70 
Parker, on the other hand, considers that between the time of 
Cyrus and the conquest of Persia by Alexander the Great, 
which all agree in dating B.C. 330, twenty years have, somehow 
or other, dropped out of sight and mind, and that, consequently, 
the common chronology ought to be raised by about that 
period. And this very divergence between two learned men, 
who have alike advocated their theories with great skill, 
will incline most people to be content with the canon of 
Ptolemy, which has the sanction of ages in its favour; besides 
being, as it is, th c juste milieu between two extremes. 
55. In confirmation of the truth of the common chronology 
at this period of history, I would adduce the testimony derived 
from a large number of clay seals discovered by Layard at 
Ivouyunjik, the palace of Shalmanesar, near the ancient Nineveh, 
some of which are now in the British Museum. Amongst them 
are two hieroglyphic impressions, with the name of Shabaka in 
the usual cartouche, the second king of the twenty- fifth Dynasty, 
who reigned, according to Egyptian chronology, B.C. 733 — 721, 
and termed by Manetho Sfj3 i^coe. The Hebrew of 2 Kings xvii. 
4, which records the application of Hoshea, who reigned B.C. 
730 — 721, to “ So, King of Egypt,” for aid against the King of 
Assyria, spells the name either as Soa or Seva, dependent upon 
the position of the vowel points; and the LXX. write it Srjywp 
orSwa. This seal, therefore, assumes an important character, 
by showing the synchronism of the three monarchs of Assyria, 
Egypt, and Israel ; and refutes, as I think, the proposal of 
lowering the chronology of the kings of Israel and Judah by 
twenty-five years, the effect of which would be to deny the 
contemporaneity of “ So, King of Egypt,” and Hoshea, which 
Scripture and the Nineveh seal alike combine to prove.* 
56. This chronology may be further confirmed by the tablets 
in the British Museum, containing what is called “the Assyrian 
Canon,” or the list of the Annual High Priests of Nineveh, 
extending from B.C. 938—643, with an interval of forty-eight 
years, representing, it is supposed, a period of confusion. Al- 
though it would trespass too much on our time to show how fai- 
th e Assyrian Canon accords with the chronology of Scripture, I 
to the Journal of Sacred Literature , about fifteen years ago ; and also in 
his valuable work entitled Messiah the Prince, &c., A Compendium of 
Sacred and Secular Chronology. The Rector of Lufiincott’s theory is no 
less ably advocated in various works, such as The Archons of Athens, The 
Parian (chronicle, A Light thrown upon Thuci/didcs, and especially in 
his volume exclusively devoted to the subject of Chronology in general, 
and his own special branch of it in particular. 
* See Dr. Birch’s note in Layard’s Babylon and Nineveh, pp. 157 — 159. 
