were not, as already observed, among them, for he was not only well acquainted with those, but considered them of the greatest importance. He subjected this Dynasty to a very careful analysis, because the birth of Moses and the Exodus were connected with it. The labours of Apollodorus did not, therefore, extend to the New Empire. Such an hypothesis were indeed hardly in itself admissible for Manetho assigns, at most, 57 Theban Kings of the 13th Dynasty to this period, and those of Apollodorus are also expressly called Thebans. Lastly, the correspondence between the number 53 in Apollodorus and 57 in Manetho were as close as could reasonably be expected or desired — even in the case of two races entirely different in origin or settlement as an argument in favour of their identity of period.

Everything therefore combines to show the proba bility of our having discovered the true system of Eratosthenes and Apollodorus, and with it a key to the right understanding of the Lists of Manetho. If our further researches upon this basis be corroborated by the monuments-and clear up in their turn the obscurities of Greek tradition-we may venture to hope that we have discovered the clue for restoring the whole chronology of Egypt.

Such a discovery will doubtless be the more acceptable at the present moment, when the written monuments of that country, after the lapse of thousands of years, have once more been made accessible to our researchesif we reflect, that beyond the pale of the Alexandrian school it were vain to look for any solution of the enigma which the native Egyptians have transmitted

to us.

D.

DIODORUS SICULUS.

1. DIODORUS.-HIS DYNASTIES AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE ANTE

HISTORICAL PERIOD.

THREE great epochs in the history of Egyptian chronological research have now been pointed out: those of Herodotus, Manetho, and of Eratosthenes. Our attention has also already been drawn to traces of a combination or blending of the genial Hellenic, the dry monumental Egyptian, and the critical Alexandrian elements of research in the later Greek literature. The path pursued by Eratosthenes was now neglected. The degenerate race, possessed by a spirit of subtle trifling, or of systematic perversion of truth, and dead to all sense of the dignity or gravity of historical pursuit, grasped at whatever happened to suit its purpose at the moment, confounding and too often falsifying both facts and authorities. Diodorus Siculus visited Egypt under the 13th Ptolemy, surnamed the Young Dionysus, in the 180th Olympiad, consequently about 58 years B.C. his history, however, was written at a considerably later period. He was the first author, as well as the last, who ventured to grapple with the whole subject of Egypt in its integrity, and that at the head of his general history of the ancient world. But unfortunately he brought to the task a mere acquaintance with books, without either sound judgment, critical spirit, or comprehensive views. He was more successful consequently in complicating and mystifying, than in sifting and illustrating the traditions with which he had to deal. He could not venture to set aside the narratives of Herodotus, now become so popular; he therefore incorporated them with other later commentaries on Egyptian chronology and history to which he

had access, chiefly garbled and mutilated versions of the systems of Manetho or Eratosthenes. The confusion which resulted has tended above all other circumstances to disparage Egyptian chronology in the eyes of critical investigators, by whom it has been considered as reflecting either an absolute want of historical character, or an irremediable state of derangement in the native traditions themselves. We shall, however, we trust, be able to show, that the fault is entirely that of Diodorus himself of his bad guides and his own precipitancy and want of judgment: and that criteria are not wanting for distinguishing and restoring the golden grains of genuine Egyptian tradition from among the chaff under which it has been sinothered. With this object in view, it will be sufficient in the present introductory notice to point out the fissures in this piece. of rhetorically patched and plastered Mosaic work, and to investigate in each particular subdivision the original from which its author had copied. We have every reason to assume that Diodorus had read neither Manetho nor Eratosthenes; but that those whom he selected as his guides, had drawn from one or other of those sources.

To this inference we are led at the outset by his mode of treating Egyptian tradition prior to Menes. Before the age of Men reigned Gods and Heroes (i. 42). The earliest Kings having been deified bear for the most part the names of the seven most ancient deities. These are the Sun and Moon (primeval Osiris and Isis), the "Spirit" who is called the father of gods and men (probably Kneph), and the four elements- Vulcan, (Phtah), Fire-Ceres, the Earth-Oceanus, WaterNeith-Athena, the Air, "hence" called by the Greeks "the blue-eyed Goddess."

Among those deified personages, the first who reigned bore, according to some, the name of the Sun; according to others, he was called the Human Vulcan. The probable

story that Vulcan, on the occasion of a forest having been set on fire by lightning, invented that element, is in favour of the latter opinion.

Then came Chronus, the husband of Rhea. Their offspring were Zeus, and Hera, whose five childrenIsis, Osiris, Typhon, Apollo (Horus), and Aphrodite all mounted the throne.

Of them, Osiris, the husband of Isis, reigned first. These two were the benefactors of the human race, which they elevated from the condition of savages and cannibals to that of devout and civilised nations, who ate bread, drank wine and beer, and planted the olive. They built Thebes with its hundred gates, and in it the first temples to their worthy progenitors Zeus and Hera -gorgeous and costly works. Hermes-Thoth was the sacred scribe and counsellor of Osiris, who organised language and religious ceremonies, and invented writing. He was also the real inventor of the culture of the olive, and not Athena. In order to extend this divinely regulated life over the whole world, Osiris traversed the globe, leaving with Isis Hermes above mentioned as counsellor, and a valorous kinsman called Hercules, as general. He made Busiris his lieutenant over Phoenicia and the adjoining sea-coasts-Antæus over Ethiopia and Libya. His two sons, Anubis and Makedon, attended him on his expedition, as did also Pan, who was worshipped in Chemmo, the city of Pan. In Ethiopia he was presented with a race of Satyrs with tails. He was a festive prince, fond of the song and the dance, and kept nine virgin well-trained singers and dancers, from whom the Greeks-it was obvious-derived their nine Muses. In India he built Nysa in honour of Nysa in Arabia, not far from Egypt, where, as the heir of Zeus, he had received an education conformable to his rank. In Thrace, where he met with Lycurgus, he left Maro behind, Makedon in Macedonia, and Triptolemus in Attica.

This worthy man was in the end treacherously killed by his brother Typhon, and his corpse shamefully maltreated. Typhon had 26 fellow-conspirators, to each of whom he gave a portion of the mutilated body.127 But his wife collected, in so far as in her power, its scattered parts, and honoured her husband with splendid funeral rites. At the same time she decreed to him divine worship, for which purpose she assigned a third of the lands to the Priests-so that one honour was equivalent to the other.

Who can fail here to recognise the corruption to which the old tradition was subjected during the Macedonian dominion by the barefaced chicanery of Greco-Egyptian Pundits? The chronological data themselves suffice to prove that Diodorus's guide was of the time of the Ptolemies. From Osiris to Alexander, according to some, says he (i. 23.), were above 10,000 years— according to others, above 23,000 years. We have already seen that the latter is the genuine Egyptian number. Soon after (i. 26.) he adds-evidently in the way of supplement, derived from some other source -from Helios to Alexander they reckon 23,000 years -the most ancient deified Kings each reigned above 1,200 years, the more recent less than 300. The former may be explained as a calculation by years of a single month-the latter by years of four monthsthe duration of the three Egyptian seasons. Thus they are both reduced to the reasonable term of 100 years.128 In these details may easily be recognised an adulteration of that genuine primeval tradition of the

127 Manifestly a mythological representation of the oldest division of the empire of Egypt into 37 provinces-the same upon which the old Labyrinth was arranged-10 for Upper, 10 for Lower Egypt, besides the Heptanomis.

128 He then introduces the absurd statement which the Fathers have copied from him-that on this account the Greeks called the years po, namely from pa, a season.