I believe this Queen is now sufficiently ascertained to have either built, or increased to double its former size, the third pyramid of Gizeh:  and the passage following in the text refers to an imaginary endeavor, by the Old Lecturer and the children together, to make out the description of that pyramid in the 167th page of the second volume of Bunsen’s “Egypt’s Place in Universal History”—­ideal endeavor,—­which ideally terminates as the Old Lecturer’s real endeavors to the same end always have terminated.  There are, however, valuable notes respecting Nitocris at page 210 of the same volume:  but the “Early Egyptian History for the Young,” by the author of “Sidney Gray,” contains, in a pleasant form, as much information as young readers will usually need.

NOTE II.

Page 27.

“Pyramid of Asychis?”

This pyramid, in mythology, divides with the Tower of Babel the shame, or vain glory, of being presumptuously, and first among great edifices, built with “brick for stone.”  This was the inscription on it, according to Herodotus: 

“Despise me not, in comparing me with the pyramids of stone; for I have the pre-eminence over them, as far as Jupiter has pre-eminence over the gods.  For, striking with staves into the pool, men gathered the clay which fastened itself to the staff, and kneaded bricks out of it, and so made me.”

The word I have translated “kneaded” is literally “drew;” in the sense of drawing, for which the Latins used “duco;” and thus gave us our “ductile” in speaking of dead clay, and Duke, Doge, or leader, in speaking of living clay.  As the asserted pre-eminence of the edifice is made, in this inscription, to rest merely on the quantity of labor consumed in it, this pyramid is considered, in the text, as the type, at once, of the base building, and of the lost labor, of future ages, so far at least as the spirits of measured and mechanical effort deal with it; but Neith, exercising her power upon it, makes it a type of the work of wise and inspired builders.

NOTE III.

Page 29.

“The Greater Pthah.”

It is impossible, as yet, to define with distinctness the personal agencies of the Egyptian deities.  They are continually associated in function, or hold derivative powers, or are related to each other in mysterious triads, uniting always symbolism of physical phenomena with real spiritual power.  I have endeavored partly to explain this in the text of the tenth Lecture here, it is only necessary for the reader to know that the Greater Pthah more or less represents the formative power of order and measurement he always stands on a four-square pedestal, “the Egyptian cubit, metaphorically used as the hieroglyphic for truth,” his limbs are bound together, to signify fixed stability, as of a pillar; he has a measuring-rod