« AnteriorContinuar »
agree with Eusebius. But forasmuch as it seems to me an impossible matter, to attain unto the truth of these forgotten times, by conjectures, founded upon Ctesias and Metasthenes, I will lay the burden upon Eusebius, who lived in an age better furnished than ours with books of this argument. Let it therefore suffice, that these two kings, (whom I have reckoned as contemporaries with Hezekiah,) Medidus and Cardiceas, are found in Eusebius; for whether Cardiceas were Diodorus's Arbianes I will not stay to search. The kings of Media, according to Eusebius, reigned in this order:
Arbaces, who reigned 28 years.
Sosarmus, - 30
Medidus, - 40
Cardiceas, - 15
Deioces, - • 54
Phraortes, - 24
Cy ax ares, - 32
Astyages, - 38
These names, and this course of succession, I retain; but add unto these Cyaxares, the son of Astyages, according to Xenophon, and sometimes follow Herodotus, in netting down the length of a king's reign, otherwise than Eusebius hath it; of which variations I will render my reasons in due place.
The twenty-nine years of Hezekiah were concurrent in part, with the rule of the four first that were chosen governors of Athens for ten years; that is, of Charops, iEsimedes, Elidicus, and Hippones. Touching the first of these I hear nothing, save that Rome was built in his first year, of which, perhaps, himself did not hear: of the second and third I find only the names. The fourth made himself known by a strange example of justice, or rather of cruelty, that he shewed upon his own daughter: For he, finding that she had offended in unchastity, caused her to be locked up with an horse, giving to neither of them any food; so that the horse, constrained by hunger, devoured the unhappy woman.
In Rome, the first king and founder of that city, Romulus, did reign both before and somewhat after Hezekiah.
In Lydia, Caudaules.the last king, ruled in the same age. This region was first called Maeonia. Lydus the son of Atys reigning in it, gave the name of Lydia, if we believe such authority as we find. This kingdom was afterwards, by the appointment of an oracle, conferred upon Argon, who came of Alcaeus, the son of Hercules, by Jardana, a bond-woman. The race of these Heraclidae continued reigning fifty-five years, (in which two and twenty generations passed,) the son continually succeeding the father. Candaules, the son of Myrsus, was the last of his race, who doated so much upon the beauty of his own wife, that he could not be content to enjoy her, but would needs enforce one Gyges, the son of Dascylus, to behold her naked body, and placed the unwilling man secretly in her chamber, where he plight see her preparing to bedward. This was not so closely carried, but that the queen perceived Gyges at his going forth, and understanding the matter, took it in such high disdain, that she forced him the next day to requite the king's folly with treason. So Gyges, being brought again into the same chamber by the queen, slew Candaules, and was rewarded, not only with his wife, but with the kingdom of Lydia; he reigned thirty-eight years, beginning in the last of Hezekiah, one year before the death of Romulus.
After Gyges, his son Ardys reigned nine and forty years; then Sadyattes, twelve; Halyattes, fifty-seven; and finally Croesus, the son of Halyattes, fourteen years, who,lost the kingdom, and was taken by Cyrus of Persia.
And here by the way we may note, that as the Lydian kings, whom Croesus, his progenitor dispossessed, are deduced from Hercules, so of the same Hercules there sprang many other kings, which governed several countries very long: as in Asia, the Mysians; in Greece, the Lacedemonians, Messenians, Rhodians, Corinthians, and Argives; and from the Argives, the Macedonians; as likewise from the Corinthians, the Syracusans; besides many great and famous, though private families.
But of the Heraclidae, that reigned in Lydia, I have not troubled myself to take notice in the time of their several reigns, for little is found of them besides the bare names, and the folly of this last king Candaules.
Or THE KINGS THAT REIGNED IN EGYPT, BETWEEN THE DELIVERANCE OF ISRAEL FROM THENCE, AND THE REIGN OF HEZEKIAH IN JUDAH, WHEN EGYPT AND JUDAH MADE A LEAGUE AGAINST THE ASSYRIANS.
That many names of Egyptian kings, found in history, are like to have belonged only to viceroys. An example proving this out of William of Tyre's history of the Holy War.
THE emulation and quarrels arising in these times, between the mighty kingdoms of gypt and Assyria, do require our pains, in collecting the most memorable things in Egypt, and setting down briefly the state of that country, which had continued long a flourishing region, and was of great power, when it contended with Assyria for the mastery. Of Cham, the son of Noah, who first planted that country, and of Osiris, Orus, and other ancient kings that reigned there until the Israelites were thence delivered, more hath been said already than I can stand to; though I hold it no shame to fail in such conjectures. That which I have delivered, in speaking my opinion of the Egyptian dynasties, must here again help me: for it may truly be affirmed, that the great number of kings, which are said to have reigned in Egypt, were none other than viceroys or stewards, such as Joseph was, and such as were the soldans in later ages. Therefore, I will not only forbear to seek after those, whom Herodotus and Diodorus have reckoned up, from the mouths of Egyptian priests, delivering them by number, without rehearsing their names, but will save the labour of marshalling them in order whose names only are found, the years of their reigns, and other circumstances proving them to have been kings indeed, being not recorded.
But that I may not seem before-hand to lay an imaginary ground, whereupon after I may build what I list, it were not amiss to give unto the reader such satisfaction in this point as apparent reason and truth of history doth afford. First, therefore, we ought not to believe those numbers of generations, which the lying priests have reckoned up, to magnify their antiquities: For we know that, from Abraham, our Saviour Christ was removed only fortytwo descents, which makes it evident that, in far shorter time, namely, before the Persian empire, there could not have passed away twice as many successions in Egypt, especially considering that many of these, whose continuance is expressed, have reigned longer than forty years. It follows that we should square the number of the Egyptian kings in some even proportion to those which did bear rule in other countries. As for the rest, whose names we find scattered here and there, any man that will take the pains to read the nineteenth book of the Holy War, written by William, archbishop of Tyre, may easily persuade himself, that it is not hard to find names enough of such as might be thought to have reigned in Egypt, being none other than regents or viceroys. Yet, will I here insert, as briefly as I can, some things making to that purpose, for the pleasure and information of such as will not trouble themselves with turning over many authors.
When Elhadech the caliph ruled in Egypt, one Dargan, a powerful and a subtile man, made himself soldan, by force and cunning, chasing away Sanar, an Arabian, who was soldan before and after him. This Dargan ministered matter of quarrel to Almaricke, king of Jerusalem, and sustained, with little loss, an invasion which Almaricke made upon Egypt. Hereupon he grew so insolent and proud, that Sanar, the former soldan, hoped to make his party good against him, if he could get any forces wherewith to enter Egypt. Briefly, Sanar sueth to Noradine, king of Damascus, for aid, who sends an army of his Turks, under the command of Syracon, against the soldan Dargan. So Dargan and Sanar met, and fought: the victory was Dargan's but he enjoyed it not, for in few days after he was slain by treason, whereby Sanar did recover his dignity; which to establish, he slew all the -kindred and friends of Dargan, that he could find in the great city of Cairo.
To all these doings, the caliph Elhadech gave little regard, for he thought it little concerned him which of thein lived, and had the administration of the kingdom, whilst he might have the profit of it, and enjoy his pleasure. But new troubles presently arise, which, (one would think,) do nearly touch the