period is certainly sufficiently long to produce all the improvement, civilization, and power which the monuments and annals of Egypt so evidently prove, and which even the sacred pages testify. We have no need therefore, to be surprised at the great antiquity of some of the Egyptian monuments. The whole length of that empire, from its first foundation to Cleopatra, embraces a period of 2845 years, according to the computation of the Septuagint, and 4338 years according to the same computation recorded and explained by the Alphonsine tables.

On the other hand, if we follow the Hebrew chronology, besides the topics I have alluded to, we must admit impossibilities, and believe in one page what is contradicted in the next. We must admit that the Father of the Faithful, who is described as dying " in a good old age, and an old man, and full of years," expired thirty-five years before Shem, who was born nearly a hundred years before the deluge, and nine generations before this son of Terah. We must believe him contemporary with Noah for more than half a century, and with Shem during his whole life; we must believe that Isaac was born only forty-two years after the death of Noah, and that he was contemporary with Shem for the period of 110 years; and as not the slightest mention is made of any intercourse between Abraham and those venerable patriarchs who survived the deluge, and

were miraculously preserved as the second progenitors of the human race, we are to conclude that this great reformer of religion wandered about from country to country, either ignorant of their existence, or regardless of their authority.

These, and other things worse than these, we must believe, by following the Hebrew computation; whilst by adopting the chronology of the Septuagint, every thing is clear, every thing follows in proper order; the age, the birth, the death of every patriarch is distinctly set down; no objection, no confusion, no anachronism, no incongruity; no violence is offered to the meaning of the sacred pages, no contradiction to profane history, there is no difference between the chronology of the sacred Scriptures, and the reckoning of most, if not all the Oriental nations.

I cannot conclude this Lecture without mentioning, for the benefit of those who wish to acquire a complete knowledge of this interesting subject, the title of the books which ought to be consulted; they are,

Syncelli Chronographia.

Vossius on the Chronology of the Septuagint. Gibert sur la Chronologie des Orientaux.

The Alphonsine Tables.

Freret's Dissertations on the Chronology of the

Egyptians, Assyrians, and Babylonians.

Jackson's Chronological Antiquities.

Josephus's Jewish Antiquities; and, above all, the

Preliminary Dissertation published by Dr. Russell at the head of his " Connection of Sacred and Profane History;" a book that I cannot sufficiently recommend, and from which I have derived the greatest assistance.

LECTURE XII.

Anaglyphs-Remarkable instance of one, exhibiting the figures of the Israelites, Hyk-shos, and Negroes-National sentiments of the Egyptians concerning these shepherds—Attempt at ascertaining their origin-Historical account from Manetho, Diodorus, Charemon, Lysimachus, and Tacitus, analysed -Systems of the ancient and modern writers about the Hykshos, and the Israelites—Opinion of the Fathers and the primitive Christians confuted. Hypothesis of Mr. Bryant analysed.

OUR last Lecture turned upon chronology, and I thought it necessary to call your attention to so important a subject, as a preliminary step to the investigation of some of the most interesting events recorded in history. Amongst these stands preeminent the endeavour to ascertain the historical names of the kings who held the throne of Egypt at the time of Joseph and of Moses.

They are both designated in our Holy Scriptures by the general denomination of Pharaoh, which was a simple title of honour, as amongst us is the name of king, corresponding to the Belus of the Assyrians, and to the Cæsar of the Romans. But on the appellation by which these Pharaohs were known in history, Moses is entirely silent. To

1

ascertain therefore, this point, I am compelled to draw your attention to a particular sort of hieroglyphics, which I have often mentioned in former Lectures, under the name of anaglyphs.

This peculiar sort of hieroglyphics seems an enlargement of the use and meaning of symbolical hieroglyphics. They are emblematical signs, or fantastic figures, which represent not syllables or words, nor even real objects, but ideas, and even these are exhibited allegorically. They do not offer to our view scenes and objects belonging to public or private life, or to religious rites and ceremonies, but they seem, (and are, an extraordinary mixture of imaginary as well as real beings, which, without having the least similarity together, are nevertheless so united as to represent several ideas. These signs are not uncommon on Egyptian monuments, as you may easily ascertain by looking into the "description de l'Egypte," but fortunately they are not many. Horapollo has given the meaning of about forty of them, and they seem allegorically formed by the combination of several distinct qualifications, or attributes, belonging to different subjects.

I shall give you an example from the letter of Champollion to the duke of Blacas, in which this indefatigable scholar gives an account of the discoveries he has made in examining the inscriptions, statues, and mummies, existing in the Museum at Turin.

On a block of black granite, which represents a