page,* and indeed in order to explain these from later circumstances, he was obliged to labor by availing himself of a number of "mistakes and inaccuracies" with reference to Egypt, to bring counter-arguments for the later age of the narrator, and for his position out of Egypt. We have proved that these pretended “mistakes and inaccuracies" are just so many proofs of the ignorance of him who alleged them. We have also shown that the Egyptian references of the Pentateuch are beyond comparison more numerous and direct than was hitherto supposed. The unprejudiced critic henceforth will be obliged to recognize in the connection of the Pentateuch with Egypt, one of the most powerful arguments for its credibility and for its composition by Moses.

* S. 54.

APPENDIX.

MANETHO AND THE HYCSOS.

I. MANETHO.

THE prevailing opinion is, that Manetho was the chief of the priests in Heliopolis who were the most distinguished for learning of any in Egypt, and wrote under the patronage of king Ptolemy Philadelphus, by the aid of the writings found in the sanctuaries of the temples.*

But there are several strong objections to this opinion: 1. In the specification of the gods and demi-gods who ruled Egypt, according to Manetho, before men, a remarkable ignorance of Egyptian divinity is exhibited, a strange mingling of Greek and Egyptian names of deities,—Mars, Apollo and Ammon are found as demi-gods, and Jupiter Ammon is divided into two divine persons, etc. From these facts, upon

which Jablonsk it as long ago as his time, and after him and copying from him Meinerst commented, Rosellini has justly argued that this list was drawn up by one

+ Panth. Aeg. Proll. p. 67 seq. In reference to these things this author says: Totus animi pendeo, ancepsque haereo quodnam de scriptoris hujus, aut diligentia, aut peritia, aut accuratione, aut bona denique fide judicium ferre debeam, and therefore was in the best way, with their help to perceive the indications of the truth.

+ Religionsgesch. der ältesten Völker, besonders der Aegypter, S. 122.

§ Vol. I. 1. p. 12.

entirely unacquainted with Egyptian affairs. But when he proceeds further: The list cannot therefore be taken from the books of Manetho, this therefore is well founded only on the supposition that Rosellini's prejudice in favor of Manetho is just. Until further proofs are adduced, we are perfectly satisfied that that which is an argument against the part is also against the whole, since every trace of a later interpolation of this part, while the whole existed without it, is wanting.

2. In the notices of M anetho upon the Hycsos preserved in Josephus it is said of the first king of the Hycsos: "But since he found in the Saïtic nome a very convenient city, which lay on the east side of the Bubastic channel," etc. This geographical designation involves an evident contradiction. A city could not be situated at the same time in the Saïtic nome and east of the Bubastic arm of the Nile. For the Saïtic nome lay in the western part of the Delta, the Bubastic channel on the other hand, is the same with the Pelusiac, the most eastern of all. Lakemachert in order to avoid this difficulty wishes for in the Saïtic nome,' to read: 'in the Sethroitic nome.' So Ed. Bernhard. This is very well if it is only first shown that Manetho was a native Egyptian who lived in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus. In the meantime, however, we intend to make use of this argument to show the opposite.

Others suppose that by Saïs is not meant the nome known in the west but another much more easterly, commonly called Tanis, from which Herodotus borrowed his designation of Saïtic arm of the Nile, while his other accounts have reference to the western Saïs. But the passage of Herod

* Contr. Ap. 1. 14: Εὑρὼν δὲ ἐν νομῶ τῷ Σαΐτῃ πόλιν ἐπικαιροτάτην, κειμένην μὲν πρὸς ἀνατολὴν τοῦ Βουβαστίτου ποταμοῦ κ. τ. λ.

f Obs. Phil. 6. 323.

Mannert. alt. Geog. 10. 1. p. 562,

otus* spoken of, can be of no service to Manetho. It is granted that it is very probable that the Tanitic arm of the Nile is called in it the Saïtic as even Strabot seems to have admitted, who in the words: "the Tanitic arm of the Nile, which some call the Saïtic," by 'some' probably means Herodotus. But the attempt to explain this renaming of the Tanitic arm of the Nile by supposing that Tanis is called Saïs, is most improbable. Either Herodotus made a mistake in writing, or what is more probable, he designates as the Saïtic, the arm of the Nile which bounds the Saïtic nome on the East. But if Tanis had been called Saïs, a city over the Bubastic channel could not lie in the TanitioSaïtic nome. The Egyptian nomes were small, and one being on this side of the Bubastic Nile-arm, could the less extend over it, since the land on the two sides of this channel was carefully divided, and that beyond it was not considered as belonging to Egypt proper. Besides we know the names of the nomes in the region without the Pelusiac arm of the Nile.§ Let any one judge whether so great ignorance of the geography of his native land can be accounted for in a noble Egyptian of the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus.

3. In the account concerning the Hycsos it is said: "But their whole nation were called Hycsos, i. e. shepherd-kings. For Hyc signifies in the sacred tongue, a king, but Sos means shepherd, and shepherds in the common dialect, and from these two is the word Hycsos compounded." There is no where else any trace found of the co-existence of a sacred + B. 17. p.

* B. 2 c. 17.

Compare Champollion, L'Ég. s. 1. Phar. 2. p. 269.

802.

§ Compare Cellarius. Not. Orbis Ant. ed. Schwarz II. p. 799. Champollion 2. p. 277 seq.

Εκαλεῖτο δὲ τὸ σύμπαν αὐτῶν ἔθνος ὑκσώς, τοῦτο δέ ἐστι βασιλεῖς ποιμένες. Τὸ γὰρ ὑκ καθ ̓ ἱερὰν γλῶσσαν βασιλέα σημαί νει, τὸ δὲ σως ποιμήν ἐστι καὶ ποιμένες κατὰ τὴν κοινὴν διάλεκτον καὶ οὕτω συντιθέμενον γίνεται ὑκσώς.