which they departed; if we make proper allowance for this, the sum of the years will correspond very well with the sojourning of the people in that country, which was two hundred and fifteen years.

Manethon tells us, as I have observed before, that the Amenophis, in whose reign the Israelites left Egypt, preceded Rhamases Sethon. In his reign they were led off, under the 'conduct of Moses. It is to be observed that Manethon styles this king the father of Sethon. This is the reason why I do not think that the former Amenophis was the person spoken of. Sethon Ægyptus, who succeeded that Amenophis, was of another dynasty, consequently of another family, and could not be his son; for new dynasties commence with new families. This, I imagine, was the prince, who is alluded to in Scripture, where it is said that * there arose up a new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph. He was not acquainted with the merits of Joseph, because he was the first king

'Manethon has confounded the history of Joseph and Moses, of which I have before taken notice. He allows that a person called Moses led off the Israelites, but supposes that this was a secondary name. Μετετέθη ἔνομα, και προσηγορεύθη Μωϋσης.

Ibid.

2 Exodus. c. 1. v. 8.

of a new dynasty, and of a different family from those who had been under such immediate obligations to the Patriarch. In the antient histories there is a distinction made between the Mizraïm and the Egyptians; and the former were looked upon as prior in time. Thus, in the Old Chronicle, the reigns of the kings are divided into three classes the first of which is of the Auritæ ; the next of the Mizraim; and the third of the Egyptians. Here is a difference expressed between the two latter, and it may not be easy to determine wherein it consisted. Those so particularly styled Egyptians were probably of Lower Egypt, and of a more mixed family than those Mizraïm, who were of the superior region, called Saït. Of these the Cunic, or Royal, Cycle consisted, and the supremacy was in their family for some generations. But a change of government ensued, and the chief rule came into the hands of the AYUTTIO, Egyptians, of whom Se

3

4

3 The region of Delta seems to be particularly denoted under the name of Egyptus. The words θαλασσα γαρ ην Αίγυπτος, res late only to Lower Egypt. In like manner AyʊTTOS SWROV TY ποταμό, Αίγυπτος ποταμοχωστος, expressions used by Herodotus and Djodorus, have a like reference to the same part of the country, and to that only.

4.0 μεν Σέθωσις εκαλείτο Αιγυπτος. Josephus cont. Ap. 1. 1. P. 447.

thon, called Egyptus, was the first monarch. This new dynasty was the third; but according to the common way of computation, it was reputed the nineteenth. Hence, in the Latin version of the Eusebian Chronicle, the author tells us very truly, Ægyptii per nonam decimam dynastiam suo imperatore uti cœperunt; quorum primus Sethos. We find that the genuine race of Egyptian monarchs did not commence before Sethon. He was of a different family from the former, and undoubtedly the person styled a new king; who was not acquainted with the merits of Joseph, and who unjustly enslaved the children of Israel. To him succeeded Rampses; and next after him came that Amenophis, in whose reign I have shewn that the Exodus happened under Moses.

I wish that I could proceed, and with any degreee of accuracy settle the dynasties downward; that the whole of the Egyptian chronology might be established. But as this is a work which will require much time, and more sagacity than I can pretend to, I shall leave it to be executed by others. I flatter myself, that it may one day be

Αιγυπτος δε ἡ χώρα εκληθη απο το Βασιλεως Σεθως το γαρ Σεθως, Φασιν, Αίγυπτος καλείται. Theophil. ad Autol. 1. 3. p. 392. Euseb. Chron. Lat. p. 17.

effected; though there will certainly be great difficulty in the execution. The Exodus is supposed to have happened 1494 years before the birth of Christ. As this event has been mistaken for the retreat of the first Shepherds, and adjudged to the reign of the first Amosis, it has been carried upwards too high by two hundred and fifty years. In consequence of this, the writers, who have been guilty of this anticipation, have taken pains to remedy the mistake, which they found must ensue in chronological computation. But this was healing one evil by introducing a greater. They saw from their commencing so high, that the years downwards were too many for their purpose. They have therefore, as we have reason to fear, omitted some kings; and altered the years of others; in order that the æra of Amosis may be brought within a proper distance, and accord with the year of Christ, By means of these changes the kings of Africanus differ from those of Eusebius; and the years of their reigns still vary more. Syncellus has formed a list of his own upon what authority I know not; wherein there are still greater variations: so that there sometimes occur three or four princes in a suite, of which there are no traces in the foregoing writers. Thus every one has endeavoured to adapt the chronology of Egypt to his own prejudices, which has introduced infinite confusion

Of this Sir John Marsham very justly complains. His modis luculentissimæ Ægypti antiquitates, κατα συςολην και διαςολην κατα προθεσιν και αφαίρεσιν miseré vexatæ, spissis involutæ sunt tenebris; ab ipsis temporum interpretibus; qui omnia susque deque permis cuerunt. Upon Syncellus he passes a severe censure. Reges comminiscitur, qui neque apud Eusebium sunt, neque Africanum : annosque et successiones mutilat, vel extendit, prout ipsi visum est, magnâ nominum, maximà numerorum interpolatione. It must be confessed, that there is too much truth in this allegation; though we are in other respects greatly indebted to this learned chronologer. The person, to whom we are most obliged, is Eusebius: for he went very deep in his researches; and has transmitted to us a noble collection of historical records, which without him had been buried in oblivion. But even Eusebius had his prejudices, and has tried to adapt the history of Egypt to some preconceived opinions. Hence he laboured to enhance the antiquity of Moses: and not considering that the Shepherd kings were the first who reigned in Egypt, he has made it his business to authenticate sixteen antecedent dynasties, which

Marsham. Can. Chron. p. 7.

7 Ibid.