The analogy of the Coptic language shows, that nouns coalescing with verbs admit not the article between them. The word before us ought to be written EP-T-OCI, er-t-osi. There are two verbs here, EP, facere, and T, dare; T being a common abbreviation of THI, dare, The literal sense, therefore, of the word ertosi, is faciens dare damnum. The explanation given by Cedrenus is nothing to the purpose, and the defence set up for it by Jablonski is not very happily imagined.

Thus we see that the authority of Vettius Valens cannot be very great. A man, who pretended to quote Necepsos, ought to have known the name of the planet Mars in Egyptian, and not to have written Artes for Ertosi. But whatever might have been the knowledge of this astrologer, it is hardly to be believed that he, or any other disciple of Necepsos and Petosiris, would have been permitted to place a zodiac of his own construction in a temple built under the auspices of a Roman emperor, especially when such a zodiac must have recalled to the minds of the Egyptians the use of that year, which had been abrogated by the Roman laws. It is remarked of this Vettius Valens, that he reckoned by the Egyptian months. The remark shows that he was singular in doing so, and that the practice was in disuse. I mean not to deny that the Copts in after times counted by these months: but this signifies nothing, since the use of the vague year, which Vettius seems to have observed, had been abolished, at least with respect to all public arts, in the time of Augustus. The Egyptians, however, may have continued to regulate some of their festivals by the vague years. It cannot indeed be supposed that they were ignorant, that a new Sothic period commenced in the year which answers to the 138th of our æra. Tradition would point out to them the monuments which had formerly represented the state of the heavens on similar occasions; and it might very naturally have happened, that the Greeks, who built and adorned the temples of Esneh and Dendera, should copy symbols, hieroglyphics, and zodiacs, which they were told, though they might not know how, were suited to the epoch, when their labors were going on.

4. Mr. Hamilton has justly remarked, that the Sun's place at the summer solstice appears to be indicated, in the oblong zodiac of Dendera, at the division of the two

2225

scarabai; but I cannot possibly agree with him, when he states, that the smaller, scarabæus marks, that the Sun at this time was 400 parts of the sign of Cancer removed from that of Leo-in other words, that Leo had ceased to be solstitial about 400 years. Thus then, in plain terms, when the zodiac of Dendera was constructed, the Sun, at the summer solstice, was in the 24th degree of Cancer, which, in reckoning by the fixed zodiac, happened between 17 and 18 centuries ago. But on what principles did Mr. Hamilton make this calculation? Clearly on the relative sizes and positions of the two scarabæi. The relative sizes he must have reckoned as 24 to 6;-the great scarabæus stands for 24 degrees, and the small one for 6 degrees. Now it surely escaped Mr. Hamilton's usual acuteness, that since the small scarabæus is next to Gemini, and the large scarabæus next to Leo, the former must have represented the ascending part of the sign of Cancer, and the latter must have represented the descending part of the same sign. If, therefore, Mr. Hamilton's reckoning be right about the relative sizes of the two scarabæi, it necessarily follows, that this zodiac represents the Sun's place, not at the 24th, but at the 6th degree of the sign of Cancer.

Mr. Hamilton likewise tells us, that the Sun being now in the first degree of Cancer at the summer solstice, the solstitial colure, about 1800 years ago, was in the 24th degree of the same sign. He thence fixes the date of the zodiac in question about the time of Tiberius. I reply, that if the Sun's place at the summer solstice be marked in this zodiac, as corresponding with any part of Cancer, its date must exceed 2000 years, unless indeed it were constructed upon a Greek model.

When we speak of the Sun's place in the ecliptic, or of the position of any planet, we generally make our references to the fixed zodiac of the Greeks. But if we wish to speak with exactness of the Sun's place in any of the zodiacal catasterisms, at any time before or since the Greeks constructed their zodiac, it will be necessary to make allowances for the precession of the equinoxes. Mr. Hamilton says, for example, that the Sun at the period when he wrote, (about 12 years ago,) was just passing at the summer solstice from Cancer into Gemini. This is perfectly true, if we reckon, as is usual, by the fixed zodiac; but the fact is, that the solstitial colure was then really just about to pass out of the dodecatemerion of

Gemini into that of Taurus. In order, therefore, to bring Mr. Hamilton's calculation to bear, it must be shown that the zodiac of Dendera was constructed by astronomers, who reckoned according to the fixed zodiac of the Greeks. Now every thing in the zodiac of Dendera seems to prove that it owed its existence to the natives of the soil. Every thing in it is Egyptian-Egyptian astronomy-Egyptian mythology-Egyptian symbols-Egyptian taste, style, and

manner.

But even if this argument failed to convince, it is impossible, upon the grounds taken by Mr. Hamilton himself, that the zodiac of Dendera could have been formed upon a Greek model. The small scarabæus, which is next to Gemini, necessarily represents the ascending part of the sign that part through which the Sun had passed before he came to the summer solstice. It is clear then that the small scarabæus, being next to Gemini, must represent the first degrees of Cancer, under a number less than 15. If we make the proportion of the small scarabæus equal to 6 degrees, as Mr. Hamilton has done, and if the zodiac of Dendera were constructed by men who reckoned according to the fixed zodiac of the Greeks, then its date will correspond with the time, when the solstitial colure was in the 6th degree of Cancer, according to the fixed zodiac. Consequently the zodiac of Dendera was constructed in the 13th century. But this consequence would be absurd; and therefore, on Mr. Hamilton's own hypothesis, I must deny that this zodiac could have been formed by persons who reckoned by the fixed zodiac of the Greeks.

But I have again to differ from Mr. Hamilton. He ap pears to me to be totally mistaken in stating the relative proportions of the two scarabæi, as 24 to 6. I should reckon these proportions as 17 to 13, or perhaps rather as 16 to 14. I consequently fix the date of the zodiac, at the time when the solstitial colure corresponded with the 14th degree of the dodecatemorion of Cancer, according to the real zodiac. This will, therefore, nearly answer to the first year of the Sothic period, of which the thoth may be certainly fixed for the year 1322 before Christ.ee

My readers will observe, that Mr. Hamilton, who had seen the original, is the first who remarked that the sign of Cancer in this zodiac was symbolised by two scarabæi, and that the division between them indicated the Sun's place at the summer solstice. On these points, I fully

agree with the learned author, whose book, next to the Euterpe, contains the most interesting account of Egypt, that I know. With respect to the date of the oblong zodiac of Dendera, I think, I have fully proved that Mr. Hamilton is mistaken.

5. M. Visconti, who does not seem to have been aware, that the Egyptians represented the sign of Cancer by a scarabæus, though this is evident in the three zodiacs under consideration, argues upon totally different grounds from Mr. Hamilton, and yet makes the date of the oblong zodiac of Dendera nearly answer to the time since fixed for it by the English author. "Le premier signe," says he, "est celui du Lion;" and yet he denies that Leo can be solstitial. "La Balance," he adds, "symbole de l'équinoxe, est à sa place, c'est-à-dire que ce signe suit celui du Lion après l'intervalle d'un seul catastérisme; ce qui ne pourroit pas arriver, si le Lion étoit solstitial. Le débordement du Nil est marqué par la figure d'Isis sur un bateau, accompagnée par une autre divinité, et dans l'attitude de répandre de l'eau par deux petits vases. figures sont renfermées dans l'espace assigné au catastérisme de l'écrevisse; et l'on sait que le débordement de cette rivière arrive au commencement de l'été. Le symbole de la constellation de Sothis, ou de la Canicule, se trouve aussi dans le même dodécatémorion."

Ces

M. Visconti then proceeds to observe, that the sign of Libra not being between the claws of the Scorpion; that Sagittarius, represented under the form of a Centaur; and that the resemblance of most of the signs to those of the Greeks; prove this zodiac to have been executed at a time, when the opinions of the Greeks were not foreign to the Egyptians. In short, this learned antiquary is almost convinced, that the zodiac of Dendera was executed, when the vague Thoth answered to the sign of Leo, “ ce qui est arrivé," says he, "à-peu-près depuis l'an 12 jusqu'à l'an 132 de l'ère vulgaire.'

66

Before I answer M. Visconti on other points, it is necessary that I offer to my readers some remarks on the very plain insinuation, which he makes with respect to the origin of the zodiacal symbols. It seems clear, that this learned man considered all these symbols as invented by the Greeks. Now I must again contend, that the Greeks were not the inventors of the zodiac, or of the signs. I shall not repeat any of the arguments, by which I endea

voured to prove in the Edipus Judaicus, that the 12 zodiacal symbols were assumed as the standards of the 12 tribes of Israel. Some errors of the press, (indeed in one place several words are omitted,) and some errors of my own, require to be corrected in the dissertation which treats of this subject; but as the whole work has given more offence than I had the least intention it should, or the least expectation it would, I shall say nothing more about it, except to observe that the book never was published. But when I find it very broadly hinted, that the Greeks invented the zodiac, I am obliged to appeal to the authority of a sacred writer, whose evidence will not be disputed. Every one knows that Job has named several of the constellations; but it is not so obvious from the versions, that he has made mention of the zodiac. Canst thou bring forth Mazaroth in his season? Now the word , Mazaroth, according to the best interpreters, signifies the zodiac, and the evident paraphrase therefore is,-Canst thou bring forth the zodiacal signs, each according to the season in which it ought to appear? The Book of Job is generally supposed to have been written about 1700 years before our æra. There is a passage in the 4th chapter of Deuteronomy, which seems to intimate that idolators, in the time of Moses, worshipped the planets and constellations under the forms of beasts, fishes, and reptiles, precisely as they are symbolised in the ancient monuments of which we are treating. In the 2nd book of Kings, (c. 23. v. 5.) it is said that Josiah put down them that burnt incense unto Baal, to the Sun, and to the Moon, and to , Mazaloth. The Rabbin understand this word to denote the zodiacal constellations. The word mazaloth signifies literally the fluxions, the distillations, or flowings. Now Sextus Empiricus tells us, that the Chaldeans divided the zodiac into 12 houses, or signs, by the means of a clepsydra. They observed, he says, how much water flowed from a clepsydra, in the interval between the two risings of the same star; and when this star re-appeared above the horizon, they allowed a 12th part of the water to flow. Then (when this 12th part of the water had flowed out), the star at the hori zon showed that a whole. sign was risen. This passage confirms the opinion of the Rabbin, and shows how the word mazaloth came to denote the zodiacal constellations. Some have thought that mazaroth and mazaloth are really the same word, and that the former is an erroneous ortho