From some circumstances not well explained in the history of the Cuthite Shepherds, Josephus has been induced to think, that they were his ancestors; and that the account given by Manethon related entirely to the sojournment of the sons of Israel in Egypt. Sir John Marsham dissents from him; and with good reason: for the histories of the two people are repugnant, and can never be reconciled. Among other arguments, he takes notice, that the Israelites, when they came into Egypt, were in number but seventy; whereas the Shepherds were two hundred and 56 [Marsham's Chronol. Sec. 8. p. 101. and Sec. 12. p. 309. Herman Witsius refers the history of the Shepherds to Abraham. L. 3. p. 210.] forty thousand. The former were in a state of servitude, and grievously oppressed: but the latter exercised lordship; and made the whole land tributary. Add to this, that the Israelites were detained; and refused the leave, they sued for, to depart. The Shepherds would not go, till they were by force driven out of the country. These arguments alone are of such force, as to set aside the notions of Josephus. Had he not been blinded with too great zeal for his countrymen, the author, from whom he quotes, affords sufficient evidence to overturn his hypothesis. Manethon plainly specifies two sets of people, one of which succeeded to the other. The first were the Cuthite Shepherds from Babylonia: the second were the Israelites, who had the land given to them, which the former had deserted. This was the district of Auris, or Avaris; which the Cuthites had fortified, and in which they were finally besieged. After their departure, it was demolished by king Amosis, as we are informed by Apion: 57 [Tatianus Assyrius. p. 273. Clemens Alexand. Strom. L. i. p. 379. Euseb. Praep. L. 10. c. 11.] [x]. It was afterwards given to the Israelites by Amenophis, who is represented, as third inclusive from Amosis. 58 [Josephus contra Ap. L. i. p. 460.] [x]. "Upon the people being distressed, Amenophis granted them for an habitation, the city Avaris, which had been deserted by the Shepherds." It was not merely a city, but, as I have before mentioned, a walled province: for it contained no less than ten thousand square 59 [Josephus contra Ap. L. i. p. 446. See Observations upon the Ancient History of Egypt, p. 175. 177.] arourae. In this was a city Aur, [x], called Avaris, and Aouaris, [x], by the Grecians; the Cenafora of Mela, and other writers. Manethon particularizes the people, to whom this district was ceded; though he has in many respect sadly confounded their history. He says, that they were employed in acts of servitude, and greatly oppressed: but they were delivered, and formed into a republic, by one, who was their lawgiver, and whose name was 60 [[x]. Josephus cont. Ap. L. i. p. 461.] Moses. These data, though culled out of a deal of heterogeneous matter, are very clear, and determinate: and if learned men, instead of trying to adapt these plain facts to the flood of Ogyges, the aera of Argos, or the landing of Danaus in Greece, had chosen to abide by what is so evident and satisfactory, the history of Egypt would have been less obscure. But the Fathers, through whose hands we receive the greatest part of our knowledge, are all to a man misled by these notions: and the testimony of the best historians is set aside, because it does not agree with some preconceived opinion; being found either too much before, or after, the reign of Phoroneus, and Apis; or the landing of Cadmus the Phenician. In respect to the history of the Shepherds, the best writers have been greatly mistaken, by proceeding always upon extremes. They suppose, either that the people spoken of were solely the Israelites, which is the opinion of Josephus, and his adherents: or else that they were a people entirely of another race; and appropriate the history accordingly. But there is a medium to be observed: for it is certain that they were two separate bodies of people, who came at different times: and they are plainly distinguished by Manethon. Those, who are mentioned with Moses, are posterior to the others, and inhabited the very province, which the former had vacated. It is likewise mentioned by the same writer, that these second Shepherds were once under the rule of an 61 [Joseph. contra Ap. L. i. p. 460.] Heliopolitan, a person of great influence; who advised them not to reverence the sacred animals of the country, nor regard the Gods: nor to intermarry with the Egyptians; but to confine themselves to those of their own family. The name of this person was [x], Osarsiph. Now I am persuaded, that Osarsiph is nothing else but a mistake in arrangement for 62 [Sar is a Prince: and the term continually occurs in the history of Egypt, and of other countries: hence we read of Sar-chon, Sar-don or Sar-Adon, Sar-Apis, Sar-Apion, Sar-Adon-Pul; or Sardanapalus. The name of Sarah was the same as Hera, "Lady." See Vol. I. of this work., p. 73. It was sometimes expressed Zar. The captain of the guard to the King of Babylon was styled Nebo-Zar-Adon. 2 Kings, c. 25. v. 11. The feminine was Zarina. Diodorus Siculus mentions a Queen of the Sacae, called [x], Zarina; which undoubtedly was not a proper name, but a title. See Diod. L. 2. p. 119.] Sar-Osiph, the Lord Osiph, by which, no doubt, is meant Joseph of the Scriptures. Manethon has to be sure greatly confused the account; and at the close says, that Osarsiph at last changed his name to Moses: by which means he would make them appear as the same person. He has likewise interspersed much foreign matter; and is guilty of gross anachronisms: notwithstanding which, he affords sufficient light to ascertain the history of the two people. And in respect to the Israelitish Shepherds, we may be assured, that by Sar-Osiph they were introduced into Egypt; and that they were led out of it by Moses. Joseph was the cause of great wealth, and plenty to the Egyptians; and was accordingly esteemed a great benefactor. They likewise looked upon him as a revealer of hidden mysteries, a discloser of the will of the Gods. In consequence of this, they styled him Hermes, which signifies an interpreter. Hence came [x], and [x], among the Greeks. There is a remarkable account of this Hermes in the Chronicon Paschale, and Cedrenus, which is worthy to be mentioned. 63 [[x]. Chronicon Patch. p. 44. 45. Cedrenus. p. 18. I have omitted a deal of extraneous matter: for these authors have strangely perplexed this curious history. They imagine Hermes to have been the same as Faunus the son of Jupiter: and suppose that he reigned after Picus in Italy, though in the same page Cedrenus tells us, that he succeeded Mizraim in Egypt. [x]. "Mizraim the son of Ham, who was king of the country, dying, Hermes was elected in his room." See Cedrenus. p. 18. He is placed in the reign of Sesostris: [x]. Cedrenus. p. 20.] It is said of him, that "he was envied by his brethren, who are represented as seventy in number." That "finding, they were continually laying snares for him, and consulting how they might destroy him, he went into Egypt, [x], to the sons of Ham, where he was received with great honour. Here he resided in much state, being superior to every body: and he was cloathed with a particular robe of gold. He proved himself in many instances to be both a philosopher and a prophet; and foretold many things, being by nature nobly endowed. They therefore reverenced him as a Deity; and conferred upon him the name of Hermes, on account of his prophecies, and for having interpreted to them those oracles, which they had received from heaven. And as he had been the cause of great riches to their nation, they styled him the dispenser of wealth; and esteemed him the God of gain. When he came into Egypt, Mizram the don of Ham reigned there." This account is very curious; and seems to have been taken from some ancient Egyptian history. It is, as I have observed in respect to other national records, in some measure perverted, and obscured: yet the outlines are plain; and even in the mistakes we may see allusions to true history, however misapplied. The Egyptians acknowledged two personages under the titles of Hermes, and of Thoth. The first was the most ancient of the 64 [Euseb. Praep. L. i. c. 10. p. 32.] Gods, and the head of all. The other was styled the second Hermes; and likewise for excellence called [x], Trismegistus. There are histories given of this Hermes Trismegistus, which will be found to accord very much with those of the Hermes mentioned above: and his real name will appear to be very similar to Osarsiph, of whom we have before treated. This person is said to have been a great adept in mysterious knowledge; and an interpreter of the will of the Gods. He particularly decyphered all that was written in the sacred 65 [Manethon apud Syncell. p. 40. AElian mentions [x]. Var. Hist. L. 14. p. 399.] language upon the obelisks in Terra Seriadica: and instructed the Egyptians in many useful arts. He was a great prophet; and on that account was looked upon as a 66 [Clemens Alexand. Strom. L. i. p. 399.] divinity, To him they ascribed the reformation of the Egyptian 67 [Hermes by Censorinus is styled Arminus. Annum AEgyptiacum novissime Arminon ad duodecim menses et dies quinque perduxisse (serunt). (Google translate: Arminus. Last Egyptian Year Arminon prolonged twelve months and five days.) c. 19. p. 103. So corrected by Scaliger.] year: and there were many 68 [Clemens supra. Jamblichus. sect. 8. c. i.] books either written by him, or concerning him, which were preserved by the Egyptians in the most sacred recesses of their temples, and held in high esteem. We are 69 [Eratosthenes apud Syncellum. (Google translate: Eratosthenes in Syncellus) [x]. p. 124. supposed to have been a king.] told, that the true name of this Hermes, was Siphoas, We have here, I think, an instance of the same confusion of elements, as was observed in Osarsiph. For what is Siphoas but Aosiph misplaced? And is not Aosiph the Egyptian name of the Patriarch, who was called [x] by the Hebrews?
The names of those Shepherd kings, who are said to have reigned in Egypt, are transmitted to us by Manethon, Africanus, and Syncellus. But these authors differ greatly both in respect to the names themselves, and to the years, which the 70 [See Marsham's Chron. Saec. S. p. 100.] kings reigned. The first of them is by Manethon called Salatis; but by Africanus, and Eusebius, the name is rendered Saitis. From hence, I think, we may be assured, that Salatis is a mistake, and transposition for 71 [[x]. Euseb. Chron. p. 16. Syncellus. p. 61. I am obliged to differ from what I have said in a former treatise, p. 318.] Al-Sa-itis, or Al-Sait: which was not a proper name, but a title of the prince, and related to the country, which he governed. Sait was one of the ancient names of Upper Egypt: whence the colonies, which went from thence, were called 72 [[x]. Diodor. L. i. p. 24.] Saitae: and that region has the name of 73 [Leo Africanus. L. 8.] Said at this 74 [In the Arabic version, the land of Goshen is rendered Sadir.] day. Saitis therefore, and Al-Saitis, signify the Saite Prince, and are both the same title. The names of the other kings seem to be equally exceptionable.
The Shepherds are said to have resided in Egypt five hundred and eleven years. But the total of the reigns of those, who are specified, amounts only to two hundred and sixty-nine, if we may credit Manethon, and Syncellus: though, Africanus makes them two hundred and eighty-four. According to Eusebius, they amounted only to one 75 [Regnaverunt Pastores annis centum tribus. (Google translate: The shepherds reigned one hundred and three years.) Euseb. Chron. Versio Lat. p. 12. According to the old Chronicle, they reigned two hundred and seventeen years. Syncellus. p. 51.] hundred and three. I take therefore for granted, that the five hundred and eleven years relate to the Israelitish, as well as to the Cuthite Shepherds; and that the residence of both people is comprehended in that term: for the accounts of them are certainly blended. And as the one did not succeed to the other immediately, that interval also is taken into the computation. This estimate upon examination will be found to agree with all the circumstances of history; and will serve for a clue to ascertain other events. The children of Israel were two hundred and sixteen years in Egypt: and Joseph had been there 76 [Joseph was carried into Egypt, when he was seventeen years old. Genesis. c. 37. v. 2. He was thirty years old, when he first stood before Pharaoh. Gen. c. 41. v. 46. He saw seven years of plenty, and two of famine: so that when he invited his brethren into Egypt, he had resided 21 years complete.] twenty-one years, when he introduced his brethren into that country. These amount together to two hundred and thirty-six years. The years of the former Shepherds, according to Manethon and Syncellus, were two hundred and sixty-nine: which, added to the above, amount to four hundred and ninety-five years. These fall short of five hundred and eleven just sixteen years; which I imagine to have been the interval between the departure of the Cuthites, and the arrival of 77 [The first Shepherds resided: 259 years; Between their departure and the coming of Joseph: 16 years; Joseph resided before the arrival of his brethren 21 years complete: 21; The Israelitish Shepherds were in Egypt: 215 years; Total = 511 years.] Joseph.[!!!] But if the numbers of 78 [284: The time of the first Shepherds, according to Africanus; 215: The time of the Israelites; Total = 499: This subtracted from 511, leaves only twelve years. By this estimate the first Shepherds left Egypt twelve years, before the others arrived.] Africanus be true, those added to the years of the Israelitiish Shepherds make four hundred and ninety-nine, and leave an interval of twelve years only. According to this computation, the Cuthites left the country after Joseph had been in Egypt some time, and only twelve years before the arrival of his brethren. I should think the former computation the nearest to the truth: though we may either way account for the land of Goshen lying vacant; and for the city Avaris being 79 [We find that it was converted to pasture ground, and possessed merely by some herdsmen. Genesis. c. 47. v. 6.] unoccupied. Joseph therefore tells his brethren, that they must say to Pharaoh, that they were shepherds; because he foresaw, that they would then be entitled to the best of the land of Egypt. This was Goshen, called from the late inhabitants Tabir Cushan; and in aftertimes the Arabian nome. In conformity to this the province is by Bar-Bahlul, the Syriac Lexicographer, rendered Cushatha, as having been the ancient Cuthite region. It lay in the region of Heliopolis, the Zoan of the Scriptures, at the extreme part of Delta; between the mountain of Arabia to the east, and the plain of the pyramids west ward. The city Avaris seems to have been rebuilt, and to have been called Cush-Aur, and Cer-Cushaur; the Cercasora of 80 [Nilus juxta Cercasorum oppidum triplex esse incipit. (Google translate: The Nile begins to be a threefold town near Cercasi.) Mela. L. i. c. 9. p. 51.] Mela, and Herodotus. Cer-Cushora signifies the city of the Cushan-Oritae.
The sons of Chus seem to have come into Egypt immediately after their dispersion from Babel. And as their arrival was five hundred and eleven years before the Exodus, this will carry us in computation as far back as to the time of Terah; and to the sixth year before the birth of Abraham. About this time, I imagine, was the confusion of speech, and the dispersion abovementioned. If then we recapitulate the great occurrences of the first ages, as they have been transmitted to us both by sacred and profane historians; we shall find that they happened in the following manner, and order. When there was a great increase of mankind, it was thought proper, that they should separate, and retire to their several departments. Their destination was by divine appointment: and there was accordingly a regular migration of families from Araratia in Armenia. The sons of Chus seem to have gone off in a disorderly manner: and having for a long time roved eastward, they at last changed their direction, and came to the plains of Shinar. Here they seized upon the particular region, which had fallen to the lot of Assur. He was therefore obliged to retreat; and to betake himself to the higher regions of Mesopotamia. In process of time the Cuthites seem to have increased greatly in strength, and numbers; and to have formed a plan for a mighty empire. People of other families flocked in unto them: and many of the line of Shem put themselves under their dominion. They were probably captivated with their plausible refinements in religion; and no less seduced by their ingenuity, and by the arts, which they introduced. For they must certainly be esteemed great in science, if we consider the times, in which they lived. The tower of Babel, which their imperious leader had erected, seems to have been both a temple, and landmark, from which they had formed a resolution never to recede. It therefore seemed good to divine Providence to put a stop to this growing confederacy: and, as they had refused to retire regularly, to force them by judgments to flee away, and to scatter them into different parts. The Ethnic writers, as I have before mentioned, speak of many fearful events, which attended the dispersion; particularly of earthquakes, and hurricanes, and fiery meteors, which the apostates could not withstand. Many of the sacred writers, though they do not speak determinately, yet seem to allude to some violent, and preternatural commotions, which happened at this season. Whatever may have been the nature of the catastrophe, it appears to have been confined solely to the region of Babylonia.
Upon the dispersion, the country about Babel was intirely evacuated. A very large body of the fugitives betook themselves to Egypt, and are commemorated under the name of the Shepherds. Some of them went no farther than 81 [It gave name to the whole region, of which Babylonia was only a part.] Shinar; a city, which lay between Nineve and Babylon, to the north of the region, which they had quitted. Others came into Syria, and Canaan; and into the Arabian provinces, which bordered upon these countries. Those, who fled to Shinar, resided there some time: but being in the vicinity of Elam and Nineve, they raised the jealousy of the sons of Amur, and the Elamites; who made a confederacy against them, and after a dispute of some time drove them from their neighbourhood. And not contented with this, they carried their arms still farther; and invaded all those of the line of Ham westward, as far as the confines of Egypt. This was the first part of the great Titanic war, in which the king of Elam was principal. We are informed by Moses, that they served him twelve years; and in the thirteenth they rebelled: and in the fourteenth year the king of Elam attacked them, in conjunction with the kings of Aram, Ashur, and Shinar: for Shinar was now regained, and in the hands of the Shemites.
This invasion happened, when Abraham had resided some time in Canaan; in which he first sojourned, when he was seventy-five years old. It happened also after his return from Egypt; but was antecedent to the birth of Ishmael, who was born in the eighty-sixth year of Abraham's life. We may therefore venture to refer this event to the eightieth year of the Patriarch's age. And as the first war is said by the Gentile writers to have lasted ten or 82 [[x]. Hesiod. Theog. v. 636. [x]. Apollod. L. 1. p. 4.] eleven years; if we add these to the fourteen mentioned by Moses, which intervened between that war, and the invasion made by the confederates, it will be found to amount to twenty-four years. And these being deducted from the eightieth year of Abraham, will give us the sixty-sixth of his life, and the first year of the Titanian war. At this time, or near it, I should imagine that it commenced. I have supposed, that the Cuthite Shepherds came into Egypt immediately upon the dispersion: and it is very plain from Manethon, that their coming was five hundred and eleven years before the Exodus. The call of 83 [Abraham was seventy-five years old, when he left Haran; and eighty-six at the birth of Ishmael.] Abraham was only four hundred and thirty, and his birth five hundred and five, years before that aera: therefore the dispersion must have been about six years prior to his birth. According to this computation, the first Titanian war was about sixty-two years after the dispersion. 84 [Euseb. Praep. Evang. L. 9. c. 15. Syncellus. p. 44.] Abydenus, 85 [P. 29. [x].] Cedrenus, and other writers, who take notice of the dispersion, mention this war as the next great event.
As the Cuthite Shepherds were in possession of Egypt at the time of this war; it may seem extraordinary, that they did not take a share in it, and assist those of their family, who were invaded. There is an obscure tradition of their being solicited to interfere: but as they were not themselves attacked, nor injured, they did not listen to the proposals. This is intimated in a history given of Oceanus, who was one of the 86 [Diodorus. L. 3. p. 195.] Titans. It is also a name of the Nile, which was called both 87 [[x]. Ibid. p. 17.] Oceanus, and AEgyptus: and in this account, that country, and its inhabitants are alluded to. The history is, that, 88 [[x]. Proclus In Timaeum Platonis. 4. p. 296.] when the Titans entered into a conspiracy against their father, Oceanus withstood the solicitations, which were made to him: though he was some time in doubt, whether he should not take a part in the commotion. Proclus, who gives this account, has preserved some Orphic fragments to this purpose. The same is to be found in Apollodorus; who mentions the Titans engaging in war, and says, that Oceanus would not join them. 89 [L. i. p. 2.] [x]. By Oceanus is meant in the language of mythology the Oceanitae and Nilotae, the inhabitants of Egypt.
I imagine, that the Canaanites had been in the same original rebellion in Babylonia, as the sons of Chus; and that they were a part of the dispersion. It is therefore probable, that they came into Canaan about the same time that the others betook themselves to Egypt. This is certain, that when Abraham traversed the country, it is repeatedly said, that 90 [Genesis. c. 12. v. 6. c. 13. v. 7.] "the Canaanite was then in the land:" from whence we may infer, that they were but lately come. And the sacred writer, speaking of Hebron, a seat of the Anakim, or Titans, says, that it "was built seven years before 91 [Numbers, c. 13. v. 22. Some have thought, that Zoan was Tanis, towards the bottom of Lower Egypt, and it is so rendered in the Vulgate. But this part of the country, called afterwards Delta, was not formed, when Hebron was built. The lower region of Delta increased gradually, and was the work of time. Zoan was Heliopolis, one of the first cities built by the Shepherds, and towards the apex of Delta.] Zoan in Egypt." By this we may infer, that the two nations in some degree corresponded in their operations, and began building about the same time. All the while, that the Patriarch sojourned in this country, we find it so thinly peopled, that he could pass where he listed, and pitch his tent, where he pleased: and yet he travelled with a large retinue, and with flocks and herds in abundance. All this seems to indicate a recent population. Syria, and the coast from Libanus upwards, had been peopled by a different family before: and it is probable, that those of the confederacy, who settled there, had some battles with the natives. Eusebius accordingly mentions, "that in early times the Chaldeans," by whom are meant the Babylonians, "made war upon the people of Phenicia." 92 [Euseb. Chron. p. 28. Syncellus. p. 153.] [x]. But the land, which the Canaanite invaded, was in great measure vacant, and had been set apart for another people. For the distribution of the whole earth was by divine appointment; and the land of Canaan was particularly allotted to the sons of Israel. They accordingly have this strongly inculcated to them, that in the division of countries, 93 [Deuteron. c. 32. v. 9.] "the Lord's portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance." The Son of Sirach also informs us to the same purpose; that 94 [C. 17. v. 17.] "in the division of the nations of the whole earthy He" (the Lord) "set a ruler over every people; but Israel is the Lord's portion." In conformity to this, the Psalmist introduces the Deity as telling Abraham, 95 [Psalm. 105. v. 11.] "Unto, thee will I give the land of Canaan, the lot," or line, "of your inheritance:" which circumstance had been before recorded by 96 [Genesis. c. 13. v. 15. c. 15. v. 18.] Moses. And yet even to him, and to his posterity, it was rather a loan than a gift: for the Deity seems always to have peculiarly reserved the property of this country to himself. The Israelite therefore had never a full command of it: he only held it at will, and was subject to God as proprietor. In short it was ever the Lord's portion. The people therefore are told, when a permission is given to them in some degree to part with their inheritance, 97 [Numbers, c. 25. v. 23.] "The land shall not be sold for EVER: for the land is mine: and ye are strangers and sojourners with me," saith the Lord. Indeed the whole earth may justly be called the Lord's: but this was his particular portion. It was however invaded, as were other places, in opposition to the divine appointment. Eusebius, in conformity to this tells us, that Noah explained to his sons the will of the Deity; and allotted to each their particular place of retreat, 98 [Chron. p. 10.] [x], "having received his instructions from Heaven." But the sons of Chus first usurped the region allotted to Ashur; and afterwards transgressed still farther upon the property of their neighbours. Of all others the transgression of Canaan was the most heinous; for he knowingly invaded God's peculiar 99 [[x]. Auctor Anon. Johan. Malalae praesixus, p. 16.] portion; and seized it to himself. The trespasses of the sons of Ham brought on the dispersion; and afterwards the war of the confederates, as Syncellus justly observes. 100 [P. 90.] [x]. "The sons of Shem made war upon the sons of Ham about the boundaries of Palaestina." Eusebius mentions the particular transgression of the Canaanite. 1 [Euseb. Chron. p. 10. Eusebius lived in the country, of which he speaks: and had opportunities of obtaining many curious histories from the original inhabitants. See also Epiphanius adverf. Haeref. L. i. c. 5.] [x]. "Canaan, the son of Ham, was guilty of innovation, and trespassed upon the allotment of Shem; and took up his habitation therein, contrary to the commandment of Noah." Besides the kings in the Asphaltite vale, the nations attacked in this war were the 2 [Genesis. c. 14. v. 5. [x]. So rendered by the Seventy. See Deuteron. c. 2. v. 10. 11. also v. 21. 22.] Rephaims, or Giants, in Ashteroth Karnaim; and the Zuzims, and Emims, who were equally of the Titanic race: also the Amorites, and Amalekites, and the Horim in Mount Seir. All these were upon forbidden ground; and were therefore invaded.
Such is the history of the Titanic war, and of the dispersion, which preceded. Sanchoniathon speaking of the people, who were thus dissipated, and of the great works, which they performed concludes with this short, but remarkable character of them, 3 [Sanchoniathon apud Euseb. Praep. L. i. p. 35. So Pelasgus [x]. Cadmus [x]. Terah, and Nahor, and all the sons of Heber had separated themselves from the stock of their fathers, and dwelt in a forbidden land. Here they served other Gods. But the faith of Abraham was at last awakened; to which perhaps nothing contributed more than the demolition of the tower of Babel, and the dispersion of the sons of Chus: and lastly, the wonderful and tremendous interposition of the Deity in producing; producing these effects. This event not only inspired them with an inclination to get away, but also afforded them an opening for a retreat. It is, I think, plain, that even the Chaldeans were not included in the people dispersed; as we find such a nation in the days of Abraham; and not only in his time, but in the days of his father and grandfather. Both Terah and Nahor dwelled in the land of Ur of the Chusdim: which could not have happened, if those Chusdim, or Cuthites, had been scattered abroad.] [x]. "These are the people, who are described as exiles and wanderers, and at the same time are called the Titans." This event seems to have been very happy in its consequences to those of the family of the Patriarch Abraham: as it must have facilitated their conversion; and given them an opening to retreat. They lived in the land of Ur of the Chaldees; which lay upon the Tigris, to the south of Babel and Babylonia. There was no passage for them to get away, but through the above country; which was then possessed by a people, who would not have suffered their desertion. Nor would they have thought of migrating, so long as they followed the religion of their fathers. But when Terah and his family had seen the tower shaken to its foundations, and the land made a desert; it was natural for them to obey the first call of Heaven; and to depart through the opening, which Providence had made. They therefore acceded to the advice of Abraham; and followed him to Haran in Mesopotamia, in his way to Canaan. The rout, which the Patriarch took, was the true way to the country, whither he was going: a circumstance, which has been little considered.
After the Cuthite Shepherds had been in possession of Egypt about two hundred and sixty, or eighty years, they were obliged to retire. They had been defeated by Halisphragmuthosis; and were at last besieged in the district of 4 [Josephus contra Ap. L. i. p. 446.] Avaris, which they had previously fortified, by 5 [By some he is called Thummosis.] Amosis, the son of the former king. Wearied out by the length and straitness of the siege, they at last came to terms of composition; and agreed to leave the country, if they might do it unmolested. They were permitted to depart; and accordingly retired to the amount of two hundred and forty thousand persons. Amosis upon this destroyed their fortifications, and laid their city in ruins. Manethon, who has mixed their history with that of the Israelites, supposes, that they settled at Jerusalem, and in the region round about. This has led Josephus to think, that the first Shepherds were his ancestors: whereas their history is plainly alluded to in that part, which is styled the return of the Shepherds: where Osarsiph is mentioned as their ruler; and Moses, as their conductor upon their retreat. Most of the fathers, who treat of this subject, have given into this mistake: and as the Cuthites were expelled by Amosis, they have supposed, that the Israelites departed in the reign of that king. This was the 6 [[x]. Euseb. Praep. L. 10. p. 493. See Tatianus. p. 273. Clemens. Strom. L. 1. p. 379. Justin. Martyr. Cohort, p. 13. He calls the king, Amasis. They have certainly made some alterations in the 18th dynasty, to make it accord to their notions.] opinion of Tatianus, Clemens, Syncellus, and many others: but it is certainly a mistake: for it was not till the time of 7 [He gave them the place called Avaris, which his grandfather had laid waste. Joseph. cont. Ap. L. i. p. 460.] Amenophis, succestor to this 8 [The list of the kings of this aera, as they give them, proves this. [x]. See Syncellus, Eusebius, &c.] prince, that they entered the country, which they did not quit till after two centuries. And however Manethon may have confounded the history; yet it is apparent from what he says, even as the Fathers quote him. For he tells us, that Amosis destroyed the seat of the former people; and Amenophis gave it to the 9 [Josephus cont. Ap. L. i. p. 460, 461.] latter: so that the history thus far is certainly very 10 [Eusebius, whose evidence Syncellus without reason rejects, places the exit of the latter Shepherds in the reign of another king, whom he calls Cencheres. Chron. p. 16. Syncellus. p. 72.] plain. As they were each a very large body of people, and their history of great consequence in the annals of Egypt; their departure must have been faithfully recorded. But length of time has impaired the memorials: so that the history is of a mixed nature; and it is not easy to arrive at precision. And as many events were prior to the reigns of any of their kings; they generally refer those to the times of their Gods. Eusebius gives us a curious account of an event in the time of Apis; 11 [[x]. Euseb. Chron. p. 26.] "when a large body of men deserted Egypt, and took up their abode in Palaestina, upon the confines of Arabia." The Israelites may possibly be here alluded to: but I should rather think, that the history relates to the Caphtorim, who seem to have resided between Mount Casius and Pelusium; but retired to Palaestina Propria, which was immediately upon the borders of Arabia. There are however other histories more precise, which manifestly allude to the departure of the Shepherds from Egypt; and point out the places, to which they retired. There was a tradition of Casus and Belus leading one colony to 12 [Eusebii Chron. p. 24. See Zonaras. p. 21.] Syria, which settled upon the Orontes. By Casus and Belus are undoubtedly meant the Cuthites and Beleidae of Babylonia, who fled from Egypt; and are said by Manethon to have retired to those parts. Some are said to have gone to 13 [Joseph. cont. Apion. L. i. p. 460.] Jerusalem; which history needs no explanation. Eusebius mentions, that 14 [Chron. p. 27.] Cadmus and Phoenix resided in Egypt; but afterwards passed over to the region about Tyre and Sidon, and were for a time kings of that country. The most plain and satisfactory account is that, which I have more than once mentioned from Diodorus. He tells us, that there were formerly in Egypt many 15 [L. 40. apud Photium. p. 1151.] foreigners, whom the Egyptians expelled their country. One part of them went under the conduct of Danaus and Cadmus to Greece: and the others retired into the province called in aftertimes Judea. But it was not only to Syria, and to Greece, that people of this family betook themselves. I have 16 [See Vol. II. of this work, and the treatise inscribed Cadmus: which is intimately connected with the whole of the present subject.] shewn, that they were to be found in various parts, widely separated, as far as India and the Ganges in the east; and Mauritania westward. Diodorus mentions Ammon, by which is meant the Ammonians, reigning in a part of 17 [[x]. Diodor. L. 3. p. 201.] Libya: and speaks likewise of the Titans of 18 [L. 3. p. 190.] Mauritania, whom he styles the sons of Heaven. The Grecians supposed, that they were conducted to this region by [x], "Cadmus the great rover:" and Nonnus mentions:
19 [Dionus. L. 13. p. 370.]
People, who dwelt amid the Atlantian cliffs,
In cities founded by the wandering chief.
They came also with the Curetes into Crete; and settled particularly about Cnossus, where they were of the greatest benefit to the natives; and improved them in architecture, and in various other arts. Diodorus speaks of the temple of Rhea in these parts, which was built by the Titans, the sons of Heaven; whose foundations were shewn in his days: and near it was a venerable grove of cypress, planted in early times. He mentions the names of many of the Titans: and says, that there was not one, 20 [L. 5. p. 334. [x].] who had not been the author of some useful art to mankind.
The calamities, which this people experienced, were so severe, and accumulated, that they were held in remembrance for ages. The memorials of them made a principal part in their sacred 21 [See Orph. Argonautica. v. 26. 31. &c. Philostratus, Vita Apollon. L. 3. c. 6.] rites; and they preserved them also in their hymns. These were generally in a melancholy style; and their musick was adapted to them. The chief subject was the history of the Titanic age, the sufferings of their Gods; and above all the flight of Bacchus, and the scattering of his limbs over the plain of Nusa. To these were added the wanderings of Isis, or Damater; who went over the world to pick up the limbs of the same Bacchus, under the character of Osiris. The Egyptians succeeded to the Cuthites in their cities and temples; and had been too early initiated in their rites ever to forsake them. They had the like hymns; and commemorated the same events: for they were a branch of the same family. Hence they recorded the labours of the Titans, and all the calamities and wanderings, to which their Deities had been exposed. The Grecians did the like: their rites and mysteries related to the same events. Linus, Orpheus, Pronapides, Thymoetes, are supposed to have written upon this 22 [Diodorus. L. 3. p. 201.] subject; some in Pelasgic, and others in Phrygian characters. The ground-work of their history is comprised by Plutarch in a small compass, 23 [Plutarch. Is. et Osir. P. 360. [x]. Diodor. L, I. p. 87.] [x]: "The labours of the Giants and Titans — the cries of Bacchus, and the wanderings of Damater."
Such is the history of the Cuthites, who came from Babylonia, and conquered Egypt. This people were no other than the [x], Scuthae, or Scythians, as I have shewn. It is therefore no wonder, that the nation so denominated should be esteemed the most ancient of any upon earth. 24 [Justin. L. 2. c. i.] Scytharum gens antiquistima semper habita. — AEgyptiis antiquiores semper visi Scythae. "The Scythic nation was at all times esteemed the most ancient. — The Scythae were always looked upon as more ancient than the AEgyptians." All this in its proper acceptation is true: for the Cuthites were the first upon earth, who were constituted into a large kingdom; and reduced under a regular government: while other nations consisted of little independent towns and villages. And as they paid the highest reverence to the memory of their ancestors; they preserved evidences for their own antiquity, of which other nations were bereaved: so that they maintained this prerogative for ages.