\ HORiE iEGYPTIACTE OR, THE CHRONOLOGY OF ANCIENT EGYPT DISCOVERED FEOM ASTEONOMIGAL AND HIEEOGLYPHIC RECORDS UPON ITS MONUMENTS; INCLUDING MANY DATES FOUND IN COEVAL INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE PERIOD OF THE BUILDING OF THE GREAT PYRAMID TO THE TIMES OF THE PERSIANS: _, AND ILLUSTRATrONS OF THE HISTOEY OF THE FIEST NINETEEN DYNASTIES, SHEWING THE ORDER OF THEIR SUCCESSION, PKOM THE MONUMENTS. EY EEGINALD STUAET POOLE. WITH PLATES AND NUMEROUS CUTS. LONDON: JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET. 1851. LONDOK : GEORGE WOODFALL AND SON, ANGBL COURT, SKINNER STRKKT TO HIS GRACE ALGERNON DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND, ETC. ETC. ETC. THIS WOEK, PUBLISHED UNDER HIS GEACE's AUSPICES, IS MOST RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED. PREFACE, During the last two years of a protracted residence in Egypt, I wrote a series of papers on the Ancient Chronology alul History of that country, which have been published in the Literary Gazette. Having returned to England, I began to prepare a new and enlarged edition of those papers ; and while I was thus occupied, his Grace the Duke of Northumberland, whose large acquaintance with the monuments of Egy])t, and with the science of Egyptian archaeology shewed him that much was wanting in my first essay, honoured me by expressing his desire that it should be improved in every way to the utmost of my ability, that the calculations which it contained should be subjected to the most rigid scrutiny, and that illustra- tions should be unsparingly added. Hence the present volume. To that distinguished nobleman I owe a large debt of gratitude for the encouragement which he has thus given me ; and to several other persons I have to ex- press my acknowledgments for important assistance. VI PREFACE. First among these, I must mention my uncle, Mr. Edward William Lane, who has greatly forwarded my undertaking by his most valuable advice and criticism. I am very deeply indebted to the justly celebrated Sir Gardner Wilkinson, for his having most liberally assisted me, by shewing to me, and allowing me to copy, important inscriptions, &c., in his unpublished papers, and for much valuable information imparted to me in many conversations on most of the subjects treated in this volume. I have also to acknowledge a great favour which he has conferred upon me, in offering to me the use of the wood-blocks from which almost all of the hieroglyphic names of Kings occur- ring in the present work are printed. My highly respected and most generous friends, the Rev. Mr. Lieder, of Cairo, and Mrs. Lieder, have for- warded my studies with a zeal that calls for my deepest gratitude. The former has rendered me most important aid in various ways, as will be seen in several of the following pages, in which I have acknowledged my obligations to his extensive learning and his rare liberality. The latter has also afforded me great as- sistance. I may mention in particular her having lately sent to me a judicious selection of paper-im- pressions, made with great care, of hieroglyphic in- scriptions of much importance, among other acts of kindness too numerous to mention. During the very few occasions of their absence from the scene of their missionary labours, Mr. and Mrs. Lieder have made the necessity for recruiting their health subservient to the PREFACE. Vll cause of researches tending to illustrate and confirm the Bible. The Astronomer Royal, Mr. Airy, has most obligingly, in compliance with my request, caused calculations which I had previously made to be again made for me at the Royal Observatory, and has revised them him- self; a favour for which I cannot be too grateful, as thus I have unquestionable authority for the correct- ness of data which are among the principal bases of my chronology. To my kind friend, Mr. A. C. Harris, of Alexandria, a gentleman who deserves the thanks of all students of Egyptian archseology for his contributions to our knowledge of that science, I have to offer my own especial thanks, for his directing my attention to seve- ral important hieroglyphic inscriptions, and presenting me with copies of some that I had not seen. I have also to acknowledge my obligations to Mr. Birch, of the British Museum, for the courtesy and readiness with which he has replied to questions re- specting hieroglyphic inscriptions on tablets, &c., under his care; and to Dr. Abbott, of Cairo, for his kindness in permitting me to examine his choice and extensive collection of Egyptian antiquities, and to copy inscriptions contained in it. i REGINALD STUART POOLE. Hastings, September, 1850. CONTENTS. PAGE Inteoduction xxi PART I. CHRONOLOGY. SECTION I. The Months and Yeaes, peopeely so called. The three Seasons of the Year ..... 3 The Tropical Year 4 The Vague Year' 5 Its Antiquity . . . . . . . . .5 The Names of the Months iu Hieroglyphics .... 6 The earliest known Mention of the Vague Year, in a hierogly- phic Inscription ........ 7 Names of the Months in the Times of the Ptolemies and Caesars, and in the present Day ...... 7 The Sothic Year 9 The Egyptian Julian Year ....... 9 Symbols of the Year in Hieroglyphics . . . . .9 SECTION II. The Teopical Cycle. Description of the Astronomical Ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kumeh .12 The Symbol of the Autumnal Equinox 14 The Divinities of the Months 14 The Great Ruk-h and the Little Ruk-h 15 The significations of "Ruk-h" in Hieroglyphics, and of the corresponding Words in Coptic . . . . . .15 The Little Ruk-h shown to be the Vernal Equinox ; and the Great Ruk-h, a point of Time a zodiacal Month before that Equinox 16 The Divinities of the Months, continued . . . .18 X CONTENTS. PAGE Chronological Inscriptions at Benee-Hasan, of the Time of the Twelfth Dynasty 18 The Tropical Cycle : its Length and other Characteristics, and the Times of its Commencement 20 The Period of the Separate State of the Soul, and its Relation to the Tropical Cycle 26 SECTION III. The Sothio Cycle. The Sothic Cycle 28 The Rising of Sothis 29 The Times of the Commencement of the Sothic Cycle . . 32 The Era of Menophres .33 Osiris, Isis, and Seth 34 The earliest Sothic Cycle 35 SECTION IV. The Ph(enix Cycle. The Description of the Astronomical Ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh, resumed ....... 39 Representation of the Phoenix . . . . . .40 The Period of the Separate State of the Soul, how termed in Hieroglyphics . . . . . . . . .42 The Phoenix Cycle : its Length and other Characteristics, and the Times of its Commencement .... . 43 The Sesostris in whose Time the Pheenix appeared . . 48 The Little Year . 50 The Cycle of Twenty-five Years . . . . " . .51 The Fabulous Birds of the Persians and Arabs . . .51 SECTION V. The Calendar of the Decans. Brief explanation of the Calendar of the Decans, and its probable Use 53 SECTION VI. The Calendar of the Panegyries. The " Heb," or " Panegyry " 55 The Great Panegyrical Month 55 CONTENTS. XI PAGE The Division of the Great Panegyrical Month . . .56 The Great Panegyrical Year 58 The Date of the Commencement of the Second Great Pane- gyrical Year in the Time of the two Suphises . . .61 The Date of the Commencement of the First Great Pane- gyrical Year, the Era of Menes 63 Date in the Time of Skha'i, or Skhee 64 Date in the Time of Queen Amen-numt . . . .65 Another Date in the Time of Queen Amen-numt . . .66 Date in the Time of Psammetichus II. . . • .67 Date in the Time of Amasis 67 Date in the Tomb of Pet-amen-apt, at Thebes . . .68 SECTION VII. The Royal Panegyries. The Thirty- Year Period of Royal Panegyrics . . . .71 The Subdivision of the Thirty- Year Period of Royal Pane- gyries 73 PART II. HISTORY. SECTION I. Introductory Observations. The Order of the First Seventeen Dynasties of Manetho's List 79 Some leading historical Facts relating to those Dynasties . 83 SECTION II. The Lists of Manetho and the Monuments. A Table of Manetho's List of the First Five Dynasties . . 86 A Table of Manetho's List of the Sixth and Eleven subse- quent Dynasties . . . . . . . .88 Remarks on these Tables, and on a Table at the End of the Volume 90 The List of the Chamber of Kings 91 The Tablet of Abydos 91 The Royal Turin Papyrus 92 Xll CONTENTS. SECTION HI. History of the Period before the Shepherd Invasion. PAGE Menes, the First King of Egypt 93 Notice of the List of Egyptian Kings given by Herodotus (Note) 93 A Remarkable Passage in the Euterpe of Herodotus, respect- ing the Interval from Menes to Sethon . . . .93 The Genesis of the World, marked by the Pdsing of Sothis, according to Porphyry and Solinus . . . . .95 The Era of Menes ascertained from the Statements of Hero- dotus, Porphyry, and Solinus, and from the Calendar of the Panegyries 96 The Date of the Dispersion 97 Babylonian and Assyrian Chronology . . . . .97 Earliest Median and Persian Kings mentioned in History . 98 The Date of the Foundation of Tyre, from Herodotus . . 98 The Reign of the Gods, Demi-gods, and Manes . . .99 The History of Menes 99 Memphis founded by Menes, according to Herodotus . .100 This, and the Thinite Kings 100 A Table shewing the Arrangement of the List called the Tablet of Abydos 101 Explanation of the Tablet of Abydos 10'2 Athothis, and the other Kings of the First Dynasty . .103 Boethos, the first King of the Second Dynasty, in whose time an Earthquake happened . 104 Animal- worship . 105 The second and succeeding Kings of the Second Dynasty . 105 The Third Dynasty, the first of Memphite Kings . . .108 The Fourth Dynasty 109 Erroneous Ideas respecting the Pyramids . . . 109 Contemporaneousness of the Memphites of the Fourth Dynasty with Elephantinites of the Fifth 109 Soris, Usercheres, and Sephres ; the last of whom founded " the Second Pyramid " 113 Nephercheres . . . . . . . . .116 The two Suphises, Shufu, or Suphis I., and Num-shufu, or Siiphis II 116 Cheops, or Chembes, the Founder of the Great Pyramid, the Shufu, or Khufu, of the Monuments 118 CONTENTS. Xlll PAGE The Chronology of the Period from Menes to the Suphises . 119 Sisires 119 Mencheres, the Founder of " the Third Pyramid " . .190 The Successors of Mencheres, in the Fourth Dynasty, and of Sisires, in the Fifth Contemporaneousness of Unas, or Onnos, the last King of the Fifth Dynasty, and Assa, or Assis, the fifth King of the Fifteenth Dynasty . Description and Explanation of the List of the Chamber of Kings A Table shewing the Arrangement of the List of the Chamber of Kings A Table comparing the List of the Chamber of Kings with other Lists Explanation of the List of the Chamber of Kings, resumed, shewing the Contemporaneousness of certain Dynasties con- tained in it , . The Lists of Chenoboscion . The Sixth Dynasty (of Memphites) Tata, or Othoes Papa, or Phiops : his long Reign . Menthesuphis, and Queen Nitokris Memphis taken by the Shepherds The Ninth Dynasty, the first of Heracleopolite Kings The most probable Chronology of the two Heracleopolite Dynasties, the Ninth and Tenth Achthoes, or Nantef L, the first King of the Ninth Dynasty . Nantef XL, surnamed " the Great," Nantef III., and Nantef IV Munt-hotp, the Successor of Nantef IV., shewn to have been contemporary with Amenemha I., the last King of the Eleventh Dynasty A Proof of the partial Contemporaneousness of the Ninth Dynasty with the Eleventh and Twelfth, and with the Fif- teenth, deduced from the Names of Persons Similar Proof of the partial Contemporaneousness of the Second, Fourth, Fifth, and other Dynasties, deduced from Kings' Names Account of the Heracleopolite Kingdom, resumed The Eleventh Dynasty, the first of Diospolite Kings 121 122 124 126 128 129 133 133 134 135 135 136 136 138 138 140 141 142 143 143 144 XIV CONTENTS. PAGE Amenemha I., or Ammenemes, probably twice deposed, and afterwards restored, contemporary with Munt-hotp, and with a Shepherd-chief 1 44 The Fourteenth Dynasty, or Xoite Kingdom . . . .147 SECTION IV. History of the Period of the Shepherd-Domination. Chedorlaomer and the Kings confederate with him : their two Invasions of Palestine, the first of which probably caused the Shepherds to invade Egypt 148 Great Famines must have caused many Shepherds to settle in Egypt 150 Probable reasons why the Shepherds so easily subjugated Egypt 150 Manetho's account of the Shepherd-invasion : King Timaios, or Timaos, in whose Reign he says that Event happened . 151 Appellations of the Shepherds : their Piace . . . .152 " The Camp of the Tyrians " at Memphis, mentioned by He- rodotus 152 Treatment of the conquered Country and People by the Shep- herds 153 Great changes in the Egyptian Dynasties, caused by the Shep- herd-invasion . . . . . . . . .154 Chronology of the Twelfth Dynasty (of Diospolites) . .155 Sesertesen I.: his Power, and the Monuments he has left . 157 Amenemha II. . . . . . . ' . . .158 Chronology of the Period from the Suphises to Amenemha II. 159 Differences of Style in Sculptures and Paintings of different Ages 159 Sesertesen II 161 Sesertesen III., Manetho's Sesostris 161 Amenemha HI., to whom Manetho ascribes the Building of the Labyrinth 161 Contemporaneousness of Amenemha III. with two other Kings, ascertained from an Inscription . . . .162 The Successors of Amenemha III. 163 Chronology of the Shepherd-Dynasties . . . .163 Salatis, the first King of the Fifteenth Dynasty, (of Shep- herds,) according to Manetho made Upper and Lower Egypt tributary 166 CONTENTS. XV PAGE A proof of the Contemporaneousness of Memphites, Heracleo- polites, Diospolites, Xoites, and Shepherds, deduced from the Royal Turin Papyrus, the Lists of Chenoboscion, and the List of the Chamber of Kings . . . .167 What Eusebius and Africanus say of Salatis, whom they call Saites 169 His Endeavour to preserve his Kingdom from the Assyrians . 169 No authentic Accounts of War between the Assyrians or Babylonians and the Egyptians in very early Times . .170 The Foundation of the Frontier-stronghold Avaris by Salatis : its Position and the Number of its Garrison . . .170 What is stated in the Lists of Africanus and Eusebius respect- ing the Shepherd-invasion 171 Abraham's Visit to Egypt 172 Ra-snufre Pi-ankhee, or Beon, the second King of the Fif- teenth Dynasty .172 An Evidence of the Contemporaneousness of the Twelfth and Fifteenth Dynasties 173 Apachnas 174 Aan, or lannas . . . . . . . . .174 Assa, or Assis, ruled not only Memphis, but also Leontopolis, or the Leontopolite Nome .175 Aphobis or Apophis . . . . . . . .177 The early Greek Traditions .178 Supposed Time of the Foundation of the Kingdoms of Sicyon andArgos 178 Connexion between Greece and Egypt . . . . .178 The Pelasgi 178 The Thirteenth Dynasty (of Diospolites) . . . .179 The Fourteenth Dynasty (of Xoites) 181 The Seventh and Eighth Dynasties (of Memphites) . .181 Etymology of the Name "Hyksos," and origin of the Shepherds 1 82 Length of the Shepherd-rule, according to Manetho, and Insur- rection against the Shepherds . . . . .183 Migrations from Egypt to Greece 184 " Cecrops the Saite " and Cadmus 185 Danaus and ^gyptus 186 Curious Traditions relating to the Colonizers of Greece, from Strabo, Agatharchides, and Diodorus Siculus . . .186 XVI CONTENTS. SECTION V. HiSTOKY OF THE PeRIOD OF THE EIGHTEENTH AND NINETEENTH Dynasties. PAGE Power of the Pharaohs of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties 188 Table of Manetho's Lists of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties 189 Enumeration of the Kings of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties, and notice of certain Corrections and Alterations in Manetho's Lists of those Dynasties . . . .190 Chronology of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties . 198 The Reign of Queen Amen-numt . . . . .198 The Exodus of the Shepherds 199 The King of the Shepherd-Exodus 201 The Sun- worshippers in Egypt 201 The Eastern Ethiopians 202 The Kings of the Sun-worshippers in Egypt . . . 203 Sun-worship 204 Hor-em-heb, doubtless the King who overcame the Sun-wor- shippers 206 Nature of the Inquiry contained in the Second Part of this Work 207 Concluding Remarks 209 APPENDIX. Letter from the Astronomer Royal 215 Hieroglyphic Tables of Kings 218 Hieroglyphic Table of the First Seventeen Dynasties . .219 Hieroglyphic Table of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties 253 Some Names of unplaced Kings, and some Variations of the Names of placed Kings 261 \ (El (H (q m C.O CO CO CO (-1 {^fr (i (^ (- / (:-l (^ (^ a: (4 CO' i -J [t:vifi \ ^ ^ ^ 5!^ N> Uli Mi« J G 1 "b (* •* ».?= B ■^ Oo»< c c 4 • f^.BK Z ># ~- ^ C z -^ar: BIB: <#^c i> o--< ^ DESCEIPTION OF PLATES. Plate I. 1. Hieroglyphic names of the Seasons and Months. See p. 3. 2. Mention of the 365 days of the Vague Year, in an inscription on a box of the time of Amenoph I. (b.c. cir. 1500), in the Turin Museum. From an unpublished copy by Sir Gardner Wilkinson. See p. 7. 3 & 4. Name of Kuk-h. See p. 15. 5. Portion of the long inscription in the tomb of Num-hotp, at Benee-Hasan, containing a record of the commencement of the first Tropical Cycle, b.c. 2005, in the reign of Amenemha II. See pp. IB, 19. 6. Inscription over the door of the same tomb. See p. 19. 7. "Manifestation of Sothis." See p. 31. 8. Fabulous bird, symbolizing a pure soul. See p. 42. 9. Extract from the inscriptions of the sarcophagus of Queen Ankh-nes, in the British Museum, mentioning the cycle of the separate state of the soul. See p. 42. Plate II. The most remarkable portions of the astronomical ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh ; containing representations of the PhcBnix (see p. 39), Sothis (see p. 28), the constellation Taurus, &c. (see p. 41), the two Ruk-hs (see p. 15), and the sitting Cynoce- phalus (see p. 14), in the following order : — The Phoenix. Sothis. Taurus, &c. The Great Ruk-h. The Cynocephalus. The Little Ruk-h. Plate III. 1, 2, 3, & 4. Different modes of writing the *• Great Panegyrical Month." See p. 55. 5, 6, 7, 8, & 9. Different modes of writing the " Division of the Great Panegyrical Month." See p. 56. 10. "The Great Panegyrical Month of Smat," from an inscrip- tion in a tomb near the Pyramids of El-Geezeh. See pp. 60, 61. b XVlll DESCRIPTION OF PLATES. 11. " Smat, the star of the Division of the Great Panegyrical Month," from the astronomical ceiling of the Eameseum of El-Kurneh. See p. 57. 12. Record of the commencement of the second Great Pane- gyrical Year b.c. 2353, with the name of Num-shufu, of the Fourth Dynasty; from a tomb near the Great Pyramid. See p. 61. 13. Record of a date of the Sixth Great Panegyrical Month, the Fifteenth Division of the Great Panegyrical Month, b.c. 1451 or 1450 ; from a tomb at Thebes. See p. 65. 14. Part of an inscription at Gebel-es-Silsileh, in Upper Egypt, recording the commencement of periods of Royal Panegyrics in the thirtieth, thirty-fourth, thirty-seventh, and fortieth, years of the reign of Rameses II. ; from Champollion's "Monumens," Plate 116. See p. 73. 15 & 16. " Heb," the common name of the ancient Egyptian re- ligious festivals, " a Panegyry." See p. 65. Plate IV. 1. The list of Kings comprised in the Tablet of Abydos. See p. 101. 2. List of three Kings' names, from a tomb near the Pyramids of El-Geezeh. See p. 111. 3. List of four Kings' names (two of which are of the same King), from a tomb near the Pyramids of El-Geezeh. See p. 111. 4. List of five Kings' names, from a tomb near the Pyramids of El-Geezeh. See pp. 106, 112. Plate V. Inscription in a tomb near the Great Pyramid, shewing the con- temporaneousness of Unas, of the Fifth Dynasty, with Assa, of the Fifteenth ; from the Rev. Mr. Lieder and Mrs. Lieder. See p. 122. Plate VI. The List of Kings comprised in ** the Chamber of Kings." See p. 124. Plate VII. 1. Fragment of the Royal Turin Papyrus. See p. 167. 2. The same in hieroglyphic characters. 3. One of the Lists of Chenoboscion, from a tomb at that place. See p. 167. ^cz^ ^CD -CZ3 ^CZ3 ^CZl «CZ3 ^CD ^^cz^ ^C~^ ^a ^dJi ^^CD < ^ ^CJ ^CDi ^CD ^CD <«|.B3) 'CD s(f*M)l < Jj ^.(^5^ "CD ^(gSi^ ^§•1 <«A)Jv)| =*(@2)| <«»«-^)l ^(Sg)l ^^3)1 ^^^ <»1*ID)I ^^CH®i 5$g)| 5@gj <«i»e)| '^M n^^ ^SSH —♦4— n •X M i tp 5C? / \ \ ^p)i' / \ PLATE VII ^1 ^ Ki©i ■^ i^ 5!^ I I I 111 6 /2 X SB R 4 ■ P 3i /s- 1^ Vrl / DESCRIPTION OF PLATES. XIX 4. Extract from the List of the Chamber of Kmgs. See p. 167. 5. Name of a foreign race, which probably reads Penu, or Phcani- cians. See pp. 146, 153. 6. " Shepherds." See p. 153. 7. Mention of the Shepherds, here called enemies, or foreigners, and of the Fields, probably the Bucolia, from the long inscription in the tomb of Num-hotp, at Benee-Hasan. See pp. 153, 174. 8. Inscription of the time of Assa, of the Fifteenth Dynasty, making mention of the City or Land of the Lion, that is, of Leon- topolis or the Leontopolite Nome. See p. 176. 9. " City of the Lion," from one of the sculptures of Sethee I., on the exterior of the north wall of the great temple of El-Kamak, at Thebes. Seep. 176. 10. Name of a branch of the Nile, from the same sculpture. See p. 176. 11. Fortress on that branch of the Nile, from the same sculpture. Seep. 176. 12. Part of an inscription, accompanying another sculpture of Sethee L, also on the exterior of the north wall of the great temple of El-Kamak, mentioning foreigners, or enemies, expelled from Egypt, by that King. See pp. 153, 176. 13. Mention of the land of A-ant, from the same inscription. See p. 176. 14. Mention of Sais, from the tomb containing No. 8. See p. 177. 15. Names of Aten-ra, the god of the Sun- worshippers. See p. 204. ERRATA. 21, insert the figures 2 and 4 over the second and fourth pairs of names in this page. 33, line 10, for "Men-path " read " Men-ptah." 82, line 5, for " presently " read " hereafter." 117, last line, for " my friend " read "another friend." 121, line 6 from bottom, for "doubtless" read "apparently." 123, line 11, for " sums " read "sum." 140, line 8 from bottom, insert " certainly " after " been." 143, note *, line 2 from bottom, after " and " insert " that it." 144, line 9 from bottom, for " ings " read " Kings." 149, line 3, for " dwell " read " dwelt." 178, line 6 from bottom, for "Palestine" read "Phoenicia." 231, column 4, dele " II." after " Munt-hotp." INTRODUCTION. The object of the present work is to explain the Chronology and History of Ancient Egypt from its mo- numents. It is divided into two parts. The first part is an examination of the ancient Egyptian divisions of time, and the dates recorded on the monuments. The second part is an inquiry into the history of the first nineteen Dynasties, and an application of the chronology obtained in the preceding part to that history. I may be permitted here to state the circumstances which led me to write this work. At the time when I began to study hieroglyphics in Egypt, from the monuments, and from the works of Champollion and others, I found that the learned world deplored the want of monumental evidence by which to fix the chronology of the ancient Egyptian Dynasties, and to determine whether any of them were contemporary or not. On considering the possibility of finding this much-desired evidence, I saw that I needed not to despair of finding it myself. It is true that others, for whose learning I have the highest respect, had not met with success in similar endeavours; but I was more favourably situated than most of those who had preceded XXll INTRODUCTION. me ; having my time unoccupied by any other important scientific or literary pursuit, excepting a course of general study, which assisted me in my progress ; and the monuments were near to be consulted. How far I have succeeded in my attempt, the following pages will show. If any one suppose that I have been guided by prejudice, I can only reply to him by asserting that the results of my investigations have been wholly unexpected to me, as I shall have occasion more explicitly to show. I have avoided, as much as possible, quoting or examining the works of others, excepting Sir Gardner Wilkinson. My object has been to explain what I have learned from the monuments ; not to combat the assertions of others. Sir Gardner Wilkinson stands in a position different from that of any others who have written on the subject ; he has never written to support a chronological hypothesis, and is entitled to the utmost confidence on account of his well-known accuracy, the many years which he has spent in the study of the Egyptian monuments in Egypt, and the caution which he has shown in refraining from putting forth any complete system of Egyptian chrono- logy*. I am aware how greatly I disagree with all others who have written on this subject; but * Since my work has been written, I have read, with no little pride, the following words in his latest publication, his very interesting and beautiful work on the Architecture of Ancient Egypt. After some remarks on the subject of chronology, he says, "It is indeed less necessary to enter into a detailed exami- INTRODUCTION. XXllI it is a sufficient consolation to me, since all differ, that it is little more to differ from all others than to differ from all of them but one. I must beg the reader to bear in mind throughout, that nothing inconsistent with the unquestionable records of the monuments has formed any part of the foundation upon which I have built. " I speak as to wise men ; judge ye what I say." nation of the chronology, and the succession of the Pharaohs, as Mr. Stuart Poole's work on the subject will soon be published ; and I have much pleasure in stating how fully I agree with him in the contemporaneousness of certain kings, and in the order of succession he gives to the ea,rly Pharaohs." — p. 132. EORM iEGYPTIAC^ PART I. CHRONOLOGY. SECTION I. THE MONTHS AND YEARS, PROPERLY SO CALLED. The Egyptians, from very early times, subdivided the year which they commonly used into three seasons, each containing four months, called the first, second, third, and fourth, months of those seasons. This notation evidently obtained from the very earliest times of Egyptian history. The three seasons were called " the Season of Vegetation," " the Season of Manifes- tation," and " the Season of the Waters," or the " Inundation." ^ There are diversities of • opinion re- specting the interpretation of the names of the first two seasons ; and what I have given as the interpreta- tion of the name of the second season is merely the radical signification of the group ; but the name of the third season is undoubtedly *'the Season of the Waters," and this gives us an accurate means of ascertaining the characteristics of that tropical year to which these names of the seasons must have originally applied. The fitness of this division is shown by our finding it universally used in Egypt in the present day, though vaguely defined ; the three seasons being called ALi3\ " Winter," lJi^\ " Summer," and Jjj\ " the Inundation," literally " the Nile," meaning the season * The hieroglyphic names of the seasons and months are given ill Plate I., No. 1. B 2 4 THE TROPICAL YEAR. [Parti. at which the Nile is spread over the cultivable parts of Egypt. " The Season of the Waters," in the ancient nomen- clature, plainly shows that the Tropical Year to which that nomenclature was originally applied commenced at the winter solstice, and not at, nor near, either of the equinoxes, or the summer solstice. We find in the present day that the four months during which the Nile is higher than at any other period of the year commence (according to the most accurate modern observations) almost exactly a month and a half before the autumnal equinox, and terminate almost exactly tw^o months and a half after the same equinox. But the inundation commences almost exactly a month before the equi- nox, sometimes a few days earlier, sometimes a few days later ; and it continues somewhat longer than it naturally would do, because the waters are retained for some time upon the lands by closing the mouths of the canals. We find, also, by the Egyptian almanacs, that, according to a tradition handed down by the Copts, what is called " the Bridal of Nilus" (from an unfounded legend, that on this occasion a virgin was thrown into the Nile as a sacrifice), which is the cere- mony of the cutting of the dam which closes the mouth of the Canal of Cairo, formerly called the Amnis Trajanus, took place, in ancient times, exactly one month before the autumnal equinox. Now, it is by this operation that the inundation is allowed to com- mence, the water being previously confined between its banks, and no other canals being suffered to be before opened to admit the water upon the lands. The Canal of Cairo is now generally cut about a fortnight too early, on account of an old law, which forbids the Sect.L] THE VAGUE YEAR. 5 levying of the land-tax unless the river rise to the height of sixteen cubits ; and, therefore, they assert it to have done so before such is really the case. Thus we find that the true period of the commencement of " the Season of the Inundation " was one month before the autumnal equinox ; and the end, at the winter solstice ; and, consequently, that the Tropical Year anciently in use among the Egyptians commenced at the winter solstice, when all things in Egypt begin anew. The Egyptians had also, in very early times, a year consisting of 365 days, apparently more ancient than the Tropical Year, and consecrated by its antiquity. This year is commonly called " the Vague Year," and was subdivided into twelve months of thirty days each, with an addition of five Epagomense, or intercalary days, after the twelfth month. The great simplicity of this year shows its antiquity. It appears to me most probable that it was instituted shortly after the time of the Deluge (following Hales's Chronology) ; for I find strong reasons for supposing that, at the time of its institution, it commenced with the autumnal equi- nox, which would have been the case at that time. In the astronomical sculptures of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh, we find a symbol of the autumnal equinox represented as one of the divinities of the first month ; and, in like manner, a symbol of the vernal equinox as the god of the seventh month. If the Vague Year were instituted at the remote period which I have mentioned, we may reasonably suppose that they who instituted it imagined that the division of that year into two periods, one of six months, and the other of six months and five days, corresponded to the natural 6 ANTIQUITY OF THE VAGUE YEAR. [Part I. division of a tropical year, commencing with the autumnal equinox. Probably the first colonizers of Egypt brought the Vague Year from the land of Shinar, and instituted the Tropical Year on their settlement in a country of such marked physical phenomena. We find the Vague Year to have been in common use, judging from the inscriptions, at least as early as the time of the Eighteenth Dynasty, in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries B.C. ; and we find its months constantly receiving the same hieroglyphic appellations as the months of the Tropical Year. Thus, the first month of the Vague Year is called " the first month of the Season of Vegetation," and so on. This suggests an interesting inquiry as to when these names were first applied in this manner ; but such an inquiry can lead to no satisfactory result. If any suppose that this happened when the Vague and Tropical Years coin- cided, which was the case in the year B.C. 2005 — a year signalized by the commencement of a great period — let him consider that the Egyptians had, by a suf- ficiently long experience, ascertained that the coin- cidence could not continue. If he imagine that there was a preceding coincidence, and that at that coin- cidence the double application of the names was made by the Egyptians (supposing the Egyptian nation then to have existed), he must not only run counter to all genuine history and tradition, but must attribute to the ancient Egyptians an inconceivable ignorance of as- tronomy ; since, in doing thus, they would have shown themselves ignorant of the relative lengths of the Vague and Tropical Years, and the only persons who could advocate such an idea as that the Egyptians instituted their Vague Year about 8500 B.C. are the Sect. I. LUNAR YEAR. very persons who attribute to them, at that ideal period of their existence, a profound knowledge of astronomy. Sir Gardner Wilkinson has pointed out to me the earliest decided instance hitherto found of the men- tion of the Vague Year, in an inscription of the time of Amenoph I., the second King of the Eighteenth Dynasty, in the Turin Museum, of which he kindly per- mitted me to make a copy, from his own. The men- tion of the 365 days of the year I insert in one of the plates accompanying this volume. (Plate I., No. 2.) Some have supposed that the Egyptian year was originally lunar. Of this I have found no evidence upon the monuments. The names by which the Egyptian months were called (excepting in hieroglyphic inscriptions) in the times of the Ptolemies and Caesars — Thoth, or Thoyth, Paophi, &c. — are never found (as such) in hieroglyphics of any time. We shall presently see that they were chiefly, or wholly, derived from the names of the divinities to which the months were considered sacred. The following are the names of the Egyptian months in the Memphitic dialect, in the first column ; accord- ing to the modern Egyptian pronunciation, in the second column ; and in Greek, in the third column : in each case I have given what appears to me to be the most common mode of writing : — EGYPTIAN MONTHS. [I 1. ecooYT Thoiit. Toot. Thoth. 2. rrxcDi 11 . Athor. Hatoor. 'AOvp. Athyr. 4. XOIXK c^XfeT ^OLUK. Choiak. Kiyahk. Choiak. 5. TCJDBI Tobi. Toobeh. Tybi. 6. Mexij' Mechir. Amsheer. Me^lp, Mechir. 7. ct>xMeNa)e Phamenoth. Barmahat. Phamenoth 8. Ct)X]>MOY©l Pharmuthi. Barmoodeh. ^ap/jLovOl, Pharmuthi. 9. TTXXrjON Pachon. Beshens. Haxciyv, Pachon. 10. TTXa>NI Paoni. Ba-ooneh. Payni. 11. eiTHTTI VW\ lEi'jn(j>t, Epepi. Ebeeb. Epiphi. 12. MeccjopH. Mesore. Misra. Mea-opl. Mesori. [Part I. Sect. I.] THE SOTHIC YEAR. 9 The names in the second column are almost exactly the same in sound as those which we find in books in the Sahidic dialect. The ninth month is called, in the Sahidic dialect, n^tyortc (Pashons) and n^^cyojitc (Pashons); and this, combined with the hieroglyphics, shows that the proper mode of writing it in the Mem- phitic dialect is u^^tjotic (Pachons), and, in Greek, When the Sothic Year, or year which commenced at the rising of Sothis, was first instituted, I think ex- tremely doubtful ; and hitherto I have found it of no use in the application of Egyptian chronology to his- tory. It was probably a year of the priests, used only in times long subsequent to the foundation of the Egyptian kingdom, at least not long before the first Sothic Cycle, which commenced e.g. 1322. It seems to me not improbable that it was then instituted. Its length was the same as that of the Julian. When Egypt had become a province of the Roman empire, Augustus commanded the Egyptians to make use of a Julian year in their public records. But in- stead of making its commencement the same as that of the common Julian Year, the Egyptians made the Vague Year Julian by intercalation ; consequently, the Egyptian Julian Year always commenced on the 29th, or, in the year next after their leap-year, the 30th, of August, O.S., which was the day on which the Vague Year commenced, B.C. 24, when the new reckon- ing began. The Copts and the Egyptian peasants still make use of this year. In hieroglyphics, the symbol of the year was a palm- branch, stripped of its leaves, and with one notch. 10 SYMBOLS OF A YEAR. [Part I. The most common group, signifying "year," is com- posed of this symbolic sign, followed by the sign of the feminine gender, and the restrictive adjunct of solar divisions of time*. It is worthy of remark, that the Arabs make use of a palm-branch stripped of its leaves as a tally by which to keep accounts ; and they use the term ^i^^i^, jereedeh, the name of such a palm-branch, to signify a register ; and the Persians and Turks make use of that word in a similar manner. This, combined with the fact that we find the gods often represented marking the number of the festivals of the King on a palm-branch with many notches, is sufficient to explain the reason why a palm-branch was chosen for the sym- bol of the year. Horapollo Nilous says, with reference to this symbol of the year, after having noticed an- other symbol, " Representing the year otherwise, they delineate a palm-tree, because this tree only, unlike all other trees, at the rising of the moon, [that is, at each new moon,] produces one branch, so that in twelve branches the year is completed." (Kal eVepco* Se eviavTov ypacf^ovres, cfyocviKa ^coypacj^ovo-L, Bia to BtvBpov rovTO fiovov Tcov aXkcov Kara rrjv dvaroX^qv rrjs (TeKr\V7]9, jjbiav f3alv yevvav, ws cv rals BcoBe/ca fidlaiv eviavrov d'TTapTL^ea6ai-\J) And again, in the next chapter, he says, M-riva Se ypdcj^ovreSf ffd'iv ^(oypacpovaiv, k. t. X.t I have not, however, found a palm-tree represented as the symbol of a year, nor a palm-branch as the symbol of a month ; but I have found the many-notched palm- branch used to signify " year" in an inscription of the * See Plate I., No. 2, last three characters. f Hieroglyphics of Horapollo Nilous, Ed. Cory., pp. 9, 10. \ Id. p. 10. Sect. I.] SYMBOL OF A CYCLE. 11 time of Sesertesen I.''^, the first King of the Twelfth Dynasty. It is remarkable that the Egyptians called a cycle " a year," or " a great year," and symbolized it by a palm-branch; and that the Greeks called the Phoenix and the palm-tree by the same name, ^olvl^. * The name of this king will be found a few pages later. The value of the first character in it is doubtful ; and hence it has been also read Osirtesen, and Osortasen, and Usrtesen ; but I have lately found a strong reason for believing the value of the character in question to be " S." SECTION 11. THE TROPICAL CYCLE. One of the most interesting of the monuments of ancient Egypt is the great temple erected by Ra- meses II., the second King of the Nineteenth Dynasty, /Si^ according to Manetho's division, on the western side of the Nile, at Thebes. It is commonly called " the Memnonium ;" but this is an inappropriate appellation, and I prefer calling it " the Rameseum of El-Kurneh." "Rameseum" is the proper name of every building- erected by a Rameses ; and "El-Kurneh" is the modern name of the district in which the temple stands. Among the sculptures of this edifice is one which has deservedly been regarded by the learned as of very great importance. I allude to the famous astronomical ceiling of one of its apartments*. This has been shown to be a record of great value, as affording us means of judging of the astronomical knowledge of the ancient Egyptians at the early period at which it was sculptured, and as indicating, approximatively, the time * See Plate 11. Sect. II.] THE RAMESEUM OF EL-KURNEH. 13 of the reign of Rameses II. ; but beyond this, I know not of its having hitherto conveyed any useful informa- tion to the chronologer or historian. A careful exami- nation, however, has shown me that it affords data for fixing other points of the ancient Egyptian chronology, especially that of the earlier dynasties, respecting which the most approved writers have so greatly dif- fered, that some have placed particular dynasties about a thousand years higher than others. The ceiling above mentioned is of an oblong form, and contains three principal longitudinal divisions, sur- rounded by a narrow border of hieroglyphics. Certain portions of its first division exhibit the coincidence of points of a Vague Year with certain astronomical phe- nomena, and part of the second division relates to the same subject. The upper part of the first division is occupied by a narrow subdivision, running through its entire length, and divided into thirteen spaces, twelve of which have the names of the Egyptian months in- scribed in them, the thirteenth being left vacant for the Epagomense, or ^Ye intercalary days. This vacant space occupies the central position ; the spaces from it to the left extremity of the ceiling containing the names of the first six months, from Thoth to Mechir inclusive ; and those from the right extremity to it, the names of the other six months, from Phamenoth to Mesori. The third division contains representations of the divinities to which the months were consecrated, and of the King performing acts of worship to those divinities. This division I propose first to examine. Before commencing this examination, I must, however, remark, that the sculptures of the first division, com- pared with other monumental data, show us that the ceiling was sculptured in some one of the first 120 14 SYMBOLS OF THE EQUINOXES. [Part I. years of the first Sotliic Cycle, B.C. 1322 to 1202; and it is most probable (as will be shown in the course of this work) that the former of those dates fell in the reign of the immediate predecessor of Rameses II. The third division, like the two others, contains several subdivisions. Commencing our examination from that part which is beneath the space of the Epa- gomense, we find a subdivision which corresponds to that space, and contains a figure of a cynocephalus, the emblem of the god Thoth, seated on what some have supposed to be a Nilometer. Horapollo says, that a sitting cynocephalus denoted the two equinoxes. (^Icrrj/jueplas Bvo irakiv aXov KaOi)- fievov ^(oypacffovcn ^a>ov.)* It is evident, however, that although a sitting cynocephalus denoted the two equi- noxes in the time of Horapollo, according to that author's statement, yet it denoted but one in the time of Rameses II., from its occurring but once in this representation of the year. After an interval of six months, we find a figure which undoubtedly represents the vernal equinox; and, consequently, the cynoce- phalus represents the autumnal equinox t. After the figure of the sitting cynocephalus, we find ten figures of different divinities, and two emblems of physical phenomena, here regarded as divinities, corre- sponding in number to the twelve months, and being the divinities to which the months were consecrated, and from which they chiefly took their names. We must, however, reckon the divinities of the months as thirteen, allotting two to the first month ; for the em- "^ Hieroglyphics of Horapollo Nilous, Ed. Cory., p. 86. f It is well known that, during the interval from the Nineteenth Dynasty to the time at which Horapollo wrote, hieroglyphics had been much corrupted. Sect. II.] GREAT AND LITTLE RUK-H. 15 blem of the autumnal equinox should be included in their number, like that of the vernal equinox, especially as it is also the emblem of Thoth, the god of letters, from whom the first month evidently took its name. The next subdivision to that in which is the cyno- cephalus, contains two figures of the King, standing in an attitude of worship before two divinities. The first of these is goddess of the month of Thoth, which is thus shown to have been consecrated to two divinities. The god of the second month is Ptah, or Phthah, whence probably its name, Paophi, or Pa-ptah, that is, " the month of Ptah." The next subdivision contains figures of the King and of At-hor and Pasht, or Pakht, the goddesses of Athyr and Choiak. Then we find a representation of Khem, the god of Tybi. Beneath the sixth and seventh months, Mechir and Phamenoth, we find two figures of jackals, called, respectively, Ruk-h Ur, and Ruk-h Se, or " the Great Ruk-h," and " the Little Ruk-h." * The latter name might be sup- posed to read " the Son of the Ruk-h," if we did not find it written in other cases " the Little Ruk-h," in a manner that cannot admit of a different interpretation. The hieroglyphic names may be seen in the sketch of the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh, and some variations will be found in the copies of inscriptions in other plates in this work. The significations of Ruk-h, according to Champollion, are " heat," " to burn," and " a live coal." The restrictive adjunct is a small pot, or other vessel, from which a flame issues t. In Coptic we find that several words with the radicals p, K, g, have the same significations. poKg signifies " burn- * See Plate II. f See two forms of writing " Ruk-h" with this restrictive ad. junct, in Plate T., Nos. 3 and 4. 16 VARIOUS SIGNIFICATIONS OF RUK-H. [Parti. ing, consumption, fuel ; to burn, to be burnt," &c. poJKg in like manner signifies " a fire, heat, fire- wood ; to burn, to inflame," &c. peKg signifies " to burn." p^Kge signifies " a live coal," &c. ; and pas^Kgl, " firewood," and, in the plural, " live coals." On com- paring these significations with those of the hiero- glyphic word Ruk-h, we see that its proper meaning was " a live coal," and its tropical meaning, " burn- ing," or " to burn," and thence " heat." I have been thus particular in explaining the various significations of Ruk-h in hieroglyphics, on account of the great im- portance of a fact which I shall have soon to state as one of the proofs of the identity of the second Ruk-h with the vernal equinox. I have now to observe, first, that the places of the two Ruk-hs in relation to the place of the cynoce- phalus, which I have shown to represent one of tlie two equinoxes, suggest that the Second (or Little) Ruk-h also represents an equinox. Secondly, the modern Egyptians, call the vernal equinox " esh-Shems el- Kebeereh" Sij^^^] -mf '-r^^ or "the Great Sun," and a point of time exactly a zodiacal month before that equinox, "esh-Shems es-Sagheereh" if^,JL^i\ rio-iitH or " the Little Sun." These two names are vulgarly pronounced " esh-Shems el-Kebeer," and " esh-Shems es-Sugheiyir." This I consider sufficient to show what are the two Ruk-hs, notwithstanding that the Great Ruk-h precedes the Little, and the Little Sun precedes the Great; for the ancient Egyptians may have had as good a reason for calling the First Ruk-h " great " as the modern Egyptians have for applying that epithet to the Second Sun. But to prove that the Great Ruk-h is identical with the Little Sun, I proceed to observe, thirdly, that the point of time called the Little Sun is Sect. II.] THE VERNAL EQUINOX. 17 also called, in the modern Egyptian almanacs, by a name exactly agreeing with the appellation of ''First Ruk-h,'' namely, "el-Jemreh el-Oola," ^^\ iy^c^\ that is, " the First Live Coal." This must satisfy every one as to the identity of the First Ruk-h with the Little Sun; and the Second Ruk-h is doubtless the Great Sun, although the point of time called the Great Sun is not called, by the modern Egyptians, " the Second Live Coal ;" for they have three " live coals;" the second of which is seven days after the first ; and the third, seven days after the second. The three " live coals" are de- scribed as being three degrees of warmth or heat; so that Ruk-h and Jemreh signify both a live coal, and a particular degree of heat at a particular season of the year. But even this is not all the evidence we have of the identity of the First (or Great) Ruk-h with the pe- riod called by the modern Egyptians the Little Sun, and of the Second (or Little) Ruk-h with the Great Sun, or vernal equinox. In the list of the gods of the months in the great temple of Adfoo, or Apollinopolis Magna, we find, in three cases, the names of divinities followed by the word " Panegyry " (or festival), showing that the Panegyrics of these divinities were celebrated during the months sacred to them. This is the case with the Great Ruk-h ; for, instead of " the Great Ruk-h," as in the Rameseum of El-Kurneh, we find written "Ruk-h Ur Heb," that is, "the Panegyry of the Great Ruk-h; " and thus we find that the Panegyry of the Great Ruk-h was celebrated in Mechir at the time when this record was made. Now it was made in the reign of Ptolemy Euergetes IL, in whose reign, after an interval of about 1500 years from a preceding coincidence of the same kind, the Great Ruk-h began again to fall in Mechir, and the Little Ruk-h in Phamenoth. Such a c 18 INSCRIPTIONS [Parti. coincidence, as I have before shown, most probably marked the institution of the Vague Year; and probably the record of Ptolemy was sculptured as a commemo- ration of a recurrence of this coincidence. Thus I have adduced evidence more than sufficient to establish the point in question. To return to the subject of the divinities of the months. Under the month of Pharmuthi, the King is represented offering incense to the goddess Ren-nu. We next see him standing in an attitude of worship before Khuns, the god of Pachon, as the Greeks wrote the name of the ninth month, which should be written Pachons, that is, Pa-Khuns, " belonging to Khuns." The King is next represented standing before Fen-tee, the god of Payni ; and then, making an offering to the goddess of Epiphi, who has a name that I cannot read with certaihty; and, lastly, to Ra, the god of Mesori. The name of the last month is probably derived from Mes-ra, the hieroglyphic name of the constellation Taurus. The identification of the two Ruk-hs has led me to the discovery of a most important cycle, which fixes with exactitude certain points in the ancient Egyptian chronology. In the celebrated sepulchral grottoes of Benee- Hasan, in Middle Egypt, are two hieroglyphic inscrip- tions of the time of the Twelfth Dynasty, which partly relate to a commencement of the great period just mentioned. I give, in Plate I., Nos. 5 and 6, correct copies, made by me on the spot, of so much of these inscriptions as relates to the subject of which I am now treating. The first extract reads thus : — " The sacrifices and offerings on every Panegyry of Hades : on the Panegyry of the First Year ; [and] the Sect. II.] AT BENEE-HASAN. 19 Panegyry of the beginning of the Year : the Panegyry of the Great Year; [and] the Panegyry of the Little Year : the Panegyry of the end of the Year ; [and] the Panegyry of the Great Festival : on the Panegyry of the Great Ruk-h; [and] on the Panegyry of the Little Rukh: on the Panegyry of the Five Huru of the year, [and] on the Sheteta . . sha : in the Twelfth Panegyrical Month; the Twelfth Division of the Panegyrical Month : every Panegyry of the chief of the plain-country, the good chief of the hill- country." The second inscription is similar in character to the first; chiefly recording offerings made by a person named Nehar, or Nehra, and his father, Num-hotp, or Nev-hotp. In it we find mention of " the Panegyry of the First Year, [and that of] Thoth," of " the Great Panegyry," of the two Ruk-hs, and of the " Twelfth [Panegyrical] Month, the Twelfth Division of the [Panegyrical] Month," of " the Manifestation of Sma," of " the Sixth (?) of the Twelve Asha," of " the Five Huru of the Year," and of " the Manifestation of Sothis," &c. With respect to the text of these inscriptions, I think it necessary here to repeat, that my copies were made with the greatest care ; and to add, that T com- pared other copies, previously published, with the origi- nals, and found them to be incorrect. There is one point in my translations upon which I must here comment. I have rendered the group writ- ten with a dagger and palm-branch in the first inscrip- tion, and with a head and palm-branch in the second inscription, " the First Year." It is well known that the dagger is a sign for the ordinal " first," and it is certain that the head is used in the same manner. In c 2 20 THE TROPICAL CYCLE, [PartL the two cases before us, the ordinal precedes, instead of following, the substantive; and it has been laid down, as a general rule, that ordinal numbers, in hiero- glyphics, follow the substantives to which they apply. Hence some would read this " the Beginning of the Year ;" but I have found abundant evidence to show that the ordinal does sometimes precede the substan- tive. Further, I have found this very group written with the ordinal after the substantive, in inscriptions of the same kind as those before us, though the other form is more usual. The reason for the general devia- tion from common usage, in this particular case, seems to me to have been merely a desire to adopt the com- bination most pleasing to the eye ; for in several in- stances we find the group " First Year " immediately preceded by the group " Beginning of the Year;" and if the group " First Year " were written in the regular manner, both the signs for " Year" would come to- gether ; but if the palm-branch is put after the dagger (as is always the case in these instances), a remarkably symmetrical group is formed. It is evident that the two inscriptions before us re- cord the commencement of a great period. Not only are they remarkable for containing a longer list of Pane- gyries than any others of a similar character that I have seen, but they make mention of two periods which I have not found mentioned on any other Egyptian mo- nument whatever, the Great Year, and the Little Year. It is further remarkable, that the two Ruk-hs are men- tioned in these inscriptions, whereas " the Ruk-h," that is, the Great Ruk-h, is alone mentioned in all the inscrip- tions that I have seen which record the commence- ment of other periods, and celebration of Panegyries, &c., with one exception. I must observe that the other >^cct. II.] ITS LENGTH. 21 periods, the records of the commencement of which have been just alluded to, are not dependent upon, nor connected with, that period of which the commence- ment is recorded in the Benee-Hasan inscriptions. This will be seen to be the case from what I have to say on the Calendar of the Panegyries, and from inscriptions then to be cited. From these considerations it appears that the com- mencement of some very remarkable period, probably connected in some manner with the vernal equinox, or Little Ruk-h, is recorded in the Benee-Hasan inscriptions. What was the nature of this period ? The monuments enable me satisfactorily to answer this question. The persons by or for whom these inscriptions were executed lived in the reigns of Amenemha I,\ the last King of the Eleventh Dynasty, and Sesertesen l.\ Ame- nemha II. ^ and Sesertesen II.*, the first three Kings of (I yvWAv r9\ t I the Twelfth Dynasty ; but the part of the longer inscrip- tion, in which the first extract given by me occurs, relates to events which took place in the reign of Amenemha II. The approximative ancient Egyptian chronology obtained from the true order of the dy- nasties shows that the reign of Amenemha II. fell in the interval from B.C. 1950 to 2050. Now, within this interval the Tropical Year coincided exactly with the Vague Year. Such a coincidence could only happen at intervals of about 1500 Vague Years. The true coin- cidence w^ould be in a somewhat longer period than 22 THE commp:ncement of [Part I. 1500 Vague Years, but I am convinced that that is the length of the Egyptian Tropical Cycle ; because, first, it is composed of a complete number of centuries ; se- condly, because it is nearly luni-solar ; thirdly, because the Egyptians are stated by ancient writers to have had periods of 3000, and of 500 years, the double, and the third of 1500 years, respectively ; and, fourthly, because we cannot suppose the ancient Egyptians to have had a more accurate Tropical Cycle than one of 1500 Vague Years. Thus we see it to be evident that the Egyp- tians had a Tropical Cycle consisting of 1500 Vague Years, from our finding that the coincidence of the Vague and Tropical Years w^hich should mark the com- mencement of such a cycle fell in the interval which the monuments give as the approximative time of the reign of Amenemha II. There is another evidence showing that the cycle which commenced in the reign of Amenemha II. was a Tropical Cycle, the commencement of which was marked by the coincidence of the Tropical and Vague Years. In an inscription in the British Museum, a copy of which is given in that useful work, " Sharpe's Inscriptions from the British Museum" (PI. XVI.), we find records of offerings having been made by or for a person of the name of Hanata, surnamed Ra-num-hat-men, at the commencement of a period which I cannot but con- clude to be the cycle of which I am now treating. The title of the person by or for whom this inscrip- tion was made proves him to have been born in the reign of Amasis, the last monarch of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty ; or, perhaps, during the lifetime of his son, who bore the prenomen of his father (Ra-num-hat) as his own name, and who was a person of great power, apparently a viceroy, in the reign of Darius Hystaspes. Sect. II.] THE TROPICAL CYCLE. 23 I formerly thought that this inscription was made in the time of Ra-num-hat, the supposed viceroy. This may have been the case, though this conclusion cannot be drawn from the inscription, as considered separately from the date which it records. The circumstances which I have stated limit the time at which the in- scription was sculptured to some years subsequent to the year B.C. 570, the earliest date we can reasonably assign to the accession of Amasis ; and in the interval that we thus obtain we find that the Vague and Tropical Years again nearly coincided, at the expiration of an interval of 1500 years after the coincidence in the time of Amenemha II.; for I have clearly shown that the Benee-Hasan inscriptions record the commence- ment of a Tropical Cycle with the coincidence of the Tropical and Vague Years in the reign of that King. I must now proceed to show the particular years in which this cycle commenced. It appears to me that the most appropriate name that we can apply to it is " the Tro- pical Cycle;" for such it was doubtless considered to be by the ancient Egyptians: I formerly called it the Ruk-h Cycle. We cannot but conclude that the Egyptians consi- dered the Tropical Cycle to be a perfectly exact cycle of the sun, moon, and Vague Year; and, consequently, its first year must have been marked by some coincidence of tropical and lunar phenomena on a particular day of the Vague Year. From the mention of both the Ruk-hs in the Benee-Hasan inscriptions, we might infer that the coincidence was that of the new moon and vernal equi- nox ; and all doubt on this point is most satisfactorily removed by the fact that in the Vague Years which commenced on the day of the winter solstice or the day immediately preceding that solstice, the nearest 24 MONUMENTAL DATES. [Part I. approximation to coincidence between the new moon and winter solstice was in that year in which the new moon and vernal equinox still more nearly coincided ; and the same is the case with respect to the Great Ruk-h. Thus I have shown that the Egyptians possessed a Tropical Cycle of 1500 complete Vague Years, which was almost exactly luni-solar, and that its first year was marked by the coincidence, exact,, or approximative, of the new moon and vernal equinox, or Little Ruk-h. I calculated that the new moon and vernal equinox coin- cided in the years B.C. 2005 and 506 ; but a calculation of this kind, referring to so remote a period, being extremely difficult, I applied to the Astronomer Royal, Mr. Airy, requesting that he would cause this and other similar points mentioned in the present work to be examined, and either verified or corrected, by one of his assistants at the Royal Observatory ; and he not only complied with my request, but, with the greatest kindness, revised his assistants' calculations himself. Thus I find, with the utmost certainty, that the new moon of April, B.C. 2005, fell on the 8th (civil) day of that month, and the true vernal equinox fell on the preceding day, namely, the 7th; and that the new moon of March, B.C. 506, fell on the 28th day of that month, and the true vernal equinox on the preceding- day, namely, the 27th. In all cases I use the civil day. For the reader's satisfaction I give Mr. Airy's calcula- tions in an Appendix. The Egyptian monuments, therefore, give us two fixed dates: the commencement of the first Tropical Cycle on the first day of the Tropical and Vague Years, January 7, B.C. 2005, in the reign of Amenemha II., the second King of Manetho's Twelfth Dynasty; and Sect. II.] RECAPITULATION. 25 the commencement of the second Tropical Cycle, De- cember 28, B.C. 507, when Egypt was a province of the Persian Empire under Darius Hystaspes. The date of the commencement of the second Tro- pical Cycle is in a time well known : that of the first is in a time respecting which modern writers have very widely differed ; but it is agreeable with history, sacred and profane ; with the general chronology of the Egyp- tian monuments, and with other dates found on those monuments ; and also nearly with the chronology of Champollion, followed by Rosellini. These learned authors placed the Sesertesens and Amenemhas in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Dynasties, instead of the Eleventh and Twelfth, to which they properly belong ; but they placed them so because they saw that the monuments will not allow of a considerable interval between those Kings and the Eighteenth Dynasty ; and they were not aware that several of the intermediate Dynasties (between the Eleventh and the Eighteenth) were contemporary. This errour, combined with the fact of their placing the Eighteenth Dynasty too early, made them nearly correct as to the age of the Kings in question. I must here add a few words by way of recapitula- tion. As I have proved beyond dispute that the two Ruk-hs designate points in the Tropical Year, a point one zodiacal month before the vernal equinox, and that equinox itself; that an Egyptian tropical cycle would consist of 1 500 Vague Years ; that I find indications of the commencements of such a cycle in hieroglyphic inscriptions ; that one of these points to a period cer- tainly about B.C. 507 ; and the other two point to a period which, according to the approximative chrono- logy obtained from monumental and other data, to be 26 PERIOD OF THE SEPARATE [Part I. given in Part II. of this work, is about 1500 years before the later period; and that the Tropical and Vague Years of the ancient Egyptians coincided at these two periods, as is clearly shown by natural pheno- mena, which are as unvarying as the courses of the planets ; I think every candid reader must admit such testimony to be amply sufficient to establish the point which I have endeavoured to prove. I have discussed the monumental records of the Tro- pical Cycle, and mentioned the remarkable agreement of the dates obtained from that cycle with the most venerable of ancient profane records, and the near agreement of those dates with the opinion of Cham- pollion and Rosellini. It now only remains for me to notice, though but briefly, one confirmation of the duration which I have assigned to the Tropical Cycle, and its connection with the period of the separate state of the soul, an important point in the ancient Egyptian mythology ; leaving many chronological and historical confirmations for the second part of this work, to which they more properly belong. Herodotus^ tells us, that the Egyptians held the doctrines of the immortality of the soul, and Metem- psychosis, and believed the time of the absence of the soul from a human body to be 3000 years. Now, this is the double of a Tropical Cycle ; and, accordingly, we find, upon mummy-cases and funereal tablets, representa- tions of two sitting jackals, the emblems of the Ruk-hs. The jackal is also an emblem of the god Anubis or Ap-heru, who is represented with a jackal's head, and the latter of whose names these sitting jackals com- monly bear. The signification of Anup, the Egyptian * Herod, ii. 128. Sect. II.] STATE OF THE SOUL. 27 form of Anubis, is not known ; but that of Ap-heru evidently relates to the paths of the sun. Plutarch tells us that some held the opinion that Anubis was Time. At all events, it is obvious that Anubis was con- nected with the sun or the ecliptic, and, consequently, with the Ruk-hs ; and hence it appears to me very pro- bable that the two jackals represented on the mummy- cases, and on funereal tablets, refer to the period during which the soul was supposed to be absent from a human body. SECTION III. THE SOTHIC CYCLE. The first division of the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh* contains representations of certain stars and asterisms, placed beneath those months of the Vague Year in which they rose heliacally, using the term in its Egyptian acceptation. The first of these representations is a boat, in which stands a female figure, shown by her name and position to be Isis- Sothis (commonly called Sothis), the Sirius of the Greeks and moderns. The head of this figure is beneath the commencement of Thoth, the first month. It is uni- versally acknowledged that this figure and place of Sothis represent the so-called heliacal rising of that star, which was a phenomenon of the greatest import- ance in the ancient Egyptian calendar. It is as well known and established that the Egyptians had a great cycle of 1460 Julian and 1461 Vague Years, the com- mencement of w^iich was marked by the rising of Sothis, in a certain manner, hitherto called " the heliacal rising," on the first day of the first month of the Vague Year. It is equally certain that one of these great cycles, called the "Sothic Cycles," commenced on the 20th of July, B.C. 1322 ; and it is generally acknow- ledged, having been first pointed out by the learned and accurate Sir Gardner Wilkinson, that the representation in the Rameseum of El-Kurneh dates about, or shortly * See Plate II. Sect. III.] " RISING OF SOTHIS. 29 before, the commencement of that cycle which began B.C. 1322*. Since the head of the figure of Sothis is beneath the commencement of the first month, Thoth, it is evident, especially when we compare this with the other representations of the same division, that, at the time when this record was sculptured, Sothis rose in the manner which then marked the commencement of the cycle in the beginning or course of Thoth, the first month. I must now notice some remarkable par- ticulars connected with the Sothic Cycle, which are very important in this place; not only as further ex- plaining the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh, but also as giving us great insight into the astronomy of the ancient Egyptians at a very early period. It seems to have been either assumed or conceded by every one who has written on this subject, that Sothis rose heliacally at Memphis or Thebes, or at some intermediate place, on the 20th of July, B.C. 1322 ; but when it is suggested to the astronomer that he should not accept this assertion without testing its accuracy, a few minutes' consideration will suffice to convince him that it is untrue; although it must be admitted that, on the day above mentioned, there was a certain rising of Sothis, which marked the com- mencement of a Sothic Cycle. Since Sothis now rises heliacally at Memphis on or about the 20th of July, O.S., and at Thebes on or about the 17th of the same month, it is evident that in the year B.C. 1322 it must have risen heliacally some days earlier than the 20th of July. (The modern days of rising just mentioned are roughly calculated by me ; assuming an arc of depression of 10°. It is probable that we should be * Ancient Egyptians, 2nd Series, vol. i., pp. 377, 378. 30 RISING OF SOTHIS. [Part I. justified in assuming a smaller arc of depression, con- sidering the intense brilliancy of Sirius ; but as the preceding calculations needed only to be approxima- tive, it was not necessary to be particularly exact as to this point in this instance.) Thus the rising of Sothis on the 20th of July, B.C. 1322, which marked the com- mencement of the earliest known Sothic Cycle, was not what the astronomers call the heliacal rising. When I first published my opinion on this point, I said that, " according to my calculation, about twenty days after the heliacal rising of Sothis (or Sirius), that star rose at the point of the first clear indication of the morning- light at Memphis on the 20th of July, B.C. 1322." I stated this with a feeling of certainty that I was cor- rect in the conclusion that Sothis rose some time before the time of heliacal rising on the day in ques- tion, though I expressed diffidence as to the exactness of my result, which made the rising at Memphis to be about two hours before sunrise. Hence I supposed that the phenomenon which marked the commence- ment of the cycle of B.C. 1322 was the rising of Sothis at the time above mentioned, and that the so-called heliacal risings of the ancient Egyptians (I mean what are so called by some writers) were phenomena of the same kind. Being in Egypt at the time when I pub- lished these observations, and having no tables by means of which I could make accurate sidereal calcu- lations of this difficult nature, I was unable to arrive nearer the truth. Through the kindness of the As- tronomer Royal, I can now state the correct interval from the rising of Sothis to that of the sun at the time in question ; and thus I find that I have to alter my opinion on this point, though, at the same time, it is incontestably proved that I was right when I said that Sect. III.] CALENDAR OF MEDEENET-HABOO. 31 Sothis did not rise heliacally either at Thebes or Memphis on the 20th of July, ^.c. 1322. The calculation made for me at the Royal Observa- tory gives an interval of one hour, sixteen minutes, twenty-three seconds, from the rising of Sothis to that of the sun, at Thebes, on the 20th of July, b,c. 1322. From this I find that on the same day at Memphis, Sothis rose very little more than one hour before the sun ; and thus we see that the phenomenon which marked the commencement of the Sothic Cycle that began in the year B.C. 1322 was the rising of Sothis about one hour before sunrise at Memphis on the 20th of July, w^hich then corresponded to the first day of the Vague Year. On the monuments we find frequent mention of " the Manifestation," or " Appearance," " of Sothis ;" * and this is evidently the Egyptian term for the rising which marked the commencement of the Sothic Cycle that began in the year B.C. 1322. Consequently, we may say that the actual occurrence of " the Manifesta- tion of Sothis " on the first day of the first month of the Vague Year, or, at least, during that month, is recorded in the representations of the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh. But Rameses III., the fourth legitimate successor of Rameses II., records, in a calendar of festivals inscribed on the great temple erected by him in western Thebes (the Rameseum of Medeenet-Haboo), that in his reign, " the Manifesta- tion of Sothis " took place on the first day of Thoth, the first month ; although, from the interval between the reigns of Rameses II. and Rameses III., it is obvious that Sothis could not have risen visibly before the sun on the first day of Thoth in the reign of the >!* See Plate I., No. 7. 32 CELEBRATION OF RISING OF SOTHIS. [Parti. latter King ; yet I have no doubt that the Calendar of Medeenet-Haboo is one of a Vague Year ; and it ap- pears that the Panegyry of " the Manifestation of Sothis" (the rising one hour before the sun) con- tinued to be celebrated on the first day of Thoth as long as the phenomenon occurred in the course of that month ; that is, for the space of 120 Julian years. Hence it appears that the position of Sothis in the sculptures of the ceiling of the Rameseum of El- Kurneh shows that at the time at which those sculp- tures were executed the manifestation of Sothis was celebrated on the first day of Thoth vague ; and thus we see the date of this record to be within the first hundred and twenty Julian years of the Sothic Cycle that commenced during the Nineteenth Dynasty, or from the year B.C. 1322 to 1202. There are two important inquiries respecting the Sothic Cycle which remain to be noticed : the con- nection of these cycles with history, and the question as to whether there were any Sothic Cycles before that commencing in the year B.C. 1322, the earliest recorded by ancient WTiters of any authority. The first known Sothic Cycle commenced on the 20th July, B.C. 1322, as already mentioned ; and the second, on the same day, a.d. 139. It is well known that the latter epoch fell in the reign of the Emperor Antoninus Pius, and we find allusions to it on the coins of his reign*. It is the commencement of the earlier cycle, in the year B.C. 1322, which is the more important, as aifording an approximative date in the chronology of Manetho's Nineteenth Dynasty, if we can satisfactorily ascertain in whose reign it took place. * V. Zoega Num. Mg. referred to by Sharpe, in his valuable History of Egypt, new edition, p. 418. Sect. III.] MENOPHRES. 33 The well-known passage of Theon Alexandrinus, given by Cory in his " Ancient Fragments," * speaks of the commencement of the Sothic Cycle which com- menced in the year B.C. 1322 in terms which justify us in saying that it was called the Era of Menophres. To which of the Pharaohs is this name applied ? It has been suggested that MENOOPH2 is a corruption of some Greek transcription of the name Men-ptah, or Men-phthah. On the monuments we find four Kings bearing the name of Men-path ; Men-ptah Sethee I., the father of Rameses II.; Men-ptah Hotp-har(?)- tma, the son, and Men-ptah Si-ptah, the son-in-law, of the latter King ; and Men-ptah Sethee II., his second legitimate successor. I have shown that the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh dates during the first hundred and twenty years of the Sothic Cycle which I am considering ; and, consequently, the Menophres of the Sothic Cycle would be Men-ptah Sethee I., the if father and immediate predecessor of Rameses II. This is confirmed by our finding that the earliest astrono- mical ceiling which has been discovered is that of the great chamber of his tomb, in which Sothis occupies a conspicuous position. The chronology of the Nine- teenth Dynasty, as obtained from Manetho, shows, on being compared with the records of the risings of Sothis, that this Sothic Cycle cannot have commenced before the reign of Men-ptah Sethee I., whom Manetho calls * Second edit., pp. 329, 330. 34 KINGS NAMED SETHEE. [Parti. Setlios, or Sethosis. It is very remarkable that all tlie Kings whose names are derived from that of Seth, to whom Sothis was considered sacred, as well as to Isis, reigned, or came to the throne, during the interval in which the manifestation of Sothis was celebrated on the first day of Thoth vague. These Kings are Men- ptah Sethee I., Men-ptah Sethee II., and Seth-nekht, the father of Rameses III. Each of these Kings is likewise called after Osiris, in some instances; thus, Osiree I., Osiree II., and Osir-nekht. The mutual resemblance of the names Osiris and Sirius is here worthy of notice, more especially since relation to Isis implies relation to Osiris. In the nomen of Sir Gardner Wilkinson's Rameses VI. there is a title con- nected with Seth ; but this title was not assumed on his coming to the throne : it was evidently given him with the name Rameses at his birth ; for we find him bear- ing that name and title as a prince in the Rameseum of Medeenet-Haboo ; and hence we cannot doubt that he was named (probably at his birth) during the in- terval in which the manifestation of Sothis was cele- brated on the first day of Thoth. I know of no other King's name, nor of any other royal title, at all connected with Seth ; and this appears to me to be a remarkable confirmation of the conclusion that the Sotliic Cycle of B.C. 1322 commenced in the reign of Sethee I. We do not know, it is true, when that King was called Sethee; but it is most probable that he took that name at his accession. I cannot, however, omit to notice in this place the reason for the consecration of Sothis to Isis as well as Seth, and for the Kings being called sometimes Sethee, sometimes Osiree. The ancient Egyptians, in their mythology, according to the Sect. III.] OSIRIS, ISIS, AND SETH. 35 opinion now generally held, personified what they re- garded as the beneficent power of nature, calling it Osiris and Isis ; and they called what they considered the destroying power of nature, or, rather, physical evil, Seth, whom the Greeks called Typhon. Sothis was considered sacred to both powers ; since, at the time of its rising, they were considered as conflicting ; for the Nile then began to show the first symptoms of rising, and, at the same time, the great heat was parch- ing up the cultivable soil. It only remains to consider the question, whether there were any Sothic Cycles before that which com- menced in the year B.C. 1322, a question of the utmost importance, and therefore deserving the most careful consideration. So many systems of Egyptian chro- nology have been constructed by modern writers upon the supposition that there were Sothic Cycles before the year B.C. 1322, that every one who attempts to elucidate the ancient Egyptian chronology is bound to give his reasons for adopting or rejecting this opinion. In the present, as in every other branch of this inquiry, we have two kinds of testimony to appeal to, before we give our assent or denial to the opinion in question. We nmst examine the statements of ancient writers, and the records upon the monuments of Egypt, and first the latter. The Egyptian monuments do not enable us to accept or deny the opinion that there were Sothic Cycles before the Era of Menophres on direct evidence. They furnish an argument against that opinion ; but it is only founded upon negative, not on affirmative, evi- dence. We find no direct mention whatever, as far as I know, of any Sothic Cycle upon the monuments, although we do find records of other periods, one of D 2 36 EARLIEST SOTHIC CYCLE [Part L which is a cycle. Consequently, as we know that a Sothic Cycle did commence during the Nineteenth Dy- nasty, and yet find no direct mention of that cycle in the inscriptions of the time, why, it may be asked, were there no Sothic Cycles before this one, alike un- mentioned on the monuments ? But we do find certain indications of the Sothic Cycle which commenced in the year B.C. 1322 in the astronomical ceilings of the tombs of Sethee I. and other Kings, and in the sculp- tures of the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh ; and we find no similar indications in earlier periods, though older inscriptions, those of the times of the Fourth and Twelfth Dynasties, abound in mentions of periods of time. We find, moreover, that the ancient Egyptians possessed a series of chronological periods commencing in the year B.C. 2717, and that these periods were independent of any Sothic Cycles, although one of them was a cycle, similar in character and length to the Sothic. A comparison of my system of Egyptian chronology with the statements of ancient writers will be seen to show that the Egyptians had no historical chronology before the year B.C. 2717; that this date, which is less than the length of a Sothic Cycle before the Era of Menophres, is the date of the commencement of their existence as a nation. This is, in my opinion, conclusive. The evidence of ancient writers, considered separately from what I have just mentioned, is also strongly against the opinion that there were Sothic Cycles before the Era of Menophres. No ancient writer of the least authority, none but the impostors who composed such works as the " Book of Sothis," and the ^' Old Chronicle," and their followers, speak of Sothic Cycles before the year B.C. 1322 ; and Sect. III.] THAT OF MENOPHRES. 37 the very name of the Era of Menophres seems to point to a new institution, and not to the renewal of a cycle. It has been said that the reigns of the gods are composed of a certain number of Sothic Cycles ; and that the Turin List of Kings, or Royal Papyrus, a re- cord of the Nineteenth, or some subsequent Dynasty, favours this opinion. But who can base a chronolo- gical argument upon a mythological computation? Even if any hold that it is a chronological computa- tion, to say that the Sothic Cycle is older than the Nineteenth Dynasty because the reign of the gods is reckoned by Sothic Cycles (admitting this to be the case) is just as reasonable as to say that the Julian year is as old as the creation because chronologers make use of it in computing the chronology of the world from the creation to the present time. From the facts which I have stated, it is evident that neither the Egyptian monuments, nor ancient writers of authority, afford us any single argument in favour of the supposition that there were Sothic Cycles, or even that there was one Sothic Cycle, before that which commenced in the year B.C. 1322; but, on the contrary, give us several arguments against that sup- position, one of which appears to me to be perfectly conclusive; and all of which, when considered care- fully, and weighed against the want of evidence on the other side, show satisfactorily that there is no reason whatever for saying that there was even one Sothic Cycle before the year B.C. 1322. The remark of Clemens Alexandrinus, that the Israelites went out of Egypt 345 years before the Sothic period, (yLverat rj e^oBos Kara Ivw^ov irpo t7J9 X(oOtaK7]s TrepcoBov, e^ekOovros air AlyvTTTov Maxreas 38 CLEMENS ALEXANDRINUS QUOTED. [Parti. tT6(TL iTpOTepov TpiaKoatois reacrapaKovra invTe: " Stro- mata," i.,) I have not adduced in the preceding inquiry respecting the antiquity of the Sothic Cycle (although it seems decidedly in favour of my view of the case), since I admit none but arguments of the strongest kind. SECTION IV. THE PHCENIX CYCLE. I MUST now beg the reader to turn his attention again to the astronomical sculptures of the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh'^, that he may understand the bases upon which I found my identification of the Phoenix, and consequent discovery of the Phoenix Cycle. It will be necessary to examine the representations contained in the first and second divisions of the ceiling, and to decide what these representations indicate. After the representation of Sothis, upon which I have already commented, in the first division, we find several similar representations, which I proceed to examine in regular order, that is, from right to left. We find, three times represented, under the second, third, and fourth, months, the figure of Horns in a boat, with a star above his head. As Achilles Tatius tells us that the Egyptians considered the planet Mercury sacred to Apollo (Horns), it may be supposed, as I formerly concluded, that these figures represent some phenomena of that planet ; but these and other minor points, which, as far as I know, do not lend any aid to the investigations which are the subject of this work, I need not discuss. Next to the last representation of Horus, beneath the same month, we find a constellation represented by two tortoises, and called Shetu, the situation of which, with respect to Sirius, seems to show that it * See Plate II. 40 THE PHCENIX REPRESENTED IN [Parti. is the zodiacal constellation Libra, which would rise at this period in the same manner as Sothis rose in Thoth. That the two tortoises were a constellation in the astronomy of the ancient Egyptians is proved by our finding them represented as such in an astrono- mical representation on a mummy-case, copied in plate c. of the Bishop of Gibraltar's valuable paper on this subject*. Continuing our examination, we are next struck by finding, beneath the sixth month, the figure of a Phoenix, accompanied by the name Ben-nu Osirt, that is, " the Phoenix of Osiris." As it is unaccompanied by any star or group of stars, it might be supposed to be strictly a chronological representation, indicating the commencement of a Phoenix period at the time at which this record was sculptured ; but the astronomical representation already referred to clears up this dif- ficulty, showing that this figure of the Phoenix repre- sents a constellation. When I first published my opinions on Egyptian chronology, I supposed this con- stellation or asterism to be composed of a Aquilse, and the stars in its immediate neighbourhood, judging from the interval between the rising of Sirius and that of a Aquilae at the present day. I find, however, from the calculations made at the Royal Observatory, one of which gives the time of the rising of a Aquilae at a period between six and seven centuries before the Era of Menophres, that we must not limit the ancient Egyptian constellation to the stars I have mentioned. I think it most probable that the constellation of the Phoenix corresponded to Cygnus, the "Bird" {''Opvis) * Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature, vol. iii., part 2. t See Plate II. Sect. IV.] THE EAMESEUM OF EL-KURNEH. 41 of the Greeks, and perhaps also included Aquila, or corresponded to part of each of those constellations. Here I would particularly beg the reader to remark, that when I speak of an ancient Egyptian constella- tion corresponding to a constellation as laid down in our maps, I mean that they corresponded more nearly than any others, or that the one was included in the other. This constellation, therefore, rose during Mechir, the sixth month, in the same manner as Sothis rose in Thoth ; that is to say, its principal, or last, star so rose. Proceeding with the examination of this division of the ceiling, we find, under the ninth month, a repre- sentation of the Boat of the Sun ; and under the tenth month, a representation of a ram or sheep. It is re- markable that these occupy the places which corre- spond to a supposed constellation containing the star called Markab, V'^^, that is, the "Ship" or "Boat," in Arabic ; and to Aries ; if we infer that they are re- presented as rising, in the same manner as Sothis did in the first month, in the months under which they are placed ; and this I formerly believed to be the case ; but I am now convinced that they belong to the Calendar of the Decans, which will be the subject of the next section. The same is the case with two other representations in this part of the first division. The second division has, like the others, several ver- tical subdivisions, the central of which nearly corre- sponds to Mesori and the Epagomense, and contains re- presentations of six constellations or asterisms, which rose during this portion of the year in the same man- ner as Sothis did in Thoth. Among these are the Bull, with the hieroglyphic name Mes-ra, undoubtedly the zodiacal constellation Taurus ; and a hawk-headed 42 THE BENNU AND REKHEET. [Part I. figure which I cannot doubt to be Orion. Plutarch tells us that Orion was the constellation of Horus, who is one of the gods whom we find represented on the monuments with a hawk's head. I have shown in the preceding remarks, that an asterism or constellation partly or wholly corresponding to Cygnus, and, perhaps, also to Aquila, is represented in the sculptures of the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh by the Phoenix, called in hieroglyphics " the Phoenix of Osiris," Bennu Osir. There can be no doubt that the Bennu is the Phoenix. The figure of a bird with human hands'^, which some have supposed to represent the Phoenix, is known from its name, Rekheet, properly to signify "a pure soul." This, indeed, is shown also to emblematize some period or cycle, by a passage in the hieroglyphic inscriptions of the Sarco- phagus of Queen Ankh-nes, in the British Museum, which speaks of " the period of pure souls."t It, how- ever, evidently does not refer to the true Phoenix Cycle, but to the cycle of the separate state of the soul, which I have already shown to have been probably a longer period than what I shall prove the Phoenix Cycle to be. The Phoenix is historical ; but the other period, merely mythical, and not commencing from any one fixed date, but from the time of each person's death, accord- ing to the mythology of the ancient Egyptians. Still, as the period of the separate state of the soul was em- blematized by a bird, generally represented with a partly human form, but sometimes by a simple bird, it is very easy to see that it may have been confounded, in late times, with the Phoenix Cycle. * See Plate I., Nos. 8 and 9. f Ibid., No. 9. Sect. IV.] THE PHCENIX CYCLE. 43 I have shown what the Phoenix was in the astronomy of the ancient Egyptians. Ancient writers tell us of the appearance of the Phoenix at various times : this must have been the appearance of the constellation, or of its most remarkable star ; and, as the rising of Sothis about one hour before sunrise is what is meant, in hierogly- phics, by the expression, "the appearance" or "mani- festation" of that star, the appearance of the Phoenix was evidently the rising of that constellation, that is, of its principal, or of its last, star, at the same time before sunrise. But the commencement of the first Sothic Cycle was marked by the rising of Sothis about one hour before sunrise on the first day of the Vague Year ; and, consequently, we might conclude that the Phoenix Cycle commenced when some particular star of that ancient Egyptian constellation rose at the same time on the first day of the Vague Year. I shall be able to show, in a subsequent place (Sect. 6), that a subdivision of a cycle exactly similar to the Phoenix had been pre- viously instituted; and a commencement of a cycle beginning with one of those subdivisions was called the appearance of the Phoenix, from the circumstance that "the manifestation" of a principal star of that constellation at that time fell in the first month of the Vague Year, and was celebrated, according to Egyptian usage, on the first day of that month. Now, since the commencement of each Phoenix Cycle was marked by the occurrence or celebration of the phenomenon just mentioned on a particular day of the Vague Year, it is obvious that the Phoenix Cycle was composed of about 1460 Julian, or 1461 Vague Years, like the Sothic, being as correct a cycle of that nature as the Egyptians could form from observation ; and from these consider- 44 LENGTH OF THE PH(ENIX CYCLE. [PartL ations, we see that the representations of the ceiling of the Rameseum fix the commencement of a Phoe- nix Cycle to some one of the years B.C. 2042 to 1923 inclusive, and give an idea of its length. This is too obvious to demand explanation. Tacitus, speaking of the Phoenix, in a well-known passage, says, " Concerning the number of years there are various accounts: the most common period is 500 : some assert that the interval is 1461 ; and that former birds flew to the city called Heliopolis, accom- panied by many other fowls which were astonished at the strange appearance, first in the reign of Sesostris, afterwards in that of Amasis, and then in that of Pto- lemy, who was the third Macedonian sovereign." (De numero annorum varia traduntur. Maxime vulgatum quingentorum spatium ; sunt qui adseverent mille qua- dringentos sexaginta unum interjici. Prioresque alites Sesostride primum, post Amaside, dominantibus ; dein Ptolemseo, qui ex Macedonibus tertius regnavit, in civi- tatem, cui Heliopolis nomen, advolavisse, multo cetera- rum volucrum comitatu, novam faciem mirantium"^.) This statement enables us to obtain nearer approxi- mative dates of two appearances of the Phoenix ; for the reign of Amasis lasted from the year B.C. 570 to 525, at most, and this falls within the approximative ex- tremes obtained from the representations of the ceiling of the Rameseum. But before proceeding in this in- vestigation, I must remark that the smaller periods, with one of which the Phoenix commenced, show that the duration of that period was 1461 Julian years, not 1460. This would make the cycle slightly inaccurate, so that, after 5844 years, there would be an errour of a * An. vi. 28. Sect. IV.] ITS COMMENCEMENTS. 45 day in the coincidence of the Vague and Julian Years. The prospect of this errour, however, is not likely to have been regarded by the originators of the Egyptian system. Assuming this duration of 1461 years to be correct, and I shall soon be able to state my reasons for believing in its correctness, we obtain approxi- mations to the dates of the first two appearances of the Phoenix mentioned by Tacitus much nearer than those obtained from the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kur- neh ; namely, some time in the reign of Amasis, B.C. 570 to 525, the appearance of the Phoenix of Amasis ; and 1461 Julian years earlier, B.C. 2031 to 1986, the ap- pearance of the Phoenix of Sesostris ; and this latter date agrees with my approximative chronology of the Twelfth Dynasty, previously obtained from the com- mencement of the Tropical Cycle in the reign of Amen- emha II. The Phoenix of the third Macedonian King, as Tacitus terms one of the Ptolemies, I shall have to notice in a future page. Before I discovered the true Phoenix Cycle, I had concluded that the ancient Egyptians made use of a chronological period of 365 Julian years, to which I gave the appellation of the Great Panegyrical Year, and that four of those periods composed a cycle of 1460 Julian years. I calculated, also, that two of those periods of 365 Julian years commenced B.C. 1985-4 and 525-4. Since publishing that opinion, I have been induced, by a change in my views respecting the length of a small subdivision of the Great Panegyrical Year (to be explained when I come to treat of that period), to determine its mean length to be 365| Julian years, and the dates of commencements which I have just mentioned to be January 2nd, B.C. 1986, and the same day B.C. 525. Since both fall within the approximative 46 THE PHCENIX CYCLE FIXED [Part I. limits of the commencements of two Phoenix Cycles, I conclude that these two dates of the commencements of Great Panegyrical Years are likewise the dates of the appearances of the Phoenixes of Sesostris and Amasis, and that the Great Panegyrical Year commencing in the year B.C. 1986, and each following one, began with a quarter of a Phoenix Cycle. It is evident that a cycle commencing with that Great Panegyrical Year which began in the year B.C. 1986 was called a Phoenix Cycle, because at its commencement the manifestation of the Phoenix was celebrated on the first day of Thoth. Thus we obtain the true dates of the appearances of the Phoe- nix ; first, approximatively, from the astronomical sculp- tures of the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh; then, more nearly, but still approximatively, from the remarkable record, perhaps derived from Manetho, transmitted to us by Tacitus ; and then, at last, truly and accurately, from the commencements of Panegyrical periods, fixed by means of the recorded dates on the ancient Egyptian monuments. No one of these steps in the process of fixing the commencement of the most perplexing of ancient periods is in any way dependent on another : all are independent, separate, and pos- sessed of high authority. It is to be remembered, also, that when I wrote on the Great Panegyrical Year, I had not formed even a guess, much less an opinion, as to the length and character of the Phoenix Cycle ; so that I had in fact already determined it, before I was aware of there being any record of it upon the ancient Egyp- tian monuments. It is also to be remembered, that the Great Panegyrical Year was not a subdivision of the Phoenix Cycle before the appearance of the Phoenix of Sesostris. Any one who will consider these things will be convinced that the Phoenix, that mythic bird, Sect. IV.] BY MONUMENTAL EVIDENCE. 47 respecting which the learned have been at variance from the times of the Greeks and Romans to the pre- sent day, is at length identified, and that the period of its appearance is ascertained, so that it can be no longer said that the most interesting of the Egyptian cycles is only explained by conjecture. Its importance to chronology and history is very great : from it we find who was the Sesostris of the Phoenix, and obtain another date, besides that of the commencement of the Tropical Cycle, in the remote age of the Twelfth Dynasty. It would be interesting could we ascertain what is the star with the manifestation of which the Phoenix Cycles commenced; but it is to be feared that this can- not as yet be satisfactorily ascertained. I speak of the manifestation of the star for brevity's sake in this place, meaning, as must be evident from what I have already said, either the manifestation or the celebration of that phenomenon. When I first published on Egyptian chronology, I concluded that the commence- ment of the Phoenix Cycle was marked by " the rising of a Aquila) at the time of the first clear indi- cation of the morning-light on the first day of the vague Thoth." I was, however, in errour as to the time before sunrise at which a Aquilse rose at the commence- ment of the first Phoenix Cycle ; for one of the calcu- lations made for me at the Royal Observatory, through Mr. Airy's kindness, and verified by him, gives the rising of a Aquilae on January 2nd, B.C. 1985, as two hours, seventeen minutes, forty-five seconds, before the sun, at Thebes. This calculation was made for the first date that I assigned to the commencement of the first Phoenix Cycle. I now have ascertained the date to be one year earlier; but the difference in this case is 48 THE PHCENIX OF SESOSTRIS. [Parti. not material. Hence we see that the year B.C. 1986 was within the period of 120 years, during which the manifestation of a Aquilse may have been celebrated on the first day of Thoth; and it is not improbable, from its being the most remarkable star in what probably composed the constellation called by the Egyptians the Phcenix, that it was the star which marked the com- mencement of the Phoenix periods. Before noticing briefly the other statements respect- ing the Phoenix, to be found in the works of ancient writers, I must make some remarks upon the King in whose reign the first appearance of the Phoenix hap- pened, namely, Sesostris. As I have shown the date of this occurrence to have been in the year B.C. 1986, it is evident that the King is the Sesostris of Manetho, the third King of Manetho's Twelfth Dynasty, and not the Sesostris of Herodotus, the second King of Mane- tho's Nineteenth Dynasty. We must now endeavour to ascertain to what King mentioned in the hieroglyphic inscriptions the Sesostris of Manetho corresponds. In the list called the Tablet of Abydos, Sesertesen II. corresponds to Manetho's Sesostris; but in the list of the Chamber of Kings, two erased names occur in the places of Sesertesen II. and III., and Amenemha III.; and, consequently, we cannot say whether in this list Sesertesen II. or III. occupies the place of Mane- tho's Sesostris. But what Manetho says respecting his Sesostris plainly shows him to be Sesertesen III. ¥ r¥\ After having given a short account of the conquests of Sect. IV.] THE SESOSTRIS OF MANETHO. 49 Sesostris, the historian tells us that he was considered bj the Egyptians as the first after Osiris. The only true explanation of this passage is, that this King was con- sidered by the Egyptians as the greatest of mortals, and to be honoured next after Osiris, " the youngest of the gods." This explanation is most strikingly con- firmed by a fact of which very remarkable instances are found in some of the unpublished papers of Sir Gardner Wilkinson, which he has kindly shown me, as well as in his published works ; that in numerous sculp- tures in Nubia we find Kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, of the Thothmes family, worshipping Sesertesen III. as a god, and that this is the only case of the kind; for although we find one solitary case of another early monarch being worshipped, and some cases of several monarchs being worshipped together, and several cases of Kings worshipping their fathers or other progenitors, yet, as far as I know, we never find another instance of a King of any dynasty being frequently represented as a god, and worshipped, in sculptures of other Kings not of the same dynasty*. On these grounds, I cannot hesitate for a moment to decide that Sesertesen III. is the Sesostris of Manetho. A question here arises, how- ever, since it is evident from this that Sesertesen is the Egyptian name which the Greeks write Sesostris. Is each of the three Sesertesens a Sesostris? We may, indeed, reasonably suppose that this similarity of name has caused some confusion; and there seems to be scarcely any doubt that two of the Sesertesens have been celebrated under the name of Sesostris. If we * The lists of Kings in the second part of this work, and my reasons for their arrangement, will explain any difficulties which may occur to the reader with reference to the order of the different Kings and dynasties. E 60 THE LITTLE YEAR. [Part I. were to consider which of the three Kings was the Sesostris famous for his conquests, we should at once say Sesertesen I., who appears undoubtedly to have been the most powerful monarch of his dynasty. It seems to me that Sesertesen I. is Sesostris the conqueror, and Sesertesen III. Sesostris the lawgiver, though I see no reason for supposing that the latter King did not distin- guish himself by foreign conquests. Some may object to this explanation, that the Egyptians could not have had a great conqueror among their Kings while the Shepherds were in Egypt. This is an erroneous suppo- sition : the Shepherd-Kings of the Fifteenth Dynasty were merely contemporary Kings ruling in Lower Egypt, and in the time of Sesertesen I. most probably at peace with the Egyptians, and probably the Egyptians were aided by them. The whole history of the Pharaohs shows that they had often foreign troops; mercenaries, or allies, or both. In accordance with what Tacitus remarks, we find that the most common period assigned to the return of the Phoenix, by ancient writers, was 500 years; and Herodotus, among the Greeks, and Horapollo, among the Egyptians, with many others, speak of the same period of 500 years. I think it most probable that this is " the Little Year " mentioned in the longer Benee-Hasan inscription. Since it is there mentioned immediately after " the Great Year," it ap- pears to have been connected with that period, which I have shown to be the Tropical Cycle of 1500 Vague Years, and to have commenced with it. Its most pro- bable length would be 500 years, which would, if com- posed of Vague Years, exactly correspond to one-third of the Tropical Cycle, and be the period in which the Vague Year retrograded through one season of the Tro- Sect. IV.] FABULOUS BIRDS. 51 pical Year, according to the Egyptians. It is possible, however, that the Little Year may be the Twenty-five- year Cycle, also mentioned by ancient writers, which was almost a perfect cycle of lunations and Vague Years. It is necessary here to remark, that the Phoenix was supposed by Greek and Roman writers, and even by some of the Egyptians themselves, in late times, that is, during the Roman domination, and perhaps the Greek, to return at periods which had no connection whatever with the true Phoenix Cycle. The difficulties produced by this confusion are removed by the dis- covery of the true period. The modern Persians and Arabs relate many mar- vellous things concerning a gigantic bird or birds which they call the " RukhV fj, " 'Anka," ^liLx-, and " See- murgh," c. j-^-wj. El-Kazweenee gives an account of the 'Anka, which resembles the well-known fable of the Phoenix. My uncle (Mr. E. W. Lane) has noticed this account in the notes of his " Translation of the Thousand and One Nights,"* remarking on the simi- larity of the two fables. El-Kazweenee states the period of the life of the 'Anka to be 1700 years. It is very remarkable that the cycle of the separate state of the soul was supposed to be a period of twice the length of the Tropical Cycle, and was apparently em- blematized by two jackals, the emblems of Anubis and the Ruk-hs, and was also emblematized certainly by a bird, called Rekheet, or " the pure soul," its name being " the period of pure souls." The similarity of " Rekheet " and " Ruk-h" to " Rukh' " is very striking, since the radicals of all three names are the same, * Vol. iii. p. 91. E 2 52 FABLES OF THE PERSIANS AND ARABS. [Part I. excepting that the k and h of the Egyptian " Ruk-h " occur in the place of the kh' of the Arabic "Rukh"' (the accent indicates reduplication): in Rekheet, the final t is augmentative. This suggests a curious inquiry re- specting the origin of the connection between the two fables, and the extent to which the Persians and Arabs may have borrowed from the Egyptians and Greeks. I SECTION V. THE CALENDAR OF THE DECANS. The ancient Egyptians had a calendar which we may call that of the Decans. They distinguished thirty-six stars or asterisms, nearly equidistant, throughout a great circle of the heavens (like the signs of the Zodiac), which rose at intervals of about ten days. Per- haps they regulated their agricultural and other pur- suits by this calendar, just as the Arabs did in ancient times by means of their similar calendar of the Man- sions of the Moon, y^\ ^\\ U^, which were twenty- eight in number, corresponding to the mean daily stages of the moon ; a kind of calendar which was also used by many other nations. In the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh, we find all the Decans, excepting Sothis, crowded into the last six months and the Epagomense ; and unequal numbers are placed beneath the several months ; whence we plainly see that nothing but the position of Sothis and the order of the Decans is regarded in this instance. It is necessary to add, that in this portion of the ceiling of the Rameseum, certain constellations, to which I have already alluded, are represented among the Decans : these are evidently representations of remarkable con- stellations, containing certain Decans, of which the names accompany them. It would be a work of great difficulty, to say the least, and one which would not in the least degree aid the inquiries which I am prosecuting in this volume. 54 THE CALENDAR OF THE DECANS. [Part I. to point out the particular stars or asterisms of which this calendar is composed. The indications are too insufficient to guide us in such an investigation ; and if we calculated the true places of a multitude of stars, and found those which agreed in the times of rising with the several Decans, in the age to which any one of the lists of the Decans belongs, we should still be bewildered in the choice. This short account of the Calendar of the Decans is a necessary introduction to the subject of the section here immediately following. SECTION VI. THE CALENDAR OF THE PANEGYRIES. On innumerable ancient Egyptian monuments of all times, from the tombs of the age of the Fourth Dynasty at Memphis, to the temples of the Ptolemaic and Roman periods, we find mention of religious festivals, commonly called, by writers on Egyptian archaeology, Panegyrics. The hieroglyphic name reads Heb''^. Different signs were employed as symbols of different kinds of Panegyrics ; but the name I have just men- tioned was the general name of the ancient Egyptian religious festivals. The Greek text of the Rosetta- stone translates Heb by Panegyry, Havriyvpos, A period denoted by the characters in Plate III., Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, I call " the Great Panegyrical Month," or, by way of abbreviation, " G. P. M." The first form reads " Sidereal Month," or simply "Month;" the second and third have the same sig- nification, with the addition of " Panegyrical ; " and the fourth reads, " Sidereal and Solar Month (or Month only) of the solar Panegyry." It must be re- marked that the signification of the hand, in two of these groups, is not certain ; but this does not affect the general signification. An Egyptian civil month is a period containing thirty subdivisions, viz., days ; therefore, a period con- * Plate III., Nos. 15, 16. : 56 THE GREAT PANEGYRICAL MONTH, [Part I. taining thirty Julian years might be called by the Egyptians, who supposed those years to be solar, a Great Month, agreeably with analogy. A further argument for assigning this duration to the G. P. M. is derived from a fact which we learn from the monu- ments, that a subdivision of it had a minimum length of a year and a half, and that at least fifteen of these subdivisions were contained in it. Thus the monu- ments show us, that the G. P. M. must have con- tained at least twenty-two years and a half, which is so near the duration that analogy would induce us to assign to it, that we cannot hesitate to accept the latter. A period denoted by the characters given in Plate III., Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, I call " the Division of the Great Panegyrical Month," or, abbreviated, " the Di- vision of the G. P. M." The literal meaning of the groups which I have given is, " Division of the Sidereal Month," or " of the Month " in the instances of the first and second forms ; and the same, with the addi- tion of " Panegyrical," in the instances of the third and fourth forms ; and " of the Solar Panegyry " in the fifth form. The hand, which I have already shown to have a doubtful signification in cases of this kind, though it cannot alter the general signification of the group, occurs in the fourth form. I have found dates of the Twelfth Division of the Twelfth G. P. M., and of the Fifteenth Division of the Sixth G. P. M. This con- vinces me that the Division of the G. P. M. had not a longer duration than two Julian years, for the length of the G. P. M. cannot be supposed to be more than thirty years. The Calendar of the Decans affords us the means of accurately determining the length of the Division of Sect. VI.] AND ITS DIVISION. 57 the Great Panegyrical Month. The nineteenth Decan, counting Sothis as the first, is called " Smat, the star of the Division of the G. P. M.,"''^ in the sculptures of the ceiling of the Rameseum of El-Kurneh ; and, being the nineteenth, it is 180°, or half a year, distant from Sothis. It is evident, therefore, that the nine- teenth Decan, reckoning Sothis as the first, in the time of Rameses II. had a connection with the Division of the G. P. M.; and from this remarkable fact we cannot but infer that, in the time of that King, the commencement of the Division of the G. P. M. was sometimes marked by the rising of the nineteenth Decan. Now, the Decan of the First Division of the G. P. M. must have been the Decan of the G. P. M., that is, the Decan at, or about, the rising of which the G. P. M. commenced. But the monuments clearly show that the G. P. M. commenced in the time of Rameses II. at, or about, the time of the rising of Sothis. Therefore, the Division of the G. P. M. then commenced sometimes at the rising of Sothis, and sometimes at the rising of the nineteenth Decan. From this we must infer its length to have been half a year, or a year and a half, or some number of whole years and a half, since we thus find that it must have commenced alternately at opposite points of the year; but I have previously shown that its length did not exceed two years, and, therefore, it could only have been half a year, or a year and a half. That the latter is the true length is shown by our finding records of the first year of a G. P. M. and of a Division of the G. P. M. in the hieroglyphic inscriptions; and besides this, all probability is in * See Plate III., No. 11. 58 INCORRECT HYPOTHESES. [Part I. favour of this duration, which is exactly the half of the Three-year period of Royal Panegyries, to be noticed in the next section. Thus we see that what I call the Division of the Great Panegyrical Month was the twentieth part of the Great Panegyrical Month, and had a length of one Julian year and a half. In this place it is necessary to remove some diffi- culties, and to show the incorrectness of certain ex- planations of the Panegyrical periods. It is to be observed that the simplest characters denoting the G. P. M. were sometimes used, perhaps as early as the Nineteenth Dynasty, for an ordinary month ; but, from the time of the Eighteenth Dynasty downwards, we find the more complete groups made use of, almost invariably, to denote the G. P. M. and its Division, to prevent mistake. There are two ways in which it has been proposed to explain the G. P. M. and the Division of the G. P. M. The first hypothesis is, that the G. P. M. was a com- mon month or a lunation, and that the Division of the G. P. M. was a half-month or half-lunation. This is disproved by our finding dates of the Fifteenth Divi- sion of the Sixth G. P. M., and of the Twelfth Division of the Twelfth G. P. M., and by the Decan of the Division of the G. P. M. If these be read sixth month, fifteenth half-month, &c., the hypothesis is equally un- tenable. The second hypothesis is, that the G. P. M. was a common month or lunation, and the Division of the G. P. M. a period of the same duration commencing in the middle of the former. The dates just mentioned equally disprove this. The highest date which I have found of the G. P. M.'s is of the Twelfth ; and this shows that the length of the period which they composed could not be less than 360 Sect. VI.] GREAT PANEGYRICAL YEAR. 59 years. This and analogy led me to the conclusion that the ancient Egyptians had a Great Panegyrical Year of 365 Tropical Years, containing twelve Great Panegyrical Months, and five intercalary years, corresponding to the five Epagomense of the Vague Year. For Tropical I now say Julian, being convinced that the Egyptians believed the Julian to be a tropical and sidereal year at the early period when their calendar was instituted. The connection of the G. P. M. and its Division with Sothis and Smat plainly shows that those periods were composed of Julian years. Having thus obtained the exact lengths of the G. P. M. and the Division of the G. P. M., and an approxi- mative length of the Great Panegyrical Year, or G. P. Y., I next apply these results to the chronology as de- rived from the monuments, but derived without the help of dates, as will be seen in Part II. of this work ; and, examining certain dates of Panegyrical periods on the monuments, I find the space from the first to the second, from the second to the third, and from the third to the fourth, as agreeable with the approxima- tive chronology derived from the monuments as could be expected. But in making this application I find certain striking peculiarities, which greatly assist me in fixing the exact length of the G. P. Y. These peculiarities indicate that the first G. P. Y. probably commenced with the manifestation of Sothis ; that the second did commence with that of Smat ; that the third probably commenced with that of Smat ; that the fourth did commence with that of Sothis ; that the fifth did also commence with that of Sothis; that the sixth probably commenced with that of Smat; and that the seventh did com- 60 SOTHIS AND SMAT. [Part I. mence with that of Smat. Thus I obtain the following order of commencements of successive G. P. Y.'s. Smat. 1 with the manifestation of Sothis. 3 ^1 Sothis. Smat. ?} The custom of the ancient Egyptians in chronology was to stop short, rather than to exceed, when they were obliged to do either the one or the other, as we see (for example) in the case of the Vague Year and its divisions. The necessity of their doing so in the pre- sent instance is also shown by the Division of the G. P. M.; for it was obviously desirable that each G. P. Y. should consist of an exact number of these periods. Therefore it was most natural that they should make their G. P. Y. to consist alternately of 364^ and 366 Julian years, and the first G. P. Y. to be of the former length. This mode of division would make the mean length of the G. P. Y. to be 365^ Julian years, and would fulfil all the conditions required by the several data upon which this inquiry is based. We see, therefore, that the Great Panegyrical Year was alternately 364^ and 366 Julian years in length, thus having a mean length of 365^ Julian years, and being evidently regarded by the Egyptians as strictly analogous to the Julian Year, which contained 365^ solar periods ; and that it commenced with the mani- festation of either Sothis or Smat ; that the Great Panegyrical Month contained thirty Julian years, and Sect. VI.] AGE OF THE SUPHISES. 61 commenced with the manifestation of the Decan of the G. P. Y. ^; and that the Division of the Great Panegyrical Month contained one Julian year and a half, and commenced alternately with the manifesta- tion of the Decan of the G. P. M., and that of the opposite Decan. It now remains to apply this explana- tion of the periods of Panegyries to dates found upon the monuments. The first date which I have found accompanied by a King's name is in a tomb in that part of the great Memphite burial-ground which is adjacent to the Great Pyramid and to the Second Pyramid. This date I give in Plate III., No. 12, omitting the usual mention of offerings which precedes it. I have already, in speaking of the Tropical Cycle (Sect. 2), had occasion to prove that the dagger and palm-branch signify " First Year ;" and I gave what I think to be the reason for the deviation from general usage in the disposition of these characters. The same is the case with two other groups in this passage, which I read " First G. P. M.," and " First Division of the G. P. M.," the interpretation of which is quite certain. The inscription which I am now considering relates that a certain person made offerings in the commence- ment of the First Year of the First G. P. M., and the First Division of the G. P. M.; that is, in the com- mencement of a Great Panegyrical Year ; and that he lived in the time of King Num-Shufu. In a similar inscription, on the outside of the tomb, evidently re- * For an example of the mention of the Decan of the G. P. M. see Plate III., No. 10, " The G. P. M. (of) Smat," from an inscrip- tion in a tomb near the Pyramids of El-Geezeh. 62 SHUFU AND NUM-SHUFU. [Part I. cording the same date, but much injured, we find men- tion of King Shufu. These names are written in hiero- glyphics Num-shufu, or Num-khufu^ and Shufu or Khu- ful In each case I prefer reading the sieve " sh," since Manetho transcribes each name by Suphis, {tovcfyis,} though this character generally has the value of " kh." These two royal names are evidently those of the two Suphises of Manetho, the second and third Kings of the Fourth Dynasty, according to the version of Africanus ; Shufu being the first Suphis. I formerly supposed the two names to apply to one King, but now it is my opinion that they are the names of the two Kings just mentioned, whom I believe to have reigned together. My reasons for these conclusions will be fully stated in the second part of this work. Having ascertained that a Great Panegyrical Year commenced in the reign of the two Suphises, I have now to show what particular Great Panegyrical Year this was. The basis of the calculations for ascertaining the dates of the commencements of G. P. Y.'s is the date of the commencement of the Tropical Cycle in the reign of Amenemha II., B.C. 2005, in the course of the Twelfth Division of the Twelfth G. P. M. From this I find the commencement of that G. P. Y. in which the date last mentioned fell to have been in the year B.C. 2352, and the commencement of the preceding one B.C. 2717. That the G. P. Y. which began B.C. 2352 is that of Sect. VL] ERA OF MENES. 63 the time of the two Suphises, I shall show in Part II., from the approximative chronology of the interval from the Suphises to Amenemha II., derived from Manetho and the monuments. The commencement of the Great Panegyrical Year which preceded that of the Suphises I have already shown to be in the year B.C. 2717. That this was the First G. P. Y. is proved by the characteristics which it possesses ; for it commenced in a year in which the manifestation of Sothis fell in the first month of the Vague Year, and was therefore celebrated on the first day of that month. Further, if we made another such period to have preceded this, we should refer its com- mencement to an age far anterior to any indicated by the monuments ; for the interval from the accession of Menes (the first King of Egypt) to the Suphises is un- doubtedly very much less than two G. P. Y.s ; and I shall be able to show, in Part II., that the date of the year B.C. 2717 is the Era of the commencement of the Egyptian race, and that of Menes. The date of the commencement of the First Great Panegyrical Year, B.C. 2717, and that of the Second, B.C. 2352, the first being the Era of Menes, and the second in the time of the two Suphises, will be seen to be perfectly agreeable with the records on the Egyp- tian monuments. The next date after that of the time of the Suphises is that of the commencement of the Tropical Cycle, in the reign of Amenemha II., the second King of the Twelfth Dynasty, in the year B.C. 2005. In treating of the Phoenix Cycle (Section IV.), I have shown that the First Phoenix Cycle commenced with the Third Great Panegyrical Year, B.C. 1986, in the reign of Sesertesen III., whom Manetho makes the 64 DATE OF SKHAI, OR SKHEE. [Part L third King of the Twelfth Dynasty. This, like the pre- ceding date, has already been fully noticed. I have not found any date recorded on the monu- ments from the time of the Twelfth Dynasty to that of the Eighteenth. I have, however, found three dates of the time of the latter Dynasty. The first of these is of the reign of a King of the time of the early part of the Eighteenth Dynasty, who is not found in the lists of Manetho, nor in those of the monuments, and therefore was not a legitimate sovereign. His name is read by Champollion " Skhai ;" but several other readings have i <9\ m ' luii i n : been proposed, and most hieroglyphic scholars are unde- cided as to the true reading. The time of his reign has likewise been considered as doubtful. Sir Gardner Wilkinson has pointed out, in his " Materia Hierogly- phica," that he was anterior to Rameses II., the second King of the Nineteenth Dynasty ; and it has been gene- rally concluded that he was anterior to Horus, the ninth King of the Eighteenth Dynasty. The application of this date to the lists shows us (as will be seen in Part II.) that Skha'i, or Skhee, was contemporary with Thothmes I., the third King of the Eighteenth Dynasty; for although he appears to have ruled at Thebes, since his tomb is there, we cannot suppose that he was not contemporary with some King found in the lists of Manetho, and those of the monuments. The inscrip- tion which contains the date I have now to notice is copied in Plate 106 of Sharpe's "Inscriptions:" it records Sect. VI.] DATE OF QUEEN AMEN-NUMT. 65 that the fourth year of a King whose name is erased, but whose square title remains, dated in the First Division of the Sixth G. P. M. This King is Skhee ; for Mr. Birch, of the British Museum, a scholar well known for his extensive and accurate knowledge of Egyptian archaeology, assures me that the square title is a variation of that usually found with his name. The First Division of the Sixth G. P. M. commenced in July, B.C. 1472 ; and the succeeding Division com- menced in January, B.C. 1470. This gives the date of Skhee's fourth year, 1472-1, and shows that he came to the throne, in some part of the years B.C. 1475-4. The next date which I have found I believe to be of the time of Queen Amen-numt, who reigned for a tsF 4^ time conjointly with Thothmes II. and Thothmes III. The date is in a tomb at Thebes, where the royal name has been almost entirely obliterated by the wantonness of travellers, or the deliberate plunder of those who should have set a better example. From the style of its paintings, the tomb evidently belongs to the earlier part of the Eighteenth Dynasty, and what remains of the royal name shows that it was painted in the time of Amenoph I., II., or III., or Queen Amen-numt. I formerly stated that my uncle, Mr. E. W. Lane, was almost certain that he remembered this tomb to be of the time of Amenoph II., and thought it highly pro- bable that, when he examined it some years ago, the King's name was uninjured. Since I published this opinion, my uncle has found among his papers a note F 66 ANOTHER DATE OF QUEEN AMEN-NUMT. [Part I. which shows that the name was so far erased when he saw it that he could not say to which of the monarchs I have mentioned it applied. The mention of offerings having been made in a particular Division of a Great Panegyrical Month, which the next date that I have to notice proves to have fallen in the reign of Queen Amen-numt, merely shows that the principal person buried in this tomb lived during her reign ; though, at the same time, there is no sound reason for concluding that he did not live many years more after the conclusion of that reign. I give a copy of the date in Plate III., No. 13. This inscription refers to the celebration of certain Panegyries in the Sixth G. P. M. and the Fifteenth Division of the G. P. M. The date is, therefore, of the year B.C. 1451, or 1450; for the Fifteenth Division of the Sixth G. P. M. of the Fourth G. P. Y. commenced in July B.C. 1451, and the next Division commenced in January, B.C. 1449. The inscription is of very great importance, as mentioning such a high number of the Divisions of the G. P. M. as the Fifteenth. The Panegyries noticed in it are those of the " Waka," respecting which I have not formed a certain opinion; the Panegyry of Thoth, "the great Manifestation, the Manifestation of Sothis," and the Panegyries of the Great and Little Ruk-hs. Another date, only a few years later than the last which I have mentioned, is found in an inscription on the base of the great obelisk of El-Karnak, a copy of which is given by M. Prisse, in Plate XVIII. of his supplement to Champollion's "Monumens de I'Egypte et de la Nubie." From it we learn that the Seventh G. P. M. commenced in Mesori of the sixteenth year of Queen Amen-numt. The date of the commencement of this G. P. M. is Sect. VL] DATES OF PSAMMETICHUS II. AND AMASIS. 67 July, B.C. 1442, which shows that the Queen came to the throne in the Vague Year corresponding to B.C. 1458-7. The reason of this ambiguity with respect to the Julian Year of this sovereign's accession is because we are not aware how early she began to reign in that Vague Year which was called, according to the ancient Eg3^tian custom, her first year, and which commenced in the Julian Year B.C. 1458, and concluded in 1457. I have found no more mention of the Periods of Panegyries until the time of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty. In the celebrated tomb of Fa-bak-en-renf, a high functionary of the time of Psammetichus II., we find a date of this time. This tomb, which is at Mem- phis, is celebrated for containing one of the oldest instances of the stone arch. I conclude that the date is during the reign of Psammetichus II,, since no other King is mentioned in this large tomb, and since it is merely the date of the commencement of a G. P. M. without the number being specified. This must have been the G. P. M. which commenced B.C. 591, in the reign of Psammetichus II. I obtain the chronology of this part of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty from a comparison of the well-known inscription on a stela in the museum of Florence, which reckons seventy-one years from the third year of Neco (the Nechao II. of Manetho) to the thirty-fifth of Amasis, with what Manetho and Hero- dotus say respecting the lengths of the Kings' reigns. Another date of the time of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty is of the commencement of a G. P. M. in the time of Amasis ; for although that King's prenomen alone occurs in the inscription containing the date*, and that prenomen is also the name of his son, who was a high * Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature, Vol. i. Part I,, PI. LXII. F 2 68 DATE IN AN INSCRIPTION [Part I. functionary under Darius Hystaspes, yet in this case we see that it must be the King's prenomen, from the royal title which accompanies it. This date can only be that of the commencement of the G. P. M. which immediately followed that of the time of Psammetichus II., and began in the year B.C. 561. - One more date recorded on the monuments remains to be mentioned : it is of the commencement of a G. P. M. and a Division of a G. P. M. The inscription which records it is found in the largest tomb at Thebes, that of Pet- am en-apt. It is remarkable that no name of a known King occurs in this tomb, but only the name of an unplaced King or viceroy, not elsewhere found. This name is mentioned in Sir Gardner Wilkinson's "Modern Egypt and Thebes."^ I was unable to find it during my last visit to Thebes, owing to its occurring but once, and to the great extent of the tomb ; and I have to thank Sir Gardner for his kindness in giving me a copy of it, which I here insert. It reads Hor-em- heb, and resembles the nomen of King Horus of the Eighteenth Dynasty, which reads " Men-amen Hor-em- heb;" and from this it might be supposed to be a wf variation of that nomen. This supposition is, however, * Vol. ii., p. 322. Sect. VI.] IN THE TOMB OF PET-AMEN-APT. 69 inadmissible (unless Hor-em-heb is not spoken of as a King of that time, which the mutilated state of the in- scription in which his name occurs does not enable us to decide) ; for the style of the tomb is undoubtedly that of the latter part of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, and, perhaps, also of the Twenty-seventh. The name Hor-em-heb is well known not to apply to any King of the latter part of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, or of the Twenty-seventh ; nor can it apply to any of the well- known viceroys, governors, and chiefs, of the time of the Persian domination mentioned by the Greek writers; neither to the Egyptians Inarus, Amyrtaeus, Pausiris, and Thannyras ; nor to the Persian governors Aryandes and Achsemenes, &c. ; nor to that son of Amasis whose name is Ra-num-hat, the same as his father's prenomen. Hence we may suppose that the royal name Hor-em-heb is the name of a prince, or a viceroy, who exercised his power for a short time ; and we may infer that he ruled in the early part of the Persian domination. From the size and splendour of the tomb, from its elaborate decoration, and from our finding no royal name but one of an unknown prince, and that but once occurring, we may reasonably suppose it to have been sculptured at a time when Egypt was under the dominion of foreigners ; though it had not been long enough in that state to preclude the possibility of an Egyptian priest's making a magnificent tomb, but yet long enough for that tomb to have been sculptured ; for if the tomb had been begun to be sculptured in the time of a native King, we should find royal rings con- taining his name, or left blank. The G. P. M. of which the commencement is recorded in the tomb of Pet- amen-apt is probably that which began B.C. 495. I offer these ideas respecting the date of the tomb with 70 PHOENIX OF ONE OF THE PTOLEMIES. [Part I. great diffidence, and as merely hypothetical ; for it is by no means impossible that it may be removed to a later or earlier period by future discoveries. I have already quoted the passage of Tacitus respect- ing the Phoenix, in which that writer says, after men- tioning the appearances of the Phoenix in the times of Sesostris and Amasis, that it appeared also in the reign of one of the Ptolemies, whom he calls "Ptolemy, who was the third Macedonian sovereign" (qui ex Macedonibus tertius regnavit). I might offer probable conjectures in explanation of this assertion, but I think it needless to do so. It may be supposed to refer to some one of the Panegyrical periods. I cannot conclude this section without adding, that all the dates of the kinds above mentioned which I have seen on the monuments, or in printed copies of inscriptions, are perfectly in accordance with the system which I have put forth ; and that I have sup- pressed no argument which I consider as opposing that system ; but, on the contrary, have stated and explained all the objections that have occurred to me. SECTION VII. THE ROYAL PANEGYRIES. In the Greek inscription of the Rosetta Stone, Ptolemy Epiphanes is called " Lord of the Thirty-year Periods, like great Hephsestus : " KTPIOT TPIAKONTAETH- PIAON KA^AHEP O H^AISTOS O MEPAS. The corresponding part of the hieroglyphic inscription is unfortunately lost ; but we find the title in other in- scriptions written in hieroglyphics, " Lord of the Royal Panegyrics, like Ptah, or Phthah {L e., Hephaestus), Tatann." In the preceding passage, we find certain characters which signify " the Periods of Thirty Years," though the hieroglyphic symbol is merely a representa- tion of the great hall in which the Panegyrics of these periods were held. It is remarkable that the name is sometimes in the singular, and sometimes in the plural, and that the group in the plural appears sometimes to signify a single Thirty-year Period of Royal Panegyries. When I first ascertained the length of the G. P. M., I supposed it to be the same as the Thirty-year Period of Royal Panegyries ; but differently named for some particular reason. But I found afterwards that this latter Period was connected with the reigns of Kings, by observing hieroglyphic inscriptions stating that some god had granted to a King to perform " a Period of Royal Panegyries ; " thus evidently alluding to the Thirty-year Period of those Panegyries. I next observed, that those Kings who had long reigns, especially Papa 72 ROYAL PANEGYRIES OF THOTHMES III. [Part I. (Phiops) and Raraeses II., make frequent and remark- able mention of these Panegyries, whilst those who reigned but a few years do not notice them, or notice them but briefly. I then ascertained that the only records of particular years of Kings in which the commencements of Thirty-year Periods were celebrated render it probable that the Thirty-year Period of Royal Panegyries commenced in the first year of a King's reign, or in that year of his reign in which he first presided at the Royal Panegyries. A Thirty-year Period of Royal Panegyries is recorded to have com- menced in the thirtieth year of the reign of Rameses II., and another in the thirty-third year of Thothmes III. The first seems obviously to point to the comple- tion of thirty years from the Royal Panegyries of the year of the King's accession ; and, upon consideration, it will be seen that the second is probably a record of the same purport. We know that Thothmes III. was for a time under the regency of Queen Amen- numt, who doubtless presided at the Panegyries ; and we know that this regency did not conclude ' before the King's third year, or a little later ; whence we see that a period of thirty years would very probably com- mence in his thirty-third year. From what I have just stated, compared with other circumstances connected with the Royal Panegyries, which I have also stated, especially that the celebration of a Period of Royal Panegyries was promised to the Egyptian Kings in the inscriptions of the temples, I can arrive at no other conclusion than that the Great Royal Panegyries were first celebrated at or about the com- pletion of the King's thirtieth year, as counted from the Royal Panegyries of the year of his accession. The record of the time of Thothmes III. reads, " In Sect. VII.] ROYAL PANEGYRIES OF RAMESES II. 73 the thirty-third year, on the second day of Mesori, the commencement of Periods of many and great Panegyrics." This is the beginning of an inscription at El-Bersheh, in Middle Egypt, communicated to me by my friend Mr. Harris, of Alexandria, who has made important contributions to our knowledge of Egyptian archaeology. A comparison of this with other inscrip- tions relating to the same subject plainly shows, that it can only relate to the commencement of a Thirty- year Period of Royal Panegyries. The usual manner of recording this event is by recording the commence- ment of the first of its subdivisions. There are some very remarkable inscriptions of the reign of Rameses II., sculptured at Gebel-es-Silsileh, in Upper Egypt, w^iich enable us to determine the length of certain subdivisions of the period which I have been just noticing. I give, in Plate III., No. 14, a copy of so much of one of these inscriptions as relates to the dates of Panegyries, from Champollion's "Monumensde I'Egypte et de la Nubie," Plate 116. This inscription reads thus — " Year 30. First (of) the Royal Panegyries." " Year 34. Second (of) the Royal Panegyries." " Year 37. Third of the Royal Panegyries." " Year 40. Fourth of the Royal Panegyries." Immediately after this, we read, " Of the Lord of Upper and Lower Egypt, Ra, the guardian (?) of justice, approved of the sun, lord of the rulers, Mee- amen Rameses [IL]*" With respect to the transla- tion which I have here given of this inscription, I must remark, that it is the ordinary group for the Pane- gyries I am now noticing which I render "Royal Panegyries;" that the years are the regnal years of 74 LITTLE ROYAL PANEGYRIES. [Part I. Rameses II. ; and that the interpretation of a certain group as meaning " second " was first mentioned to me by Mr. Birch, of the British Museum, who believes that Dr. Hincks first mentioned it to him. A very brief consideration of the inscription which I have just cited will show that the subdivisions of the Thirty-year Period of Royal Panegyrics, which were marked by the celebration of what I may call " Little Royal Panegyries," could only have been periods of three Julian years, if they were of equal length. If such were the case, and if we suppose the first recorded in the inscription of Rameses II. to have commenced on the last day of the Vague Year, the succeeding ones would have fallen in the years there mentioned ; and if this were the length of the subdivisions, each of them would correspond in length to two Divisions of the G. P. M., as the Thirty-year Period corresponded in length to the G. P. M. ; thus confirming the durations that I have assigned to the latter Period and its Divi- sion. There is, however, one difficulty in this expla- nation of the Thirty-year Period of Royal Panegyries, and its subdivision. In what manner was the first thirty years of a King's reign divided? Although it is perfectly evident that the first Panegyry of much importance was the jubilee, which was cele- brated in the King's thirtieth year, yet we must sup- pose that Little Royal Panegyries were previously celebrated. But the interval of nearly thirty Vague Years manifestly could not be divided into periods of three Julian years with exact precision. This will be explained if we suppose that the Royal Panegyries were celebrated on the occasion of the occurrence of some variable physical phenomenon, oc- curring at intervals of which the mean length would Sect. VII.] NILUS AND THE NILOA. 75 be a complete number of Julian years, though in par- ticular instances they would somewhat differ in length one from another. From the place where the Royal Panegyrics are most remarkably recorded, Gebel-es- Silsileh, the ancient Silsilis, where Nilus was particu- larly worshipped, and from the circumstance that both in the time of Thothmes III. and in that of Rameses II. (if one were celebrated late in his thirtieth year), these Panegyrics were celebrated about midsummer, I think it most probable that they were partly cele- brations of the first indication of the rise of the Nile (including the festival called by the Greeks the Niloa), since festivals celebrating such a phenomenon would have varied a little in time, if not fixed to a particular day, from the vagueness and slight irregularity of the event on which they would depend. From the Thirty-year Period of Royal Panegyrics, or from the Great Panegyrical Month, most probably originated the Thirty-year festivals of the Roman Emperors, which were called Tricennalia"^. * I have pointed out what I believe to be an indication of a Sixty-year Period in the shorter of the two Benee-Hasan inscrip- tions which I have already partly cited ; and even if any do not agree with me as to the explanation of a certain group as signifying " The sixth of the twelve Asha," or " Egg-periods," it cannot be denied that there is great probability that the ancient Egyptians had a Sixty-year Period. If the First Great Panegyrical Month commenced with the First "Egg-period," the Eleventh and Twelfth G. P. M.'s coincided almost wholly with the Sixth '* Egg-period." That the Egyptians made use of a Sixty-year Period, and connected that period with the crocodile and its eggs, is apparent from the statements of ancient writers. Plutarch says, that the crocodile's eggs are sixty in number, that they are sixty days before they are hatched, and that the longest life of the crocodile is sixty years, lamblichus also states the number of the crocodile to be sixty, 76 THE TETRAETERID. [Part I. which number he connects with the sun. Elian makes similar statements respecting the eggs of the crocodile, the time before hatching, the life of sixty years, and other particulars of the same kind. (See Wilkinson's " Ancient Egyptians," 2nd Series, Vol. ii., pp. 36, 233, 237.) Horapollo Nilous (p. 12, ed. Cory) and others make mention of a Tetraeterid, or period of four Julian years, connected with the intercalary quarter of a day. As, however, we have no evidence of this period having been in use in the times of the Pharaohs, it is unnecessary to examine it. The ancient Egyptians may have had it so long as they made use of a year of 365 days and a quarter. HOR^ iEGYPTIACA PAET II. HISTORY. SECTION I. INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS. In the following pages I shall endeavour to pre- sent to the reader an outline of the History of Egypt during the time of the Pharaohs of the First Nineteen Dynasties, a period comprising about 1500 years, and ending about the date commonly assigned to the taking of Troy. Before entering upon this portion of Egyptian his- tory, I must consider the order of these Dynasties, a subject respecting which the learned of modern times have widely differed. Every one allows that the Nineteenth Dynasty suc- ceeded the Eighteenth, and that neither of these Dynasties was contemporary with any other : it is the order of the first seventeen Dynasties of Manetho's list that has been the cause of so many disputes, and it is this that I have to consider. Manetho speaks of the rising of the Kings of the Thebaid and of the other parts of Egypt against the Shepherds, themselves a Dynasty or Dynasties of Kings ; and thus he plainly indicates his belief that there were at that time at least three contemporary Dynasties. Other writers of ancient and modern times have affirmed some of the facts which I am about to prove, and have adduced arguments in favour of their asser- tions; but the proof from the monuments has hitherto been wanting. This proof I have now to give ; and I beg that the reader will pay especial attention to it. I shall prove that the monuments establish the contempo- 80 CONTEMPORARY DYNASTIES. [Part IT. raneousness of certain of the first seventeen Dynasties with others of the same portion of Manetho's list, by several records which have not hitherto been adduced as proofs of this important fact, and which develop the general scheme of the arrangement of these Dynasties in a most striking manner, while they signally confirm the Chronology ascertained in Part I. It may be well here to remove a prejudice which some have thought to rest upon a foundation not easily shaken. It has been supposed that those Pharaohs who are styled in inscriptions of their own times Kings of all Egypt, or, more particularly, Kings of Upper and Lower Egypt, titles not uncommonly used, were sole Kings ; and, consequently, that some of the first seven- teen Dynasties ruled alone over all Egypt, without con- temporaries. That this is an erroneous conclusion will be most satisfactorily proved by inscriptions which I shall have to cite, in which two contemporary Kings are mentioned, and one of them receives these titles. Even if we had not these proofs, it seems to me that this objection would not carry any weight, when we remem- ber the parallel instances in the history of other nations, such as the title of King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland ; and others too numerous to mention. Several Oriental Sovereigns of the present day arrogate to them- selves titles far more extravagant, with respect to the extent of their rule, than those which certain of the Pharaohs assumed in calling themselves Kings of all Egypt. The following table of the order of the first seven- teen Dynasties was constructed by my uncle, Mr. E. W. Lane, in the year 1830. He founded it upon the evi- dence given by Manetho and others, that some of the early Dynasties were contemporary, and upon a consi- Sect. I.] ORDER OF THE DYNASTIES. 81 deration of the ordinal and other appellations (or num- bers and names) by which those Dynasties are distin- guished ; for the interpretation of hieroglyphics was not then certain enough for him to obtain clear monu- mental evidence. When I commenced the study of hieroglyphics, he showed me this table ; and, although he had discontinued that study for some years, he ex- pressed his belief that his arrangement would be con- firmed by the discoveries of others. After perusing some of the works of late authors, I became per- suaded that his system was untenable ; and that, if any of the Dynasties were contemporary, they were not contemporary in that order. Thus I relinquished it, and sought in the works of others a true scheme of Egyptian chronology ; but sought in vain : I could find no system that would bear the test of comparison with the monuments. At last, after lamenting the time that had been lost in this fruitless search, I determined to study the monuments only, and to judge for myself; and, to my astonishment, I found everything confirm my uncle's theory, until, by degrees, proving point after point, I at last became convinced that the system was altogether correct. Thus I came to the conclusions which I have adopted after having long entertained the strongest prejudices against them, I now subjoin the table. Thinites. Dyn. Yrs. Ist 253 2nd 302 665 Memphites. Dyn. Yrs. Dys. 3rd 214 4th 284 6th 203 7th ... 70 8th 146 847 70 Elephan- tinites. Dyn. Yrs. 6th 248 248 Heracle- Di^g ^4^5. opohtes. i '^ Dyn. Yrs. Dyn. Yrs. 9th 409 10th 185 694 11th 69 12th 160 13th 184 17th 161 554 Xoitea. Dyn. Years. 14th 184 or 284 184 or 284 Shepherds. Dyn. Yrs. 16th) 16th J. 611 17th J 611 G 82 ' ORDER OF THE DYNASTIES. [Part II. My uncle has assigned 511 years to the Shepherd- Dynasties, instead of the sum of the durations of those Dynasties in the lists, because Manetho states that the whole period of the Shepherd-rule was 511 years. The length of those Dynasties I shall presently consider. He has in this table given the numbers of years ac- cording to Africanus's transcript of Manetho's list, ex- cepting in the case just noticed. It will be afterwards seen that these numbers need corrections : my uncle gave them in his table because he considered them in genera] the most correct. What he intended to be shown by that table will appear more clearly in the following arrangement of the Dynasties, also made by him : the only alteration that I have made in this is in the case of the Seventeenth Dynasty, which I hold to have been a single Dynasty, of Shepherds ; not a double Dynasty, of Diospolites and Shepherds : but this does not affect the general system. 1st W 3rd 2nd) ( 4th 5th 6th \ f 9th \ ( nth ) ,..,. . /15di \ (lothjirnhfi^^M 7th , 8th' -- - .o.. ...... s 16th 17th This table exhibits the First and Second Dynasties as for the most part contemporary with the Third and Fourth ; the Fourth with the Fifth ; the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth with the Ninth and Tenth ; the Ninth and Tenth with the Eleventh, Twelfth, and Thirteenth ; the Twelfth and Thirteenth with the Fourteenth ; and the Fourteenth with the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seven- teenth. This arrangement of the first seventeen Dynasties rests, particularly, on the following grounds: — The Sect. I] ANCIENT EGYPTIAN KINGDOMS. 83 Memphites of the Fourth Dynasty are clearly shown by the monuments to have been in part contempo- rary with the Elephantinites of the Fifth. The Diospo- iites of the Eleventh and Twelfth Dynasties are like- wise shown to have been in part contemporary with the Heracleopolites of the Ninth, and the Shepherds of the Fifteenth ; and the latter part of the Fif- teenth Dynasty is also shown to have been contem- porary with the latter part of the Fifth. The Fifteenth Dynasty I also find to have immediately, or almost im- mediately, succeeded the Sixth Dynasty. The arrange- ment of five columns of the table I consider as thus established from monumental evidence. The Thinite kingdom cannot be supposed to have commenced long before the Memphite. This will plainly appear from what I have to state respecting the Era of Menes, in Section III. of this Part ; from a consideration of my explanation of the Tablet of Abydos, in the same sec- tion ; and from an inspection of the hieroglyphic Table of the first seventeen Dynasties, at the end of this work, in which it will be seen that, by assigning average lengths to the reigns of the Thinite Kings, we find that the end of the Second Dynasty comes almost exactly to the point where the Twelfth Dynasty begins both in that Table and in the Tablet of Abydos. Other rea- sons also will be found in the course of this work. The Xoite kingdom probably arose about the time of the Shepherd-invasion, shortly after which event the Fifteenth Dynasty commenced. Those propositions which I state to be proved by the monuments will be fully developed in the ensuing inquiries. The true arrangement of the first seventeen Dynas- ties indicates the following leading historical facts. The Thinites were the first Egyptian Kings, and the G 2 84 SHEPHERD-KINGS. [Part U, first of them, Menes, was undoubtedly sole King of Egypt. Soon after the establishment of the Thinite kingdom, Lower Egypt, it appears, became an inde- pendent state, and Memphis was its capital. About two centuries after this event both the Thinite and Memphite kingdoms appear to have been dismembered by the establishment of the Elephantinite Dynasty ; and many years afterwards, by that of the Heracleopo- lite and Diospolite Dynasties. Not long after the time of the commencement of the Diospolite kingdom, an- other kingdom, the Xoite, appears to have been founded, in Lower Egypt ; and about the same time, a warlike eastern tribe of Pastors, to whose successive chiefs the Egyptians gave the appellation of Shepherd-Kings, invaded l^gypt, and, favoured by its divided state, made all the native princes tributary to them, choos- ing Memphis as their capital. These, and other tribes of Pastors, whose Kings compose the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Dynasties, ruled in Egypt for more than five hundred years. SECTION 11. THE LISTS OF MANETHO AND THE MONUMENTS. In the present section I have to notice the lists of the first seventeen Dynasties given by Manetho, and those found on the monuments. I first give Manetho's list of the first seventeen Dynasties, arranged, approximatively, in the order of contemporaneousness. Other lists will be given in subsequent places, and I shall frequently have occa- sion to comment upon all the lists here mentioned. 86 EXTRACT FROM [Part II. 1^ 1^ :^ s . o Ol ^ [ " I. p4 tS •• • . ^ Xi § g . -e •^ I I ^ § a> ^ ^_,c) I ^ I. I ^^ ^\^ I> s f4 rti^o>-su5.*j ThW ;;^^EHEH;^02EH<1aQW .2P- « f^ ^ ^ «rt CI i 00 OS pq 05 ta' R O o o &p to 3 3- S i 88 EXTRACT FROM [Part II. faS . .s s 1.2'S r^i 2|.l 1 t£ Variati • 5 Theban ho reigned 1 us. i III s ^ H ^ k> ^(ii K ^ tJ OS -* r-l O C35 rH -^ o r-i "* «o »o '^ :o CO rJl ^a ^ Q EH f^ a CO m 1^ t> ►J 1^ M EH § M.2 o cc pq PL, a2 ^ ^ ^, I i ^2 go &I-S •2 o £ <^< ^■s 1.6 a B rt O) H . o CO lO o ^ .a £ S.2^f2 ^ "Z Soplh^(1h JZ2 CO i-I g4 CO ^ OQ 2 OQ =g W 2 S^ o o -S •Diospolite Kings, who reign- ed 250 years, Eus. Note.— Eus. calls this the Fif- teenth Dyn. c ■< < > is ll o no" ^ ro W I ^.^ 5 1 2§ 90 REMARKS ON MANETHO's LISTS. [Part II. In the preceding tables, I have given the lists of Manetho according to the transcript of Africanus, as being the most correct extant ; and I have added the most important variations from the Greek text and Armenian translation of Eusebius's Chronicle, with a list of the Fifteenth Dynasty from the fragments of Manetho preserved by Josephus, and a few variations of the text of Africanus. In the abbreviations which I have employed, E. stands for the Greek text and Armenian translation of Eusebius when they agree ; E. G. for the Greek text, and E. A. for the Armenian translation. At the end of this volume will be found a table of the hieroglyphic names of all the Kings that I have found to belong to particular Dynasties, from the First to the Seventeenth inclusive ; the Dynasties and Kings being there arranged in their proper relative places, according to the monuments, which seldom enable us to determine the exact points of contemporaneousness in two or more Dynasties ; and the spaces allotted to particular Kings being proportioned to the lengths of their reigns in some particular and remarkable cases ; average length, deduced from the length of the Dynasty, and the number of its Kings, being indicated in other cases. Sir Gardner Wilkinson has most kindly offered me the use of the wood-blocks from which the names in the table above mentioned, as well as most of the names of Kings which occur in this work, are printed. The errours in Manetho's lists, and the manner in which the monuments assist us in verifying or correct- ing those lists, will be discussed in many places throughout this portion of the present work. The instances of corruption by copyists, to be noticed here- after, plainly show us that we cannot rely upon the Sect. IL] MONUMENTAL LISTS. 91 accuracy of the numbers in Manetho's Dynasties as they now stand, and that we must therefore correct that historian's lists as far as possible from the dates and other records on the monuments. I must also distinctly state, that I place no reliance upon Manetho in any case in which he is not in some degree confirmed by the monuments or other trustworthy ancient autho- rity. The corruption of his text, by copyists or epi- tomizers, has probably been partly intentional and partly unintentional ; but I suppose it to have been in a great measure effected before the times of Josephus, Theophilus of Antioch, Africanus, and Eusebius ; whose quotations and abstracts of Manetho have still further suffered by the carelessness of later copyists. There are several other lists of Egyptian Kings, preserved on the monuments and in papyri : on the former, in hieroglyphic characters ; in the latter, in hieratic. The chief of these lists are the List of the Chamber of Kings, and that called the Tablet of Abydos. The former, which contained sixty-one royal names, belong- ing to the Sixth, Ninth, Eleventh, Twelfth, Thirteenth, and Fifteenth, Dynasties, and which other writers have been utterly unable to explain, most remarkably con- firms the arrangement of the Dynasties which I have adopted. It is a monument of the reign of Thothmes III., the fifth King of the Eighteenth Dynasty, by whose order it was sculptured, in a chamber of the great temple of the metropolis of that time. The latter list (that of Abydos) contained fifty-two names (two of which are of one King) of Thinite and Diospo- lite Kings, as will soon be shown. In both lists, many names are erased. There are also many other shorter lists on the monuments, containing from two to four- 92 ROYAL TURIN PAPYRUS. [Part II. teen Kings' names, and dating from the time of the Fourth Dynasty to that of the Twentieth. The Royal Turin Papyrus is a hieratic manuscript which, from what remains of it, seems to have con- tained the first seventeen Dynasties, with the lengths of the Kings' reigns, generally in years, months, and days, but sometimes, in years only ; with the com- mencements of Dynasties indicated. Most unhappily it is in a very mutilated state, so that little information has hitherto been derived from it. I shall, however, have to notice some important facts which are to be learnt from this record, and to show that it affords a most remarkable confirmation of the scheme of con- temporary Dynasties which I have founded upon tlie monuments. SECTION III. HISTORY OF THE PERIOD BEFORE THE SHEPHERD INVASION. Menes was the first King of Egypt, according to Manetho, Herodotus, and Diodorus Siculus. His hieroglyphic name, which reads Menee, heads the list at the Rameseum of El-Kurneh. It is also given in the Royal Turin Papyrus as the name of the first mortal King. There is a very remarkable passage in the Eu- terpe of Herodotus*, which has been supposed to be of great importance towards the elucidation of the Egyptian Chronology. After having spoken of the number of generations from the first King to Sethon the priest of Hephaestus, and said that in the interval * The hst which Herodotus has given of the most remarkable of the Pharaohs, as received from the Egyptian priests, though it presents several inaccuracies, plainly shews us a fact too remarkable to be passed over without notice : that the priests read to him a list of the most celebrated of the Kings of Upper Egypt, and then a list of those of Lower Egypt : and his chief errour lay in his sup- posing that the latter succeeded the former. 94 TIME OF MENES. [Part II. from the former to the latter no god had appeared in a human form, the historian adds, that '* they [the priests] said, that in this time the sun had risen four times out of its usual places : where it now sets, it had twice risen ; and where it now rises it had twice set ; " and he goes on to saj, that these events had produced no physical changes in Egypt. (Ev rolvw tovtw to5 "Xpovi^ TerpaKLs eKe^yov ef rjO^cov rov rjXtov avaTetXai' evOa Te vvv KaraBverao, evOevTev h\s eiravrelXai' /col evOev vvv dvareWet, evOavra his Karahvvai' koI ovSev toov Kar AlyvTrrov vtto ravra erepoicoOrivai, ovre ra eK rrjs yrfs, 0VT6 TO, €K Tou iTOTafjLov (Tcfn ytvojjbeva, ovre ra a[X(fl vovaovs, ovre ra Kara tovs Oavdrovs.) Many attempts have been made to explain this passage ; but none of them is satisfactory ; and I am convinced that the reader will agree with me that the explanation which I am about to offer (supported by most remarkable evidence) is the true one. It is evident that the priests told Herodotus that great periods had elapsed since the time of Menes, the first King ; and that, in the interval from his reign to that of Sethon, the solar risings of stars, that is to say, their manifestations, had twice fallen on those days of the Vague Year on which their settings fell in their own time ; and vice versa ; and that the historian, by a natural mistake, supposed they spoke of the sun itself This would place Menes at or before cir. B.C. 2760 to 2640 and later than cir. B.C. 3490 to 8370. Sethon was reigning in Egypt about B.C. 713 ; and therefore the interval from his time to that of Herodotus is not sufficiently long to affect the calculation based upon the historian's statement. Herodotus was in Egypt about the year B.C. 450. Porphyry says, that the Egyptian year, by which he Sect. III.] GENESIS OF THE WORLD. 95 means the Sothic Year, commenced with the rising of Sothis, which marked the genesis of the workl. {AcyvTTTCOLs Be ap')(if) erovs ov^ vBpo^do9, ms ^Vco/iialoLs, aWa KapKLVos. Tipos yap rS KapKivo) rj %S>Ols, r)v kvvos aarepa ' EiW7)ve9 (paac. l^ovfiijvca Be avrols rj ^(odeco9 avaroXr], yevecrecos KaTap')(^ovaa rfjs ei,9 tov koo-jjuov^'.) It is scarcely necessary to remark that he speaks of Aquarius instead of Capricornus as the sign of the Winter Sol- stice by an evident oversight. Perhaps he obtained the information just mentioned, respecting Sothis and the genesis of the world, from Manetho's works, one of which, concerning " Archaeology and Piety," {irepl ap')(alafjbov icai evae^eias^ he quotes in his treatise de Abstinentia. Solinus tells us, as on the authority of the priests, that the time of the rising of Sothis was the birth of the world ; but he is mistaken in fixing upon what was in his time the conventional day of the rising of Sothis. (Verum omnem abscessus originem de sole concipi, primosque fieri excessus tumoris, cum per cancrum sol vehatur : postmodum triginta ejus partibus evolutis, ubi ingressus leonem ortus sirios excitavit, propulso omni fluore tantam vim amnis erumpere. Quod tem- pus sacerdotes natalem mundi indicarunt, id est, inter tertium decimum Calendas Augustas & undecimumf.) There is another passage concerning the rising of Sothis, &c., which is generally supposed also to refer to the genesis of the world. It is in the manuscript work of Vettius Valens, an astrologer. I do not cite it, as the meaning is contested, and somewhat obscure. I have given my reasons in the first part of this work for asserting that the first Great Panegyrical * De Antro Nympharum, 24. f Cap. 32. 96 ERA OF MENES. [Part II. Year commenced, and the Calendar of the Panegyrics was instituted, in the year B.C. 2717; and that the manifestation of Sothis then fell in the first month of the Vague Year, and was consequently celebrated on the first day of that month. Hence it is evident that this era was not instituted for purely astronomical and chronological purposes, but also to mark a historical period. If it had not been so, it would have com- menced with the day of the manifestation of Sothis, like the first Sothic Cycle ; or, possibly, with the day of the Summer Solstice; neither of which was the case. This is evidently the era to which the statement of the priests to Herodotus points ; for it falls within the interval obtained from his statement and within the smaller interval indicated in the works of Porphyry and Solinus, and is the earliest date that is deduced from the monuments. To recapitulate these arguments : the Egyptian priests made a statement to Herodotus, from which I find that Menes began to reign in some one of the eight hundred and fifty years from cir. B.C. 3490 to 2640 : and Porphyry and Solinus say, that Sothis was the star of the genesis of the world, indicating that the manifestation of Sothis then fell, or was celebrated, on the first day of the Vague Year ; thus shortening the eight hundred and fifty years to about one hundred and twenty. I have before spoken of the Era of Menes as the same as the genesis of the world. This needs explanation. Herodotus himself, the Royal Turin Pa- pyrus, and Manetho, most distinctly tell us that Menes was the first mortal King. His accession is the date of the origin of the Egyptian race ; and therefore, since they thought themselves the most ancient of men, is what they called the genesis of the world. The date of Sect. III.] BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY. 97 the commencement of the first Great Panegyrical Year, and of the institution of the Calendar of the Pane- gyries, is B.C. 2717, a year which undoubtedly falls not only within the period indicated by Herodotus, but also within the smaller limits obtained from the statements of Porphyry and Solinus. Thus we see that the Era of Menes, which was pro- bably the date of that King's accession, or at least fell in his reign, was the date of the commencement of the first Great Panegyrical Year, B.C. 2717. I cannot omit here to notice how this date is corroborated by the records of other nations. The Septuagint Chronology dates the Dispersion of mankind about the year B.C. 2758 ; that is, about forty- one years before the Era of Menes. The Bible-narrative indicates, that an Assyro-Baby- lonian kingdom was founded by Nimrod shortly after the Dispersion. The traditions and histories of the Assyrians and Babylonians respecting this part of their national existence are almost entirely lost : the history of Berossus is only known to us by a few frag- ments : but from these we learn that the period of tradition ended, and that of history began, some time after the Septuagint-date of the Dispersion. The reckoning by the mythic divisions of time of the Chal- daeans, the sari, neri, and sossi, ends, and that by years begins, with the termination of the first Chaldsean kingdom and the conquest of Babylon by the Modes, an event which appears from the numbers and reigns to have taken place about the year B.C. 2500, or somewhat later. The origin of the Assyrian Empire, according to Ctesias and his followers, (excepting Euse- bius,) dates about the year B.C. 2200 ; but their state- H 98 FOUNDATION OF TYRE. [Part II. ments are of doubtful authority, to say the least. The Persians and Modes have preserved no ancient tradi- tions respecting the period before Arbaces. The ear- liest Median Kings mentioned in history are those who reigned at Babylon after its capture, (cir. B.C. 2500,) though Berossus speaks of Median Kings during the traditional period. The first Persian King of whom we have any record is Chedorlaomer, who made two expeditions with other Kings into Palestine and the neighbouring countries, between the years B.C. 2095 and 2071, according to Hales's Chronology, slightly corrected by me. What the modern Persians say of their ancient history is purely poetical, and contains as little truth as the Greek accounts of the exploits of Hercules and Perseus. Leaving the nations in the immediate vicinity of the land of Shinar, the original seat of the human race, we find the traditions and histories of other nations, not far distant, pointing to a period little subsequent to the date of the Dispersion, or indicating their origin at that time. The priests of the Tyrian Hercules told Herodotus that Tyre was built, and the temple of their god founded, at the same time ; and that since Tyre was first inhabited, two thousand three hundred years had intervened. This would place the foundation of Tyre about the year B.C. 2750, shortly after the Disper- sion. The Arabs have no ancient history, and scarcely any veritable ancient tradition, excepting that they have preserved the memory of their descent from Joktan, and from Ishmael. It is well known that the history and traditions of Sect. III.] REIGN OF MENES. 99 other nations point to more recent periods than those I have just mentioned, and therefore it is unnecessary to consider them. Before noticing the actions ascribed to Menes, I must not omit to mention the mythical relation of the Egyptians concerning the time before Menes. As we learn from Eusebius, Manetho states in his history, that the gods, demi-gods or heroes, and manes, reigned during a vast period of twenty-four thousand and nine hundred years before Menes. Similar statements are found in the works of Herodotus and Diodorus ; and some have attempted to explain these mythic periods by supposing that the year was anciently called a month, and that these are periods of months, not of years; but, although this opinion has been held by several ancient writers, it is evidently at variance with the Egyptian system. From all this it is perfectly clear that the Egyptians had neither history nor tradition of their own existence as a nation before Menes. Respecting Menes, Manetho, according to Eusebius, tells us that he made a foreign expedition, and acquired renown ; and, moreover, that he was killed by a hip- popotamus, as Africanus also tells us in his version of Manetho's lists. The sculptures and paintings of the tombs of the ancient Egyptians show us that liunting the hippopotamus was one of the favourite sports of that people, and it was probably in indulging in it that Menes lost his life. The expedition of Menes, the earliest re- corded in history, was probably made to repress the in- cursions of some wandering tribe on the eastern frontier of Lower Egypt. (On the first occasion of mentioning the short historical notices which occur in the lists of Manetho, it is necessary to remark, that we cannot H 2 100 FOUNDATION OF MEMPHIS. [Part 11. always be certain that they are derived from that histo- rian's work.) Diodorus Siculus relates*, that Menes, whom he calls Menas, first instructed the Egyptians in religion, and so changed their simple manners, that Tnephachthos, the father of Bokchoris the Wise, find- ing from experience the happiness of a frugal life and the evils of luxury, inscribed a curse against him in the temple of Jupiter (or Amen-ra) at Thebes. Herodotus t ascribes to Menes more useful actions than those mentioned by Diodorus : he says that he founded Memphis, after he had diverted the course of the river by raising a dike. Probably he did not change the course of the river, but built Memphis on an island, and closed the southern end of the western branch ; but this is only conjecture, as we cannot say what was the exact course of the Nile at that remote period. The situation of Memphis, as the capital of Egypt, was wisely chosen ; and it appears to have been long the chief city in extent and population. Hero- dotus also tells us that Menes founded the temple of Vulcan, or Ptah. Some remains of a temple which was probably dedicated to Ptah may still be seen on the site of Memphis. Menes is said by Manetho to have been of This ; and the Kings of his Dynasty, as well as those of the suc- ceeding one, are called by that author Thinites. The ancient city of This was situated near to Abydos, in Upper Egypt. No remains of its monuments are known to have been preserved to the present day. I have recognised the names of certain of the Thi- nite Kings in the Tablet of Abydos. The table here annexed will shew the arrangement, and what were till * I. 45. t II. 99. Sect. III.] TABLET OF ABYDOS. 101 lately preserved, of the names comprised in that import- ant monument, the first division of which I am the first to explain. My explanation of this tablet, shewing that it contained a complete list of the Thinite Kings, is founded upon internal evidence which it presents, and confirmed by the fact of its being found in the neigh- bourhood of the site of the Thinite capital. Besides, it would be difl&cult to find any other place or places, before the Twelfth Dynasty, in which the Kings here preceding that Dynasty could be introduced. The Kings' names contained in the first two lines of this tablet are given in Plate IV., No. 1. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13 f 14. . . neter-ka. 15. Men-ka-ra. 16. Nufre-ka-ra. 17. Nufre-ka-ra. Nebee. 18. Tet-ka-ra. Ma. 19. Nufre-ka-ra. Khentub. 20. Mer-en-hor. 21. Snufre-ka. 22. Ka-en-ra. 23. Nufre-ka-ra. Rerer. 24. nufre-ka. 25. Nufre-ka-en-seb. Pa.pa, 26. Snufre-ka. Annu. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. ra. Nub-kau-ra Sha-ter-ra. Sha-kau-ra. Ma-en -ra. Ma-tu-ra. Neb ... . Ser-ka-ra. Naa-ter-ka-ra. Naa-ter-en-ra. Men-ter-ra. Naa-teru-ra. Men-teru-ra Ma-neb-ra. Ser-teru-ra setep-en-ra Men . . . . ra. Ma-men-ra. Seser-ma-ra. Mee-amen Rameses. 102 TABLET OF ABYDOS. [Part 11. The sixteenth name in this list is Nufre-ka-ra ; and Nephercheres is the fifteenth Thinite King, according to Africanus's version of Manetho's list: his prede- cessor, Men-ka-ra, is called Chaires in the same list. The sixth King after Nufre-ka-ra in the Tablet is Ka-en-ra, the Cheneres of Manetho, (in Africanus,) who makes him the second successor of Nephercheres. He is preceded in the Tablet by Snufre-ka, perhaps the same as Sesochris, whom Manetho (in Africanus) makes the predecessor of Cheneres. After Ka-en-ra, we find in the Tablet the names of four other Kings, evidently belonging to the same Dynasty. I conclude that it continued to the commencement of the Twelfth Dynasty, since there are only seven effaced rings in which the names of the Kings of the Eleventh Dy- nasty could have been inscribed, had that Dynasty pre- ceded the Twelfth in the Tablet; and eight of its Kings are found in the list of the Chamber of Kings. Hence it appears that the Second Dynasty continued until the commencement of the Shepherd-Kingdom and Twelfth Dynasty. It is to be remarked that the first uneffaced ring in the second line of the Tablet of Abydos is that containing the prenomen of. Ame- nemha II. I reckon the last ring of the Second Dy- nasty to be the third preceding this, since we cannot suppose that Amenemha I. (the first colleague of Seser- tesen I.) was omitted. Fourteen names of the Kings of the Second Dynasty were preserved partly or wholly in the Tablet of Abydos at the time that Sir Gardner Wilkinson made his invaluable copy * ; three of these being partly erased ; the rest perfect. The recogni- tion of names of Kings of the Second Dynasty in the Tablet of Abydos, indicating that the first line of that * Materia Hieroglyphica, Part II., PL IX. Sect. IIL] ATHOTHIS. 103 tablet and part of the second consisted of an entire list of the Thinite Kings, thirty-two in number, will, I think, be regarded as an interesting and important discovery. It is further worthy of remark that most of the names of Thinite Kings after Nufre-ka-ra in the Tablet are of a compound form, a prenomen and nomen in one ring, and that this is accounted for by their belonging to a period partly preceding, and partly synchronous with, the Sixth, Ninth, and Eleventh Dynasties, in which we first find Kings with separate prenomens. The son and successor of Menes was Athothis, who was the second King of the First Dynasty. Manetho, according to Africanus and Eusebius, tells us that this King built the palace at Memphis, and that he was a physician, and left the anatomical books. This is a very remarkable statement, as it affirms that the Thi- nites had possession of Memphis for some years, and also that the Egyptians had made some progress in the art of writing, and in medicine, at that early period. The name of Athothis, the etymology of which must be A-thoth, the son of Thoth, or Hermes, shews the antiquity of some part of the ancient Egyptian reli- gion: it seems, however, that all the details of the system were not completed until the reign of Kaiechos, the second King of the Second Dynasty, from a state- ment in the lists which I shall soon have to consider. The name of Athothis, in a much injured state, is sup- posed to be found in the Royal Turin Papyrus. The Third Dynasty evidently commenced, and Mem- phis became independent, during, or soon after, the reign of Athothis. As, however, the time of this occur- rence cannot as yet be exactly determined, I shall continue the history of the Thinite Kingdom during 104 THE PYRAMIDS OF UENEPHES. [Part II. the First and Second Dynasties, before entering upon the consideration of the history of the Memphite Kingdom. Respecting Kenkenes, the third King of the First Dynasty, we know nothing more than that he was the son of Athothis. (Afr. and Eus.) We are told that Uenephes, his successor, built the Pyramids near Kochome. I have been unable to find any name which I could reasonably suppose to be that of Kochome among the names of the Egyptian cities found on the monuments, or mentioned by Greek, Roman, or Copt, writers. This is the earliest notice of Pyramids. We are told nothing more respecting the Kings of this Dynasty, and the events of their reigns, excepting that a famine afflicted Egypt in the reign of the King last mentioned ; and that there happened a very great plague {(f)6opa fjueyLo-TT)) in that of Semempses, the seventh King of the Dynasty, and, as Eusebius adds, many remarkable events. — Such are the fragments which have come down to us, in Manetho's lists, of the his- tory of the First D3Tiasty, and it is to be feared that the hieroglyphic inscriptions will furnish us with few, if any, more, owing to the remoteness of the period, and the want of monuments which we can certainly ascribe to this Dynasty. In considering the history of the next Dynasty, I shall not distinguish the statements which are given in Manetho's lists, as no other ancient historian has pre- served any records of it, and therefore no mistake can arise. In the time of the first King of the Second Dynasty, Boethos, we are told that a chasm of the earth opened at Bubastis, and many perished. This is a remarkable statement, as Egypt is seldom subject to earthquakes, but often to the shocks of earthquakes Sect. III.] ANIMAL-WORSHIP. 105 which happen in Syria. These are, however, some- times so severe as to cause much destruction among the mosques and houses of the Egyptians in the pre- sent day. Similar shocks are recorded by the Arab historians of Egypt, and the manner in which some of the ancient temples have fallen shews that their ac- counts are not exaggerated. During my residence in Egypt, I felt several shocks, one of which was so vio- lent that about seventy houses in Cairo were rendered uninhabitable ; several of them being entirely ruined ; and much injury was done to the mosques. Similar, though less severe, shocks are by no means unfrequent ; but I am not aware that there is any record, besides that in Manetho's lists, of these shocks being ever ac- companied in Egypt by an opening of the earth, though such occurrences are not rare in Syria. We are told that in the reign of the next King, Kaiechos, the bulls Apis, in Memphis, and Mnevis, in Heliopolis, and the Mendesian goat, were called gods. {evofjbi,cr07}(rav elvat Oeol, Afr. Oeol evo/jUia-Orjcav, Eus.) From this it seems that the Egyptian religion was not completely developed until the time of Kaiechos, or after his time ; and that the great Ritual was not be- fore composed. In the reign of Binothris, the next King, we are told that it was adjudged that women could reign. This law was certainly in force at a later period ; for we find from Manetho and the monuments that there were at least two Queens during the first eighteen Dynasties. Nothing is related of the history of the next three Kings, who are called " Tlas," " Sethenes," and "Chaires." According to my explanation of the Tablet 106 KINGS OF THE [Part II. of Abydos, the name belonging to the first of these three Kings is almost wholly erased, but the last cha- racter remains, and is the cerastes ; and one of the few Kings whose names end with the cerastes is shewn by an inscription in one of the tombs near the Pyramids of El-Geezeh to have been contemporary with a per- sonage who lived during, or shortly after, the time of Num-shufu ; and in another inscription, in the tomb of a personage who lived in the time of Shaf-ra, also near the same Pyramids, the same King is mentioned with Shaf-ra, Men-kau-ra, U-seser-kef, and a King whom I believe to be Shura; the five names being placed side by side''^. It is therefore perfectly evident that the name is that of a Thinite King who reigned soon after U the commencement of the Fourth and Fifth Dvnasties ; and I can have no doubt of its being that of Manetho's " Tlas." The reading of the hieroglyphic name is doubtful : if " Tlas " be not a corruption, it may pos- sibly read " Telea-ses-kef," as the first character, which is a sitting figure or statue, is the only one which is doubtful, and Texex is a Coptic word, signifying "forma "and the like. — The account of the Fourth and Fifth Dynasties, soon to be given, and the table of the hieroglyphic names of Kings at the end of the volume, will explain what I have here said of the Memphites * See Plate IV., No. 4. Sect. III.] SECOND DYNASTY. 107 and Elephantinites. — The name of " Sethenes" in the Tablet of Abydos is partly erased, and is as follows : that of his successor, the " Chaires " of Manetho, is Men-ka-ra. AVWS JnnnL In the reign of Nephercheres, (or Nufre-ka-ra,) the seventh King of the Second Dynasty, we are told that it was fabled that the Nile flowed mixed with honey for the space of eleven days. Manetho, if his very words on this subject are preserved, qua- lifies this statement; merely giving it on the autho- rity of tradition. The next King, Sesochris, (perhaps Snufre-ka,) was said, we are told, to have been a man of gigantic stature. According to Afri- canus's version of Manetho's lists, the Thinite King- dom lasted five hundred and fifty-five years ; and ac- cording to Eusebius's, ^\e hundred and forty-nine ; and according to the former version, Cheneres (Ka-en-ra) 108 THE MEMPHITE KINGDOM. [Part II. /^ u JfillUI.'ll^ was the last King. Both versions are shewn to be erroneous by the Tablet of Abydos ; from which we learn that terx Kings reigned after Cheneres, and that the duration of the Second Dynasty was most probably little less than four hundred years. I have already shewn that, according to my scheme of Egyptian Chronology, the Memphite Kingdom com- menced shortly after the Thinite. In Manetho's list, we are told that in the reign of Necherophes, or Ne- cherochis, the first King of the Third, which was the first Memphite, Dynasty, the Libyans revolted from the Egyptians, but returned to their allegiance, being ter- rified by a sudden increase of the moon. It is scarcely necessary to remark, that an optical illusion is evidently here intended ; but the statement that^the Libyans were at this early period subject to the Egyptians is very in- teresting, as shewing what importance Egypt had then acquired. The second King of Memphis, Tosorthros, or Sesorthos, is said in the lists to have been called by the Egyptians ^sculapius, on account of his medical knowledge, and to have invented the art of building with hewn stones, and to have patronized literature. In this passage, the Greek text of Eusebius has a vague term, {olKohojxrjv,) instead of the plainer term olKoBo/jiiav; but the rest of the sentence, as well as the testimony of the Armenian translation, shews that Africanus's reading is the better one. It is worthy of remark that the Tower of Babel was built of brick. Several of the names of the Kings of this Dynasty Sect. Ill] THE PYRAMIDS. 109 have been thought to be recognised on the monu- ments. The next Memphite Dynasty was the Fourth, some of the Kings of which possessed great power, and made themselves famous by the wonderful monuments which they raised. At this period of Egyptian history, we begin to be able to study the chronicles of the early Kings from contemporary records ; and as this is the time at which we can first decidedly ascribe certain Pyramids to particular Kings, it will not be amiss to controvert an opinion which has gained some adherents. It has been supposed that each Pyramid was the tomb of a sovereign or sovereigns, and that all the Pyramids were built before the Shepherd-invasion, being the tombs of successive Kings. It is enough to remark that ancient authority, the evidence of the monuments, and the relative positions of Pyramids, are against this theory ; and the monuments distinctly shew that con- temporaneous Kings were buried in the Pyramids around Memphis. Under these circumstances, it is manifestly unnecessary to enter upon this question in detail ; and I have merely mentioned it to warn the reader against accepting as facts unsupported hypo- theses, however boldly put forth. According to the scheme of the Dynasties w^hich I have adopted, the Fifth Dynasty (of Elephantinites) was, in its earlier part, contemporary with the Fourth (of Memphites) ; and the records in the tombs at the Pyramids satisfactorily prove this to have been the case. Certain names, which can only be those of Elephan- tinites of the Fifth Dynasty, are found in tombs at the Pyramids of the time of the Fourth Dynasty ; and, in these instances, are mentioned with Kings of that 110 ELEPHANTINITE KINGS [Part II. D3niasty. Consequently, we must conclude that they were contemporary with these Memphite Kings; for they could not have been anterior to them. In order to render what I have to say on this subject more intelligible than it would be otherwise, I subjoin a table of the Fourth Dynasty and part of the Fifth. FOURTH DYNASTY. MANETHO MONUMENTS. 1. Soris . . . . . 29 Shura, or Khura. 2. 3. 4. Suphis Suphis . . Mencheres 63 ^^ 66/ 63 Shufu, or Khufu. Num-shufu, or Num-khufu Men-kau-ra. 5. Ratoises . 25 6. Bicheres . 22 7. Sebercheres 7 8. Thamphthis 9 PART OF THE FIJ^'TH DYNASTY. MANETHO. MONUMENTS. 1. Usercheres . . . . '^8 U'Seser-kef. 2. 3. 4. Sephres . . Nephercheres Sisires . . . • • • 13 20 7 Shaf-ra, Nufr-ar-ka-ra. Seser-en-ra. It will be seen in a later part of this work, that the last three Kings of the Fifth Dynasty in Africanus's version, and in the Royal Turin Papyrus, are separated from the earlier Kings, whose names are found at the Pyramids, by a very long interval of time ; and that Eusebius's number of thirty-one Kings is more accu- rate than Africanus's of eight or nine, and is probably the true number. It is not certain whether Rathures and Cheres belonged to the earlier or the later part of the Dynasty. In one of the tombs near the Pyramids of El- Geezeh we find many royal names, some of which Sect. TIL] CONTEMPORARY WITH MEMPHITES. Ill belong to the Fourth Dynasty, and some to the Fifth. The tomb is that which ChampoUion calls that of Eimai*, one of the principal persons buried in it, an officer of Suphis I. ; and in one of its cham- bers we find a kind of list of Kings, which contains the names of two Memphites, and one Elephantinite, in the following order : Shura ; Num-shufu ; Num- shufu ; Nufr-ar-ka-ra * ; and in another part of the same tomb we find a similar list, with the names of two Elephantinites and one Memphite, thus: Nufr- ar-ka-ra; Shura; Seser-en-raf. The only peculiarities in these lists is the repetition of the name of Num- shufu in the first of them. The reason for the manner in which these lists are arranged seems to me to be obvious. The first indi- cates that Nufr-ar-ka-ra was partly contemporary with Shura, and partly with Num-shufu ; and the second, that Shura was partly contemporary with Nufr-ar-ka-ra. There are two Kings in Manetho's lists to whom Nufr- ar-ka-ra might be supposed to correspond, besides the Elephantinite Nephercheres ; namely, Nephercheres, the seventh King of the Second Dynasty, of Thinites, and Sebercheres, supposed by some to be a copyist's mistake for Nephercheres, the seventh King of the Fourth Dynasty, of Memphites. Neither of these Kings, however, can be Nufr-ar-ka-ra ; for the former is recognised in the Tablet of Abydos, and the latter is too long after the Suphises to be mentioned in the tomb in which these lists occur. Further, we find traces of Elephantinite race in the names of the Kings of the Fourth Dynasty; for in the name of Num- shufu, the first syllable, Num, or Nev, is the name of the tutelary god of Elephantine ; and we cannot fail * Plate IV., No. 3. t Plate IV., No. 3. 112 THE FIFTH DYNASTY. [Part II. to observe similarities in the names of the Memphites and Elephantinites as found in the lists of Manetho, and on the monuments. From these considerations it appears that the Elephantinites of the Fifth Dynasty were contemporary with the Memphites of the Fourth. Some suppose that the Fifth Dynasty ruled at Memphis after the Fourth. This hypothesis, however, I have sufficiently disproved ; but I shall also have to mention a fact relating to the latter part of the Fifth Dynasty which would be conclusive on this point by itself if we had no other evidence. But there is an objection which may be urged against the manner in which I have stated certain Kings of the Fourth and Fifth Dynasties to have been contemporary. If the monu- ments show Soris to have been partly contemporary with Nufr-ar-ka-ra, how are we to explain the fact of Manetho's making the reigns of the predecessors of Nephercheres to have been twelve years longer than that of Soris, unless we suppose that the Fifth Dy- nasty commenced a little before the Fourth, which is unlikely? But we must remember that Manetho's numbers are incorrect as they now stand in many places, and that he reckons co-regent Kings as if in succession. I have mentioned another very important record, in which five Kings' names are placed side by side in a tomb near the Pyramids of El-Geezeh. They are Shaf-ra, Men-kau-ra, the King who appears to be the Thinite Tlas of Manetho, U-seser-kef, and a much erased name which is apparently Shura. (See Plate IV., No. 4.) This is another strong proof of the contemporaneous- ness of the Memphites and Elephantinites. I am indebted to the kindness of Mrs. Lieder for a copy of this valuable record. Sect. III.] NORTHERN PYRAMID OF ABOO-SEER. 113 The name of Soris, the first King of the Fourth (also written) r9\ Dynasty, is, as I have already remarked, found in the tombs near the Pyramids, and reads " Shura." His name was also found, by Mr. Perring, in the quarry- marks of the Northern Pyramid of Aboo-Seer, in the Memphite Necropolis ; and hence it appears that this was his tomb. We know nothing of the history of his reign, nor of that of Usercheres, the first King of the Fifth Dynasty, who reigned about the same time, and whose name, which reads U-seser-kef, I here give. \\\\\\ iL The second King of the Fifth Dynasty is called by Manetho, according to Africanus, Sephres. This can only be Shaf-ra, or Khaf-ra, whose name is found in many of the tombs near the Pyramids of El- Geezeh. Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus call him, respectively, Chephren, and Kephren ; and ascribe to I 114 SHAFRA, THE FOUNDER OF [Part II. him the building of " the Second Pyramid."* Both these authors call him the brother and successor of the builder of the Great Pyramid, whom the former calls Cheops ; and the latter, Chembes, or Chemmis, the Khufu, or Shufu, of the monuments, and Suphis I. of Manetho. Diodorus adds that some said he was the son of Chembes, by name Chabryis, that is, Khafra; and both historians assign to Chephren, or Kephren, a reign of fifty-six years. In the inscriptions of his own time, Shafra repeatedly receives a title which some have read " Shafra of the Little Pyramid," and which, however it is interpreted, must be understood as con- necting him with a Pyramid. Manetho assigns to him a reign of only thirteen years, and from what I have said above respecting the first three Kings of the Fifth Dynasty it seems that this is not less than the true duration of his reign. Notwithstanding this, the Second Pyramid is the largest of all the Pyramids, excepting the Great Pyramid. How are we to account for these apparent discrepancies? The Second Pyra- mid, which cannot be doubted for a moment to have been founded by Shafra, presents peculiarities which explain this difficulty. I subjoin a section of it. * That Shaf-ra is Chephren is an opinion which has been held by my uncle (Mr. E. W. Lane) for many years; and probably by several others. Sect. III. THE SECOND PYRAMID. 115 The peculiarities of this Pyramid will be understood by comparing it with others. In general we find that a Pyramid has but one entrance, and one sepulchral chamber ; but there are some exceptions to this rule ; and of these exceptions, the Second Pyramid is one of the most remarkable. It seems that Shafra built a small Pyramid over the northern chamber ; and that a later King founded another Pyramid over the southern chamber, and continued to enlarge it until it included that of Shafra. Herodotus and Diodorus place Chephren (or Shafra) between the builders of the First and Third Pyramids, probably because of the position of his Pyramid ; and with respect to his rela- tionship to Cheops, or Chemmis, what these historians say on that subject we may reasonably suppose to have arisen from the fact that the Fourth and Fifth Dy- nasties were contemporary, and perhaps even consisted of princes of one family. It might be supposed to be unlikely that an Elephantinite King should be buried I 2 116 SHUFU AND NUM-SHUFU, [Part II. at Memphis ; but Mr. Perring has found the name of another Elephantinite King, Seser-en-ra, among quarry- marks on a part of one of the Pyramids of Aboo-Seer ; and we also find the names of Elephantinite Kings in tombs near the Pyramids of El-Geezeh. Memphis, it is well known, was a sacred city, and one of the re- puted burial-places of Osiris. The third King of the Fifth Dynasty is called by Manetho Nephercheres, and on the monuments, Nufr- ar-ka-ra, as I have already shown. All we know I -<2>- jrrmx respecting him is, that he appears to have been partly contemporary with Shura, or Soris, after whom, Manetho, according to the transcript of Africanus, mentions two Kings of the name of Suphis; Supliis I., the second King, and Suphis II., the third King, of the Fourth Dynasty. These two Kings correspond to the Shufu, or Khufu^ and Num-shufu, or Num-khufu^ '^^'■^" of the monuments. I formerly supposed that these two names applied to one King, the Suphis I. of Manetho's list of the Fourth Dynasty, as given by Africanus. My reasons were, that both names occur in the quarry-marks on the stones of the Great Pyra- Sect. III.l THE TWO SUPHISES. 117 mid (see Col. Vyse's Pyramids), and that a personage buried in a tomb at the Pyramids mentions Shufu in its inscriptions, and in the same tomb has employed a stone of another building of his own, containing a record of the commencement of the Second G. P. Y. in an inscription of the time of Num-shufu. I believed this to be confirmed by the statement of Manetho, according to Eusebius, that Suphis I., who built the greatest Pyramid, " was arrogant towards the Gods ; but, repenting, wrote the sacred book, which the Egyptians esteem as a great treasure." (In Africanus's version we read that " he was also arrogant towards the gods, and he wrote the sacred book," &c. ; imply- ing, though not directly stating, his repentance.) For I found that Num-shufu, which I believed to be the first name of Suphis I. for a reason already stated, was a name which seemed to indicate the arrogancy of Suphis towards the gods, as Num-shufu signifies " Num (or Kneph) the long-haired ; " and I concluded that, on his repentance, Suphis I. assumed a common appellation, Shufu, " the long-haired." This etymology we owe to the ingenuity of the learned Rosellini. (Monument! Storici, T. i., p. 128.) I added that, although almost all the names of Egyptian monarchs, handed down to us by the monuments, are partly com- posed of the names of gods, they may (as far as I am aware) be divided into two classes, neither of which comprehends such a name as Num-shufu. Lastly, the opinion above mentioned I more readily adopted on finding that a friend, upon whose judgment I place great reliance, and with whom I discussed this point in Cairo, agreed with me in believing the two names in question to apply to one King. This opinion I must now retract ; for my friend, the 118 THE GREAT PYRAMID. [Part II. Reverend Mr. Lieder (to whom I am very deeply indebted for his having supplied me with very valu- able materials, as well as for much learned criticism upon this and other subjects treated in the first edition of this essay, and for most important aid which he has rendered me in every branch of my studies during a long course of years), has informed me that he has lately found both the names in question upon the monument which contains the inverted block. Hence I conclude that Shufu is Suphis I. ; and Num-shufu, Suphis II. ; and I believe them to have reigned to- gether, from the manner in which they are here men- tioned, and from their names being found in the Great Pyramid, which has two great chambers, and which all are agreed in stating to have been built in the reign of one King. My reason for identifying Shufu with Suphis I. is, that Shufu is evidently the correct name of the King to whom Herodotus ascribes the building of the Great Pyramid, which Manetho ascribes to Suphis I. Herodotus calls the King who built the Great Pyra- mid " Cheops," that is Khufu, a manner of pronouncing Shufu; and he tells us of his impiety and cruelty, assigning to him a reign of fifty years. Diodorus calls him " Chembes," or " Chemmis ; " and likewise gives him a reign of fifty years. (" Chembes" is evidently a corruption of Khufu.) He also tells us that, from the erection of the Great Pyramid to his time, not less than a thousand years, or as some wrote, more than three thousand and four hundred years, had elapsed. Both these statements are manifestly incorrect. The other statements of these historians respecting this King and the Great Pyramid are well known, and this is not the place to discuss them, as they do not furnish Sect. III. DATE OF THE SUPHISES. 119 any important contributions to our knowledge of gene- ral Egyptian history. The reign of Suphis I. is stated by Manetho to have lasted sixty-three, and that of Suphis II., sixty-six, years. From this it appears that the two Kings reigned sixty-three years together, and that Suphis II. reigned three years after the close of the reign of Suphis I. ; or perhaps they were not so long co-regents, and the reign of Suphis II. may have lasted a few years more than three after his predecessor's had concluded : but however this may be, it is certain that the approxima- tive chronology of this Dynasty derived from dates of the Calendar of the Panegyrics, &c., plainly shows that there is an errour of about sixty years in this part of Manetho's list, as preserved by Africanus. I have already mentioned the date of the commence- ment of the second Great Panegyrical Year, B.C. 2352, in the time of the two Suphises. The interval from Menes to Suphis I. remarkably agrees with the interval of one Great Panegyrical Year from the Era of Menes to the date of the Suphises : for the Third Dynasty evidently commenced during, or soon after, the reign of Athothis, the successor of Menes, and therefore the whole interval from the Era of Menes to the accession of Suphis I. could not much exceed the sum of the reigns of Menes and Athothis, with the length of the Third Dynasty, and of the reign of Soris. According to Africanus, this sum is 362 years ; and according to Eusebius, it is probably less. This I regard as a re- markable confirmation of the chronological system put forth in Part I., when we consider that Manetho's lists have, in so many instances, errours in excess. From what I have already remarked respecting the Kings of the Fourth and Fifth Dynasties, it appears 120 MENKAURA, THE FOUNDER OF [Part II. that Sisires, the fourth King of the latter Dynasty, whose hieroglyphic name is Seser-en-ra, was contempo- It rary with the two Suphises. Mr. Perring, who is well known for the ability and success with which he con- tinued Colonel Vyse's researches at the Pyramids, found this King's name, or rather a variation of it, in the quarry-marks of the Middle Pyramid of Aboo-Seer, which was therefore most probably built by him. The fourth King of the Fourth Dynasty, the succes- sor of Suphis II., is called by Manetho, according to Africanus, " Mencheres." This is the same King whom /^ u Herodotus and Diodorus call " Mykerinos;" the latter writer adding, that some call him "Mecherinos." To him they ascribe the erection of the Third Pyramid; and Co- lonel Vyse found his hieroglyphic name, Men-kau-ra, on part of his mummy-case when he opened that Pyramid. In Manetho's list of the Dynasties, as given by Africa- nus and Eusebius, the building of this Pyramid is attri- buted to Queen Nitokris, the last sovereign of the Sixth Dynasty, though Eusebius's version seems to state this merely on the authority of tradition. It will be seen by consulting the plans and sections in Colonel Vyse's excellent work on the Pyramids, that the Third Pyra- mid was originally much smaller than it is at present : it appears that Queen Nitokris enlarged it, and made a Sect. III.] THE THIRD PYRAMID. 121 new passage in the rock beneath it, leading to a new chamber: thus the original entrance is found to be at a considerable distance within the face of the Py- ramid. The names of the successors of Mencheres in the Fourth Dynasty are not, as far as I know, found upon the monuments. The same is the case with respect to the Kings whom Africanus's list makes the fifth and sixth Kings of the Fifth Dynasty; but the names of the last three Kings of that Dynasty are found together in the Royal Turin Papyrus, and the name and square-title of the last are also found in hierogly- phic inscriptions. These names, which I give in the hieroglyphic characters corresponding to the hieratic of the Papyrus, I now subjoin, with the lengths of their reigns from the Royal Papyrus and Manetho (Afr.). yWWS ^1 T EI Men-ka-hor, 8 years. Mencheres, 9 „ Tet. . . 28 years. Tancheres, 44 Unas, 30 years. Onnos, 33 „ Perhaps these differences in the lengths of reigns, as stated in the Royal Papyrus and by Manetho, may be thus explained. As we do not know the number of months, the eight years of the Papyrus probably corre- spond to the nine which Manetho assigns to Mencheres ; the real sum having doubtless been eight years and some months. The length of the reign of Tancheres in Manetho is probably a repetition of that of Rhathures. In the case of Onnos we cannot be sure that the units have not dropped out in the Papyrus ; so that Manetho's thirty-three years may be the correct sum. 122 CONTEMPORANEOUSNESS OF [Part II. While writing this work, I have received from my friend, the Reverend Mr. Lieder, one of the most im- portant of all the evidences that I now possess of the correctness of my scheme of the order of the Dynasties. In a letter to me from Cairo, he has informed me that he has found, by clearing out a remarkable tomb near the Great Pyramid, of the time of Assa, the fifth Shep- herd-King of the Fifteenth Dynasty, the names of Unas and Assa together, in an inscription in that tomb ; remarking that they belonged to the same Dynasty, one being the predecessor of the other, or were con- temporary. After the receipt of the communication above-mentioned, another letter brought me a copy of the inscription in which the two Kings are mentioned together, and of another containing the name of Assa ; each drawn by Mrs. Lieder, on a large scale, and evi- dently with the most scrupulous accuracy, with illus- trative remarks by Mr. Lieder. The tomb, which is that of a high functionary named Snemt-em-hat, as his name most probably reads, is near the north-west angle of the Great Pyramid. I give a copy of the inscrip- tion containing the two names in Plate V. This important inscription is divided into three parts: — first, the record of the celebration of Panegyries, which, not containing any date, excepting that of " the beginning of the year," I do not give : secondly, two la- teral inscriptions, each composed of the titles of Snemt- em-hat, who is called "devoted to Assa," and "devoted to Unas;" thus standing in the same relation to both Kings. In the lines in which Unas and Assa are both mentioned, Unas is called " Lord of Upper and Lower Egypt," while both he and Assa receive no titles in the other cases in which they are mentioned in the same inscription. This shows plainly that Unas, the last Sect. 111.] ELEPHANTINITES AND SHEPHERDS. 123 King of the Fifth Dynasty, was contemporary with Assa, the fifth King of the Fifteenth ; and hence we may make two very important deductions : — first, that the Elephantinites did not reign at Memphis between the Fourth and Sixth Dynasties ; secondly, if we cal- culate average Kings' reigns in the table of the hiero- glyphic names of the Kings of the first seventeen Dynasties, from the commencement of the Fourth Dynasty to the reign of Assa, the result will show that Eusebius's sum of thirty-one Kings of the Fifth Dy- nasty is, at least, very near the truth. The sums of the Fourth and Sixth Dynasties, and of the Fifteenth, excluding the reign of the last King, is about 577 years, which would give an average of about eighteen years for the reign of each King of the Fifth Dynasty, supposing that Dynasty to have consisted of thirty-one Kings. The contemporaneousness of Unas and Assa thus proved on monumental evidence is of the greatest importance, since it is one of the proofs of the contem- poraneousness, in the manner which I have already explained, of the Kingdoms of the Fifth and Fifteenth Dynasties, and those between them ; five out of the seven columns of the table of contemporary Dynasties being thus satisfactorily shown to be correct by this one evidence ; in addition to which there is also a variety of evidence, already adduced, by which the cor- rectness of the arrangement of the first two columns is proved. It seems to me to be probable that Assa treated Unas with respect, although doubtless more powerful himself, from motives of policy, as the latter was a legitimate Egyptian King. Before continuing this investigation in order, it is necessary to consider the monumental lists of those Dynasties whose history I am about to examine ; and I 124 LIST OF THE CHAMBER OF KINGS [part II. trust that the reader will excuse the dryness of some of the preliminary details which I place before him in order to present to him a complete view of the data by which I am guided in this inquiry. The most im- portant of the monumental data is the list of Kings commonly called that of " the Chamber of Kings." This list was sculptured in a small chamber of the great temple of El-Karnak, and is now in the Louvre, to which collection it was presented by M. Prisse, who removed it from Egypt. It contained sixty-one royal rings, fifteen of which are entirely obliterated, and ten much injured ; the remaining thirty-six being perfect, or nearly so. I shall now show in what order this list was arranged, and how the monuments enable us to ascertain that order. The list is divided into two equal parts ; one contain- ing originally thirty, and the other thirty-one, royal names, arranged in four rows : that part containing thirty-one names, and which was to the left of a person entering the chamber, is universally allowed to contain the names of sovereigns of whom some, at least, were anterior to those of the other part. This part, there- fore, I now examine. The lowest line reads from right to left, as is proved by our finding that No. 5, Seser-en-ra, whose prenomen is composed of the same signs as those of the name of an earlier King, (Sisires,) differently disposed, was a predecessor of No. 8, Ter-ka-ra (Sesertesen I.) ; and further, that No. 7, Sken-en-ra, was the immediate pre- decessor of the same King*. The second line, or that immediately above this, reads from left to right ; as No. 9, Amenemha I., reigned conjointly with No. 8, * Colonel Felix's Notes on Hieroglyphics. Sect. III.] DESCRIBED AND EXPLAINED. 125 Sesertesen I.; and as Nos. 10, 11, 12, and 13, were his successors; for although the names of Nos. 10 and 13 alone remain, their relative positions render this cer- tain. The next, or third line from the bottom, reads in the same manner, that is, from left to right ; for No. 22, Papa, is placed as the immediate predecessor of No. 23, Mer-en-ra, in a list, thrice occurring, in the grottoes of Chenoboscion. The fourth and last line of the same compartment also reads in the same manner ; for No. 25, Snufre, was the successor of Nufre-ka-ra, as we learn from the Turin Royal Papyrus ; and Nufre-ka-ra in the Chenoboscion lists immediately succeeds No. 23, Mer- en-ra. These are sufficient proofs of the correctness of my arrangement of each line of this side of the list ; and I am convinced that the lowest line is the first, and that the lines above it regularly continue the list ; the next being the second ; that above it, the third ; and the uppermost, the fourth ; on the following evi- dence : — In the first line. No. 8 is the first King of a Dynasty, other Kings of which are found in the next line. In the second line, No. 15, Nantef I., is the first King of a Dynasty, which is continued in the line above. Lastly, in the third line we find Kings which in the lists of Chenoboscion precede the first King of a Dynasty, other Kings of which are found in the fourth line. It will be seen that these views are amply confirmed by the monuments, by Manetho, and by the Turin Royal Papyrus. To render my explanation of this most important record more clear, I here insert the names in Roman characters, in the order in which they are there ar- ranged, giving both parts of the list''^. * For the Hieroglyphic names, see Plate VI. 126 LIST OF THE CHAMBER OF KINGS, [Part II. CO i-1 06 00 ih ^ a ^ S :g CO Hi Jig CO |d Is § - CO s li^ oi :2 CO iiii ^ id 7-< 11^ 00 CO c4 1 ^ si no « '^ |:S ^ CO l|l^ 06 ji^ » 1-4 CO III. CO T-H :S3 T-H ,^ si <^5 ^ ^■' ! 06 Sect. III.] AND OTHER LISTS. 127 Another tabular view which I insert will, I hope, render what I have to say still more plain. It will be seen that the Eleventh and Twelfth Dynasties are placed first : then the Ninth, Sixth, and Fifteenth, because con- temporary with the Eleventh and Twelfth ; and then the Thirteenth. The first column contains the nomen or prenomen from the left part of the list in Roman characters ; for in some cases the nomen is given, in others, the prenomen. When the other name of a King, whether it be nomen or prenomen, is found on the monuments or in the Royal Turin Papyrus, I have inserted it in brackets ; and where the name is partially erased in the table, I have been sometimes able to re- store it from these authorities. The second column contains corroborations of the arrangement from the list of Kings called the Tablet of Abydos, and from the Lists of Chenoboscion ; these extracts being distin- guished by the abbreviations T. A. and L. C. The third column contains parts of the Royal Turin Papyrus corresponding to the List of the Chamber of Kings ; and the fourth contains the portions of Manetho's List (according to the transcript of Africanus) which cor- respond to this List. The extracts from the Papyrus relating to the Twelfth Dynasty will be found more fully given in a table in page 156. 128 TABLE OF LISTS OF KINGS. [Part II. OB a a . ^ . ^ O Ph ^ ^ oQ pq p4 02 <5 ^ 'i-Hil:c4cO'*ld«C5t-lrH i-(-«*0«07-l(NCO-^0«Oi-l(N XI ^xixixj SXI M X X X'^S -^ £ 2 : ii - ^ g ^ ^ e8 o f5 d *-• ■g (H PI «5 s 2 g a a M.!:i-.G.fH-et> "tf d "^ '-^ _o ^ Or-71 W SJ « ^j •♦J ^ • .■ a i ao'ga,-! g, S g ? ? g ? c» {2; ^ 02 jfi a; EH CO ^ ^M T^ i fil r-l(NO:)-«*<^'»l>'OOOiO t~, tH W pi d a Sect. III.] CONTEMPORARY KINGS. 129 I must now proceed to show the evidence of the contemporaneousness and relative rank of these Kings, from the titles here given to them, which are very various, and are evidently disposed, not ornamentally nor regularly, but generally according to the rank of the Dynasty or King. In the first place we ob- serve, that the twelve remaining of the first fourteen names are prenomens; and that, of the other names, twelve in number, exclusive of the five erased rings, only three are prenomens, all the rest being nomens, although other monuments give us the prenomens of many of them. Secondly, the first fourteen Kings have all similar titles, as far as those titles are pre- served, " Lord of all Egypt," " Lord of Upper and Lower Egypt," " Good God," and " Lord aree-khet," a title of which the signification is uncertain. No. 15, Nantef I., has the title " Good God, lord of Upper and Lower Egypt." Nos. 17, 18, 19, are each called " Horns," or "Prince ;" and their second title is, in each case, almost, or wholly, effaced. No. 20 is merely called "Chief." No. 22, Papa, and No. 23, Mer-en-ra, are both called " Lord of Upper and Lower Egypt." No. 25, Snufre, is called " Lord of all Egypt ;" and Nos. 26, 27, 28, only " Good God." Besides this, after every name is the title " Speaker of truth," in such a position supposed to signify "deceased." Hence it is evident that certain Kings are treated with much more honour than others, in this list. The reason is obvious : Thothmes III., who caused this record to be sculptured in the great temple of Thebes, was a Diospolite King, and therefore he gives prenomens to all the Kings of Diospolite Dynasties. The prenomen was undoubtedly more honourable than the nomen : the former being assumed by a King on his accession to the throne ; K 130 EXPLANATION OF THE LIST OF [Part IL the latter being only a proper name. Thus the list is naturally divided into Diospolite Kings, and Kings con- temporary with them. The latter Kings are again divided into Dynasties by their various titles. Are not these facts, I would ask, strongly confirmatory of the contemporaneousness of the early Dynasties ? If the Dynasties contained in this list were all successive, how is it that their arrangement is totally different from that of Manetho ? The arrangement is clear ; for it cannot be denied that the left portion contains the Eleventh, Twelfth, part of the Ninth, the Sixth, and Fifteenth, Dynasties ; only two of these Dynasties being successive in their numbers. In the Royal Turin Papyrus also, the Fifteenth Dynasty immedi- ately follows the Sixth ; the one concluding, and the other commencing, in the same fragment. These are strong evidences of contemporaneousness ; but there is, in this list, a far stronger evidence, not only of the contemporaneousness of certain of the first seventeen Dynasties with others of the same portion of Manetho's list, but also of the particular scheme of contempo- raneousness which I have adopted. The left portion of the list commences with the Eleventh and Twelfth Dynasties, and concludes with part of a Dynasty which is shown to be the Thirteenth, from the one name that remains ; and I may here add, that I shall be able to show that all the Kings of the other, or right, half belong to the Thirteenth Dynasty. Therefore, the list commences with the Eleventh and Twelfth Dynasties, and concludes with the Thirteenth Dynasty; and therefore the intermediate Kings must be those who were for the most part contemporary with the Eleventh and Twelfth Dynasties. On referring to the table of contemporary Dynasties, it will be seen that the Sect. III.] THE CHAMBER OF KINGS. 131 Ninth, the Sixth, and the Fifteenth Dynasties were more or less contemporary with the Eleventh and Twelfth: thus 6th - 9th - 11th. 12th - 15th. 13th. I must now briefly state my reasons for assigning the Kings in this list to certain of Manetho's Dynasties. Nos. 8-14, inclusive, excepting No. 9, are the Kings of Manetho's Twelfth Dynasty: this is now so well proved that it cannot admit of the least doubt. The first seven Kings, since one of them is a direct an- cestor, and another a predecessor, of the first King of the Twelfth Dynasty, must belong to the Eleventh Dynasty. No. 9, Amenemha I., is a King of the same Dynasty in Manetho's list ; and is put after Sesertesen I., in the present list, probably because he reigned, for some part of his rule, conjointly with him. Nos. 15-20 are Kings of a Dynasty of which the third, fourth, and fifth Kings are called " Princes ; " and the sixth is called " a Chief." I assign No. 15, Nantef I., to this Dynasty on account of his name, although his titles are different from those of his successors. After No. 20, one name is lost ; and next we find the nomen of Mee-ra Papa, who corresponds to Phiops, the fourth King of the Sixth Dynasty, in Africanus's version of Manetho's list; and the prenomen, Mer-en-ra, of his successor Menthesuphis immediately follows. We next find another name wanting ; and then follow four names which are evidently those of the second, third, fourth, and fifth Kings of Manetho's Fifteenth Dynasty. Nos. 29 and 30 are erased. No. 31 is a King of the Thirteenth Dynasty, as I judge from his prenomen, K 2 132 THE NANTEFS. [Part IL which is similar to those of the Kings of that Dynasty which continue the list, and entirely occupy the right part, which I shall afterwards have to consider. As I have pointed out the Kings of the Sixth, Eleventh, Twelfth, and Fifteenth Dynasties, the Nantefs must be the earlier Kings of the Ninth. That they are of a Hera- cleopolite Dynasty is most satisfactorily proved by a fact which Sir Gardner Wilkinson has mentioned to me as a confirmation of my system, and therefore they can only be of the Ninth or Tenth Dynasty, the only two Heracleopolite Dynasties. Since certain of the Kings of the Nantef family are proved by the monuments to have been contemporary with the Eleventh Dynasty, as Munt-hotp was contemporary with Amenemha I., they can only be of the Ninth Dynasty. — On these evidences I have based the comparison between the list of Manetho and those of the monuments given in the preceding table. The most important differences in each Dynasty will be noticed in their proper places. The reader, however, will see at once that the Twelfth and Fifteenth Dynasties present no great difficulties. The Eleventh is shorter than in Manetho's list ; a difference which is most probably caused by certain usurping Kings being included in that list, and ex- cluded in this. The Sixth Dynasty contains two Kings too many in Manetho's list as given by Africanus: Queen Nitokris is most probably here omitted, as it ap- pears that the names of Queens were not generally admitted into the national lists; and in the lists of Chenoboscion we find Nufre-ka-ra, the prenomen of Salatis, placed immediately after Mer-en-ra ; therefore his is most probably the wanting name. No. 24. Respecting the other lists that I have adduced in confirmation of my arrangement of the list of the Sect. III.] THE PRENOMEN OP SALATIS. 133 Chamber of Kings, I have nothing to add to what I have already said, excepting with respect to the lists of Chenoboscion. A copy of one of these lists has been already published by Sir Gardner Wilkinson, who was the first to visit and describe the interesting tombs at that place. I have been enabled, by com- paring these lists with the list of the Chamber of Kings and the Royal Turin Papyrus, to ascertain that Nufre-ka-ra, the last name at Chenoboscion, and pro- bably the No. 24 of the list of the Chamber of Kings, is the prenomen of Salatis, the first Shepherd-King of the Fifteenth Dynasty. It is worthy of remark that the scribe who wrote the Royal Turin Papyrus omits the Ra in this prenomen, writing it Nufre-ka, as if to indicate that the King who bore it was a foreign King, and therefore not a Ra, or Pharaoh, by right. The solar disk, called " Ra," or " Phra " with the article, is the Egyptian for " Pharaoh," as is now acknowledged by all authorities. I have now to resume my examination of that part of the history of Egypt which preceded the Shepherd- invasion, to which the remarks that I have been making form a necessary introduction. The last Dynasties which I noticed were the Fourth, (Memphites,) and the Fifth, (Elephantinites,) which were partly contemporary, and therefore the next Dynasty to be considered is the Sixth, which immedi- ately succeeded the Fourth, reigning at Memphis. To this Dynasty, Manetho, according to the transcript of Africanus, assigns six monarchs, and a duration of 203 years ; the transcript of Eusebius also mentions the same duration, but does not state the number of monarchs. There is an evident errour in Africanus's list of this Dynasty. The second and third Kings, 134 TATA, OR OTHOES. [Part II. Phios and Methusuphis, are repetitions of the fourth and fifth, Phiops and Menthesuphis. My reasons for this assertion are, that but one King is wanting be- tween a King of the Ninth Dynasty and Papa, in the list of the Chamber of Kings ; that Sir Gardner Wilkinson has found the name of Phiops with a King's name which he agrees with me in considering that of the first King of this Dynasty, and which cannot apply to either Phios or Methusuphis ; and that the names of the two pairs of Kings are so remarkably similar. That Papa is Phiops is quite certain from the length of the reign of that King in Manetho, and the monu- mental evidence in the numerous sculptures that he has left. We can therefore construct the following table of this Dynasty on the authority of Manetho and the monuments. SIXTH DYNASTY. MANETHO. 1. Othoes ..... 30 4. Phiops 100 6. Menthesuphis . . 1 6. Nitokris .... 12 Sum . 143 MONUMENTS. Tata. 1. — 2. Mee-ra Papa. 3. Mer-en-ra — - 4. Neet-akartee. The hieroglyphic name of Othoes, the first King of this Dynasty, reads " Tata," but it was also pronounced /C^ "Atat" or " Athath," as " Papa" was pronounced " Apap" or " Aphaph." In Manetho's lists we read that Othoes Sect. III.] PAPA, PHIOPS, OR APAPPUS. 135 was slain by his guards. We know nothing more respecting him. We are also told in Manetho's lists that Phiops began to reign when he was six years old. His hiero- glyphic name is found in many tablets and inscriptions in various parts of Egypt, which show that he was a very powerful King. I have already noticed the cir- cumstance of his having left many records of the cele- bration of the commencements of periods of Royal Panegyries, or Jubilees ; affording a strong confirmation of the long reign which Manetho assigns to him ; for if the Jubilee in the thirtieth or thirty-first year of a King's reign were remarkable, how much more re- markable must have been that in his sixtieth or sixty- first year, and still more so that in his ninetieth or ninety-first year. We know nothing respecting the successor of Phiops, who is called in Africanus's list Menthesuphis, but that his prenomen was Mer-en-ra. 3?* Queen Nitokris concluded the Sixth Dynasty, ac- cording to Manetho, in Africanus's version, and accord- ing to the Royal Turin Papyrus. I give her name, rendered into hieroglyphics, from the hieratic charac- 136 QUEEN NITOKRIS. [Part II. ters of that record. In Manetho's list we are told that she built the Third Pyramid, a statement which I have already had occasion to notice in treating of the Fourth Dynasty. Herodotus also mentions Queen Nitokris, With her the Sixth Dynasty ended; the Shepherds, who had lately invaded Egypt, taking Memphis, which they continued to hold for more than two centuries. I shall have to speak of the invasion of Egypt by the Shepherds, and their domination, in the next section. During the Sixth Dynasty, the Heracleopolite king- dom commenced ; and its first Dynasty was the Ninth. Of the Kings of this Dynasty, Manetho's lists mention but one, the first, by name; but the hieroglyphic names of several of them have been ascertained by me. I have already mentioned the fact of Sir Gardner Wilkinson's having found a proof that the Kings of the Nantef family found in the Chamber of Kings are Kings of a Heracleopolite Dynasty : it is this : five of the six Kings of the Nantef family have nomens into the composition of which the name of the Egyptian Hercules, the god of Sebennytus, and also doubtless of Heracleopolis, enters ; and this proves that these six Kings belong to a Heracleopolite Dynasty, which can only be the Ninth, for I have already shown that it cannot be the Tenth. This fact is even of greater importance than it appears to be at first sight ; for it not only proves that the Kings whose names are Nos. Sect. Ill] HERACLEOPOLITE KINGS. 137 15-20, inclusive, in the list of the Chamber of Kings, are of Manetho's Ninth Dynasty, but it also furnishes one of the many proofs of the contemporane- ousness of certain of Manetho's Dynasties. It is so evident from the monuments that the Nantefs were immediately before the Twelfth Dynasty, that Mr. Birch and M. de Rouge concluded they must be of the Eleventh Dynasty, Even if they were right in this, which I have shown could not be the case, the proof of contemporaneousness would not be in the least invalidated, since two of the Kings of the true Eleventh Dynasty are shown by their relationship and connection with Sesertesen I. to have been contem- poraries of the Nantefs; not to mention the direct proofs of contemporaneousness. Six names of Kings of the Ninth Dynasty are given in the list of the Chamber of Kings, while Manetho, according to Africanus, assigns to it nineteen Kings, and according to Eusebius, four. The latter number is obviously erroneous, so that Africanus's is probably right, since it is not likely that both are wrong. How is it, then, that only six names are given in the list of the Chamber of Kings ? The last Nantef whose name is given in the Chamber of Kings is called merely " chief," and I shall be able to show that he reigned about the time of the commencement of the Twelfth Dynasty ; and this shows, apparently, why none of his successors are given in this list ; for the Twelfth Dy- nasty may be supposed, with great probability, from this, to have laid claim to the dominions of the Hera- cleopolites ; and it is evident that the Diospolites of the Eleventh Dynasty were as inferior in power to the earlier Heracleopolites as the later Heracleopolites were to the Diospolites of the Twelfth, and afterwards 138 NINTH AND TENTH DYNASTIES. [Part 11. to the Shepherds. Respecting the Chronology of the Heracleopolite kingdom, it appears to me that it is not very difficult to form a tolerably accurate judgment. If we take the durations that Africanus assigns to the Ninth and Tenth Dynasties, the whole sum is thirty- eight Kings who reigned five hundred and ninety-four years. I have already shown the probability that Africanus is correct with respect to the Ninth Dynasty ; and I must remark that the number of Kings is agreeable with the length he assigns to it. With respect to the Tenth Dynasty, Africanus and Eusebius entirely agree in the number of its Kings, and the duration of their rule. Most probably this Dynasty ended at the time of the great Shepherd-war of ex- pulsion. I subjoin a table of the two Dynasties, from Manetho, according to Africanus, and from the monu- ments. NINTH DYNASTY. MANETHO. MONUMENTS. 1. Achthoes 1. Nantef [I.] (2) 2. Nantef [II.] Naa (3) 3. Nantef [III.] (4) 4. Nantef [IV.] .... (S) 5. Munt-hotp. (6) 6. Na[ntef V.] Thirteen more Kings. TENTH DYNASTY. Nineteei 1 Kings. IManetho, according to the lists, tells us that Ach- thoes was more cruel than any of his predecessors, and did evil to all the Egyptians ; and, at last,, was seized with madness, and killed by a crocodile. It is well known that in some parts of Egypt the crocodile was Sect. III.] ACHTHOES. 139 particularly venerated ; and in others, execrated and destroyed ; and among those who were most noted for their hostility to that animal were the Heracleopo- lites''^. Was Achthoes a warlike King, who gained considerable power in Upper Egypt, and ruled in his own nome with lenity, and in other parts of his king- dom with severity; and in consequence did some of the ancient Egyptians execrate, and others revere, the animal that killed him ? The reader may remember the tradition related by Diodorus Siculus t, respecting the preservation of an ancient King by a crocodile. The learned Sir Gardner Wilkinson remarks, that, although Diodorus calls the King so preserved " Menas" (his mode of writing Menes), the story evi- dently refers to Moeris, from what follows it t. It appears that the hieroglyphic nomen of Achthoes is Nantef ; the former name is probably his prenomen. In the list of the Chamber of Kings, Nantef I.'s nomen is written thus : his prenomen is not yet found, as far as I am aware. The name Nantef is also written more fully : /WVSA. and abbreviated thus imiim rw^ 23 u\\\( L * In speaking of Heracleopolis, I mean the city of that name in Middle Egypt, which, without doubt, was the city of the Kings of the Ninth and Tenth Dynasties. f I. 89. t Ancient Egyptians, Second Series, vol. ii., p. 233. 140 NANTEF II., III., AND IV. [Part II. I have found the nomen of Nantef III. written with the former of these variations. The nomen, prenomen, and square title, of Nantef II., surnamed " the Great," have been found in hiero- glyphics. There is satisfactory evidence, which is ^^ A/WNA iJJJQJJi, i ^i.iii| | (^ , known to Sir Gardner Wilkinson and Mr. Birch, that this King, as well as Nantef IV., was anterior to the Twelfth Dynasty, and that he was succeeded by a brother named Nantef This enables us to supply the destroyed nomen. No. 16, between Nantef I. and Nantef III., in the list of the Chamber of Kings, and to decide that the partly-effaced nomen. No. 18, is that of Nantef IV. The nomen of Nantef III. is the same as that of Nantef I., which I have just given : his prenomen has not been found. We know nothing of the events of his reign, excepting such events as belong to the his- tory of other Dynasties, and that of Egypt generally, which probably fell in that period. Respecting Nantef IV., we know as little as we do of his predecessor. His prenomen and nomen have been found, and I here insert them. He has a title which I 'm r*\ a ■Jill 1 1 u. cannot certainly interpret, in his nomen. Sect. Ill] MUNT-HOTP. 141 In the reign of the next King, Munt-hotp, we again find direct monumental evidence of the contempo- raneousness of two Dynasties. The prenomen of Munt-hotp, which I here insert with his nomen, reads Jllllllfr. Neb-tete-ra, that is, " Pharaoh, lord of Upper and Lower Egypt." In a tablet on the Kuseyr Road (a road which crosses the Desert between the Thebaid and the Red Sea), we find the following royal names : a prenomen, inclosed in a royal ring (which Mr. Burton, in his " Excerpta Hieroglyphica," gives in cha- racters which read " Si-n-hes-ra," but M. Prisse, in his supplement to Champollion's " Monumens de FEgypte et de la Nubie," gives differently), preceded by the title " Lord of all Egypt ; " with the prenomen of Amen- emha I., also enclosed in a royal ring ; and the name " Munt-hotp ; " both preceded by a title which I cannot read, and that of " chief." Dr. Tomlinson, the learned Bishop of Gibraltar, has already directed the attention of students to this tablet. In another tablet, to be more fully noticed hereafter, we find the name "Amenemha," not enclosed in a royal ring, but with the title " King " given by Munt-hotp, whose name is enclosed in a royal ring, and who is thus identified with the chief Munt- hotp ; and the same tablet also shows us that Amenemha I. was confirmed in his kingdom by Munt-hotp. Hence we ascertain that Munt-hotp, the fifth King of the Ninth Dynasty, was contemporary with Amenemha L, the last King of the Eleventh Dynasty. Perhaps the 142 CONTEMPORANEOUSNESS [Part IT. prenomen which occurs in the upper part of the first tablet which I have been noticing is that of the second predecessor of Munt-hotp, Nantef III. ; for (whether we follow the copy of Mr. Burton or that of M. Prisse) we do not know it to be the prenomen of any pre- decessor of Amenemha 1., nor of any Diospolite King, nor is it the prenomen of the immediate predecessor of Munt-hotp. 1 formerly held it to be most probably a variation of the prenomen of Papa, of the Sixth Dynasty ; but 1 think that my opinion was not based upon sufficiently satisfactory grounds ; especially since I have found that M. Prisse gives it differently. This is not an unfit place in which to notice a proof of the partial contemporaneousness of the Ninth Dy- nasty with the Eleventh and Twelfth, and with the Fifteenth, deducible from the names of persons who lived in the time of the Twelfth Dynasty. It was customary among the ancient Egyptians to name some of their children after the reigning King and other Kings of his Dynasty; so that we find the names Sesertesen and Amenemha very prevalent during the time of the Twelfth Dynasty ; whereas we find those names seldom applied to persons not born in the time of Kings bearing them : for example, I have found only one Amenemha after the time of the Kings of that name. Now it is very remarkable that Nantef and Snufre, the former the name of five of the first six Kings of the Ninth Dynasty, the latter the pre- nomen of the second Shepherd-King of the Fifteenth Dynasty, are very commonly applied to individuals who lived in the time of the Twelfth Dynasty; a fact which, if we had no other evidence, would indicate that the Ninth and Fifteenth Dynasties immediately preceded in time, or were partly contemporaneous with, Sect. III.] OF CERTAIN DYNASTIES. 143 the Twelfth ; thus affording another independent ar- gument for the scheme of contemporaneousness which I have adopted. But what is still more remarkable is this; that we find a similar correspondence in the nomens and prenomens of Kings. Nufre-ka-ra and its variations are found as nomens in the Second, and Fifth Dynasties, and, as prenomens in the Eleventh, and Fifteenth Dynasties ^. We find two Menchereses, Men-ka-ra of the Second Dynasty, and Men-kau-ra of the Fourth, nearly, if not quite, contemporaries. In like manner, we find two Papas, one in the Second Dynasty, and the other in the Sixth, in like manner, nearly, if not quite, contemporaries. On the other hand, we find scarcely any instances of Kings at dis- tant intervals bearing the same or similar nomens or prenomens. This inquiry might be carried to a still further length ; but I think that I have said enough to satisfy any candid mind that the names of men, as well as of Kings, furnish remarkable arguments for the scheme of contemporaneousness explained in this work. We know some other particulars of the history of the time of Munt-hotp ; but these will be more pro- perly discussed in the examination of that of the Eleventh Dynasty. The Shepherd-invasion, the great event of this part of the ancient Egyptian history, took place in the reign of this King or in that of his pre- decessor. Of the last of the Heracleopolites men- * On referring to the table of the hieroglyphic names of the Kings of the first Seventeen Dynasties, it will be seen that part of the Second Dynasty was contemporary with part of the Fifth, and terminated about the time of the commencement of the Fif- teenth, being also partly contemporary with the Eleventh Dynasty. 144 THE DIOSPOLITE KINGDOM. [Part II. tioned in the list of the Chamber of Kings, the suc- cessor of Munt-hotp, whose name is partly erased, but was doubtless Nantef (V.), we know nothing but that in that list he is only called "Chief," and his name appears not to have been enclosed in a ring, though this part of the list is so much erased as to render it uncertain. I have already mentioned the probable reason why Thothmes III. does not treat this personage as a King. The history of the subsequent Kings of this Dynasty, and of all those of the Tenth, is unknown ; and I have already given the most pro- bable Chronology of the two Dynasties. The Diospolite Kingdom commenced with the Eleventh Dynasty, which was partly contemporary with the Sixth and Ninth. Of the Kings of this Dynasty we know very little, and they evidently did not possess much power. Its chronology also presents consider- able difficulties. Manetho says that it consisted of sixteen Kings, who reigned forty-three years; after whom Ammenemes reigned sixteen years. Thus it appears that, if we include Ammenemes, (Ame- nemha I.,) who does not appear to be assigned to this or the succeeding Dynasty, strictly speaking, the sum would be seventeen Kings and fifty-nine years. In the list of the Chamber of ings, we find only eight Kings of this Dynasty, the legitimate Kings; but in the Turin Papyrus we find several others, seven in number. This portion of the latter list is preceded by a prenomen, partly effaced, which is probably that of Amenemha I., whose prenomen twice occurs among the names that follow; so that altogether there are ten names, including the seven first mentioned; and thus the Turin Papyrus gives at least seven Kings more r Sect. III.] THE ELEVENTH DYNASTY. 145 than the List of the Chamber of Kings. This sug- gests, (as, I believe, Dr. Hincks was the first to re- mark,) that several of the Kings of the Eleventh Dynasty were usurpers, and that Amenemha I. was probably at least twice deposed, and afterwards restored to the throne. Part of this King's prenomen, or a similar name, occurs before the place of the first King of Manetho's Twelfth Dynasty, in another part of the same list. The monuments shew that Amen- emha I. was the co-regent of Sesertesen I., the first King of the Twelfth Dynasty, for part of his reign ; and this, added to what Manetho says, indicates his second restoration. The sixteen years' reign of Amen- emha I., mentioned by Manetho, probably refers to the time during which that King reigned after the commencement of the Twelfth Dynasty. Since the portion of the Eleventh Dynasty which I have men- tioned above, in the Royal Turin Papyrus, is only in a fragment, and since another fragment apparently con- tains the prenomens Nos. 3 and 5 of the list of the Chamber of Kings, with the omission of No. 4, but both partly erased, it appears that Manetho is right in assigning sixteen Kings to the Dynasty, exclusive of Amenemha I. It is not so easy to form a probable opinion as to the duration of the Dynasty ; for forty- three years seems, at first sight, far too short a sum ; and that it is really so is proved by our having the date of the forty-sixth year of the King whose pre- nomen reads Neb-tu-ra*. Perhaps it commenced shortly after the Ninth Dynasty. The only remarkable King of this Dynasty was Amenemha I., the Ammen- * Champollion's Deux Lettres au Due de Blacas, PI. XV. L 146 TERMINATION OF [Part II. emes of Manetho. Perhaps the Shepherd -invasion happened during his reign, though I think it most pro- bable that it took place in that of an earlier King. There is an important tablet relating to this King on the Kuseyr Road, a copy of which is given in Plate V. of Mr. Burton's Excerpta. It commences thus : " The second year, the fifteenth day of Paophi, [of the reign of] the Horus, lord of Upper and Lower Egypt, lord of Upper Egypt, lord of Lower Egypt, lord of Upper and Lower Egypt, the gold of the gods, King of all Egypt, Neb-tete-ra, the son of the sun, Munt-hotp, living for ever." I have translated all these titles to shew that a King who calls himself lord of all Egypt, &c., was not necessarily sole sovereign, as I have already had occasion to observe. After some more titles, &c., we read, " The lord of all Egypt, Neb- tete-ra, living for ever, like the sun, says, I will establish his majesty, the illustrious, the chief, chief of the buildings, the magnanimous, [literally fullhearted] King, Amenemha [L], with soldiers, .... in Upper Egypt." In the fourteenth line of the same tablet, we find a mention of Munt-hotp's having appointed a certain person, called the chief of the " foreigners," over, or chief of. Upper and Lower Egypt. What I have translated " foreigners" is the group which I give in Plate VI I. No. 5, and which probably reads " Penu," or Phoenicians. From this record we ascertain that Munt-hotp, at the time supreme King, made Amen- Sect, III.] THE ELEVENTH DYNASTY. 147 emha I. King of Upper Egypt, or confirmed him in his kingdom, endeavouring by an alliance with him to counteract the power of the Shepherds. It ap- pears also that he was forced by the Shepherds, who seem to have flattered him by acknowledging him as supreme King, to give one of their chiefs an im- portant title, which would oblige the Egyptians to acknowledge his authority to a certain extent. The Fourteenth Dynasty, or Xoite Kingdom, may have commenced during the time of the Eleventh ; but as it more probably commenced with, or during the time of, the Twelfth, I shall notice it hereafter. I have now, concluded the examination of that part of the history of Egypt which relates to the period be- fore the Shepherd-invasion, and I have somewhat over- passed my proper limits in treating of the Eleventh Dynasty until its conclusion, which was subsequent to that invasion by a few years. This I have done for the sake of clearness. SECTION IV. HISTORY OF THE PERIOD OF THE SHEPHERD- DOMINATION. In the present section I shall consider the most re- markable memorials of a period of more than five hundred years, during the greater part of which, chiefly after the time of the Twelfth Dynasty, the Shepherd- Kings appear to have been predominant. This portion of the history of Egypt is the more interesting on account of the manner in which it illustrates that of neighbouring countries at this remote period. Before considering the account which Manetho gives of the invasion of Egypt by the Shepherds, it will be proper to inquire what causes led to that remarkable event, and how it came to pass that Egypt was so easily subjugated by the foreign invaders. In the fourteenth chapter of Genesis, we are told that a great confederation of Kings, Amraphel, King of Shinar, Arioch, King of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer, King of Elam, (Persia,) and Tidal, King of the Goim, or Gen- tiles, invaded Palestine, and compelled the Kings of " the cities of the plain" to become tributaries of Che- dorlaomer, the chief of the confederation. " Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled. And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer, and the Kings that [were] with him, and smote the Rephaims in Ashteroth Karnaim, and the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emims in Shaveh Kiriathaim, and the Horites in their Mount Seir, unto El-paran, which [is] by the wilderness. And Sect. IV.] CHEDORLAOMER. 149 they returned, and came to En-mishpat, which [is] Kadesh, and smote all the country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites, that dwell in Hazezon-tamar." Having recorded these events, the sacred historian proceeds to relate the defeat of the Kings of the cities of the plain by the four confederate monarchs, whose names are again given, and whose overthrow by Abra- ham is afterwards narrated. I have been particular in quoting part of this passage verbatim, to prevent mis- apprehension of the position of some of the conquered nations. As Khem is the hieroglyphic name of Egypt, as the Shepherd-invasion evidently took place about the time of Chedorlaomer's expeditions, and as a Ham was conquered during those expeditions, it might be supposed that the confederate monarchs conquered Egypt, and that the Shepherds were garrisons left by them ; but this would be an erroneous idea : Ham, when applied to Egypt, is written with Heth; (orr;) but here Ham is written with He ; (DH ;) and even if we allow that, by a mistake of a copyist, Heth may have been changed to He, in consequence of the simi- larity of the two letters, the order of march shews that this Ham can only have been somewhere in Palestine. The dates of the two invasions of Palestine which we are considering are not easily fixed with great exact- ness. All we know is, that the second happened be- tween Abraham's journey to Palestine from Haran and the birth of Ishmael, therefore between the years B.C. 2082 and 2071 ; and consequently the date of the first would be between the years B.C. 2095 and 2084, according to Hales's chronology, slightly corrected by me. I shall shew that the reign of the first Shepherd- King commenced about this time ; and the Shepherd- invasion evidently happened not many years before 150 INVASION OF EGYPT [Part II. his reign. It apj3ears to me that the first invasion of Palestine by Chedorlaomer and his confederates pro- bably caused the Shepherds to leave the East, and settle in Egypt. Further, Manetho tells us that Salatis built Avaris from his fear of the Assyrians, who were " then increasing in power," and by whom Manetho probably means the confederate monarchs. Such an event as Chedorlaomer's first expedition must have unsettled many powerful tribes of those coun- tries whence the Shepherds came. It is also probable that the "grievous" famine which compelled Abraham to visit Egypt caused a considerable influx of Shep- herd-settlers. The second famine, which caused Isaac to go to Gerar, must have had the same effect. Manetho tells us that the Shepherds easily gained possession of Egypt without a battle. When we see from the monuments how powerful Egypt was when ruled by the Kings of the Fourth Dynasty and their contemporaries, it naturally surprises us to read such an account of its subjugation. It seems to me, how- ever, that it is not difficult to see the probable cause. For more than six centuries, from the time of Menes, the founder of the monarchy, to the Shepherd-invasion, it appears that the Egyptians enjoyed a long period of prosperity; and, contented with the natural fertility of their own country, did not seek to enrich themselves by foreign conquest. Indeed they do not appear to have engaged in any external war, further than in oc- casional expeditions beyond the boundaries to repress the incursions of Nomadic tribes ; and, possibly, in in- roads into the interior of Africa for slaves, ivory, and other objects of trade. But this long period of pro- sperity had its usual results : the inhabitants became indolent and luxurious, and the kingdom became sepa- Sect. IV.] BY THE SHEPHERDS. 151 rated into small states. When this state of things had long continued, and a peace of great duration had pro- duced, as we may conclude, delusive feelings of secu- rity, the Shepherds invaded Egypt. This, however, would explain the circumstance that the Shepherds con- quered Egypt, but not that they conquered it without a battle. How could this have been the case, when that country was populous, and its inhabitants were not unacquainted with the art of war ? I think it pro- bable that some one of the Egyptian Kings, to recover his rightful supremacy, or to destroy the power of a dangerous rival, adopted the unwise expedient of in- viting foreigners to aid him in attaining his object. The sudden appearance of a large force of foreigners, in alliance with an Egyptian King, would have awed the other Kings, his contemporaries, and induced them to become tributaries, rather than to risk every- thing upon an unequal contest. Then the Shepherds would not hesitate to consider their own interests, and forget those of him who had invited them. The his- tory of the world, in all ages, affords instances of the same kind ; but my explanation of this event is, of course, based upon probabilities and conjecture ; though I think that it is the only one that can be offered, and it is not inconsistent with the last inscription which I have noticed, Manetho gives us a most circumstantial and inte- resting account of the invasion and conquest of Egypt by the Shepherds, which is preserved by Josephus in his tract against Apion. From its great importance, it will not be amiss to give this narrative in full, with a commentary on the most remarkable statements which it contains. The historian begins by saying, " We had [formerly] 152 APPELLATIONS OF [Part IL a King whose name was Timaios (or Timaos)." This King's name does not occur in Manetho's lists ; and from the time at which the Shepherd-invasion took place, we can only say that he must have belonged to the Second, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth, Eleventh, or Four- teenth, Dynasty. " In his time, [it came to pass,] I know not how, that God was displeased, and [there came], in a strange manner, from the East, men of an ignoble race, [who] had the confidence to invade the country, and easily subdued it by their power without a battle." The Egyptians called these invaders " Shepherds," and " Hycsos," or " Shepherd-kings," according to Ma- netho's statements. Respecting their race, he (or Jo- sephus, perhaps,) says, in a subsequent place to that which I am now considering, that some said they were Arabs. In the list of the Dynasties, the Kings of the First Dynasty of Shepherds, those who reigned at Memphis, are called Phoenicians. This seems to be confirmed by what Herodotus says respecting the temenos, or sacred grove, of Proteus, at Memphis. He remarks, " Phoenicians of Tyre dwell round this teme- nos, and this whole tract is called the Camp of the Tyrians." (irepiOLKeovan Be to refievos tovto ^oi,vlx€9 TvpioL' KaXeerat Be 6 x^pos ovtos o a-vvdiras Tvpicov o-TparoTreBov,) The historian adds, that " in the temenos of Proteus is a temple, which is called that of the foreign Aphrodite.'"'^ The name of the Camp of the Tyrians seems to me to point to the time of the taking of Memphis by the first Shepherds, some of the de- scendants, or reputed descendants, of whom may have continued to live at Memphis in the time of Herodotus. * Herod, ii. 113. Sect. IV.] THE SHEPHERDS. 153 The foreign Aphrodite can scarcely be doubted to be Ashtaroth, called by the Greeks " Astarte," whose name is found at the quarries of Tura, opposite Memphis, in a tablet of the time of Amenoph II. We shall see, however, in a future place, that there is abundant evi- dence to show that the Shepherds did not consist of but one race, although their first Kings may have been Phoenicians of Tyre. It is evident that many foreign settlers of different races came to Egypt during the Shepherd-period, and it is not improbable that the first Shepherds who invaded that country were of several tribes. In the monumental inscriptions we find men- tion of "Shepherds,"* " Phoenicians?" t and "Enemies;"* and in the inscriptions of the time of Sethee L, the first King of Manetho's Nineteenth Dynasty, " Enemies of the land of Shasu."§ I shall show, in a subsequent place, that the " Enemies of the land of Shasu" appear to have been of the same race as some or all of the first Shepherds, and to have invaded Egypt a second time, and been expelled by Sethee I., in the first year of his reign. Manetho continues his narrative in the follow- ing words : "And having subdued the rulers, they also burnt up the cities, and demolished the temples of the gods ; and they acted most cruelly to all the natives, slaying some, and making slaves of the children and wives of others." The manner in which the Shepherds pillaged Egypt and maltreated its inhabitants may perhaps have been * See Plate VII., No. 6. t See Plate VII., No. 5. I See Plate VII., No. 7, latter half. § See Plate VII., No. 13, first twelve characters. 154 ' EFFECTS OF [Part II. somewhat exaggerated bj some of Manetho's authori- ties, from the bitter hatred which the Egyptians had for those foreign tribes at a later period ; but there is evidence of the ruin which they effected among the monuments of Egypt. No temples remain of the time before the Shepherd-invasion, and few monuments of the time of the Shepherd-rule. Their destruction is not, however, to be wholly attributed to the foreign subjugators. We must not forget that it is generally acknowledged, from what remains of them, that the temples constructed before the time of the Eighteenth Dynasty were in most cases smaller, and less strong in construction, than those of later times. I shall be able to show that Manetho misrepresents the Kings of the Fifteenth Dynasty ; some of whom, at least, instead of being tyrants and oppressors, were benefactors to the Egyptian race: but perhaps this is the fault of Mane- tho's authorities. The invasion and subjugation of Egypt by the Shepherds must have been the chief cause of the remarkable changes which then took place in the Dynasties which ruled that country. The Mem- phite kingdom was for a time supplanted by that of the Shepherds of the Fifteenth Dynasty, who seized tlie city founded by Menes, and continued to reign there for little less than three centuries. The Eleventh Dynasty, after a time of confusion, was succeeded by the Twelfth, which soon appears to have deprived the Heracleopolites and Elephantinites of much of their power ; though the Fifth Dynasty, and most probably the Ninth, continued for a long time afterwards. About this time also, it appears that the Second Dynasty, the later Kings of which seem to have had but little power, came to an end. The Xoite Kingdom commenced Sect. IV.] THE SHEPHERD-INVASION. 1 55 about the same time ; but we have no evidence to show that its Kings extended their rule beyond the northern parts of Lower Egypt. The whole of Egypt was virtually divided between the Diospolites of the Twelfth Dynasty, who ruled Upper Egypt, and the Shepherds of the Fifteenth, who ruled Lower Egypt. Middle Egypt was probably for the most part under the dominion of the Diospolites. This state of things continued for more than a century and a half. I shall now consider the chronology and history of the Twelfth Dynasty. It has been shown from the monuments, that certain of the Kings of this Dynasty reigned conjointly with others ; Amenemha II. begin- ning to reign in the reign of Sesertesen I. ; and Seser- tesen IL, in that of Amenemha II. ; and Sesertesen I. and Amenemha I., as well as probably Amenemha III. and the King whose prenomen reads Ma-tu-ra, being for a time, at least, colleagues. All these Kings, excepting Amenemha L, belong to the Twelfth Dynasty. The uncertainty as to whether Sesertesen III. and Ra-sebak- nufre reigned conjointly with other sovereigns, and as to the length of the reigns of particular Kings, makes it impossible to fix the chronology of this Dynasty with exactness. I now give two tables : the second being a list of the Twelfth Dynasty partly conjectural ; and the first, the lists upon which it is chiefly based. I mark the conjectural parts of these tables with notes of interrogation. 156 THE TWELFTH DYNASTY. [Part II. TABLES OF THE TWELFTH DYNASTY. I. Manetho, according to Africanus. Years, 1. Sesonchdsis . . 46 2. Ammanem^s . . 38 3. Ses6stri8 . 4. Lachar^s . 6. Amer^s 6. Amenemes 7. Skemiophris . 48 Turin Papyrus. Years. Ms. Ds. . 45 X X . XX X X . 19 X X . 3x X X . 4x X X (In another Fragment.) Ma-tu-ra . 9 3 27 Ea-sebak-nufre3 10 24 (Sum) .213* 1 Ix Mon.name. Most probable length of reign Years. Ms, Sesertesen (I.) . 45 Amenemha (11.) . 38 Sesertesen (11.) . 19 Sesertesen (III.). 38? Amenemha III. . 42? Ma-tu-ra ... 9 3 Ra-sebak-nufre . 3 10 Sum about 195 1 * This sum probably includes the reign of the King next before Sesertesen rus, who is probably Amenemha I. : its length is x9. in the Papy- n. Remarkable events in Kings' Sesertesen I. . 43 Amenemha I. Amenemha TI. . . 1 B.C. 2005. First Tropical Cycle. Sesertesen II. . . 1 Sesertesen III. 33 B.C.1986. Phoenix of Se- sostris. Amenemha III. . 1 . . 30? Ma-tu-ra . . . . 1? . 39? Ka-sebak-nufre . . 1? The correspondences of the years of Sesertesen I. and Amenemha II., and of Amenemha II. and Seser- tesen II., are on the authority of the monuments. The co-regency of Sesertesen II. with Sesertesen III., and of Amenemha III. with Ra-sebak-nufre and Ma-tu-ra, I only consider probable. With respect to the latter case, my conjecture is founded upon Eusebius's having said that the later Kings of this Dynasty reigned forty- two years. It is most probable that the Twelfth and Fifteenth Dynasties commenced about the same time. Sect. IV.] SESERTESEN I. 167 I have already mentioned that Munt-hotp, of the Ninth Dynasty, Amenemha I., of the Eleventh, and a chief of the Shepherds, were contemporary. From this it might be supposed that the first King of the Fifteenth Dynasty began to reign before the com- mencement of the Twelfth Dynasty ; but, in the first place, it must be remembered that Amenemha I. was, for part of his reign, a co-regent of Sesertesen I., the first King of the latter Dynasty ; and, in the second place, that the Shepherd-chief mentioned above may not have been a Shepherd-king. I can now notice the history of Manetho's Twelfth Dynasty. Sesertesen I., the first King of the Twelfth Dy- ^ i y Avwvy ^ LJy nasty, was one of the most powerful sovereigns of the period that preceded the Eighteenth Dynasty, and there are many records still preserved among the monu- ments of Egypt which show the extent of his power. The two most famous of the Sesertesens were the First and Third ; the former of whom may be called Sesos- tris the conqueror ; the latter, Sesostris the lawgiver : the latter is Manetho's Sesostris, and was worshipped by some later Kings, being esteemed far before the conqueror, though he may also have signalized himself by military exploits. Two obelisks, that of Heliopolis, near Cairo, and that of Bigeeg, in the province called the Feiyoom, are of the time of Sesertesen I. They possess great interest, not only from their antiquity, being about coeval, in my opinion, with the time of 158 AMENEMHA II. [Part II. the patriarch Abraham, but also from their being the oldest monuments of their kind known to remain. There is another remarkable record of this King's reign, a list of conquered or tributary tribes or coun- tries, the most ancient yet discovered, on a tablet found by Dr. Ricci at Wadee Halfeh, in Nubia, near the Second Cataracts. Rosellini gives a copy of it^; and Champollion first described itt. It has not been satis- factorily ascertained to what tribes or countries these names apply. I have already mentioned that Amen- emha I. was a colleague of Sesertesen I. for some time. This was doubtless early in the reign of the latter King. In the forty-third year of Sesertesen I., his second colleague, Amenemha II., began to reign, and reigned, /^uuA J 1 1 1 ' 1 1 fc. according to Manetho, thirty-eight years. There is a small temple of the time of Amenemha II. and Seser- tesen II. at Wadee Gasoos, near the Egyptian shore of the Red Sea. (Wilkinson's "Modern Egypt and Thebes," ii. 885.) In the reign of Amenemha II., the first Tro- pical Cycle commenced, on January the 7th, B.C. 2005. This is the second date which I have found recorded on the Egyptian monuments : the first so recorded being the commencement of the second Great Panegy- rical Year, B.C. 2352, in the time of the two Siiphises. * Monumenti Storioi, PL XXV., No. 4. f Lettres, p. 124. Sect. IV.] CHRONOLOGICAL REMARKS. 159 I must here deviate from my present subject, to show how the interval between the Suphises and Amenemha II., according to Manetho's lists, as they have come down to us, corrected by means of the monuments, may be compared with the system of chro- nology which I have put forth. The successors of the Suphises are stated by Africanus to have reigned 126 years : the Fourth Dynasty was immediately succeeded by the Sixth, which lasted, according to Africanus, cor- rected for reasons already stated, 143 years : at the conclusion of the latter Dynasty, unless the seventy days' reign of the Seventh Dynasty intervened, the Fifteenth Dynasty commenced ; and about the same time, the Twelfth; and Amenemha II. began to reign in the forty-third year of Sesertesen I., the first King of the Twelfth Dynasty. Thus the whole interval from the accession of Mencheres to that of Amenemha 11. is about 311 years, according to the best version of Manetho, with certain corrections ; and the interval from the beginning of the second Great Panegyrical Year, in the time of the two Suphises, to that of the first Tropical Cycle is 347 years. This shows that my dates agree in a remarkable manner with Manetho corrected by the monuments. There is also another argument which would lead us to the same results with reference to the interval from the Fourth to the Twelfth Dy- nasty. The sculptures of the time of the Fourth Dynasty bear such a near resemblance to those of the time of the Twelfth, that when we find a sculpture of either of these two periods, it is almost impossible to say to which period it belongs until we see in it a royal name. The difference between the sculptures and hieroglyphics of the Twelfth Dynasty and those of the 160 CHRONOLOGICAL REMARKS. [Part II. commencement of the Eighteenth Dynasty, separated by a period of four or five hundred years, is very strongly marked. During the Eighteenth Dynasty, as vrell as the Nineteenth and Twentieth, we can often distinguish the sculptures of the time of one King from those of the time of another a century later, by the style. When the arts in Egypt had attained their highest degree of excellence, their decline commenced, and continued until the time of the Twenty-sixth Dy- nasty, when there was a remarkable revival ; but the decline of the arts continued after this uninterruptedly until the time of the latest monuments : and throughout this long period, we can generally distinguish the relative ages of monuments by the style of their sculptures and paintings when separated by an interval equal to that which I find to have divided the Suphises from the Twelfth Dynasty. Thus the chronology of the Egyptian monuments, confirmed by the style of their sculptures and inscriptions, shows the length of the interval from the Suphises to Amenemha II. ; while Manetho, according to Africanus, properly understood, agrees as to the duration of the period in ques- tion. This, it should be remarked, is the most dis- puted part of Egyptian Chronology ; there being but little dispute concerning the interval from Menes to the Suphises. I must beg the reader to remember, in this place, the authorities upon which the ascertaining of the length of the interval from the Suphises to Amen- emha II. is based. They are inscriptions on the Egyptian monuments, copied by me, so that I have not to rely upon others, and can myself put them forth with confidence : and the calculations by which these inscriptions have been elucidated, originally made by Sect. IV.] MANETHOS SESOSTRIS. 161 me, have been again made at the Royal Observatory, and the calculations there made have been verified by Mr. Airy himself, the Astronomer Royal. Sesertesen II. became the colleague of Amenemha 1 I II. in the thirty-third year of the reign of the latter King. Sesertesen III., Manetho's Sesostris, who was lif afterwards worshipped, apparently as a great lawgiver, was probably for some time a co-regent of Sesertesen II., succeeding Amenemha II. In the reign of Se- sertesen III., occurs that most important date, the commencement of the Third Great Panegyrical Year, and the First Phoenix Cycle, called the appearance of the Phoenix of Sesostris, in the year B.C. 1986. I have already had occasion, in the first Part of this work, to give my reasons for concluding that Sesertesen III. was Manetho's Sesostris. In the lists we find a short account of the conquests of Sesostris, which can scarcely be doubted to be more applicable to Se- sertesen I. than to Sesertesen III., and still more so to Rameses II. The successor of Sesostris is called, in the lists, *' Lachares," " Lamaris," or " Lampares " ; and we are M 162 CONTEMPORARY KINGS. [Part II. told that he built the Labyrinth in the Arsino'ite nome, as a tomb for himself. The successor of Manetho's Sesostris in the Tablet of Abydos is Amenemha III., whose prenomen reads " Ma-en-ra." He may be the Moeris of the Greeks. Among the hieroglyphic inscriptions of Wadee Ma- gharah, we find one (a copy of which was given by Lord Prudhoe, now the Duke of Northumberland, and Colonel Felix, to Mr. Burton, for his " Excerpta Hiero- glyphica "), which throws much light upon the history of this period. This tablet * is divided into three compartments. The first of these is dated in the third year of Amenemha III., and does not seem to contain any important information. The second compartment commences with the date of the forty-first year of the same King, and gives the following name (which reads Seser-hotp-ret) and the titles of a King, who is pro- bably of the Ninth Dynasty, but, perhaps, of the Fourteenth. The third compartment contains the name and titles of a foreign King, Snufre, whose name Excerpta Hieroglyphica, PI. XII . Sect. IV. THE SHEPHERD-DYNASTIES. 163 is differently written from the synonymous pre- nomen of Beon. This part is dated in the forty- second year of the reign of Amenemha III., about which time it is probable that the Twelfth Dynasty concluded. Snufre is called the ruler of several foreign lands. I cannot doubt that this Snufre was a King of the Sixteenth Dynasty. This important tablet, there- fore, plainly points out the contemporaneousness, in part, of three Dynasties, the Twelfth, the Sixteenth, and another Dynasty, which is either the Ninth or the Fourteenth. I have already mentioned my opinion that the King whose prenomen reads " Ma-tu-ra"' and Ra-sebak-nufre^ /T\ *i. were probably co-regents of Amenemha III. I now return to the consideration of the history of the Shep- herds in Egypt. The whole duration of the Shepherd-Dynasties can- not easily be determined, and the variations between Africanus and Eusebius and Josephus make it impos- sible to decide what Manetho wrote on this subject. This will appear from the following table, which con- tains what Africanus and Eusebius and Josephus say respecting the length of the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and M 2 164 CHRONOLOGY OF [Part II. Seventeenth Dynasties, and the number of Kings of which they consisted. I have made two transpositions in this table; putting the Seventeenth Dynasty in Eusebius's list opposite the Fifteenth in Africanus's ; and the Fifteenth in the former list opposite the Seventeenth in the latter. This I have done jbecause the Fifteenth Dynasty in Africanus's list evidently cor- responds to the Seventeenth in Eusebius's. TABLE OF THE SHEPHERD-DYNASTIES. APRICANUS. EUSEBIUS. JOSEPHUS. Fifteenth Dynasty. Seventeenth Dynasty. Six Shepherd-Kings Four Shepherd-Kings Six Shepherd - Kings who reigned 284 years. who reigned 103 years. who reigned 269 years, Sixteenth Dynasty. Sixteenth Dynasty. 10 months. Thirty-two Shepherd- Five Theban Kings Kings who reigned 518 who reigned 190 years. t years. Seventeenth Dynasty. Fifteenth Dynasty. Forty-three Theban Diospolite Kings who Kings and forty-three reigned 250 years. Shepherd - Kings who reigned 151 years. Before noticing the difficulties occasioned by the extraordinary disagreements between the copyists, I shall make some remarks on the chronology of the period. The date of the commencement of the First Tro- pical Cycle, in the time of Amenemha II., shows that the Twelfth Dynasty commenced in one of the years B.C. 2084 to 2047, inclusive ; and the Fifteenth Dy- nasty must have commenced about the same time. Josephus tells us, from Manetho, that the Shepherds ruled over Egypt for five hundred and eleven years, until the Kings of the Theba'id and of the rest of Sect. I v.] THE SHEPHERD-DYNASTIES. 165 Egypt made an insurrection against them. The date of the commencement of the Eighteenth Dynasty, which is the latest date that we can assign to the re- volt against the Shepherds, is about the year B.C. 1525 ; and therefore, if Manetho's five hundred and eleven years be correct, the latest date we can assign to the commencement of the Fifteenth Dynasty will be about the year B.C. 2036 ; and it seems to me most probable that it commenced about half a century earlier. Josephus and Africanus agree in assigning to the Fifteenth Dynasty six Kings, though the former makes its duration twenty- five years less than the latter. The difference lies in the length of the reign of the third King, Apachnas, which is stated to have been thirty- six years by Josephus, but sixty-one by Africanus. We cannot decide which is the more accurate of the two copyists in this instance. There is also another difference between these two writers ; for Josephus places Apophis, whom Africanus makes the last King of the Dynasty, between Apachnas and lannas, making him the fourth King of the Dynasty. In the list of the Chamber of Kings, a prenomen, which is shown by the Royal Turin Papyrus to be that of Apachnas, immediately precedes the nomen of lannas ; and there- fore it is most probable that Josephus is wrong in placing Apophis between these two Kings. I say most probable, since sometimes Kings mentioned by Manetho are omitted in the monumental lists, although they have left monuments, because they were not considered legitimate sovereigns by those who made these lists. The monuments do not enable us to decide as to the correctness or incorrectness of the statement of Afri- canus respecting the number of Kings, or the duration, of the Sixteenth Dynasty. He is, however, manifestly 166 THE FIRST SHEPHERD-KING. [Part II. wrong as to the number of the Kings of the Seven- teenth Dynasty. I have no doubt that this Dynasty v^'-as one of Shepherd-Kings only, and not of Thebans also ; since it is evident that the Thirteenth Dynasty ruled from the conclusion of the Twelfth to the com- mencement of the Eighteenth. It appears to me most probable that the Sixteenth Dynasty was partly contemporary with the Fifteenth, and that it lasted long after it ; and that the Seventeenth ruled during the later part of the period from the conclusion of the Twelfth Dynasty to the commencement of the Eighteenth. To return to what Manetho says respecting the Shepherds in Egypt. After speaking of the cruelties which the Shepherds inflicted upon the conquered people, he continues his narration in the following words : " And at length they made one of themselves King, whose name was Salatis. He lived at Memphis, making the Upper and Lower Country to pay tribute, and placing garrisons in the most fit situations." From this it is evident that some time elapsed after the invasion of Egypt by the Shepherds before they made for themselves a King, according to Manetho ; but we have no reason to suppose that the period was one of many years. The prenomen of Salatis is found on the monuments, and it is also given in the Royal Turin Papyrus, where it is written without the sign Ra. It reads, in the former case, " Nufre-ka-ra." It is important here to notice a proof of the con- Sect. IV.] CONTEMPORARY DYNASTIES. 167 temporaiieousness of certain of the first seventeen Dy- nasties with others of that portion of Manetho's list, which would be sufficient to establish, on monumental evidence, the contemporaneousness of the Memphites, Heracleopolites, Diospolites, Xoites, and Shepherds. On account of the great importance of this fact, I give one of the lists of Chenoboscion (from my own copy), a portion of the list of the Chamber of Kings, and a fragment of the Royal Turin Papyrus, in Plate VII., Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4. The reader will see that the arrangement is as follows : — ROYAL TUBIN LIST OF CHENO- LIST OF CHAMBER DYN. PAPYRUS. \ BOSCION. OF KINGS. VT. Papa. [Pa]pa. ,, Mer-en-ra. Mer-en-ra. »» Net-akartee. XV. Nufre-ka. Nufre-ka-ra. ,, Snufre. Snufre. »> Ab Shura. All the names in this table, excepting Papa, Net- akartee, and Ab . . . ., are prenomens. The num- bers of the Dynasties are from Manetho. With respect to the fragment of the Royal Turin Papyrus, it is necessary to remark, that it is but one fragment, not two joined together. Each of the three lists of Chenoboscion contains three names in the same order, with no difference but that one gives the prenomen (Mee-ra) instead of the nomen (Papa) of Phiops, and that the first two characters of the same King's name in one list are indistinct. Sir Gardner Wilkinson first discovered these lists, as I have before mentioned, and published a copy of one of them in his " Ancient Egyptians." * Two of the lists are in hori- * Vol. iii., p. 280. 168 CONTEMPORARY DYNASTIES. [Part II. zontal lines, and the third is in perpendicular : a single line containing a King's name and titles in each list. Now from these three records, that is, from the triple monumental record in the grottoes of Chenoboscion, which is of the time of Salatis, and from the Chamber of Kings, also a monumental record, and a national one, of the time of Thothmes III., sculptured in the great temple of Thebes, the metropolis of that time, and from the Royal Turin Papyrus, which, though much injured, is most valuable as the fullest list which has been preserved among the papyri, and in hieratic characters, — from these three remarkable records, we learn that the Fifteenth Dynasty succeeded the Sixth *. From this fact, it is obvious that the intermediate kingdoms in Manetho's list, and the kingdoms to which the Sixth and Fifteenth Dynasties belong, were con- temporary ; and therefore the Memphites were con- temporary with the Heracleopolites, Diospolites, Xoites, and Shepherds ; and thus five of the seven columns of the table of contemporary Dynasties are proved : analogy would suffice for proof of the rest ; but it is worthy of remark, that the Elephantinite Dynasty con- tained in one of these two other columns is proved by the monuments to have been partly contemporary with the Fourth and partly with the Fifteenth; and the Kings of the remaining column, the Thinites, are likewise proved to have been contemporary by the Era of the commence- ment of the Egyptian kingdom, independently of several arguments, derived from the monuments, which would * Perhaps the seventy days' reign of the seventy Kings called the Seventh Dynasty intervened between the Sixth and Fifteenth Dynasties, though it more probably intervened between the Fif- teenth and Eighth ; so that it must always be understood, when I speak of the Fifteenth Dynasty as having succeeded the Sixth, that the Seventh Dynasty may have intervened between them. Sect. IV.] ACTIONS OF SALATIS. 169 render this most probable were it not so proved. The contemporaneousness of certain of the first seventeen Dynasties is most satisfactorily proved : the records which I have just adduced would be sufficient to prove this fact even if there were no other indication of it upon the Egyptian monuments ; but those monuments, of many ages, during the first seventeen Dynasties, are full of abundant evidence of this great fact of ancient Egyptian history, from the time of the Fourth Dynasty to that of the Fifteenth ; that is, from the period of the earliest monuments to the middle of the Shepherd- period. I have dwelt upon this subject at some length because of its very great importance ; as, without a knowledge of the contemporaneousness of certain of the first seventeen Dynasties with others of the same portion of Manetho's list, it is impossible to form any- thing approaching to a correct idea of the chronology of these Dynasties, and to explain either Manetho or the monuments. To return to what we are told of the Shepherd- Kings. Eusebius and Africanus call the first King of the Fifteenth Dynasty " Saites " ; and state that from him the Saite nome received its name. If the latter part of this statement be Manetho's, and not his copyists', it seems that this King's name must have been Saites, or something similar, and not Salatis. — From the words of Manetho, cited in page 166, it appears that Salatis rendered the Egyptian Kings tributary to him. We cannot doubt, however, that the Kings of the Twelfth Dynasty were, for many years, at least, independent of the Shepherds. — Manetho continues : " But he chiefly fortified the eastern provinces, fore- seeing that the Assyrians, then increasing in power, would have a desire to invade his kingdom." 170 AVARIS FORTIFIED [Part II. I hare already* shewn the important synchronism probably deducible from this statement of Manetho. It also implies that the Assyrians had a desire to in- vade Egypt at a later time. Perhaps this refers to Chedorlaomer and his confederates, who may have had such a desire, or perhaps it points to a much later period. We know that in the times of the Ethiopians and Saites of the Twenty-fifth and Twenty-sixth Dy- nasties, the Assyrian and Babylonian Kings waged an almost uninterrupted warfare with their powerful rivals of Egypt, often advancing towards the frontiers of that country ; and once, under Nebuchadnezzar, conquering it. We have no authentic accounts of war between the Assyrians or Babylonians and the Egyptians in earlier times. Diodorus Siculus relates that Ninus sub- dued Egypt and Phoenicia, and that Semiramis passed through all Egypt. Manetho next says, "And finding, in the Sai'te nome, a most suitable city, lying to the east of the Bubastite branch of the Nile, called from some ancient theological reference {diro nvos ap')(aLas OeoXoycas,) Avaris, he [Salatis] rebuilt it, and made it very strong with walls, placing in it a multitude of soldiers as a garrison, to the number of two hundred and forty thou- sand men." In the preceding passage, we should read " Seth- roi'te " for " Saite," with Syncellus. Manetho, also, according to Africanus, (Dyn. 15,) and Eusebius^ (Dyn. 17,) in his list of the Dynasties, calls the great city which the Shepherds built " a city in the Seth- roite nome." The position assigned to Avaris with reference to the Nile and the boundary, in the account of the reign of Salatis, just cited, shews the accuracy of the correction. Some clue to the signification of Sect. IV. BY THE SHEPHERDS. 171 the name of Avails is obtainable from the fact of Manetho's saying that it was so called from some ancient theological reference, and from his saying in another place that it was a Typhonian city. It is not difficult to ascertain the position of Avaris ap- proximatively from Manetho's statement. The Bu- bastite branch of the Nile is that commonly called the Pelusiac. In the time of the Romans the Sethroi'te nome was the most eastern of all the nomes of Egypt, situated between the Pelusiac branch and the desert, havinof the Mediterranean Sea to the north, and the Arabian nome to the south. In more ancient times, the nomes were fewer, and consequently, in some cases at least, of greater extent. After relating the building and garrisoning of Avaris, the historian continues thus : " Hither he came in harvest-time, (or summer, Kara Oepeiav,) giving [his troops] allowances of corn and pay, and exercising them diligently in the use of arms, to terrify foreigners. And having reigned nine- teen years, he died." I have now quoted all that Manetho, as cited by Josephus, tells us respecting Salatis. In the list of the Dynasties given by Africanus and Eusebius there is a notice of the Shepherd-invasion which somewhat differs from the account which I have already exa- mined. In the text of Africanus, we read, "The Fifteenth Dynasty : of the Shepherds. They were six foreign Phoenician Kings, who also took Memphis. They also built a city in the Sethroite nome, whence making an incursion, they subdued the Egyptians. » # * There is a misplacement in a transcript of Africanus, and in the Greek version and Armenian translation of Eusebius; the words "The first of whom," &c., instead of following what I have trans- lated above, being placed between the sentence which there ends 172 ABRAHAMS VISIT TO EGYPT. [Part II. In this statement the invasion of Egypt is erroneously placed by the copyists or epitomizers of Manetho after the building of Avaris. In about the year B.C. 2081, the patriarch Abraham visited Egypt, before the second invasion of Palestine by Chedorlaomer and his confederates. Perhaps Salatis was the Pharaoh to whom he came. The King's being called Pharaoh should not lead us to suppose that he was not a Shepherd ; for on the monuments of their subjects the Shepherd-Kings of the Fifteenth Dynasty receive the usual titles of Egyptian Kings, and the title Ra, or Phra, that is, Pharaoh, commences the pre- nomen of Salatis, as well as the prenomens of almost all the other Kings of Manetho's Dynasties. The second Shepherd-King, called by Africanus and Eusebius " Bnon," and by Josephus " Beon," is called on the monuments Ra-snufre Pi-ankhee. His preno- ^ T and z /Tify and M I llrlUUjJl» and 1 men is usually written without the solar disk, thus forming an exception to the general usage. Another instance of a prenomen without the solar disk, or the with "Memphis," and that commencing "They also," thus, "The Seventeenth Dynasty, Shepherds. They were foreign Phoenician Kings, brothers, who also took Memphis. The first of whom, Saites, reigned nineteen years, from whom the Sai'te nome was called. They also built a city in the Sethroite nome, whence making an incursion, they subdued the Egyptians." (Eus. Gr.) It is worthy of remark, that the Scholiast on the Timseus gives the correct order, although he otherwise agrees with Eusebius in what he says respecting the Shepherd- Kings. (V. Rosellini's Monument! Storici. T. i. p, 45, note i.) Sect. IV.] CONTEMPORARY DYNASTIES. 173 figure of the god Ra, is that of Amen-si Pi-hor, the supposed Bocchoris, of the Twenty-fourth Dynasty. The prenomen of Beon is found in tombs adjacent to the Pyramids of Memphis. There is a tablet in the British Museum which shews the contemporaneousness of the Twelfth and Fifteenth Dynasties, and that they commenced about the same time. This tablet, a copy of which is given in Plate XIX. of Sharpe's Inscriptions, contains the names of many worshippers, male and female, among whom we find four Snufres. The first eight lines wholly consist of names. In the ninth line, and part of the tenth, we find the usual list of offerings. From near the end of the tenth line to the conclusion of the in- scription, we read, " Snufre the son of Setafu, deceased female : he says, I have come to the palace of ... . the lord of all Egypt, Nub-kau-ra [Amenemha II.,] ever-living." Beneath this are several figures with their names. First, Snufre, son of Setafu, who is re- presented as a chief, holding in one hand a staff, and in the other, a mace. Before the chief are his brother, sister, and wife ; and, lastly, his father, who is called " The ruler, the devotee, his father, Snufre, Ankhee." Here, then, we find a person bearing the nomen and prenomen of Beon; for "Ankhee" is equivalent to " Pi-ankhee," " pi " being merely the masculine article, which is more commonly understood than ex- pressed in hieroglyphics. I have shewn how general was the practice of persons taking the sovereign's nomen : we also occasionally find them taking his pre- nomen, with some title ; but here we find a man bear- ing the nomen and prenomen of a King, not inclosed in royal rings. It is necessary here to remark, that it was not unusual among the ancient Egyptians to 174 THE BUCOLIA. [Part II. bear two names. From this tablet, therefore, we can only conclude that Snufre Ankhee is either Beon him- self, or a person born in his reign. If the former be the case, it is easily explained by the suggestion that the tablet was sculptured at Abydos or some other place in the Theban Kingdom. In either case, the tablet plainly shews that the Fifteenth Dynasty com- menced about the same time as the Twelfth. The third King of the Fifteenth Dynasty, Apachnas, reigned sixty-one years, according to Africanus's tran- script of Manetho's lists. In the list of the Chamber of Kings, we find his prenomen, " Shura ; " and in the Royal Turin Papyrus, his nomen, " Ab . . . ." In 1 21Mi\ 0 CO '<* o? B fl OCO r-H r— ! rH rH rH i— t *4"^ t»0505O00O '^^ -H i—i >o fH >0 CO r-( T# O? CO £»C;COO'--J^?»0050 >.C^o6 a o r-lC^CO'r}r . i-T Ji «u Ph • M 1 1 «o OS «o T-l QQ M «s ' 1 "^ » 34' n.p.d. 82° 49' 46" III. Longitudes of the Sun, at Paris midnight commencing the civil day. (1.) 1322 B.C., July 20 . (2.) 1985 B.C., January 2 (3.) 2005 B.C., April 8 . (4.) 506 B.C., March 27. (5.) 1652 B.C., April 21 . 103° 23' 41" 265° 26' 42" 0° 29' 47" 359° 37' 32" 15° 23' 25" IV. Longitudes and approximate Latitudes of the Moon, at Paris midnight commencing the civil day. (3.) 2005 B.C., April 8, Long. 357° 4' 56", Lat. 59' South, increasing, (4.) 506 B.C., Mar. 27, Long. 342° 37' 49", Lat. 58' North, increasing. (5.) 1652B.c.,April21, Long.l94°49'39", Lat. 1° 33' North, increasing. To the Sun's longitude in No. (1) I have added 7^ and to that in No. (2) I have added 13', as a rough allowance from midnight at Paris to sunrise at Thebes : and from the altered places I get the following: — V. Sun's E.A. and n.p.d. at sunrise. (1.) 1322 B.C., July 20, r.a. 6'» 58*" 55', n.p.d. ^^"^ 47' 32". (2.) 1985 B.C., Jan. 2, r.a. 17^^ 41"" 1', n.p.d. 113° 55' 43". VI. "With these, and the star-places above, and the latitude of Thebes 25° 44' North, the following times of rising are com- puted — (1.) 1322 B.C., July 20 :— Sidereal time of sunrise 0'> 11'" 12' Sidereal time of rising of Sirius .... 22*^ 54"' 49' Sirius earlier by . . . . . . 1" le"* 23' (2.) 1985 B.C., Jan. 2 :— Sidereal time of sunrise 12'' 40'" 25' Sidereal time of rising of « Aquilas . . . lO** 22" 40' Aquilaj earlier by 2'^ 17"' 4i APPENDIX. 217 The comparison of the numbers under III. and IV. gives the following : — VII. Relative positions of the Sun and Moon. (3.) 2005 B.C., April 8, beginning of civil day, Moon's longitude 357° 4' 66" Sun's „ 0° 29' 47" Moon behind Sun 3° 24' 51" The true conjunction would therefore be about 6^ a.m. at Paris, or about 8^ a.m. at Thebes. The true equinox was on the preceding day. (4.) 506 B.C., March 27, beginning of civil day. Moon's longitude 342° 37' 49" Sun's „ 359° 37' 32" Moon heUnd Sun 16° 59' 43" March 27 is the day of the equinox : but the conjunction will not take place till March 28, in the morning. (5.) 1652 B.C., April 21, beginning of civil day *, Moon's longitude 194° 49' 39" Sun's longitude + 180° . . . . . 195° 23' 25" Moon behind opposition 0° 33' 46" The full moon occurs shortly after Paris midnight (i. e. very early in the morning of April 21). No eclipse at either of these times. * 5|C * ^ * (Signed) G. B. AIRY. * This calculation refers to my date of the Exodus, which I intended to discuss in the present work at the time that I applied to the Astronomer Royal. R. S. P. HIEROGLYPHIC TABLES OF KINGS. The following tables comprise the names of all the Kings whose chronological places I consider certain, from the First Dynasty to the Nineteenth, Dynasty inclusive. I have, in these tables, arranged the Dynasties and Kings in their proper relative places, according to the authority of the monuments. The spaces allotted to particular Kings are proportioned to the lengths of their reigns only in some particular and remarkable cases : in other cases I have only indicated the average length deduced from the length of the Dynasty and the number of its Kings. The names in these tables, with few exceptions, are printed from wood-blocks of which the use has been most kindly offered to me, for this purpose, by Sir Gardner Wilkinson. APPENDIX. 210 IIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Paet 1. Thinites. 1st dyn. diiii^ y^^^^ IjJ Menee. 3Un^s. Era of Menes, B.C. 2717. Memphites. 3rd dyn. Athdthis. Nedierdplies. B.C. cir. 2650. KenkenSs. Tosorthros. Uenephis. Tyreis. APPENDIX. 221 IIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Thinites. Memphites. Part 2. 1st dyn. 3rd dyn. Usaphaidos. Mesdchris. MieUdos. 1 Shufu. Sdyphis SemempsSs. Tosertasis. BienecMa. AchSs. There was, apparently, another King, in this, or in the next, dyn., before TIas. SSphuris. APPENDIX. 223 rEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Part 3. Thinites. Memphites. 2nd dyn. BoSthos. B.C. cir. 2470. Chaiechds. Bindthris. . ses-kef. Tlas. J 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , . neter-ka. Sethenes. 3rd dyn. KerpherSs. 4th dyn. Shura. Sdris. Elephantinites. 5th dyn. M I 1) 1^1 Shufu.^ Num- ^/*2^/«s shufu. [I.] Sfiphis. [II.] A date in their reigiij .c. 2352. If jmnL U-seser-kef. Usercher^s. B.C. cir. 2440. /^ m1 ■ i i I i'l^L Shaf-ra. Sephris. n\ I JTTmx Nufr-ar-ka-ra. Nephercheres. APPENDIX. 225 ROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Thinites. Memphites. Elephantinites. Part 4. 2nd dyn. AWAA Ji I 111 f^ Men-ka-ra. Chair^s. ji 1 1 1 1 1^ Nufre-ka-ra. Nephercheris. -niniL Nufre-ka-ra. Nebee. r9\ Tet-ka-ra. Ma. Nufre-ka-ra. Khentub. 4th dyn. Men-kau-ra. Mencheres. 5th dyn. Ratouis. Bicheris. I Seser-en-ra. Sisiris. APPENDIX. 227 HIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Pabt 5. Thinites. Memphites. Elephantinites. 2nd dyn 4th dyn 5th dyn. ffl Mer-en-hor. [PI U, Sehcrchcr^, Snufre-ka. S esdchris ? (^\ ' /WW y Ka-en-ra. Thamphthis. ChenerSs. Heracleopolites. Diospolites. 6th dyn. 9th dyn. 11th dyn. AAAA. iMEDt^ J HHr Nufre-ka-ra. Tata. Nantef. I. Rerer. OthoSs. B.C. cir. 2200. AchtJiois. B.C. cir. £200. B.C. cir. 2200. A (^ n 11 m . . . nufre-ka. Q 2 APPENDIX. 229 HIEEOGLYPHIC TABLE OP THE FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Part 6. Thinites. Memphites. Elephantinites. Heracleopolites. Diospolites. 2nd dyn. Nufre-ka-en-seb. Papa. 6th dyn. 6th dyn. Phidps. 9th dyn. 11th dyn. /¥^ AVVAA X Ji iim / Nantef II. Naa. Nantef III. m ,1 J 1 1 1 1 1 n APPENDIX. 231 HIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Part 7. Thinites. Memphites. Elepkantinites. Heracleopolites. Diospolites. 2nd dyn. 6th dyn. 5th dyn. 9th dyn. 11th dyn. MeniliesHphis. i/ m Nitdkris. No Memphite Kings : Memphis being taken by theShepherd8,B.c. cir. 2080. €) JlllliL- ^ m Nantef IV. (^^ /iTN ro^ I—* 111^ Ik. AAAAA Munt-hotp II. Amenemha I. Aimnenem^s. 234 APPENDIX. HIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE Memphites. Elephantinites. Heracleopolites. Diospolites. 5th dyn. 9th dyn. 12th dyn. ^^ \j vvvvvv\# jrmrrC Sesertesen I. Sesonchdsis. B.C. cir. 2080. /mm^ ^\fS^ u Amenemha II. Ammanemis. A date in his reign, B.C. 2005. ^ APPENDIX. 235 FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Part 8. Xoites. Shepherds. 14th dyn. 15th dyn, 16th dyn. Sams (ScUatis). I ■riiinir Pi-ankhee. Bndn (BSdn). Ab . . . . Pachnan {Apachnas). B.c.cir. 238 APPENDIX. HIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE Memphites. Elephantinites. Heracleopolites. Dlospolites NO KINGS. 5th dyn. 9th dyn. Men-ka-hor. Mencheris. /T\ I I Tet. Tanclieris. -3- 1» T m Unas. Onnos. 12th dyn. WWAP r9\ Amenemha III. Lachar^s. APPENDIX. 239 FIEST SEVENTEEN Xoites. DYNASTIES. Part 9. 14th dyn. Shepherds. 15th dyn. 16th dyn.. rT\ AANVk A-an. Staan {I annas). I Snufre. 242 APPENDIX. HIEEOGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE utes. Heracleopolites. Diospolites. NO KINGS. 9th dyn. 13th dyn. 7th dyn. /"®\ APPENDIX. 243 FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Part 10. Xoites. Shepherds. 14th dyn. 16th dyn. 16th dyn. ,— till 1 1 1 1— Archies (Assis). R 2 APPENDIX. 245 HIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Part 11. Memphites. Heracleopolites. Diospolites. Xoites. Shepherds, 8th dyn. 9th dyn. 13th dyn. 14th dyn. 16th dyn. B.C. cir. 1800. f ■a Sebak-hotp. IOth dyn. B.C. cir. 1750, APPENDIX. 247 iklEROGLYFHIC TABLE OF THE FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Pabt 12. Memphites. Heracleopolites. Diospolites. Xoites. Shepherds. 8th dyn. 10th dyn. 13th dyn. 14th pyn. 16th dyn. Ml ^u.i.iil -IllillH- Tern . . f. APPENDIX. 249 HIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Part 13. Heracleopolites. DiospoUtes. Xoites, Shepherds. 10th dyn. 13th dyn. 14th dyn. 16th dyn. 17th dyn. ^ ^ ^■"""r rm\ -^ jGsnifc r9\ I B.C. cir. 1680. APPENDIX. 251 HIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE Heracleopolites. 10th dyn. Diospolites. 13th dyn. FIRST SEVENTEEN DYNASTIES. Part 14. Xoites. Shepherds. 14th dyn. 16th dyn. 17th dyn. Sebak-hotp. This dynasty proba- bly ended some years before the end of the 13th. This dynasty proba- This dynasty per- bly ended before the haps ended before the end of the 13th. end of the 13th. APPENDIX. 253 HIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE EIGHTEENTH & NINETEENTH DYNASTIES. Diospolites. tP^RT 1. 18th dyn. Thothmes 11. MSphrSs. Amen-numt. A date in her reign B.C. 1450-1. Another date, in her sixteenth year, b.c. 1442. APPENDIX. 255 HIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE EIGHTEENTH & NINETEENTH DYNASTIES. Diospolites. ^ 18th dyn. H 11 I I i Amenoph II. Thothmes IV. Tuthmdsis. Mi Amenoph III. Ainendphis. w ©Til Hor-em-heb. Oros. M. JLUjUL O Amen-mes. Hak-ka-ra. AcherrSs ? Atenra-en-scs .... IF, 9 III l/VVVW i JEEHL Amenoph IV. ^ I 9 /wvwl JUIlLiJ^ Amen-tu-ankh. m i Bekh-en-atenra. AhencliMs ? 1 Atenra . . APPENDIX. 257 HIEROGLYPHIC TABLE OF THE EIGHTEENTH & NINETEENTH DYNASTIES. Diospolites. [Pabt 3. 18th dyn. liTi Rameses I. JRamesgSs. 19th dyn. Sethee 1. Sethds. B.C. cir. 1340. Coxnmencementof Sothic! Cycle, B.C. 1322. n Rameses II. Men-ptah. AmenephtMs. M, Amen-meses. Ammenemnis ? r9\ ^^MHHtt*^ Men-ptah Si-ptah. Thudris ? End of the 19th Dyn., b.c, cir. 1220. 259 SOME NAMES OF UNPLACED KINGS. VARIATIONS OP THE NAMES OF PLACED KINGS. The following List contains the names of some of those ancient Pharaohs whose places in the first Nineteen Dynasties have not been ascertained, and some variations of names given in the preceding Tables. I subjoin a few particulars respecting these Kings. 1. Name and square title of an ancient Memphite King found in the Great Pyramid of Sakkarah, in the Memphite burial-ground. The name reads Nub-rekhee-ra, "the Sun of pure gold," and resembles the " Xvov^oq TvBv^o? ecTTtv x^va-ng x^va-ov vlW of the list of Eratosthenes , both in sound and signification. In that list, Chnubos Gneuros is made the third predecessor of the first Saophis, the Suphis I. of Manetho. X^va-riq, the proper name, doubtless signifies " golden," though the Lexicons only say that it is a derivative of %§i/o-o?. It must not be supposed, that, in the translation of Nub-rekhee-ra, I have written " sun" inadvertently for '* son." It appears to me to be not improbable that the hieroglyphic name in question may be that of Necherophes (Afr.), or Necherochis (Eus.), the first King of the Third Dynasty. I may mention the very ancient character of the inscription containing the name ; and in particular the fact, that the royal ring (here circular, not elongated,) follows, instead of enclosing, the name ; as favouring this opinion. It may be urged against it, that there would be a considerable gap between this inscription and the next that has been found with a royal name. 2. A name -found at Wadee Magharah. It reads "... kau-hor," the sound of one character not being known. Similar names are found in the Fourth and Fifth Dynasties. 260 APPENDIX. 3. Name of a King of the Ninth Dynasty, or of the Fourteenth, contemporary with Amenemha III. See pp. 163, 3. 4. A name found with that of Amenemha III. From its form we must conclude it to be a prenomen, unless the King who bore it had but one name. 5. A variation of the prenomen of the ninth King of the Thir- teenth Dynasty, according to the order of the list of the Chamber of Kings, as explained by me, found with his nomen. 6 & 7. Prenomens resembling those of the Thirteenth Dynasty, and probably of Kings of that Dynasty : the latter is given by Sir Gardner Wilkinson (Materia Hieroglyphica, p. 117; and Part II. Plate V. F. & G.), as found with another unplaced King (No. 19), whose prenomen resembles those of Kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, and of the Sun-worshippers contemporary with them. 8 & 9. Prenomen and nomen of a Nufre-hotp, of the Thirteenth Dynasty : in No. 9 both names are enclosed in one ring. 10 & 11. Prenomens, probably of the time of the Thirteenth Dynasty, but, perhaps, more ancient. 12. Prenomen and nomen of the time of the Thirteenth Dynasty, and most probably of a King of that Dynasty, from a tablet in the possession of Mr. A. C. Harris of Alexandria. 13. A very old name found in a grotto at Asyoot, the ancient Lycopolis : whether it be a nomen or prenomen is uncertain : it reads Ka-mee-ra. There is a prenomen resembling it in the List of the Chamber of Kings, that of the sixteenth King of the Thirteenth Dynasty, according to that list, as arranged by me. The difference between the two names is the same as that between Men-ka-ra of the Second Dynasty and Men-kau-raof the Fourth, and that between the prenomen of Thothmes III. and that of Thothmes IV. Per- haps the Asyoot name is a prenomen of the time of the Thirteenth Dynasty. It is worthy of notice, that an inscription of this King's speaks of the Royal Panegyrics, which we do not find mentioned on monuments of the date of which we are certain before the reign of Papa, of the Sixth Dynasty ; so that it is possible that this King was not anterior in time to Papa : but in cases of this kind the paucity of monuments prevents our coming to satisfactory con- clusions. 14. Perhaps a variation of the prenomen of the fifth King of the Eleventh Dynasty according to the List of the Chamber of Kings. 15. 16, 17. Names of Kings in a series of royal personages, male and female, sculptured in a tomb at Thebes. The only other APPENDIX. 261 King's names, besides the names of Aahmes and Amenoph I., are those of the seventh King of the Eleventh Dynasty, according to the List of the Chamber of Kings. No. 15 is supposed to be the same King as the third King of the Eleventh Dynasty, according to the same list. His nomen, as here written, reads Men-em-hotp. No. 18 was found by Sir Gardner Wilkinson with the name of Amenoph I., in a tomb at Thebes. The nomen resembles the nomens of Kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, particularly Horus, and that of the King, commonly held to be Amyrtseus, whose sarco- phagus is in the British Museum. No. 19 has been found with No. 7, as already mentioned. No. 20. Variation of the nomen of Skhee. APPENDIX, 263 Tfi n\ XJYi r::h 'd] ^f jnnnl— AAAA ^rnn; 10 11 /i^ r?^/^ /^ i ± Jlllll L jcrrrnL. I ^1 1 i n iTL. fn 12 13 14 15 16 M AVWV ■ rSAAAA. m 17 18 19 20 i E /-^ Ml ■III""- G. Woodfall and Son, Printers, Angel Court, Skinner Street, London. 60, Albemarle Street, London. November, 1851. ME. MUEEAY^S GENERAL LIST OF WORKS. ABBOTT'S (Rev. J.) Philip Musgrave ; or Memoirs of a Church of England Missionary in the North American Colonies. Pos't 8vo. 2s. Qd, ABELL'S (Mrs.) Recollections of the Emperor IS'apoleon during the First Thi-ce Years of his Captivity on the Island of St. Helena. Second Edition. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 10s. Qd. ABERCROMBIE'S (John, M.D.) Enquiries concerning the Intel- lectual Powers and the Investigation of Truth. Thirteenth Edition. Fcap. Svo. 6s. 6c?. Philosophy of the Moral Feelings. Eighth Editimi. Fcap. Svo. 4s. Pathological and Practical Researches on the Diseases of the Stomach, the Intestinal Canal, the Liver, and other Viscera of the Abdomen. Third Edition. Fcap. Svo. 6s. ACLA'N'D'S (Thos. D.) and William Sturge's Reports on the Farming of Somersetshire. Map. Svo. 2s. M. • (Rev. CnARLEs) Popular Account of the Manners and Customs of India, Illustrated with Numerous Anecdotes. Post Svo. 2s. M. iESCHYLUS. (The Agamemnon and Choephorae). A New Edition of the Text, with Notes, Critical, Explanatory, and Philosophical, for the Use of Students. By Rev. W. Peile, D.D., Head Master of llepton School. Second Edition. 2 Vols. Svo. 9s. each. ^SOP'S FABLES. A New Version chiefly from Original Sources. By Kev. Thomas James, M.A. lUustrated with 100 Original Designs, on Wood, by John Tenniel. Post Svo. 16s. *«« A Cheap Edition for Schools and Young Persons. Woodcuts. 16mo. AGRICULTURAL (The) Journal. Published (half-yearly) by the Royal Agricultural Society of j:ngland. Svo. 10s. AMBER-WITCH (The). The most interesting Trial for Witch- craft ever known. Edited by Dk. Meinhold. Translated from tlie Gennan by Lady Duff Gordon. Post Svo. 2s. Qd. ARABIAN NIGHTS (The). A New Translation arranged for Family Reading. Third Edition. With 600 Woodcuts, by AVilliam Harvey. 3 Vols. Post Svo. 18s. ARAGO'S (M.) Historical Eloge on James Watt. Translated from the French, with Notes by J. P. Muirhead. Portrait. Svo. Ss. Qd., and 4to, 21s. ARTHUR'S (Little) History of England. By Lady Callcott. Fifteenth Edition. Woodcuts. ISmo. 2s. Qd. AUNT IDA'S Walks and Talks ; a Story Book for Children. By a Lady. Woodcuts. 16mo. 5s. R LIST OF WORKS ADMIEALTY PUBLICATIONS (The) ; Published by direction of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty : — 1. A MANUAL OF SCIENTIFIC ENQUIRY, for the Use of Officers in H.M. Navy and Travellers in General. By Various Hands. Edited by Sir J. F. Herschel, Bart. Second Edition. Post 8vo. 10s. &d. 2. AIRY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS made at Geeenavicii. 1836 to 1847. Royal 4to. 50s. each. APPENDIX TO THE ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. 1836, 1837. 1842, 8s. each ; and 1847, 14s. Royal 4to. CONTENTS. 1886.— Bessel's Refraction Tables. Table for converting Errors of R. A. and N. P. D. into Errors of Longitude and Ecliptic P. D. 1837. — Logarithms of Sines and Cosines to every Ten Seconds of Time. Table for converting Sidereal into Mean Solar Time, 1842,— Catalogue of 1439 Stars. 1847.— Twelve Years' Catalogue of Stars. 4. MAGNETIC AL AND METEOROLOGICAL OBSERVA- TIONS. 1840 to 1847. Royal 4to. 50s. each. 5, . ASTRONOMICAL, MAGNETICAL AND METEOROLO- GICAL OBSERVATIONS, 1848 and 1849. Royal 4to. 50s. each. 6. REDUCTION OF THE OBSERVATIONS OF PLANETS. 1750 to 1830. Royal 4to. 50s. - LUNAR OBSERVATIONS. 1750 to 1830. 2 Vols. Royal 4to. 50s. each. 8. BERNOULLI'S SEXCENTENARY TABLE. Lmdm, 1779. 4to. 5s. 9. BESSEL'S AUXILIARY TABLES FOR HIS METHOD OF CLEAR- ING LUNAR DISTANCES. 8vo. 10. FUNDAMENTA ASTRONOMIC : Begiommiti. 1818. Folio. 60s. 11. BIRD'S METHOD OF CONSTRUCTING MURAL QUADRANTS. Lmdm, 1768. 4to. 2s. Qd. 12. METHOD OF DIVIDING ASTRONOMICAL INSTRU- MENTS. London, 1767. 4to, 2s. 6^, 13. COOK, KING, AND BAYLY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. London, 1782. 4to. 21s. 14. EDWARDS ON THE COMPOSITION OF METALS FOR REFLECT- ING TELESCOPES. 8vo. 2s. M. 15. EIFFE'S ACCOUNT OF IMPROVEMENTS IN CHRONOMETERS. 4to. 2s. 16. ENCKE'S BERLINER JAHRBUCH, FOR 1830. Berlin, 1828. 8vo. 9s. 17. GROOMBRIDGE'S CATALOGUE OF CIRCUMPOLAR STARS. 4to. 10s. 18. HARRISON'S PRINCIPLES OF HIS TIME-KEEPER. Plates. 1767. 4to. 5s. 19. HUTTON'S TABLES OF THE PRODUCTS AND POWERS OF NUMBERS. 1781. Folio. 7s. Qd. 20. LAX'S TABLES FOR FINDING THE LATITUDE AND LONGI- TUDE. 1821. 8vo. 10s. 21. LUNAR OBSERVATIONS at GREENWICH. 1783 to 1819. Compared with the Tables, 1821. 4to. 7s. M. 22. DISTANCES of the MOON'S CENTRE from the PLANETS. 1822, 3s.; 1823, 4s. M. ; 1824 to 1835. 8to. -4s. eac^h. PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. Admiralty Publications — continued. 23. MASKELYNE'S ACCOUNT OF THE GOING OF HARRISON'S WATCH. 1767. 4to. 2s.Qd. 24. MAYER'S THEORIA LUN^ JUXTA SYSTEMA NEWTONI- ANUM. 4to. 2s. Qd. 25. TABULA MOTUUM SOLIS ET LUNJE. 1770. 4to. 5s. 26. ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS MADE AT GOT- TINGEN, from 1756 to 1761. 1826. Folio. 7s. Qd. 27. NAUTICAL ALMANACS, from 1767 to 1854. 8vo. 2s. M. each. 28. SELECTIONS FROM THE ADDITIONS, up to 1812. 8vo. 5s.— 1834-54. 8vo. 5s. 29. SUFFLEMENTS, 1828 to 1833, 1837 and 1838. 8vo. 2s. fMch. 30. —— TABLES requisite to be used with the N. A . 1788. Bvo. 2s. Qd. 31. Second Edition, enlarged. 1781. 8vo. 5s. 32. '■ . Third Edition, corrected. 1802. 8vo. 5s. 33. FOND'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. 1811 to 1835. 4to. 21s. each. 34. RAMSDEN'S ENGINE for Dividing Mathematical Instruments. ' 4to. 5s. 35. ENGINE for Dividing Straight Lines. 4to. 5s. 36. SABINE'S FENDULUM EXFERIMENTS to determine the Figure of the Earth. 1825. 4to. 40s 37. SHEPHERD'S TABLES for Correcting Lunar Distances. 1772. Royal 4to. 21s. 38. '■ TABLES, GENERAL, of the MOON'S DISTANCE from the SUN, and 10 STARS. 1787. Folio. 5s. Qd. 39. TAYLOR'S SEXAGESIMAL TABLE. 1780. 4to. 15s. 40. TABLES of LOGARITHMS. 4to. 3L 41. TIARK'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS for the Longitude of Madeira. 1822. 4to. 5s. 42. CHRON(JMETRICAL OBSERVATIONS for Differences of Longitude between Dover, Fortsmouth, and Falmouth. 1823. 4to. 5s. 43. VENUS and JUPITER : Observations of, compared with the Tables. London, 1822. 4to. 2s. 44. WALES and BAYLY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS. 1777. 4to. 21s. 45. WALES' REDUCTION of ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS MADE IN THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE. 1764—1771. 1788. 4t0. lOs. Qd. AUSTIN'S (Mus.) Fragments from German Prose Writers. Trans- lated, with Biographical Notes. Post 8vo. 10s. Translation of Eanke's Political and Ecclesiastical History of the Popes of Rome. Third Edition. 2 Vols. 8vo. 24s. BABBAGE'S (Charles) Economy of Machinery and Manufactures. Fourth Edition. Fcap. 8vo. Qs. — Table of the Logarithms of the Natural Numbers from 1 to 108000. Fourth Edition. Royal 8vo. 6s. Ninth Bridgewater Treatise. Second Edition. 8vo. 9s. Qd. Keflections on the Decline of Science in England, and on some of its Causes. 4to. 15s. Exposition of 1851 ; or, A^iews of the Industry, the Science, and the Government of England. Second Edition, 8vo. 7s. Qd, LIST OF WORKS BAEROWS (Sir John) Autobiographical Memoir, including lleflections, Observations, and Kcminiscenccs at Home and Abroad. From Early Life to Advanced Age. Portrait. 8vo. 16a-. . Yoyages of Discovery and Ec3carch within the Arctic Regions, from the earliest periods to the present time. Under the Command of the several Naval Officers, employed by Sea and Land, in search of a North-west Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific : with Two Attempts to reach the North Pole. Abridged and arranged from the Official Narratives, with Occasional Remarks. Maps, 2 Vols. 8vo. Vol. 1, 12s. Vol. 2, 15s. (John) Memoirs of the Kaval Worthies of Queen Elizabeth's Keign, their Gallant Deeds, Daring Adventures and Services in the infant state of the British Navy, with brief Biographical Notices of the respective Commanders. 8vo. 14s. Life and Voyages of Sir Francis Drake. With nume- rous Original Letters from him and the Lord High Admiral to the Queen, and great Officers of State. Post Svo. 2s. 6d. Tour in Austrian Lombardy, the Northern Tjrol, and Bavaria. Woodcuts. Post Svo. IDs. Gd. BASSOM PIERRE'S Memoirs of his Embassy to the Court of England in 1G26. Translated with Notes. Svo. 9s. Gd. BELISARIUS (Life of). By Lord Mahon. Second Edition. Post Svo. 10s. 6d. BELL (Sir Charles) on the Anatomy and Philosophy of Expression as connected with the Fine Arts. Fourth Edition. Plates. Impl. Svo. 21s. On The Mechanism and Endowments of the Hand as CAdncing Design. A Neiv Edition. Woodcuts. Post Svo. BENEDICT'S (Jules) Sketch of the Life and Works of Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy. Svo. 2s. M. BERTHA'S Journal during a Yisit to her Uncle in England. Containing a Variety of Interesting and Instructive Information, adapted for Young Persons. Seventh Edition. Woodcuts. 12mo. Is.Qd. ■ Heiress in her Minority ; or, the Progress of Character. By Author of " Bertha's Journal." 2 Vols. 12mo. 18s. BETHUNE'S (J. E. D.) Specimens of Swedish and German Poetry. Part I. Poems of Esaias Tegner. Part II. Schiller's Maid of Orleans. Crown Svo. 12s. BIRCH'S (Samuel) History of Ancient Pottery : Egyptian, Asiatic, Greek, Koman, Etruscan, and Celtic. With lUustrations. Svo. {Nearly Beady). IHRT'S (W. R.) Hurricane Guide. Being an Attempt to connect the Rotatory Gale, or Revolving Storm, with Atmospheric Waves. Including Instructions for observing the Phenomena of the Waves and Storms; with Practical Directions for avoiding the Centres of the latter. With Circles on Cards. Post Svo. 3s. BIOSCOPE (The) ; or, the Dial of Life explained. To which is added a Translation of St. Paulinus' Epistle to Celantia on the Rule of Christian Life and an Elementary View of general Chronology. By Gbanvii.i.e Pkxn. S'-cond Edition. With Plate. 12mo. 12.'?, PUBLISHED BY MR. MURRAY. BLUNT'S (Hev. J. J.) Undesigned Coincidences in the Writings of the Old and New Testament, an Argument of their Veracity : with an Appendix containing Undesigned Coincidences between the Gospels, Acts, and Josepluis. Third Edition. 8vo. 9s. Principles for tlie proper understanding of the Mosaic Writings, stated and applied, together with an incidental argument for the truth of the Resurrection of our Lord. Being the IIulsean Lectubes for 1832. Post 8vo. 6s. Qd. BOOK OF COMMOIIT PRAYER. Illuminated with 1000 Illus- trations of Borders, Initials, and Vignettes. Medium 8vo. 21s. cloth, 31s. Qd. calf, or 42s. morocco. BORROWS (George) Lavengro ; The Scholar— Gipsy— and Priest. With Portrait. 3 Vols. Post 8vo. 30s. Bible in Spain; Or the Journeys, Adventures, and Imprisonments of an Englishman in an Attempt to circulate the Scriptures in the Peninsula. 3 Vols. Post 8vo. 27s., or Cheap Edition, 16mo, 5s. — Zincali, or the Gipsies of Spain ; their Manners, Customs, Religion, and Language. 2 Vols. Post Svo. 18s., or Cheap Edition, 16mo, 5s. BOSWELL'S (James) Life of Dr. Samuel Johnson. Including the Tour to the Hebrides, with Notes by Sir W. Scott. Edited by the Right Hon. John Wilson Ckoker. A New and Cheaper Edition, thoroughly revised, (1848) loith much additional Matter. With Portraits. Complete in one Volume Royal 8vo. 15s, %* Be particular in ordering Choker's Boswell, in One Volume, BRAY'S (Mrs.) Life of Thomas Stothard, R,A. With Personal Reminiscences. With Portrait and Woodcuts. 4to. BREWSTER'S (Sir David) Martyrs of Science, or the Lives of Galileo, Tycho Brahe, and Kepler. Second Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 4s. 6c?. BRITISH ASSOCIATION REPORTS. Held at York and Oxford 1831-32, 13s. 6d. Cambridge, 1833, 12s. Edinburgh, 1834, 15s. Dublin, 1835, 13s. 6, Mffomctm JAN»6'?8 j 1 LD21-35m-8,'72 General Library (Q4189sl0)476 — A-32 University of California Berkeley