NOTE ON EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY. 105 like those which surround the Second and Third Pyramids. In fact, the tomb of an Egyptian was essentially a temple, consecrated to the deities of Amenti. The limits of our work will not admit, in general, of antiquarian discussions on the scale we have allotted to the Pyramids; but their vast antiquity, their existing state, and the deeply interesting problems they suggest, seemed to demand that the reader should be put in possession of all that is known concerning them. They stand out as conspicuously on the comparatively blank page of early Egyptian history, as their forms rise above the valley of the Nile, the monuments of an almost unknown chapter in the history of the world. NOTE ON EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY. The various sytems of chronology adopted by the Egyptologers are based on astronomical calculations, on the traditions of Manetho and others, and in some degree on the chronology of Scripture. Enjoying, like the kindred Chaldæans, the greatest advantages of climate and horizon, the Egyptians divide with that people the honour of being the first cultivators of astronomy. Like the Chaldæan temple-towers, the pyramids had probably a connexion with astronomical observation. In addition to other proofs, it has been discovered that the passages which slope inwards from the northern face of these structures are inclined at the very angle which would make them point to what was the pole-star at the epoch of their erection. We have seen the reasons for ascribing these edifices to the Fourth Dynasty, probably about the middle of the twenty-fourth century B.C., or about 4000 years ago. At that time, on account of the precession of the equinoxes, the north pole of the heavens was about 3° 44′ from the star a Draconis. The latitude of Ghizeh, where the pyramids stand, being just 30° N., this would be, at all times, the inclination of a tube pointing to the true pole. But the altitude of the then polar star, at its two meridian passages, would differ from this elevation by the amount just stated, and, at its lower culmination, would be about 26° 16'; and so slightly do the passages of the three principal pyramids differ from this inclination, that the mean is 26° 13'. "At the bottom of every one of these passages, therefore, the then pole-star must have been visible at its lower culmination, a circumstance which can hardly be supposed to have been unintentional, and was doubtless connected with the astronomical observation of that star, of whose proximity to the pole, at the epoch of the erection of these wonderful structures, we are thus furnished with a monumental record of the most imperishable nature." It is obvious how complete a criterion this discovery would afford for the date of the erection of the pyramids, if we could be quite sure that it is not an accidental coincidence. " * Sir J. Herschel, Outlines of Astronomy, §§ 319, 320, ed. 1849. Other Egyptian monuments, such as the famous zodiac in the temple at Denderah, show the care of the priests in taking and recording astronomical observations, upon which they based an elaborate system of chronology. They claimed the discovery of the true length of the solar year, by means of the stars, but the priests kept this reckoning to themselves. The year employed in ordinary computations, both civil and religious, was the "Vague Year" of 365 days, divided into twelve months of 30 days each, with five days added after the twelfth. It was in use from a time at least as early as the second king of the Eighteenth Dynasty (about B.C. 1500), till it was merged in the Julian year by Augustus (B.c. 24). The neglect of the quarter of a day would of course, as in the Roman calendar before the Julian reform, have caused the year to retire through the seasons. But its division into three seasons of four months each seems to prove that they also used a "Tropical Year," that is, one whose length was regulated by the recurrence of the seasons. The three seasons were called by names which the best authorities interpret as signifying those of "Vegetation," "Manifestation," and the "Waters" or "Inundation." The months were named after the different deities. The year of 365 days, which seems to have been the nearest approximation they made to the true length of the year, was determined by the heliacal rising of Thoth or Soth (the Dog Star), and hence was called the "Sothic Year." The interval between two coincidences of the Vague and Sothic years was 1461 of the former and 1460 of the latter. This was called the "Sothic, or Dog Star Cycle," and is a period of the greatest importance in Egyptian chronology. The ancient writers mention two Sothic epochs, the one called the era of Menophres (the Men-ptah of the monuments), on July 20th, B.C. 1322, probably near the beginning of the Nineteenth Dynasty, and the other on July 20th, A.D. 139, in the reign of Antoninus Pius. There seems to have been also a "Tropical Cycle," at the end of which the Vague and Tropical years coincided, consisting of about 1500 Vague years; but our information on this point is scanty and uncertain. Supposing that the Tropical cycle began with the Vague year in which the new moon fell at or near the vernal equinox, we obtain two such epochs, namely, Jan. 7, B.C. 2005, in the reign of Amenemha II., of the Twelfth Dynasty; and Dec. 28, B.C. 507, under Darius Hystaspis. Equally important and difficult is the "Phoenix Cycle," to which Herodotus alludes in his celebrated fable of the phoenix. From the astronomical ceiling of the Ramescum (formerly called the Memnonium) at El-Kurneh, we learn that this fabled bird was a constellation, "the Phoenix of Osiris," corresponding probably to the constellation now called Cygnus. Its heliacal rising on the first day of the Vague year seems to have marked the commencement of a Phoenix cycle, which would therefore be of the same length as the Sothic cycle, namely, 1460 Julian, or 1461 Vague years, the very interval which Tacitus assigns to the successive returns of the phoenix. Tacitus also places the recurrences of the cycle in the reigns of Sesostris (probably Sesertesen III.), Amasis, and Ptolemy III.; and Mr. Poole has shown that the two latter known dates agree fairly well with those calculated approximately from the Rameseum. These epochs may be more accurately deduced from the "Great Panegyrical Year," an Egyptian cycle, four of which made up 1461 Julian years, having a mean length of 3654 Julian years, and made up of 3641 and 366 such years alternately. If the Phoenix NOTE ON EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY. 107 cycle corresponded exactly with the Panegyrical, it must have consisted of 1461 Julian (instead of Vague) years. The Great Panegyrical Month contained 30 Julian years, and the Year was made up by intercalating 4 or 6 years alternately. From these data Mr. Poole has calculated the following chronological epochs : B. C. 2717. Era of Menes, the first king of Egypt. First Great Panegyrical Year. Length, 3644 years. 2352. Time of Suphis I. and II., kings of the Fourth Dynasty. 1986. Time of Sesertesen III., fourth king of the Twelfth Dynasty. Third Great Panegyrical Year. First Phoenix Cycle. Length, 3644 years. Length, 366 years. 1622. Fourth Great Panegyrical Year. Length, 3644 years. 161. In the reign of Ptolemy Philometor. Eighth Great Panegyrical Year. A.D. 205. In the reign of Septimius Severus. Length, 366 years. Ninth Great Panegyrical Year. Length, 364 years. Mr. Poole also gives the following table of epochs mentioned on the monuments, with their probable dates : B. C. 2352. Second Panegyrical Year. Time of Suphis I. and II., kings of the Fourth Dynasty, and builders of the 2005. First Tropical Cycle. Time of Amenemha II. Twelfth Dynasty. 1472-1. Date in the fourth year of Sethee. Eighteenth Dynasty. 1442. Date in the sixteenth year of Queen Amen-nunt. Eighteenth Dynasty. The accession of the Eighteenth Dynasty is fixed, with a high degree of probability, about B.C. 1525. Different opinions are held as to the correspondence of this epoch with the Exodus; some chronologers placing it about the same time, others (as Mr. Poole) as much as 125 years earlier, and others (as the Rabbis and Lepsius) 200 years later. Unfortunately it is impossible to settle this epoch independently, as a point in Scripture chronology. The Egyptian priests told Herodotus that there had been 341 generations, both of kings and of high-priests, from Menes to Sethos (the successor of the Ethiopian Tirhaka). This he calculates as 11,340 years. He adds that, during this period, the sun had "twice risen where he now sets, and twice set where he now rises." This apparently absurd statement is explained by Mr. Poole as referring to "the solar risings of stars having fallen on those days of the Vague year on which the settings fell in the time of Sethos" (Hora Egyptiaca, p. 94). CHAPTER VII. HISTORY OF EGYPT FROM THE SHEPHERD INVASION TO THE FINAL CONQUEST BY PERSIA. B.C. 2080? TO B.C. 353. "High on his car Sesostris struck my view, Whom scepter'd slaves in golden harness drew : And the learn'd walls with Hieroglyphics graced."-POPE. THE SHEPHERD KINGS, OR HYKSOS, THE FIFTEENTH, SIXTEENTH, AND SEVENTEENTH THE rule of the Shepherd Kings, by whom the Memphian and other kingdoms were overthrown, is doubly interesting from its probable connexion with sacred history. Unfortunately, however, its annals are as obscure as the Scripture history itself is rendered by chronological difficulties, and by the constant use of the title Pharaoh, without the proper names of the respective kings. The dynasties of the Hyksos,* or Shepherd Kings, are the Fifteenth, *This, their Egyptian name, is derived by Manetho from Hyk, a king, and Sos, a shepherd. The latter word exists in Coptic. In the hieroglyphics Hak is king, and Huk, captive, a sense which Manetho also mentions. This etymology has helped to favour the now exploded opinion that these "captive-shepherds" were the Israelites. But the Egyptians used captive as a term of contempt for foreigners; so that the word may mean "foreign shepherds." B.C. 2080?] THE SHEPHERD KINGS. 109 Sixteenth, and Seventeenth. Manetho says that they were Arabs; but he calls the six kings of the Fifteenth, or First Shepherd Dynasty, Phoenicians. This statement is adopted by Mr. Poole, who connects the invasion of the Shepherds with the great movement of the Phoenicians from the shores of the Erythræan Sea, and with the expedition of Chedorlaomer. Manetho says that they took Memphis, and founded a city in the Sethroite nome (probably the fortified camp of Avaris, the later Pelusium, on the eastern frontier), whence they conquered all Egypt. The primary object of this camp was to resist the Assyrians, from whom, Manetho tells us, they expected an invasion. He adds that they easily gained possession of the country without a battle, which has been explained by the hypothesis that they were brought in as auxiliaries or mercenaries, in contests between the native dynasties; perhaps to aid the Memphians against the Thebans. Mr. Poole supposes them to have been at first in a subordinate position, and on friendly terms with some of the Egyptian kings, so that their rule in Lower and part of Upper Egypt was not inconsistent with that of the Twelfth and Thirteenth Dynasties at Thebes. It was not, he thinks, till the close of the latter dynasty, that the Shepherds began that oppressive rule which made them hateful to the Egyptians, and so provoked their expulsion. The first king of the Fifteenth Dynasty was Salatis or Saites (about B.C. 2080?), who ruled at Memphis, and made both Upper and Lower Egypt tributary; Mr. Poole assigns Abraham's visit to Egypt to about the beginning of his reign. The name of his fourth successor is found on the hieroglyphics as Assa; and this is the king to whom Joseph was prime minister, according to Mr. Poole's computations. It is impossible to discuss here the various opinions held upon this most difficult and as yet undecided question. Its settlement on purely chronological grounds is forbidden by the difficulties in which both Egyptian and Scriptural chronology are involved; and it is necessary to draw other arguments from the state of Egyptian affairs as described in the book of Genesis. The chronology of Egypt is now so far settled, that the accession of the Eighteenth (Theban) Dynasty may be regarded as fixed to within a few years of B.c. 1525. The era of the Exodus, on the system of Ussher (that given in the margin of our English Bibles), is B.C. 1491. The obvious conclusion agrees with the statement of Manetho, according to Julius Africanus, that Moses |