a

cal means, which place the accession of Ahmose I within the four years from 1580 on. It will be seen that the result of the astronomical calculation is remarkably corroborated by the dead reckoning with minimum dynastic totals. It should be noted, however, that the above date for the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty, based upon the Sothic date in the ninth year of Amenhotep I, is corroborated, not only by the above dead reckoning, but also by the Sothic and new-moon dates in the reign of Thutmose III, a calculation from which places this king's reign at just the right remove from that of Amenhotep I, as determined by the Sothic date (see § 46). 52. The existing contemporary monuments do not suffice to determine by dead reckoning the length of the obscure period which preceded the Eighteenth Dynasty, including the Hyksos. It should be noted, however, that these monuments do not indicate a long period. They are few and scanty. There is nothing to show that the long list of kings which the Turin Papyrus places in this period were not partially contemporaneous. The same document gives no indication in its enumeration of the kings of the Twelfth Dynasty that they were partially contemporary; and it is only in the sum-total of the dynasty that parallel years are deducted. The same was evidently done for this long series of kings between the Twelfth and Eighteenth Dynasties. Two hundred years is ample for the whole period, including the Hyksos. The Sothic date from the Twelfth

C

aThere is no choice between these limits; but as a round number is convenient, I have taken 1580, which brings the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty to 1350 B. C. bThe figures given in Manetho's scanty notes are not worthy of the slightest credence.

cUnder the Moslems 77 viceroys held the throne of Egypt in 118 years, from 750 to 868 A. D. In Europe some 80 Roman emperors after Commodus ruled in a period of 90 years (193-283 A. D.; see Meyer, op. cit.). The 118 kings enumerated in this confused age by the Turin Papyrus may have ruled no more than 150 years; 100 years is ample for the Hyksos, of which 50 years may be contemporary with the native dynasts.

a

Dynasty, placing its fall in 1788 B. C., determines the maximum length of the period as 208 years. The Eleventh Dynasty, as shown herein (§§ 415-18), lasted at least 160 years, so that the second dark age, between the Old and Middle Kingdoms, terminated about 2160 B. C.

53. The data for determining the length of the dark period preceding the Middle Kingdom are scanty. Its beginning, in Manetho's so-called Seventh Dynasty, is hopelessly obscure, but fortunately the time during which this Seventh Dynasty ruled, as well as the length of the Eighth Dynasty also, is included by the Turin Papyrus in a summation of the time which elapsed from the rise of the Sixth Dynasty to the fall of Memphis (180 years), and also in a grand total of the length of the whole period from the accession of Menes to the close of Memphite supremacy, which terminated with the fall of the Eighth Dynasty. The Heracleopolitan rule, which falls between the end of Memphite and the beginning of Theban domination, is therefore the uncertain factor. Manetho divides the Heracleopolitans into two dynasties, the Ninth and the Tenth. The Turin Papyrus had a dynasty of eighteen kings immediately preceding the Eleventh, and these must be the Heracleopolitans, as is shown by the occurrence of Manetho's second Akhthoes, near the beginning of the series. We have no means of determining how long these eighteen Heracleopolitans ruled, for Manetho's data (with nineteen kings

aThe proposal to push back the said Sothic date by a whole Sothic cycle, thus lengthening the above period between the Twelfth and Eighteenth Dynasties by 1,460 years, is hardly worthy of a serious answer. It involves the assumption that nearly fifteen hundred years of history have been enacted in the Nile valley without leaving a trace behind! It is like imagining that in European history we could insert at will a period equal to that from the fall of Rome to the present!

bThat this summation includes the Eighth Dynasty is shown by the fact that the Heracleopolitans (the Ninth and Tenth Dynasties) immediately follow. So also Meyer, op. cit., 171 ff.

in each of his Heracleopolitan dynasties), like most of his figures, are not to be accepted, unless clearly supported by the contemporary monuments. These eighteen Heracleopolitans vouched for by the Turin Papyrus, if given sixteen years each (a sum below the customary average, in a long. period of timea under orderly conditions of government), reigned, in round numbers, 285 years. It will be evident that this estimate is extremely uncertain. The period is the only undetermined epoch in the dynastic chronology, and it introduces a margin of uncertainty of several generations in all dates back of the Eleventh Dynasty.

54. The Turin Papyrus gives the length of the Sixth Dynasty (with which it merges the Eighth, ignoring the Seventh1) as 181 years. The length of the Fourth and Fifth together is determined by the Turin Papyrus and the contemporary monuments as follows: The royal favorite Mertityôtes, after having been in the harem of Snefru and Khufu successively, was still living under Khafre (§§ 188 ff.). Prince Sekhemkere lived under Khafre, Menkure, Shepseskaf, Userkaf, and Sahure." With Snefru counted in the Third Dynasty, and Userkaf and Sahure (together nineteen years) falling in the Fifth, the length of the Fourth cannot have been more than 150 years, as measured by part of two successive human lives. A third lifetime connects the latter part of the Fourth and the first part of the Fifth. Thus Ptahshepses, the son-in-law of

aThe Fourth and Fifth Dynasties (including Snefru at the beginning of the Fourth) show an average of 16.6 years for each ruler (Meyer, op. cit., 151); that is, 18 kings ruled 300 years. Again, at the beginning of the dynastic age 18 kings (First and Second Dynasties) ruled 420 years—an average of over 23 years each. The first 53 kings of the Turin Papyrus (from the First to the Eighth Dynasty) ruled 995 years an average of nearly 19 years. But among these, it should not be forgotten, there are 15 reigns of less than 10 years each, footing up to only 70 years.. bSee § 53.

cLepsius, Denkmäler, II, 42; Rougé, Six premières dynasties, 77.

dSee Meyer's reconstruction of the Turin Papyrus (op. cit.. plate opposite p. 145).

King Shepseskaf, was born under Menkure and lived into the reign of Nuserre, the sixth king of the Fifth Dynasty (§§ 254 ff.). Now, granting him a long life, he could not have lived more than 40 or 50 years in the Fifth Dynasty. The Turin Papyrus has preserved the length of the reigns at the end of the Fifth Dynasty from Nuserre on, making a total, including him, of about 100 years. If Ptahshepses survived 10 years under Nuserre, the length of the dynasty was at most 130 years, more probably 125 years. The lengths of seven out of the nine reigns are preserved in the Turin Papyrus, and make a total of 122 years + x.

55. The overlapping of these three lifetimes is very significant:

Three lifetimes somewhat overlapping, a matter of 200 years at most, run parallel, as stated above, with the end of the Third Dynasty, the whole Fourth, and the first half of the Fifth. The Fourth and Fifth Dynasties thus lasted together not more than 300 years.

56. Now, the Turin Papyrus has preserved the length of the reigns in the Third Dynasty, and they foot up to about 80 years (including Snefru). The Palermo Stone insures at least 500 years for the first three dynasties, leaving about

420 years for the first two dynasties. This gives us a total of 950-75 years for the entire period from the beginning of the dynasties to the final fall of Memphis. Now, it is practically certain that the total of 955 years on a fragment of the Turin Papyrus is a summary of the same period," belonging at the end of the Memphite kings. Deducting the length of the Memphite dynasties (535 years) from this total of 955 years, we have left 420 years for the preceding Thinite period (First and Second Dynasties), just as shown by the Palermo Stone. We thus reach the date 3400 B. C. for the beginning of the dynasties, and 3400 to 2980 B. C. as the Thinite age, the first two dynasties. It is highly improbable that future discovery will shift these dates more than a century in either direction.

57. To recapitulate, in the following table it should be remembered that the dates in the Twelfth Dynasty are astronomically computed and correct within three years. The early part of the Eighteenth is closely correct (all dates astronomically established are starred), and the latter part probably within a decade of error. The margin of error is doubtless somewhat greater between the close of the Eighteenth and the accession of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty, where the dates are again accurate. Back of the Middle Kingdom, the unknown length of the dark age (from the Seventh to the Tenth Dynasty) produces the wide limits of uncertainty affecting all the preceding dynasties (from the First to the Tenth), the end of which period fell about 2160 B. C. It is back of 2160 B. C., therefore, that our chronology of Egyptian history becomes unstable and exhibits a margin of uncertainty of at most two centuries; that is, a century either way.

aFrag. No. 44. It was already placed here by Seyffarth; a study of the possibilities shows clearly that this position is correct. [Later: This is also the opinion of Meyer (op. cit.).]