« AnteriorContinua »
e been tolen of is hich is between the the empt of the treaty
the Chaldees *, which is intimated by the sacred writer to have been the family abode of his brethren and ancestors. The Ur here spoken of is generally supposed, by our best critics, to have been the same which is mentioned by Ammianus Marcellinust, and by him placed between the Tigris and the city of Nisibis, at which city or citadel of Ur the emperor Jovianus Augustus rested so lately as at the commencement of the fourth century of the Christian æra, after he had concluded his treaty of peace with the Persians. Towards this region; in which we trace his posterity so shortly afterwards, it is highly probable, then, that Peleg directed his course upon the general division of the earth which occurred in his day: and if this be a fact, it is impossible he could have united himself to Nimrod, with whose territories we are expressly acquainted, which comprised
Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinart,' and which of course must have lain several hundred miles to the south-east of the city of Ur. Consequently, moreover, far from partly concluding that Peleg was ' nearly concerned in the grievous schism of the primitive church, and had apostatised together with the Ammonians in the land of Shinar, we must admit that it is more probable he had no concern whatever, in this blasphemy, and was so remotely situated as to be ignorant of the fact itself.
There are many parts in the present volume, however, founded upon better evidence than conjecture; and in the latter portion of the ensuing section we accompany our author with far more satisfaction, and with many obligations for his profound researches and legitimate deductions. On the section we have now closed we have dwelt the longer, lest our readers should be unwarily led astray by the captivating plausibility of the general theory advanced, and thereby be rendered incapable of appreciating its real merit, and of severing the fanciful from the more solid. The section upon which we now enter commences with an examination how far an accurate knowledge of the import of terms may become subservient to the development of such passages in the ancient history of Greece as have never hitherto met with any satisfactory explanation. The general analogy and import of terms in different languages may be fairly urged as a proof of the pre-existence of one primitive and universal vocabulary, and consequently of the origin of all mankind from one common race : and for this purpose, had it been necessary, the writer might have furnished us with far more examples than the nine here presented, and traced them through a far greater variety of tongues; but as we shall be necessarily called to 2 reconsideration of this subject in the fourth section, which is a re
Gen. x. 10.
* Gen. xi. 28. † Lib. xxv. 26, Crit. Rey. Vol. 34. Jan. 1802.
capitulation of the point now discussed, we shall pass it by for the present.
Following the guidance of Mr. Bryant, our author, upon the dispersion of the Ammonians or Cushites, which immediately followed the destruction of their tower and the confusion of their language in the land of Shmar, conducts, as we have already observed, several large colonies of these idolaters towards Egypt, where, pursuing principally the fragments of Manetho, he supposes them to have conquered the Misraïm or aboriginal inhabitants, to have established a dynasty under the title of Royal Shepherds, to have introduced among the natives all their own idolatrous worship of the ark, the sun, and the serpent (an account of the origin and amalgamation of which has already been given in our former number), to have been finally overpowered by an insurrection of the Misraïm, and driven into the land of Cushen or Goshen ; where, after having been long besieged in the city of Avaris (Fonix Avo.plv), they entered into a convention with the besieging army for the retention of this province alone; but whence, in a short time, they peaceably departed in different colonies, and under the different appellations of Erectheidæ, Danaidæ, Cecropians, and Cadmians, towards Phrygia and Greece, overpowering the nations of these various regions as they advanced, and still establishing among them their own idolatrous rites. Their exodus from Egypt he fixes at a period not long anterior to the vice-royalty of Joseph in that country, and the general famine which drove his brethren into his presence to purchase provisions for their families; and here it must be confessed that there is a wonderful accordance between the account given by Diodorus Siculus* and Manetho, and that of the sacred historian respecting this extraordinary event; which different statements our author has again made to bear with great probability upon the tradition of the dreadful famine in Lydia, narrated by Herodotust to have raged for several years in the reign of Atys, as an additional proof of the truth of the general account, both as to the duration and universality of the dearth : 'And the seven years of dearth began to come, according as Joseph had said; and the dearth was in all lands; but in the land of Egypt there was bread I.' But we shall suffer our author to speak for himself.
• In the second place,' says he,'we are enabled very accuratelyto ascertain the scope of that passage of Diodorus, which informs us that this dearth prevailed κατα πασαν σχεδον την οικομενην, ΠΛΗΝ ΑΙΓΥΠΤΟΥ, AIA THN JAIOTHTA || THE X.IPAE, every where throughout the
* Vol. I. lib. i. p. 34. + Herod. lib. i. c. 94. Gen. xli. 54.
' || 180otne seems properly to imply some peculiarity or singular circumstance attending this region.'
sporld, except in Egypt, which was protected by THE GENIUS OF THE COUNTRY* These words are very remarkable ; and convey a meaning, which could never have been investigated without a comparison with the sacred writings. I have observed in a former page, that the genius, who usually preserved this country from famine, was the Nile; and that the dronght must have been great and universal indeed, which could afford no rain among the mountains of Abyssinia, and, consequently, no inundation to fertilise Lower Egyptt. We are now assured, beyond the possibility of doubt, that such a time of drought did really happen, and that it continued seven years. It was not the Nile therefore that preserved this, and other lands, during this period of distress : it was another Genius, whom the Egyptians long remembered under the significant appellation of TomTOUN&MAX#(Psontompanēch ) “the revealer of secrets;" and whom Moses, varyir.g the term to suit the dialect of the Hebrews, has styled 173yons (Tsaphnathphanehs), which is a word confessedly foreign to their language Il. Hence it appears that the Sicilian historian has handed down the substance of an Egyptian tradition, which accords in a most wonderful degree with the evidence of the inspired penman. We learn from both, that there was once a dreadful famine over the whole world; and that Egypt was preserved from utter destruction, and was the means of saving other countries, through the instrumentality of some extraordinary person. This person is called THE GENIUS OF THE PLACE by the one, and Tsaphnathphaneh (the same as Psontom panēch) THE REVEALER OF SECRETS by the other; but he was no other than Joseph, who was raised up by God, and endued with an extraordinary degree of wisdom and fore-knowledge, for this very purpose. “ The dearth was in all lands ; but in the land of Egypt there was bread c." “ And all countries came into Egypt to Joseph to buy corn ; because the famine was so sore in all lands**
• It remains to be inquired, in the last place, at what time these things were done. Toseph, it is said, in consequence of the commission be had received to lay up corn, “ went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt ++;" and this passage is the more valuable, because it conducts us to two conclusions very important to the ancient history of that country namely—that the whole of Egypt was at this time under the dominion of one so. vereign ; and that therefore the date in question must have been
** Diodor: Sical. lib. i. vol. i. pag. 34.'
+ Page 239, pote*. If there were rain in any quarter, the Abyssinian mountaias were never deprived of their seasons of wet : they generally had them, even when the lower regions in every direction were consumed by drought: and this is the reason why Egypt, in early tiines especially, was most justly considered as the granary of the east.'
In the copy before us this word is written TomCORUM&VH Xbut this is probably an error of the press.-Rev. " Genesis, chap. xli, ver. 45.'
There is a valuable dissertation upon the import of these words in Kircher, Prodrom. Coptic. pag. 124, &c.'
• Genesis, chap. xli. ver. 54, *** Genesis, chap. xli. ver. 57. * 4 Genesis, chap. xli. ver. 16.'
some time, but not long, after the expulsion of the Cuthite shepe herds. The first of these inferences is further confirmed by the very language of Pharaoh on this occasion--" He said unto Joseph, I am Pharaoh ; and without thee shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all the land of Egypt* :" which surely supposes, that this monarch had an absolute and undivided sovereignty over the whole country,
• We learn from Manetho, that the Cuthite shepherds were succeeded in Egypt by another race of shepherds : and he distinguishes them by the title of Captivest; under which we easily recognise the descendents of Jacob who were enslaved in Egypt. They were allotted the land of Goshen for their residence; and “ it seems pretty certain,” says Mr. Bryant, “ from the tenor of Scripture, that they came into a vacant unoccupied district. And, as it was the best of the land, there is no accounting for its being unoccupied, but by the secession of the Cuseans, whose property it had lately been. Joseph, when he instructs his brethren what answer they were to give to
Pharaoh, when he should inquire about their occupation, lays this 'injunction upon them : · Ye shall say, Thy servants' trade hath been about cattle, from our youth even until now, both we and also our fathers : that ye may dwell in the land of Goshen ; for every shepherd is, an abomination unto the Egyptians.' From whence Le Clerc very justly collects, that this land must have been in possession of shepherds or herdsmen before. Qui enim colligere potuisset Josephus fratribus, arte editâ, eum tractum in colendum concessum iri, nisi, &c. The inference he makes is good, that there must have been shepherds in those parts before ; otherwise Joseph could not have foreseen that, upon telling their occupation, this land would necessarily be given to his brethren [."
Upon the whole, therefore, it appears that the time of this gene. ral dearth could not have been long after the Cuthites had been obli. ged to abandon the country; that is, in all probability, not many years after the Erechtheidæ had possessed themselves of Attica. And if there be any truth at all in that part of the list of Athenian monarchs, where Erechtheus is introduced, it will amply confirm the justice of the foregoing conclusion; for it was in the reign of this king that the famine took place. But the date assigned to this event is one thousand seven hundred and eight years before Christ; and perhaps the settlement of the Erechtheidæ at Athens might have been fifteen or twenty years earlier.' P. 286.
6* Genesis, chap. xli. ver. 44.'
+ Manethe, as quoted by Josephus, says that they kept possession of Egypt five hundred and eleven years. Joseph. contra Appion. lib. i. sec. 14. This writer, however, seems to have confounded the Israëlitish with the Arabian shepherds. He first mentions the reigns of the shepherd kings, whom he styles Hyosos, and afterwards introduces another race of shepherds, whom he erroneously calls the descendents of the former, and distinguishes hy the name of Captives. The amount of the reigns of the shepherd kings is stated to be two hundred and fifty-nine years and ten months. This, however, was not the whole time of the residence of these shepherds in Egypt; it was only the time during which they were under a race of kings. I apprehend that the total period may be rated at two hundred and eighty years, or a little inore.'
• $ Observations upon Ancient Egyp, page 139.
There is certainly some undue latitude of interpretation here assumed in translating the IOLOtyta the Genius of the country; and it betrays too much attachment to system to apply it, so translated, to the patriarch Joseph. We have also to observe that Manetho makes no mention of CUTHITE shepherds in any part of his fragments that are preserved to us by Josephus. He says precisely, In the reign of Timaüs, the Deity blasted us with his anger, and suddenly an obscure race of men (70 yaros anju) invaded us from the East, who, confiding in their cou. rage, fixed themselves in our country, and seised it boldly without the risk of a battle (z ows nau anayeti TYM ww pay eixov)'... 'These people, continues he, 'were called Yksos or Üksos (*TX5CS), that is shepherd-kings; for yk or uk signifies a king in the sacred language, and sos a shepherd or shepherds in our vernacular tongue ; and thus is the compound yksos (uksos ) derived*.' Josephus, who gives us this information, tells us shortly afterwards that in another copy he found the term uk signifying not royal, but captive; and, consequently, uksos not shepherd-kings, but cap. tive-shepherds. And we cannot avoid noticing therefore, even in this instance, a powerful propensity in our author to bend, perhaps unwarrantably, all the different significations of this term to his favorite hypothesis. If the yksos (or uksos! mean, in his view of the word, shepherd-kings, let him uniformly retain this interpretation; if, on the contrary, he prefer the translation of captives or captive-shepherds, let him as punctually adhere to this latter sense : but he has certainly no authority, either from Manetho or Josephus, to use the former meaning, when he wishes to accommodate it to his Cushite shepherds, who are nevertheless probably the conquerors of Egypt here referred to, and the latter meaning when he would have it express the Israëlites, who we know were captives in the land. We believe the former to be the more accurate interpretation; and we find the Chaldean shepherds in Eusebius entitled ('Txx8ows) Ukkousos, perhaps UkChusust, a word of nearly similar letters, and obviously from the same origin as (uxros) uksos, and to which he attaches the idea of royalty; a circunstance that will obviously tend to corroborate the opinion of Mr. Allwood, that although they are not expressed by name, Manetho, in his account of the conquerors of Egypt, referred to the Cushite shepherds, who were certainly Uk-Chusæi (royal shepherds), and of the same country.
To the same radical Mr. Bryant indeed, very ingeniously, attributes the Latin term lux, light. The sun, says he, was de
* Joseph contra Appion. I. i.
ή Εκαλειτο δε το συμπαν αυτων εθνος Υκκεσως τετο δε εστι βασιλεις: αοιμενες το γαρ *T*, xa6' jepar zwecay, Bassa on cives, Præp. Evang. lib. 4. c. 13.