istence, cited by Kircher* from the Vatican, in which this Suphis of the Memphite dynasty is called Southis, and in which he is said to have erected many pyramids, which Abnephius, in the Arabic, translates as obelisks. Pliny† also says that Sothis erected several obelisks. Ramesses II. is also evidently the same with the Osymandyas or Ismendes of Diodorus; as that author, under the name of the sepulchre of Osymandyas, describes the Ramesseion. Ramesses and Sethos, by the frequency with which they are substituted for each other, seem to be interchangeable, and perhaps synonymous; and with the latter the name of Ismendes is likewise connected, as both Seth and Mendes are names of the god Khem. And this appears to me to give the solution why the Greeks stated that this king changed his name to

* Obelisk. Pamph. Proem.

+ Lib. xxxvi. c. 8. See Mythol. Inq. p. 44,

Egyptus, and that the country was thenceforth called Egypt from his name, because he appears to have assumed the name of the god Seth or 'Khem; and Egypt (which in the ancient Hebrew and in the modern Arabic retains its original appellation of Mizraim or Mizor) in the hieroglyphics and in the Coptic is known only by the name of Khemi, or the land of Ham. The same remark may perhaps tend to solve the question, whether the names and signets of Ramesses II. belong to one or to two kings, by showing that the difficulty arises simply from his having adopted another name.

There are very few points in the more ancient history of the world better established, than that the emigration of the colony of Danaus from Egypt took place at the same time with the Exodus of the Israelites. The colony of Cadmus followed at an interval of but a very few years, as is expressly asserted by Dio

dorus* and Eusebius. The Parian Chronicle, and other authors, place the colony of Cadmus 8 years prior to that of Danaus. At all events this is clear, that two colonies left Egypt for Greece at an interval of a few years of one another; and further, that the leaders of these two colonies were nearly connected in consanguinity with the Egyptian kings who reigned at the end of the 18th dynasty. A closer examination of the personages will throw further light upon the subject, and the monumental fragments will clear up the difficulties in the literary records.

The best authenticated Greek pedigree of the Egyptian kings and the Greek colonists is as follows:

Of these Danaus is said to have led the first colony, and Phoenix and Cadmus the second. According to others, however, the sons of Belus were not Ægyptus and Danaus, but Cepheus and Phineus. And this Phineus is stated variously to be the son of Neptune, of Belus, or of Agenor. He was originally the same with Phoenix. The corresponding Egyptian pedigree

As Ramesses I., Armais, and Ramesses II., the grandfather, father, and son, all succeeded to the throne within a pe

*

riod of six years, it is evident that Ramesses I. must have been far advanced in years at his accession, and consequently, a man of about the same age as Amenoph III. (who was a minor when he came to the throne). I suspect he was a brother of him and of Danaus.* And hence Amun Toohn or Danaus might very well be reigning in Greece, when the second colony left Egypt under the rebel brother of Ramesses II. Ramesses II. must also have been a contemporary with Bocchoris, as he was not a minor when he succeeded to the throne six years afterwards: and from this position follows another singular coincidence. The cities built by the persecuted Israelites were named Ramesses and Pithom. Now this could hardly have occurred before the names of Ramesses and Pithom came into use.

* This may have given rise to the supposition that Danaus was brother of Ægyptus, as it is not always very clear whether Ramesses I. or Ramesses II. was intended by Ægyptus.