APPENDIX IV. EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY.
Reading edition
“The chronology of Egypt has been a disputed point for centuries. The Egyptians had no cycle, and only dated in the regnal years of their monarchs. The principal Greek sources have been the canon of Ptolemy, drawn up in the second century A.D., and the lists of the dynasties extracted from the historical work of Manetho, an Egyptian priest, who lived in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, B.C. 285-247. The discrepancies between these lists and the monuments have given rise to many schemes and rectifications of the chronology. The principal chronological points of information obtained from the monument are the conquest of Egypt by Cambyses, B.C. 527, the commencement of the reign of Psammetichus I, B.C. 665, the reign of Tirhaka, about B.C. 693, and that of Bocchoris, about B.C. 720, the synchronism of the reign of Shishak I with the capture of Jerusalem, about B.C. 970. The principal monuments throwing light on other parts of the chronology are the recorded heliacal risings of Sothis, or the Dog-star, in the reigns of Thothmes III and Rameses II, III, VI, IX, the date of four hundred years from the time of Rameses II to the shepherd kings, the dated sepulchral tablets of the bull Apis at the serapeum, the lists of kings at Sakkarah, Thebes and Abydus, the chronological canon of the Turin papyrus, and other incidental notices. But of the anterior dynasties no certain chronological dates are afforded by the monuments, those hitherto proposed not having stood the test of historical or philological criticism.”—S. Birch, LL.D.: “Guide to the First and Second Egyptian Rooms at the Brit. Museum.” 1874, p. 10.
As some indication of the wide divergence of opinion upon this subject, it is enough to point out that the German Egyptologists alone differ as to the date of Menes or Mena (the first authentic king of the ancient empire), to the following extent:
B. C.
Boeckh places Mena in5702
Unger places Mena in5613
Brugsch places Mena in4455
Lauth places Mena in4157
Lepsius places Mena in3892
Bunsen places Mena in3623
Mariette, though recognizing the need for extreme caution in the acceptance or rejection of any of these calculations, inclined on the whole to abide by the lists of Manetho; according to which the thirty-four recorded dynasties would stand as follows:
ANCIENT EMPIRE. NEW EMPIRE.
DYNASTIES. CAPITALS. B. C.DYNASTIES. CAPITALS. B. C.
I. This 5004XVIII. Thebes 1703
II. This 4751XIX. Thebes 1462
III. Memphis 4449XX. Thebes 1288
IV. Memphis 4235XXI. Tanis 1100
V. Memphis 3951XXII. Bubastis 980
VI. Elephantine 3703XXIII. Tanis 810
VII. Memphis3500XXIV. Saïs 721
VIII. Memphis 3500XXV. (Ethiopians) 715
IX. Heracleopolis 3358XXVI. Saïs 665
X. Heracleopolis 3240XXVII. (Persians) 527
XXVIII. Saïs 405
MIDDLE EMPIRE.XXIX. Mendes 399
XI. Thebes 3064XXX. Sebennytis 378
XII. Thebes 3064XXXI. (Persians) 340
XIII. Thebes 2851
XIV. Xoïs 2398LOWER EMPIRE.
XV. Shepherd Kings2214XXXII. Macedonians 332
XVI. Shepherd Kings 2214XXXII. (Greeks) 305
XVII. Shepherd Kings2214XXXIV. (Romans) 30
To this chronology may be opposed the brief table of dates compiled by M. Chabas. This table represents what may be called the medium school of Egyptian chronology, and is offered by M. Chabas, “not as an attempt to reconcile systems,” but as an aid to the classification of certain broadly indicated epochs.
B. C.
Mena and the commencement of the ancient empire4000
Construction of the great pyramids3300
Sixth dynasty2800
Twelfth dynasty2400
2000
Shepherd invasion?
Expulsion of Shepherds and commencement of the new empire1800
Thothmes III1700
Seti I and Rameses II1500
1400
Sheshonk (Shishak), the conqueror of Jerusalem1000
Saïtic dynasties700
600
Cambyses and the Persians500
Second Persian conquest400
Ptolemies300
200
100