180 The Rev. E. Hincks on the Years and Cycles 



are consequently 318 and 255 years, which will allow of being repeated six or 

 seven times between the chronological epoch and A. D. 34. The penultimate 

 appearance, in the reign of Amasis, was, consequently, that, on which I had to 

 depend. Amasis reigned 44 years, down to about half a year before the Persian 

 conquest. No chronologer has fixed this conquest later than 525 ; which is, 

 therefore, the latest date, at which this phoenix could have appeared. There are 

 cogent reasons, however, for placing it two years earlier ; and I am inclined to 

 think that the first year of Amasis was that which began in January, 572, B. C* 



• As this does not appear to be recognized as a truth by the students of Egyptian literature, and 

 as the arguments in its favour can be very briefly stated, it will be well to state them here. 

 1st, Manetho, as quoted by Africanus, makes the reign of Cambyses over Egypt six years. 2nd, 

 There is an inscription in existence near Cosseir, (Burton's Excerpta Hieroglyphica, pi. 8,) in which 

 the duration of the Persian authority in Egypt, up to the period of its being cut, appears to be 

 recorded. The period stated is six years of Cambyses, thirty-six of Darius, and twelve of Xerxes. 

 3rd, There is a pillar in the museum at Florence, the inscription on which reckons seventy-one 

 years from the 3rd of Neco to the 35th of Amasis ; whence it follows that Neco and his successors 

 reigned thirty-nine years before the accession of Amasis. Now, the first year of Neco could not 

 have been later than 610 B. C, as we know from Scripture that in that year he defeated Josiah. 

 Consequently, the first year of Amasis could not have been later than 571 B. C. As the first year of 

 Darius was 521 B. C, we have at least fifty years for the interval, viz. forty-four for the reign of 

 Amasis, and six for that of Cambyses and Smerdis. It is probable, however, that the first year of 

 Neco was 61 1 B. C, and that of Amasis 572 B. C. We may allow a year for the short reign of 

 the son of .Amasis; for the confusion attending on the conquest, and for the dominion of the Magi ; 

 and there will then remain forty-four years for Amasis to have reigned, and six for Cambyses. 



With respect to the division of the intervening thirty-nine years, I believe Herodotus to be 

 correct when he assigns sixteen years to Neco, and six to Psamitich II. Manetho, as we find his 

 text in Syncellus's work, on the authority of Africanus, makes the two reigns to contain six years 

 each. This, however, is an obvious mistake of a copyist as to the reign of Neco. There remain 

 seventeen years for Apries or Uavre, "the priest of the sun," reckoning his reign to last from the 

 death of Psamitich II. to the accession of Amasis. As to the latter hmit, however, it is probable 

 that Uavre lived some time after Amasis assumed the royal dignity, say two years. This would 

 account for his reign having been reckoned as of nineteen years by Manetho ; and it may have been 

 reckoned by others as of twenty-five years, (the number given to him by Herodotus,) if his years 

 were computed from the death of Neco. I suppose Psamitich II. and Uavre to have been brothers, 

 and to have shared the sovereignty between them. I suppose, further, that the king, known to us 

 from the monuments as Psamitich III., was the son of Psamitich II., and that in course of time he 

 was deposed by his uncle. Amasis married the daughter of this prince, and avenged his cause by 



