83 
the reign of George I. Eusebius states respecting Abgarus, king of Edessa, 
what he had found in the archives of the city and had faithfully 
copied, observing at the same time : “ There is nothing like hearing the 
epistles themselves, taken by us from the archives, and the style of it, as it 
has been literally translated by us from the Syriac language.” ( Eccl. Hist., i. 
c. xiii.) This may be compared to Froude the historian copying the Simanca 
MSS. relative to affairs which happened in this country at the time of the 
Reformation ; and no doubt has been thrown upon the admissibility of such 
evidence. 
To the foregoing Dr. Eircii replies : — It is with great reluctance that I 
take up my pen to offer a few additional remarks to those already given on 
the paper of my excellent friend Mr. Savile ; but as there has been some 
misconception about one or two expressions I have used, it is desirable, for 
various reasons, that an explanation of what they meant should be given. 
Mariette-Bey has never to my knowledge doubted the authenticity of the 
tablet of the 400 years ; but I have, and up to the present moment my 
suspicions are not allayed. The question with Mariette-Bey was, how it was 
to be computed who was the Shepherd king intended, and what was the year 
of Rameses II. from which it was reckoned : without these data determined 
little light is thrown on the chronology by it. For example — if the 
Shepherd Saites, or Salatis, as the lists give the name, is intended by 
Set-Nubti, then the 400 years are from the commencement of the Shepherd 
Dynasty ; if Nubti means the An-nub of the Turin Papyrus, the 400 years 
commence with Bnon, Bienon, or Beon. The question of Raamses has been 
so exhaustively treated by Egyptologists — especially Chabas, Melanges, 1864, 
p. 108 — that it is scarcely necessary to refer to it. The name of the prince 
in the grave of Der-el-Medinet, now in Berlin (Lepsius, Konigsb., Tav. xxi. 
No. 320), is the one straw by which it is attempted to connect the name of 
Raamses with the 18tli Dynasty ; but the following reasons are urged against 
it ; — that it is not certain tliat_this name is not that of Ramses I. before his 
accession to the throne ; that the name of the prince is written with one s, 
whereas that of Raamses or Ramesse is written with two, or a double s, — 
exactly as the names Rameses or Ramses of the kings of the 19th Dynasty; 
that there is no known Egyptian instance of forts or cities being named 
after any person of lower rank than the sovereign, and that, with all his 
titles, the prince Rameses seems only an associated son or adopted successor 
of some unknown king ; that there are several examples in the Egyptian 
texts of cities, forts, and other places named after the monarchs called 
Rameses or Ramessu, of the 19th Dynasty. As yet the probability tends 
to the Exodus being at the time of the 19th Dynasty, supposing the text of 
Exodus to be contemporaneous with it. 
a 2 
