80 
REMARKS BY S. BIRCH, ESQ., LL.D., 
President of the Society of Biblical Archeology. 
British Museum, 1 4th May, 1873. 
Although chronology, owing to its uncertainty, has never occupied much 
of my attention, at your request I put down a few notes on Mr. Savile’s 
very exhaustive paper. It goes over a deal of disputed ground, such as the 
date of the Nativity and Crucifixion, the general tendency of chronologists being 
to elevate the Nativity to B.C. G. There is some proof that Xerxes and 
Artaxerxes may have reigned conjointly, as stated in § 18-19. There is, 
however, some difficulty about Xerxes, the Egyptian inscription mentioning 
him as at one time expelled, and that the true ruler of Egypt was Kabash, 
who reigned at least two years. As to the period of the visit of Abraham to 
Egypt, the dynasty at the time must be considered con jectural ; but the date 
of the Exodus is generally placed after the reign of Menephah, of the XIXth, 
and not Amosis I., of the XVIIIth, dynasty ; the reason, of course, being, 
that the name Raamses applied to the land given to Jacob, and the treasure 
city, must be that of a king of the XIXth dynasty. On the hypothesis that 
the text handed down of the Books of Moses has retained the names of 
these places as they Avere called in the days of Moses, there is this one 
point to determine the period of the Exodus. Take that aAvay, and assume 
that the A T ersion is as late as the kings, and that the name of the fort and 
land Avas known as Raamses at the regal period, all synchronism is con- 
jectural and external. If the Hebrews Avent in and out with the Shepherds, 
it is remarkable to find the expulsion of the Shepherds not alluded to in the 
Scriptures ; but the version implies a new dynasty, though not necessarily 
an internal revolution. In § 31, Nu is the name of the “ celestial Avater ” 
or ether ; but it is difficult to interpret the myth of Osiris in the man- 
ner there stated. In § 32, Oppert’s translation is not noAV recognized. 
The passage referred to the destruction of a temple by time and rain, and 
the subsequent rebuilding by Nebuchadnezzar. The part about the confusion 
of tongues was erroneously translated, and had no such meaning. The 
chronology of the intermediate periods, 6 — 12, dynasty 12 — 18, is uncertain, 
and its length monumentally unknoAvn (§40). The Festival of the First 
year, considered as a cycle, is an error. It occurs oidy at the time of 
Cheops, and the hieroglyphics have other meanings than the first month of 
the first year of a cycle. The age from king Nubti or Sutcch to Raineses II. , 
