beginning of the same character as the “Round Towers” of Ireland. They were sacred places of Initiation. In 1877, the writer, quoting the authority and opinions of some most eminent scholars, ventured to assert that there was a great difference between the terms _Chrestos_ and _Christos_, a difference having a profound and Esoteric meaning. Also that while _Christos_ means “to live” and “to be born into a new life,” _Chrestos_, in “Initiation” phraseology, signified the death of the inner, lower, or personal nature in man; thus is given the key to the Brâhmanical title, the twice‐born; and finally, There were _Chrestians_ long before the era of Christianity, and the Essenes belonged to them.(536)... For this epithets sufficiently opprobrious to characterise the writer could hardly be found. And yet then as well as now, the author never attempted a statement of such a serious nature without showing as many learned authorities for it as could be mustered. Thus on the next page it was said: Lepsius shows that the word _Nofre_ means Chrestos, “good,” and that one of the titles of Osiris, “Onnofre,” must be translated “the goodness of God made manifest.” “The worship of Christ was not universal at this early date,” explains Mackenzie, “by which I mean that Christolatry had not been introduced; but the worship of _Chrestos_—the Good Principle—had preceded it by many centuries, and even survived the general adoption of Christianity, as shown on monuments still in existence....” Again, we have an inscription which is pre‐Christian on an epitaphial tablet (Spon. _Misc. Erud._, Ant., x. xviii. 2). Υαχινθε Λαρισαιων Δησμοσιε Πρως Χρηστε Χαιρε, and de Rossi (_Roma Sotteranea_, tome i., tav. xxi.) gives us another example from the catacombs—“Ælia Chreste, in Pace.”(537) To‐day the writer is able to add to all those testimonies the corroboration of an erudite author, who proves whatever he undertakes to show on the authority of geometrical demonstration. There is a most curious passage with remarks and explanations in the _Source of Measures_, whose author has probably never heard of the “Mystery‐God” Visvakarma of the early Âryans. Treating on the difference between the terms Chrest and Christ, he ends by saying that: There were two Messiahs: one who went down into the pit for the salvation of this world; this was the Sun shorn of his golden rays, and crowned with blackened ones (symbolising this loss), as the thorns: the other was the triumphant Messiah mounting up to the summit of the arch of heaven, and _personified as the Lion of the Tribe of Judah_. In both instances he had the cross; once in humiliation and once holding it in his control as the law of creation, He being Jehovah.