were of a different race from the fons of Japhet; and that the country, when they came to it, was in the poffeffion of another people; which people they diftinguished from themselves by the title of Bagongo.

[To be continued.]

K.

ART. II. The Hiftory of ancient Egypt, as extant in the Greek Hiftorians, Poets, and others: Together with the State of the Religion, Laws, Arts, Sciences, and Government: From the first Settlement under Mifraim, in the Year before Chrift, 2118, to the final Subverfion of the Empire, by Cambyfes. Containing a Space of 1664 Years. - By George Laughton, D. D. of Richmond in Surry. 8vo. 5 s. fewed. Cadell. 1774.

WHE

HEN the appearance of a diftin&t hiftory of Egypt was announced to the Public, we flattered ourselves that it might particularly deferve the attention of the learned. We were very fenfible that the fubject was an interefting one, on many accounts. Egypt is undoubtedly to be reckoned among the firft of the great kingdoms which were formed after the difperfion of mankind. Perhaps it arofe earlier than any other country, not only to confiderable power, but to a comparatively high degree of knowledge, learning, and refinement. The colonies from Egypt were the means of civilizing no small part of the world; and it was certainly the fource from which Greece derived its philofophy, how much foever the Grecian Sages may be supposed to have improved upon the intelligence they received. The opinions which have been advanced concerning the accuracy and extent of the fcience and literature of the Egyptians, are exceedingly different. Some Writers have, in this refpect, reprefented them in a very exalted point of view, while others have been as much inclined to depreciate them; probably, in both cafes, without fufficient reafon. However, if we regard the early period in which the Egyptians flourished, their knowledge will be found to have been confiderable, and they introduced their worship, rites, cuftoms, and improvements into Europe; though not, indeed, exclufively of the Phoenicians, and the rest of the defcendants of Ham, who fent out colonies from the Eaft to the West.

In a variety of other inftances, Egypt furnishes fubjects of literary inquiry. Its high pretenfions to antiquity, and the reducing of its early accounts of things to true chronology, have afforded fome trouble to the learned. To adjust the Dynasties of its Princes, and to determine whether they ought to be deemed fucceffive or collateral, are likewife matters of no little difficulty. If there was fuch a mighty Conqueror as Sefoftris, the fettling of the age in which he lived, and the bringing his exploits to the standard of truth and reason, certainly merit

6.

peculiar

peculiar notice. The origin and nature of the hieroglyphics of Egypt are, alfo, curious objects, as well as the origin of alphabetical writing, which feveral ancients have afcribed to Thoth an ptian, and which many moderns have fuppofed to have been derived from that country. How far the Egyptians were the first inventers of fcience, or were indebted for it to the Babylonians and Chaldæans, is another question among men of learning. Who the Shepherd Kings were, has, moreover, been an affair of no fmall difcuffion and debate. To all which may be added, that the controverfy, lately ftarted, whether the Chinese be a colony from the Egyptians, is not wholly undeferving of attention.

A history of Egypt, in which these subjects, and others of a fimilar kind, were to be accurately examined, and judiciously determined, would be a very acceptable prefent to the Public. But if the Reader expects thefe matters to be fatisfactorily adjufted in the prefent work, he will be greatly disappointed. Several of the circumances we have mentioned, are entirely unnoticed, and the rest of them are treated in a flight and fuperficial manner, without any apparent fenfibility of the difficulties in which they are involved.

In fact, Dr. Laughton's hiftory of Egypt, is a mere compilation; nor is it executed, even in this view, with such a degree of fagacity, or judgment, as entitles it to much applause. His chronology, from whomfoever it is taken, is given without hesitation, as if it were a point that had never been difputed. With the fame confidence, he places the Dynafties in the fucceffive order, though he ought to have known, and obferved, that Sir John Mariham contends for their being collateral; and that herein he is followed by fome of the ableft Chronologers. In respect to Sefoftris, Dr. Laughton fixes the commencement of his reign a very few years after the departure of the Ifraelites, without taking notice of the opinion of Marsham, Sir Ifaac Newton, and other eminent men, that Sefoftris and the Sefac of Scripture were the fame perfon; and without confidering how unlikely it is that fuch a mighty Conqueror fhould arife in Egypt, and fuch prodigious exploits be performed by him, in fo fhort a time after the kingdom must have been reduced to the loweft ebb, by the deftraction in the Red Sea. None of these difficulties feem to have occurred to our Author, who carries on his ftory with as much ease and affurance, as if he were writing the events of yesterday.

Unless, therefore, Dr. Laughton had performed more than he has actually done, we cannot perceive what neceffity there was for the prefent publication. A far better account of Egypt is to be met with in the Ancient Univerfal Mikory; and if only a fchool-book was intended, we should prefer the fhorter rela

tions

A

tions of Boffuet and Rollin, as containing fufficient general information for youth, and as being written in a very fuperior

manner.

However, the Author has given a paffable detail of what occurs in Herodotas, Diodorus Siculus, and fome other writers, with regard to the Egyptians. His compofition is not deferving of particular commendation. His ftyle is not free from inaccuracies, nor is it void of affectation. He aims at fomething. of a philofophical refinement, in his narration and reflections, but he poffeffes not the ingenuity, penetration, and acuteness, which conftitute the real merit of that mode of hiftorical writing.

Notwithstanding thefe defects, Dr. Laughton's pretenfions are not inconfiderable. This will appear from his preface, in which he acquaints his Readers, that, in an introductory difcourse, he hath fhewn the divine difpenfation and intention of longevity immediately after the deluge, the difperfion at Babel, origin of languages, method of handing down events in various parts of the world, the fpeculative branch of the Egyptian religion, fource of the Grecian mythology, and errors in ancient chronology. How compleatly he has performed his promises, will be evident from one or two examples,

The whole of what he fays concerning the difperfion at Babel, and the origin of languages, is as follows: Un the building of the tower of Babel, it is allowed by Jews, Chrif tians, and Mahometans, that one language prevailed over all the earth. How the confufion was effected, has been a matter of fpeculation: fome have thought that the Almighty inspired the builders of that tower with new words; and others conjectured, that the confufion arofe from their forgetting the ufual application of the words, and naming one thing for another, though all indifferently spoke the original tongue.

The Hebrew now fpoken, as well as the Arabic and Chardee, are generally fuppofed to be dialects of the language spoken by Adam, which is loft. The Hebrew cannot be enti tled to the high diftinction, fo vainly contended for, of being the language taught of God. It is far inferior to other lan guages in elegance, copiousness, and clearness, and is fo exceedingly dry, that the Hebrews want words to exprefs the moft common things, and are obliged to ufe the fame periods continually, for want of expreffions to vary the phrafe. The Arabic is greatly fuperior to it, the Greek is vaftly more elegant and harmonious, and modern languages are more abundant in beauty, fertility of words, and modes of conveying ideas.

Such a fuperficial and indeterminate account of things, the manifeft refult of ignorance, affuming the guife of wisdom, can only excite the fmile of contempt,

With

With regard to the fource of mythology, the Author informs us, that the Fable of the Grecian Bacchus is borrowed from the Hiftory of Mofes, and he endeavours to point out some circumstances of resemblance, between that divine Lawgiver, and the ftory of Bacchus, as defcribed in Euripides. Bacchus, however, as Mr. Bryant hath fully fhewn, must be referred to an earlier period.

Vulcan, fays Dr. Laughton, means Tubal Cain, who first wrought iron. Janus with two faces alludes to Noah, who faw the first and latter world. Jupiter Hammon, who had a temple in the deferts of Lybia, and received divine honours, was Ham, the fon of Noah, to whom Lybia was granted in the divifion of the earth by his father. The Chaos of the Poets is evidently borrowed from the Book of Genefis, and the Golden Age from the happy ftate of our firft parents. The garden of the Hefperides, the golden apples, and the dragon which guarded them, with Pandora's fatal curiofity, are evidently the garden of Eden, the tree of life, the ferpent which beguiled Eve, and the evils confequent on Eve's disobedience. The fabulous war of the Giants against the Gods, and the mountains they piled up to affault Heaven, arose from that ambitious attempt to build the tower of Babel. Lot's wife turned into a pillar of falt, furnished them with the fable of Niobe changed into marble. Adonis is derived from the Hebrew Adonai, fignifying Lord; Jove from Jehovah.

These unfupported affertions, in which there is a great mixture of error and falfehood, the Author would pass upon us for an explanation of the fource of the Grecian mythology.

That part of the work before us, from which we have received the most pleasure, is the Recapitulary Differtation. It contains a number of fenfible and judicious remarks; but, at the fame time, they are fuch as have been made by preceding Writers.

ART. III. A Practical Effay on a Cement, and Artificial Stone, juftly fuppofed to be that of the Greeks and Romans, lately re-discovered by Monfieur Loriot, Mafter of Mechanics to bis moft Chriftian Majefty, for the cheap, eafy, expeditious, and durable Construction of all Manner of Buildings, and Formation of all Kinds of Ornaments of Architecture, even with the commoneft and coarseft Materials. Tranflated from the French Original lately published by the express Orders of the above Monarch. 8vo. I s. 6 d. Cadell. 1774.

HIS pamphlet feems to convey intelligence of great importance with refpect to all kinds of building and architecture, fuppofing the art treated of to be really loft; and which ought to be as extenfively known as poffible, in order that if fallacious,

fallacious, it may be quickly detected; or if well founded, that it may receive the improvements which experience may add to it, and be adopted for the general fervice of mankind. Something like this, however, was laid before the Public, by Mr. Doffie, in his fecond volume of Memoirs of Architecture, &c. See Review, vol. xliv. p. 479, where our Readers will fee the process for making a mortar, impenetrable to moisture; as communicated to a noble Lord, from a gentleman at Neuf chatel,

The refult of Mr. Loriot's inquiry concerning the materials employed in the Roman buildings remaining in the fouth of France, is thus given:

Most of these monuments exhibit nothing but enormous masses in point of thicknefs and height, the heart of which, but juft faced with an almoft fuperficial coating, evidently confifts of nothing but pebbles and other fmall ftones, thrown together at random, and bound by a kind of mortar, which appears to have been thin enough to penetrate the smallest interftices, and fo form a folid whole with thefe materials, whichever kind was first laid to receive the other, when poured into it.

'It is enough therefore to confider these ruins, with the smallest degree of attention, to be convinced, that all the fecret of this mode of conftruction confifted in the method of preparing and using this ftrange kind of mortar; a mortar not liable to any decay; bidding defiance equally to the perpetual erofions of time, and heaviest ftrokes of the hammer and pick-axe. At least, when any little ftone, and it must be a round one, gives way to them, the mould of cement left by it is found equally hard with the compleateft petrification.

How different, then, muft this ancient mortar be from the very best of our modern! the latter, one would imagine, never dries perfectly but to fall to duft again at the leaft touch. Of this the remarkable crumbling away of our most recent buildings is an evident proof.

Another of the extraordinary qualities of this Roman cement is its being impenetrable to water. This is not a mere conjecture. It is a fact, which the aqueducts of theirs, ftill in being, leave not the leaft room to doubt of; for, in these works, they never employed either clay, maftich, or any other refinous fubftance, to prevent the waters inaking their way through them. The areas of these canals, refting fometimes on the ground, fometimes on a wall, and fometimes on arches built for the purpose, as well as their roof and fides, confifted of the fame kind of small stones bound together by this extraordinary cement; with this difference, that the infide furface was compofed of finer and fmaller ingredients; which, at the fame time that it does not look any thing like a coating made at fecond hand, and of course capable of being fcaled off, carries evident marks of its being the refult of a peculiar operation, which it may not be impoffible to imitate by carefully attending to the obfervations that will occur in the course of this Effay.

Rav. Sept. 1774.

• Thus,