Poole, Reginald S.: Horae Aegypticae: or, the chronology of ancient Egypt: discovered from astronomical and hieroglyphic records upon its monuments, including many dates found in coeval inscriptions from the period of the building of the Great Pyramid to the times of the Persians ; and illustrations of the history of the first nineteen dynasties, shewing the order of their succession, from the monuments (London, 1851)

130

EXPLANATION OF THE LIST OF

[Part II.

the latter being only a proper name. Thus the list is
naturally divided into Diospolite Kings, and Kings con-
temporary with them. The latter Kings are again
divided into Dynasties by their various titles. Are not
these facts, I would ask, strongly confirmatory of the
contemporaneousness of the early Dynasties? If the
Dvnasties contained in this list were all successive, how
is it that their arrangement is totally different from
that of Manetho ? The arrangement is clear; for it
cannot be denied that the left portion contains the
Eleventh, Twelfth, part of the Ninth, the Sixth, and
Fifteenth, Dynasties; only two of these Dynasties
being successive in their numbers. In the Royal
Turin Papyrus also, the Fifteenth Dynasty immedi-
ately follows the Sixth; the one concluding, and the
other commencing, in the same fragment. These are
strong evidences of contemporaneousness; but there
is, in this list, a far stronger evidence, not only of the
contemporaneousness of certain of the first seventeen
Dynasties with others of the same portion of Manetho's
list, but also of the particular scheme of contempo-
raneousness which I have adopted. The left portion
of the list commences with the Eleventh and Twelfth
Dynasties, and concludes with part of a Dynasty which
is shown to be the Thirteenth, from the one name that
remains; and I may here add, that I shall be able to
show that all the Kings of the other, or right, half
belong to the Thirteenth Dynasty. Therefore, the list
commences with the Eleventh and Twelfth Dynasties,
and concludes with the Thirteenth Dynasty; and
therefore the intermediate Kings must be those who
were for the most part contemporary with the Eleventh
and Twelfth Dynasties. On referring to the table of
contemporary Dynasties, it will be seen that the