the Jews was made accessible, and could not but attract the attention of the learned in Egypt; and it was a story that reflected little honor on the Egyptians. Hence, to gratify national conceit, and wipe off national disgrace, it became necessary to put forth another version, more soothing to Egyptian pride, and more creditable to Egyptian character. The Jews are accordingly made odious as lepers, and we are furnished with a distorted picture of the residence of the Hebrews in, and their exode from Egypt, for the purpose of vindicating the conduct of the Egyptian government.

But whether the passage be from the pen of the true Manetho, or of one who put forth falsehoods under his name, is, for our present purpose, comparatively unimportant; for if written by the real Manetho, and if founded, as we are told his writings are, on ancient Egyptian records; then it must follow that, according to the ancient records of Egypt itself, there was a man called Moses, of a different race from the Egyptians; that he lived in Egypt, that he taught his countrymen to shun idolatry, and that, finally, he and they left Egypt together. Leper or no leper, these facts at least are distinctly and unequivocally recorded; and thus the ancient Egyptian records bear testimony to the truth of the Bible. Again, if we suppose the passage to have been the production of a spurious Manetho, then it is obvious, that long after the events of the bondage and exodus of the Hebrews, there must have existed some traditionary knowledge, at least in Egypt, of these great events; and that tradition must have preserved the facts above enumerated, and contained in the statement itself, (for we cannot suppose that writer to have merely drawn on his invention, and yet to have come so near historic truth;) and we respectfully submit whether such a tradition could possibly have existed for centuries in Egypt, without a basis of fact, as to its grand features. Whether, therefore, the ancient records of Egypt, or centuries of tradition, preserved the facts, that Moses lived there, that he and his people were not Egyptians, that he denounced idolatry, and at last, that all left the country together, is quite unimportant; for in either case we are furnished with strong and undesigned testimony for the truth of at least one part of the Bible.

But this is not all. Manetho, without intending it, has furnished another example of incidental proof corroborating, in a striking manner, the Scriptures. The reader will remember, that he tells us the first shepherd kings were very much afraid of an invasion from the Assyrians. Now it so happens, that at the very date of the shepherd kings, (which we will demonstrate directly,) we learn from the Bible, that the Assyrians had actually established their power on this side of the Euphrates, and had even conquered part of Palestine.

Returning from this digression, which has been made for the purpose of presenting the incidental testimony for the Scriptures, unconsciously furnished by Manetho; we proceed to the ultimate object we have had in view in dwelling thus long, and we fear somewhat tediously, on the shepherd kings. That object is this. If Abraham, on his visit to Egypt, was not an "abomination" as being a shepherd; we mean now to show that it was because that part of Egypt in which he was, was ruled by shepherd kings, and inhabited by shepherds. The whole period of the intrusion of these shepherds, is stated by Manetho as having been 511 years, and it is clear that these years terminate at the exode of the Hebrews. We now refer to comparatively modern chronology, not contradicted by the "Egyptologists.''

Hales makes the exode 1648 B. c.

Add to these the whole time of the shepherds . . 511"

This makes the commencement of the shepherd rule 2159" Abraham was born (according to Hales) .... 2153"

It is therefore obvious, that during Abraham's time there was abundant reason why he should not be slighted or despised in Egypt as being a shepherd.*

But the question may arise, whether the shepherd kings were known by the title Pharaoh; inasmuch as the Bible applies it to the reigning monarch of Egypt at the time of Abraham's visit. It would appear from all the light yet shed on the subject, that the shepherds, during their stay, had adopted the religion, the manners, and the customs of Egypt. Considerations derived from the monuments also justify the opinion, that the name, or rather title, of the first monarch of Egypt. Phra, became the generic title of all his successors.

9. The gifts made to Abraham consisted of sheep, oxen, he and she-asses, men and maid-servants, camels, gold and silver.

To this a German writer (Von Bohlen) objects as follows: "The narrator mentions the animals of his own native land, a part of which Abraham could not receive in Egypt. He ascribes to him no horses, which were native to Egypt, as the relator is indeed aware. But, on the other hand, he mentions sheep, which are found in the marsh lands of Egypt" [Abraham's visit was to the lower part of Egypt] "as seldom as camels (hence these last are denied to the country by the ancient writers) and asses, which were specially odious to the Egyptians, on account of their color." Hengstenberg has very satisfactorily answered all this. Horses certainly were abundant among the Egyptians, as the monuments show. They were used chiefly in the war chariots; and though there were horsemen in Egypt, it is remarkable that but a single instance of a man on horseback has yet been found among the representations. But, common as the animal was in Egypt, it was not used among the Israelites until the time of the kings. There were none used, either in peace or war, in the time of Joshua. Horses were not likely, then, to be used in the earlier days of Abraham's time, when, as far as we know, the chief object of keeping them in Egypt did not exist in Canaan. If this be the reason why the horse was not among the gifts to Abraham; if the present would have been useless, because the habits of his country did not require its use; then, as Hengstenberg remarks, the omission of horses among the gifts, is a fact in favor of the true historical character and Mosaic origin of the narrative. For if the history had been compiled in the time of the kings or afterward, the horse (which was then used in Israel) would probably have been mentioned; since we cannot suppose the precise time of their introduction would have been accurately known. In fact, the introduction of the animal among the Israelites was gradual, and we have no direct historical account of the time when it commenced. By an examination of many scattered passages, modern scholars have proved it to have been about the time of the kings; but the Israelites, after that day, finding horses in the country, troubled themselves not with an inquiry as to the time of then introduction. How many of our own countrymen can, at the present day, tell when and how the horse was introduced into America?

In all the enumerations of patriarchal wealth in the Bible, horses are never mentioned; oxen drew the tabernacle in the desert, and in truth, in the further history of the people descended from Abraham, we find that God specially forbade their kings to have many horses, or to trust to Egyptian cavalry; for his purpose was to hedge his people around from the temptation of coming into contact with idolaters, and Egypt would have been the great horse-market of the Israelites. The non-introduction of the horse by Abraham, may, therefore, have been a part of the providential designs of God for the future.

Von Bohlen, also, denies that there were asses in Egypt; but, as Hengstenberg says, it never occurred to any one before to deny it. There are numerous representations of them on the monuments.

It is also said there were no sheep. They are very often mentioned by ancient authors. Herodotus informs us that the Egyptians had them, so also does Diodorus. They may be seen in large numbers on the monuments; and numerous flocks of them were kept near Memphis, the region where Abraham was.

As to the camel, it is reasonable to infer, from present facts and usages, that it existed in ancient Egypt. Munitoli