In an 'Inquiry into the Origin of Moral Distinctions. Mandāta de Providendo. See EXPECTANTIA. establish by proof the fundamental points of the theory. Mandeville, Bernard de, a sceptical writer in the English tongue, was born of French extraction about 1670 at Dort, Holland, and went to England near the opening of the 18th century. He practiced medicine in London, but does not appear to have had much success as a physician, and depended mainly on his literary activity for the means of support. He died in 1733. In the article DEISM (q. v.) the name of Mandeville has not been inserted "because his speculations" (see works below), as Farrar says (Crit. Hist. of Free Thought, p. 135, note 65), "did not bear directly on religion." Upon morality, however, Mandeville exerted so great an influence that we cannot pass him unnoticed. His attacks on Christian morals already reveal him to have been a champion of Deism. The doctrines laid down in several of his works is nothing more nor less than a further elucidation of the assertion of Bayle (in Pensées diverses), that Atheism does not necessarily make man vicious, nor a state unhappy, because dogmas have no influence on the acts of men. Superficial observation of society led Mandeville to the belief that many institutions of public weal derive their strength and support from prevailing immorality. This view he developed in a poem entitled The Grumbling Hive, or Knaves turned Honest (1714), to which he afterwards added long explanatory notes, and then published the whole under the new title Mandeville, Henry, D.D., a (Dutch) Reformed of The Fable of the Bees. However erroneous may be minister, was born at Kinderhook, N. Y., March 6, 1804; its views of morals and of society, it bears all the marks graduated at Union College in 1826, and at New Bruns of an honest and sincere inquiry on an important sub- wick Theological Seminary in 1829, and was licensed by ject. It exposed Mandeville, however, to much oblo- the Classis of Albany in 1829. His ministry was chiefly quy, and, besides meeting with many answers and at- spent in the Reformed Church in the State of New York, tacks, was denounced as injurious to morality. It would viz., at Shawangunk, 1829-31; Geneva, 1831-34; Utica, From 1841 to 1849 he was professor of moral appear that some of the hostility against this work, and 1834-41. against Mandeville generally, is to be traced to another philosophy and belles-lettres in Hamilton College, N. Y. publication, recommending the public licensing of stews, While in this position he published several valuable the matter and manner of which are certainly excep- text-books on elocution and English literature, whic i tionable, though it must at the same time be stated that evince his thorough scholarship and "aptness to teach." Mandeville earnestly and with seeming sincerity recom- From Hamilton College he was called to the Govera mends his plan as a means of diminishing immorality, ment Street Presbyterian Church, Mobile, Ala., where Dr. Mandeville was a and that he endeavored, so far as lay in his power, by he died of yellow fever in 1858. affixing a high price and in other ways, to prevent the man of large frame, imposing presence, and cultivated work from having a general circulation. Mandeville manners. He was a brilliant pulpit orator, a powerful subsequently published a second part of The Fable of the reasoner, a successful preacher and professor, and a Bees, and several other works, among which are two faithful pastor. He gloried in the cross of Christ, and entitled Free Thoughts on Religion, the Church, and Na- devoted all of his fine powers to his work. tional Happiness, and An Inquiry into the Origin of lished address on the Reflex Influence of Foreign MisHonor and the Usefulness of Christianity in War. "Thesions, which was delivered before the Society of Inquiry Fable of the Bees, or Private Vices Public Benefits, may be viewed in two ways, as a satire on men and as a theory of society and national prosperity. So far as it is a satire, it is sufficiently just and pleasant; but viewed in its more ambitious character of a theory of society, it is altogether worthless. It is Mandeville's object to show that national greatness depends on the prevalence of fraud and luxury; and for this purpose he supposes a 'vast hive of bees,' possessing in all respects institutions similar to those of men; he details the various frauds, similar to those among men, practiced by bees one upon another in various professions; he shows how the wealth accumulated by means of these frauds is turned, through luxurious habits, to the good of others, who again practice their frauds upon the wealthy; and, having already assumed that wealth cannot be gotten without fraud and cannot exist without luxury, he assumes further that wealth is the only cause and criterion of national greatness. His hive of bees having thus become wealthy and great, he afterwards supposes a mutual jealousy of frauds to arise, and fraud to be by common consent dismissed; and he again assumes that wealth and luxury immediately disappear, and that the greatness of the society is gone. It is needless to point out inconsistencies and errors, such, for instance, as the absence of all distinction between luxury and vice, when the whole theory rests upon obviously false assumptions; and the long dissertations appended to the fable, however amusing and full of valuable remarks, contain no attempts to His pab of the Theological Seminary at New Brunswick, N. L in 1847, is a masterpiece of reasoning and eloquene, and a worthy memorial of the author's genius, piery, and zeal. - Personal Recollections; Corwin's Manual, s v. (W. J. R. T.) Mandingo is the name of an African people, the nation of the Wangarawa-according to Barth, comprising some 6,000,000 or more. Strictly speaking, however, Mandingoes should be termed only the inhab itants of the most south-westerly territories belonging to the great West African race of the Wangarawa (sing. Wangara), and inhabiting a district extending in lat. from 8 to 120 N., and between the west coasts and the head waters of the Senegal and Niger. Their original seat is said to be Manding, a small mountain country on the eastern sources of the Senegal, whence, partly by conquest and partly by emigration, they have spread themselves over a most extensive tract of country, and now consist of a variety of tribes. They are black in color, tall and well shaped, with regular features, and are, generally speaking, a fine race, capable of a high degree of civilization and organization, great travellers fond of trading, and remarkable for their industry and energy. The language of the Mandingo prevails from the Senegal coast up to Sago on the Niger. A grammar of the language was compiled by R. Maxwell Mac brair (Lond. 1837). Religious Belief, etc.-Of the neighboring nations, the Mandingoes were the first who embraced Islamism. The greater portion of them are now Moslems, and are zealous propagators of their religion. Those of the Mandingoes adhering to their primitive religion have a very peculiar idea of marriage. With them it is merely a form of regulated slavery, and there is no marriage ceremony observed to evince union (Caillé, Travels, i, 350). Most generally the female partner is carried from her home by force (Gray, Travels in W. Africa, p. 56). They have also, according to Park (Travels, i, 267), a very peculiar idea of the Deity, whom they regard as "so remote, and of so exalted a nature, that it is idle to imagine the feeble supplications of wretched mortals can reverse the decrees and change the purposes of unerring wisdom." Neither do they have any confidence in any belief in the hereafter, of which they assert that "no man knows anything about it." Mandra (sheepfold), a name given to a monastery in the Greek Church. See ARCHIMANDRITE. Herb. i, 38, 82) supposes, intend Atropa mandragora. Dioscorides (iv, 76) notices three kinds: (1.) the female, which is supposed to be the Mandragora autumnalis of Berloton; (2.) the male, Mandragora vernalis of the same botanist (these two are, however, usually accounted varieties of Atropa mandragora); (3.) a kind called morion. It has been inferred that this may be the same as the mandragora of Theophrastus, which, by some authors, has been supposed to be Atropa belladonna. To all of these Dioscorides ascribes narcotic properties, and says of the first that it is also called Circæa, because it appears to be a root which promotes venery. Pythagoras named the mandragora anthropomorphon, and Theophrastus, among other qualities, mentions its soporific powers, and also its tendency to excite to love. Its fruit was called love-apple, and Venus herself Mandragorites. But it is not easy to decide whether the above all refer to the same plant or plants. (See Lucian, Tim. p. 2; Pliny, xxv, 94; Apulæi, Asin. x, 233, Mandrake (only in the plur. 77, dudaïm', Bip.; Schol. at Plat. Rep. vi, 411, tom. v, Lips.; Philo, from 77, to be hot, from their amatory properties; Opp. ii, 478.) Persian authors on materia medica give whence the sing. "777, a pot or boiling vessel, hence a is said to be the root of a plant of which the fruit is madragoras as a synonyme for yebrûk, or yabrúz, which basket, Jer. xxiv, 1) occurs in Gen. xxx, 14-16: "Reu- called lúfach. This, there is little doubt, must be the ben went out in the days of wheat harvest, and found above Atropa mandragora, as the Arabs usually refer mandrakes in the field, and brought them home to his only to the plants of Dioscorides, and on this occasion mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, Give me of they quote him as well as Galen, and ascribe narcotic thy son's mandrakes;" "And Jacob came out of the field properties to both the root and the fruit. D'Herbelot in the evening, and Leah went out to meet him, and (Bibl. Orient. i, 72) details some of the superstitious said, Thou must come in unto me, for surely I have opinions respecting this plant, which originated in the hired thee with my son's mandrakes; and he lay with East, but which continued for a long time to be retailed her that night." The only other passage is Cant. vii, by authors in Europe. (See Schubert, iii, 116; Schulz, 13: "The mandrakes give a smell, and at our gates are Leit. v, 197; Burckhardt, i, 441.) By the Arabs it is said all manner of pleasant plants." From the above pas- to be called tufah al-sheitan, or devil's apple, on account sages it is evident that the dudaim were collected in the of its power to excite voluptuousness. If we look to the fields, that they were fit for gathering in the wheat har- works of more modern authors, we find a continuance of vest in Mesopotamia, where the first occurrence took the same statements. Thus Mariti, in his Travels (ii, place; that they were found in Palestine; that they or 195), says that the Arabs called the mandrake plant yathe plants which yielded them diffused a peculiar and brochak, which is, no doubt, the same name as given agreeable odor; and that they were supposed to be pos- above. "At the village of St. John, in the mountains, sessed of aphrodisiac powers, or of assisting in producing about six miles south-west from Jerusalem, this plant is conception. It is possible that there is a connection found at present, as well as in Tuscany. It grows low, between this plant and the love-charms (77) which like lettuce, to which its leaves have a strong resemseem to have been worn by Oriental brides (Cant. i, 2, blance, except that they have a dark-green color. The 4: iv, 10; vii, 12; comp. i, 12), like smelling-bottles (Isa. flowers are purple, and the root is for the most part iii, 20, "tablets"); perhaps these contained an odorifer- forked. The fruit, when ripe, in the beginning of May, ous mandrake philter. From this it is manifest that is of the size and color of a small apple, exceedingly there is little to guide us in determining what plant is ruddy, and of a most agreeable odor; our guide thought alluded to at such early periods, especially as no similar us fools for suspecting it to be unwholesome. He ate it name has been recognised in any of the cognate lan- freely himself, and it is generally valued by the inhabguages. Hence interpreters have wasted much time itants as exhilarating to their spirits and a provocative and pains in endeavoring to ascertain what is intended to venery." Maundrell (Trar. p. 83) was informed by by the Hebrew word dudaim. Some translate it by the chief priest of the Samaritans that it was still noted "violet," others "lilies," "jasmins," "truffles or mush- for its genial virtues. Hasselquist also seems inclined to rooms;" and some think that the word means "flowers," consider it the dudaim, for, when at Nazareth, he says or "fine flowers." Bochart, Calmet, and Sir Thomas (Trav. p. 183), "What I found most remarkable in their Browne suppose the citron intended; Celsius (Hierobot. villages was the great quantity of mandrakes that grew i, 20; but see, on the contrary, Oedmann, p. 99) is per- in a vale below it. The fruit was now (May 16) ripe. suaded that it is the fruit of the lote-tree; Hiller that From the season in which this mandrake blossoms and cherries are spoken of; and Ludolf (Hist. Æth. i, 9, etc.) ripens its fruit, one might form a conjecture that it is maintains that it is the fruit which the Syrians call Rachel's dudaim. These were brought her in the wheat mauz (that is, the plantain), resembling in figure and harvest, which in Galilee is in the month of May, about taste the Indian fig; but the generality of interpreters this time, and the mandrake was now in fruit.”—Kitto. and commentators understand mandrakes (not the mel- Dr. Thomson (Land and Book, ii, 380) found mandrakes on so called, "melo dudaim," but the mandragora) by ripe on the lower ranges of Lebanon and Hermon todudaim. The ground upon which the mandragora has wards the end of April. On the 15th of May, Schulz been preferred is that the most ancient Greek trans- also found mandrakes on Mount Tabor, which, as he lator interprets the Hebrew name in Gen. xxx, 14 by says, "have a delightful scent, and whose taste is equalmandrake apples (uñλa pavôpayopŵv); and in the ly agreeable, although not to every body. They are Song of Solomon by mandrakes, oi pavopayópaι. Sa- almost globular, and yellow like oranges, and about two adias, Onkelos, and the Syriac Version agree with the and a quarter inches in diameter. This fruit grows on Greek translators. The first of these puts laffach; the a shrub resembling the mallow; and the fruit lies about two latter yabruchin, which names denote the same the stem, as it were about the root, after such a manner plant (Rosenmüller, Bib. Bot. p. 130, and note; Castelli, that a single shrub may have six to ten fruits, of which Lexicon, p. 1591). The earliest notice of pavopayopac is the color is so beautiful that no orange equals its brillby Hippocrates, and the next by Theophrastus (Hist. iancy." This fruit, which a recent traveller describes Plant. vi, 2). Both of these, C. Sprengel (Hist. Rei. as of an "insipid, sickish taste," is by the Arabs of other 158; Michaelis, Suppl. p. 410; Oken, Lehrb. d. Natersgesch. II, ii, 333; W. Bickerton, Dissertation on the Mandrake of the Ancients (Lond. 1737); Tristram, Nat. Hist. of Bible, p. 466 sq. Ma'neh (, maneh', Ezek. xlv, 12, a portion as divided by weight; hence the Greek uva, a mina; rendered "pound" in 1 Kings x, 17; Ezra ii, 69; Neh. vii, 21, 22), a weight of a hundred shekels, as we gather from 1 Kings x, 17 (compare 2 Chron. ix, 16). Another and somewhat obscure specification is given in Ezek. xiv. "twenty shekels, five and twenty shekels, fifteen shekels, shall be your maneh;" spoken either of a triple maneh of twenty, twenty-five, and fifty shekels; or of a single maneh of sixty shekels, distributed into three parts of fifteen, twenty, and twenty-five. There are other exJarchi, J. D. Michaelis, and others), but the latter is genplanations offered (as by the Chaldee paraphrast, by erally supposed to be the best. See WEIGHTS. regions alleged to possess strengthening virtues, when used in small quantities, but they call it tuffah el-majanim, or "apples of the possessed," owing to the temporary insanity which an over-dose produces. "At first," says a traveller, "I felt inclined to doubt the assertion, Mandyas (pavovac), a vestment of the Greek but during my residence in the country I had the op- priests, not unlike the cope of the Romanists, but with portunity of witnessing its effect on an English travel-bells at the lower edges, in supposed imitation of the ler, a Mr. L., who had the temerity to test the property Jewish high-priest. of the mandrake. A few hours after partaking of the root he began to show unequivocal symptoms of insanity; and such was its effect on the nervous system that he had to be relieved by cupping and other remedies before he could be restored to consciousness" (Dupuis, Holy Places [1856], i, 272). The name "love-apple"Gesenius's translation of dudaim-was formerly in this country given to a kindred plant, the tomato (Lycoper-12, sicum esculentum), a native of South America, but now largely cultivated everywhere for its agreeable acidulous fruit. "From a certain rude resemblance of old roots of the mandrake to the human form, whence Pythagoras is said to have called the mandrake avowóμoppov, and Columella (10, 19) semihomo, some strange superstitious notions have arisen concerning it. Josephus (War, vii, 6, 3) evidently alludes to one of these superstitions, though he calls the plant baaras. In a Vienna MS. of Dioscorides is a curious drawing which represents Euresis, the goddess of discovery, handing to Dioscorides a root of the mandrake; the dog employed for the purpose is depicted in the agonies of death (Daubeny's Roman Husbandry, p. 275). The mandrake is found abundantly in the Grecian islands, and in some parts of the south of Europe. The root is spindle-shaped, and Atropa Mandragora Officinarum. Mančtho (Μανεθών or Μανεθώς), OF SEBENS TUS, a distinguished Egyptian historian, a native of Diospolis, according to some, or of Mende or Heliopolis, according to others, is said to have lived in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and to have been a man of great learning and wisdom (Elian, De Animal. x, 16). He belonged to the priestly caste, and was himself a priest, and interpreter or recorder of religious usages, and of the religious and probably also historical writings. His name has been interpreted "beloved of Thoth;" in the song of Lagos and Ptolemy Philadelphus, Mai en tet, or Ma Net, "beloved of Neith;" but both interpretations are doubtful. Scarcely anything is known of the history of Manetho himself, and he is more renowned for his Egyptian history than on any other account. On the occasion of Ptolemy I dreaming of the god Serapis at Sinope, Manetho was consulted by the monarch, and, in conjunction with Timotheus of Athens, the interpreter of the Eleusinian mysteries, declared the statue of Serapis, brought by orders of the king from Sinope, to be that of the god Serapis or Pluto, and the god had a temple and his worship inaugurated at Alexandria. It appears probable, however, that there were more than one individual of this name, and it is therefore doubtful whether all the works which were attributed by ancient writers to Manetho were in reality written by the Ma netho who lived in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus (See below.) Writings. The only work of Manetho which has come down to us complete is a poem of six books, in hexameter verse, on the influence of the stars (anore opariká), which was first published by Gronovius (Leyden, 1698), and has also been edited by Axtius and Rigler (Cologne, 1832). It is probable, however, for many reasons, as Heyne has shown in his Opuscula Academica (i, 95), that parts, at least, of this poem could not have been written till a much later date. We also possess considerable fragments of a work of Manetho on the history of the ancient kings of Egypt. (See below.) It was in three books or parts, and comprised the period from often divided into two or three forks. The leaves, the earliest times to the death of the last Persian Darius. which are long, sharp-pointed, and hairy, rise immedi- Some of these fragments are preserved in the treatise of ately from the ground. The flowers are dingy white, Josephus against Apion; and still greater portions in the stained with veins of purple. The fruit is of a pale or- "Chronicles" of George Syncellus, a monk of the 9th ange color, and about the size of a nutmeg; but it would century. The "Chronicles" of Syncellus were princiappear that the plant varies considerably in appearance pally compiled from the "Chronicles" of Julius Africanus according to the localities where it grows. The man- and Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, both of whom made drake (Atropa mandragora) is closely allied to the well-great use of Manetho's "History." The work of Afriknown deadly nightshade (A. belladonna), and belongs to the order Solanacea" (Smith). See Liebetantz, De Rachelis Dudaim (Vitemb. 1702); Simon, De 77, etc. (Halle, 1735); Ant. Bertolini, Comment. de Mandragoris (Bol. 1836); Dougtæi Analect. i, 35; Velthuysen, Comment. üb. d. Hohelied, p. 502; Eichhorn, Repert. xi, canus is lost, and we only possess a Latin version of that of Eusebius, which was translated out of the Armenian version of the Greek text preserved at Constantinople. Manetho is said to have derived his history of the kings of Egypt, whom he divides into thirty classes, called dynasties, from the sacred records in the temple at Heli opolis. In addition to these works, Manetho is also said to have written, 1, 'Iɛpà Bißλog, on the Egyptian religion; 2, Iɛpi apxaïoμov кai εvoeßeias, on the ancient rites and ceremonies of the Egyptians; 3, voikov Toμn (Laertius, Proam. s. 10), probably the same work as that called by Suidas quotoλoyiká; 4, Bißλoç TZwc, both the subject and genuineness of which are very doubtful. See Smith, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Biog, s. v.; English Cyclopædia, s. v. His name is introduced here on account of the importance of his work on Egyptian history in determining the list of ancient Egyptian kings. See EGYPT. In the following discussion of this point we chiefly make use of the elaborate and searching article on the subject in Kitto's Cyclopedia, s. v. Authenticity of Manetho's History.-Manetho was a learned priest at the court of the first Ptolemy, according to Plutarch (de Is. et Os. c. 28), who cites a religious work of his in Greek, which is quoted also under various names by Ælian, Diogenes Laertius, Porphyry, and other late writers (Fruin, Manethonis Sebennytæ Reliquie, p. 133 sq.; Parthey, Plutarch über Isis u. Osiris, p. 180 sq.). Josephus (Apion, i, 14-16, 26, 27) gives two long extracts, with a list of seventeen reigns, from the Alyvaτiakά, “a work composed in Greek by Manetho the Sebennyte, from materials which he professes to have rendered from the sacred records:" of which history all else that is extant is a catalogue of Egyptian dynasties, preserved in two widely different recensions by Georgius Syncellus, A.D. 800; the one from the lost Chronographia of Julius Africanus, A.D. 220; the other from the Chronicon of Eusebius, A.D. 325 (of which we have now the Armenian version); both texts are given by Fruin, and by Bunsen in the appendix to Egypt's Place, vol. i. The statement that "Manetho the Sebennyte, of Heliopolis, high-priest and scribe of the sacred adyta, composed this work from the sacred records by command of Ptolemy Philadelphus," rests only on the dedication (ap. Syncell.) prefixed to the Sothis, an undoubted forgery of Christian times. All that can be inferred from it is that the forger had grounds, good or bad, for placing Manetho in the time of the second Ptolemy. In fact, the incident with which Plutarch (ut sup.) connects his name (the bringing in of Serapis) is related by other writers (without mention of Manetho), and is assigned by Tacitus also (Hist. iv, 183 sq.) to the time of the first Ptolemy; but by Clem. Alex. (Protrept. iv, 48) and Cyrill. Al. (c. Julian. p. 13) to Ptolemy Philadelphus, with the date Ol. 124=B.C. 284–1. If he did live, and was a man of note, under the early Ptolemies, certain it is that "this most distinguished writer, the sage and scholar of Egypt" (as Bunsen calls him, Aeg. St. i, 88), was speedily and long forgotten; for more than three centuries after the time at which he is said to have flourished not a trace of him or his writings is anywhere discoverable. Nothing of the kind occurs in the remains of the Alexandrine scholars, the early Greek Jews, Polyhistor's collections, or the chronological writings of Castor. That the Catalogue of Thirty-eight The ban Kings (ap. Syncell.) is the work of Eratosthenes there is nothing to show; at any rate, it contains no reference to Manetho. If it was from Manetho that Dicæarchas, cir. A.D. 290 (ap. Schol. in Apollon. Rhod.), got his two Egyptian names and dates, it was in quite another form of the work; to the scholiast, Manetho is an unknown name. The Egyptian list in the Excerpta Latino-barbara of Scaliger, bearing the name of Castor, is a mere abstract from Africanus. Diodorus Sic. and Strabo visited and wrote about Egypt, yet neither of them names or alludes to Manetho; and the former gives (i, 44 sq., from the priests, he says) an account of the kingly succession altogether different from his. If, as Fruin suggests (p. lxiii), it was through measures taken by Domitian to repair the losses sustained by the public libraries (Sueton. Dom. 29) that Manetho's works were brought to Rome from the Alexandrine library, where they had long slumbered unregarded, still it is strange that the Egyptiaca should have caught the attention of Josephus alone (among extant writers), and that neither those who, as Plutarch, do mention the other work, nor others who have occasion to speak of the ancient times of Egypt, as Tacitus and the elder Pliny (esp. H. N. xxxvi,8-13), ever name this history, or show any acquaintance with its list of kings. Lepsius (Chron. der Aeg. i, 583 sq.) better meets the difficulty by supposing that the original work, never widely known, was so early lost that even in the 1st century all that survived of it was a bare abstract of its names and numbers, and (distinct from this) the two passages relating to the "Hyksos" and the "lepers," with the accompanying list of seventeen reigns, which some Jewish reader had extracted on account of their Biblical interest, and beyond which Josephus knew nothing of Manetho. Whatever be the explanation, the fact is that it is only through Jewish and Christian writers that we ever hear of Manetho as a historian. Of these, Theophilus Ant. (ad Autolyc. iii, 20, cir. A.D. 181) does but copy Josephus. Clemens Alex. nowhere names Manetho. A history of "the Acts of the Kings of Egypt, in three books"-not, however, by Manetho, but by "Ptolemy the Mendesian" is, indeed, quoted by him (Strom. i, 26, 101), but at second-hand from Tatian; who again (ad Gentes, p. 129), as perhaps Justin Martyr before him (ad Gr. 8), quotes Ptolemy, not directly, but from Apion. In short, it is plain, on comparing these passages and Euseb. (Pr. Ev. x, 11, 12), that Apion is the sole source of all that is known of this Ptolemy of Mendes; and Apion, as far as we know, makes no mention of Manetho. In what relation the work of Ptolemy may have stood to Manetho's, as there is no evidence to show, it is idle to speculate; and, indeed, the question with which we are concerned would remain very much where it is, even were it proved that " Manetho" is a borrowed name, and the Egyptiaca a product of Roman times. For the important point is, not who wrote the book, and when, but what is its value? It may not be genuine, nor so old as it pretends to be, and yet may contain good materials, honestly rendered from earlier writings or original records, probably as available in the time of Domitian as they were under the Ptolemies; and, in fact, existing monuments do furnish so considerable a number of names unquestionably identical with those in the list, that to reject this altogether, and deny it all historical value, would betoken either egregious ignorance or a reckless scepticism that can shut its eyes to manifest facts. Chronological Value of Manetho's History.-The attestation which the list obtains from contemporary monuments cannot be held to warrant the assumption that it is to be depended upon where these fail. For the monuments which attest, also correct its statements. Monuments prove some reigns, and even dynasties, contemporaneous, which in the list are successive; but we have no means of ascertaining what was truly consecutive and what parallel, where monuments are wanting. Their dates are always in years of the current reign, not of an æra. From Cambyses upward to Psammetichus, and his immediate predecessor, Taracus = Tirhaka, the chronology is now settled [see CHRONOLOGY, sec. iii]. Thence up to Petubastes (dyn. xxiii) the materials are too scanty to yield any determination. For dyn. xxii, headed by Sesonchis=Shishak, the records are copious: dates on apis-stela, of which Mariette reports seven in this dynasty, prove that it lasted much more than the 120 years of Africanus. But even these reigns cannot be formed into a canon, and the epoch of Sesonchis can only be approximately given from the Biblical synchronism, "In 5 Rehoboam Shishak invaded Judæa” — in what year of his reign the monument which records the conquest does not say; although the epoch of Rehoboam is, as to B.C., a fixed point, or nearly so, for all chronologists. The inscription is dated 21 Shishak, but does not indicate the order or time of the several conquests recorded. The attempt has been made to prove from Bib lical data that the invasion was in the 20th year. Thus: It was while Solomon was building Millo (2 Kings xi, 27) that Jeroboam fled to "Shishak, king of Egypt" (ver. 40). This work began not earlier than 24 Solomon (vi, 37-vii, 1). If it began in that or the next year; if Jeroboam was immediately appointed overseer of the forced labor of his tribesmen; if he presently conceived the purpose of insurrection, encouraged by Ahijah; if his purpose became known to Solomon almost as soon as formed; if, in short, his flight into Egypt was not later than 26 Solomon; lastly, if Shishak became king in that year, then 5 Rehoboam (=45 Solomon) will be 20 Shishak. This is a specimen of much that passes for chronology, where the Bible is concerned. Some light is thrown on the dynastic connection of dyn. xxii and xxiii by a stele recently discovered by Mariette in Ethiopia, which proves the fact of numerous contemporary reigns throughout Egypt at that time (Brugsch's Zeitschrift, July, 1863; De Rougé, Inscr. du roi Pianchi Meri Amun, 1864). But it helps the chronology little or nothing. In dyns. xx, xxi, is another gap, at present not to be bridged over. The seven-named Tanites of xxi (Afr. 130, Eus. 121 years) seem to have been military priestkings; and that they were partly contemporaneous with xx and xxi may appear from the absence of apis-stela, of which xx has nine, xxii seven. Dyn. xx, for which the list gives no names, consisted of some ten or more kings, all bearing the name Rameses, beginning with R. III, and five of them his sons, probably joint-kings. The apis-inscriptions furnish no connected dates, nor can any inference be drawn from their number, since Mariette reports no less than five in the first reign. For dyn. xix (Sethos), xviii (Amosis), the materials, written and monumental, are most copious; yet even here the means of an exact determination are wanting: indeed, if further proof were needed that the Manethonic lists are not to be implicitly trusted, it is furnished by the monumental evidence here of contemporary reigns which in the lists are successive. It is certain, and will at last be owned by all competent inquirers, that in the part of the succession for which the evidence is clearest and most ample, it is impossible to assign the year at which any king, from Amosis to Tirhaka, began to reign. No ingenuity of calculation and conjecture can make amends for the capital defects the want of an æra, the inadequacy of the materials. The brilliant light shed on this point or that, does but make the surrounding darkness more palpable. Analysis of the lists may enable the inquirer, at most, to divine the intentions of their authors, which is but a small step gained towards the truth of facts. But it has been supposed that certain fixed points may be got by means of astronomical conjunctures assigned to certain dates of the vague year on the monuments: Thus, (i) A fragmentary inscription of Takelut II, 6th king of dyn. xxii, purports that "on the 25th Mesori of the 15th year of his father" (Sesonk II, according to Lepsius, Age of XXII Dyn., but Osorkon II, according to Brugsch, Dr. Hincks, and v. Gumpach)," the heavens were invisible, the moon struggling ." Hence Mr. Cooper (Athenæum, 11 May, 1861) gathers, that on the day named, in the given year of Sesonk II, there was a lunar eclipse, which he considers must be that of 16th March, B.C. 851. Dr. Hincks, who at first also made the eclipse lunar, and its date 4th April, B.C. 945, now contends that it was solar, and the only possible date 1st April, B.C. 927 (Journal of Sac. Lit. Jan. 1863, p. 333-376; compare Ib. Jan. 1864, p. 459 sq.). In making it solar, he follows M. v. Gumpach (Hist. Antiq. of the People of Egypt, 1863, p. 29), who finds its date 11th March, B.C. 841. Unfortunately the 25th Mesori of that year was 10th March. This is the only monumental notice supposed to refer to an eclipse: not worth much at the best; the record, even if its meaning were certain, is not contemporary. (ii) In several inscriptions certain dates are given to the "manifestation of Sothis," assumed to mean the he liacal rising of Sirius, which, for 2000 years before our æra, for the latitude of Heliopolis, fell on the 20th of July. (Biot, indeed, Recherches des quelques dates abeolues, etc., 1853, contends that the calculation must be made for the place at which the inscription is dated— each day of difference, of course, making a difference of four years in the date B.C.) The dates of these “manifestations" are-(1) "1 Tybi of 11 Takelut II" (Brugsch): the quaternion of years in which 1 Tybi would coincide with 20th July is B.C. 845-42. (2) "15 Thoth in a year, not named, of Rameses VI, at Thebes” (Biot, ut sup.: De Rougé, Mémoire sur quelques phénoménes célestes, etc., in Révue Archéol. ix, 686). The date implied is 20th July, B.C. 1265–62 (Biot, 14th July, B.C. 1241-31. (3) "1 Thoth in some year of Rameses III at Thebes" (Biot and De Rougé, ut sup., from a festival-calendari. The date implied is, of course, B.C. 1325–22 (Biot, 14th July, B.C. 1301-1298). (4) “28 Epiphi in some year of Thothmes III" (Biot, etc., from a festival-calendar at Elephantine). This implies B.C. 1477-74 (Biot, 12th July, B.C. 1445-42). The antiquity of this calendar is called in question by De Rougé (Athén, Français, 18551, and by Dr. Brugsch, who says the style indicates the 19th dynasty. Mariette assigns it to Thothmes III (Journal Asiatique, tom. xii, Aug., Sept., 1858). Lepsins, who in 1854 doubted (Monatsbericht of Berlin R. Acad.), now contends for its antiquity (Königsbuch der Aeg, p 164), having contrived to make it fit his chronology by assuming an error in the numeral of the month. (5) "12 Mesori in 33 Thothmes III" (Mr. S. Poole in Trans. R. S. Lit. v, 340). This implies B.C. 1421-18. These dates would make the interval from Rameses III to Takelut II 480 years, greatly in excess even of Manetho's numbers, and more so of Lepsius's arrangement, in which, from the 1st of Rameses III to the 11th of Takelut II are little more than 400 years. Again, the interval of only 152 years, implied in (3) and (4), is unquestionably too little: from the last year of Thothmes III to the first of Rameses III, Lepsius reckons 296, Bunsen 225 years. Lastly, in (4) and (5) the dates imply an interval of 56 years, which is plainly absurd. The fact must be that these inscriptions are not rightly understood. We need to be informed what the Egyptians meant by the "manifestation of Sothis;" what method they followed in assigning it to a particular day; espe cially when, as in Biot's three instances, the date occurs in a calendar, and is marked as a "festival," we ask, were these calendars calculated only for four years? when a new one was set up, were the astronomical no tices duly corrected, or were they merely copied from the preceding calendar? (iii) "At Semneh in 2 Thothmes III, one of the three feasts of the Commencement of the Seasons is noted on 21 Pharmuthi." Biot (ut sup.) supposes the vernal equinox to be meant, and assigns this to 6th April in the quaternion B.C. 1445-42 (as above), in which 6th April was 21 Pharmuthi. But the vernal equinox is not the commencement of one of the three seasons of the Egyp tian year; these start either from the rising of Sirius, 20th July, or, more probably, from the summer solstice: as this, in the 14th century, usually fell on 6th July, the two other tetramenies or seasons would commence cir. 5th Nov. and 6th March. Now 6th March did coincule with 21 Pharmuthi in B.C. 1321-18, at which time it also occupied precisely the place which Mr. Stuart Poole assigns to "the great Rukh" (Leps., “the greater Heat), just one zodiacal month before the little Rukh, or vernal equinox (Hora Egypt. p. 15 sq.). (iv). "On 1 Athyr of 11 Amenophis III the king ordered an immense basin to be dug, and on the 16th s. m. celebrated a great panegyry of the waters" (Dr. Hincks, On the Age of Dynasty XVIII, Trans. R. Irish Acad. vol. xxi, pt. i; comp. Mr. S. Poole, Trans. P. & Lit. v. 340). If the waters were let in when the Nile had reached its highest point-which, as it is from 90 to 100 days after the summer solstice, in the 14th celltury would be at 4-14 Oct.—the month-date indicates |