No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
Still more remarkable than all previous results is the exact chronological coincidence of the new epigraphic finds with certain hitherto neglected Alexandrian theories about the date of the legendary “Cadmus” and his expeditions to Thasos, Thrace, Boiotia, etc.
page 169 note 1 Paribeni, I.e., p. 339 : “ indici, che l’incendio non fu casuale a me sembra che non manchino.” The same applies to all the large Cretan palaces.
page 170 note 1 Scripta Minoa, Oxford, 1906, p. 30. Cf. Evans, Ann. Brit. School of Athens, vii, p. 65, fig. 21. Griffith, Egypt. Expl. Fund, Archæol. Rep. 1900–1, pp. 37 f. Heyes, Bibel und Ägypten, Münster, 1904, p. 721. v. Bissing, Anteil d. ägypt. Kunst. am Kunstleben der Völker, Munich, 1912, p. 34.
page 171 note 1 Kibru=“ bank of a river”, “shore of sea”; kibratu, “region, territory,” Muss-Arnold, 367 f.
page 171 note 2 Title given to the Pharaoh in the Amarna letters by the Palestinian princes, e.g. No. 83, Kundtzon ; mat, akkad. “land” is written with the same ideograph 
“mountains ” as hśwׁt 
. Ḫian as ḥḳ hśwt, Budge, Book of Kings, London, 1908, i, p. 100; 
. The Old Babylonian title šar kiššati, “king of the universe,” is applied in the Egyptian form nb-rḏr, “lord of the universe” (δυναστς το ὅλου, Diod., i, 53), to King Senwosret I in the so-called “instructions ” of Amenemmes I (Sethe, Untersuch. z. Gesch. Ag., ii, 1, 16). Cf. Lehmann-Haupt, ZDMG., 73, 1919, p. 73, n. 1.
page 171 note 3 PEFQST., 1904, 225, Macalister, Gezer., i, 253; ii, 316.
page 171 note 4 Révue Archeol., Nouv. Ser. iv, 1861, pp. 210, 256.
page 171 note 6 Hist. of Egypt, New York, 1905, pp. 266 ff.
page 172 note 1 Scripta Minoa, p. 30. See, however, “Palace of Minos” (1921), p. 121.
page 172 note 2 Gesch. d. Alt.2 I 2, p. 716.
page 172 note 3 Gesch. Volk. Israel, i, 3, p. 93.
page 172 note 4 Enc. Rel. Eth., vol. iv, Edinburgh, 1913, p. 890b, art. “Hyksos ”.
page 172 note 5 Unpublished lecture of the 2nd of March, 1920, before the Oriental section of the Munich Anthropological Society.
page 173 note 1 This would be analogous to the use of papyrus (with Aramean alphabetic writing) and parchment in the chancery of the Persian world-empire.
page 173 note 2 The historicity of this Ægean expedition of Thutmosis III is questioned for entirely insufficient reasons by the extremely prejudiced Professor R. v. Lichtenberg, MVAG., 1911, 2, p. 7.
page 173 note 3 See, however, Maspéro, Hist. Anc. des Peuples d’Orient, p. 1623. Pietschmann, Gesch. d. Phöniz., Berlin, 1889, pp. 251–2.
page 174 note 1 In Photios, Bibl. 
.
page 174 note 2 See above, p. 63 f., n. 4.
page 175 note 1 In Syncell. ed. Bonn., i, pp. 113 ff. Cf. Euseb. Præp. Ev, x, 13. Chron., i, 157.
page 175 note 2 Contra Apionem, i, 14.
page 175 note 3 See Polyaen, viii, 4. Ἄμασις (= Aḥmose Dyn., 18) ν τῷ πρς Ἄραβες πολμῳ. Cf. below, p. 199, on Apollodor περ νεν. The native Egyptian texts call the Hyksos 
. Cf. the Benê ‘Ammi, Gen. xix, 38, or ‘Ammôn (cuneiform Ammân), “ the people,” or walad ‘Amm, the national name of the South Arabian Ḳatabān, or Mnṯjׁw, that is (Ἄραβες) Μαννεται, a tribe mentioned, according to the Arabian historian Uranios, in Steph. Byz., s.v. Μννεως. Cf. also the Arabian traditions about an ‘Amaleqite or ‘Adaean dynasty of Egypt, residing in Awar, Caussin de Perceval, Hist. Ar., i, 7–13. Yaqîdi, Expugn. Aeg. ed. Hamaker, p. 41, 60 ar. Tabari, Chron., i, pp. 209 f., 261 f. Abulfeda, Hist. Anteisl., pp. 30, 70, 100.
page 175 note 4 After explaining ‘ϒκουσσως (ḥḳׁw š
sׁw, vulgar contortion of ḥḳׁw ḫśwׁt) as βασιλεῖς ποιμνες, he quotes from another copy (ν ἄλλῳ ντιγρφῳ) the explanation αἰχμλωτοι (ḥ kׁw). Cf. Schürer, Gesch. d. jüd. Volkes 7, iii, 530, n. 66 (Leipzig, 1909). Ed. Meyer, Āg. Chronol., pp. 71 ff.
page 175 note 5 Ed. Meyer, Äg. Chronol., pp. 73ff., would not attribute to Manetho himself the identification of the Hyksos with Phœnician kings.
page 175 note 6 Joseph c. Ap. i, 15, 26. F. H. G. Müller, ii, 573 [50]. Euseb. ap. Sync, chron., pp. 135 f., 293, ed. Dindorf.
page 176 note 1 Euseb. ap. Sync. Chronogr., 155b. Cf. Ed. Meyer, Äg. Chronol., pp. 77, 85. Most probably the often represented hundreds of sons and daughters of Ramses (II)—s. Breasted-Ranke, p. 356 — reminded Manethos of the legendary fifty sons of Aegyptus and of the fifty daughters of Danaus.
page 176 note 2 Rev. Archéol., xii, 1862, 2, pp. 372, 376. Journ. Hell. Stud., viii, 1887, 429, 38.
page 176 note 3 Herod., 7, 163f. Suid., s.v. Ἐπχαρμος ; Hippocr., cf. 7.
page 176 note 4 Beside the legendary, possibly pseudepigraphic historian, the son of Pandion, we have K., son of Archelaos of Miletos, Suid., s.v. A Roman public slave K., an executioner in Caesar's time, Horace, sat., i, 6, 39, is probably also an Ionian Greek.
page 176 note 5 Account lists on an Ostrakon, Brit. Mus., 5630, Nos. 29558, yellow 5647b; see W. M. Müller, Or. Lit. Zeit., 1899, No. 2, c. 38. In the same document occurs the name 
p ∋Kftjw-î, “the Kaphtorite ” or “Cretan” = Greek κρητῖνος as PN.
page 177 note 1 W. M. Müller, As. u. Eur., 380, took this to mean : “ Our support (column) is (the) Turša.” I prefer to think of a compound ethnic like Ἀραβιγπτιοι (Ptol., 4, 5, 27; Marc. Heracl. per mar. extr., 1, 11. Συροφονιξ, Luk. deor. conc, 4. Ev. Marc. 7, 26. Τυρσηνο Πελασγο, Soph. ap. Dionys. Hal., 1, 25).
page 177 note 2 For all these names see Heyes, Bibel u. Äg., pp. 32 f.
page 177 note 3 Rec. Trav., xiv, 62. Spiegelberg, Z. Assyr., xiii, 52 f. Caspari, ZATW., 1909, xxix, p. 2682.
page 177 note 4 This is 
R-Štji, the Malaḫite-land (Sinai), Dümichen, Geogr. Äg., 174–8.
page 177 note 5 Budge, Book of Kings, London, 1908, vol. i, p. 79 (Papyrus Turin, Rec. Trav., xv, 99 ; Ahnas, pi. 4, B 1 and B 2). Cf. p. 100, Neḥsi, as “ King's son ”, either the same person or rather his son.
page 178 note 1 Stele of Ḏḥwtj-
, Brit. Mus., No. 630. Budge, l.c., i, p. 86, as Pen- … then. But the restitution of the 
on the 
is quite certain from the determinative of the high-flying bird. See on Rṯnׁw, variant Ṯnnׁw 
in the Sinuhe story, Eisler, Ḳen. Weihinschr. Freib., 1919, p. 1375, where I have first explained the old crucial ethnic of the Rṯnׁw as that of the 
Reḏenneh of the Sinai Peninsula, the ‘Ραιθηνο of Ptolemy, 5, 16, 3. The name was later on—in the New Empire—extended all over “Upper” and “Lower Reḏenneh ” = Syria (somewhat like the French “Allemagne”, which is meant for the whole land up to the Memel, not only for the real southwestern Alemanian districts).
page 178 note 2 Cf. the Qâdjâr dynasty reigning till quite lately over Persia, if Father Anastase (al Machriq, p. 868 ff.) is right in identifying this family name in its various forms, Ghadjar, Kotchar, Katchar, Qatchar, Ghatchar, with the Turkish word cotchar, “ a nomad,” which is used from the seventeenth century onwards for the Turkoman, Uzbeg, etc.
page 178 note 3 See on these names Sethe, Untersuch. z. æg. Gesch., i, Leipzig, 1896, p. 4, n. 2. Sethe has well observed that the name—which would read (quite nonsensically) 
“great bread”, if it were Egyptian—is probably non-Egyptian. He supposed syllabic orthography, and therefore transcribed T‘. The above given Semitic explanation is of the greatest historic consequence, because the descendant of these three “Nomad” kings is the very Ἀ‘ḥ-mose who expelled the dynasty of Avaris from Upper Egypt and became the founder of Dyn. 18, which is consequently by no means an autochthonous house, but itself a Beduin family of Semitic usurpers. This explains the imperialistic Asiatic policy of the New Empire, the frequent new Semitic loan-words of its language, the Suteš cult of Dyn. 19, etc.
page 178 note 4 Cf. the Arabian tribe Tijâha (sing. Tîhi) from Tîh (Badiet et Tih, “Wilderness of Wandering”) = “Wandering” in the Sinai—the Biblical ’erṣs nōd—from חחח “to wander about ” = “the erring”, “ wandering ones ”. There is also a dialectic variant יעט. חעט “to err about ” ; from this is derived Talm. אעיט “ Arabian nomad ”.
page 179 note 1 
I‘nu, Budge, l.c., i, 99, may be 
ja‘enu, “desert-dweller” cf. Arab, wa‘nah, “desert.”
page 179 note 2 Budge, l.c., i, p. 99.
page 179 note 3 
Great Harris Pap., Pl. 75, 1. 4. Budge, l.c., i, 194. Gressmann-Ranke, Texte u. Bilder z. Alt. Test., p. 250. See, however, Weill, Journ. As. sér. x, vol. xvi, 1910, p. 285.
page 179 note 4 The article is justified if the name is an Ethnic one, but to Egyptian proper names of kings Manethos never adds the p at the beginning. W. M. Müller's idea, MVAG., 1898, iii, 1232, that Παχναν could be the name ‘
-ḳnn-R‘ of Apophis I without the R‘ at the end and with the article at the beginning is very hazardous.
page 180 note 1 This is a feature of the greatest interest, because it corresponds remarkably with a detail in Manethos’ Hyksos-story (Fragm. Hist. Gr., ii, 566), which has been considered hitherto as a pronounced anachronism. The Phœnician invaders are said to have built Avaris as a frontier fortress against the Assyrians, “who were a great power at that time ” (the same phrase as in Konon, μγα τι ἴςχυον, above, p. 174 !). We know now, from the new Assur-finds, that as a matter of fact at the end of the 11th and during the 12th dynasty the Assyrian world-empire extended to the frontiers of Egypt. Sargon I (E. Forrer : about 2150 or 2180 B.C.) of Assyria built bridges (titurri) and a “front-work” or “ frontier structure” (šikittu pûti ḫarran matMeluḫa) for the “ road of the land Meluḫa” (= Sinai and au-delà), and Šamši-Adad (I., Weidner, A.D. 1852–1860) again pushed forward the Assyrian frontier to the Lebanon and the Mediterranean coast. Cana‘an and Phœnicia were Assyrian provinces at that time and the independence of Egypt was threatened by the old Assyrian world-empire. It is this period which established the dominance of the cuneiform script and the Akkadian language in the diplomatic correspondence of Western Asia and Egypt, which can be traced back to Dyn. 12 (W. M. Müller, OLZ., iv, 1901, 8 ; MVAG., 1912, xvii, 3, p. 8, n. 2).
page 181 note 1 Nonnus has throughout used good old Alexandrian sources. The tradition connecting κδμος and his father Ἀγνωρ with the Nile-land goes back to Pherecydes of Athens (age of Herodotus), who makes Ἀγνωρ marry a daughter of the Nile (FHG., i, p. 83) who begets Κδμος. She is called Ἀγχιρη (var. Ἀγχινη, Αργιοπ), which could easily be read as Egyptian 
‘anḫ k R’, or ‘anḫ ḫ‘j R‘, a name occurring in different dynasties. In Schol. II., 1, 42, “ Agenor ” is a descendant of the cow-heroine Ἰώ-which is Egyptian ἰω, “cow ”—
and of her son Ἔπαφος, which is ḥ‘pἰ-pw, “that Nile,” or ḥpj-pw, “that Apis-” bull. Schol. Eur. Phoen., 247: Phoinix (= Χνς (nom.), above) and Agenor are both sons of Ἰώ ; Iō's father, the river-god Ἰναχς is ἰnj ḫׁt, “ the bringer of inundation.”
page 181 note 2 See Ḳen. Weihinschr., p. 138, note to 1376.
page 182 note 1 Untersuch. z. äg. Gesch., ii, 1, Leipzig, 1900.
page 182 note 2 Malalas, p. 25, 19 ff., and Suidas, s.v. Σώστρις, Cramer, Anecd., 2, pp. 237, 27, 238, 1. Sethe, p. 8, n. 5.
page 182 note 3 = “ Sesoostris,” Ausonius, Ep. 19, 21. But I am not sure whether the Latin oo is not simply a graphic device to render Greek ω.
page 182 note 4 “ Vesozis in Justin, Orosius, Jornandes, may be a transposition of *Seoozis or a (minuscular) misreading of Vesoris. See below, p. 191, note, 1. 3.
page 183 note 1 Louvre, C. 14. Sethe, l.c., 78. = “ Man of (the goddess) Wsrt.” This explains the form Σωστρις, for the 
n could be omitted and S-wśrt would equally mean “ Man of Wśrft ”. This seems to decide the question of etymology discussed by Sethe, p. 7, l.c.
page 183 note 2 Sethe's hypothesis that the tradition may have been derived by Herodotus from what he believed to be Sesostrian trophies in Asia and Europe is impossible. This archæologic or epigraphic method may be credited to Professor Breasted, who infers a world-empire of Ḫian from the dispersion of his monuments, but never to Herodotus. The Sesostrislegend must have been as popular wherever Herodotus went as the story of Alexander Dhu’l Ḳarnain (Iskender Rumi) in the whole modern Orient, or he would not have been shown the Hittite rock-inscriptions of Karabeldere and Bel Kaive and countless other monuments as Sesostrian inscriptions. Or if the attribution of these monuments and countless other “Sesostrian columns ” was his own idea,—which is quite possible, for he criticizes (II, 106) people who attributed them to Memnon (Ḫumbanumennu of Elam) — he must have known the Sesostris-tale before such an idea could have occurred to him. We must not forget that Herodotus could not read hieroglyphs, nor even distinguish them from “ Hittite” script!
page 183 note 3 Cf. basalt lion of Bagdad, Brit. Mus. 987, our fig. ; colossal mutilated sitting statue from Bubastis in Cairo, Budge, Kings, i, 95.
page 184 note 1 See n. 2, p. 182.
page 184 note 2 Cf. Sethe, l.c., p. 8 : “das n war wohl weggefallen, wie das im Aegyptischen öfter der Fall ist.”
page 184 note 3 Budge, Book of Kings, i, 86 f.
page 184 note 4 Upper and Lower Egypt. Prof. H. Schäfer kindly writes me (20. 4. 21) that neither he nor Sethe have any grammatical explanation to offer either for a form with 
, 
, let alone 
. Could it be a foreigner's barbaric orthography for s R‘ śwśr t wî, “son of Re‘, made mighty of both lands” and s 
R‘ s 
śwśr t 
wi, “son of Re‘, son of the one, made mighty over both lands ”?
page 184 note 5 Königsbuch, Taf. xv, No. 33. But see Sethe, Urk. 18, Dyn. iv, 609, 
: “unmöglich 
oder 
oder 
sondern wie 
(mś) Bénedite.”
page 185 note 1 o, the οὖ or ὂ μικρν of the Greek, is occasionally, as its name shows, a u-sign.
page 185 note 2 For the vowel of R‘ cf. cuneiform Manachpiria, Nimurria, etc., for Mn-ḫpr-R‘ and N-m 
. The form Σεσυρτωσις given by Eratosthenes (Budge, l.c., lxxiv) looks very much as if it had originated through a transposition of the very similar minuscule letters σ and ρ from *Σευοσρτωις, which would perfectly correspond to Śewśr R‘ t wi.
page 185 note 3 See the table of alphabets appended to Larfeld's Handbook of Greek Epigraphies, 3, Munich, 1914. The form Σεσγχωσις is due to a confusion of the great conqueror with the Pharaoh Sheshonk of Dyn. 22 (cf. Joseph, ant., viii, 10, 2, 3), whose Palestinian expedition is recorded in the LXX, and had therefore to be mentioned and discussed by the native Egyptian historians. Sheshonk (Σασακος, Joseph., Σεσωγχισ Afric.) is indeed called Sesonchusis-Σεσγχωσις in Eusebius’ quotations from Manetho (Budge, Kings, i, lxx).
page 186 note 1 Sethe has well observed (Nachr. Gött. Ges. Wiss., Gesch. Mitt., 1916; 1372) that the Egyptian name of the horse, ssm, is Cana‘anite םיםׅים, a dual with the specific Cana‘anæan ending -im, instead of -in (Arabic or A‘ramean). As the word is probably originally an Aryan one (açva), it should be observed that according to Arrian (cf. Suid., s.v. Πρθοι) the Parthians broke into their later dwelling-lands “at the time of Sesostris, king of Egypt, and of the Scythian king Ἰανδσης” (obviously Γανδσης = Gandiš, the first Kossacan king !).
page 186 note 2 They did not breathe a word to Herodotus of the whole Hyksos dynasty !
page 186 note 3 If we may conclude from the name Ḫîn (p. 187, n. 1), that the Ja‘adi or Ja‘udi 
of Samal—mentioned in the Kalamuwa, Hadad, and Panamuwa inscriptions of Sendjirli-played a prominent part in the confederation of Semiticpeoples who subdued Egypt and established the “Hyksos” dynasty, this would explain why the Hyksos are regularly called the i’
dtׁw 
, the “pestilent” ones (e.g. Pap. Sallier, i, 1 ; Breasted, Hist. Eg., 215 ; Maspéro, Ét. Égyptol., i, p. 198 ; R. Weill, Journ. As., 11 sér., 1913, i, p. 852 ; cf. Groff, La Malaria, 1891) by the Egyptians ; why the “plague-infected” ones are continually mentioned in all the Greek accounts of the Hyksos period, and why finally the Exodus of the Jews (Jehudim םידוהי) was brought into connexion with the expulsion of the ידאי Ja’udi-Hyksos by all the Hellenistic historians. If the name Ja’adi, Ja’udi is Semitic, it can easily be explained as “ the oppressors” from 
or דיא, and Egyptian 
, “calamity,” “oppressor,” “plague,” may well be the same word.
page 187 note 1 Sayce, PSBA, xxiii, 1901, 96; Littmann, SBAW, 1911, 985; Lidzbarski, Eph., 1915, iii, 225. 2003.
page 187 note 2 The Cretan Minōs, that is Μνϝως, is only a different spelling of Menuwas, Μνυας, the “Minyan ” (Fick, Griech. PN2, 429 ; F. Hommel, Grundr., 684). As PN “ Menuas ” occurs in the Chaldic inscriptions of Van about 800 B.C. (Hommel, l.c.) and—most characteristically—as a prince 
“Mnwś from the lands of the Phœnicians”, in the Sinuhe story (age of Sesostris I). The Armenian landscape Μινυς (Nicol. Damasc., cf. Joseph. Antq., i, 3, 6) is mentioned as Minuaki in the Gudea-inscriptions (statue B, 6, 4). Cf. the Μινυς γ round Orchomenos, Μνυα in Thessaly, in Phrygia, the island Μινια between Pathmos and Lade with the different islands and towns called Μινα.
page 188 note 1 Pindar, Ol., 4, 69.
page 188 note 2 Hence the genealogical connexion of “Cadmus” and “Phoenix” with Phineus of Salmydessos and Φινπολις.
page 188 note 3 Strabo, 11, p. 499 ; Appian, b. Mithr., 103 ; Plin. n. h. 33, 15.
page 188 note 4 After speaking of the Egyptian rite of circumcision practised by the Phœnicians and the Egypto-Colchians, Herodotus says (ii, 105): “ I will add a further proof of the identity of the Egyptians and the Colchians. These two nations weave their linen in exactly the same way, and this is a way entirely unknown to the rest of the world. … The Colchian linen is called by the Greeks Σαρδονικν.” Evidently the hoplites of the Sesostrian army were Shardana, just like Manaḫpiria's most famous lansqenets. In peaceful times, when they “lay low”, they may have taught the natives the special technique of Egyptian linen weaving.
page 189 note 1 Sethe, l.c., p. 13, cf. p. 3. The fact that Josephus (Antiq., viii, 10, 2, 3) ascribes the Asiatic campaign of Sesostris, as related by Herodotus, to Sheshonk of Dyn. 22 is no reason for doubting with Sethe, l.c., the Manethonian origin of Syncellus’ extracts about “Sesostris”. For Josephus certainly used other Egyptian sources besides Manetho and certainly several editions of Manetho. The use of the form Σοσακος—instead of the Manethonian Σσωγχις or Σεσγχωσις—shows that Josephus has used a Jewish-Egyptian source dependent on the LXX in this place. See also Wiedemann, Theol. Lit. Zeit., 1901, 186 f.
page 189 note 2 Thus Hiller von Gærtringen in Pauly-Wissowa, iii, 1076, 1. 12. Cf. Steph. Byz., s.v. Busiris.
page 189 note 3 Περ τν κατ’ Αἴγυπτον θεν ἱερς λγος, Clemens, Strom., i, 21 ; Augustin, Civ. Dei, xii, i; Jacoby in Pauly-Wiss., vi, 968, 1. 59. Cf. E. Schwartz, ibid., v, 671, 11. 43–59.
page 189 note 4 The description of his campaigns is exactly parallel to the description of those of Sesostris. He passes through Æthiopia and Arabia to India's frontiers, through the lands of Asia and over the Hellespont into Thracia. He, too, erects everywhere his inscribed victory-pillars. The tendency of the Hellenistic author becomes transparent where he gives the names of Osiris’ two sons—one clad in a dog's, the other in a wolf's skin, who accompany their father as leaders of his army—as Anubis and Μακδον (for the correct wolf-god's name Wp-W t, possibly with regard to mk-t, “protection ”) and makes him Osiris’ viceroy for Macedonia.
page 190 note 1 Plut. de Is., 37, 43.
page 190 note 2 Budge, i, p. 93 ; Rhind. Pap., pl. i ; Cairo-door Rec. Trav., xiv, 27, No. xxx; Naville, Bubastis, 22, 35.
page 190 note 3 Whether the names Πασιρις and Πασιρας are p Usiri or p Wśr-t or P WśrR‘ I do not know. The initial Β for p is analogous to Βοσιρις = pr Usiri, the place-name of the four Egyptian towns of this name (Sethe, Pauly-Wiss, iii, 1073 f.).
page 190 note 4 It has been an egregious mistake of modern historians to follow the opinion of Eratosthenes (Strabo, 17, p. 802) that there never was an Egyptian king or ruler of any kind called Busiris. Even so Herodotus, 2, 45, was misled by his Egyptian informants into denying the possibility of the Busirian human sacrifices (about them see Lefébure, Sphinx, iii, 3, p. 129). Most obviously the legend alludes to the typical representation on the Egyptian triumphal monuments of victorious kings of all ages : the king slaying with his archaic ceremonial weapon, the stone mace, a horde of kneeling prisoners of war of different foreign races, while the god of the temple in question leads a long row of fettered prisoners from vanquished lands and cities towards the king, to whom he presents the sword of victory (Sethe, MVAG., 1916, 316). Especially images referring to the annual feast of “slaying the Iwntjׁw (Capart, Rev. hist, rel., 43, 1901, pp. 203, 2271), i.e. the Syrian Ἰωνται, the sacrifice of the “ Typhonian ” men (śttjׁw !) (Plut. de Is., 73 ; Diod., i, 84) may well have given rise to the legend of Greek (Ionian) prisoners sacrificed regularly by a cruel Egyptian king. If the triumphal ‘Σεσώστριδος στλαι did exist in Thracia, Asia Minor, and Syria, they certainly showed Śwśr-n-R‘ — occasionally also called Uśr-n-R‘ (Budge, i. 160) or p ‘
-wśr-R‘-Βοσιρις in this position. The arresting of all “foreigners ” landing in the Delta refers simply to the energetic measures of protective marine-policy against the Greek (Ḥ nb.w or Hellopian) pirates, which we know to have been taken by several Egyptian rulers after the 11th dynasty, and which certainly became more disagreeable for the Ḥ nb.w after the Phœnician mariners held the delta harbours. The story of Herakles and Busiris is quite analogous to the Theseus and Minos story ; as Minos in the non-Athenian literature, so Busiris is also occasionally described as a great law-giver. If the story of the world-conquering Osiris in Diodorus (see above) makes Busiris the resident or locum tenens of the absent Osiris, this is clearly an Egyptian popular etymology explaining the name as bw Usiri in “place of Osiris”. Hecatæus (Diodor., i, 45), who places Busiris more than 1,400 years — evidently one Sothis period — after Menas—that is about 2000 B.C. after the short chronology—and makes him found a dynasty of eight kings, with another Busiris at the end, seems to mean the two Apophises of the Hyksos period with his two Busirises.
page 192 note 1 Migne, Patrologia Graeca, xix, 383, cf. Patrol. Lat., xxvii, Chronic. Hieronymianum ad ann. 560. Synkell., p. 1520.
page 192 note 2 Note the difference against εἰς Ἀσσυραν in Nonnos, above, p. 180, n. 1.
page 192 note 3 Konon, Greifswald, 1890, p. 55.
page 192 note 4 Cf. fragm. 6, Fragm. Hist. Graec., 4, 424.
page 193 note 1 Ginzel, Hdb. d. Chronol. Leipz., 1911, ii, 359. Manetho makes the fall of Troy coincide with the last king of dyn. 19 (Θουωρις), Pliny (36, 65) with Ramses II, others with Σθως (Schol. Odyss., 14, 278 ; Eustath. Cram. Anecd. Paris., iii, 488 ; Sethe, Sesostris, 55).
page 193 note 2 Sethe, ibid.
page 193 note 3 Cf. Diodor. i, 64. Cf. Hecatæus, Κφρην for Herodotus (2, 127), Χφρην = Ḫ‘f R‘.
page 194 note 1 Therefore = “the Easṭern one”, because of the ḳibla towards sun-rise.
page 194 note 2 Budge, l.c., i, 153.
page 194 note 3 Ibid., i, 69.
page 194 note 4 Budge, Hist. of Egypt, iii, 1461.
page 194 note 5 Schol. Lycophr. Alex. ed. Scheer, ii, 60.
page 195 note 1 Clem. Alex., i, p. 207B>Aristotle>Hellanikos(Crusius in Roscher's Myth. Lex., ii, 1864). Κδμος … μετλλα χρυσο τ περ τ Παγγαῖον πενησεν ρος.
page 195 note 2 See also Steph. Byz., s.v. Αἴγυπτος : ἔστι δ κα ἄλλη Αἴγυπτος μικρ. Tümpel, die Aethiopenländer, Fleckeisens Jbb. Suppl. 16, 161 ff., 174. See, however, E. Maass, de Aesch. Suppl., pp. xxii, xxiv.
page 195 note 3 See E. Naville, Journ. Egypt. Archeol., vol. iv, 1917, pp. 228–33.
page 195 note 4 In view of what has been conjectured above, p. 188, on “Sesostrian” trade-settlements on the shore of the Black Sea, the ancient name Aegypsus (Geogr. Rav., iv, 5, p. 19815) for the modern Tulča in the Delta of the Danube might also be remembered.
page 196 note 1 Phot. Bibl., i, 46, cod. 244 ; Diodor. xl (15), 3, 2, p. 542, Wessling.
page 196 note 2 It is a standing complaint of the Egyptian sources against the “ Hyksos” that they neglected the cults of the Egyptian gods—showing thereby the true Bedawin spirit. See the Stabl-Antar inscription of Queen Hatshepsut, the story of Seknen Re's fight against Apophis, who knew none of the gods but his lord Seth of Avaris and the Setnekht inscription, quoted above, p. 179, n. 3. Ḫî
n Σστρις callṡ himself “beloved”—not by Re‘, or Seth, etc.—but by his own genius (k э) !
page 196 note 3 Ewald, Altertümer d. Volkes Israel, 2, ii, 1202.
page 196 note 4 Thus very acutely K. Dyroff in Helmolt's Weltgesch.2, Leipzig, 1914, vol. iii, p. 271. I have treated the subject in detail in a still unpublished lecture before the Munich Oriental Society in 1919 about the brothers of Joseph as sarē miḳnê= “ shepherd princes” (Gen. xlvii, 6).
page 197 note 1 The Egyptian orthography = Aqαῖϝοι shows that primarily the West Caucasian pirates are meant whom the Greeks (see Tomaschel's article Achaioi, 21, in Pauly-Wissowa, i, 205) called Αχαῖοι or Ἀκεῖοι (Arr., Peripl., 84), a name which has been plausibly derived by Schiefner from the Abkhasian word áqâ “ coast-dwellers ”. It is the Caucasian equivalent of the later Greek term ἠπειρτοι = “coastmen ”. The Δναοι or * Δανϝονες are the people living on the δανη = “ the dry land ”.
page 197 note 2 Breasted-Ranke, p. 356 ; Breasted, Records, iii, 576, 579.
page 197 note 3 FHG., i, p. 28, No. 357 ; Schol. Eurip. Orest., 872, ed. Schwartz, i, p. 185, 3 ff.
page 197 note 4 Eusebius, Chron., Hieronymus, l.c., places the flight of Danaus twenty-five years before that of the ποικα Κδμου into the year of Abraham 535 = 1481 B.C. He knew Hecatæus’ theory and meant to criticize the implied synchronism. The Parian marble chronicles (ed. Flach, Tuebingen, 1883; FHG. i, 533 ff.) place the immigration of Cadmus into Thebes at 1519, that of Danaus into Argos at A.D. 1511.
page 198 note 1 The name is probably akin to that of the Thessalian (Phthia) and Asianic towns Θβη) in the Troas, Θβη near Miletus, and Θβη in Kataonia ; and also Θβασα. of Lycaonia ; see Fick, Vorgriech. O.N., 78, 81, 128. As τ and θ may alternate in “Asianic” languages, we might with Prof. Sayce, JSBA., ix, 1893, 119, compare also τβαι, τβεαι, and Carian or Lyḍian τβα “rock ”, Θβαι = “colles” in old Italian and Greek dialects, Varro, de re Rustica, 3, 1, 6. Lewy, Semit. Fremdw., p. 208, would derive Θβαι from הבׇיתֵ= “ ark” because of the Theban legend about the “ Ogygian ” flood. Cf. Steph. Byz. s. ταναρος : θβη=κιβώτιον. (=הבׇיתֵ).
page 198 note 2 Sethe, Z.Ae., 45, 85.
page 198 note 3 Mythogr. Gr., p. 324, Westermann ; fr. 13. FHG., iii, p. 639, M. : Σεμλη Κδμου θυγτηρ λγετηι κυσαι πρ το γμουׁ τν δ παῖδα θειτατον ντα Κδμος διτι κ πυρς σώθη περιεῖπε καῖ τθεται αὐτῷ Αἰγυπτου Διονσου πτριον νομα.
page 198 note 4 He is the author to whom we can most probably trace the Greek mentions of the conquest of Avaris by Ἅμωσις (Tatian, Or. ad Graecos, c. 38. Euseb. praep. ev., x, ii, 14 Gaisf. ; Clem. Alex., Str. i, 21, 101. Euseb., l.c., x, 12, 2. Julius Afric. ap. Euseb., l.c., x, 10, 16 ; Syncell. Dind., i, 120, 281 ; [Justin], Coh. ad Graec., c. 9.
page 199 note 1 Cf. Plutarch, Theseus, 5 : οἱ δ Ἄβαντες οὐχ ὑπ’ Ἀρβων διδαχθντες ὡς ἔνιοι νομζουσιν, and Diodor., iii, 65, after the Thebais of one Antimachos (age of Plato), who calls the Thracian Lycurgus an Arab king. Herodotus, 5, 57, expressly mentions the Gephyraean Cadmeans as Φονικες!
page 199 note 2 ‥ τν στοιχεων εὑρτην … Κδμον ϕασ, τινς δ Φοινκων εὑρσεως πρς μς δικτορον γεγεννσθαι … Πυθοδρος δ ν τῷ περ στοιχεων κα Φλλις (a Delian author on music) … πρ Κδμου Δναον μετακομσαι αὐτ ϕασιν (cf. however Euseb., above, p. 197, n. 4). πιμαρτυροσιν τοτοισ οἱ Μιλησιακο συγγραϕεῖς … οὓς κα
Ἀπολλοδρος ν νεν καταλγῳ παρατιθεται.
page 199 note 3 ix, 12, 2 : τοῖς οὖν νομƷουσι εἰς γν ϕκεσθαι Κδμον τν Θηβιδα Αἰγπτιον κα οὐ ϕονικα ντα, στν νντιον τῷ λγῳ τς Ἀθηνς τατης τ νομα, ὅτι Ὄγγα κατ γλώσσαν τν ϕοινκων καλεῖται καῖ οὐ ΣΪς κατ τν Αἰγυπτων ϕωνν.
page 200 note 1 Schol. Eur. Phoen., 1062; Schol. Pind., O1.244; Steph. Byz., Ὂγκ. Hesych., s.v. Ὄγκας Ἀθηνςׁ τς Ὠγυγας πυλς λγει. Tzetzes, Alex. Lycophr., 1206: Ὤγυγος Θηβν Αἰγυπτων ἦν βασιλεὺς ὅθεν δ Κδμος ὑπρχεν, δς λθὼν ν Ἑλλδι τς πταπλους ἔκτισε κα Ὠγυγας πυλς κλεσε, πντα ποισας εἰς ὔνομα τν Αἰγυπτων Θηβν. Cf. Photios s.v. Ὠγυγια κακ, ii, p. 277, No. 6 : Κδμον τν Ὤγυγον. Suidas, s.v. Ὠγγια κακ. The genealogy which makes “Cadmus” a son of Ogygos should be compared with the Arabian tradition (above, p. 175, n. 3) that the Hyksos were Amalekites, for בבׇאֲ, ’Agūg in Phœnician pronunciation—cf. Akkad. agagu “be powerful ”, Muss-Arn., 13b—the δυναστς is the title of the Amalekite kings (Num. xxiv, 7 ; 1 Sam. xv, 8, 9, 20, 32 f.) and ’ Agågi in the Book of Esther is synonymous with Amalekite.
page 200 note 2 Πολμων ν τῇ πρώτῃ τν Ἑλληνιακν ἱστοριν, Ps. Justin, Coh. ad Graec., c. 9.
page 200 note 3 Cf. above, p. 198, n. 1, and Schol. Eurip. Phœniss., 638 ff. ; Tzetzes, Lycophr., 1206 ; Etym. Magn., 450, 41 ; Eustath., Ilias, 2, 503, where the name of Thebes is said to be taken from the cow, which led Cadmus to the spot, for θβα συριστ λγεται βogr;ς. AS a matter of fact, there is no such word for cow in Syrian or Aramean, except ṣebaḫ, הַצֶ. a “sacrificial victim ” of any kind, not necessarily a cow. But there is, in fact, as E. Assmann has observed in an otherwise very hazardous essay, Berl. Phil. Wocheuschr., 1920, 3/1, c. 18, in Egyptian (Brugsch, Wb. 7, 1347), a word 
ṯb, “young cattle,” “calf,” written with the determinative of a fettered sacrificial victim. This would seem to suggest an Alexandrian origin for the said etymology of Thebes, and it might be well to remember that Manetho's birthplace Sebennytos 
was itself called after the “sacred calf” (Dümichen, Geogr. d. alt. Aeg., p. 253).
page 201 note 1 Joseph, c. Ap., i, 34 f. Cf. Raymond Weill, Journ. Asiatique, 1915, p. 95.
page 201 note 2 Ann., xi, 4: “ Primi per figuras animalium Aegyptii sensus mentis effingebant … et litterarum semet inventores perhibent. Inde Phœnicas, quia mare praepollebant, intullisse Graeciae … Quippe fama est Cadmum classe Phoenicum vectum rudibus adhuc Graeciae populis artis eius auctorem fuisse …”
page 201 note 3 That they really did so in Plato's time appears from the famous passages, Phaedr., 274c, and Philebos, 18b, of which a new analysis will be found in my paper, Plato u. d. ægypt. Alphabet, Archiv. f. Gesch. d. Philos. xxxiv, 1922, pp. 3–13.
page 202 note 1 According to Herodot., ii, 44, there are five generations between Herakles and Cadmus ; ii, 142, he says that three generations are about 100 years ; ii, 145, he gives 900 years as the period between Herakles and his own age (about 450 B.C.). This gives about 1060 years—not 1600 as the MSS. of Herodot., ii, 148, have—because the later scribes misread the western ξῖ-sign X = 60 for the Eastern χῖ-sign X = 600, which would have been written ψ in Thurioi—as the period between Herodotus and Cadmus. Cf. Wiedemann, Herodot's, ii. B., p. 517.
page 202 note 2 According to Manetho the last year of Aḥmose is 1657 B.C. Euseb. gives ann. Abrahæ 294 = 1722 B.C. −318 = 1698 B.C. for Ἄμωσις. Julius Africanus places the “exodus” and the expulsion of the Hyksos 1797 B.C. Breasted places Aḥmose 1580–1567 B.C. according to good astronomical evidence. For Herodotus Euseb. gives 468/7 as κμ, which would place Cadmus in 1532/3 B.C., and not into the year 1456 B.C., where he places him (above, p. 1974). Evidently Herodotus’ date was not considered by Alexandrian chronologists.
page 203 note 1 V R., 33, 38a. Rogers, Outlines of the Hist, of Early Babylonia, 1895, p. 40. Hommel, Grundr., 190.
page 203 note 2 “ Minos ” of Crete (see above, p. 187, n. 2) wars against “ Sarpadon ” because of “Milatos”—eponymous hero of the homonymous towns in Crete and Karia—and drives him from Crete to Lycia (Herod., i, 173). As ruler of Lycia (and Cilicia, Immisch in Roscher's Lex., s.v. c. 395 f.) he is mentioned among the allies of Troy in Homer. In Thrace a “ Sarpedon ”, son of Europa and Poseidon, is mentioned by the same Hegesippus of Pallene, who speaks of the ποικα of “ Cadmus” and Proteus to Pallene (Schol. Eurip. Rhesos, 29, cf. Lykophr. 1284, and Schol. Scheer, ii, 362). He is said to have been killed by Herakles (Apollod. Bibl., 2, 5, 9, 13), that is by the representative of the immigrating Dorians. The search for the sister (Basilios, Migne, Patrol. Graeca, 85, 478 ff.), the victorious fight of “ Minos ” in Crete and of “Heracles ” in Thrace against “ Sar Padan ” may be an echo of the later downfall of the Hyksos empire over Crete and the coast of Thrace through the attack of the Minyans and Dorians, provided that the Kassite title “šar Padan” was borne already by the Hyksos predecessors of the Kassite rulers. The different landmarks and promontories called Σαρπηδών(ιον); Immisch, l.c.) after a demon, whom Ed. Schwartz, Quaest. Herod., 13, correctly explains as the mythic representative of a “ ventus rapax et procellosus, … nautis promontoria circum vehentibus periculosus ”, suggest a plausible etymology for this place-name : as the Babylonians called the west wind šāri Amurri (Muss-Arnold, 1106b) “ wind from Amurru ”, as in Austria the west wind is popularly called “ der boarisch wind” (Bavarian wind), and as the Greeks called the south-western wind Λψ “Libyan” wind, so šār Padan “wind of Padan ” may have been the name for the south-eastern wind blowing from Padan-Alwan on to the Lycian and Thracian shores.
page 204 note 1 Civ. Préhell.2, 1914, p. 391 ; cf. 179.
page 205 note 1 We should remember that the Abyssinian and the Indian grammarians preferred a simple syllabary to the ordinary alphabet at a time when the latter was used over the whole οἰκουμνη.
page 205 note 2 See above, p. 180, on the new Sargon text discovered by Dr. E. Forrer. Cf. my note in the review Janus, i, 1921, p. 212.
page 205 note 3 This characterization of the alphabet will be amply justified in my forthcoming book on the origin of the alphabet to appear as the next supplementary volume of the review Klio, Beiträge z. alt. Gesch. through the kindness of Prof. Lehmann-Haupt.
page 206 note 1 Kenitische Weihinschriften, Freiburg, iii, 1919, pp. 106 ff. This is contrary to the idea that the alphabet was evolved from the hieroglyphs.
page 206 note 2 Ibid., pp. 113 ff.
page 207 note 1 The copper ingots of Hagia Triada, Mycenæ, Serra Ilixi, are all products of the Syrian (ḲKenit. Weihinschr. 1052, 1684) and Cyprian mines. If they came from Sinai they would show (a) traces of arsenic, which are characteristic of the copper ore of the Malachite-land, and (b) signs of the peculiar Sinai alphabet, especially the Egyptianizing 
or 
instead of the e in the 
(ṭb) inscription of Hagia Triada, and the Sinai samek 
, instead of the genuine Phœnico-Assyrian 
.