' s benefit . Just as a quack-doctor at a fair trios to self rtifc " infallible'German corn-plaster , " or the » Cordial Elixir of Lternal Youth , " -by stating his own opinion of the inestimable virtues of the ointment or the drug , * o do -American publishers try to sell books , which wj quite as useless as tho corn-plaster , and not by ; any means as normlcn as 3 ie Elixir of Youth : and so , wo are now obliged , and ashamed , to add , ao of an
• SSffifSn ^ lSn aw specimen this discroditabled impudent -system is for ^ he firs t six pftffes at least , « a curiosity which xt may be worth ^ e ^ T i ^ ti ^ ftSr SSely , ^ - ^ - " ^ £ T ^^ g ? of "Mesars-Ho ^ kt on andStonoman , '' tho names of iMe « srs . 'Orr and iCo .,
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), Feb. 10, 1855, page 19, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_10021855/page/19/
-