Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

Salai is. one of themselves, king. He reigned at Memphis, and made the upper and lower regions [of Egypt] tributary; garrisoned fit places, particularly in the eastern frontier, through fear the Assyrians should invade the country. He rebuilt and strongly fortified the city of Avaris, in the Saite nome, upon the east of the Bubastite channel, and garrisoned it with two hundred and fifty thousand men, as a treasure city. He reigned nineteen years." Manetho then gives the names of five successors; the whole number of years occupied by the six kings being, according to the version of Manetho by Josephus, 284; and according to that by Eusebius, 250.

He then informs us that the IGth dynasty, which he calls shepherd kings, was composed of thirty-two sovereigns, who reigned 518 years; and that the 17th, composed of fortythree shepherd kings, and forty-three (contemporary) Theban kings, reigned 151 years; and, in reference to these dynasties, he thus writes:—

"All this nation was called Hyksos, or shepherd kings; for the first syllable, Hyk, in the sacred dialect, means a king, and sos, in the vulgar tongue, a shepherd: some say they were Arabs. These shepherd kings and their descendants retained possession of Egypt 511 years."

He then proceeds, and thus explains the removal of these Hyksos:—

"The kings of the Thebaid and the other (i. e. Lower) Egypt rose against the shepherds, and after a long war, Alisphragmuthosis drove the shepherds, or captives as they were sometimes called, out of the other parts of Egypt, and confined them to the district of Avaris, which they strongly fortified to protect their property. Amo sis or Thummosis, his son, besieged them in their stronghold with 480,000 men; reduced them to capitulate, and they left Egypt in number 240,000, and marched through the desert toward Syria, and built the city of Jerusalem, in the country now called Judea, which they fortified against the Assyrians."

Thus far, we have, at least, an intelligible story: whether it be probably true, in every particular, is to be seen. In the main features of an invasion of Egypt by a race of shepherds from the East, of their dominion in the lower part of the country for many years, and of their final expulsion, the story is probably true; but the invaders were not Arabs; nor would we vouch for the entire accuracy of the details as to numbers, &c., given by Manetho. Hengstenberg objects to the whole story as being a fabrication, and one of his grounds for rejecting it calls for a passing remark. The word Hyksos, according to Manetho, is as to the first syllable, derived from the sacred dialect, and as to the last, from the vulgar tongue: Hengstenberg says there is nowhere else found any such union of a sacred and vulgar dialect in Egypt. Hence he infers the ignorance of the pretended Manetho as to the Egyptian language, in confounding the difference between sacred and common writing, with a difference between sacred and common language. He also, on the authority of Jablonski, says that the word Hyk is found where it cannot mean a king. In the first of these reasons there would be force were it certainly true; but we are not sure that there is not a difference between the ancient sacred and vulgar language. It is true, as Bunsen has remarked, that "all sacred language is essentially nothing but an earlier stage of the popular dialect, preserved by the sacred books;" and he illustrates it by the case of the Hebrew with the so-called Chaldee; the old Hellenic in the Greek church, with the modern Greek, &c.: but he adds, "it does riot follow that the more modem idiom [the vulgar] is every where the offspring of the sacred language. The 'common dialect' of the Egyptians, therefore, is not necessarily the immediate descendant of the sacred language of this nation." As to the word Hyk, we presume there can be no doubt that it does mean king; though it may also mean something else: there are words in our own, and every language, with a double meaning. But leaving this out of view, the main features of Manetho's narrative are worthy of belief, because, if we mistake not, they find some confirmation from the monuments, if the inscriptions be not, as is often the case, overlooked. The tomb of one of the officers of Amosis, (who, according to Manetho, expelled the shepherds,) has been found at Thebes. An inscription on it implies that the war against the shepherds . was severe, and that many hard battles were fought before they were expelled.

The shepherd kings, Manetho tells us, reigned at Memphis, and he gives the names of the first six. Two of these names, Aphophis and Assis, have been discovered in the burial-place of ancient Memphis. The tomb of Assis, is said by its discoverer, M. 1'Hote, to be executed in cavo-relievo, with surpassing skill.

Rosellini gives a plate of the conquests by Sethos, taken from the walls of Karnac, which helps us much toward a discovery of who these shepherd kings were. The name of one of the string of captives, translated from the hieroglyphics, is the Coptic word shOs, which means shepherd, and is what Josephus, in his version of Manetho, writes in Greek, 2ms, [sOs.] If we can ascertain the locality of this representation of a conquered people, thus delineated in the triumphs of Sethos, it will aid us in settling who were the shepherd invaders. Turning to the first picture of the war of Sethos with the shds, on Rosellini's plate, we find the representation of a sanguinary defeat of the shds, in the immediate vicinity of a fort on a high hill, covered with trees, and with a lake on one side of it. On this fort is inscribed in hieroglyphics, 'the fort (stronghold) of the land of Canaan.' The shepherds then, who invaded Egypt, were, as Josephus has said, Canaanites, and not Arabs, as Manetho writes.

We therefore reach the conclusion that, in substance, the narrative of Manetho, no matter by whom written, is correct. There was a race of shepherds who invaded and conquered Lower Egypt, ruled over it for many years, and were finally expelled by the sovereigns of Upper Egypt.

We now return to the residue of Manetho's story. The dynasty founded by Amosis (who expelled the shepherds) consisted of sixteen kings, who, together, reigned two hundred and sixty-three years. The last of these kings, Amenophis, or one of his immediate predecessors, "being warned by the priests to cleanse the whole country of lepers and unclean persons, gathered them together, and sent them to the number of 80,000, to work at the quarries on the east side of the Nile. And there were among them some learned priests equally affected with leprosy. When they had been for some time in that miserable state, the king set apart for them the city of Avaris, which had been left empty by the shepherds. When they had possession of the city they revolted, and made Osarsiph, a priest of Heliopolis, their ruler, who afterward changed his name to Moses. He made many laws directly opposed to the customs of the Egyptians, forbidding them to worship their gods and sacred animals. He sent ambassadors to Jerusalem, to the shepherds, whom Tethmosis had driven out, who gladly sent 200,000 men to their assistance, in hope of regaining the dominion of Egypt. Amenophis at first retreated to Ethiopia, whose king was his friend; but returning with a great force, slew many of the shepherds, and pursued the rest into Syria."

This is Manetho's account, and the reader will perceive at once how he has confounded the affairs of the Jews with the shepherds. It is this statement which has exposed Manetho to the strong suspicions of some. For ourselves, we venture to express the opinion, that the whole passage is unworthy of confidence. Bunsen, in his anxiety to save Manetho, says that "he relates it as a mere popular legend." Manetho, however, does not say so, and we do not believe he ever related it at all. To us it seems—we speak with deference toward others who differ from us—that there was a genuine Manetho, who probably was a man of character; that it is also probable he preserved some of the historical incidents of his country;—but there was also a spurious Manetho, that lived afterward; one who stole a respected name, and made it a cover for his falsehoods. It is quite probable that some matters recorded by the genuine Manetho may have come down to us in the fragments under his name; but those fragments contain, also, that which we believe he did not write; and this passage we think is not his. The obvious intention of the passage is to cast opprobrium upon the Jews, as unclean and leprous persons; and this passage appears at a very suspicious period. It purports to be the work of a Manetho who lived in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus. Now it was in the reign of this very king that the septuagint version of the Scriptures, from Hebrew into Greek, was made; of course, the whole true story of the bondage and exode of

« AnteriorContinua »