;
SECT. 13.] AND SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. 251
will pass on among the captives in their triumph for so great an achievement. But certain it is that men are exceedingly apt to take up with learned conjectures out of heathen writers, though pressing hard on the reputation of sacred truth.
13. An instance hereof, if I mistake not, may be taken from that space of time, and what sets out therein what we have now under consideration. Josephus in his Discourses against Apion, lib. i, reports somewhat of the history of the Egyptians out of Manetho, a priest of Heliopolis, who wrote his story in the days of Ptolemy Philadelphus, about sixteen hundred years after Abraham’s being in Egypt. Out of this man’s writings, and in his own words, he gives- an account of a nation that was called Hyksos, which in the Egyp- tian language signifieth “kingly shepherds.” This nation, as he says, entered Egypt and subdued it, holding it for about five hundred years, erecting an especial dynasty therein. By these shepherds and their kings, with Josephus, Manetho intended the Israelites and their abode in Egypt, although he mixed the story of it with many fabulous traditions; for under that name and character were they known to the Egyptians, and on the account of that profession of life whence they were so denominated lived separately from them. This story, with allowances for the fabulous tradition and invention of the reporter, is for the substance of it fairly reconcilable unto our sacred writings; yea, no other interpretation of it is consistent with them, as we shall manifest. But our late learned chronologers are generally of another mind. ' They will have a nation called by the Egyptians Hyksos, leaving no memorial of any name of their own, nor ground of any tolerable conjecture from whence they came, nor what became of them in the issue, nor why the Egyptians gave them that name, being a composition of what they most adored and most abhorred, to have entered Egypt presently after the death of Joseph, and conquering the whole kingdom, or at least all the lower and principal parts of it, to have erected a kingdom of their own therein.
_ These, they say, were they who oppressed the Israelites, as is related
in Exodus; and under their rule was the people delivered, as in the same story, in the reign of Apophis, leaving them to rule in Egypt two or three hundred yearsafter. Concerning this people, the prin- cipal things observed out of Manetho are,—(1.) That they invaded the country in the reign of one Timaus, God being angry with the
nation; and that they had no king of their own at their first en-
c
trance. (2.) That after their entrance they made one from among themselves a king, whom they called Salatis. (3.) That this Salatis took care about corn and its measures, with the stipends of sol-
_ diers, (4.) That he and his successors endeavoured to root out all
_ the Egyptians. (5.) That they kept Abaris (that is, Pelusium) with
252 PREFIGURATIONS OF THE PRIESTHOOD [EXERC. XXXIV.
a garrison of 240,000 soldiers, building of some other cities. Now, leaving unto others the liberty of their judgment, I cannot but declare that to me either this whole story is a mere coined fable, or it is the Hebrews alone that are intended in it, or that credit is not to be given unto our sacred story, as I shall evidently de- monstrate. For,—(1.) If the Hebrews and their abode in Egypt be not intended in this story, what credit is to be given unto the writings of this Manetho, and the skill he pretended in the antiquities of his country, or the sacred records from whence he boasteth to have transcribed his commentaries? For if the state of the Israelites be not here expressed, it is apparent that he had not any notice of it ; for J ose- phus, searching of him no doubt with diligence, to find what he could discover concerning the antiquity and affairs of his own nation, could find nothing in his book concerning their coming into and departure from Egypt but this passage only. For what he mentions afterwards about the lepers and mixed people hath no consistency with the story of the Hebrews, but was a mere figment of the Egyptians, de- signing their reproach. And if this Manetho was utterly ignorant, and had no tradition of what befell his country in that terrible deso- lation and ruin, the like whereof never befell any nation under hea- ven, what reason have we to give the least credit unto any of his reports? A man may soberly judge, on such a supposition, that all his dynasties and kings, and what fell out under them in ancient times, were mere figments of his own brain, like the story of Geof- frey of Monmouth concerning the succession of kings in this island from the-coming of Brutus, which in like manner is pretended to be taken from sacred monastical archives. (2.) The Israelites were at that time known by the name of shepherds, professing themselves to follow that course of life whence they were so denominated; and as such they were “an abomination unto the Egyptians.” These things concurring with the ruin that befell Egypt at their departure, issued in such a fame and tradition as might easily be fabled upon by Mane- tho, an idolatrous priest, so long after. But that there should be two sorts of persons, two nations, at the same time in Egypt, both strangers, both called shepherds, the one oppressing the other, the Egyptians as it were unconcerned in both, seems rather to be a dream than to have any thing of real tradition or story in it. Besides, who the one sort of shepherds at that time were is known unto all; but as to the other sort, none can imagine whence they came, nor what was the end they were brought unto. (3.) They are said by this Manetho to come into Egypt without a king, but afterwards made one of themselves so, who “in time of harvest ordered the measures of corn, and paid men their allowances” (évdé re xurd Sépesauy Hpyero Tk wey oirowerpav xo) wscbopopiay wupexouevoc); which things have so