human chronology ourselves, it is imperative upon us to carry the outworks of truly-
erudite short-chronologists before storming their last English citadel: a facile exploit now
to be performed.
“ The thistle th a t was in Lebanon
Sent to the cedar th a t was in Lebanon
Saying, ‘Give thy daughter to my son to wifef:
And there passed by a wild beast th a t was in Lebanon,
And trode down the thistle.” (2 Kings xiv. 9.)
On the part of one of the authors of “ Types of Mankind,” old Nilotic associations—on
that of the other, convictions of the scientific worthlessness of HoRiE _ZEGYPTiAGiE,(427)
have, for two years, restrained both of them from printed notice of this production: and,
if now they conjoin to chant its requiem, the necessity is superinduced, on one hand, by a
desire to vindicate Egyptology; on another, the deed has been fastened upon the writer
individually by the incessant officiousness of theologers in the United States, in local obtrusions
uncalled-for, and in appeals continual to the illusory authority of an adolescent scholar,
It has been already shown [supra, p, 670] how Mr. Wilkinson, in 1835, had obliterated, with
a dash of his pen, all the “ unplaced kings” he had previously published; (428) and had
cut down the era of Men e s to the year b . c. 2201, “ for fear of interfering with the deluge.”
During twelve years, Sir Gardner Wilkinson compassionately refrained from diluvial interference;
but, from 1837 (420) to 1847, (430) he made a retrocession of Men e s , on a sliding
scale, to the year b . c. 2320; thereby placing this unfortunate king amid the paludic miasmata
(he was killed by a hippopotamus) consequent upon that grand catastrophe t e only
twenty-eight years after Archbishop Usher’s cataclysm, with which the gallant Knight
scrupled to interfere.
The consequence was, that, for twelve years, no hierologist thought it incumbent upon
him to quote Wilkinson in matters of chronology; even if scientific justice toward the
latter’s innumerable Egyptian discoveries occasionally induced Egyptologists to cite a most
erudite author notoriously chary of mentioning the labors of continental contemporaries.
(431)
Solitude, however, in time becomes tiresome even to an anchorite. Between the years
1835 and 1847, the bound made by Egyptian studies was enormous. • Lepsius, followed by
the whole school of Champollionists, had discovered the Xllth dynasty of Maiietho; (432) and
the XVI—XVIIth dynastic arrangement of Rosellini, abandoned by every other scholar,
survived, in 1847, through Wilkinson’s Hand-book alone. It became desirable, therefore,
to “ wear ship” in the smoke of Cairo, and to reappear to windward on the other tack; just
as if the gallant Knight had been sailing in line with Manetho’s Xllth dynasty all the time!
A “ cat’s paw ” of breeze, nevertheless, was requisite for these nautical evolutions, and
Horce ¿Egyptiacce kindly wafted it over seas to the London “ Literary Gazette.”
“ And I think this conjecture,” wrote the author of Horce, (433) “ strengthened by the
fact, that Sir G. Wilkinson has found with the name of Phiops (Pepi) a king’s name, which
I believe he agrees with me in considering as that of Othoes, the first king of the Vlth
dynasty.”—“ And this explanation is most strikingly confirmed by a fact [known 1 4 years
previously (434) to every reader of Rosellini!], of which some very remarkable instances
are found in some of the unpublished papers of Sir Gardner Wilkinson, which he has
kindly shown me, as well as in some of his published works; that in numerous sculptures
(427) Horce AEgyptiacaz— “ or the Chronology of Ancient Egypt discovered from Astronomical and Hiero-
glyphical records upon its Monuments; including many dates found in coeval inscriptions from the period of
the building of the Great Pyramid to the times of the Persians: and Illustrations of the History of the first
nineteen Dynasties, showing th e order of their succession, from the Monuments.” London, Murray, 8vo, 1851.
(428) Materia Hieroglyphica ; Cairo, 1827-’32; Supplement, and Text, Malta.
(4 2 9 ) Manners and Customs; 1 8 3 7 ; i. p. 4 1 .
(430) Handrbook for Travellers in Egypt; 1847; p. 17.
(431) Gltddon : Chapters ; p. 11, a.
(4 3 2 ) B u n sen : 2Egyptens SteUe; 1 8 4 5 ; i. , V o r r ed e , p p . 1 3 , 1 9 ; i i . p p . 2 7 1 -3 6 2 ; iii. p i. 3.
(433) Literary Gazette; 1849; p. 486; “ Cairo, May, 1849.”
(434) Compare also L e p s iu s—“ Culte frfiquent en Nubie de Sesertusen H I.” . Lettre, 20 Juin, 1845; in Rev.
Archfiol., June, 1844, p. 208.
in Nubia, we find kings of the XVIIIth dynasty worshipping Sesertesen [Wilkinson always
wrote “ Osirtasen ”] III. as a god.” (435) —,“ I was unable to find it \Hor-em-bai/] during
m y last visit tp Thebes, owing to its but once occurring, and to the great , extent of the
tomb; and I have to thank Sir Gardner Wilkinson in giving me a copy of it.” (436) — “ I
must express my obligations to Sir Gardner Wilkinson, for his having greatly promoted
these investigations, during his last visit to Egypt, in discussing with me every point of importance
in the first four numbers (all I had then written), as well as for the kindness and
liberality which he showed me in allowing me to examine and copy many of his unpublished
transcripts from Egyptian monuments.” (437)
These meritorious acknowledgments were due to the paternal solicitude with which the
gallant Knight had watched at Cairo over Horae. Nevertheless, expostulations were addressed
from London to its author about the suppression of the names of so many other fellow-
laborers; as well through private channels, as also hinted, in public session, before the
“ Syro-Egyptian Society.” (438)
Years passed away. The 12 articles entitled Horae JEgyptiacae, originally published in
the “ Literary Gazette,” having received unparalleled aid from the highest quarters, reappear,
considerably altered, in a beautiful octavo.
We read first Sir J. Gardner Wilkinson’s endorsement of Horae: (439) —
“ It is indeed the less necessary to enter into a detailed examination of the chronology,
and the succession of the Pharaohs, as Mr. Stuart Poole’s work on the subject will soon be
published; and I have much pleasure in stating how fully I agree with him in the contemporaneousness
of certain kings, and in the order of succession he gives to the early Pharaohs.”
Secondly, we admire Horae?s re-endorsement of Sir Gardner Wilkinson: (440)
“/h a v e avoided, as much as possible, quoting or examining the works of others, excepting
Sir Gardner Wilkinson. My object has been to explain what /learned from the monuments;
not to combat the assertions of others. Sir Gardner Wilkinson stands in a position
different from that of any others who have written on the subject; he has never written to
support a chronological hypothesis [‘ in order not to interfere with the Deluge,’ supra], and
is entitled to the utmost confidence on account of his well-known accuracy, the many years
which he has spent in the study of the monuments in Egypt, and the caution which he has
shown in refraining from putting forth any complete system of Egyptian chronology: I am
aware how greatly I disagree with all others who have written on this subject; but it is a
sufficient consolation to me, since all differ, that it is little more to differ from all others
than to differ from all of them but owe.” (441)
Thirdly, Sir Gardner Wilkinson again endorses Horce: (442) &L.
“And the contemporaneousness of others [kings—entirely arbitrary/] have been very ingeniously
and satisfactorily explained by Mr. Stuart Poole, in his Horae JEgyptiacae; where he
acknowledges that it was first suggested to him by Mr. Lane. That arrangement may be
seen in the following table, which he has obligingly communicated, and which I have the more
pleasure in inserting, as I agree with him in the contemporaneousness of- the kings, and in
the general mode of arranging those of the same line.”
Fourthly, Th e F r ie n d op Moses endorses both:>r-
“ So complete and satisfactory is the train of evidence adduced by Mr. Poole, that Sir
J. G. Wilkinson, one of the most learned of living men, in all that relates to Egyptian
archEeology, has openly published in his last great work on the Architecture of Egypt, his
entire concurrence in the views of Mr. Poole, arid his conviction of the complete and satisfactory
character of the evidence that gentleman has adduced from the monuments.” (443)
Ever and anon, after reiterating this endorsement, the same F r ien d of M oses adds
in Italics: —
“ Egypt, with all her splendid Monuments, is found a witness [as much as and not less than
Spitsbergen] to the truth of the Bible, and to the correctness [ “ credat Judaeus Apella!” ] of
the Mosaic chronology. . . . These concessions of the Chevalier Bunsen prepare us to receive
with greater confidence the statements of Mr. R. S. Poole, in his Horce ¿Egyptiacce, claiming
to adduce proofs from the monuments themselves, that several of the dynasties which
(435) Ibid.; p. 552-; “ Cairo, June, 1849.”
(436) Ibid.: p. 522.
(437) Ibid.; p. 910.
(438) London, 10th April, 1S49; Literary Gazette, 28th April, 1849.
(439) Horce JEgyptiacce; Preface, p. 23 — citation from W il k in so n : Architecture o f Ancient Egypt.
(440) Horce; p. 23.
(441) Horce; p. 23.
(442) Hieratic Papyrus of Turin; 1851; p. 29.
(443) “ Mobile, Jan. 27,1852” — Southern Presbyterian; Milledgeville, Ga., Feb. 19,1852.