196 
AXUM. 
which would scarcely have been the case under a Ptolemy. Thirdly, 
the language is bad in both, the singular person being repeatedly 
made to agree with a plural verb; and masculine and feminine 
nouns are used for the same thing, as rsr ^oca-iXeifs^ and Tvjg ^oiciXBixg, 
which is not very Ptolemaic. Fourthly, the writer of the inscrip- 
tion on the chair styles himself in the conclusion, as Aizana does 
in the Axum inscription, son of Mars; the one dedicating a sta- 
tue " in honour of the invincible Mars, who begot me t» s^s 
yEvvsa-uvrog uviycTjTis A^ecog; and the Other dedicating a chair in ho- 
nour of Mars, A^eug og f/,e kui lyevvvitre, a conformity that is extremely 
remarkable. Fifthly, that the whole account can be traced with 
facility, as relating to an Abyssinian king, which is by no means the 
case, nay, is attended with insuperable difficulties, if considered as 
referring to Ptolemy. 
" Before I enter on the following statement, I must make one pre- 
liminary observation, that the very omission of Axum in the in- 
scription is strongly in my favour, since a king of Abyssinia would 
be likely enough to omit all mention of his capital, as is the casein 
the Axum inscription ; whereas if Ptolemy had been there, which 
he must have been to make the conquests described, he would not 
have failed to record something concerning it, as it would have 
been the most important part of his victory. But, it may be ob- 
jected, that Axum was not then in existence, and that it may have 
been built by Ptolemy ! Still more extraordinary would it appear 
that such thing should be here recorded, and that no knowledge of 
such a circumstance should have ever reached Egypt, or be known 
to Agatharcides, Strabo, or Pliny. Taking the inscription, therefore, 
before me, as it stands in Fabricius and Montfaucon, and considering 
