'the sea, when the Sun is the sign of the Lion; and among the Egyptians, the keys of the temples bear the figures of a lion, 'from which hang chains, to which a heart is attached. They ' have consecrated the whole of this constellation (orgov) to the Sun. For then the Nile spreads beyond its banks, and the 'heliacal rising of the Dogstar takes place towards the twelfth hour*. They place at this instant the commencement of the year; and consider the Dogstar, as well as its rising, as con'secrated to Isis.' • The word employed by the author (orgov) seems to indicate that he wishes to consider the Lion as a constellation, and not as a sign; but the heliacal rising of Sirius in Egypt, of which he makes a circumstance co-existing with the presence of the Sun in the Lion, finally confirms this sense, by showing that it is of the constellation that he speaks. In fact, the author of the Scholia lived towards the fourth century of the Christian era, and he cites the rising of Sirius as present, and taking place in his own time. Now, at this epoch, when Sirius rose heliacally in Egypt, which happened about twenty-seven days after the solstice, the Sun was no longer in Leo considered as a sign, but he had the same longitude with the stars of the head of the Lion. For, by an astronomical circumstance that has not hitherto been remarked, but of which I shall presently give the demonstration, from more than 3000 years before the Christian era, until more than 1000 years after that era, the Sun has always been in the same constellation, Leo, but in very different parts, at the time of the year in which the heliacal rising of Sirius takes place in Egypt.' At an epoch prior to thirty centuries before the Christian era, the Sun would have been in the groupe of Virgo at the time of the rising of Sirius; and hence the use of the hieroglyphic, or rather anaglyph, explained by Horus Apollo, could not have arisen at an earlier date, and the claims set up to a much more remote antiquity fall to the ground. Biot also cites the passage of Porphyry, that has already been quoted; and in which, if we conceive that he has, as is probable, united the traditions of the ancient Egyptians with * An hour before sun-rise. the improved astronomy of his own day, there is strong corroboration of our views. The citation is therefore repeated. The Egyptians do not commence their year, like the Romans, with Aquarius, but with Cancer; for near Cancer appears the star Sothis, which the Greeks call the Dogstar; and the rising of the Dogstar is with them the renewal of the year, because this star rules over the epoch of the nativity of the world.' This indication becomes still more precise; for, according to the calculation of Biot, from 2800 B.c. to 1000 A.D. the Sun has always been in the sign Cancer, at the period of the year at which Sirius rose heliacally in Egypt. And this did not, at the time Porphyry lived, take place when the Sun was in the first point of Cancer. Hence, when the Alexandrian school fixed the epoch of their year at the entrance of the Sun into Cancer, they must have referred to a circumstance that did not exist in their own day, but which had occurred 2800 years before the Christian era. Here, then, we again find an astronomical epoch, of a date closely coinciding with the two already determined. IV. The passage in Herodotus is very remarkable, and its meaning has been much disputed. Some, from its appearing to involve an apparent absurdity, have been for rejecting it as a fable; while others have sought in it a hidden meaning, whence the date of the origin of the Egyptian monarchy may be deduced. The information of Herodotus was derived from the Egyptian priests, and he does not appear to have himself credited their statements; still, however, he is not content with detailing their communications simply, but adds comments of his own, which obscure the sense that the mystic expressions of the priests were intended to convey. Thus, in the earlier part of the passage, he informs us, that from Menes, the first mortal who reigned in Egypt, they counted three hundred and forty-one generations, and during this long series of generations a similar number of kings and priests. On this he founds a calculation that these reigns comprised the vast period of 11,340 years. But the calculation is obviously his own; and if it be admitted that, before the conquest of the shepherd kings, Egypt contained several kingdoms, as is most probable, the number 341 does not appear excessive for the time that has been deduced from other considerations. He then goes on to state- During this time, then, they said the Sun has four times risen out of his customary places; that both where he now sets he had there twice risen, and where he rises he had there twice set; that this had not produced any change in Egypt; that the productions of the earth and the inundations of the Nile had been the same; and that there had neither been more disease, nor a more considerable mortality.' This change in the rising and setting of the Sun, without producing any change in the seasons or inundations of the Nile, is mysterious in appearance; but a reference to the nature of the Egyptian year will render it at once obvious. All that is to be remarked previously is, that the two clauses of the passage are in contradiction with each other, and that we, therefore, again see the double expression of the recital of the priests, and the comment of Herodotus. A change in the place of rising is attended with a corresponding one in that of setting, and, therefore, by the last clause, which is in detail, there are but two changes instead of four. The first, therefore, is, from its vagueness to be rejected in favour of the circumstantial account in the latter. Let us, then, see whether this last account of the change be consistent with astronomic phenomena. On the first day of the first vague year of the Cynic Cycle, marked by the heliacal rising of Sirius, the Sun was in the constellation of Leo, which was then his accustomed habitation, or os. At the end of 730 vague years, or at the beginning of the 731st of the cycle, the Sun would be in opposition to the stars of the constellation Leo, and would of course rise with that point of the celestial sphere which, on the same day of the vague year, at the commencement of the cycle, had set as he arose; and would set at that point of the celestial sphere which, at the former epoch, had risen at his setting. The change, therefore, spoken of by the Egyptian priests, would have occurred for the first time; at the end of 1460 Julian years, he would again be in the constellation Leo at the time of the rising of Sirius; but at the end of 730 vague years more, he would be in the position in which he had been at the beginning of the 731st year of the previous cycle, and the same change would now be effected a second time. Within the space, then, of 2190 years the sun will have twice arisen, on a given day of the vague Egyptian year, where he had at first set, and twice set where he had before risen. Herodotus informs us, that the period of these changes was included between the reign of the first king, and that of Sethos, priest of Vulcan. The latter was rewarded by Sennacherib, the date of whose reign is well established at about 700 years B. C. Thus the most remote date that this passage will permit us to assign for the beginning of the reign of Menes is 2890 years B. C. It is, in addition, to be considered, that the year of 365 days was the invention of his successor, Attothes, and that every day by which the year fell short of that number of days will tend to reduce the length of this period; and hence the estimate deduced from the passage of Herodotus is easily reconciled with that of 2782 B.C., which has been deduced by other methods, as the close of the reign of Menes. Neither of these modes of computation may, when standing by itself, be of any great value, but, when united, they struck me as furnishing a most convincing evidence, if not of the exact time of the origin of regal government in Egypt, at least of an antiquity, that however high it may be when compared with that of the nations whose authentic history has come down to us, is yet fully within the chronology of the sacred volume. Their close and remarkable coincidence was wholly unexpected by me, when I first took up the investigation, for it was hardly to be anticipated, that in the vague and scattered notices that have descended to us, of the origin and antiquity of that mysterious people, anything that would point out an exact chronological epoch could have been gleaned. I must say, that the results are still a matter of surprise even to myself: I cannot, however, avoid entertaining the hope that the singular coincidence thus obtained by four separate and distinct methods is not a matter of pure accident, but has really an important bearing upon the date of the settlement of Egypt, and thus upon the connexion of sacred and profane history, and the disputed chronology of those remote ages. AN ACCOUNT OF A REMARKABLE INSTANCE OF OF AN EXOGENOUS TREE. BY JOHN LINDLEY, Esq., F.R.S., &c. THE following case will, perhaps, be found to offer an interesting proof of the manner in which the wood is formed. in the trunks of Dicotyledonous, or Exogenous Trees: In the year 1828, I was informed that a poplar-tree had been felled in a small court belonging to Mr. Nicol, near the Palace of St. James's, which exhibited the singular anomaly of one tree growing within another; at the same time, I received a specimen of a portion of the trunk of this supposed monster, which was sufficiently in accordance with this statement to justify the report, and to induce me to make further inquiries upon the subject. Upon proceeding to the place where the tree had grown, I fortunately found that the lower part still remained in the ground; and that this, with the fragment which had been sent me, and those which were still scattered about, contained nearly all the evidence that could be wished for of the structure of the tree before it was cut down. The principal specimen consisted of a shoot about four feet long, and an inch in diameter at the thickest part, having the distinct marks of the removal of a number of lateral shoots by a pruning-knifethe scars being as sharp and well defined as if the branches had been recently dissevered. No trace of bark was visible upon this specimen, except one small patch, half an inch in diameter at the lower end. The shoot was inclosed within the solid trunk of a poplar-tree, about thirty years old, of which it occupied the centre, but with which it had no organic connexion whatever, except at the two extremities, where it was continuous with the trunk itself. The wood within which it lay was applied closely to its surface, having, in the course of its formation, followed accurately every projection or impression upon the surface of the shoot; so that a cross section of the trunk would have exhibited no appearance whatever of this inclosed shoot, except by a circular line half an inch from the centre, |