following order: 4Then succeeded his son Helius; after him Sosis, then Osiris, then Orus, then Thoules, who conquered the whole earth to the ocean; and last of all Sesostris. The "Scholiast upon Apollonius Rhodius calls him Sesonchosis; and places him immediately after Orus, and the third in succession from Osiris: giving at the same time an account of his conquests. He adds. that he was the person whom Theopompus called Sesostris. The same Scholiast quotes a curious passage from Dicæarchus, in which Sesonchosis maintains the same rank, and was consequently of the highest antiquity. 16 Dicæarchus in the first book of his history mentions, that immediately after the reign of Orus, the son of Isis and Osiris, in Egypt, the government devolved to Sesonchosis: so that from the time of Sesonchosis to Nilus were two thousand years. Cedrenus" calls him Sesostris; and mentions him after Osiris, and Orus,

+ Euseb. Chron. p. 7. 1. 43. Bλns' Keta de τα τον Σεσωσεις. 15 Σεσογχωσις, Αιγυπτε πάσης βασιλευς μετα Ωρον της Ισιδος και Οσίριδος παιδα, την μεν Ασίαν όρμησας πασαν κατεςρεψατο, ομοίως δε τα πλεισα της Ευρωπης. Θεοπομπος δε εν τρίτῳ Σεσωστριν αυτόν καλεί. Schol. in Apollon. Argonaut. 1. 4. v. 272.

16

Δικαίαρχος εν πρώτω, μετά τον Ίσιδος και Οσίριδος Ώξον, βασιλιά γεγονέναι Σεσόγχωσιν λέγει· ώςε γενεσθαι απο της Σεσυγχωσίδος βασιλειας μexes TNS NEIAB IT disini. Schol. in Apollon. Argonaut. ibid. "Cedrenus. v. 1. p. 20. Osiris, Orus, Thoules, Sesostris.

and Thoules; which last was by the above writer omitted. Όσιρις. Ωρος. Θελής, μετά δε τότον Σεσως ρις. The author of the Chronicon Paschale makes Orus to have been succeeded by the same personage, as is mentioned above, whom he calls Thoulis; and next to him introduces Sesostris. He relates all his great conquests; and gives us this farther information, that this prince was the first of the line of Ham, who reigned in Egypt: in other words, he was the first king of the country. 18. Εν τέτοις μετα ταυτα χρονοις εβασίλευε των Αιγυπτιων πρωτος εκ της φυλής ΤΟΥ ΧΑΜ 19 Σεσως ρις. Aristotle speaks of Sesostris; but does not determine the time of his reign on account of its great antiquity. He only says that it was long before the age of Minos, who was supposed to have reigned in Crete. Apollonius Rhodius, who is thought to have been a native of Egypt, speaks of the great actions of this prince; but mentions no name: not knowing, I imagine, by which pro

20

13. Succeeded by apaw. Chron. Pasch. p. 48.

19 Joannes Antiochenus has borrowed the same history, and calls this king Sostris. Εβασίλευσεν Αιγυπτίων πρώτος εκ της φυλης το Χαμ Eurgis. p. 28. He adds, that Sostris, or Sesostris, lived in the time of Hermes, Ερμης ὁ τρισμέγιςος Αιγυπτιος. He was succeeded by Pharaoh, gros, the first of the name. Ibid. Herodotus calls him Pheron, and Pherona. 1. 2. c. 111.

20

Πολύ υπερτείνει τους χρόνοις την Μίνω βασιλείαν ἡ Σεσως ιος. Politic. 1. 7. c. 10.

not, says he, what to make of this Sesonchosis; I who is represented as five thousand years before. Menes, and who is referred to the time of the Demigods. In another place: Sesostris, who is in the twelfth Dynasty of Africanus, and whose æra extends higher, than the Canon of Eusebius reaches, reigned according to Scaliger's computation in the 1892d year of the Julian Period. By this calculation Sesostris is made prior to Sesostris; and this too by no less than 2355 years: for it is manifest, as I will shew from Scripture, that Sesostris undertook his expedition into Asia, and got póssession of Jerusalem in the 3747th year of the Period abovementioned. What is said in the sacred writings, I have taken notice of before. Not a word occurs about Sesostris, nor of any such Asiatic expedition. I am obliged to say, that through the whole of this learned writer's process; instead of a proof, we find nothing else but the question begged, and some inferences of his own consequence of this assumption. He indeed

Panodorus is placed first of the Demigods, that reigned in Egypt; but by "Herodotus is ranked among the deities. According to Dicæarchus the reign of Sesostris was two thousand five hundred years before Nilus: and the reign of the latter was four hundred and thirty-six years before the first Olympiad. I do not place the least confidence in these computations; but would only shew from them that the person spoken of must be referred to the mythic age, to the æra of the Demigods of Egypt. Some of these evidences are taken notice of by Sir John Marsham; who cannot extricate himself from the difficulties with which his system is attended. He has taken for granted, that Sesostris and Sesonchosis are the Sesac of the Scriptures; though every circumstance of their history is repugnant to that notion. 25 I know

24

23 Herodotus. 1. 2. c. 144.

OUTW THIGER KUVτa x. T. λ. Apollon. Argonaut. I. 4. v. 261. See the whole, and Schol. ibid.

24 Canon. Chronic. Sec. 10. p. 238, 239.

25 Quis igitur Sesonchosis ille, qui, Menen antevertens annis amplius 5000, inter Semideos locum habere videatur? Marsham. . Canon Chronic. Sec. 10. p. 238.

Sesostris in XII. Africani Dynastiâ (quæ Eusebiani Canonis epocham antevertit) ex Scaligeri calculis regnavit anno Per. Jul. 1392: quo ratiocinio Sesostris factus est annos 2355 ipso Sesostre senior. Nam ex S. literis (suo loco) apparebit, Sesostrim expe

not, says he, what to make of this Sesonchosis; who is represented as five thousand years before Menes, and who is referred to the time of the Demigods. In another place: Sesostris, who is in the twelfth Dynasty of Africanus, and whose æra extends higher, than the Canon of Eusebius reaches, reigned according to Scaliger's computation in the 1392d year of the Julian Period. By this calculation Sesostris is made prior to Sesostris; and this too by no less than 2355 years: for it is manifest, as I will shew from Scripture, that Sesostris undertook his expedition into Asia, and got póssession of Jerusalem in the 3747th year of the Period abovementioned. What is said in the sacred writings, I have taken notice of before. Not a word occurs about Sesostris, nor of any such Asiatic expedition. I am obliged to say, that through the whole of this learned writer's process; instead of a proof, we find nothing else but the question begged, and some inferences of his own in consequence of this assumption. He indeed quotes the authority of Manethon from Josephus to prove that the great actions of Sesostris were the same as were performed by Sesac. But Manethon says no such thing: nor does Josephus

ditionem suscepisse in Asiam, et Hierosolyma cepisse Anno Per: Jul. 3747. Ibid. p. 239.