34 PEOF. FLINDEi;S PETRIE^ D.C.L., ON RESEARCHES IN SINAI. 



shekels used for the court and hoards, so the Bi])le estimate is proved 

 to 1)6 absolutely correct, and Professor Petrie's estimate of 5,550 

 absolutely wrong. 



Tlic Lerite.'i ^var nnmhered separatehj, and they numbered 22,000 

 over one month old (Numbers iii, 39). 



It is interesting to notice, that at the end of the 40 years' 

 wanderings the new generation which entered Canaan, numljered 

 601,730 (over 20) Xuml)ers xxvi, 51, and the Levites numbered 

 23,000 (over one month) Numbers xxvi, 62, or 1,000 more altogether 

 than came out of Egypt. 



Mr. Joseph Offori). — Professo:' Hull in his interesting review 

 of Professor Flinders l*etrie's work upon the Sinaitic remains of 

 Egyptian occupation there, has not treated of some important 

 evidence they afford as to certain peoples mentioned in the Old 

 Testament. In reading the Egyptian Sinaitic inscriptions it is 

 curious to notice that two of them relate to Xllth Dynasty 

 expeditions, an echo of which is preserved in the memorial of a 

 certain Khonsovkou found by Mr. Garstang, in Egypt, in 

 1900. 



The new texts which throw light upon the Old Testament, 

 however, are still more interesting l)ecause they show that the 

 Egyptians were well acciuainted with three tril)es which appear in 

 the geographical and ethnographical list contained in Genesis xxxvi. 

 Those are the Lotan or Lotanu, the Horitcs, and the Aiah. More- 

 over the inscriptions, or a certain papyrus, connect them racialh' and 

 territorially as does the Old Testament. The first of these valuable 

 inscriptions records a campaign against the Sakimim country and 

 the tri])e or people of the Lotanu, who were encountered during an 

 expedition to the land of Moiiition-Sati which in early Egyptian 

 times denoted near Asia, or rather South Syria. 



Immediately the text was translated it confirmed a previous 

 supposition of Professor Max Midler that the people read " as named 

 Tanou " upon the celebrated papyrus relating the travels and 

 adventures of Saneha, should be read Lotanu. 



Saneha tells us they occupied two districts wliich he terms 

 Lotanu simple, and Higher, or Upper Lotanu. The Sinaitic 

 insci-iption of Senofrit mentions a chief, or Sheikh, mimed Khebta, 

 or Khebtata, who he says was brother to the Lotanu king. This 

 Sinaitic prince was evidently an ally, if not a sub-othiial, of Egypt, 



