ticular remark, that to the most remote period to which our investigations enable us to penetrate, the arts and sciences seem to have then attained as perfect a state as at any subsequent period. We are unable to trace any thing like a gradual rise, or mark the progress of a nation through its various stages from barbarism to civilization. The lights of Egyptian knowledge burst upon us at the very commencement of our enquiry.

Of the profound skill of the ancient Egyptians in the sublime science of AsTRONOMY, we have only within a comparatively recent period been enabled to form the slightest notion. If developed during the darkness of our middle ages, it would have been utterly incomprehensible. Until the days of Newton, Egyptian astronomical knowledge was far in advance of all modern discovery. Indeed there are many circumstances which show that they entertained the idea of a central sun; such a supposition is far from improbable.

With regard to GEOLOGY, it is a remarkable fact recorded by Plato, that when Solon visited Egypt and conversed with Egyptian priests upon the beginning of all things, they observed-"You mention one deluge only, whereas many happened." (See Wilkinson, vol. iv. p. 109.) Upon this, Mr. Gliddon, in his erudite work on ancient Egypt, which I have referred to in the previous chapter, remarks-"I leave it to geologists to define the true meaning of the priests, and to concede the correctness of the Egyptian record." The Egyptian priests, as Mr. Gliddon observes, "told Solon many things that must have humbled his Athenian pride of superior knowledge." And with regard to GEOGRAPHY, there are several circumstances, and one in particular, relative to the transatlantic world, worthy of our peculiar notice. Tangible reasons can be adduced to show that Africa was circumnavigated by the orders of Pharaoh Necho, and the Cape of Good Hope actually doubled about six hundred years before Christ. This is a startling fact. In our schools, geographical beginners are taught that the Cape of Good Hope was discovered by Diaz and Vasco de Gama, A. D. 1497. And with regard to the far west, it is a fact no less startling, that when Solon was receiving that instruction in the Egyptian sacerdotal colleges which rendered him the "wisest of mankind," (among the Athenians,) besides gleaning that insight into primeval history and geology, which subsequently induced him to compose a great poem, wherein he treated on Africa before the OGYGIAN FLOOD, and on the VAST ISLAND which had sunk into the Atlantic Ocean, he was informed by "Sonchis, one of the priests, of the existence of the Atlantic Isles, which Sonchis said were larger than AFRICA and ASIA united." On this interesting subject, see Wilkinson's "Thebes," p. 254, extract from Plato.

It is thus perfectly manifest, that until the re-discovery of America by Columbus, the Egyptians possessed a much greater amount of geographical knowledge than was possessed by the most learned modern nation. At a period so remote as six hundred years before Christ, they had intercourse with India, the Spice Islands, and China; and in maritime skill equalled, as in geographical knowledge they excelled, all the other nations of antiquity.

With regard to their SOCIAL CONDITION, it is apparent that all the arrangements of their domestic economy were conducted with the utmost order and regularity, and that they enjoyed in abundance not only the comforts but the luxuries of life, whilst the respect which they paid to the female sex affords an unfailing test of superior civilization, in which their conduct and customs contrast most advantageously when compared with other oriental nations, both ancient and modern.

As to CHRONOLOGY.

We now approach a part of the subject which is deeply interesting; for whilst hieroglyphical discovery shows that it is impossible at such early periods to define dates with indisputable accuracy, it also proves that the dates recorded in the Septuagint version of the Bible are unquestionably more correct than those founded on the authority of Archbishop Usher, and appended to the edition of the sacred volume in general use. It is now clearly shown that a much greater period must have elapsed between the deluge and the advent of the Messiah than is

assigned by Archbishop Usher. Wilkinson, and other writers upon Egyptian antiquities, feel themselves compelled to assign dates to postdiluvian facts and occurrences, which, if Usher be correet, must have preceded the deluge; and as they all, except Mr. Gliddon, fail to enter into any explanation of the apparent discrepancy, it becomes necessary at once to grapple with the difficulty, lest it may be imagined that hieroglyphical archeology presents results at variance with Holy Writ. This it does not, when Biblical dates are correctly understood. It merely corrects the errors in computation, which an uninspired human mind may have committed in common with many others, who have given their interpretation as to dates and occurrences in history, both sacred and profane. Indeed, as will hereafter be shown, our hieroglyphical researches tend to throw much light on sacred antiquities; but it is totally impossible to reconcile the monumental evidences of remote antiquity still existing in Egypt, with Ushers chronology, and all attempts to confine the early history of the land of the Pharaohs within such circumscribed limits, must be abandoned as altogether untenable.

In conducting this investigation, it should be borne in mind that antiquity is merely a relative term. A thousand years are but a drop in the great ocean of Eternity, and countless ages but fleeting moments in the estimation of Omnipo

tence.

The period which elapsed between the deluge and the birth of Christ, is unquestionably much greater than that assigned by Usher. This is a fact which is now incontrovertible;* and as we thus clearly perceive the existence of a discrepancy, it becomes important to ascertain in what way it originated. This was a task unertaken by the Rev. Dr. Hales; and we may, therefore, avail ourselves of the result of his investigation. Having patiently, and with great labor, weighed the various evidences in favor of the longer and shorter computations of patriarchal genealogy, he established the untenableness of the shortest, or Hebrew computation. It appeared that the apparent discrepancy had proceeded from a manifest corruption of the text about the time of the Seder Olam Rabba, (the great Jewish system of chronology,) A. D. 130, when the Scriptures were altered, interpolated, and curtailed by the Jews themselves, to confuse the dates, because they found "their own Scriptures" turned by the Christians into arms against themselves, and were confounded by proofs drawn from their own archives, that the Saviour's advent at the exact time of his appearance, was prophesied from patriarchal times in the ancient Hebrew text. The computation, however, from this spurious source was adopted by Archbishop Usher, and the older translation of the Bible-the Greek, made about B. C. 250-disregarded. But, as Dr. Hales observes, "Usher's date, attached to our English Bible, has been relinquished by the ablest chronologists of the present time, from its irreconcilableness with the rise of the primitive empires; the Assyrian, Egyptian, Indian, and Chinese, all suggesting earlier dates for the deluge." And it may be added, "now that we can bring Egyptian positive annals, derived from writings on existing monuments, the chronology of the Hebrew version of the Bible, is, in the opinion of the learned, altogether exploded." It may be here observed that no less than three hundred systems of chronology have been constructed at various periods, all of them differing in results, and many of them materially so.

*The accession of Menes cannot be brought within a less period than 2400 years before Christ; the erection of the palace of Memphis within less than 2300 years before that event; and the erection of the pyramid of Suphis within a less period than 2120 years before Christ. The latter date corresponds with the chronology of Josephus; and Sir John Herschel observes, that if the inclined passage into the largest pyramid of Gheezah, (which could never at the time of its building have been pointed at the polar star, that is, at a Ursa Minoris,) was made at an angle to correspond to a Draconis, this pyramid must have been built about the year B. C. 2123. The date assigned by Josephus, however, would alone be sufficient to destroy Bishop Usher's chronology; for, assuming the deluge to have occurred at the time be mentions, two hundred and twentyeight years would be too brief a period for the Caucasian children of Ham to migrate from Asia into Egypt, there to acquire such a perfect knowledge of the arts and sciences as they possessed, and such mechanical skill as to construct a work so enormous as to contain 6,848,000 tons of wrought stone, brought fifteen miles from the quarry.

Let us compare a few of the dates with regard to the deluge! This event occurred,

These chronological differences are to be regretted, but they in no manner affect the validity of any scriptural fact, being mere deductions drawn by different individuals from their various interpretations of the original text; and we are aware that in points of interpretation as well as chronology, many eminently pious individuals have entertained opinions of the most adverse description. In the present investigation, the TRUTH alone should be our study. Being one of the grand principles upon which our Fraternity is founded, it is the point to which we should strenuously seek to arrive; and it is of the utmost importance here to observe that the truth which we seek to establish is in accordance with Revelation, and is antagonistic only to the opinions of those who place on Holy Writ a false interpretation. In thus showing that the chronology in general use, though appended to our Bible by act of Parliament, contains computations based on erroneous data, we merely prove that Archbishop Usher was wrong in his calculations, and do not seek to impeach the reality of any scriptural occurrence. Biblical chronology, indeed, is so uncertain, that among thirtysix Christian authorities who have computed the epoch of our Saviour's nativity, the year itself is a disputed point, and cannot be defined within ten years; so that whilst the whole of our dates are dependent upon the precise period of Christ's birth for accuracy, we cannot for a certainty say whether this year, which we term 1847, should be 1842 or 1852. Our present Christmas day was not determined until three hundred and twentyfive years after our Saviour's birth; and if the year cannot be accurately determined, still less can we hope to define the precise day. Hales quotes Scaliger to the effect that "to determine the day of Christ's birth, belongs to God alone, and not to man."

On the importance due to the evidence resulting from hieroglyphics, Mr Gliddon observes-"The monuments of Egypt, whereon are chiselled the glowing chapters of her history, presenting to us the records of events coeval with their erection, are, apart from the reverence due to inspiration, and the undoubted collateral testimony that demands our belief in Holy Writ, of interest next to the Bible in importance; while, in authenticity of record, (due allowance made for possible exaggeration and a national vanity, with the evils of which every history of every age on earth is more or less pervaded,) these legends are as satisfactory as the Old Testament itself; because the Pentateuch, though preserved by the hand of Providence, has not reached us in one single original copy, written at the time of the event's occurrence; and the text we make use of is acknowledged to be the result of varied and laborious comparisons, made and collated by learned divines of all nations and ages, from the most perfect editions obtainable at the several periods of their respective examinations, of the Masorete Hebrew, the Greek, Samaritan, and other versions."

The investigation of this part of our subject, therefore, clearly shows these results, viz: that the computation of the Hebrew text was rejected by the early Christians at its outset; renewed in the middle ages by some Roman Catholic anthority; adopted by Usher, and appended to our Bible by an act of the legislature; but analyzed and overthrown by Hales, and other orthodox protestant churchmen, and now placed beyond further question by the unanswerable evidence resulting from the monumental and hieroglyphical annals of Ancient Egypt.

Upon this most important point much more might be said, but I trust I have entered into a sufficient explanation to define my present meaning, which is to

show that the remote dates to which we must necessarily refer many important events in the history of Ancient Egypt, are not really inconsistent with Scripture History, though they may be at variance with generally received opinions, which, in the great majority of instances, are formed without sufficient investigation, but being placed in apparently an unauthorized position, are hastily adopted as verities, without further question or inquiry.

[To be continued.]

LET'S WELCOME

THE

HOUR.

[Written by Br. W. H. HAMERTON, of Calcutta, and Dedicated to the Lodges in India.]

LET'S welcome the hour, when thus happy we meet,
May the Light of our Order long gloriously shine,
While in kindliest feeling and harmony sweet,
All true brother Freemasons forever combine.

Some sage once declar'd that a portion of gold

In mankind lay conceal'd, but he ne'er could impart
The secret recess, till our Masters of old

Prov'd the ore was Freemasonry lodg'd in the heart.
Then welcome the hour, &c.

This gold of kind nature then shone but in few,

Nor had Masonry's virtue as yet its full scope;

Till illumin'd by Faith, it arose to our view,

And the heart was adorn'd by the sunshine of Hope.

The ore, even then, was unyielding and cold,

Nor as yet had the ensign of light been unfurl'd,

Till, melting with Charity's glow, the heart's gold,

In a stream of warm fellowship flow'd through the world.
Then welcome the hour, &c.

The Craft thence diffus'd the rich, pure golden tide
Of Masonic benevolence, right from the heart,

Over all human nature, extensive and wide,
Shedding lustre the Order alone can impart.

And now for a toast-fill your glasses besure,*

And let each with each heart flow in union with me ;
A bumper--good friends, here's "The health of all poor
And distress'd brother Masons, wherever they be."

Then welcome the hour, when thus happy we meet-
May the light of our Order long gloriously shine;

While in kindliest feeling and harmony sweet,
All true brother Freemasons forever combine.

*With cold water, "besure."-ED.

CORRESPONDENCE.

DEAR SIR AND BRO.:

Goshen, Ia., Sept. 3, 1847.

The Order is in a healthy condition here at present, and accessions of the right kind of material are being made. I shall propose to our Lodge, soon as we are free from pecuniary embarrassment, incurred by the procurement of a new hall, to make an appropriation for the purpose of obtaining from you a list of suitable books, &c. A good library should be connected with every Lodge, and I am inclined to think that if a certain per cent. of all receipts were set apart for the express purpose of obtaining one, that the money could not be better applied. Many of our Lodges are groping in the dark, or at best have but the uncertain light of tradition, and even that depending upon imperfect recollection. A Masonic library should contain standard works upon all those arts and sciences we profess to revere and to teach. An article from your pen on this subject, in the Magezine, would do much good.

Yours, fraternally,

E. G. C.

Hamilton, Canada West, Sept. 9, 1847.

R. W. SIR AND BRO.:-Enclosed I transmit you a list of the officers of the Barton Lodge of Freemasons, over which I have the honor to preside as W. M. This Lodge was established A. L. 5795, and has kept up its working ever since, except for a few years during the last war. It now numbers one hundred and fifty members, and it has increased so much lately that it has been thought expedient to divide. A new Lodge is now forming in this city, to be called the Lodge of Strict Observance.

The following are the officers of Barton Lodge:-C. H. Webster, W. Master; S. C. Richardson, P. M.; Thomas Duggan, S. W.; David C. Beasby, J. W.; Alexander Carpenter, Treas.; Thomas M. Simons, Sec'ry; Alex. Mackidd, Chaplain; Albert H. Hills, S. D. ; C. Westring, J. D.; J. B. Harrison, Geo. Mortimer, Stewards; Wm. Davidson, Inner Guard; John Morrison, Tyler.

Yours, fraternally,

C. H. WEESTER.

Norwich, Conn., Sept. 6, 1847.

BRO. MOORE-I give you below for publication in the Magazine, the names of the officers of the several Masonic bodies in this city :

Franklin Council, No. 3, R. and S. Masters.-Chauncey Burgess, Th. Ill. G. M.; John Nichols, Rt. Ill. D. G. M.; Willliam H. Copp, P. C.; Thomas Robinson, Capt. Guards; Frederic Prentice, Treas.; John H. Grace, Rec.; Caleb Haywood, Steward and Tyler.

Franklin Chapter, No. 4, R. A. Masons.-Wm. H. Copp, H. P.; Frederic Prentice, King; Joel W. White, Scribe; Thomas Robinson, Treas.; Giles M. Eaton, Sec.; Edward W. Eells, C. H.; John Nichols, P. Soj.; Isaac Williams, R. A. Capt.; James W. Danielson, Joseph K. Brewer, Jonathan Knapp, Masters of the Veils; Wm. Buck, Tyler.

Somerset Lodge, No. 34.--Wm. H. Copp, W. M.; Charles Ball, S. W.; Wm. I. Brewer, J. W.; Rufus L. Fanning, Treas.; Giles M. Eaton, Sec.; James W. Danielson, S. D.; Joseph K. Brewer, J. D.; Edwin N. Roath, Charles Kingsley, Stewards; William Buck, Tyler. Fraternally, yours,

C. W. MOORE, Esq.-Dear Sir :—*

W. H. COPP.

Tuscaloosa, Ala., Sept. 5, 1847. I have been a patron of the Freemasons' Magazine, since its first establishment. I have carefully perused every number to the present time, and from the valuable information I have received from it, I shall never regret being its patron, and would recommend it to the whole Masonic Fraternity. E. M. BURTON.

Fraternally, yours,