IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I £121 lAO l^ ^«.l US lAO - 6" 2.5 2.2 1.8 11-25 i 1.4 i 1.6 Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14S80 (716)872-4503 v;.^ ^\ '^O kii^^^-iMAti^sA l^V CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CiHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notaa/Notat tachniquaa at bibliographiquas Tl to Tha Inatituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua. which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha raproduction, or which may aignificantly changa tha uaual mathod of filming, ara chackad balow. D a n n D Colourad covars/ Couvartura da coulaur I I Covars damagad/ Couvartura andommag^e Covars restorad and/or laminatad/ Couvartura rastaurAa et/ou palliculAa Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relii avac d'autres documents r~l Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion la long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutias lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte. mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont pas it6 filmias. Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplimentaires: L'inatitut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a AtA possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. r~n Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdas Pages restored and/oi Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxe( Pages d^color^es, tachetdas ou piqu6es I I Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ □Pages detached/ Pages ditach6es [T~> Showthrough/ UG Transparence I I Qualit; of print varies/ D D Quality indgale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du material suppi^mentaire Only edition available/ Seule Mition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalament ou partieliement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont M filmies d nouveau de facon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. Tl P< o1 fil O b< th si oi fil ai OI Tl si Tl w l\^ dl ai b( ri< re m This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmi au taux de reduction indiquA ci-deasous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X • 12X 16X 20X a4X 28X 32X tails > du odifier une mage The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Mstropolltan Toronto Library Literature Department The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. L'exemplaire filmA fut reproduit grice k la gAnArositA de: Metropolitan Toronto Library Literature Department Les Images suivantes ont tt6 reprodultes avec le plus grand soln, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettet* de l'exemplaire film*, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies In printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed cr illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. Ail other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or Illustrated Impression. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est ImprimAe sont flimfo en commenfant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la derniire page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'lllustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous Ie9 autres exemplaires originaux sont fllmte en commen9ant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'lllustration et en terminant par la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol ^»> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la dernlAre image de chaoue microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols y signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included In one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent 6tre filmfo A des taux de reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seui clichA, 11 est filmi A partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nicessaire. Les diagrammes suivants lllustrent la m^thode. >rrata to pelure, n d □ 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 S 6 JABEZ. " And Jabez was more honourable than his brethren : and his mother called his name Jubez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow. And Jabez called on the God of Israel, saying, Oli that tliou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, and that thine hand might be with me, and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me ! And God granted him that which he ' requested."— 1 Chronicles iv. 9-10. 1^ \^ rrHE age in which we live is pre-eminently one of historical T discovery. No longer dependent upon the doubtful tradi- tions of the Greek and Latin historians, we are brought face to face with the actual sources of their imperfect information in the long-sealed-up monuments of distant centuries. The in- scriptions of actors in the great historic past or of their con- temporaries, have yielded their treasures of knowledge to the learning, ingenuity and patient research of modern investiga- tors. Egypt and Ethiopia, Himyaritic Arabia and Accadian Chaldea, Assyria, Media and Armenia, Persia and Elara, Cyprus and Moab have contributed in large or small measure to our acquaintance with the ancient world ; and the keys will doubtless soon be found to unlock the secrets of Hamathite Syrian, of Etruscan, and of the inscriptions of Central America. Already many deciphered monuments have corroborated the truth of the Bible narrative, and have amplified our know- ledge of the times, persons and piaces of which the inspired writers treat. But, for as long a period as many of these records have lain hidden from mortal view, there has been con- cealed within the leaves of our well-thumbed Bibles another historical record, brief indeed, yet comprehensive and of infinite value, being the very key to the truthful but often chaotic facts of the monuments themselves. It is in this genealogical record that the brief notice of Jabez occurs. To the eye of the superficial student, and to the mind of him who would limit God to one way of revealing Himself in his Word, Jabez is, as he was to the Jewish commentators, a wise doctor of the law belonging to the tribe of Judah, who lived at some unknown period in an unknown city called Jabez. Now if Jabez lived after the conquest of Palestine, it must have A II 2 Jabcz. beeu at a time of religious tloclensioij, for his bretliren evidently did not ctdl upon God. He dwelt In a city of some import- ance, since a notable family of scribes, mentioned in chapter ii. verse 55, had their abode there, and a city that reflected his dignity since it was named after hitn ; but the Scriptures, so full of geographical information, tell us nothing concerning this great literary centre, and, when we consult our Hebrew lexicons or manuals of Scripture antiquities, we learn that Jabez was " an unknown town in the tribe of Judah." But Jabez was a Prince rather than a doctor of law, for he had a coast to defend against his enemies and to enlarge at their expense. In the Book of Judges we learn that Caleb, the son of Jephunneh, with his nephew Othniel, enlarged the coast of the Kencis/ites, who are mentioned lower down in the genealogies which con- tain the name of Jabez ; but concerning the greater Jabez there is absolute silence. It is plain that this Prince does not belong to the period of the Conquest, for at that time there were none but honourable men and worshippers of Jehovah in all the host of Israel. If again we refer him to the tiine of the Judges, it is strange that a record which sets forth Tola and Jair, Ibzan, Elon and Abdon should leave us in the dark re- garding so worthy a character as this hero of faith. Shall we place Jabez in the time of Israel's sojourn in Egypt ? If so, we must find his city in that ancient land, and, finding it there, we shall, as will shortly appear, be compelled to deny that Jabez was in any sense, save that of faith, an Israelite. Indeed the Gentile origin of Jabez is apparent in many ways. His very name has no signification in Hebrew, much less that which is attributed to it in the text. In order to find such a meaning, the letters of the word must be transposed to form an anagram, and, allowing such a liberty, it would be easy to prove that Zaphnath-Paaneah, and Abrech are Hebrew also. But the most striking evidence of his Gentile origin is found in the statement that he called, not upon God, but on the God of Israel. He was a proselyte, more honourable than his brethren, because he left the worship of their false gods to im- plore the favour and protection of the One Living and True. Let us glance over this fourth chapter of First Chronicles, und find the connection in which Jabez stands. The chapter begins with these words : " The sons of Judah ; Piiarez, Hezron, »g The Genealogies of Chronicles. 3 and Carmi, and Hur, and Shobal ;" and proceeds at once to give part of the genealogy of Sliobal. Now Pharez was un- doubtedly a son of Judali, and Hezron and Carnii were two of his descendants, but while Hur, the lather of Uri, belonged to the same family, we have no evidence that a patriarcli so named had a son called Shobal. The name Shobal is not Jewish, and I have proved, in my essay on the Horites and elsewhere, that this Shobal, who is also mentioned in chapter ii. of the same book, is Shobal the Horite, whose line is set forth in the 36th chapter of Genesis. These are the Auritae, or earliest rulers of Egypt, according to the Old Chronicle, the Hor- shesu of the monuments : and some of those mentioned in Chronicles and Genesis must be of great antiquity, as they are the very ancestral gods of the ancient Egyptian line. In Shob-al we recognize Seb-ra, the father of the solar family ; in his sons Eeaiah, Manahath, and Onam, the deities Ra, Month-ra (a name which Mr, Osburn in his Monumental Egypt identified with that of Manahath), and An-ra ; while his descendants Ahumai and Etam appear as Ahom-ra and lie- Athom. Passing to the line of Asshur, the father of Tekoa, in the 5th verse, we find ourselves among Hittites. Zohar, wrongly called Jezoar in our English version, by the error of substituting a yod for a vav, is the father of Ephron, the con- temporary of Abraham, whose name occurs in the 23d chapter of Genesis. Zereth left his memorial in the geographical term, Zereth Hashachar, commemorating his name in conjunction with that of his father Ashchur, which was a city in the neigh- bourhood of Moab that fell to the lot of Eeuben. Another Ashchurite here mentioned is Haachashtari or Achashtari, a word that has no connection with the Semitic languages, and which Gesenius derives from the Persian. He is Ashtar, the great deity of the Hittite enemies of the Egyptians, and, at the same time, the Hasisadra or Xisuthrus of the Accadians of Babylonia, who have recently been connected with the Hittite family by Assyriologists. Passing over the immediate predecessors of Jabez, we are introduced in the 11th verse to the family of Chelub, the brother of Shuah. The name of Chelub is significant in Hebrew, but those of his descendants are foreign, such terms as Beth-Kapha, the family of the physicians, and Ir-nahash, ' ('■ I 4 Jabes. the serpent city, to«,'ether with tlie general designation "men of Reelmh," exhibiting no relation wliatever to Hebrew phraseology. Ifapha was a Philistine, and Nahash an Ammonian, name. Who again is Shuah, that fixes the relation of Chelub and his family ? The only Shuah that connects with the line of Judah is mentioned in Genesis xxxviii. 2, as a certain Canaanite, whose daughter became by that patriarch the mother of Er, Onan, and Shelali. At the 13th verse, the genealogies of the Kenezzites, who were a people in the days of Abraham, are given. Professor Plumptre and the Bishop of Bath and Wells have asserted the non- Israelite origin of this family, to which Caleb the son of Jephunneh belonged ; and, indeed, commentators must have strangely understood the temper of the ancient Israelites, when they imagined it possible for them to call their children by the name of an unclean animal, Caleb, the dog. The genealogies of the Kenites, who are mentioned together with the Kenezzites in Genesis, as a Gentile people inhabiting Palestine in the days of Abraham, are set forth in chapter ii. verse 55, and are continued in the chapter under considera- tion at the 17th verse. Concerning them, the remarkable fact is noted that one of their number, Mered, married Bithiah, the daughter of Pharaoh. Mered, " the rebel," is not a name that could be honourably borne by any Israelite, even were it pro- bable that a remote descendant of Judah took to wife the daughter of an Egyptian monarch ; nor can we understand how such an one could connect with Garmites and Maacha- thites. Lepsius and Osburn have discovered Mered and the Pharaoh whose daughter he married. His sepulchral chamber was unearthed at Gizeh and carried to Berlin ; his very pro- trait forms one of the illustrations of Mr. Osburn's book. He was a prince and high functionary in the Pharaonic court, and, at the same time, a royal scribe. His name is given as Merhet, and his royal father-in-law was Cheops, the builder of the great pyramid. So far, therefore, from being a descend- ant of Judah, Mered must have lived some generations earlier than the entrance of Israel into the land of Egypt. The names immediately following those of the line in which Mered appears are thoroughly Gentile, and some, like Zoheth, Thebes, the City of Jabcz. 5 ii "men ebrew di an es the that enesis me by At the were a u nipt re nt)n- son of st have raelites, ihildren I, The sr with labitiim present roots that occur iu no Semitic lunguaye. Ji uly, as the writer remarks in verse 22, " these are ancient tilings." Ewakl looked upon the brief notice of Jabez as one of great anticiuity, but I am not aware that any writer has yet given to that prince his true place in the world's history. So far we have found him to be a convert from gentilism to the worship of Israel's God, and a prince who, in spite of disastrous cir- cumstances attending his birth, received special favours from God, including a happy and prosperous life and the extension of his dominions. His surroundings in the genealogies are Gentile, and some of them peculiarly Egyptian. Those who were able to record facts connected witli Egyptian liistory, such as the incident regarding Mered, may be reasonably supposed to have dwelt at some period in the land of the Pliaraohs. The recorders, there can be little doubt, were the Kenite scribes of chapter ii. verse 55, some of whose descendants, including the brother-in-law of Moses, entered the Liind of Promise and received an inheritance in Israel, with whom, however, they seem never to have anialganjated. An ancient abode of these scribes was the city of Jabez, a city we search for in vain either in Palestine or in the Kenite region of Arabia Petraea. Turning to Egypt, there is little difficulty in identifying Jabez with Tliebez, the famous capital of the Thebaid, and the University of the Upper Kingdom. The forms by which Thebez is represented in the inscriptions are aipe, ajJd, aptu, etc., the initial T or Th of the Greek word being the Egyptian feminine article, which was frequently employed as a prefix to names of places, and which as a mere locative prefix, meets us in the geographical nomenclature of other lands, as in Thapsacus, a word derived from Pasach. Thebez, therefore, which is also the name of a somewhat obscure town that existed in Central Palestine in the days of the Judges, may appropriately represent T Jabez. It is most probable that the Palestinian Thebez, like those of Asia ]\Iinor and Greece, derived its name from the Egyptian original. In the Bible the title of the Egyptian Thebez is No-Ammon, that city having been the great centre of the worship of the divinity so-called, for Amnion, with his wife Maut and son Chonsu, made up the Theban triad. The first records of the 1 ( 6 Jabez. city are those which associate it, not indeed by its name of T Jabez, with the earliest monarchs of Manetho's twelfth dynasty. It appears to have been founded by the Amenenihes and Osirtasens, of whom that dynasty is exclusively con- stituted. The name, liowever, with which it seems most natural to associate that of Jabez, if he be an Egyptian Pharaoh, is that of Apophis, the shepherd, whom all the ancient and most of the modern authorities agree in regarding as the friend of Joseph. He is also called in different lists Apepi, Aphobis, and Apappus the Great. Eratosthenes, who designates him by the latter name, ascribes to him a reign of one hundred years. As a Shepherd King, his name is in some lists pre- ceded, and in others followed, by that of Archies. Now it is not a small coincidence that gives us, in the verse immediately preceding that in which mention is made of Jabez, the name of one of his kinsmen, Acharchel, tl»e son of Harum. Again the shepherd king. Anon or Bnon of the lists, who precedes Apophis, is generally, as for instance by Lenormant and Chevalier, regarded as a misreading of Annoub, who occupies the same position iu the Turin Papyrus. But in verse 8 we read : — " And Coz begat Anuh and Zobebah and the families of Acharchel the son of Harum, — and Jabez, etc." In the Shep- herd Kings, Annoub, Archies, and Apophis, we have thus a presumption that Anub, Acharchel, and Jabez may be found. Who is Coz, the father of this wonderful family ? There is, so far as I am aware, only one Egyptian monarch whose name agrees with that of the sire of Anub. This is the Kaiechos of Manetho's second dynasty, the Choos of Eusebius, the Kekeu, whose pyramid, said to be the oldest of Egyptian monuments, Lepsius found at Saccarah, and whose inscription now lies in the Berlin Museum. This Choos is reported by Manetho to have introduced animal worship into Egypt, and thus to have been the originator of a degrading form of idolatry. It is another remarkable coincidence that Manetho makes the first pyramid- builder, not this Kaiechos or Choos, but one Uenephes of the first dynasty, the Anoyphes of Syncellus, and adds the state- ment that his pyramids were built at a place called Cochome. The site of Cochome, which the Armenian version of Eusebius calls Cho, is unknown. Kenrick supposes it to relate to the '^' His Relatives. Inie of Jwelfth lenihes con- Again woman, as all on account of The successor Coptic word Kos, meaning to enibahu. Is it not a little strik- ing then to find that the god who presided over embalmment was Anubis. I cannot doubt, therefore, that Anoob, Uenephes, Anoyphis, Anubis, denote one and the same historical charac- ter — Anub the son of Coz. Zobebah, the second child of Coz, was a lexicographers are agreed, and is mentioned some celebrity that attaches to her personally, of Uenephes of the first dynasty is Usaphais, a name not altogether discordant from that of Zobebuh, yet not sufficiently resembling it to enable us to found an argument from simi- larity. Still more unlike is Binothris, who follows Choos of the second dynasty, although the name is feminine, being the same as Benteresh of later Egyptian story. Eusebius calls this personage Biophis, which name compares better with Usaphais. But the confirmation of the identity of the Hebrew and Egyptian lists appears in the statement of Manetho, that in the reign of tliis sovereign it was decided that women should have the prerogative of royalty. Now, putting together all the facts contained in the forms Usaphais and Biophis, in the double relation to Choos on the one hand, and to Uenephes on the other, in the undoubted feminine appellation Binothris or Benteresh, and in the statement that her reign was signalised as the legitimate commencement of female royalty, we find an argument of no small force for the identification of Zobebah, the daughter of one Pharaoh and the sister of another, with the Egyptian queen. As a goddess, since her brother Anub became Anubis, I would be disposed to find in her, as Usaphais and Biophis, his companion deity Bubastis. This Zobebah, however, must be the mother of Jabez. The deification of Anub can hardly have taken place with- out raising his father Coz to divine honours. Among the divinities portrayed on the Egyptian monuments there are three that differ from all others in the peculiar form and shading of what may be called the mane or head-dress. These are Chonso, Anubis, and Bubastis. Chonso and Bubastis also agree in being lunar divinities, bearing upon their heads a representation of the moon. In Chonso 1 have no hesitation in discovering the deified Coz or Choos. He is represented as the son of Ammon, and, with him, one of the guardians of 'Ir i ',, \ ! i 8 Jabcz. Thebes or No-Aniinon. The iiiythohrj^ists represent Anubis as a subordinate son of Osiris, but his name is frequently compounded with tliat of Ammon. What is hicking in our knowledge from Egyptian sonrce^, the niytliolngy and h'gendary history of the Cireeks will supply, for tiie older Greek writers constantly asserted the intimate connection of their theological system with that of Egypt. According to Diodorus Siculus and other writers, the son of the Egyptian Ammon was the Greek Bacchus or I)ionysus, and the son of the latter was Oenopion. Dionysus, moreover, was known as lacchos, and the island which cidebrated his worship and over which his son Oenopion is said to have ruled, is that of Chios. Bochart derived Bacchus from Bar Chus, the son of Cush, and made him Nimrod. It is more rational to derive it from the form Pa-chons, in which the Coptic article is prefixed to the name of the divinity Chons. Oenopion, the man of wine and the king of Chios, is undoubtedly Anub son of Coz, the very word Anub denoting grapes in more than one Semitic language. It will be evident that I hold the old doctrine of Euhemerus, that heathen gods were in the main historical characters deified by their descendants, and that ancestor-, not nature-worship, was tiie origin of all systems of mythology, a doctrine received by the most honest of the Greeks, by all the fathers of the Church, and, indeed, by all reasonable men but a few ancient allego- rising philosophers, who were ashamed of their national creed, and some over-poetic sonls in the })resent day. In Ammon, therefore, the father of Coz and great-grandfather of Jabez, I am perfectly convinced that we should find Ammon, at once the son and the grandson of the patriarch Lot. He was one of the late divinities of Egypt. Mr. Osburn connects the fortunes of Moab'and Ammon with those of the Hittites, and it is thus appropriate that the mention of Amnion's son Coz, should, in Chronicles, immediately follow that of the Hittite line of Ashchur. The contemporaneousness of many of IManetho's dynasties, and the .actual identity of certain Pharaohs whose names appear in different lists, is a doctrine which has the sanction of most li\'ing Egyptologists. We must look in vain npon the monuments for records of the so called Shepherds, if we regard their greatest king, Apepi, as a distinct personage from Pepi or His Identity ivith Apapi. Phiops of the sixth dynasty, who, like the Apappus of Eratos thenos, is saiil to have reigned a hundred years. This Pepi, as Leuonnautsays, "was one of the most fjlorious and powerful kings. The whole country was suhjoct to his sceptre, for his monuments have been found in all i)arts of Egypt from Syene to Tanis." He subdued the Is'egroes and JJedouins in the south, and took possession of the Sinaitic Peninsula, at the same time engaging in great public works at ht me. The moat interesting feature in the identification of lepi with Jabez is that it furnishep us with tiie name of his father. lie is the Othocs of Manetho, the Ati of the monuments, whose reign was one of great trouble and internal strife. Two competitors for the crown, named Teta and IJserkara, warred against him; and at last he wa.3 put to death by his own guards. We understand now why Zobebah called her son Jabez, and what was the soirow wherewith she brought into the world a post- humous child. A king from his birth, his wliole long life was a reign. He was but a child when Joseph stood before him, and afterwards became, as he liimsoif said to his brethren, "a father to Pharaoh." It was this lad, in whom the honesty and simplicity of youth had not yet been contaminated by the evils of an idolatrous and licentious court, who, taught by the heaven-sent Hebrew captive, became more honourable than his brethren, and called on the God of Israel. Amnion, Maut, Chonso, and Anubis, his ancestors, with idl the solar line of Hor, he knew to be but men, unable to save themselves from the power of the grave. So, as we read in the first Sallier Papyrus, " King Apapi took to himself Sutecli for Lord, refusing to serve any other god in the whole land ... he built for him a temple of goodly and enduring workmanship ; King Apapi appointed festivals, days for making sacrifice to Sutecli with all rites that are performed in the temple of Ea Harmachis." Sutech was the name of a Hittite god, but, inasmuch as it is a form corresponding to the Hebrew Shaddai, there is no more reason for declaring Apapi to have been a Hittite idolater than there would be for making St. Augustine a worshipper of Zeus, because Dens, the name by which he knew God, originally pertained to that divinity. To the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, God had revealed Himself as YX Shaddai, the Almighty, and by this well-known name doubtless Joseph rr •1 * 10 Jabez. \w declared to Pharaoh the being and the character of his father's God. The only Egyptian monument which even doubtful tradition connects with the prime minister of Apophis is the great canal that runs parallel with the Nile through a great part of its course, and which is known to this day as the Bahr Jusouf. By this canal Lake Moeris was led. Now Lake ^Moeris is a monument of the twelfth dynasty of Manetho, and around the name Moeris cluster many facts that cannot be foreign to the story of Joseph's Pharaoh. Tiie Amenenihes, who began the worship of Amnion, belong to this dynasty, and to them must be attributed the foundation of No- Amnion or Thebes. Ac- cording to the lists of Manetho and the interpretation of some modern historians of Egypt, the Shepherds followed the twelfth dynasty, but, according to the more trustworthy monuments, that dynasty was immediately followed by the so-called Eighteenth, consisting of the Pharaohs that knew not Josepli and the vanquishers of the Shepherd line. From the monu- ments we also learn that certain Pharaohs of the Sixth dynasty, in which Ati and his son Phiops of the hundred years occur, were contemporary w^th others of the Eleventh and Twelfth. Mr. Sharpe observes that Eratosthenes, who professed to have exercised much care in compiling his list, placed Apophis after Osirtesen iii. of the twelfth dynasty, although it is proper to add thatMr. Sharpe does not think this arrangement is supported by the monuments. But the Pharaoh who succeeds Osirtesen III. on the monuments is Amenemhe ill., and he is universally regarded as the Moeris from Avhom the lake received its name. Now Bunsen held that Pepi or Phiops of the Sixth dynasty, who is called ^ferira, was the Moeris of the Labyrinth and lake, and Sir Gardner "Wilkinson supposed that Pepi might have been the original king of that name. 1 am disposed to go further and assert that Pepi Merira of the Sixth, Amenemhe III. of the Twelfth, and Apophis of the Shepherd dynasty, are one and the same. It is certainly remarkable tliat Amenemhe II., whom we may reasonably regard as the father of Amenemhe III., met with a fate identical with that which befel Ati, the father of Pepi, being put to death, as Manetho informs us, by his own guards of the bed-chamber. All the reforms and public acts which the Bible attributes to the Pharaoh of Identity with Amenemhe Moeris. II tion Joseph are, by the ancient historians and tne evidence of the monuments, referred to monarchs of the Twelfth dynasty. To the same dynasty belongs the famous picture of Benihassan representing the arrival in Egypt of a Palestinian family, which was once supposed to be that of Jacob. So many are the facts that serve to mark the Pharaoh of Joseph as a king of the Twelfth dynasty, that those writers who reject the ancient evidence in favour of Apophis, place the entrance of Israel into the land of Egypt in the reign either of Osirtesen in. or his immediate successor, Amenemhe iii. Moeris. In seeking the reconciliation of such widely different names as Pepi, Apappus or Apophis, and Amenemhe, we mlist remember that the one is a personal and the other a dynastic appellation. Thebez, called Te Api, was also known as No-Ammon, and the name of its great divinity naturally formed part of the dynastic title of those who not only were Theban kings, but traced their descent from the god himself. It is probable that we owe the knowledge which Egyptian monuments afford of the personal name Pepi to the conversion of the youthful Jabez, and his consequent rejection, so far as his personal in- scriptions were concerned, of the idolatrous title Amen-mai, " the beloved of Amnion." It is true that beyond the fact of the twelfth dynasty being Ammonian and Theban, we have little that serves to connect Jabez, as Amenemhe in., with his maternal ancestors. The name of Amenemhe ii. is read Noub or Knephcheres, and may thus designate Anub rather than Ati, If such be the case, Manetho must have erred in referring to him the death he elsewhere attributes to Ati. This Ati could only claim the title Amenemhe as connected by marriage with the family of Ammon in the person of Zobebah, tlie daughter of Coz. I have evidence, which the limits of this article will not permit me to set forth at present, that Ati was the son of Ophrah, the son of Meonothai, mentioned in First Chronicles iv. 14, so that Osirtesen ii., whose name is Meshophra, may represent this unfortunate Pharaoh rather than Amenemhe ii. Once more, however, the Greek traditions, which knqw Apophis as Epaphus, the son of lo, must help us to unravel the tangled skein of the Egyptian records. The story of Cybele, the site of which is given as Phrygia, is but a version of i I r la yabez. ■ M ii that contained iu the Egyptian annals, and in the genealogical record of Chronicles. Cybele, an old Queen reigning in her own right, is the lover of Atys, who is put to death before her eyes. Lamenting his death, she roams tliroughout the earth like lo, and at last brings forth her child Sabus or Sabazius, whose name is intimately connected with the worship of Bacchus, just as lo gave Epaphus to the world. It is a singular coincidence, though I do not count much upon it, that Banier interprets the name Cybele by the Hebrew Cliebel — enfanter avec douleur, the very expression that the sacred narrative employs in regard to the birth of Jabez. In Cybebe, however, another form of this heroine's name, it is not hard to recognise Zobebah. The companion of the Queen and guardian of the youthful Sabazius, who is also called after his father, Atys and Papas, is Marsyas. Now, according to Osburn, the father and guardian of Apophis was Moeris, from whom doubtless he received the surname which makes Pepi, Merira, and Amen- emhe, Moeris. Among geographical terms, which are of great use in connection with early history, when men called their lands after their own names and after tliose of their ancestors, Eitter points out a Kubeibeh in southern Palestine and near it a Mareshah. This j\Iareshah I identify with the names Mar- syas and Moeris, and find him as a historical personage in the Maresliah who is mentioned in First Chronicles iv. 21, and ii. 42. as the son of Laadah and the father of Hebron. From many sources, which space and the patience of my readers do not permit me to set forth in the pages of this review, I have ob- tained the information that Laadah, his father, was the son of Eplier, the son of Midian, whose invasion of Egypt, attested alike by Josephus and the Arabian historians, gave rise to the story of a Shepherd dynasty. To the line of Midian Jabez did not belong, his parents representing two of the families which exercised sovereignty contemporaneously prior to the Midianite invasion. But, inasmuch as the Shepherds are both by the Egyptians and tl\e Arabians termed Aadtous or Adites, it would seem that Ati or Othoes, the father of Jabez, had allied himself with these foreigners, who themselves exercised a petty sover- eignty, and that on the death of Ati, Mareshah or ^loeris, the son of Laadah, Alites or Sah.tis, became the guardian of the youthful monarch. This is strictly in accordance with the His father A ti or OtJioes. 13 order or succession given by Mr. Osburn, as Othoes, Salatis, Moeris, Apophis. lie was not aware, however, that Salatis and Moeris had no right to be considered ancestors of Jabez or Apophis, although recognising the fact that their authority was one, not of inheritance, but of guardianship. The tradition concerning the tragical fate of Ati, the father of Jabez, seems to liave been widely diffused in ancient times. Already we have found it embodied in the story of Cybele and Atys, the scene of which is placed in Phrygia. In Lydia, the talc connects with Croesus, whose son Atys was killed by those who should have defended him. In Greece Ati became Actaeon, torn to pieces by his own hounds ; and, as Mr. Talbot has shown, the same legend appears in the Izdubar tablets. Since there is so much repetition in the dynasties of Manetho, it is far from improbable that his only king of the ninth dynasty, Aclithoes the Atrocious, who did great mischief to the people of Egypt, who fell into madness and was destroyed by a crocodile, is another form of Ati, Othoes, Atys and Actaeon. It is worth remarking that the next monarch named by ^lanetho is the fiist Ammenemes or Amenemhe. Diodorus Siculus makes the predecessor of Moeris, whom he calls Mendes or Marrus and characterizes as the builder of the Labyrinth, an Ethiopian named Actisanes, who cut off the ears, and noses of offenders, and banished them to Rhinocolura on the borders of Syria or rather Palestine. If Achthoes and Actisanes designate the same person as Othoes or Ati, he is given to history as a cruel and oppressive king, against whom his own people rose in rebellion. The licentious myth of Atys, and the statement by Manetho that Amenemhe 11. was put to death by his eunuchs, or guards of the bed-chamber, together with the fact thot such cvirati were almost unknown in Ancient Egypt, seem to indicate that the cause of the rebellion was the introduction into that country of the barbarous oriental custom. Its introduction is also suggestive of a Babylonian connection at this period with the land of the Pharaohs. Such a connection appears on the tablets of Babylonia in the reign of Naram-Sin, the son of Sargon, who conquered Apira.: or Avaris, the kingdom of the Shepherds, and also Maganna or Egypt proper. The late Mr. George Smith fixed the date of Sargon about 1600 B.C., a period at I '( : ! u Jabes. which the conquest of Egypt by a Babylonian king is a historical impossibility. His date should be a century and a half or two centuries earlier, in the stormy time that marks equally the beginning of the sixth, and of the twelfth dynasty, in other words, that which became known as the period of the Shepherd invasion. I have a suspicion that Acharehel and his father Harum represent the Babylonians at this time in some connection by marriage with the line of Coz, and I should not be surprised to find that Harum is the Naram-Sin who actually conquered Egypt. If this be the case, Acharehel may be represented by one of the Babylonian Kurigalzus, as well as by the Egyptian Archies. I have also discovered in the record of Chronicles the successors of Jabez on the throne of the Pharaohs. The sixth dynasty of Manetho gives us as his successor, and perhaps his son or grandson, Mentliesuphis or Methosuphis, whom Mr. Osburn makes the founder of Thebez, the city named after his father, and who, as Mentuhotep, is erroneously placed by the Egyptologists in an eleventh dynasty. This Menthesuphis, called " pure gold of the gods," I identify with Mezahab, the golden, who is mentioned in First Chronicles i. 50, and Genesis xxxvi. 39, as the father of a Queen Matred, who, again, is the mother of Princess Mehetabel, the wife of Hadar, an Edomite king that held his court at Pai. In Matred I recognise the so-called Nitocris who follows Menthesuphis in Manetho, and in the list of Eratosthenes is the second from Apappus the Great. The twelfth dynasty of Manetho also ends with the name of a queen, who, however, is called Scemiophris. She is made the successor of an Ammenemes, whose reign lasted but eight years. Mr. Sharpe identifies queen Nitocris with Mykera or Mytera, by whose marriage with Thothmes li., the kingdoms of Upper and Lower Egypt were brought under one sceptre, aud whose son Thotliraes iii. was one of the greatest of the Pharaohs. It was a sister of tliis Thothmes ill., named Mehetabel, who married Hadar, King of Edom, and thus gave to the kings that knew not Joseph a valuable ally on the borders of Palestine. On the death of Jabez, the southern tributaries, descended from an ancient line of local Egyptian monarchs, gained sufficient strength to take possession of the entire Upper Kingdom. By marriage with the heiress of the His Descendants. 15 y and a marks ynasty, of the lel and iine in should n who larchel izus, as Ammonian or Apophiaii line, one of these kings, Thothmes II., brought the whole land under one sceptre, and proceeded to oppress and expel the Midiaaite, Kenite, and other Palestinian allies or tributaries, who had been invited to settle in the neiglibourhood of the Delta by the wise policy of Jabez or his predecessors. These Midianites, Kenites, Hittites, and Hebrews, and not any series of Egyptian kings, were the original Shepherds of the Manethonic story. The materials which furnished me with the information justifying a connection between Mezahab and Jabez, so far separated in the lists of Chronicles, were drawn from many sources, including the Sanscrit and other scriptures. But the one legend which most fitly illustrates the connection is that which several Greek authors supply. Many circumstances, too numerous to specify here, led me to find in the legendary Abas, King of Argos, the land of the Egyptian Apis, lo, Epaphus, and Danaus, the Jabez of Chronicles and the Apophis of Manetho. His son Acrisius, the golden, is but a translation of Mezahab. But, better still, in the story of his daughter and heiress, Danae, who was wooed by Jupiter in a shower of gold, we have a mytli arising, as Max Miiller has shown often to be the case, out of a wrong use of words. Matred denotes a shower, and she herself is tlie golden shower, as the daughter of Mezahab, the golden. The true story, though much cor- rupted, is that which makes her the mother of the great Perseus by Dictys of Seriphos. Dictys is the natural Greek rendering of the Egyptian Tahuti, which is the true form of Tlioth, from whom the kings that knew not Joseph derived their dynastic name Thothmes. But still clearer does the Egyptian connection appear, when we learn that Perseus accidentally killed his grandfather Acrisius at the court of the Larissean king Teutamas. Herodotus was told by the Egyptian priests that Perseus was one of their kings, and a native of Chemmis. His watch-tower was shown in the Delta, and all ancient authorities place the scene of the deliverance of Andromeda by this hero at Joppa in Palestine. He has been identified, time and again, with the Persian Mitliras, many traces of whose worship are found in Egypt and Ethiopia. This Mithras has been generally regarded as symbolizing the union of two creeds, ana, as a personage, he is made the i6 Jabez. w mediator betweeu two religions. In reality he was the ofi'- spring of a marriage by which not two religions, but two states, were merged in one ; and Mithras is but the masculine form of the well-known goddess Mithra, who is Matred his mother, the daughter of Mezahal). The wide diffusion among savage as well as civilized peoples of the same ancient legend, has been the tlieme of many students of mythology and folk-lore, and writers, like Sir G. "* ^ Cox, the author oi Aryan Mythology, have striven to account for the phenomenon by imputing to the people of antiquity a faculty, for the existence of which they have no other evidence than the myths themselves — a faculty which compelled them to personify according to set forms the objects and powers of nature. But even if it were possible for any modern Niebuhr to nullify the almost universal testimony of the Greek historians and poets to an ancient connection between the populations of Egypt and Hellas, there would still remain an evidence of such a connection that no adverse criticism can touch. It is stated briefly in the title of one of the Eecords of the Past : " The Invasion of Egypt by the Greeks in the reign of Menephtah." This Menephtah is supposed to have been the Pharaoh of the Exodus. We hav^ learned, then, that certain Kenite scribes, pro- bably of the family of Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, carried with them into Palestine the genealogies of Egyptian Pharaohs and other Gentile chiefs, which their ancestors and predecessors in office had placed on record in the city of Thebez. Expelled from this seat of learning, and from the land of Egypt by a new dynasty that had no sympathy with their pure religion, they had carried these treasures and their faith into the peninsula of Sinai, where Jethro became the priest of Midian, and worshipped, as the great king Jabez had appointed, Joseph's God, El Shaddai. Why the inspiring and guiding Providence, that caused these truthful and in- valuable documents to be placed in the canon of His Scriptures, permitted them to be annexed to, I dare not say confounded with, the brief genealogies of Israel's tribes, and interspersed with the purely Jewish genealogies of David and the Levites, is a question hard to answer. I do not speak of the ten years and more of my leisure that have been spent in the vain Importance of the Identification. 17 was the oft'- ut two states, asculine form d his mother, as civilized ;he tlieme of writers, like ave striven to he people of they have no acuity which ns the objects ssible for any testimony of it connection there would lat no adverse title of one of Egypt by the ^lenephtah is LS. scribes, pro- aw of Moses, i of Egyptian ancestors and L the city of and from the i^mpathy with Lires and their 3 became the b king Jabez the inspiring ihful and in- lis Scriptures, y confounded . interspersed 1 the Levites, k of the ten it in the vain attempt to reconcile these genealogies (always excepting those of David and the Levites) with others given in the "Word of Inspiration; for some who have preceded me have given the better part of a lifetime to the same great task, and have mot with similar failure. But now we know how ri<>ht and •'ood it was that failure should attend such an effort. Of what value aft.r all would it have been to tlie Church or the world to know the names of men that had no record on the page of history, oven though they had Abraham for their father? Here, on tlie contrary, in the part of Scripture that has long been a sealed book, a very mine of knowledge, or of materials for correcting and arranging information elsewhere obtained, lies open to the student, and will soon, I trust, lie open to every intelligent reader of the Word of God. And yet. in com- paring the brevity of the record that sets before our eyes the whole history of the ancient world with the fulness of the Church's story, there is impressed upon the mind a lesson of infinite wisdom — the smallness in God's sight of what man deems great. By the internal evidence of the short account of Jabez, given in Chronicles, we have found him to be no Israelitish doctor, but a Gentile prince, whose life presented a marked contrast to those of his fellows in that he called upon the God of Israel. An undoubted reference to Egyptian history in the brief mention of Mered, the son-in-law of Cheops (who is the Joab of 1 Chron. iv. 14, and appears as the son of Seraiah, the Soris who precedes Cheops) furnished presumptive evidence of the Egyptian origin of Jabez. An examination of the whole chapter sufficed to indicate that its genealogies are not Israelite, and that, in its very commencement, we are introduced to the beginnings of Egyptian history in the persons of the Auritae or first rulers of the Nile valley, the Horites of Bible story. And the name of Jabez, a seat of learning and the c^cy of the royal proselyte, has been found in the Egyptian Thebez. This name should have carried us at once to the twelfth dynasty of Manetho, whose Amenemhes and Osirtaseus were the earliest rulers of the famous city so called. But the universal testimony of ancient writers could not, in the meantime, be disregarded, and as this testimony points to Apophis, the shepherd, as the only royal Egyptian convert, his identity with Jabez was taken D ri Ml ■'IS - 1 1 i ■ |i!l t i8 Jabez. fur granted. Our only important record of Apopliis is that contained in the First Sallier Papyrus, which, although written by an enemy, corroborates the story of Jabez's conversion, and represents him as relinquishing the worship of Egypt's national divinities for that of one God, Sutech or Shaddai, the Almighty. The monuments afforded no information concerning this great monarch, a circumstance altogether unaccountable when we consider the important events by which, according to the book of Genesis, his reign was marked. But these monuments do speak out regarding a powerful Pharaoh named Pepi, who, according to Brugsch, was censured by king Sken-n-re of the so-called eleventh dynasty for favouring the Shepherds. This Pepi is universally recognised as the Phiops of Manetho's sixth dynasty, who reigned a hundred years, and by this remarkable circumstance coincides with the Apappus of Eratosthenes, in whose name we are brought back to Apopliis, the shepherd. We are told that he extended his borders on every side, and that the whole of Egy[)t was subject to his so'^'ntre. The hundred years of a useful and prosperous reign, the widely extended empire, are the comment of history upon the brief Bible statement " God granted him that which he requested," when he prayed — " Oh, that thou wouldest bless me indeed, and enlarge my coast, and that thine hand might be with nic, and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me." The incidents furnished by Manetho and the monuments concerning the father of Phiops or Pepi explained how it was that " his mother called his name Jabez, saying, Because I bare him with sorrow." His father's reign, unlike his own, had been one of strife and bloodshed. He had called to his assistance against Teta and Userkara, competitors for the throne, foreign tribes who took from his name Ati their designation of Aadtous or Adites, and whose original pastoral occupations gained for them and for the dynasty they supported the name of Shepherds. Other Egyptian and Greek traditions have enabled us to see in Ati a cruel and probably a licentious king, the inaugurator in Egypt of the barbarous harem system of the East, whose wife proper, however, was a queen in her own right, no longer in the, bloom of her youth, the Cybebe of a strange and shameful story. Whether by the unfortunates whom his cruel policy had deprived of manhood, Statonent of Ri suits. 19 lliis is that [gh written lersiou, and t's national Almighty, this great when we the book uments do Pepi, who, n-re of the erds. This etlio's sixth remarkable osthenes, in e shepherd, ry side, and ntre. The the widely )n the brief requested," nie indeed, be with nic, it may not monuments how it was 3ause I bare s own, had lied to his >rs for the a Ati their lal pastoral y supported k traditions a licentious lem system queen in youth, the lier by the •f manhood. or by the foreign tribes he had called to his assi.'>tivnce, Ati was put to death, leaving his queen, Zobebah, the mother of a posthumous child. Her husband dead, his mur- derers within the walls of her palace, her enemies emboldened to renew the strife for empire, and, perhaps in addition to all this, a Babylonian invasion upon her borders, we can under- stand how Jabez was her Benoni and Ichabod, and her exclamation, " I bare him with sorrow." It is not a little remarkable, as has been already stated, that the Abbd Banier and other students of mythology explain Cybele, the commoner name of Cybebe, by the Hebrew word clichd, " to bring forth with pain." The Phrygian legend of Cybebe, originally no doubt a legend or tradition from Apirak or Avaris, the land of the so- called shepherds, has given us the clue to the subsequent history of the family of Ati. This wife of the murdered Atys and mother of Sabazius found a friend in ]\Iarsyas. Among the Palestinian or Arabian tribes whom Ati had invited to aid him against his enemies was a Midianite family, probably iu the line of Eplier, whom Josephus an I the Arabian historians represent as an invader of Egypt. The Midianites, as we learn from the story of Joseph, were in friendly relations with the Shepherd dynasty, and their name, as Matennu, long denoted a class of Egyptian mercenaries. The chief of these Midianite warriors and the son of Epher was Laadah of the Chronicles, known to Egyptian history as Alites or Salatis, the leader of the Shepherds ; and his son jMareshah, the ^loeris of the Egyptians and the Marsyas of the Greek tradition, became the friend of the widowed Zobebah and the orphan Jabez. Assuming the command of the faithful Egyptians and their allies, Laadah and his son subdued the revolters, overcame the claimants for the throne, and drove them far into the Ui>per Kingdom, where, unable to regain their lost dominion, they weie fain to content themselves with censuring Pepi or Jabez for employing the doughty bhepherds in his service. In gratitude doubtless for such signal benefits, the youthful Jabez added to his name that of the wise and warlike Midianite who had been to him a father, and called himself Pepi INIerira, Jabez of Mareshah. If we rely upon ancient testimony, and find that Jabez was a king from the day of his birth, we see Joseph i r s 2o Jabez. ii ! ■^ '., appearing before a mere cliild in his eighth year. The use of the third person in the address of tlie chief butler to Pliaraoh, when he said, " nie he restored unto mine ollice and him he hanged," may not be significant, bnt again it may point to one different from the youthl'ul monarch, ami exercising sovereignty in his name, in other words to Maresliah or Moeris. If this be the case, we may presume that since his act of judgment upon the two officials he had died, and that Joseph became his successor as the royal adviser and viceroy. At any rate we know from Joseph's calling himself " a father to Pharaoh," though he was but thirty years of age when he stood before him, that Jabez must have been at best a youth ; and the fact that Joseph was exalted to the highest position under the king would seem to indicate the previous death or withdrawal from office of the Midiiinite regent. Jabez being the Apophis and Tepi of the lists and monu- ments, it was to be expected that Egyptian history should at least mention those who in Chronicles are placed in proximity to this honourable Pharaoh. Accordingly we found Anub, his uncle, and Acharchel, his kinsman, in the Shepherd dynasty, as set forth by Manetho and the Turin Papyrus under the forms Anoob and Archies, two names so uncommon as to take their resemblance to those of Chronicles out of the sphere of mere coincidence. Seeking for a further recognition of Anub, who as Anubis is mentioned together with Hercules or Acharchel in more than one ancient list of Egyptian divinities, he was discovered in Uenephes of the so-called first dynasty of Manetho. As the first pyramid builder, and by Cho or Cochome, the site of his pyramids, he connected with Kaiechos or Choos, the Kekeu, whose pyramid is regarded as the oldest Egyptian monument, and whom Manetho places in his second dynasty. Since there is good evidence of the multiplication of dynasties and of individual Pharaolis by this historian, it ia not unlikely that Keiikeues, the immediate predecessor of Uenephes in the first dynasty, is but a corrupted form of Kaiechos or Choos, who is Coz the father of Anub. If we identify Chons the Theban god with Kaiechos, the form Ken- kenes is capable of easy explanation. I have not yet indicated the monumental Anub; as a pyramid builder, I hold hini to have been Kneph Chufu, the contemporary, during the latter Statement of Results. at 'he use of Pharaoh, d him he point to exercising eshah or since his and that id viceroy. "a father when he a youth ; 5t position death or md monu- should at proximity Anub, his d dynasty, under the as to take e sphere of n of Anub, ercules or I divinities, rst dynasty by Cho or h Kaiechos I the oldest his second [Itiplication torian, it is iecessor of id form of lb. If we form Ken- it indicated lold hini to ; the latter part of the reign of Cheops, with that illustrious Pharaoh. The initial letter of Anub is the Hebrew ayin, which often receives the power of ^ or c in transliteration into other languages. Thus Cauopus and Anubis are the same term. The surname Chufu he must have acquired from some alliance with the house of Cheops or Joab. In Usaphais, the successor of Uenephes, and in Biophis or Binothris, who follows Choos, Zobebah, the daughter of Coz, and sister of Anub, appeared, as the first female sovereign in the land of Egypt. Seeking the aid of the other records it was found that Greece knew Anub, the man of grapes, and Uenephes, the king, under the name of Oenopion, king of Chios, the son of Bacchus, the god of wine, whose ancient worship connects with Cybebe and Sabazius. This Bacchus again was the son of Amnion, according to the mythologists, and thus reveals his Egyptian origin. In Thebez was his seat ; and Chonsu was his son, who, by the representa- tions of divinities upon the monuments, is allied with Anubis and Bubastis. Bubastis, us the goddess of the moon, wliich she is portrayed as bearing on her head, must be the Greek lo, mother of Epaphus, and Zobebah, motlier of Jabez. These were late divinities compared with the old solar line of Ea, and came into note only when the twelfth dynasty began its reign. Now, placing the Hebrew line alongside of the maternal ancestry of Jabez, the four generations, Amnion, Coz, Zobebah, Jabez, may easily coincide with the three, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and give us in Aramon, the god, the son of Lot, for Amnion and Isaac were contemporaries. It is true that we have little else on wliich to base this identification, save the undoubted Egyptian origin of the Moabite god Chemosh, and the fact that in the story of the Theban Niobe many mythologists have found a reminiscence of Lot's wife. But the name of Ammon conducted us to Thebez or No- Ammon and to Manetho's twelfth dynasty. There we found, with the deities Ammon and Chons, the Pharaohs named Amenemhe after their ancestor, one of whom had the same fate as Ati, the husband of Zobebah. It was, however, in Amenemhe iii. IMoeris, that we met with the great Egyptian builder and legislator, who may fitly represent the Pepi Merira of the sixth dynasty. If the record of Chronicles be true, which, apart from its appearance in the most truthful of all books, as Jabes. i, I t \^ % should be established by the fact that the men who handed it down were the contemporaries in Egypt and in Thebez itself of those whose names it commeiiiorates, then it follows of necessity that this Theban dynasty is that in which Jabuz occurs. In order, therefore, to restore the history of Jabez to the world, all the glories of the reign of Moeris must be added to those of Pepi Merira and the obscure notices of Apophis. As we have seen, many modern writers place Joseph under a Pharaoh of this dynasty, feeling comi)elled to do so by the coincidence of the reforms introduced by the Hebrew viceroy, as these are recorded in Genesis, with those attributed to the Osirtesens and Amenemhes. The most ancient monument that marks the site of On or Heliopolis, the city whence came Joseph's wife, is that of Osirtesen i. The materials at my disposal are not such as to enable me to give the Pharaohs of the twelfth dynasty their individual places in the scheme of Chronicles. The present system of chronicling the monarchs of Egypt by their dynastic titles is as absurd and useless as it would be to call the English John, Plantagenet in., and Elizabeth, Tiidor v. The Pharaohs had simple names like other people, and these names, such as Cheops, Schafra, Pepi, are the only ones by which they can be identified in other records. For they do survive in other records, not only in that contained in tlie book of Chronicles, nor in those which Sanscrit and Persian, Greek and Latin authors have written, but also in the oral tradition of far-off peoples in whose ears the name of Egypt has never been breathed. And one great mission of the long-neglected chapters with which this paper has been occupied is to reduce to system and unity all these old legends of the world's second infancy, and prove that God has made of one blood all nations of men. It was no part of my scheme to reduce the alleged antiquity of the Egyptian annals and place the patriarch Abraham not many generations later than their commencement. I had no theory to work out, no preconceived notion to prove true. The study of Chronicles led me, whether I would or not, into Egypt, astonishing me more, perhaps, than any of my readers may be astonished with the new revelation the book unfolded, when read in the light of the ancient glories of that historic land. Nor did it diminish these glories to find that Abraham who handed it 1 Thebez itself I it follows of 1 which Jabez )ry of Jabez to must be added us of Apophis. Joseph under a do so by the [ebvew viceroy, tributed to the jut monument ff whence came is to enable me lieir individual sent system of 'nastic titles is 1 English John, Pharaohs had lames, such as ch they can be rvive in other of Chronicles, eek and Latin iition of far-off as never been long-ne