p611-606 APPENDIX.

[figure description] Page 597.[end figure description]

A FEW WORDS TO THE EGYPTIAN STUDENT AND TO THE
CRITIC.

There are necessary, perhaps, a few words to show that the author
of the preceding book has not arbitrarily employed facts, and made use
of traditions to suit a certain series of hypothetical events; but has
been controlled strictly by authorities.

Scholars, versed in Egyptian archæology, will do the author justice in
the plan and execution of his work; for minds, enriched with true
erudition, upon the history of the land where his scenes are placed, will
not only understand the difficulties which a writer has to contend with,
but appreciate what he has done. Captious criticism will, of course,
hold itself wholly independent of facts; while hypercriticism must be
suffered to show its quasi erudition. To fair and manly scholastic criticism,
whether from theological scholars, or students in the “learning of
the Egyptians,” the work is open; and the author will be grateful to
any judicious and respectable scholar who will kindly point out errors—
proving them to be such.

The reader of Egyptian history is aware that but little reliance can
be placed on the assigned length of periods, which furnish us with
neither names nor facts, nor reliable monuments; because at this day
we have no control over the fictions and errors of historians. To carry
up to the first century of history a connected chain of authentic chronology
is not yet possible.

We have given due credit to Manetho's statements, but have little
confidence in many of his alleged facts, vouched as they are by Josephus
and Herodotus. The late discoveries by Champollion le Jeune,
Bunsen, Dr. Young, Lepsius, and others, with the revelations of actual
historical inscriptions, have rendered the books of these hitherto universally
quoted writers nearly obsolete. The traveller of to-day, who
visits Egypt and can read hieroglyph, knows more of the history of
Egypt than Manetho, Josephus, Diodorus, Herodotus, Strabo, or any of
the cis-Pharaoic writers thereupon. As revelations are made from time
to time, we have to change our dates, revise our “facts,” and reform
our whole history of the past of Egypt, both in its chronology and dynasties.
In this work we have availed ourselves of the latest discoveries,
down to those of last year, by the celebrated French savant, M.
Auguste Mariette, whose discoveries have, until recently been made
known only to the Academy of Sciences, France, in modest and unpretending
reports of his scientific researches.

As we have very thoroughly gone over the ground of Egyptian archæ
ology, both in its scientific and theological relations, we are aware from
what quarters attacks will be likely to come, if this book is honored by

[figure description] Page 598.[end figure description]

the notice of scholars. But to such, we beg leave to say that, while we
may not have formed our work on the plan their views would have suggested,
we have done so on a plan which is defensible; for there are
several schools of interpretation of chronology and dynasty; and as we
have chosen to abide by one of them alone, we are ready to defend our
position, so far as may be necessary to prove that we are not ignorant
of the subject we have attempted to illustrate.

The impartial scholar will see that we have endeavored to combine
the different, and often conflicting statements and opinions of the
mythology of Egypt, and to present a system which should represent
the belief of the Egyptian people at the time; and out of confusion to
create order.

In writing a book, the time of which is placed anterior to the language
in which it is written, and even to the Greek and Roman, there is of
necessity the use of terms, which in one sense are anachronisms, unless
one actually makes use of the vernacular of the Egyptians. For instance,
the Greek form of names of gods and men, is often adopted instead
of the Misric, the use of which would be unintelligible pedantry:
therefore, Apollo, Hercules, Venus, Isis, and Mars, are often written in
our pages instead of the Egyptian names.

In order to show the general reader the variety allowable in Egyptian
names and dynasties, as well as chronology, we will append a few examples:

According to one writer on Egypt, it was Amenophis who was lost in
the Red Sea. According to another, it was Thothmes III.; to another,
Thothmes IV.; and to still another, Amos I.; and to another, Osis!

Amuthosis is called by Kenrick (ii. p. 154), Misphragmuthosis.
Thothmes is also called Thothmeses and other variations. Osiris has
many titles and many legends, but we have adopted the popular one in
Egypt.

Sesostris is called Ositasen, Osokron, Remeses, and other names,
according to the interpretation of his cartouches, and other inscriptions.

The pyramid of Chephren is called also Chafre, Chephres, Cephren,
and other designations, while Cheops has half a dozen appellations. A
writer, therefore, who seeks to present an intelligible view of the
manners, customs, religion, and polity of the ancient Egyptians must
decide what authority and what path he will follow; and having chosen
each, he should pursue it undeviatingly to its close. This we have tried
to do; and while those who might have selected a different one may,
perhaps, not coincide with our judgment, they will at least have the
candor to acknowledge that we are as much entitled, as scholars, to
respect in the choice we have made, as if we had made one in harmony
with their own peculiar views.

The question of “dynasty” has presented singular difficulties; but
we have mainly followed Nolan and Seyffarth, leaving their guidance,
however, when, our own judgment dictated a deviation from their views.
When some chronologers of the highest character place the birth of
Moses 1572, B.C. (vide Nolan), others 1947 (vide Seyffarth), others
2100 years, others 1460, it is necessary that a writer, whose book requires
a fixed date, should make a decision. We have, after careful
consideration of the whole ground, adopted the era which we believe to
be the true one. The confusion attending the adjustment of the Pharaoic
dynasties to their true time, is well known to scholars, and

[figure description] Page 599.[end figure description]

admitted by all except those who have advanced figures of their own, and
expect Egyptian Chronology henceforth to be construed by them alone.
Nolan (vide Book IV., Sect. iv.), has presented to our minds the clearest
exposition of the question; and we have followed, very closely, his
table of the dynasty of the Pharaohs between the eras of Joseph and
the Exodus.

The Biblical scholar need not be informed that Moses was forty years
of age before he interested himself openly in the Hebrews. Egyptian
history (see Nolan) shows that in his thirty-fifth year, the queenmother,
Pharaoh's daughter, died, and was succeeded by Mœris; and as
the Scriptures are silent, as to the occupation and place of Moses in the
interval, we are justifiable in placing him out of Egypt, during the six
years that followed, as we have done.

We desire here to acknowledge our indebtedness to the following
authors, whose works, either directly or indirectly, we have consulted,
and from which we have made use of such parts as served our purpose;
and not wishing to burden our pages with notes and references, we
here make our grateful acknowledgments to them, and recognition of
their works:

G. Seyffarth, A. M., Ph. D., D. D., seriatim, especially, “Observationes Egyptiorum
Astronomicæ, et Hireroglyphice descriptæ in Zodiaco,” &c., &c.—Leipz.

“The Egyptian Chronology Analyzed;” by Frederick Nolan, LL. D., F. R. S.—
London.

“The Monuments of Egypt and Voyage up the Nile;” edited by Francis L. Hawks,
D. D., LL. D.

“Ancient Egypt under the Pharaohs;” by John Kenrick, M. A. A work which
presents at one view the most complete illustrations of Egypt extant.

To Sir Gardiner Wilkinson, D. C. L., F. R. S., &c., the writer is indebted for much
information respecting details of art, society, and customs.

“The Philosophy of the Plan of Salvation;” edited by Professor C. E. Stowe, D. D.,
by an anonymous author.

Dr. Max Uhlemann's writings on Egyptian antiquities.

Rt. Rev. Bishop Wainwright's “Land of Bondage.”

Mills' “Ancient Hebrews.”

Lepsius' “Discoveries in Egypt, Ethiopia,” &c., and this eminent author's other
valuable writings upon Egyptian archæology and antiquities.

Stanley's “Sinal and Palestine.”

Hengstenberg's “Egypt and the Books of Moses Illustrated by the Monuments of
Egypt.”

Col. Howard Vise on the Pyramids.

J. A. St. John's “Egypt and Nubia;” London, 1845.

“Antiquities of Egypt;” London, Rel. Tr. Soc., 1841.

Rossellini's works.

Burton's “Excerpta Hierogl.”

J. C. Nott, M. D., Mobile, to whose courtesy the author is indebted for several
valuable works illustrating ancient Egypt.

Von Bohlen (Petrus).

Birch, Roy-Soc. Lit.

“Description de l'Egypte,” pendant l'Expédition de l'Armée Française, 1826.

Lesueur, “Chron. des Rois d'Egypte.”

Dr. Robinson's very valuable researches.

Bunsen's “Egypten” and other writings, seriatim.

`Denon's Voyage.”

[figure description] Page 600.[end figure description]

Herodotus, Socrates, Diodorus, Strabo, Pliny, Ptolemy, Eratosthenes, Plutarch,
and other Greek and classic authors who have written upon Egypt, have been
made use of by the author as sources of information, and adopted as authorities so far
as subsequent monumental revelations have not lessened the weight of their testimony.

We are also under obligations to Professor Henry S. Osborn, for the aid afforded in the
Phœnician portion of our book, by his recently published work, “Palestine, Past and
Present,” with “Biblical, Literary, and Scientific Notes;” one of the most valuable and
interesting books of travel and research which has appeared for many years, on the
East: Challen & Son, Phil., 1859.

Besides the above, we have availed ourselves of numerous sources of
information accessible to the Egyptian student, to enumerate which
would extend this note to a catalogue.

We have sought in the foregoing work, to illustrate and delineate
events of the Old Testament, as in the “Prince of the House of David”
the New, so that they should “come home with a new power,” to make
use of the language of another, “to those who by long familiarity have
lost, as it were, the vividness of the reality,” and bring out their outlines
so as to convey to the mind of the reader a more complete realization
of scenes which seem to be but imperfectly apprehended by the
general reader of the historical parts of the Old Testament. The work
is written, not for scholars nor men learned in Egyptian lore; it advances
nothing new; but simply offers in a new dress that which is old.
The writer will have accomplished his object, “if his book,” to quote
the words of Mr. Stanley, in his preface to “Sinai and Palestine,” “brings
any one with fresh interest to the threshold of the divine story `of the
Exodus,' which has many approaches, and which, the more it is explored,
the more it reveals of poetry, life, and instruction, such as has fallen to
the lot of no other history in the world.”

The intention of the author in writing these works on Scripture narratives
is to draw the attention of those persons who do not read the
Bible, or who read it carelessly, to the wonderful events it records, as
well as the divine doctrines it teaches; and to tempt them to seek the
inspired sources from which he mainly draws his facts.

The author's plan embraces three works of equal size. They cover
the three great eras of Hebrew history, viz.: its beginning, at the Exodus;
its culmination, as in the reigns of David and Solomon; its decline,
as in the day of Our Lord's incarnation.

J. H. I.

[figure description] Blank Page.[end figure description]

[figure description] Blank Page.[end figure description]

[figure description] Free Endpaper.[end figure description]

[figure description] Free Endpaper.[end figure description]

[figure description] Paste-Down Endpaper.[end figure description]