358 
commencement of the XVIIIth Dynast}', given by 
Boeckli at 1655 B.C. 
Bunsen 1625 „ 
Lepsius 1681; ,, 
Unger 1796 „ 
but I prefer to all these Brugsch’s estimate: — 
Brugsch 1558 B.C. 
This is founded on a separate estimate of the period of 31 
genealogies of architects (subject, perhaps, to some reduction 
as above ; but it is probable that architects would live longer 
than kings). Then, in adding these two periods together, we 
have approximately the era of Mena, 1558 + 1690 = 3248 13. C. 
I do not attach any importance to this period of 1690, which 
is probably too long by one-half ; but the research shows how 
little we can rest upon any of the data hitherto adduced. It is 
possible that some new evidence may be produced which may 
render the matter more clear. 
The whole number of the kings in the 1st Book of Manetho, 
he computes (but I cannot follow his computation) at 192, who 
reigned during a space of 2,308 years and 20 days. But this, 
again, is not consistent with the amount of the years of the 
different dynasties, as he gives them. The period of 70 days 
refers, no doubt, to the reign of 70 Memphite kings, who 
reigned 70 days ! What can be made of such historical (?) 
information ? 
Herodotus (Book iv. 143) informs us that “ when Ilecataeus 
in giving his genealogy mentioned a god as his sixteenth an- 
cestor, the priest opposed their genealogy to his, going through 
the list [of the high priests], and refusing to allow that any 
man was ever born of a god. Their colossal figures (which it 
was the custom for every high priest during his lifetime to set 
up in the temple) were each, they said, a Piromis, born of a 
Piromis, and the number of them was 345. Through the 
whole series Piromis followed Piromis, and the line did not run 
up either to a god or a hero. The word Piromis may be 
rendered ‘ gentleman / — k aXog Kal uyaQog.”* 
An uninterrupted succession of “ gentlemen/’ for 7,000 to 
10,000 years, is scarcely consistent with the Darwinian doctrines 
of evolution of the species. It is, however, more credible, and 
certainly more agreeable to one’s feelings, than the descent 
proposed cither from a god or a monkey ! 
* So Rawlinson translates, ii. p. U)l. 
