Mr. Champollion has endeavoured to explain the absence of the names of our queens from the tablet of Abydus, by saying that it must be considered as a tablet “purely _genealogical_.” First Letter to the D. de B. p. 89. A reader is naturally disposed to acquiesce in this explanation, since Mr. Champollion, who has carefully examined it, asserts it on his own credit; especially as the assertion appears to be supported by a long and minute discussion. Unhappily, however, it is only necessary to compare his brother’s chronology in P. 107, with his own Plates II. and III. fig. 5, from which it appears that Amenses, who _reigned_ more than 20 years, was the mother of Thuthmosis the second, whose name is in the tablet, while his mother’s is _omitted_. It is true that, with his usual ingenuity, Mr. Champollion seems afterwards to change his ground in the same page: for he says, that one only of two brothers or sisters was inserted, in order to keep the number of the [p320] _generations_ unaltered: and he might have added that Amenses was the sister of Amenophis, whom she succeeded. If he had stated this clearly, the reader might have judged for himself, whether such a coincidence was or was not sufficient to support the chronology of Manetho; which was, however, by no means in want of _such_ support: in the article EGYPT, for example, Manetho’s chronology of this dynasty is fully adopted: and the same ‘cartouche’ is read _Thuthmosis_, which Mr. Champollion, after all his parade, still admits to be Thuthmosis: nor is there a difference of half a century in the dates assigned to his reign by various chronologists. It was established in the article Egypt, that the name contained that of Thoth, the Egyptian Hermes, and for this reason it was considered as better established than any other of the names of the Pharaohs. Mr. Champollion had never discovered this for many years afterwards: and yet we have been told by an ENGLISHMAN in the last Quarterly Journal, that to Mr. Champollion the _greater part_ of the _discoveries_ made by the interpretation of hieroglyphics are owing! Believe me, dear Sir, very sincerely, yours, * * * * _London_, 24 _Nov._ 1827. _On the Naturalization of Fish. By_ J. Mac Culloch, M.D., F.R.S., &c. Dear Sir,