peculiarity that is significant of its great antiquity; it is written in the pure monumental hieroglyphic character, while in all the other extant remains of Egyptian literature, the hieratic character is employed. This difference is important in other aspects, to which we advert not here, as the object now is simply to illustrate the fact of the great antiquity of the art of writing in Egypt.

The next question that naturally arises, is an inquiry whether any, and if any, what historical works have come down to our day from Egyptian authors? The answer to this must be, that although we have some fragments, of which to speak presently, yet that nothing deserving the name of an authentic and continuous history concerning ancient Egypt, has yet been found in her monuments or elsewhere; while of some portions of that history, the only records worthy of confidence, are contained in the Bible. For the preservation of these, the pride of a tyrannical Pharaoh little dreamed that it would be indebted to the oppressed victims of its persecution. The proud triumphs of Egyptian kings are lost in the past, or but indistinctly read in a mysterious language on the decaying walls of temples, tombs, and palaces; while the heartless cruelties that preceded the exode of a race, outcasts in Egypt and trampled in the dust, are chronicled by the providence of God, for all time, on imperishable pages:

"The evil that men do lives after them."

Egypt has no certain history of her ancient greatness. That her "sacred books did not contain any history of the Egyptian nation," says the Chevalier Bunsen, "is no less certain than that the Old Testament does contain that of the Jews. The

idea of a people did not exist—still less that of a people of God, the Creator. of the heavens and the earth. History was born in that night, when Moses, with the law of God, moral and spiritual, in his heart, led the people of Israel out of Egypt."

It has already been intimated that fragments of Egyptian writers have come down to our days. Of these, the only one worthy of note is Manetho. He lived in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, about 180 B. c. His work, originally in three volumes or books, was written, it is said, at the command of Ptolemy, and is now lost. All that we have of it is to be found in quotations from it, in the writings of Josephus, Eusebius, and Syncellus. The last of these quotes from two abbreviators of Manetho, one of whom was Eratosthenes; the work of the other is called "The Old Chronicle."

Manetho (as Plutarch informs us) was a priest of Sebennytus; hence he is sometimes called the Sebennyte. He wrote in the Greek language, but professed to draw his materials from Egyptian sources. Manetho's history, like that of many other ancient nations, refers the origin of his people to gods and demigods, who reigned for hundreds of thousands of years. The first of these was the Sun or Phra, whence came the name Pharaoh, as a generic term applied to all the Egyptian monarchs. He then commences with the reign of men, and extends his list of sovereigns over an incredibly long period, if time were computed then as it is now. But it is no part of the purpose of the present work to enter into the much disputed question of Egyptian chronology. The general reader will find in it little to interest him, and we are not presumptuous enough to suppose that our pages will furnish any attraction to the historical antiquarian. Beside, without

meaning to undervalue chronology, as a very important feature in the study of history, we may yet be permitted to say in the words of a modern writer on Egypt, that "the disclosures made by inscriptions on public buildings, of kings, wars, and conquests, may, when verified as to age, and placed in their probable order by the aid of learning and criticism, reveal more as to the dynasties and individual sovereigns; but on such information, even when free from doubt and most accurate, little real value can be set; while the Bible supplies, either by express statement or obvious implication, facts and principles which constitute genuine history, and go far to give the past all the value which it can possess for the men of these times."

In his work, enti

It is proper to add that, while, among the learned generally, there seems to be no doubt that Manetho had a real existence, and wrote what has been preserved in quotations from his works; yet there have not been wanting some who deem the writings under his name to be entirely fabulous. The learned Hengstenberg is of this class. tled "Egypt and the Books of Moses," he devotes an entire article in his appendix to this subject; and, with great ingenuity, throws more than the shadow of a suspicion on the authenticity and credibility of the supposed Egyptian historian. He considers the work to be spurious, and of later times than the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus. In this conclusion we are not prepared entirely to acquiesce, though it is possible that an exaggerated importance may have been given by some, to the writings under the name of Manetho. They derive, however, so much confirmation from the discovery of what is known as the "tablet of Abydus," that their entire rejection as authority seems scarcely consistent with sound criticism.

The tablet of Abydus, which is now in the British Museum, is delineated on the opposite page. It is a series of royal rings inclosing the inaugural titles of the names of many of the ancient kings of Egypt, in the order of their succession. It was engraved on the wall of one of the vestibules of a temple, which has been excavated in the mountain to the north of the city of Abydus. It is not, however, to be concealed, that, while in some instances it confirms Manetho's lists, in others, it is directly at variance with them.

Another source of information concerning Egypt is in the writings of Herodotus. This oldest of the Greek historians was born about 484 B. C., and having from political causes become an exile from his native city, he travelled through Greece, Egypt, Asia, Scythia, Thrace, and Macedonia. His work is divided into nine books, which he named after the nine muses. The second of these, Euterpe, is devoted to Egypt, and contains an account not merely of what he saw, but also of such explanations as he received from the Egyptian priests, together with observations on the manners and customs of the country, and a long dissertation on the succession of its kings. He does not pretend, in this latter subject, to observe strict chronological order; and his work is chiefly valuable when brought into juxtaposition with other authorities that can be relied on.

Diodorus Siculus is another writer, of less value, however, than Herodotus. He professes to treat of the affairs of Egypt. He visited the country about 58 B. C., though his work was written at a later period. He brought to his task (says Bunsen) "a mere acquaintance with books, without either sound judgment, critical spirit, or comprehensive views. He was more successful consequently in complicating and mysti