There are necessary, perhaps, a few words to show that the author of the preceding book has not arbitrarily employed facts, and made use of traditions to suit a certain series of hypothetical events; but has been controlled strictly by authorities.

Scholars, versed in Egyptian archÆology, will do the author justice in the plan and execution of his work; for minds, enriched with true erudition, upon the history of the land where his scenes are placed, will not only understand the difficulties which a writer has to contend with, but appreciate what he has done. Captious criticism will, of course hold itself wholly independent of facts; while hypercriticism must be suffered to show its quasi erudition. To fair and manly scholastic criticism, whether from theological scholars, or students in the "learning of the Egyptians," the work is open; and the author will be grateful to any judicious and respectable scholar who will kindly point out errors—proving them to be such.

The reader of Egyptian history is aware that but little reliance can be placed on the assigned length of periods, which furnish us with neither names nor facts, nor reliable monuments; because at this day we have no control over the fictions and errors of historians. To carry up to the first century of history a connected chain of authentic chronology is not yet possible.

We have given due credit to Manetho's statements, but have little confidence in many of his alleged facts, vouched as they are by Josephus and Herodotus. The late discoveries by Champollion le Jeune, Bunsen, Dr. Young, Lepsius, and others, with the revelations of actual historical inscriptions, have rendered the books of these hitherto universally quoted writers nearly obsolete. The traveller of to-day, who visits Egypt and can read hieroglyph, knows more of the history of Egypt than Manetho, Josephus, Diodorus, Herodotus, Strabo, or any of the cis-Pharaoic writers thereupon. As revelations are made from time to time, we have to change our dates, revise our "facts," and reform our whole history of the past of Egypt, both in its chronology and dynasties. In this work we have availed ourselves of the latest discoveries, down to those of last year, by the celebrated French savant, M. Auguste Mariette, whose discoveries have, until recently been made known only to the Academy of Sciences, France, in modest and unpretending reports of his scientific researches.

As we have very thoroughly gone over the ground of Egyptian archÆology, both in its scientific and theological relations, we are aware from what quarters attacks will be likely to come, if this book is honored by the notice of scholars. But to such, we beg leave to say that, while we may not have formed our work on the plan their views would have suggested, we have done so on a plan which is defensible; for there are several schools of interpretation of chronology and dynasty; and as we have chosen to abide by one of them alone, we are ready to defend our position, so far as may be necessary to prove that we are not ignorant of the subject we have attempted to illustrate.

The impartial scholar will see that we have endeavored to combine the different, and often conflicting statements and opinions of the mythology of Egypt, and to present a system which should represent the belief of the Egyptian people at the time; and out of confusion to create order.

In writing a book, the time of which is placed anterior to the language in which it is written, and even to the Greek and Roman, there is of necessity the use of terms, which in one sense are anachronisms, unless one actually makes use of the vernacular of the Egyptians. For instance, the Greek form of names of gods and men, is often adopted instead of the Misric, the use of which would be unintelligible pedantry: therefore, Apollo, Hercules, Venus, Isis, and Mars, are often written in our pages instead of the Egyptian names.

In order to show the general reader the variety allowable in Egyptian names and dynasties, as well as chronology, we will append a few examples:

According to one writer on Egypt, it was Amenophis who was lost in the Red Sea. According to another, it was Thothmes III.; to another, Thothmes IV.; and to still another, Amos I.; and to another, Osis!

Amuthosis is called by Kenrick (ii. p. 154), Misphragmuthosis. Thothmes is also called Thothmeses and other variations. Osiris has many titles and many legends, but we have adopted the popular one in Egypt.

Sesostris is called Ositasen, Osokron, Remeses, and other names, according to the interpretation of his cartouches, and other inscriptions.

The pyramid of Chephren is called also Chafre, Chephres, Cephren, and other designations, while Cheops has half a dozen appellations. A writer, therefore, who seeks to present an intelligible view of the manners, customs, religion, and polity of the ancient Egyptians must decide what authority and what path he will follow; and having chosen each, he should pursue it undeviatingly to its close. This we have tried to do; and while those who might have selected a different one may, perhaps, not coincide with our judgment, they will at least have the candor to acknowledge that we are as much entitled, as scholars, to respect in the choice we have made, as if we had made one in harmony with their own peculiar views.

The question of "dynasty" has presented singular difficulties; but we have mainly followed Nolan and Seyffarth, leaving their guidance, however, when, our own judgment dictated a deviation from their views. When some chronologers of the highest character place the birth of Moses 1572, B. C. (vide Nolan), others 1947 (vide Seyffarth), others 2100 years, others 1460, it is necessary that a writer, whose book requires a fixed date, should make a decision. We have, after careful consideration of the whole ground, adopted the era which we believe to be the true one. The confusion attending the adjustment of the Pharaoic dynasties to their true time, is well known to scholars and admitted by all except those who have advanced figures of their own, and expect Egyptian Chronology henceforth to be construed by them alone. Nolan (vide Book IV., Sect. iv.), has presented to our minds the clearest exposition of the question; and we have followed, very closely, his table of the dynasty of the Pharaohs between the eras of Joseph and the Exodus.

The Biblical scholar need not be informed that Moses was forty years of age before he interested himself openly in the Hebrews. Egyptian history (see Nolan) shows that in his thirty-fifth year, the queen-mother, Pharaoh's daughter, died, and was succeeded by Moeris; and as the Scriptures are silent, as to the occupation and place of Moses in the interval, we are justifiable in placing him out of Egypt, during the six years that followed, as we have done.

We desire here to acknowledge our indebtedness to the following authors, whose works, either directly or indirectly, we have consulted, and from which we have made use of such parts as served our purpose; and not wishing to burden our pages with notes and references, we here make our grateful acknowledgments to them, and recognition of their works:

Besides the above, we have availed ourselves of numerous sources of information accessible to the Egyptian student, to enumerate which would extend this note to a catalogue.

We have sought in the foregoing work, to illustrate and delineate events of the Old Testament, as in the "Prince of the House of David" the New, so that they should "come home with a new power," to make use of the language of another, "to those who by long familiarity have lost, as it were, the vividness of the reality," and bring out their outlines so as to convey to the mind of the reader a more complete realization of scenes which seem to be but imperfectly apprehended by the general reader of the historical parts of the Old Testament. The work is written, not for scholars nor men learned in Egyptian lore; it advances nothing new; but simply offers in a new dress that which is old. The writer will have accomplished his object, "if his book," to quote the words of Mr. Stanley, in his preface to "Sinai and Palestine," "brings any one with fresh interest to the threshold of the divine story 'of the Exodus,' which has many approaches, and which, the more it is explored, the more it reveals of poetry, life, and instruction, such as has fallen to the lot of no other history in the world."

The intention of the author in writing these works on Scripture narratives is to draw the attention of those persons who do not read the Bible, or who read it carelessly, to the wonderful events it records, as well as the divine doctrines it teaches; and to tempt them to seek the inspired sources from which he mainly draws his facts.

The author's plan embraces three works of equal size. They cover the three great eras of Hebrew history, viz.: its beginning, at the Exodus; its culmination, as in the reigns of David and Solomon; its decline, as in the day of Our Lord's incarnation.