fact of the Shemitic religious influences, and is inclined to connect them with the time of Abraham, though why he should then reject the date of B.C. 2170, which would fit that period, in favour of B. c. 3350, which is an anachronism of about a 1000 years, he does not explain. We must say that the peculiar, and, as it were, defiantly negative state of what might otherwise have been a sepulchral chamber, the known fact of the Shemitic religious influences, and the crowning fact that the innermost and most important chamber of the pyramid, the Sanctuary, as it were, which the whole structure seems designed to enshrine (itself in darkness like the most sacred sanctuary of the children of Israel), contains, like the sanctuary of the Israelite temple, at its western end, a coffer of the same capacity as the coffer (ark) which was in that, combine to induce in our mind the strong persuasion that the Great Pyramid is a religious building, and that the religious ideas of its builders were something very like Judaism. It is perhaps unnecessary to say that Mr. Proctor occupies himself a good deal with sneering at Professor Piazzi Smyth. He favours us (p. 42) with the statement that that gentleman has joined a new 'sect,' 'religion,' or 'faith,' evidently an attempt at a joke, since he mentions that one of those who agree with Prof. Smyth about the Pyramid, is the Abbé Moigno, a French ecclesiastic. We will not remark upon the good taste of this pleasantry, but will observe that, while Prof. Smyth's theories are a fair object of attack, neither he nor any other man is a proper subject for misrepresentation. We are informed (p. 114) that, according to Prof. Smyth, the second coming of Christ, or the end of the world was to have taken place in 1881.' The Professor's words as to the year answering to the 1,881st inch, are as follows:- Something seems to be appointed to take place at that particular time, and it is much easier to say what it is not, than what it is. It is not, for instance, the end of the world. and equally it is not Christ's second coming.'-(Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid. p. 547, 4th edition). Such a misstatement is not, of course, intentional on Mr. Proctor's part, but it shows unscrupulous in

accuracy.

From the very nature of Mr. Proctor's hypothesis, it follows that astrology is the essence of the book. To say that this part is feeble, would be an abuse of language; a more appropriate term would be, non-existent. Any one who has taken the trouble to find out, even to a very slight extent, what are the doctrines and practices of astrology, sees at a glance that the proposed hypothesis is out of the question. There is no particular reason why any one should know anything about astrology, but we cannot understand any one sitting down to write a book in such ignorance of his subject as that which Mr. Proctor displays; his information upon it really seems to consist of one partial mistake. He does not even know what astrology means. Astrology is the theory that, as a matter of fact, the experience and observation of mankind show certain political, personal, and meteorological phenomena to coincide as a general rule with certain

astral phenomena, and therefore that, as the latter can be calculated, the probability of the former can be calculated also, and human conduct guided accordingly; and the argument upon which the whole thing has been so long and so widely discredited, is equally simple, viz.: that, as a matter of fact, the experience and observation of mankind show that the alleged coincidences are so rare and so uncertain that no conclusion can be drawn from them. It is very similar to the system on which storms are now predicted from certain meteorological observations, and as though one argued against the value of these predictions, on the ground that they only rarely came true. But our author seems to have a fixed idea that there is something preternatural about astrology; he uses the word 'superstition' several times, (e.g. p. 323,) classes it with magic (p. 39), and indulges in curious verbiage such as 'casting the royal nativity with due mystic observances,' (p. 34) and so on, usque ad nauseam. This is possibly owing to his amazing choice of an astrological authority. The object being, not to discuss the claims of astrology in general, but to know what the ancient Egyptians believed concerning it, we should have thought there could have been no doubt as to the work to be consulted, namely, the Tetrabiblos of Ptolemy. Will it be believed, Mr. Proctor does not even name it, and, we suspect, never heard of it. As astrology has gone on changing its theories and practices like astronomy, we do not see that there would have been much use in consulting a modern author at all. But if it was to be done, there are (without counting Orientals) standard writers from Placido onwards, and in England itself such men as Lilly, Dr. Sibley (M.D.), or the late Lient. Morrison, R.N., who edited Lilly for Messrs. Bohn. But not one of these is referred to, if we except a few sneers at Mr. Morrison, under the name of 'Zadkiel.' No, the only authority cited is 'Raphael's' Guide to Astrology. 'Raphael' is a person who, or rather, a school which, to judge by some advertisements, is addicted to practices of White Magic. The Guide in question (2 small volumes) is, however, published under this name, by the same persons; but in astrology Raphael' is known almost exclusively for his rejection of the old theories, and that, not only in the length to which he carries the idea of the excitement of direction by transit, and his singular doctrine as to the nature of the Hylegiacal point, but by his attempt to substitute in Genethliacal astrology a new and rough method of obtaining (for we cannot call it calculating) the directions, instead of the trigonometrical system. To prefer such a writer to Ptolemy, as an exponent of the astrological ideas of the old Egyptians, is more extraordinary than if an author about to treat of the state of medical beliefs in the Homeric age were to select as the sole expression of these beliefs the latest pamphlet printed in San Francisco to suggest a new departure in homœopathy. But having got his 'Raphael' and placed him in this invidious position of exaltation, Mr. Proctor is not kind to him. He calls him 'doubtless some Smith, or Blodgett, or Higginbotham,' (p. 167) talks of his 'meaningless and absurd jargon,' (p. 35) and so on, in

.

the same tasteful way. He certainly does not seem to have honoured him with much study, or he could not have fallen into the errors he does. Indeed, the only thing he seems to have got from him, is an idea that astrological schemes are drawn up in squares, as in a wood-cut borrowed from him, (with his permission ?) given on p. 168. So they are, sometimes; but he evidently does not know that they are quite as often, if not more often, drawn up in a circular form, as more suitable to that calculation of arcs which, as he is also evidently not aware, is the main feature (and not the observation of transits) of Genethliacal astrology. We will only make two other remarks upon Mr. Proctor's astrology. One is that any means of Genethliaco-astrological work less well adapted for its purpose than the platform he supposes, can hardly be conceived; the only use of the telescope gallery, for instance, would have been to observe the M.C. (which is never the principal point in a nativity) when it happened to be on the meridian. Our other observation is on Mr. Proctor's statement, several times repeated with the most amusing complacency, expressed on p. 34 in the words, each king would require to have his own nativity-pyramid,' and finally summed up on p. 173, 'Dead kings of one family might sleep with advantage in a single tomb; but each man's horoscope must be kept by itself. Even to this day the astrological charlatan would not discuss one man's horoscope on the plan drawn out and used for another man's.' This is the mere reverse of the truth. Such a platform as he imagines, with the 'houses' marked upon it, would, if it had ever existed, have served equally well (and ill) for the nativities of all the people who were ever born in the neighbourhood. Moreover, the practice of Genethliacal astrology may actually be said to consist, for the most part, whether as regards directions, transits, or revolutions, of the application to the Radix of other schemes for moments other than that of birth, with a view to observe the coincidence, or precise distance apart, of the various points of each respectively; and this is done, not only with regard to moments in the life of the native, but also with the horoscopes of other persons, such as wives, near relations, adversaries, etc.

Nearly half the book is taken up with a series of six appendices. The first of these is by Professor Baxendell, on the Great Pyramid measures; and the last on astrology, the value of which may be guessed from the above. The second is on the origin of the Week, the main point being the not very startling discovery that seven days is about the length of one of the moon's quarters. The third and fourth are on Saturn and the Sabbath of the Jews, and on the Jewish Festivals. The object of these two is to show that Judaism and, incidentally, Christianity also, are forms of a sort of astrological star-worship or star-worshipping astrology. They remind us somewhat of the happy identification, now made some time ago, of Edinburgh with the Garden of Eden. We learn, for instance, that the Sabbath is a weekly Festival held in honour of the planet Saturn, with

the object of circumventing by cajolery the malignity of the Greater Infortune, and on which it is no use working, as he would be sure, from his maleficence, to make everything go wrong. We are also informed (p. 282, etc.,) that the Pesach is a Festival held in honour of the passage of the sun over the line of the equator at the vernal equinox, and that the old English name of the same Feast, viz., Easter Day, (a translation of the Latin Dies Resurrectionis,) refers to the sun's rising at that season above that line. The morning and evening (daybreak and early afternoon) sacrifices were really a worship of the sun at its rising and setting. And so on. Some thoughts of the same kind have occurred to our own mind, and we should feel sure that it could only be through inadvertence that they have failed to present themselves to that of Mr. Proctor, since he prints astrology enough for the purpose, (p. 35, 168,) were it not for his own ingenuous confession that the 'jargon' of even his chosen 'Raphael,' is 'unmeaning' to him. On further consideration, however, or on deeper astrological research, he cannot fail to perceive that the booths in which the Feast of Tabernacles is celebrated are the same things as the 'houses' of an astrological diagram; and that the present inhabitants of London are sunworshippers, since they not only go to church (such of them as do so at all) on Sun-day, but are careful to be there during the very moment when the sun transits the M.C. The flourishing state of heliolatry is further strikingly evidenced by the popularity of lively services in the evening, the time when the sun passes the Descendant, and by the growing custom of the Ritualists of going to church early in the morning, when (indeed, at some seasons, at the very moment when) it crosses the Ascendant. Nay, more; some pious persons have occasionally organised what are called Midnight Meetings, the relation of which to the sun's conjunction with the Imum Coeli is at once obvious. The astrolatro-astrological character of these religious ceremonies will no more admit of doubt in Mr. Proctor's mind, when he realises that the moments thus marked by the due mystic observances,' are those when the Greater Luminary transits the cusps of the Four Angles.

The fifth appendix is on the observance of Sunday among Christians, arguing that it has nothing to do with the Scriptural Sabbath, but is an ecclesiastical enactment some centuries later than the Christian era. This is, of course, true enough in the main, but we think that the observance of Sunday as a day for holding religious meetings, can be traced to a very early period in the history of Christianity, and that Mr. Proctor's own citations tend to show that the notion of having a weekly day of rest was derived and imitated from the Law of Sabbath.

Among the Rocks Around Glasgow: A Series of Excursion Sketches, and Other Papers. By DUGALD BELL. Glasgow: J. Maclehose, 1881.

The rocks around Glasgow here referred to are pretty widely scattered,

some of them being as far from that busy centre as Edinburgh, Stirling, Loch Lomond, Loch Fyne, and Arran. Far apart as they are, however, Mr. Bell has, as his book sufficiently proves, a close and accurate acquaintance with them. To the Clyde valley he seems to have paid most attention, and writes about its geological formation in a very pleasing and instructive way. His notes on the geology of other places are equally well worth reading, and his chapters on the Old Glaciers' and 'Ice Marks,' will open up to the uninitiated new fields of wonder. The notes and references show that Mr. Bell has consulted the most recent authorities; while every page bears witness both of actual observation and careful study. As a companion for a summer's stroll in the places referred to by Mr. Bell, the little volume he has now published will be found delightful.

Thoughts in the Cloister and the Crowd. By SIR ARTHUR HELPS, K.C.B. Glasgow: Wilson & McCormick, 1883.

This is a charming little reprint of a work published anonymously by Sir A. Helps, so far back as 1835. If we mistake not, it was his first appearance as an author. It is full of delicate and often profound thoughts expressed in the chastest of English, and such as may be easily carried in the memory, and pondered over during spare moments, either in the cloister or the crowd. As samples of what it contains, we take the following at random: 'Tact is the result of refined sympathy.

'The most enthusiastic man in a cause is rarely chosen as the leader. 'Tolerance is the only real test of civilization.

'There are some books which we at first reject, because we have neither felt, nor seen, nor thought, nor suffered enough, to understand and appreciate them. Perhaps The Excursion is one of them.

No man ever praised two persons equally-and pleased them both. 'Those who are much engaged in acquiring knowledge, will not always have time for deep thought or intense feeling.

The publishers have given at the end a list of Sir Arthur's works, chronologically arranged.

A Life's Love. By GEORGE BARLOW. London: Remington & Co., 1882.

Into that unfathomable abyss, the great sonnet question, we do not venture to cast the contribution of our enlightened opinion, feeling sure that any such opinion, supported by the most irrefutable testimony, could be met by equally irrefutable testimony on the opposite side. We accept Mr. Barlow's volume as one almost entirely of sonnets, but we cannot further say they are sonnets which fill us with much admiration. The three entitled 'Dreams' strike us as very superior to any of the rest. There is a certain harmony of both form and colour about them, in which the others are, generally speaking, very deficient. Mr. Barlow is sometimes obscure. Will he explain what this means ?—