Note 898 — ANTIENT HEROES.

From what has been said, we may perceive that if such a person as Sesostris had existed, his reign must have been of the earliest date. He is by some represented as succeeding Thoules: according to others he comes one degree higher, being introduced after [898]Orus, who in the catalogue of Panodorus is placed first of the Demigods, that reigned in Egypt; but by [899]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 [900]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. [901]I know 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 possession 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 attribute any such exploits to Sesac: but expressly says more than once, that Sesac, and Sesostris were two different [902]persons. It is no where said of Sesac, that he made an expedition into Asia; much less that he conquered it, as is supposed of Sesostris. Sesac went up against Jerusalem, and took it, αμαχητι, without meeting with any opposition. Upon this he departed, and carried with him the treasures which he had there seized: in other words, he went home again. There is not the least mention made of his invading [903]Samaria, or the country about Libanus, and Sidon; or of his marching to Syria: all which made but a small part of the great Continent, called in aftertimes Asia: much less did he visit the countries of the Assyrians, and Babylonians; or the regions of Elam and the Medes. All this, and much more he must have done, to have come up to the character, to which they would fain entitle him.