Besides, what reason have we to imagine, that Mizraïm reigned in Egypt, or that he was dedevoured by such an animal? The kings, who are brought in immediate succession to him, are Athothis, Cercenes, and Venephes. But these very kings occur in the same order elsewhere. They occupy the fifty-ninth, sixtieth, and sixtyfirst places in the catalogue of Syncellus. They consequently lived about one thousand years later. Who can put up with these dynasties of Diospolites, and others, whose reigns are so uncommonly short? And is it possible to give credit to the account of seventy kings, who reigned but seventy days? May we not be assured, that it was some college history; and related to a society of priests, whose office came in rotation; and who attended once in that " term? After all, that Africanus, or Manethon before him could do to make up what was wanting, yet many dynasties have scarce a name inserted. The seventh, eighth, tenth,

24 Euseb. Chron. p. 14.

26

25 The Cunocephali were said to die by piecemeal; and the whole body was extinct after seventy-two days. "Ews d' as as ἑβδομήκοντα και δυο πληρωθώσιν ἡμέραι, τότε όλος αποθνήσκει. Horapollo. 1. 1. c. 14. p. 29. They were undoubtedly an order of priests, who were in waiting at some temple; and their term was completed in seventy-two, or rather in seventy, days. See of this work vol. ii. p. 20. note 14.

26 In the ninth, one name only out of nineteen specified.

eleventh, thirteenth, and fourteenth, are quite anonymous: and in many places, where names have been inserted by Africanus, they are rejected by Eusebius, who came after him.

For these reasons, and from the authority of the Old Chronicle, I entirely set aside the reigns of all princes antecedent to the Auritæ, or Shepherds. They first reigned in Egypt, as the best histories shew. And however high the later Egyptians may have carried their antiquity, I cannot admit of any dynasty prior to the fifteenth, counting back from the last. Indeed we may infer, that the fifteenth was looked upon by all as the leading dynasty, before the true system was spoiled. And even afterwards, there seems to have been a tacit reference to it, as to a stated point, by which every thing else was to be determined. Both Manethon, and Africanus place the Auritæ, or Shepherds, in the fifteenth dynasty; but count from the first. Eusebius also places them in the fifteenth, if we count from the 27 last. From hence we may perceive, that which way so ever we may reckon, and however the accounts may have been impaired, the fifteenth was the object, by which they were originally determined. The words of Africanus

27 It is to be observed, that Eusebius begins with what he styles the seventeenth, and ends with the thirty-first: but in the series the twenty-first is somehow omitted.

28

are very remarkable, when he speaks of the kings of this dynasty. 33 Πεντεδέκατη Ποιμένων. Ησαν δε Φοινικες ξενοι βασιλεις σ', δι και Μεμφιν εἷλον. δι και εν τῷ Σεθροίτη νομῳ πολιν εκτίσαν, αφ' ἧς ὁρμωμένοι Αιγύπτιες Exegwo avto. The fifteenth is the dynasty of the Shepherds. These were foreign princes, styled Phonices. They first built themselves a city in the Sethroite (or rather 29 Sethite) region; from whence they made their invasion, and conquered all Egypt. This author having mentioned these Shepherds, whom he calls Phoenices, adds a dynasty of thirty-two Hellenic Shepherds; and a third of forty-three Shepherds, who reigned collaterally with as many kings of Thebes. This is extraordinary, that they should correspond so exactly in number; but what is more strange, that they should reign the same number of years. Ποιμένες και οι Θηβαίοι εξασίλευσαν ετη ένα. herd kings, and those of Thebes reigned the same number of years which amount to one hundred and fifty one. We see here two dynasties at different places, commencing at the same time, which correspond precisely in number of kings and in

30 Oμou à Ὁμου δι The Shep

28 Syncellus. p. 61.

29 It was the province of Seth, called also Saït, to which the author alludes.

30 Syncellus, p. 61.

number of years. And the sum of these years allows little more than three years and a half to the reign of each prince. For there are forty three in each place; and reign but one hundred and fifty-one years; which is incredible. Both the Phoenician, and Hellenic Shepherds were certainly the same as those who made an inroad into Egypt, and took Memphis; and afterwards conquered the whole country. They are brought by Africanus in succession after the former; but were certainly the same, however diversified by titles, and increased in number. The years of their reigns are apparently a forgery. We may, I think, be assured, that Manethon and Africanus out of one dynasty have formed three; and have brought them in succession to one another. And this arose from their not knowing the antient titles of the persons; nor the history with which it was attended.

Eusebius saw this, and therefore struck out two of these dynasties, and brought the third downwards two degrees lower. By these means the dynasty of the shepherds is made the fifteenth upwards; which is the true place and at this commences the history of Egypt. take away the two supposititious Manethon, which are rejected by Eusebius, the Shepherd dynasty, marked by him the fifteenth, will be the fifteenth from the bottom. And it

If then we dynasties of

will be plain, that the series, from the Shepherds to the last Persic princes inclusive, consisted at first of fifteen dynasties only. The notion of any antecedent kings arose from a retrograde manner of counting among the Greeks, and from an error in consequence of it. In Eusebius the Shepherd dynasty is the fifteenth from the bottom: and if we discard the two spurious dynasties, which he has substituted in the room of the two inserted by Manethon, it will be found the fifteenth from the top, and accord every way. In short, it was, according to Manethon, the centre dynasty of twenty-nine. All from it inclusive downwards were genuine, but the fourteen above supposititious. They were superadded, as I before said, from an error in judgment, and a faulty way of computation.

As the mistake began with Manethon and the Hellenic Egyptians, it may be worth while to give a list of the dynasties as they stood before they were further corrupted by the Grecians in other parts.