in the 106th page of this work, nor is it singular, but very correspondent to Eufebius.

Sanchoniatho being undoubtedly an idolater, he made whatever records he had recourse to, subservient to his own purpose; nor is it possible he could have had any very intimate acquaintance with the Mofaic writings which is vainly supposed by some imaginary writers; for if that were the cafe, he would have made use of Hebrew names in his genealogies, especially as his line of defcent seems to have been that of Cain.

سلسل سيا

Seth's Line.

2. Cain.

2. Genus and Ge

nea.

3. Enoch.

3. Phor, Phur, and

Plox.

4. Irad.

4. Cassius Libanus

5. Mahallaleel.

5. Mehujail.

5. Memroumus.

6. Methusael.

6. Agreus, Alieus.

7. Lamech.

7. Krufor.

8. Jabal, or Jubal. 8. Tichmtes.

9.

9. Agros, Agrueros

A mere inspection of this table is fufficient to shew that Sanchoniatho's account has a vast affinity to Mofes; Protogonus and Æon being Adam and Eve, and Genus being Cain, which has nearly the same meaning in Hebrew, and also the number of generations to the Mifraim of Mofes, so nearly correfponding.

Manetho was an author of much later date, who wrote the Egyptian history, with an intention, no doubt, to recommend himself to the favor of his master Ptolomy Philadelphus, and to raise the annals of his own country beyond those of any other with respect to its antiquity. The works of Mofes had been newly translated; it was necessary that the Egyptian annals should be raised above those of the Hebrews; therefore he had recourse to a fubterfuge which might have been sufficient in the eyes of readers in general, to establish this point. He therefore introduced an immense series of years into his dynafties, which are indeed very properly supposed to be lunar years. Yet Scaliger speaks highly of this history, saying, "nullas vetuftatis reliquias cum iftis comparandas effe." But

Perizonius seems very much furprized at this,

as

as Manetho carries his history immensely beyond the true æra of the world: yet otherwise he is allowed to correspond very much with sacred history-if so, we may forgive this proud Egyptian his filly vaunting, which can do no harm because incredible. From the æra of real hiftory, which begins with the history of Mofes, he has been candid enough in his relations, confidering the circumstances under which he wrote.

Candour obliges me to lay before the learned reader, the observations of Witfius. Ægypt, Lib. 3. cap. 3.

MANETHONIS DE HEBRÆORUM INTROITU ET EXITU EX ÆGYPTO STOLIDE INEPTIÆ.

SED & ex MANETHONE haud difficulter colligas, ea quæ de Ifraeliticæ gentis ftirpe atque origine ipfis nobisque ex Mofe notiffima funt, præ nimia antiquitate, illorum temporum, quibus Manethos vixit, AEgyptiis, propemodum incognita fuiffe, & in iis ipfis quæ vetuftatem mentiebantur commentariis, adeo fabulose, abfurde, & confufanee tradita, ut vix umbram veritatis deprehendas. Unde argumentando inferimus, nugatorias effe AEgyptiorum commentationes quando de Mofaicis Mofaicis temporibus & quæ iis antiquiora funt garriunt; & nihil denique de iftis ætatibus certi exftare, in quo pedem tuto figas, nifi in Mofis facra historia. Fruftra itaque Manethonem laudari quando de Ifraelitarum antiquis ritibus ferenda eft fententia. Quid ením ab eo exspectes homine, qui neque unde oriundi Ifraelitæ fint, neque qua occafione in AEgyptum venerint, indeve exierint; neque quis Mofes fuerit, utrum He

bræus an AEgyptius, exploratum habuit: neque Davidis tempora, quibus demum occupata a Judæis, & ædificata auctaque Hierofolyma est, a tempore exitus ex AEgypto diftinguere didicit? Hoccine demum auctore finiemus, quid facrorum vel dogmatum vel cærimoniarum AEgyptii ante Hebræos habuerint?

II. At ne temere hæc dixifsse videar, audiamus quæ Manethos de primo Hebræorum in AEgypto adventu, quæ de exitu, quæ de occupatione terræ Canaan fabulatur. Quum vero Manethonem ipsum non habeamus, nemo id melius Jofepho dixerit. Cujus hæc funt in primo contra Apionem verba. Is Manethos in fecundo Ægyptiacorum hæc de nobis fcripfit. Ponam vero etiam verba ejus tanquam ipfum illum adducens teftem. Fuit nobis (ita Manethos) Rex Timaus

1

1

Timaus nomine. Sub hoc nescio quo modo Deus iratus fuit: & præter spem ex partibus Orientalibus homines, genere ignobiles, adepta fiducia in provincia caftra metati funt. Et facile ac fine bello eam potenterque ceperunt : & principes ejus alligantes, de cætero civitates crudeliter incenderunt: & Deorum templa everterunt. Erga omnes vero provinciales inimiciffime fe gefferunt: & alia non pauca, quibus corum crudelitatem exaggerat. Deinde Regum quibufdam nominibus interjectis, narrat gentem illam vocatam esse Hycsos, hoc eft Reges Pastores. Hyc enim fecundum sacram linguam Regem fignificat; Sos vero paftorem five Paftores, fecundum communem dialectum; & ita compofitum invenitur Hycfos. Quidam vero dicunt, eos Arabas esse. Addit Jofephus : In aliis autem exemplaribus non Reges fignificari comperi per appellationem Hyc, fed e diverfo captivos declarari paftores. Hyc enim Ægyptiaca lingua, & hac, quando denso sono profertur captivos aperte fignificat: & hoc potius verifimile mihi videtur, & hiftoriæ antiquæ conveniens.

III. Poft alia interjecta pergit Manethos: Sub Rege cui nomen erat Alisfragmuthosis vietos paftores, & aliam quidem univerfam Ægyptum perdidiffe, inclufos autem in locum habentem menfuram jugerum decem millium: cui loco nomen eft Avaris.

Filium vero Alisfragmuthoseos Themofin cona

tum