greatest nation in the world, and have held it for seven hundred years, without their history being very well known to every early historian. It is glaringly apparent that no power could have crossed the Euphrates and occupied Egypt before crushing the power of Elam, therefore such a conquest is inconsistent with common sense. But if we understand that it was vital to a priestly design, that Abraham should be stripped of his worldly power, and appear before us as a simple shepherd under the personal guidance and protection of the Almighty, then we shall recognise that this version of the Hyksos occupation of Egypt is a tale, adroitly distorted, for the purpose of obscuring true history. It is based upon a substratum of truth which makes it so dangerous; for inscriptions tell us that a change of dynasty did occur in Egypt at this period; we may, therefore, be absolutely certain that the Hyksos must represent the Cushites, who succeeded in subduing the Elamites, and acquired dominion over the whole Empire. Abraham beyond a doubt was not a wandering shep

herd, but the chief of the mighty Cushite nation. I must leave it to students to say under which name we may recognise him. in the royal lists. I am well aware it is conjectured that these so-called Hyksos did not invade Egypt for some centuries after the fall of the XIIth dynasty—but as we know that the XIIth dynasty did fall about 2,200 B.C., we have to find the race which could have overthrown the greatest power in the world; and when we have it recorded that Abraham did overthrow the Elamites under Chedorlaomer about 2,200 B.C., we are actually forced to the conclusion that Abraham, that is father Ham, who certainly represents the Hamitic race, did subjugate the race of Shem (Elamites) represented by Chedorlaomer. We may also reasonably conjecture that the Hamitic race may have effected their conquest of Egypt through Nubia. We certainly find the symbol Nub associated with the Hyksos kings, which recalls Nubia. We also learn from the inscriptions that the Pharaoh Hirhor styled himself as King's Son of Cush, and Cush again recalls Nubia.

This is strongly confirmed, for we find that nearly all the expeditions of the XIIth dynasty were directed against the Ethiopians who clearly represent the Nubians. or Cushites; hence we might suppose that the so-called Hyksos' conquest of Nubia preceded their conquest of Egypt and Western Asia. Thus the XIIIth and XIVth dynasties would represent an unsettled government as indicated in the inscriptions. Again we find it recorded Brugsch, vo by Manetho that the so-called Hyksos occupied Memphis and especially fortified the Eastern frontiers, for they foresaw that the Assyrians, who were then the most powerful people, would endeavour to make an attack on their kingdom.

i. 262.

Translation by Phillip Smith,

2nd edition.

This is very important, for we find it recorded that Asshur, who undoubtedly Genesis x. 22. personates the Assyrians, was the son of Elam, the son of Shem.

We are therefore irresistibly led to the conclusion that the so-called Hyksos were the Hamitic Cushites, and their rivals were the Semitic Elamites.

We

must now understand that the

Cushites had subjugated the Elamites, and gained possession of Egypt. This occupation is shadowed in the Biblical narratives.

As this great revolution has been ascribed by historians to the Hyksos, and the term so pervades all Egyptian history of this period, I must, for the sake of avoiding confusion, occasionally refer to the Cushites as the Hyksos. It has been ascertained that they acquired dominion in Egypt about 2200 B.C., and continued to occupy it for some seven centuries, their rule is a very obscure one and I need not dwell upon it; but we find them dislodged from power about 1500 B.C. I must contend that there is no other race known to us which could have effected such a momentous revolution but the Elamites. During the seven hundred years of Hyksos rule they had gradually crept into power. This may be traced in the Biblical narratives in Joseph's accession to high distinction; and we may be certain that Aahmes, the Pharaoh who deposed Apepi the last Pharaoh of the Hyksos dynasty, was none other than Joseph.

Genesis xii.

10.

Ragosin, Story of the Nations,

Chaldea, 224.

We learn from the inscriptions that Aahmes, who founded the XVIIIth dynasty, expelled the Hyksos from Thebes; they however still continued their hold on the Delta during forty years, to which we may dimly trace the forty years wandering, and were finally driven from Egypt about 1500 B.C., under their Pharaoh Apepi.

I have pointed out that no other race but the Elamites could have effected such a revolution; this is abundantly confirmed, for Aahmes, who secured the throne of Egypt, is claimed by Seti as his ancestor. This must convince us that the Pharaohs of the XIIth dynasty were of the same race as the Pharaohs of the XVIIIth dynasty.

During their long rule the Cushites in Egypt would certainly have acquired the territorial name of Egyptians; they may also have been termed Hyksos and were probably known under many other appellations; but I must impress on the reader that none of these names give us any indication of their nationality.

If we are to believe the tale, handed down by Josephus, that they were a race