Types of mankind, or, Ethnological researches, based upon the ancient monuments, paintings, sculptures, and crania of races, and upon their natural, geographical, philological and Biblical history / illustrated by selections from the inedited papers of Samuel George Morton and by additional contributions from L. Agassiz, W. Usher, and H.S. Patterson ; by J.C. Nott and Geo. R. Gliddon.

  • Nott, Josiah C. (Josiah Clark), 1804-1873.
Date:
1860
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Types of mankind, or, Ethnological researches, based upon the ancient monuments, paintings, sculptures, and crania of races, and upon their natural, geographical, philological and Biblical history / illustrated by selections from the inedited papers of Samuel George Morton and by additional contributions from L. Agassiz, W. Usher, and H.S. Patterson ; by J.C. Nott and Geo. R. Gliddon. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    738/800 (page 682)
    but, calculated from my date of the Ex- B _ odus, b. c. 2758.”(458) — “ / say that the Pharaoh of the Exodus reigned un- doubtedly not more than about one year ; for, although his being drowned in the Red Sea is not expressly men- tioned by Moses, it is so mentioned in the 136th Psalm [what a clinching argument!], and / hold all the books of the Bible to be equally true.”(459). - It is to be deplored that, after being promoted for his Hebraism to a post in the British Museum, “ my kind young friend,” as the Friend of Moses affectionately terms him, should have expunged these delightful samples of pious feeling from the republication of Horce in its octavo form. So imbued, we fear, is he likely to become in that 1200 1300 1400 1500 1G00 enlightened institution with self-immo- lating principles, that it would not sur- prise us to learn through newspapers that Horce likewise—as Scaliger says, “ ut signatius loquar”—for the sake - 1700 -1800 of Oriental literature were to turn Mohammedan. No inclination remains to follow Ilorce's farthing-rush-light any further. We leave the pupil for the teacher, when we here exhibit on the margin a table printed by Wilkinson in the pamphlet-text accompanying the lat- ter’s truly - valuable contribution to archaeological science — The fragments of the Hieratic Papyrus at Turin: con- taining the names of Egyptian Kings, with the Hieratic inscription at the back. Here is that “magnificent error” which the Friend of Moses could not discover by going to Egypt: — “Respecting the construction of the table, he observes : ‘ The relative po- sitions and the lengths of most of these dynasties are founded upon some kind of monumental authority. The rest / have placed within approxima- tive extremes. There are several points of exact [!] contemporaneous- ness, as in the 2nd and 4th and 5th dynasties, again in the 5th and 15th, and in the 9th and 11th; and these, with other evidence of the same nature, enable us to adjust the general scheme of all the dynasties.’ ” (460) Reader! Suppose a Chinese archae- ologist, with a little red button on his cap, were to come all the way from Pe-kin to America, and tell us that good old king Egbert was a b. c.- 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2G00 2700 i—< H X X X > X ■85 ii ir* 1st g- («8) Art. X.; Lit. Got.; p. 641. (459) Art. V.; Lit. Gat.; p.432. (460) Uicr.Papyr.; pp. 30, 31, and table, p. 31. XVII,