ページの画像
PDF
ePub

SECT. IV. Of Cham, and his son Mizraim, or Osiris. THAT the succession of kings began and continued in such wise as the table hath shewed from Cham to Chencres, now it followeth to shew. Egypt is called in the scripture t the land of Ham. That this name is not given to it because the posterity of Cham did reign there, but for that himself did first plant it, we may gather by many circumstances. For I think it is nowhere found, that the countries of Cush, Put, or Canaan, as well as Egypt, were called the land of Ham. Further, it is found in a Diodorus Siculus, that Osiris calleth himself the eldest son of Cham, saying, Mihi pater Saturnus deorum omnium junior ; also, Sum Saturni filius antiquior, germen ex pulchro et generoso ortum; which must needs be understood of Cham; for this Saturnus Egyptius was Cham; as it is said, that on the monument of Ninus was an inscription, wherein Cham was called Saturnus Ægyptius. Likewise the temple of Hammon, not far from Egypt, doth testify, that Ham resided in those parts; and St Jerome, in Quæstionibus Hebraicis, saith, that the Egyptians themselves did in his days call their country Ham; as in four several places in the Psalms this country is called the land of Cham. And Ortelius, noting out of Plutarch in Osiride, that in the sacrifices of the Egyptians this country of Egypt was called Chemia, expounds it for Chamia : Ut puto, saith he, a Chamo Noes filio; to which also he addeth out of Isidore, Ægyptum usque hodie Ægyptiorum lingua Kam vocari ; “ That Egypt “ unto this day, in the tongue of the Egyptians, is called “ Kam.” For the beginning and continuance of Cham's reign, the same reasons may suffice to be alleged, which I have already given in proof of the time spent in the fifteen first dynasties : neither is it strange that the reign of Cham should last so long as 161 years, considering that Sem lived 600 ; Arphachshad and Shelah each above 400. But strange it had been, if one Saltis, created by Manetho, had in those · Psalm lxxviii. 51. cv. 23. 27. cvi. 22.

u Diod. Sic. l. I.

long-lived generations reigned there nineteen years, and with Bæon, Apachnas, Apochis, and others of the same brood, obscured the fame and glory of Osiris, Orus, and Sesostris. Reineccius, in Histor. Julia, placeth Mizraim next, otherwise called Osiris, according to Diodorus, who saith he was the son of Hammon: Krentzhemius sàith, that Mizraim and Osiris are words of near affinity and sound in the Hebrew tongue. Howsoever it be, we know that Mizraim, the son of Cham, was lord of Egypt, and Reineccius, citing good authority in this case, affirmeth, that Egypt is now called by the naturals in their own language Mezre. Neither do I see cause of doubt whether Osiris were the same with Mizraim. It is more necessary, and hard to shew manifestly, how long Mizraim or Osiris reigned. For whereas the year of his death is nowhere precisely set down, we must be fain to follow probabilities. That he is not vainly said by Annius's Berosus to have begun his reign at the birth of Abraham, when the dynasty of the Thebæi began, it appeareth, first, by the authority of Eusebius, who avoucheth as much; next by Diodorus, who saith, that he inhabited Thebes; which habitation of Osiris there, that it might be cause of that dynasty, I can well believe; assenting so far to Reineccius, who thinks the dynasties were named only according to the several seats of the kings.

SECT. V. Of the time when Osiris's reign ended ; and that Jacob came into

Egypt in the time of Orus the son of Osiris. THE death of Osiris, when it was, none can certainly affirm. The only conjecture that I know is made thus. Lehabim the son of Mizraim, called Hercules Libyus, made war in Italy to revenge his father's death on the associates of Typhon, in the 41st year of Baleus king of Assyria; before which year he had made many great wars in Egypt, Phænicia, Phrygia, Crete, Libya, and Spain ; and having ended his Egyptian wars, left the kingdom to Orus. Thus far Berosus, or authors following Berosus. That Orus, last

of all the gods, (as they were styled,) held the kingdom of Isis, * Diodorus Siculus plainly saith, and Plutarch as much; to which all old histories agree. Krentzhemius hereupon infers, that six years may be allowed to the wars which Hercules made in so many countries, after the Egyptian wars were ended; so should the death of Osiris have been the 34th of Baleus, when himself had reigned 297 years. I think that Krentzhemius was a greater scholar than soldier: for surely in those days, when commerce was not such as now, but all navigation made by coasting, a far longer time would have been required to the subduing of so many countries. An allowance of more time, though it would alter his computation, yet would it well agree with his intent; which was, doubtless, to find the truth. If, according to his account, the death of Osiris had been the 34th of Baleus, then must Israel have come into Egypt but seven years before the death of Osiris, and have lived there in the reign of Typhon: a thing not easily believed. For it was the same king who advanced Joseph, bade him send for his father, and gave him leave to go into Canaan to the performance of his father's funeral ; as may easily be gathered out of the book of Genesis. Whereas therefore the reign of Osiris cannot be extended by any possible allowance in account of times, beyond the seventh year of Israel's coming into Egypt; we must needs cut off twenty-three years from that number, which Krentzhemius conjectures his reign to have continued ; namely, seven which he should have lived after Jacob's coming into Egypt; nine in which Joseph had there flourished ere his father's coming; and other seven in which Typhon and Hercules had reigned after the death of Osiris, yet before Joseph's advancement.

Neither will this disagree with the time of Hercules Libyus's wars. For the war which Hercules made in Italy is said to have endured ten years; after which proportion we may well give, not only six years, as Krentzhemius doth, but twenty-three more, to so many wars in so many and so far distant countries, as are named before; yea, by this proportion we may attribute unto Orus the thirteen years which passed between the time of Joseph's being sold into Egypt, unto his advancement; considering that Putiphar, who bought him, and whose daughter he may seem to have married, continued all that while chief steward unto Pharaoh ; a thing not likely to have been, if so violent alterations had happened the whilst in Egypt, as the tyrannous usurpation of Typhon must needs have brought in. If citing some fragment of a lost old author, I should confidently say, that Putiphar, for his faithfulness to Orus, the son of Osiris, was by him in the beginning of his reign made his chief steward ; at which time buying Joseph, and finding him a just man, and one under whose hand all things did prosper, he rather committed his estate into Joseph's hands, than unto any of his Egyptian followers, (many of whom he had found either falsehearted, or weak and unlucky in the troublesome days of Typhon,) I know not what could be objected against this. Perhaps I might proceed further, and say, that when the saying of Joseph pleased Pharaoh, and all his servants; then Putiphar, priest of On, being chief officer to Pharaoh, did acknowledge in Joseph the ancient graces of God, and his injurious imprisonment, whereupon he gave him his daughter to wife; and being old, resigned his office of chief steward unto him ; who afterwards, in regard of Putiphar, did favour the priests, when he bought the lands of all other Egyptians. This might appear to some a tale not unlike to the friarly book of Asenath, Putiphar's daughter ; but unto such as consider that God works usually by means, and that Putiphar was the steward of that king under whom Jacob died; it would seem a matter not improbable, had it an author of sufficient credit to avouch it. Concerning the wars of Hercules, in which by this reckoning he should have spent forty-two years after he left Egypt, ere he began in Italy, it is a circumstance which (the length of his Italian wars considered, and his former enterprises and achievements proportioned to them) doth not make against us, but for us; or if it were

* Diod. Sic. 1. 2. c. 1. Plut. I. de Iside et Osir.

against us, yet could it not so weaken our supposition, as these probabilities collected out of the undisputable truth of scripture do confirm it. Nevertheless I freely grant, that all these proofs are no other than such as may be gathered out of authors not well agreeing, nor to be reconciled in such obscurity, otherwise than by likelihoods, answerable to the holy text.

SECT. VI. Of Typhon, Hercules Ægyptius, Orus, and the two Sesostres, suc

cessively reigning after Misraim; and of divers errors about the former Sesostris.

CONCERNING the reign of Typhon and of Hercules, I find none that precisely doth define how long either of them continued. Daniel Angelocrator giveth three years to Typhon, omitting Hercules. But he is so peremptory without proof, as if his own word were sufficient authority in many points very questionable; alleging no witness, but as it were saying, teste meipso: yet herein we may think him to speak probably, forasmuch as the learned Krentzhemius affirmeth, that Hercules did very soon undertake his father's revenge, and was not long in performing it; and that leaving Egypt to his brother, he followed other wars, in the same quarrel, as hath been shewed before. True it is, that I cannot collect (as Krentzhemius doth) out of Berosus, that Hercules reigned after Typhon; yet seeing Aventinus, a follower of Berosus, hath it so, I will also believe it. That in the reign of Typhon and Hercules seven years were spent, howsoever divided between them, I gather out of Krentzhemius only, who placeth the beginning of Orus seven years after the death of Osiris ; forgetting to set down his reasons, which, in a matter so probable, I think he wanted not. Now whereas he alloweth ninety years of the eighteenth dynasty to Osiris, Typhon, Hercules, and Orus; it seems that the reign of Orus lasted 115 years. From the death of Orus to the departure of Israel out of Egypt, there passed 122 years by our account; who (according to Beroaldus and others) think that Abraham was

« 前へ次へ »